Governmental Light Bulb Clean Up

Basically, the government has decided that it knows what light bulbs are best for the public to use. Therefore, the regular light bulbs that we've all grown to know and love since the days of Thomas Edison are out and those damn curly, swirly CFL bulbs are in. That's right. Sometime in 2012, you will no longer be able to choose which light bulb you want to use. This in the "Land of the Free". I understand that the new ones will save you a minimal amount of money over the course of the bulb. I also understand that I am the one who pays my electric bill. And as long as I pay for it, why does the government get to tell me which bulb to use? Besides, I hate the light that comes off of those swirly things. It's too fluorescent for me. It's a very harsh light. I'm a rather delicate flower in some areas and the light in my home that I bathe myself in is just one of those areas.

Another thing that you're going to say goodbye to? Cleaning up a broken light bulb without having to follow a series of directions that spans over four pages and requires just about everything except a Hazmat suit (and I'm sure that one would actually be preferred). I'm not kidding. What we have here is a document that appears to be put out by the Connecticut Department of Public Health and is entitled: Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs What To Do If A Bulb Breaks Wait. What now?

I would have thought that the answer would have simply been "Sweep it up". Oh, no. No, no, no. That's the old way of doing things. The new way is much different. And of course, different is better. And since this is the ONLY choice for a light bulb that you're going to have pretty soon, I suggest you pay attention. You're going to need the following:

• Disposable gloves
• Flashlight
• Duct tape or other sticky tape
• 2 index cards or stiff pieces of paper
• Zip-lock bags
• Damp paper towels or rags
• Portable window fan (optional)

That's right. Six items. Or seven if you're going to utilize the option of breaking out your portable window fan. But don't worry. Considering that you're supposed to leave the area that the bulb is broken in for at least fifteen minutes, you'll have plenty of time to gather your supplies. And before you do any of that, make sure that you "Turn off forced hot air heat, central air conditioners, and fans." And "Open windows to allow fresh air in." Oh, but don't do any of this if you're pregnant. If you're pregnant, you are specifically instructed to not do it and to find someone else to do it for you. You're also supposed to keep infants, small children, women who are pregnant and pets out of the room...if you've broken a light bulb.

In cleaning up of the shattered bulb, you are not allowed to vacuum or sweep and for heaven's sake, don't use a metal dust pan. (They don't give any reason for not using the metal dust pan, but I suspect that spontaneous combustion is involved.) No, you're supposed to pick up the big pieces with your gloved hands and then use the index cards to sort of scoop the other pieces into piles and then you use the sticky tape to pick up those pieces. Shove all of that into a ziploc bag when you're done and seal the crap outta that sucker, lest you succumb to...something.

Once you're done with that, you're supposed to pat the area down with the damp paper towels or rags and then seal those and the gloves in another ziploc bag and put them both "...in an outdoor trashcan immediately" as "Getting the waste out of the house right away is an important safety step." And even though you've been all safe up to this point, it's also imperative that you "Wash your hands and face after the waste has been removed from the house." Also, Continue to ventilate the room for as long as possible (at least several hours)." That's right. Hours. (Hey, it helps exhaust the "dirty air' out of the building!) I don't know about where you are, but winter gets a little chilly around here. I'm not so sure that I want to ventilate my room for several hours in the middle of winter. Sooooo, try to only break bulbs during the warm weather months.

That's just the cleanup for hard surfaces. For rugs or area rugs, there is a whole different set of instructions which span a couple of pages. And one of the things that they mention is that if you break one of these CFL bulbs on an area rug is to consider disposing of the entire rug! Oh, and after all of this is cleaned up and you've changed out of your Hazmat suit, remember that "...pregnant women and young children should stay out of a room where a CFL has broken until several days after the clean-up." Several DAYS?! What in the world is IN these things?! I'm really not thrilled about having this toxic item in my home when my regular bulbs (the ones that I pay for and that I pay for the energy that they use) work just FINE! I am going on a regular light bulb shopping expedition in the coming days as I stock up on enough regular bulbs to last me for the rest of my life. Which, if they keep coming up with asinine restrictions on items that I can and cannot use in my own home, is going to be in the very near future.

Riot Like An Egyptian

Well. It's going DOWN in Egypt. The proverbial poo has hit the proverbial fan and it is chaos over yonder in Cairo. And while I don't want to oversimplify the whole ordeal, I do want to point a couple of things out.

