First in a long series...

You'll all be quite sick and tired of puppy cuteness and my incessant 'aren't they cuuuuute' for the next few weeks. I'll try to keep it to a bare minimum. I am besotted.

We went down to Colorado Springs to drop off a deposit, planning to pick up the puppies on Friday or Saturday and we all decided that since we're taking TWO puppies, they could go now. They are seven weeks old today, which is the absolute youngest I'd consider taking a puppy.

So, we scrambled to the pet store for a crate, puppy food, and the necessary puppy stuff and I now have two completely exhausted puppies sleeping in a large puppy playpen in front of my desk. They're adorable, and while they're a bit freaked out right now, they are settling in pretty nicely.

Uulaq has been snorfling them with interest through the plastic puppy-prison walls, and seems pretty calm about all of this. I think she really wants to play with them, but they're freaked out enough about the car ride and new place and new stuff that we're going to keep them segregated for a day or so.

I'd post pictures, but I'd need flash and we're trying to be very calm and very non-threatening today. We'll have them tomorrow from outside in the sum, I promise!

A little help for my Friends

"I don’t believe my role is to replace the verdict of a jury with my own, unless there are new facts or evidence of which a jury was unaware, or evidence that the trial was somehow unfair."

-- George W. Bush, writing in his autobiography, A Charge to Keep.

Except, of course, when it is politically or personally beneficial to him.

Who's That Puppy?

Puppy pictures! Puppy pictures!


Look carefully at the two pictures. You might think that these are the same puppy.

And you'd be wrong! This is "dj" and "sweetie", the two puppies we are getting next weekend! (Well, we're working on better names, really). They are eight weeks old on Friday, very sweet. "sweetie" has the black nose, "dj" has a pinkish nose. What cuties!

I am so excited!

Potter Trivia

A few Harry Potter snippets (have you ordered yours yet?)

3 million copies of Goblet of Fire sold in two days.
5 million copies of Order of the Phoenix sold in 24 hours
6.9 million copies of Half-Blood Prince sold in 24 hours

12 million copies of Deathly Hallows have been shipped to American markets alone. It's the largest first printing ever.

Cool.

Dog Show

I don't think I've ever been to a dog show before -- I've watched them on television (Westminster), but never gone to one in person. I've been talking to people about puppies for two weeks now, and someone suggested that I go to the show in Loveland this weekend.

The Buckhorn Valley Kennel Club show had 18 Akitas competing, as well as about 1500 other dogs of all breeds. It was a lot of fun to see all the dogs, and wander around looking at all the "dog stuff". It wasn't the most productive visit -- no one I talked to locally has any planned litters -- but it was fun, nonetheless.

My sister and her husband show their Pug, Truman. Or rather, the breeder who co-owns him shows him on their behalf and he's been doing really well. They love the whole dog-show thing, and it's definitely eaten up their weekends traveling locally to shows with the little beast.

I can't say that I want to show dogs. There seems to be two level of interest in this "sport" -- those who enjoy the company and the competition, and those who reaaaaaalllly like winning. I guess it can be pretty cut-throat at higher levels, but this show was a local one, and everyone was pretty laid back and nice. I've heard that talking to exhibitors during some of the larger national shows is a no-no; they are likely to bite your head off for trying to engage them before a show. They want to show off their dogs, of course, but only to the judges.

Everyone we me was thrilled to talk to us about their breed, ask about our own dogs, and in general was thrilled to see people coming out to the show. Rather nice!

Otherwise, it was just HOT this weekend.

Expensive Beer

Last week, I was posting about Ethanol and biofuels and how I really feel like I'm being sucked into a bad marketing campaign. I'm pretty skeptical about the claims of how fabulous Ethanol is and how it will solve our energy problems...

I still don't think so, and I think the side-effects of everyone rushing off to the Super Fabulous Solution to all our Problems are going to difficult. Apparently, Germany is thinking the same thing. Beer in Germany is up over 40%, and the brewers are blaming the rush to grow food crops for fuel.

