Monday, November 12, 2007

Mayroon MIndoro!

Diyos ko naman! Mayroon Mindoro pa nan dito sa Wisconsin!. My God, we have a Mindororo here in Wisconsin too!

Mindoro is also a major island of the Philippines

Labels: , ,

Sunday, January 28, 2007

Vetoing the Cigarette Tax Increase.

Charlie Sykes picks up a story saying Governor Doyle has decided to veto any cigarette tax increase put on his desk. Interesting, wonder what that veto will look like?

Sec 1.02) The department of revenue is directed to increase the tax on cigarattes from $0.77 per pack to $1.25 per pack the revenues thus collected will be allocated per section 1.89 of statute 227...


Yeah he will veto such a bill like he did this one!

Labels: ,

Sunday, January 14, 2007

Bleg: Is There an Arabic Restaurant in Wisconsin?

Yesterday the Empress and myself dined at Siroccos downtown Appleton. Not bad but pricey and we had our hearts set on some good ole Arabic food. There were teases of Arabic in the food but pork tenderloin & ham wrapped scallops do not strike me as very Arabic.

Is there an authentic Arabic restaurant in the state? Don't tell me Husnus on State St. in Madison either, as we have dined there and it didn't strike me as Arabic either. It was close but no hubbly-bubbly.

The last time I had decent Arabic food was in 2000 at the Golden Sheep on Khalifa St. in Al-Ain. I tell you it was heaven. Prior that, it was at a couple of joints in – Detroit.

Labels: , ,

Thursday, December 28, 2006

Duh!

Peg says
The state's outgoing attorney general said Wisconsin's new ban on gay marriage doesn't mean employers have to stop providing benefits to same-sex couples.

The six-page opinion released on Wednesday was one of Peg Lautenschlager's last official acts.

Voters in November approved a statewide constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

The city of Madison asked Lautenschlager to clarify whether the amendment had any bearing on its ability to offer benefits to domestic partners.

Lautenschlager wrote that the amendment's language shows "that neither the Legislature nor the people intended to invalidate domestic partnerships when they adopted this provision."[emphasis added]
Source: WISC-TV.com
Duh! The amendment was meant to restrict how government defines marriage and not contracts between an employee and an employer. I am currently working for a company that provides benefits to domestic partners and it seems to a couple (hetero-unmarried) I know are working through getting this set up with one of their employers.

Labels: , , ,