What to Do with Bad Shampoo

March 30, 2013 at 4:32 pm | Posted in Practical tips | Leave a comment
Tags: ,
Friseurmeisterin bei der Arbeit (hairdresser at work), photographed 2005-10-01 by Frank C. Müller in Mannheim, Germany.

Friseurmeisterin bei der Arbeit (hairdresser at work), photographed 2005-10-01 by Frank C. Müller in Mannheim, Germany.

What to do with bad shampoo?
It works for some, but not for you.

In my relentless quest to avoid buying from companies that contribute primarily to the Republican Party, I occasionally try brands of shampoo that are new to me.

Some do not work well, at least for me.  Is there an alternative to just throwing the shampoo away?

There is.  Shampoo is excellent as hand soap.  It is also very effective for washing toilet bowls.

Washing hands with soap, photographed 7 September 2008 by Serenity.

Washing hands with soap, photographed 7 September 2008 by Serenity.

A toilet with a flush water tank. Photo taken on October 5, 2006 by Jarlhelm.

A toilet with a flush water tank. Photo taken on October 5, 2006 by Jarlhelm.

But be warned: if you wash a toilet bowl with shampoo, the toilet bowl may stare back at you.  See photo 7 in this very amusing collection.

Heloise, feel free to quote these hints.

The Green Parties of Australia and the US

August 21, 2012 at 7:16 pm | Posted in Climate change, Conceited, Global warming, Presidential election | 6 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Several posts (Jill Stein, Roseanne Barr, and the Green Party, Mr Belly Button and the Green Party) in this blog have pointed out the negative electoral effect of the Green Party, and its vagueness, impracticality and grandiose quality.  The US Green Party seems to be a self-indulgent hobby.  Its only effect on US politics so far has been to help Republicans win elections.  Of course, this unintended effect blocks the achievement of all of the goals of the Green Party, and of those who vote for its candidates.

But these criticisms apply only to the US Green Party.  Blogging on WordPress has acquainted me with the Australian Green Party.  It seems to be entirely different from the US Green Party.  I came to that view by following James Wight’s posts, in particular

http://jameswight.wordpress.com/2012/08/03/renewable-energy-target-at-risk/
http://jameswight.wordpress.com/2012/08/02/australia-admits-renewables-cheap/
http://jameswight.wordpress.com/2012/07/28/new-coal-export-terminal-must-not-proceed/

Wight’s blog shows that the Australian Green Party, unlike the US Green Party, does the hard work of crafting detailed policies and justifies them with quantitative data and analyses.  Thus they really contribute something substantive and usable to discussions of policy, and their ideas can be cited and used even by the elected members of other parties, as well as by the Green Party itself.  Unlike the US Green Party, the Australian Green Party is constructive.

Australia’s Green Party shows how the US Green Party could change itself into something beneficial, and no longer inimical to its own stated objectives:
– It could propose detailed, quantitative proposed legislation and regulatory action.  This should be detailed enough to be used as draft legislation, and should be backed by quantitative data and assessments of impact.
– It could avoid siphoning votes away from the Democratic Party.

Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.