Not that there's anything wrong with looking like Jessica Alba. But, um, you're Chinese, for starters, and it might be a wee bit difficult pulling this off, if you know what I mean. Besides, if the guy you're hoping to win back is the reason you're doing this, he isn't worth it.
A Chinese woman whose boyfriend insisted she wore her make-up like actress Jessica Alba is now planning the drastic step of changing her entire face to look like the Hollywood star.
Desperate to win back her obsessed boyfriend, who had insisted she wore a blonde wig and copy Miss Alba in every way, the 21-year-old woman is prepared to spend a fortune on the very physical make-over.
Chinese surgeons say that changing the woman's face so she ends up looking like the Fantastic Four star can be done, but it will be extremely expensive.
However they have revealed that the woman is well off and that 'money is no object as long as the end result is to turn herself into a Jessica lookalike'.
Identifying herself only as Xiaoqing, the woman told the Shanghai Daily that her 28-year-old ex-boyfriend was so obsessed with Miss Alba that he hung photos of her on the walls of his home and carried her image on his mobile phone.
'He was always telling me to do my make-up like Jessica does, even when I'm asleep,' she said.
'At Christmas time he gave me a blonde wig to wear and asked me to keep it on all the time.'
But it was that wig that was to bring about the end of their relationship.
As she walked around Shanghai wearing the wig and Miss Alba-style eye-catching make-up she noticed people staring at her and laughing. She was so upset by the public's reaction that she tore off the wig and her false eyelashes and threw them to the ground.
Reverting to her Chinese looks, her boyfriend wanted no more of her.
Now Xiaoqing has said she wants him back - and is ready to change her appearance so that she will look like Miss Alba forever.
'I love him very much,' she said of her former lover. 'That's why I always followed his opinions. I don't want to lose him.'
Doesn't sound like the healthiest of relationships.
As their world melts around them and they scurry for cover, the climate hoaxers are now desperately trying to cling to their jobs and precious funding that keeps them in business. Today's news is sure to send the warmers into a state of panic, as the UK's chief scientific advisor admits the time has come to listen to the skeptics of the junk science. Sure, good idea, considering the skeptics have the truth on their side.
Prof John Beddington admitted the impact of global warming had been exaggerated by some scientists and condemned climate researchers who refused to publish data which formed the basis of their reports into global warming.
In an interview, Prof Beddington, called for a new era of honesty and responsibility from the environmental community and said scientists should be less hostile to sceptics who questioned man-made global warming.
Prof Beddington said public confidence in climate science would be boosted by greater honesty about its uncertainties.
''I don't think it's healthy to dismiss proper scepticism,” he said.
“Science grows and improves in the light of criticism.
“There is a fundamental uncertainty about climate change prediction that can't be changed.”
His comments come after the United Nations’ climate science panel admitted last week that it made a mistake by claiming that the Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was forced to apologise after the prediction in its benchmark 2007 report – that Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035 – was revealed to have been based on unsubstantiated claims.
It followed another row surrounding the science behind climate change, dubbed “Climategate”, when leaked e-mails appeared to suggest that scientists at the University of East Anglia had manipulated climate change data.
This is all well and good but the horses have left the barn and aren't coming back. The credibility of these people has been irrevocably shattered and their fundamental dishonesty all these years has destroyed any shred of credibility they cling to.
When ClimateGate first erupted their first reflex was to lie, hide the decline and lash out at critics. They've engaged in one of the greatest hoaxes in history and it's they who need to repair their image, apologize for the fraud they're perpetrated, reveal all their data and be prosecuted if they indeed are found culpable. It's not time to make nice with the folks they've likened to Holocaust deniers. That's a bit too late.
Considering this is Maureen Dowd, it's hard to tell whether this is sarcasm or true love. Frankly, this sounds like something more made for Tiger Beat than the New York Times. Then again, Tiger Beat does have higher journalistic standards.
He’s The One, all right.
The handsome, athletic pol with the comely wife and two lovely daughters who precipitously rose from the State Legislature to pull us all together.
The fresh face and disarming underdog America’s been waiting for, someone who suffered through his parents’ divorce, watched his mom go on welfare and survived some wayward youthful behavior to become disciplined and successful — a lawyer, a lawmaker and a devoted family guy who does dog duty.
Someone who’s always game for a game of pickup basketball, loves talking sports and even boasts beefcake photos. A pro-choice phenom propelled into higher office by conservatives, independents and Democrats, a surprise winner with a magical aura.
