Newspage go!

So as I tried to inject something fun into everyone's lives, I began to see it was going to be a test to find the first OTHER article after I skimmed all the Trump articles off the news.  Here's what I came up with.

FoxNews- a Bishop performing a memorial service for Baseball HOFer Roberto Clemente was punched during the service by a man in a white robe, who then ran away.  Nobody seems to know a motive, but it WAS in New Jersey, so...

CNN: A government adviser in Myanmar who supported religious liberty was shot dead at an airport in Burma (yes, I said Burma, not the M word) just after cradling a child in his arms.  Believed to be from the Muslim group currently being persecuted by the army of that darling of citizen's rights, Aung San Suu Kyi.

MSNBC:  The entire front page was Trump articles.  Talk about perspective.

BBC, Agency France Presse, and Deutsche Welle all had as their first non-Trump story the results of the socialist primary in France, with Benoit Hamon the unlucky sap expected to get pummelled by far right Marine Le Pen in the general.  An appendage to this story in the BBC article...


However, there have been reports of mismanagement, with one reporter from news site Buzzfeed saying she had been allowed to vote four times in the second round. She said she voided her ballot so as not to affect the outcome.
Journalists from Le Monde newspaper also claimed they were permitted to vote more than once in the first round.

Wow, who'd a thunk it?  Leftists voting multiple times...


Denmark's Copenhagen Post led with a wonderful story about how everyone loves soccer.  After that was a story about the ever-tightening immigration rules in the world's happiest nation.  Hmmm...


The Moscow Times led with a story about how avant-garde artists and writers did some amazing children's books back in the early days of the Soviet Union, teaching children about the wonderful new world of Communism.  Until Stalin started the purges and sent them all to the Gulags.

In the Philippines, the lead was on how President Duarte was going to carry on his drug war, despite the fact that all his cops are corrupt.

The Times Of India- and yes, starting here with a Trump story- led with a story that claimed that everybody in the USA "from the courts to the cabbies", were forming a wall of dissent against the immigrant ban.  Obviously, their reporter never went farther than the airport or the NY Times.  Shortly thereafter, they had an article about some Bollywood starlet's favorite sex position.  Seems they are following the BBC's lead in descending from professionalism.

In Australia, the first Non-T story involved Roger Federer hinting about retirement after beating Rafael Nadal in the Aussie Open tennis final.  And the tennis world shuddered.


Xinhua led with smiling people enjoying the Chinese New Year this weekend.  I'm guessing that since none of them were wearing respirators, this was not a Beijing story.

Obviously not a very funny lot, but I had my patience rewarded when I got to the Japan Times and found this:

SAGA – Two men with the same name who had run as candidates in Sunday’s municipal assembly election in Karatsu, Saga Prefecture, have been elected.

But for about 800 votes, the local election board could not differentiate which candidates they were cast for, causing such votes to be apportioned according to the proportion of votes each received from other voters.

Both men were named Shigeru Aoki, which is written using the same three kanji (青木茂). One was a 56-year-old incumbent assembly member and the other a 43-year-old challenger.

The election board had asked voters to write either their age, or “incumbent” or “challenger,” beside their name if voting for one among the 32 candidates running for 30 seats in the assembly.

The message did not get across to everyone. Some votes were judged to be invalid for failing to differentiate between the two, including ones that said, alongside their name, “the better-looking one.” The board decided the phrase defied objective judgment.

Campaign officials for both candidates reported receiving phone calls from voters that they had cast their votes to the wrong candidate, getting the “incumbent” and “challenger” mixed up.

Not trying to be the ugly American, but which one is "the better looking one"?

In an effort to gussy-up the post a bit, I saved a recent e-mail for entertainment value.  First off, I tried to google the sender's e-mail address and found a plethora of gobbledygoop, heavily on the porn-site side.  Moving on to the letter itself...

Hello,

Your email was found by our HR manager through recruiting agency for Procurement Coordinator.

We received many applications for this position and the screening process is still runing. The search committee is looking through your profile and we are glad to say that you have been chosen for an interview.

Payment rate you will get starts from $88,900.00 up to $135,100.00 per year. Also you get adaptable schedule, and benefits: health, life and dental insurance coverage.


Wow, sounds like a great deal, and I'm SURE I'm qualified for a job with those kinda numbers!  Please, tell me more...


The duties of the position:

- Negotiate with suppliers (If you ever heard me talk about suppliers at my current job, you'd be a bit skeptical of me being a good fit here...)

- Supervise a team of managers and control them  (Like with mind control?  GREAT!  Let me start right away...BWA-HA-HA-HA...)

- Monitor contract compliance and optimizes contractual obligations

- Develop long-term strategic sourcing plans

- Manage inventory and provide administrative help as required


So at this point, I'm thinking I'd be earning that money...  Next:

Please see conditions below:


- Be a citizen or a resident of the United States or have work permit (Got that covered)

- Aged 30 years +  (REALLY got that covered)

- Negotiation skills  (Ask any FB troll I've battled)

- Be punctual time manager (Truth be told, I used to be much better at this one... but lately my "efficiency" has mirrored the down-curve that my company has set as an example...)\

So altogether I have about 5% of what they're looking for under duties, and maybe 75% of the conditions.   That makes me eligible for for about $35,500 worth of that big salary, which still is about 20 months of what I'm making now.  So whadda I gotta do?

To verify your agreement for the position, please write the following and answer us back:

- Name and Surname

- Phone number

Thank you for time and interest in this position listing.


So, all I gotta do is just type out the words "Name and surname" and "phone number" and I'm in?  Great!  Just one question- does capitalisation count?