First, I'm not pro-dictatorship. Dictators are really bossy. I don't like it when someone thinks that they're the boss of me, so I have to imagine that the Egyptians aren't all that keen on it either. But we're talking about one of the Sand Lands. So, you know what could be the alternative to the current government? That's right. A government that is based on Islamic Fundamentalism. That would not be good for our relations with Egypt. It certainly wouldn't bode well for Israel. They're already worried that Iran is going to get all froggy and do something. I can't imagine that they'd be real thrilled about having to watch their backs for the same sort of behavior from the Egyptians. Just remember, different doesn't always mean better. While getting rid of a dictator sounds like a good idea, it's not like they're going to end up with a democracy that is identical to that of the United States'.

That brings me to my second point. If you think that this is going to happen overnight, you're wrong. Please remember that after the uprising in Tunisia, they had three different presidents in ONE DAY! (Imagine their State of the Union addresses! "Are you better off than you were at lunchtime?") Even if the current government is overthrown, it will likely be YEARS before there is anything overly functional over there. Again, it certainly isn't going to end up looking like the United States. I totally get that all of those folks who think that the United States is so freaking great could not possibly understand why other countries would not want to mold their government in an exact mirror image of what we have going on over here. I get that. I just don't know how to explain to them that it's not true. A lot of those Sand Lands are ruled by religion (and not always in a good way). Have we learned nothing from what went down in Iraq? Apparently not. Morons.

And finally, while I'm all in favor of a nice revolution, you know what I'm not in favor of? I'm not so much in favor of the asshats that look at a time of political unrest as a justification to start looting stuff. People who are out there stealing stuff don't seem to have as much of an interest in overthrowing the government as much as they do getting a new TV for free. Same goes with looting the museums and ripping the heads off of the mummies. No one wants to see that and it perplexes me as to why someone would do that. The merchants of Egypt have little to do with the dictatorship. And I'm pretty sure that the mummies are completely blameless. So stop breaking their windows and stealing their stuff. And leave the dead guy's dome in tact, would you? You folks want to rain down your disgruntledness (it's a word) on the palaces and things like that? Have at it. Burn them to the ground if you want to (just don't tell anyone that I said it was OK). But try and stay focused, rebels. You've got a job to do. You can't carry out a thorough and effective ousting if you're running through the streets of Cairo with a flat screen TV that you just swiped from the Kwik-E-Mart. Focus, people. Focus!

Get The Lead Out...Or Don't

If you can figure out the rationale on this one, I'm all ears. Granted, I realize that it involves the Federal government, but still. There has to be a reason why some lead tainted drinking glasses were recalled because it was thought that they were for children. Once they found out that they were technically not for children, then the recall was recalled. Never mind that the glasses still have over 1,000 times the acceptable amount of lead in them. As long as their purpose is defined, everything should turn out just dandy, right? Wait. What?

Here's the story: See, there were these drinking glasses that had Wizard of Oz characters on them and Star Wars characters on them. Pretty cool, yes? Yes. According to The Daily Herald, the "...Consumer Product Safety Commission (the ol' CPSC) said last month the glasses were children's products and thus subject to strict federal lead limits". That seems like a good thing, especially since "Lab testing by The Associated Press found lead in the colored decorations up to 1,000 times the federal maximum for children's products." That's a whole lotta lead. But they were recalled so everyone is safe. Problem solved! Ummm, yeah....not so fast.

Lead is bad. No one wants a mouthful of lead. Ever. It's just a bad, bad thing to ingest into your body. But for some reason, there are no limits on lead for adult drinking glasses. None! As adults, our products can be as lead-y as they can be (and a thousand times more than a maximum sounds like an awful lot of lead) and they're just fine to sell and use willy-nilly. Am I the only one confused as to why something like lead would only be monitored for children's products and not for adult products? I must be. That's because once the CPSC decided that a drinking glass with a Wizard of Oz character or a Star Wars character on it was not a drinking glass made for an adult (an assumption that I take great umbrage at!), they recalled their recall and all is well in drinking glass land again. Right? What now? Oh, the lead! Yeah, I was getting to that.

Who ARE these morons?! Are they serious?! It's a drinking glass. Do you think that kids (or adults, for that matter) actually differentiate between which drinking receptacles are for children and which are for adults? I'm not so sure that they do. I'll go as far as to say that I will draw the line at a sippy cup. I don't think that adults should be drinking out of one of those (no matter how spill proof they may seem). Other than that, I don't think that there's going to be much differentiating going on.