The New One is the shimmering vessel that we are pouring all our hopes and dreams into after the grave disappointment of the Last One, Barack Obama.
The only question left is: Why isn’t Scott Brown delivering the State of the Union? He’s the Epic One we want to hear from. All that inexperience can really be put to good use here.
Obama’s Oneness has been one-upped. Why settle for a faux populist when we can have a real one? Why settle for gloomy populism when we can have sunny populism? Why settle for Ivy League cool when we can have Cosmo hot? Why settle for a professor who favors banks, pharmaceutical companies and profligate Democrats when we can have an Everyman who favors banks, pharmaceutical companies and profligate Republicans? Why settle for a 48-year-old, 6-foot-1, organic arugula when we can have a 50-year-old, 6-foot-2, double waffle with bacon?
Get a hold of yourself, woman. Sounds like you want to hump his leg.
You can set your clock by this guy and his endless proclamations he's not running, he might run, he might change parties, he might endorse someone, he might want to be vice president ... enough. Just shut up and be Mayor of New York City and worry about the big things, like how much salt people are consuming. The shamelessness of the guy, constantly putting his name out there and then weakly claiming he has no aspirations. He's three weeks into his third term as mayor and already getting cute.
It's déjà vu all over again for Mayor Bloomberg.
The Republican-turned-independent Hizzoner yesterday said he has "no plans" to run for president. But that hasn't kept him from reveling in the rampant speculation over the possibility -- just as he did during the last presidential cycle.
The latest rumors swirled after it was revealed that Bloomberg was hiring Hillary Rodham Clinton's former media strategist, Howard Wolfson, as an administration adviser.
Pressed about the significance of the move, Bloomberg smiled and told a reporter, "I can't believe you're even asking" about presidential plans," then went on to say he's thrilled to have someone like Wolfson leave a lucrative consulting business to join city government.
Still, as annoying as Bloomberg is, he'd be infinitely preferable to the current occupant of the White House.
You know things are going south when all the sycophants are jumping ship. The other day it was Jon Stewart goofing on Obama's TelePrompter crutch, now today Obamagirl is having second thoughts.
I bet she's got the hots for Scott Brown.
First, Massachusetts turned on the president.
Now, the bikini-clad "Obama Girl" -- who famously cooed about her "crush" throughout the presidential campaign on YouTube videos -- admits the thrill is gone.
Amber Lee Ettinger -- the buxom sensation who lip-synched about her love for then-candidate Barack Obama -- said she wishes he spent his first year in office more focused on fixing the abysmal economy.
"I think he's doing an OK job," said Ettinger, whose original "Crush on Obama" video, first shown in 2007, has had more than 16.5 million views on YouTube.
"I know he's getting a lot of flak for things that he's not doing," she told The Post. "In my opinion, I feel like he should be focusing a lot more on jobs and the economy."
Ettinger, 28, said that even though she doesn't have health care -- "I can't afford it" -- she still thinks Obama should have waited to tackle the thorny legislation that has been blamed for the devastat ing Democratic loss of Ted Kennedy's Senate seat.
Showing she's still pining a bit for her man, she gives the hapless Obama a grade of B-.
Last year's $787 billion economic stimulus bill is going to be even more expensive — $75 billion more.
The new Congressional Budget Office estimate, released Tuesday, provides more ammunition for Republicans who say the stimulus has been long on spending and short on creating promised jobs. The additional cost also eats into the savings forecast from the budget freeze President Barack Obama is expected to propose Wednesday night during his State of the Union address.
Almost half of the additional cost, $34 billion, is because the food stamp program won't be able to take advantage of lower-than-expected inflation rates and will instead have benefits set by the stimulus bill.
Higher unemployment insurance costs added $21 billion to the bill, and stimulus-subsidized bonds to pay for infrastructure projects have proven more popular than expected with state and local governments.
The $75 billion increase would erase one-third of the $250 billion in 10-year savings that would come from the partial domestic spending freeze being proposed by Obama. The boost in unemployment payments alone would more than erase the $10 billion to $15 billion in first-year savings from such a freeze.
U.S. President Barack Obama will freeze the salaries of senior White House officials and other top political appointees for savings of $4 million in fiscal 2011, a senior administration official said on Tuesday.
The official told Reuters that Obama, in his State of the Union address on Wednesday, would likely mention the move, which will expand on the pay freeze he ordered last year.