The head of the German brewers' association, Richard Weber, has caused outrage among friends of the annual Oktoberfest beer jamboree by predicting the hefty price rise. He pointed out that the German barley crop has been halved this year and that prices have soared by 50 per cent within 12 months

Brewers are demanding that farmers stop growing crops to make fuel (well, perhaps not the best response to the problems) and I think are highlighting a problem that makes many of us nervous: if we're using the acreage to grow crops for fuel, what happens to food production and food prices? I'm far more concerned that people worldwide won't be able to afford food -- or even get food -- than I am that the First Worlders can feel better about driving their SUVs.

Maybe biofuels are part of the solution, but they are no panacea.

Doppleganger

I've been combing the Internet for Akitas breeders, trying to find a puppy to add the the Phouka household. Uulaq is becoming more and more neurotic being alone, and we definitely miss having two beasts.

Not much luck, really. No one has puppies, and only a few are planning litters this year. We found a local woman who has a litter of puppies on the ground now, but she's definitely a "backyard breeder" who isn't genetically testing her two dogs, and while she loves her dogs they are not the best examples of Akitas that I've seen. Not even close. We found a really, really cute white puppy there, but we're balking at getting him because his dad has the weirdest looking head we've ever seen. I've never seen a jowly akita before.

But one of the sites that I found has a 9-month-old Akita puppy for sale. He was originally kept as a show dog, but didn't quite make the cut. I opened the site and burst into tears. It was Rukh. Seriously -- the pictures are so eerily similar that I'd be hard pressed to identify who's who if I saw them side by side. It's kind of freaky.

My gut went "now! your dog! get him now!" but the rational part of my brain freaked out a little at the thought of getting a dog that was such a perfect doppleganger for our old dog. That might just be a bit weird.

But it's Rukh's face. Click on the 'for sale' link here to see. The picture above is of Rukh, of course.

La-la-la-I Don't Hear You!

Apparently Bush and Congress are headi1ng to a showdown over the subpeonas. Bush has claimed executive privilege and Congress (through Leahy) is taking steps to knock him down a notch. Fielding cites opinions by Paul Clement -- a poor choice to bolster this uber-secrecy practiced by the White House, as his conflict of interest is awfully clear. He is--already, even before we hit the courts--in a position where he is simultaneously defending the White House, and investigating it. Must be nice, eh?

Fred Fielding's letter telling Congress to f--- off is not so much a legal notice, but a lecture. It spends two paragraphs saying "no," one paragraph spinning the White House as cooperative, and then seven paragraphs talking about the exalted tradition of executive privilege.

More troubling, however, is what Fielding attaches: an opinion written by Solicitor General Paul Clement, explaining that OLC has reviewed Congress' requests and found that those requests fall squarely within the realm of executive privilege.
Paul Clement, as you'll recall, is the guy currently in charge of any investigation into the US Attorney firings, since Alberto Gonzales recused himself some months ago. He's the one who technically oversees the Office of Special Counsel investigation into whether politics played an improper part in Iglesias' firing or the hiring of career employees in DOJ, he's the one who oversees the joint Office of Professional Responsibility and Inspector General investigations into whether anything improper--including obstruction of justice--occurred in the hiring and firing of USAs. And now, he's the guy who gets to tell the President that he doesn't have to turn over what might amount to evidence of obstruction of justice in the Foggo and Wilkes case, among others.

We're back!

What a lovely weekend! Of course, now I've got blisters on my feet (never wear new shoes out and about!) and the top of my head is sunburned to a crisp (wear a hat!) but we had a great time.

Stayed at the Hotel Monaco downtown, right on the 16th Street Mall, so we could wander about and have great food, went to the Colorado Renaissance Festival (the source of the sunburn!) and then went down to check out a litter of Akita puppies in Colorado Springs. We saw the new Cirque du Soleil show Corteo on Sunday, and walked through the La Piazza del Arte Festival (the source of the blisters)

Finally, we saw the Titanic exhibit ta the Science Museum yesterday, followed by dinner at The Fort (where we had rattlesnake as an appetizer).