Seriously, the glasses have pictures of cool things on them. What kid, given a choice, would not opt for one with a picture on it as opposed to one that does not have a picture? I'm not imagining that too many would. Heck, I would choose the Yoda glass over a plain glass any day. (May the Force be with me and my liquids!) But according to a one Scott Wolfson, the spokeshole for CPSC, "These glasses are not primarily intended for use by a child 12 or younger. ... Since these glasses are not intended for use by young children, it is recommended that parents not provide them to children to use." Oh. OK, then. If it's that simple then...wait a minute! That's not going to work!

Clearly, this Mr. Wolfson does not have small children. It's questionable, given his reasoning, as to whether he's ever been around a small child. If either of those scenarios had been true, he'd realize that is near idiotic. You think that an 11-year old isn't going to be drinking out of the Chewbacca glass? You're wrong. They are. And what are you supposed to tell them as to why they can't drink out of the cool glasses?

You: You can't use that glass.

Child Susceptible To Lead: Why?

You: Because it has a whole lot of lead in it.

Child Confused With Your Logic: What's lead?

You: It's a chemical that's really, really bad for you. Worse than masturbating.

Child With More Sense Than The CPSC: Then how come you can use it?

You: I'm like Superman. Lead doesn't hurt me. Now, go play on the freeway.

I'm not sure why things with lead in them are not regulated for adults. I'm also not sure why drinking glasses need to have any lead in them in the first place, let alone 1,000 times more lead that they're allowed to have. Did I mention that they're made in China? They are. The Chinese seem to just love lead, as they seem to put it in a lot of stuff that they're selling us. Hmm. Maybe that's how they think that they'll overtake us. Tempt us with Chewbacca glasses and then wait until our lead-y, lead-y brains end up like pickled turnips. The sad part is, given how we apparently regulate things in this country, it just might work.

Your Tax Dollars Hard At Waste

Today I learned about ExpectMore.gov. (It's actually called www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore, but ExpectMore.gov will get you there.) It is a website, the purpose of such is apparently to make me very angry. It definitely sucked out most of my WTL (Will To Live) and kind of filled me with an HFOH (Heart Full Of Hate). Let's see if it makes you angry as well!

The purpose of the site (which is run by the Federal government) is to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of all Federal programs and then rate whether the program is Effective, Moderately Effective, Adequate, Ineffective or Results Not Demonstrated. According to the page which explains what each rating actually means, Results Not Demonstrated means "...that a program has not been able to develop acceptable performance goals or collect data to determine whether it is performing." In other words, they're just screwing around. An Ineffective rating means that "Programs receiving this rating are not using your tax dollars effectively. Ineffective programs have been unable to achieve results due to a lack of clarity regarding the program's purpose or goals, poor management, or some other significant weakness." Well, that doesn't sound good. I guess the rating "Piece of S**t" didn't sound very official and that's why they went with Ineffective.

They have so far evaluated about 98% of the Federal programs and that amounts to 1,015 of them. Do you want to know how many are below Adequate? (And let me just tell you that the definition of Adequate isn't anything to throw a party over. It is indicative of a "...program that needs to set more ambitious goals, achieve better results, improve accountability or strengthen its management practices." Seriously, do you feel good about that? I don't.) Ready? 199 out of 1,015 are a complete waste of money. 19.6%. And that's not even ALL of the programs yet! More to come! Stay stuned!

Twenty percent of the governments programs have been deemed by the government to be doing nothing other than pissing away your money! That's astounding. Take a look at your next pay stub. Look at what you paid in Federal taxes. Take twenty percent of that and realize that, not only did you work to earn it and you can't have it, it isn't doing a damn thing and is being wasted. And when you hear what some of these programs are, you're going to be wondering why they were ever given money in the first place.

There's the Food Stamp Nutrition Education Program. It's goal is "To improve the likelihood that persons eligible for the Food Stamp Program (FSP) will make healthy food choices within a limited budget and choose physically active lifestyles consistent with the current Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGAs) and My Pyramid". Uh-huh. Like that's going to happen. Of course, they really have no way that they're doing this. And that's why their budget has gone from $600,000 in 1992 to (brace yourself) $147 million in 1992 and THAT was eight years ago! So in ten years, their budget grew to 245 times what it started out at! And if I'm reading the chart correctly (it's a little hard to follow and I know that's completely shocking to you) their funding for 2008 was $312 million. That means that it's doubled and then some in two years. And it's not doing anything! I wish I could have a budget for some worthless piece of crap double in the span of only two years. Good Lord. Got your axe handles at the ready? Torches? Pitchforks? I'm just getting started.