Wow, a whole $4 million a year from now. A regular fiscal conservative, this one.
Maybe Joe Wilson can interrupt the SOTU tomorrow and let him know he's still lying.
The unfortunately named blobfish has already acquired a reputation for looking sad.
And now it has good reason for its glum expression - scientists are warning over-fishing by trawlers of its south eastern Australian habitat is threatening to make it extinct.
The bloated bottom dweller, which can grow up to 12 inches, lives at depths of up to 800m, so it rarely seen by humans.
But thanks to increased fishing, the fish is being dragged up with other catches. Despite being unedible itself, the blobfish lives at the same depths as other more appetising ocean organisms, including crab and lobster.
Deep-sea expert Professor Callum Roberts, from University of York, said the blobfish had plenty to be miserable about.
Prof Roberts, author The Unnatural History of the Sea, said: 'Blobfish are very vulnerable to being dragged up in these nets and from what we know this fish is only restricted to these waters.
The comments at the link will bring you to tears. A sample:
Looks like my mother in law when she just comes out of the sea and sunbathe's! - OneWhoKnows, Shangri-La, 26/1/2010 4:21
The prank was set up perfectly. A high school girls' basketball coach in Kansas was told he'd win tickets to the Final Four if he hit a half-court shot while blindfolded. The crowd was instructed to scream wildly when his attempt inevitably failed (because, really, that shot is nearly impossible) so the coach would think the shot went in. For an instant ,he'd think he was Final-Four-bound and then the joke would be revealed. There was just one problem, though: He made it.
The students at Olathe High School in Kansas may have picked the wrong foil for the joke. Joel Branstrom, the popular girls' basketball coach at the school, was a walk-on for the University of Kansas basketball team in 1997. Clearly he had the basketball chops to make such a prank risky, at best.
That Kansas team, by the way, was ranked No. 1 headed into the NCAA tournament but lost one game short of the Final Four. Branstrom was hoping he'd finally get to go this year. Instead he received a gift certificate from a Mexican restaurant from students who felt guilty about setting up the prank.
Here's the version from College Park last year, when the guy who got punked thought he won $500,000.
I just love a good Democrat civil war, and these two seemingly are going at it daily. It's very close to getting nasty and personal. I can't wait.
An hour after tweeting her outrage at Harold Ford Jr. for dubbing her a "parakeet" of Democratic leaders, Gillibrand laced into her potential primary rival in an interview with The Post, branding him a phony and saying he's spinning a "fraud" image as a political outsider.
Gillibrand -- who has been accused of having party leaders and well-placed surrogates do her heavy hitting for her -- spoke shortly after slapping back at Ford Jr. with her "Twitter" account, saying she wouldn't let her young child name-call that way, a move that was heavily mocked by her near-opponent's team.
"I really don't know who Harold Ford thinks I am but I'm not gonna be pushed aside (by) his banker buddies," she said.
Ford had told The Post's Fred Dicker on his Talk1300am radio show on Monday that neither Gillibrand nor her political patron, Sen. Charles Schumer, is keeping New York's interests in mind, and accusing his would-be rival of being a "parakeet."
She followed up the too-cute email play with an unprompted phone call, saying, "This guy aspires to be a US senator?"
"Him calling me names doesn't hurt me but it affects New York because it distracts from issues," she added, saying, "All we know about him is his record which is abysmal for New York."
And she blasted his payroll tax-cut ideas as "a regurgitation of failed Bush" policies.
She called ideas that she's a puppet of Schumer "absurd, it's insulting, it's very far from the truth....my record, if anybody would bother to look at it, is that I fight for the poeple I represent."
She added, "The fact that he says he's an outsider is ridiculous. It's a fraud."
Ford spokesman Davidson Goldin lashed back hard, saying, Ford is someone "who will focus on creating jobs for New Yorkers, so it's no surprise the unelected senator seems so afraid of losing in an actual election.
"It's interesting the unelected senator is spending her time on Twitter rather than fighting to create jobs for New Yorkers," Goldin added.
The Ford camp appears eager to make an issue of Gillibrand's having represented the evil Big Tobacco.
"She started her career as a tobacco apologist and after being appointed senator in a backoom deal, has spent her time kowtowing to Washington insiders," he said. "She takes positions that hurt the people of New York, whether it's raising our taxes or killing jobs. And her rock bottom approval numbers prove that New Yorkers are well aware of this. Undoubtedly she is too."
