This weekend I learned that there had been a recall of organic brown eggs produced at en Dulk Poultry Farms in Ripon, California and distributed through Safeway, Pak n’ Save, and CostCo. ((When Eggs Go Bad courtesy of TimOve.)) Although no illnesses have been reported, they are initiating this recall admist concerns about Salmonella.
Here’s how to check if you have these recalled eggs:
You have “Kirkland Organic Brown Eggs” from CostCo in the 18-count cartons. It will have either of the expiration and plant codes:
April 1 062, 35 P1776
April 8 069, 35 P1776
You have “O Organic Grade A Large Brown Eggs” from Safeway and Pack n’ Save in the 12-count cartons with the expiration and plant code:
SPOILER warning: This post discusses every big reveal from series finale
Battlestar Galactica: The Finale
If you’re a fan of Battlestar Galactica like myself, you may have watched the finale on Friday night and thought, “What the hell?” This show has introduced so much character development, conflict, and drama over four years that it is honestly difficult to tell whether I’m disappointed the series is ending or disappointed with the series’ ending. ((Photo by way of “diverse distinctive dave’s” blog)) They wrapped up most of the big questions and left a lot unanswered. Without further ado, I present you with the answers to all the outstanding questions gleaned from the post-finale press conference:
What’s the deal with the Battlestar Galactica “Final Supper” picture? Red Herringe?
Its an unintentional red herring. ((Photo courtesy of stridli. Editing, all me!)) basically has nothing to do with the show’s plot. It was a photo op someone thought would be cool. ((And, they were right.)) The writers had nothing to do with the photo setup, so don’t read anything into it.
What’s the deal with the “Cylon god”?
We don’t know. The “Cylon god” is not necessarily the same “god” referred to by the imaginary Baltar and Six. We probably won’t know for sure about the “Cylon god” until “Battlestar Galactica: The Plan” comes out in Fall 2009.
What’s the deal with imaginary Baltar and Six and the real Baltar and Caprica Six?
The imaginary Baltar and Six are agents of “god” that apparently only manifest to the real Baltar and Caprica Six. They are neither good nor bad, neither angels nor demons. The “god” the imaginary Baltar and Caprica Six serve is something akin to the collective unconscious underlying the universe. Their sole mission was to ensure the real Baltar and Caprica Six survive to deliver Hera to the CIC on the Galactica. The real Baltar and Caprica Six come to believe in the god described by their imaginary counterparts. This belief enables Baltar (a true cynic) to deliver his speach to Cavil and almost broker peace between the Cylons and humans and break the cycle of violence.
What’s the deal with the opera house dreams?
Four people (9Sharon “Athena” Agathon – a Cylon 8 model, President Laura Roslin, Dr. Gaius Baltar, and Caprica Six)) shared the opera house dream. This dream was meant to guide each of these people to the CIC on the Galactica at the end of the confrontation between the humans and Cylons.
What’s the deal with Kara Thrace/Starbuck?
Who the frak knows. While we don’t know how she was brought back to life, we do know why she was brought back. We also have no idea where she went or how she just disappeared. She was brought back from the dead for the purpose of entering the numeric equivalent of “All Along the Watchtower” into the FTL drive. Starbuck, her father, and Hera all tapped into something eternal and fundamental underlying the entire universe in order to hear/play this song.
What’s the deal with Daniel? Was Daniel the father of Kara Thrace/Starbuck?
Red Herring
He was an unintentional red herring. He was meant to be a “Cain and Abel” back story for Cavil to show he was a right bastard – nothing more. While there are certain pieces which support this theory, he was never meant to be Starbuck’s dad. The “Daniel” model Cylon would have been permanently destroyed long before Starbuck was ever born.
What happened to the Cylons in the base near the black hole?
After Racetrack’s Viper was knocked around, it accidentally nuked the Cylon baseship. After the battle and after the Galactica jumped away, it lost its stable orbit at the edge of the black hole and was pulled in.
What’s the deal with the various prophecies, the mandala/nebula/nova in Starbuck’s drawings, and “All Along the Watchtower”?
“Everything has happened before and will happen again.” The cycle of humans, humans building Cylons, Cylons evolving, human-Cylon violence, has occurred for thousands of years and will occur again. During these cycles certain people (Starbuck, Starbuck’s father, prophets, those who see the opera house dreams, etc) all tap into the collective unconscious underlying the universe. This allows Starbuck’s father to compose “All Along the Watchtower,” Hera to paint the musical notes for it, the song to be the key to unlock the final five, and the song to be the numerical equivalent of the way to our Earth. 150,000 years after everything in this series, humankind has again evolved to the point of embracing technology. This would allow the new BSG series to serve as a background and origin story for the original BSG series.