There's the National Writing Project which is "...to promote K-16 teacher training and professional development in the area of writing. The Project consists of one national office and a network of local sites through which teachers have access to training, professional development, and current research about the teaching of writing." HOW MANY teachers does that scope actually make up? Is it enough to make it worthy of $22 million in funding in 2008? Since when do our grades go from kindergarten to Grade Sixteen?! Isn't that a senior in college? Shouldn't they know how to write by then? Why do they still need to be taught how to write?

There is the Black Lung Clinics Program (BLCP) which received $6 million in 2008 and is "...to establish and operate clinics that identify, diagnose, treat, and rehabilitate active and retired coal miners with occupational exposure to airborne particles resulting in respiratory and pulmonary ailments." I'm sure that you'll be comforted and satisfied to learn that "Since implementation of the Black Lung Clinics Program in 1979, only one independent assessment of the program has been conducted. This assessment did not provide an evaluation of the program's effectiveness and was limited in the range of issues addressed." Oh, good. So, in thirty-one years there has been ONE assessment. Sure. That seems easily explainable. Not by me, of course.

Let's not forget the Workforce Investment Act - Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers which got $83 million in 2008 for the purpose of providing "...competitive grants to fund training, employment, and other services to help economically disadvantaged farmworkers and their families. Through these services, the program seeks to help them achieve economic self-sufficiency by strengthening their ability to gain stable employment." What the what?! You'll also want to know that "Each year, more than 60 percent of the program's approximately 30,000 participants receive only supportive services, like emergency cash assistance." Wait a minute.

30,000 participants and they get $83 million dollars?! For the guys that pick the strawberries that are frequently permanently visiting here from foreign lands?! Emergency cash assistance?! I know some folks who could use some emergency cash assistance. Oh, but they're citizens and they don't pick strawberries. Why is this sounding more and more backwards the more I go on. (And by the way, do you want to or should I tell the Federal government that it's not "farmworkers", it's "farm workers"? Two words. We're doomed.)

And these few that I have listed were merely some of the Ineffective programs. There are plenty of programs with ridiculous sounding names that were rated Results Not Demonstrated. Programs like the $49 million Mentoring Program (I swear to you that's what it's called), the $120 million Teaching American History program, the $20 million Packers and Stockyards program and the $4.783 billion Universal Service Fund E-Rate program which is supposed to "...help ensure that the educational benefits of telecommunications services are provided to schools and libraries. The program provides discounts on these services in varying amounts based on demonstrated economic need." (What, exactly, do they mean by "telecommunications"? A PHONE?!)

Now, maybe some of those or the other 169 programs whose results cannot be demonstrated are actually doing some good. Since they results can't be demonstrated, I'm sure that some jackass congressperson will make that argument. Hard to imagine that if they were actually doing some good that they wouldn't be able to prove it, though. Hard to imagine. It's also hard to imagine that 20% of these Federal programs don't do squat. And they wonder why we're having budgetary issues. They wonder why the consumer isn't spending more. It's because the country is being run by a bunch of folks who keep spending our money on crap like this. That's why.

A Fairly Reasonable Pay Freeze

Yesterday, President Barry's administration announced that they're going to not give any civilian federal employees (military personnel are excluded) a raise for the next two years. It is, essentially, a pay freeze. And it is, essentially, about friggin' time.

I'm not sure why it took so long for this to happen. It's not like we couldn't all see that it was necessary. According to the Huffington Post they're looking at a "...two-year pay freeze that would save the country $28 billion in the next five years and $60 billion over the coming decade." I like the sound of that. You know who doesn't like the sound of that? That's right. Civilian federal employees. To which I reply: Sorry. (Not really, but you know what I mean. Trust me, I had a much more colorful phrase that I was intending to use there. But then I remembered that I have friends who work for the federal government and I didn't see any need to anger them further.)