Memo to those news organizations planning to charge for online content: Consider alternative plans. Granted, we're talking about Newsday here and their circulation has been tanking for years. Yet when a major newspaper is charging for access and gets 35 people to sign up over three months their future is rather murky, at best.
In late October, Newsday, the Long Island daily that the Dolans bought for $650 million, put its web site, newsday.com, behind a pay wall. The paper was one of the first non-business newspapers to take the plunge by putting up a pay wall, so in media circles it has been followed with interest. Could its fate be a sign of what others, including The New York Times, might expect?
So, three months later, how many people have signed up to pay $5 a week, or $260 a year, to get unfettered access to newsday.com?
The answer: 35 people. As in fewer than three dozen. As in a decent-sized elementary-school class.
That astoundingly low figure was revealed in a newsroom-wide meeting last week by publisher Terry Jimenez when a reporter asked how many people had signed up for the site. Mr. Jimenez didn't know the number off the top of his head, so he asked a deputy sitting near him. He replied 35.
Michael Amon, a social services reporter, asked for clarification.
"I heard you say 35 people," he said, from Newsday's auditorium in Melville. "Is that number correct?"
Mr. Jimenez nodded.
Hellville, indeed.
The web site redesign and relaunch cost the Dolans $4 million, according to Mr. Jimenez. With those 35 people, they've grossed about $9,000.
In that time, without question, web traffic has begun to plummet, and, certainly, advertising will follow as well.
Of course, there are a few caveats. Anyone who has a newspaper subscription is allowed free access; anyone who has Optimum Cable, which is owned by the Dolans and Cablevision, also gets it free. Newsday representatives claim that 75 percent of Long Island either has a subscription or Optimum Cable.
"We're the freebie newsletter that comes with your HBO," sniffed one Newsday reporter.
Mr. Jimenez was in no mood to apologize. "That's 35 more than I would have thought it would have been," said Mr. Jimenez to the assembled staff, according to five interviews with Newsday staffers.
I'm one of those Cablevision subscribers who gets access and since this started I may have gone to Newsday two or three times as it is.
This clown James Dolan has also presided over a decade of abysmal failure as owner of the New York Knicks and has little success to show with the New York Rangers. If it weren't for his daddy he'd be lucky to have a job at McDonalds.
The independent filmmaker who brought ACORN to its knees last year with an undercover expose was arrested this week along with three others, including the son of a federal prosecutor, and accused of trying to interfere with the phones at Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu's office.
Activist James O'Keefe, 25, was already in Landrieu's New Orleans office Monday when Robert Flanagan and Joseph Basel, both 24, showed up claiming to be telephone repairmen, according to U.S. Attorney Jim Letten's office. Letten says O'Keefe recorded the two with his cell phone.
Once inside the reception area, Flanagan, the son of acting U.S. Attorney Bill Flanagan in Shreveport, and Basel asked for access to the main phone at the reception desk.
After handling the phone, "Flanagan and Basel next requested access to the telephone closet because they needed to perform work on the main telephone system," Letten's office said.
The men were directed to another office in the building, they're accused of again misrepresenting themselves as telephone repairmen.
They were arrested later by the U.S. Marshal's Service. Details of the arrest were not available. A fourth man, Stan Dai, 24, was also arrested, but Letten's office said only that he assisted the others in planning, coordinating and preparing the operation.
Barry O's cast of clowns, er cabinet members, have put together little video messages for us little people that are meant to inspire and fill us with the spirit of hope and change. They instead should serve as a warning of what you can expect in the coming years and the final years of this lame duck president's term.
Janet Nincompoop's priorities for the coming year?
I think we tried that whole comprehensive immigration reform thing a couple of years ago. She might want to check with Sen. McCain on how that whole thing worked out, since he is one of the few who was in favor of it that managed to keep his seat in the Senate, mostly because he wasn't up for re-election.
Gee, what is missing from this list of priorities for wonderful leader of Homeland Security?
Terrorism! At least she didn't mention home-grown terrorists. You know, like all those military veterans or Tea Party protesters. Pesky little scamps, doncha know.
How about Eric Holder, head of the Department of Injustice?
1. Financial fraud 2. Safety of Americans 3. Civil Rights 4. Fairness in our markets
How about that case against the New Black Panther Party in Pennsylvania? How did that thing turn out? About that transparency you are talking about, why are you ignoring a FOIA request for documents related to your dismissal of the case?
Do you really expect us to take you serious with your insane decision to bring the Club Gitmo guests to New York for a show trial?
