|
| |
 |
Friday, February 20, 2004 |
Shark Dander
Headline in the San Francisco Chronicle, chronicling Thursday night's Sharks-Blackhawks tilt in Chicago: "Sharks get dander up." And the subhed says, "Chicago's questionable tactics rile San Jose."
OK, taking the subhed first: No, it wasn't "tactics" that got "San Jose" riled up. Tactics imply some kind of thinking. The Sharks were mad about their hosts' thoughtless behavior -- extreme rough-housing of the National Hockey League variety.
But the more important question is raised by the Chron's headline: Since when do sharks have dander? A rugby-playing colleague of mine, a native of Hawaii who knows sharks, says they're skins are covered with tiny abrasive denticles, not fur, so no dander. Just what I thought. She agreed an acceptable headline would be: "Sharks get denticles in uproar."
11:44:32 PM 
|
|
Your future ... as a G-Person
There's a good short piece in the Trib today about the FBI putting word out that it needs to hire 900 new intelligence analysts. I was intrigued -- I think everyone secretly wants to be a cop at some time or other, or at least I do -- so I looked for the jobs on the FBI's site. Since the analyst openings require a top-secret security clearance, that means a deep background check. So I took a look at the "final background application" page to see what sort of information the bureau would want from and about an aspiring G-Person. But checking out the application means disobeying this directive:
"Do not download this application unless you are advised by an official FBI Representative who will provide you with a mailing address or fax number."
But I clicked and downloaded every page. Nothing to do now but await the repercussions.
5:01:30 PM
|
|
My current rage ...
... is only that the Radio UserLand software with which this blog is published is stupid and user-unfriendly. Not that I'm a genius, but here's the current case in point: I write an item. I get ready to post it. I go to check one of the stupid category pages I've set up for parallel posting of my sapient observations, but instead of hitting the check-box, I hit the link to the category instead and am taken to that page. Not a problem. But oh, no! Going back to the previous page, where I had written my post, it's gone. Again, not that we're talking about the Sentences that Transformed the Way We See the World -- someone else must have written them -- but it's *&%$& infuriating.
Isn't it?
2:07:24 PM
|
|
© Copyright 2004 Dan Brekke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