Am I being heartless, as per usual? I don't think I am. I think that I'm being realistic as per usual. (Realistic is never very popular.) Let's take a look at some simply astounding statistics (they're also known as facts) from the lovely folks over there at USA Today. Keep in mind that a lot of this data covers the time frame between 2005 and today. So, when the entire housing market crashed and when everything in the financial world went completely into the crapper, all of this stuff was going on. Also keep in mind that the current national unemployment rate is hovering around 9%. NINE percent. And as long as we're keeping things in mind, please also remember that earlier this year, unemployment was around 11%. ELEVEN. Now, let's see how things are going in the fantasy land that is working for the federal government, shall we?

Where to begin? How about here: "Top-paid staff have increased in every department and agency. The Defense Department had nine civilians earning $170,000 or more in 2005, 214 when Obama took office and 994 in June." Um, wait. What now? So, in the last FIVE years, the Defense Department went from having NINE civilians in the $170,000 or more range to NINE HUNDRED NINETY FOUR?!?! With SEVEN HUNDRED EIGHTY of those folks making that wage under President Barry's watch? He's only been President for two years!!

What else? How about this: "The biggest pay hikes have gone to employees who have been with the government for 15 to 24 years. Since 2005, average salaries for this group climbed 25% compared with a 9% inflation rate." Oh, sure. That makes perfect sense. Inflation is 9%, so absolutely the average salary of a federal worker should increase by 25%. Are you kidding me?! Is there anyone who can explain that rationale to me? Anyone? Anyone? OK, then. That's what I thought. Moving on...

"Federal workers earning $150,000 or more make up 3.9% of the workforce, up from 0.4% in 2005." And "Since 2000, federal pay and benefits have increased 3% annually above inflation compared with 0.8% for private workers." OK, then. Well. I think I've read enough.

It is about time that something was done to curb the ridiculous amount of debt that this country has incurred. And I realize that if you're a federal civilian employee, you are none to happy about this. Tell you what, buttercup. If you'd like, we could have the federal government deal with their bloated workforce the same way that the private industry has been dealing with their problems for...oh, forever. That's right. We could lay a bunch of y'all off. Would that make you feel better? Because that's what the private sector does. They lay people off. They don't freeze their pay. No, they cut their pay entirely by firing them. So if you're out there whining about this, knock it off. You're going to be hard pressed to find any sympathy in the private sector and you're sure as hell not going to find an iota of sympathy from me. My only two questions are "What took so long?" and "What's next?"

The Condescending President

You know what I can't stand? Wait. Let me narrow that down a little bit, lest we be here all the live long day. You know what I can't stand about politicians? Wait. Hmm. There's no way of phrasing this without generating an incredibly long list of possibilities. I'll just cut to the chase. I can't stand a condescending politician. And I really can't stand a condescending President. I'm talking to you, President Barry.

The huffy folks over there at The Huffington Post tell us that President Barry was at some town hall meeting that CNBC broadcast live on Monday. And I guess that the question or the issue was simple enough. Apparently, an audience member pressed President Barry to chime in on what it is that makes the Tea Party movement do its thing. For some reason, President Barry seems to think that there are no specific goals that these folks have. I'm not sure why he thinks that. But whatever the reason is, he came across sounding like a condescending jackass.

Here's part of what he replied (and it's the part that really ticked me off): "So the challenge, I think, for the Tea Party movement is to identify, specifically, what would you do?....It's not enough just to say get control of spending. I think it's important for you to say, I'm willing to cut veterans' benefits or I'm willing to cut Medicare or Social Security benefits or I'm willing to see these taxes go up. What you can't do, which is what I've been hearing a lot from the other side, is we're going to control government spending, we're going to propose $4 trillion of additional tax cuts, and that magically somehow things are going to work. Now, some of these are very difficult choices." Oh, for cryin' out loud.

There are two basic goals of the Tea Party movement. The second one can be almost automatic if the first goal is met. It's all about smaller government. Yes, it's also about lower taxes, but it's largely about smaller government. The government is huge and bloated. You don't think that there could be some cut backs in government there, President Barry? Really? Because you seem to think that we're all a bunch of idiots who would believe you that the only things that could be cut would be services that are essential.

This is what politicians do. Arnold Schwarzenegger pulls it at least once a year in California when they can't agree on a budget for this fiscally doomed state. They tell folks that, in order to stay within a budget, they're going to have to cut services like firefighters and policemen and school teachers. You don't want that, do you? No, of course not! That's when they justify raising taxes. But hold on a minute! Aren't there things within the governmental bureaucracy that could be cut other than firefighters, policemen and teachers? I'm 100% positive that there are.