Just as a funny side note, I tried to get a screen grab of the picture of the cabinet and wasn't able to do it so I decided to go see if they had one in the photo section of the website. No luck. There are however, three pages of pictures of the Magnificent One while there are only four, not four pages, mind you, four photos of the First lady and three photos of the First Family and very little else in the way of photos.
Hey, I'm never one to miss out on a good catfight. And while I don't have any dog cat in this fight, when anyone is throwing their weight around with mental defective Joy Behar, you know whose side I'm on. Plus, that quote is absolute gold.
Pull up a chair and enjoy the festivities.
A pretty spectacular Twitter war has broken out between former "Fat Actress" star Kirstie Alley and "The View" co-host Joy Behar -- though it's unclear why.
The two TV stars have been exchanging nasty tweets for more than two weeks, though it appears the war of 140-characters began when Alley took issue with the coverage of the Tiger Woods' cheating scandal on "The Joy Behar Show," the nightly talk show Behar hosts on HLN.
"And WHY has Joy Behar turned into such a self righteous c- - - head? OOOOooo that's right . . . FOREVER!" Alley tweeted.
A short while later she added: "CHEATING is between a husband and wife. Not TMZ and Joy Bewhore . . . God, I want to bash her in the vagina with her microphone."
Other Twitter subscribers quickly complained to Alley about her strong language and warned that her comments might provoke a response.
In response, the former "Cheers" actress claimed Behar "already WENT after me several times," and that "she trashes some celeb every night on her HLN show and every day on the view."
Behar appears to have ignored Alley's tirade until last Friday, when the talk-show host took mocking notice of what, until then, had been a one-sided fight.
"Kirstie Alley calls me Joy Bewhore," Behar tweeted. "Compliments! Compliments!"
The bitter feelings and public bashing has been a real head-scratcher, since no one can recall why there might be so much bad blood between the two women.
Who cares? They're women. When did they ever need an excuse to pick a fight?
This sounds like more good news for Nevada, which is already experiencing an increase of businesses and individuals fleeing the bankrupt socialist utopia known as California.
With a surge of last-minute votes expected, Oregon will decide Tuesday whether to impose higher taxes on businesses and people whose income is well into six figures
Liberals only know one policy when it comes to getting money. They love to use the force of law to seize from it one group of citizens--whoever happens to be on their enemies list at the moment--to give to another group. They lack any sort of intellectual power to come up different ways to try and generate revenue or, heaven forbid, they should even think for one moment to maybe, you know, cut spending.
Air America failed because they could not seize money and lacked the product or ingenuity to develop some other way of generating money.
What seems so oxymoronic about the two provisions is that one proposal is to tax wealthy individuals and the other is to tax businesses. Now correct me if I am wrong, but aren't the wealthy individuals the same people who own the businesses that, like, hire the other folks to work so that they can pay taxes?
The only ingenious thing liberals can come up with is Orwellian names to give to these new taxes, that are all too often cloaked behind some sort of really feel good, be kind to puppies, type of title.
In the last couple of days I have started to notice a curious new narrative coming out of the White House spin machine and subtly being presented by our news media. It is curious in a disturbing sort of way.
The most visible appearances of Obama as commander in chief are the speeches he’s given at military bases, the visit to Arlington National Cemetery on Veterans Day and the image of him saluting a flag-draped coffin at Dover Air Force Base.
The crux of the article was to show how Obama learned how to render a proper military salute; while being just nuanced enough to say that he spent some time learning how to salute, it was vague enough to not give any real details on how this was accomplished. The reader was left with the impression that this was president who was deeply concerned about the sensibilities of military service members and wishing to do right by them.
Fair enough. I figured it was a one-time puff piece, but then I ran across this story in a Denver newspaper which links back to an original Washington Post article today that attempts to show a president who is seeking advice from all sources to help shape his decision making. What raised my curiosity, however, was a couple of passages that were directly targeted towards the military audience.
During one of his Afghan review meetings last year, President Barack Obama surprised senior advisers by jumping into a discussion between two military officials about a new study of post-traumatic stress disorder. No one in the room had briefed Obama on the data.
"It's not like we'd sent him the study, but he'd clearly seen it," one adviser said. "It was telling."