I'm exhausted. But what fun!

Adventures!

The Adorable Husband has planned a weekend out on the town -- and is refusing to divulge the details, so I assume that I will be offline until Tuesday.

It's making me crazy not to know, but it should be fun!

How to Hug a Baby

This arrived in my email yesterday, and I'm still chuckling. So -- for your edification: How to Hug a Baby. (Note that I have no idea whose pictures these are).

1. First, spy a baby.

2. Then, confirm that the object really is a baby by employing classic sniifing techniques. If you smell wet diapers, this is indeed a baby. Proceed.

3. You will need to flatten the baby before actually beginning the hugging process. *NOTE: the added slobber will assist in future steps by making the baby easier to manipulate.

4. The "Paw Slide" -- slide paws around baby and prepare for close up.

5. If a camera is present, you will need to execute the difficult "hug/smile/lean" maneuver to achieve the best photo quality.

My sister has a mastiff like this one -- although her beast is fawn-colored, and a bit bigger. At his last vet visit, Colonel weighed in at an astounding 209 pounds. Makes my dogs seem tiny in comparison!

I am! I'm not! I am!

Vice President Cheney is insisting that the VP is not part of the Executive Branch of Government. Or, to be entirely accurate, is "also part of the legistlative branch" because of the role as president of the Senate. Thus, he is not subject to rules for the executive branch.

Why? Well, to bypass the rules, of course. Cheney is refusing to comply with a presidential order regarding annual reports on security with the National Archive. All federal offices are required to file reports, based on a presidential order to provide a uniform, government-wide system for safeguarding classified info. Cheney filed in 2001 and 2002...but since then? He has decided that he doesn't have to. He's not "fully part of the executive branch", so the rules doesn't actually apply to him. He has also refused to comply with orders to disclose how much information was begin classified and declassified.

The Vice President's office's refusal to comply with the executive order and the National Archives's request prompted the National Archives to file a complaint with the Attorney General's office. But the Justice Department has not followed up on the Archives's request. [Rawstory]

Isn't that nice? He has 'executive privilege' or 'executive immunity' whenever it suits him, but when it doesn't suit him (as when he's been requested to provide information to Congress regarding his activities and those of his close aides), he claims executive privilege. Nice to have it both ways isn't it?

When the National Archives lodged a complaint with the Justice Department, Cheney's office retaliated:

It has requested changes in the executive order that would abolish the ISOO and
eliminate the ability of the National Archives to appeal disputes to the Attorney General.

At least he didn't shoot anyone.

Joke for Grammarians

[slightly off-color joke to follow]

Harry is getting older, and find that he is unable to...ahem...perform to his satisfaction. Visits to his doctor result in pills and such, but nothing works. Finally, desperately, Harry seeks the help of a local witch doctor.

After much chanting and smoke and incantations, the witch doctor tells Harry, "This is a very powerful spell, so it will only work once every year. Just say '123' and you'll have an erection for as long as you like!"

Harry is very pleased "What about when it's over, and I don't want to continue?"

"You or partner just have to say '1234' and it will go down. But remember--you can't try again for another year!"

Harry rushes home, eager to try the new spell. He spiffs himself up, shaves, uses his best cologne, and climbs into bed next to his wife. Putting his hand lovingly on his wife's shoulder, he whispers, '123' and suddenly is more aroused than he has ever been in his entire life! It worked! Just like the witch-doctor promised!

His wife rolls over sleepily, and asks, "Harry? What did you say 123 for?"

And this, dear readers, is why you never end a sentence with a preposition.

Dog Cooties

Anyone with a dog knows that you have to be careful that you don't inadvertently continue eating with the fingers you just fed the dog with -- sometimes you forget, and suddenly realize that you just picked up another chip with the hand you fed one to the beast with. Eeeu!

Well, I shouldn't cringe away in horror, it doesn't actually gross me out that much, but I know if really gives some people the heeby-jeebies.

We noticed a very strange phenomenon, though.