President Barry, are you trying to tell me that every single government agency and department and job is absolutely, completely necessary? I don't think that it is. Are you going to tell me that every single government pension plan isn't overly generous? I don't think that you can tell me that and not have your nose grow at least six inches. You're trying to tell me that none of these governmental departments overlap and do the same work that other agencies do? And I'm supposed to believe you? Really?

How about, before you go suggesting cuts to Medicare and to veteran's benefits, you cut all services to those who are in this country illegally. How much money would that save? And that's just one area where money could be saved and where government could be shrunk. Don't go around threatening us by minimizing our obligation to our soldiers by suggesting that we should cut their services. How dare you. Seriously.

Smaller government. Lower taxes. Reduce the size of the government and spending will go down some. Reduce the size of the government to what it really needs to be reduced by and watch spending go down a great deal. Watch spending go down and watch the need to taxes to raise diminish. Remember, over fifty percent of Americans want fewer services and smaller government according to two different polls, one done in April of this year and the other conducted in September of this year. Over fifty percent want smaller government. Is that specific enough for you, President Barry? How else do we need to spell it out for you?

Governmental Brownies

You are aware of the fact that the government is extremely inefficient in many, many ways, aren't you? You have to be. It doesn't matter who the President is. It doesn't matter which party controls Congress. None of that matters. Government itself is its own entity. And it's a poorly functioning one at best. Don't believe me? Then you've been living under a rock. A very efficient rock.

Have you ever made brownies? Yes. Brownies. You know, you can buy one of those boxed mixes in the store for a couple of bucks and they're really quite efficient. I think all you do is add an egg and some oil or water or something, pour it into some sort of pan and bake the sucker for about 40 minutes. It's not hard. The instructions are right there on the side of the box. I'm pretty sure that a rhesus monkey could do it if you gave him all of the ingredients beforehand. (It's not like you could really expect the monkey to go to the store and buy all of the stuff. Monkeys are pretty short. They'd never be able to hand the money up to the cashier.)

But according to the taxpayer funded folks over at NPR, the government is not quite as bright as the rhesus monkeys. That's because the government's rules and regulations needed to bake brownies is twenty six pages long. Wait. What now?

Correct. 26 pages of how to bake brownies in the government. To which I ask, "Are you effing kidding me?" Oh, but they're not. Oh, no. That's why sections like Section 3.2.6 (the section covering the eggs) not only tells you which kinds of eggs are acceptable, but also references another section, as it reads (only in part) "Whole eggs may be liquid or frozen and shall have been processed and labeled in accordance with the Regulations Governing the Inspection of Eggs and Egg Products (7 CFR Part 59)." Good Lord, man.

Now if you ask a one Jeremy Whitsitt, who has something to do with something called the Department of Defense Combat Feeding Directorate (The ol' DDCFD), there's a reason for this. It's not a reason that makes any sense to me, but it's a reason. He says, "One thing we like to say is, 'What would happen if you cooked a meal, stored it in a stifling hot warehouse, dropped it out of an airplane, dragged it through the mud, left it out with bugs and vermin, and ate it three years later?'" If it were a military meal, Whitsitt says, it would still be edible and maybe even tasty." Um, OK...? Sounds....delicious. Or...something.

The article at NPR goes on to state that "Brownies made from the Pentagon’s recipe will probably last about three years if they're packaged properly." Wait. What now? If they're packaged properly? Sooooo, you're telling me that's it's about the packaging? Yet, there is a twenty six page document on how to make the freaking things? Who in the world cares how they're made? Doesn't it seem like it would be all about the packaging? Do we really need twenty six pages on how to make a brownie?

Maybe we don't. After all, "The Pentagon actually updated its official brownie specifications recently." Oh, good! I'm glad to know that's what the Pentagon is doing these days. Updating official brownie specifications. That will help find bin Laden. But apparently, "The new document has been streamlined and expanded to cover things like lemon poppy seed cake and chocolate banana nut muffin tops." Oh, thank God for the streamlining, not to mention the lemon poppy sees and the chocolate banana nuts with which to top the military muffins! (Kinda makes you forget that we're the most powerful nation on Earth there for a minute, doesn't it?) Did I just say that it was a streamlined document? Then why is it now thirty one pages?! I don't know either, but to see for yourself, the document is below. If it doesn't load, just click the handy link. Your tax dollars hard at work folks!

MIL-C-44072C