PTSD is a serious issue and one that while much is known about it, the treatment is just as varied as the circumstances which cause it and vary from person to person. It is what makes the condition so insidious, because there is no one-size-fits-all or magic pill to treat it. I just found it odd that an article purporting to show how Obama seeks advice starts with paragraph or two showing him apparently letting senior advisers know he was familiar with the issue. Why he thought it was something to bring up in a review of Afghanistan is beyond me; maybe it was a topic thrown out for discussion, but to me appears to be an attempt to portray him as a empathetic leader concerned with making victims out of the military.
My fears were not assuaged when later on in the article I come across this.
After a middle-of-the-night trip to Dover Air Force Base to receive the bodies of fallen soldiers, Obama was both moved and disturbed, said advisers who talked with him about it. The speech he delivered a short time later at West Point announcing a 30,000-troop increase in Afghanistan was also "very emotional," Jarrett said.
"He talked to us all about the trip to Dover and coming back at 4 in the morning, and just how hard that was," she said. "But he couldn't let that interfere with making a decision that he thought was best for the American people.
The Jarrett mentioned above is Valerie Jarrett, who has been taking to the airwaves recently as part of the White House spin machine trying to somehow put lipstick on this pig of an administration.
The trip to Dover was nothing more then a photo op and everybody knows it. What is sending shivers up my spine is that in both of these stories so far the liberal view of our service members as victims come through, but I also am sensing an attempt for this administration to push more of these military related stories in the hope that like oppressed people all around the globe, they can find safety and security in the umbrella provided by those who wear the uniform of this country.
I guess with the week they just experienced they just may feel that way.
UPDATE: Right on cue here comes a story, once again from Politico about the First Lady making an announcement for an $8.8 Billion increase in support programs for the military. Why was the First Lady chosen to make this announcement? Veterans will certainly welcome the increase, if it goes to what it is purported to go for. With this administration that is a big IF.
Stepping up her focus on military families, first lady Michelle Obama announced Tuesday an increase in federal spending for support programs, a 3 percent hike that raises federal investment to a record $8.8 billion for the 2011 budget.
It just don't get no better then this. Unless of course you are Uncle Jimbo who gives us the impression that he was helping the young ladies put on the boots.
That is a "military technical expert" job even I could handle.
It's thinking like this that may soon leave the Democrats in a permanent minority. These "rich" people have only so much to give before they will abandon your state, you nitwit.
Oregon officials know all about anti-tax fervor.
Over the years, voters here have capped property taxes (saddling the state with two-thirds the cost of running the schools) and passed a constitutional amendment requiring rebates whenever tax receipts come in 2% over budget. Nine times they have been asked to OK a sales tax -- and said no. Proposals to increase the state income tax? Down in flames twice.
But now the Legislature is taking a tack that analysts think could finally pull the rug out from under the tax revolt: soaking the rich.
In mail-in voting that ends today, Oregon is considering measures to raise taxes on households earning $250,000 or more and on individuals earning at least $125,000, as well as hike corporate taxes. About 39,000 of the state's 1.5 million taxpayers would be subject to the higher tax, and some big companies could see their annual bills go from $10 to $100,000.
The success or failure of Measures 66 and 67 will be a concrete test -- one of the few in the country this year -- of how willing voters are to accept tax increases targeted at those theoretically best equipped to pay them.
"These measures are the first test of a progressive solution to the recession," said Cynthia Kain, a spokeswoman for the National Education Assn. who has been working to help pass the ballot measures.
Opponents of the tax hikes warn that they could cripple small businesses and jeopardize employment in a state that has lost 131,000 private-sector jobs during the recession.
But many voters appear willing to risk that. Polls have shown both measures ahead, although one late last week showed the gap tightening.
"I'm convinced. Let's tax the hell out of 'em," said Rebecca Maxwell, a young software developer from Portland.
Maybe some day when young Rebecca grows up she'll be one of those evil rich earning at least $125,000. How much you want to bet she's singing a different tune by then?
Naturally, it's the unions that are footing the tab to try and further rape the earners.
The campaign in support of the tax increases has been financed mostly with contributions from small businesses and public employee unions -- including $1.65 million from the Oregon Education Assn. and more than $1 million from other local and national public employee labor unions.
Their unquenchable thirst for more of your money will blow up in the faces. If these measures actually do pass, good luck finding jobs when the state's largest employers begin fleeing for more hospitable climates.
Not that there's anything wrong with looking like Jessica Alba. But, um, you're Chinese, for starters, and it might be a wee bit difficult pulling this off, if you know what I mean. Besides, if the guy you're hoping to win back is the reason you're doing this, he isn't worth it.