Tuesday I tried to submit settlement documents for a walk-through in Oakland. ((Photo courtesy of racatumba.)) I had prepared the document cover sheet, minutes of hearing, and had everything ready to go. As per procedure, I left the packet with the court clerk and came back about half an hour later.
When I returned the settlement documents were still on the counter, but without any indication of which judge I would be seeking approval from. I was told that the documents had already been signed by the day’s walk-through judge.
That’s when the fun started.
The computer told the clerk that the original documents in front of us had the judge’s signature and that the judge had the file. The documents clearly did not have the judge’s signature. However, since EAMS believed the documents were already approved, it felt (?) I shouldn’t be given the opportunity to walk the documents through. Even more interestingly, the EAMS was telling us that the documents had been approved that very afternoon.
Since I had stamped the documents in, the clerk did not want to return them to me so that I could ask the judge if he had signed the settlement. Mind you, the judge would have had to sign the documents (in invisible ink) in the half hour between the time I dropped off the documents and came back to pick them up. Eventually I was allowed to take the documents with me to ask the judge if he had signed them.
Once before the walk-through judge, I explained that I had no board file because EAMS believed he already had the file and had approved the documents I was handing him. Puzzled, the judge went to investigate whether he had approved the documents that did not have his signature. He returned a few minutes later saying that he did not have the file, he did not recall signing the documents, and that he did not recall signing any documents for myself or the Applicant’s attorney involved. EAMS was adamant that he had signed those documents.
Thankfully everyone in the hearing room was good-natured about the entire thing. The funniest part about the entire situation is that the court clerk, myself, and the judge were made to doubt our own recollection, the documentary evidence in front of us, and sanity because EAMS said so.
Last month I mentioned that this website had a record number of new visitors. I honestly thought that was an anomalous one day spike in traffic. Instead we’ve had a sustained increase in new visitors and people signing up to use the workers’ compensation calculators for free.
Ever since I relaunched this website I’ve had this idea in the back of my mind that getting to 500 users would be a big deal. There are literally hundreds of workers’ compensation professionals who rely on this website and its calculators to make their lives a little easier. This certainly feels like a big deal to me.
California Court of Appeals, Sixth Appellate District
Just when you thought things couldn’t get any crazier in workers’ compensation than Ogilvie, Almaraz/Guzman, Benson, and XyzzxSJO2. Yesterday I found out that on April 7, 2009 the case of Smith v. WCAB (California Youth Authority) is on calendar for oral argument. As with Almaraz/Guzman, Smith v. WCAB dealt with similar legal issues across two particular workers’ compensation cases. In case you missed it, here’s the court of appeal decision:
Smith involved an informal denial of medical treatment without a formal petition to terminate medical care under L.C. 4607, after an award of permanent disability. Eight years after Smith’s award, SCIF refused to authorize epidural injections. Smith’s attorney sought utilization review, Smith was reexamined by the AME who said the injections were necessary to relieve from the effects of the industrial injury. Although SCIF then authorized the injections without the need for a hearing, Smith’s attorney sought fees under L.C. 4607.
The WCJ denied Smith’s attorney’s petition for fess since there was no formal petition to terminated medical care. The WCAB denied reconsideration on the grounds that SCIF’s was not denying all medical treatment.
Amar is substantially similar to Smith, except that in Amar the workers’ compensation judge took the extra step of opining that SCIF’s denial of medical treatment was made in good faith, not unreasonable, and not improper.
However, the 2nd Appellate Court reversed the WCAB in Smith and Amar, stating in relevant part:
“We see no difference when a carrier informally denies some of the treatment that is a necessary part of medical care previously awarded. This is tantamount to a petition to deny medical care even though the carrier continues to provide treatment for some of applicant’s medical care.”
“Insurance carriers who fail to provide previously awarded medical care may not avoid attorney fees to successful applicants’ attorneys through the expedient of an informal denial, even when they do so in good faith.”
I would love to watch the oral argument on this case – but Los Angeles is a bit of a hike for me. ((I last watched oral argument on the Mt. Diablo Unified School District v. WCAB (Rollick) case back on 8/5/2008. It was particularly interesting for me since I was familiar with the applicant attorney, defense attorney, and facts of that case. If nothing else, its always fun to watch judges get snarky.)) I am very very interested to see how this case shakes out.