After dinner, we usually give Uulaq the bits of leftovers (the rest of the rice, or the last few meatballs, that sort of thing) on one of the dinner plates (and no, don't worry, we prety much scald them into an antiseptic state in the dishwasher!). So the Adorable Husband mixes the rest of the veggies in with brown rice with the serving spoon and both of us suddenly realize that we both now consider the spoon "dirty" and, even though we haven't done anything with it but touch the food that we were planning to give to the dog, the spoon had cooties. The spoon went from perfectly fine serving spoon to "touched-the-food-for-the-dog" icky just by intent.

The dog at this point is still outside, hasn't even seen the bowl yet, and we realize that we are both absolutely unwilling to use the spoon again. Same thing a fork or knife used to cut up something. In this case, we had been eating the rice and veggies all mixed up anyway, so it wasn't even that the food was in some sort of weird mixed-up, inedible combination. We had just decided that it was now the dog's leftovers.

Weird, eh?

Annoying Alarmclock

If you're like me, you reached over and hit the snooze a couple of times this morning. Every morning. Or even turned off the alarm entirely and fell back to sleep. (Luckily, I work from home and can't really be "late." Those seven minutes or so of snooze-time are the best sleep of the whole night, if you ask me.

But it does make it a bit more difficult to actually get up and get going in the morning. Well, a designer (Ena) has designed an alarm clock that might actually get even the most snooze-happy people out of bed. You'd have to get up -- the bloody alarm clock is buzzing around like a manic bumble-bee and you have to chase it down. In the air. Perhaps with a net, if you have tall ceilings.

When your alarm goes off, the little ball starts up, levitates, and then zooms around the walls and ceiling until you catch it and turn it off. Unless you happen to keep rocks next ot the bed to throw at the thing and knock it out of the air!

And then, of course, there's Clocky, which runs away and hides when the alarm goes off so you have to follow it around to turn it off.

Seriously, these things were designed by chirpy morning people to torture those of us who don't get going until we've been up for an hour, right? That could be the only reason that people are developing this stuff. They get some sort of sadistic pleasure out of forcing the rest of us to be "morning people!"

History of Western Philosphy

One of the courses that I listen to from the Teaching Company mentioned Bertrand Russell's History of Western Philosophy. I haven't read it (although I just ordered a copy!) and I was surprised that it also came up in a discussion forum just today. One of the quirks of the Internet, I guess.

On the forum, it came up in a discussion regarding admonitions about marriage and how the rules about who to marry, who not to marry, etc were derived. So someone asked the rather odd question of how it was determined to be "bad to marry your brother or sister". Well, we all sort of know this, right? I mean, cultural taboos against incest are pretty deeply grounded. And we all know now that there are some very good physical reasons not to interbreed (the Hapsburg Chin, anyone?), but how has this decision been explained by others?

Well, someone remembered a discussion by St. Thomas Aquinas regarding the topic, and we all were rather amused by the hilarious justification he gives for not marrying your sibling (quoted here from Russell's book):

[According to St. Thomas] Divine Law directs [...] There must be strict monogamy; polygyny is unfair to women, and polyandry makes paternity uncertain. Incest is to be forbidden because it would complicate family life. Against brother-sister incest there is a very curious argument: that if the love of husband and wife were combined with that of brother and sister, mutual attraction would be so strong as to cause unduly frequent intercourse. (H.W.P.p459)

Thomas Aquinas wrote the Summa Theologica, which has commentary on any number of questions and is intended as a teaching tool for theology of the 13th century He's generally considered to be a fantastically smart guy. But the reason he could come up with to bar sibling marriage was too much sex? You have to admit that's pretty funny, and pretty telling about medieval attitudes towards women and men and the natural things they do together!

Ethanol numbers

I've been hearing a lot of advertising for GM "flex-fuel" vehicles, and supported ads for ethanol producers telling us to "go green!" It's a hot topic, and it seems that the verdict really isn't in on whether moving to ethanol as an alternative fuel (E85- - 85% ethanol, 15% gasoline) is a good idea.

