Valentine's Day With a Twist

Well, here's a distasteful little twist on Valentine's Day/Presidents' Day:

This billboard is located on I-30 in Little Rock.  It advertises AshleyMadison.com, a "dating service" for married folks whose copyrighted motto is "Life is Short. Have an Affair."  For real.

In a recent press release, the founder of the site explained the connection among the former presidents and her "service" --

"Throughout history powerful men, particularly those in politics, have sought out the romantic company of women who weren't their wives. We chose to honor these three men as each had well-documented affairs during their time in office." In addition to their wandering eyes, Noel Biderman says the men have another major thing in common. "Despite their dalliances, they were still considered heroes by the American people, who never stopped viewing them as great leaders."

The website includes a link to "Infidelity News" and an online Adult Toy Store "by popular demand." And a freakin' blog!

"Great leaders" my foot.  Great politicians, yes, but I'm not so sure about the leader thing, and Bill Clinton is certainly not a hero by any stretch of the imagination.  Maybe JFK, but he went off and got all dead and stuff, so we never saw his full evolution.  I'm not even going to acknowledge that Progressive FDR.

If this is a legitimate business and not some colossal, cosmic joke, then as a society, We. Are. Doomed.

Or, perhaps you may call me "Pollyanna."

It is kind of a clever ad.

Happy Valentine's Day.

Of Big Brother and Postage Stamps

So, I just ordered stamps for wedding invitations online from the USPS website.  I've been procrastinating a bit because I just dread the idea of dealing with government-related websites, but it's better than standing in the interminably slow lines at the actual Post Office substation.

This is the first time I've ordered stamps online -- it's just so easy to buy them at the ATM, but Younger Daughter wanted "specialized" wedding ring and cake stamps, so I suckered in and went to the website.

It's not the easiest site to navigate, in all honesty.  But, I finally found Items 574240 and 574140, entered the quantity, and expected the shipping or payment screen to pop up.  But, no!  A "sign in or register" screen popped up.  With no option to order simply as "guest" without registering.

I hate websites like that.  I mean, who wants to register at five hundred thirty-seven thousand websites and keep up with five-hundred thirty-seven thousand passwords and usernames?!?!

So, being the wonderful mother I am, I registered so my baby could get her cute stamps, using the password "USPS3sucks," and not allowing it to remember my credit card info or send me exciting emails about new products and services from my postal service.  Then, I clicked "continue" expecting the shipping or payment screen to pop up.  But, no!  A "you must acknowledge our privacy policy" screen popped up.  A rather pushy "you must acknowledge our privacy policy" screen.  This is what it said (italics mine):

"The information you supply will be used to provide you online registration capability for Internet-based services, and to provide those services. Please be aware that this service is voluntary, but that requested information is required to provide the service. Collection of information for this service is authorized by 39 U.S.C. 401, 403, and 404. We do not disclose your personal information to anyone, except in accordance with the Privacy Act.


Authorized disclosures include limited circumstances such as the following:
(a) in a legal proceeding in which the USPS is a party or has an interest, or pursuant to federal court order;
(b) to a congressional office at your request;
(c) to an independent certified public accountant during an official audit of USPS finances;
(d) to an authorized credit bureau or other government agency for purposes of identity verification;
(e) to a Postal Service contractor, such as a technology or service provider, if the disclosure is necessary to fulfill an agency function;
(f) to a payee or financial institution for billing payment; and
(g) to a government law enforcement agency pursuant to a federal warrant.

For information about additional protections we provide you, please visit our privacy policy via the link below."

And the referenced link is kinda hard to locate, too.

So, in essence, it's purely optional ("voluntary") for you to provide the information requested by the website, but you won't get your stamps unless you do.  And they won't share any of your info unless one of Uncle Sam's other nieces or nephews asks for it.  Or unless the USPS really screws up and lands in litigation.

Holy.  Crap.

Now they really know where to find me! 

I'm thinking I should have stood in line at the substation. 

Winning the Battle of the Form Letters

It's time for us taxpaying constituents to revolt against form letters from our elected officials that may or may not be on topic. Here's my suggestion for our very own form rebuttal:

Dear Mr. and/or Ms. Elected Official:

I am in receipt of your form letter response to my (choose one: email/letter) dated (choose one: 1 month ago; 2 months ago; more than 2 months ago) on the subject of _________________ (fill in the blank). I appreciate your acknowledgement of my correspondence.

I do not appreciate, however, the enormous amount of irrelevant boilerplate contained in your email. You chose not to address my questions or comments, opting instead to pat yourself on the back in an effort to influence my opinion of you and the "job you've been doing for me" (choose one: on Capitol Hill; in the White House; in the state capitol; in the loony bin known in New Orleans as City Hall).

I can quite easily ascertain your position on any issue, and how you voted; I know how to use several search engines on the internet. It is wholly unnecessary for you to explain why an issue is important and how you plan to resolve it -- I already know. That's why I wrote to you.

You, however, need to hear directly from your constituents, in depth, to understand the will of the electorate in our Representative Democratic Republic. That's why we correspond with you -- to communicate our positions, not to solicit you to blow smoke where the sun don't shine.

I will continue to communicate with you, and I will appreciate getting a brief reply from you acknowledging that you comprehend my position. I will not appreciate the heaping mounds of self-congratulatory barky-malarkey in which your previous communications abound.

I remember, I make contributions to candidates, and I vote.

Most VERY sincerely,

MoogieP

Of course, I don't have to worry about receiving form letters from Speaker Pelosi or the Young President -- they never reply to the love letters I send them anyway. Do you have anything to add?

Internet Sales Taxes: A Return to Blue Law Practices?

Oh, ye gods and gophers. The "Blue Laws" of yesteryear are rearing their bizarre heads on Capitol Hill.

Michelle Malkin reports here that a Republican Senator from Wyoming (?!? Are you listening, brother-in-law?) and a Democratic Congressman from Massachusetts (is there anything but Democrats in Massachusetts?) will introduce legislation requiring internet retail sales merchants to collect sales tax on behalf of all the states. Serious lobbying is expected to ensue on both sides of the issue.

Malkin points out that this is just one more hidden tax that will smack the middle class in the face, and that collecting the taxes will be nearly impossible because the tax structures among the states vary so widely, with one state taxing something one way and another not taxing it at all.

I'll point out how ridiculous the Blue Laws (Sunday Sales Prohibition Laws) were. Let's take a stroll down memory lane.

When my older daughter was a baby, Arkansas had yet to do away with Blue Laws and the sale of clothing was prohibited on Sunday. Okay, no serious clothes shopping on Sunday -- deal with it. But, some nimrod in the Revenue Department came up with the brilliant decree that disposable diapers are "clothing." No Sunday sales of disposable diapers. Have you ever had a baby with tummy issues and no diapers? Not a pretty picture (or memory!). Also, you couldn't buy a leather belt because it's an item of clothing, but you could buy a leather dog collar. No sales of hand tools, no sales of tools enabling you to cook. So, you could buy plastic wrap because that was only a food storage tool, not a food preparation tool. Aluminum foil, on the other hand, could be used to prepare food, so no aluminum foil on Sunday for you.

Figuring out what and how to tax internet sales will be as difficult to figure out as what could be sold under the Blue Laws.

Egad.

Cross-posted here.