It sounds good on the surface, of course -- fewer emissions, using a "renewable" resource vs reliance on fossil fuels (and the necessary reliance on foreign supplies of oil). I'm all for changing what we do if it's really better; I'm not a tree-hugger by any means, but I think we all have a responsibility to use resources better and try to keep our impact on the rest of the world as small as possible. We Americans love our cars, and I think we need to be more careful how we use them and fuel them.

But the ads that I've been hearing have some disturbingly vague information. Most notably, the "Live Green, Go Yellow!" campaign touts that "Ethanol can cost up to a dollar less per gallon and save x dollars a year in fuel!".

Well, not quite. First, in many states, E85 is actually more expensive than gasoline, and it is available in only a few places. In March, the adjusted average for gasoline was 2.30 a gallon, for ethanol, 2.96. The difference was a bit smaller recently, but only because gas is climbing near the 3.50 mark, at least around here.

Second--and more importantly--Ethanol has fewer BTUs than gasoline (about 80K/gallon, vs 109-125K), that is. it has less energy in it. So, your car gets fewer miles per gallon of ethanol than it does for gasoline, despite the higher octane. Estimates range from 25-25% decrease in fuel efficiency. The latest studies from the Energy Dept suggest that the drop could be as high as 40%. (Their tools are here)So that mythical dollar you save on buying ethanol is easily outweighed by the additional gallons you have to buy. It's hard to get actual numbers, since Ethanol is not yet widely used and most cars mix a tank of gasoline in once in a while, but at least one example noted a 17% difference in fuel efficiency running "mostly E85" and 24% using solely E85.

[Businessweek] From General Motors, an ad campaign called "Live Green, Go Yellow" gave America the impression that by purchasing GM vehicles capable of using E85 ethanol, we could help reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

What GM left out of its ads was that the use of this fuel would likely increase the amount of smog during the summer months (as the EPA's own attorneys had admitted in 1995) -- and that using E85 in GM products would lower their fuel efficiency by as much as 25%. (USA Today recently reported that the Energy Dept. estimated the drop in mileage at 40%.)

Newer cars, with computer-managed fuel-injection systems are likely to do better, but even cars designed as flex-fuel vehicles show a definite drop in fuel efficiency. Ok, so it doesn't cost less -- that has never really been a goal of using alternate fuels (although it sure seems to be touted as a benefit in advertising). Does it at least cost less to produce? Early data suggested that it actually was a zero-sum game: it took as much energy to produce a gallon of ethanol as it contained. Newer methods of generating ethanol are not as bad, and there is a net energy gain from ethanol. I was also surprised to learn that ethanol cannot be transported in pipelines like gasoline (it picks up impurities and excess water too easily) and thus must be trucked to processing plants and distribution centers. If you balance the cost of having to drive trucks to haul the stuff, the balance sheet doesn't look as good, either. [Ethanol's Net Energy Balance]

But cost of fuel is not really the driving issue here. Even if it costs you the same to drive with E85, the benefits of cleaner air, etc, would be enough to get people to swap, right? Well, even that is up in the air. E85 use can actually cause more smog during some periods even if it doesn't belch out hydrocarbons and other greenhouse gasses.

But it's the invisible cost that strikes me as more dangerous. If we pursue creating ethanol from food crops (corn, beets, etc) as a primary use, we're going to drive up the cost of food. No one is really sure just how far the ripple effect will go -- but the demands of producing corn, for example, as a source of ethanol have already impacted corn prices and land use. Recently, the UK reported that:

the final figure is equivalent to 1.2 billion litres of bioethanol and 1.35 billion litres of biodiesel. If this were to be produced in the UK, 1.2 million hectares would be required, about 20% of the UK's arable land.

Now, the US has a lot more land under cultivation, as does the rest of the world, so the assumption is that most ethanol/biodesiel will be shipped around the world from producers to users.

So if I sound skeptical about the lovely claims that ethanol is "the perfect plan", I am. Perhaps in the balance, it is a better choice, but the campaign to get it accepted seems to be relying on some pretty shady marketing tactics. Appealing to my pocketbook might get me to look at other options, but when in the end, it might cost more to use it, I'm definitely going to be doing a lot more research first. If a large chunk of the things I buy get more expensive because we shifted land-use, transportation methods, and other costs from oil to cover crops...the benefit of fewer emissions may not be enough to sway most people away from common, (relatively) cheap and familiar gas.

Ages and Ages

Today is our 18th Anniversay -- and as I told the Adorable Husband today, I'd do every single minute again....well, perhaps not the giant flying bug part while living in Georgia, but you know what I mean!

It's odd, really. Most of our peers haven't been together half as long, and many are on their second or even third marriages. We've been very, very lucky, I know that. I still look over in the morning and think, "Damn, I'm lucky I married this man!"

We've actually been together a bit over 25 years. Couple that with turning 41 next week, and attending the graduation party of our friend's daughter (when I remember her when she was TEN) and I'm feeling quite old this week.

I say it in a rather facetious way, because I certainly don't really feel old except for those first few minutes in the morning when I'm trying to get my back straightened out. But in general, I realize that I've definitely hit adulthood with all the requisite responsibilities and stuff. Kind of daunting, actually! I suppose I can get older but I'm not going to grow up. Nya-nya-nya!

The Adorable Husband was on call all weekend, so we are taking time off next weekend to wander around Denver, see the new Titanic exhibit at the museum, go to dinner, that sort of thing. It'll be fun!

Think we didn't notice?

[From ThinkProgress] Attorney General Alberto Gonzales had once again bypassed the Senate and used an obscure Patriot Act provision to appoint an interim U.S. attorney in California. In doing so, he exercised an authority that was specifically banned by a bill that passed both chambers of Congress and passed to Bush on June 4.

That bill, the Preserving United States Attorney Independence Act of 2007, has been on the president’s desk since June 4th. Do you know it seems he just can’t bring himself to sign it? Instead, we were informed yesterday through the Justice Department that the attorney general has used the power that we voted to repeal again.

Well, Bush got what he wanted, and by delaying, he was able to get one more loyal Bush-follower into a public office. The bill was finally signed yesterday. After Gonzales did his spiffy little two-step around the law.

Summer vs Winter Temps

So, I've been wondering: why in the winter does 50 degrees feel warm and we're outside in shorts basking in the pale sun, while the same temperature in the summer is frigid and requires a coat?

This has been a topic of much discussion in the Phouka household this week. We open the house up at night to take advantage of the lovely Colorado summer weather, and the temperature in the house in the morning has been dipping into mid-50s territory. It's perfect sleeping weather, and if we are conscientious about shutting the windows in the morning, the house stays cool enough that the air conditioning doesn't really come on until early evening, even on the 90-degree days. That sun blasting into the house from the west tends to heat things up a bit, but otherwise, it's pretty comfortable. The temp outside was 85, and even at 4pm it was still only 68 in the house.

Anyway, it's pretty dang chilly in the house in the morning, and even cooler downstairs. The Adorable Husband has been exercising in the basement each morning, and enjoying the cool mornings. I had to laugh at him -- if the house was the same temperature in January, say, he'd be bitching to high heaven that the house was like an icebox and refusing to get out of bed in the morning! (Well, me, too, but I tend to like it cooler than he does in general).

But now? When the days are climbing to 90 degrees? It's "refreshing" and perfectly ok that the house is at 56 in the morning while he runs around in pajama bottoms and no slippers.

Well, why does this happen? Obviously, it has to do with perception of "hot" and "cold" compared to the normal environment (I found an interesting explanation here in Hot and Cold Questions), but my body temperature is the same. Do I just get used to it being warmer, so my body thinks that 75 degrees is the "right" temperature instead of 35 degrees? So at some point in the spring and fall my body temperature sensors readjust? What triggers it? Average outdoor temperature? Longer daylight hours? Humidity?

It's all a sensory illusion, of course. 55 degrees is 55 degrees, but the relative difference in what we see as "normal" temperature accounts for the difference. I'd be curious, though, to find out the specific trigger points for when we think 55 is hot vs when we think 55 is cold.