World of Suck

http://www.ifilm.com/video/2860052

Heh. I wonder how much is scripted and how much is from the heart.

So, our friendly neighborhood legislators in New York have penned a new law. They introduced it, and passed it in both the state house and senate in less than a day. They have to work out a few differences between the two and then it'll go to be signed into law. Should be done before the recess at the end of the month.

The law makes it a class E felony to sell indecent, or violent games to minors. Also, it will make it illegal to sell game consoles that don't have parental controls built in (basically, new consoles only).

Amazing. Truly. And like many other lawmakers before them, they know it's unconstitutional. They admit that portions of it closely mirror prior laws that were struck down. They know precedent is against them. And they're aware that not only have those laws been struck down, the but the states that passed them have been put on the hook for the ESA's legal fees used fighting the law. Plus the cost that state will spend defending the damn thing. Hell, I bet the ESA lawyers already are on the clock racking up time on this.

The sponsor of one side even had the balls to say "We have nothing to lose by trying." So, since it's nothing, I vote the ESA receive funds directly from that guys personal bank account. I mean, since it's nothing, it shouldn't matter.

I mean, does New York have nothing better to spend money on? I vote every person that votes for the bill be impeached. Reckless disregard for the constitution. Mismanagement of state legal concerns and financial security.

Fucking idiots.

I just took a business trip to Connecticut. 600 miles round trip, give or take.

During this trip, I felt various things. Peaceful serenity of the open road. The thrill of speeding down the highway. And the blood boiling rage of hatred toward my fellow man.

I know I've bitched before. So have others. Let me reiterate because it fucking deserves it.

First, simple highway rules. Slow traffic right, fast traffic left. If you're moving at the same speed or less than the traffic to your right, you're in the wrong lane. Even if you're "speeding" if there is traffic backing up behind you that wants to go faster, you're in the wrong lane. Very simple rule. Easy to follow. Why FUCKING IDIOTS don't get it... I have no fucking idea. It affects traffic for miles when there is no way to get past the jackass blocking the left lane.

Second, Mr Truck Driver. You belong as far to the right as possible. You can move over one lane to pass a slow driver, no problem. But you should never ever ever be in the left lane of a four lane highway. You're worse than the slow fucker because you're both slow and fucking huge.

Third, design. This is not the fault of the drivers. But there is a roadway engineer out there that needs to be shot at the earliest possible chance. As a state, you can't put up signs demanding all cars left/all trucks right for miles of highway, and then suddenly switch it when you get to a bridge. I know you want the trucks on the top deck. But there had to be a better way to get them up there than putting the upper deck ramp on the left and the lower ramp on the right. It means we all get to shuffle suddenly. In NYC traffic, that's pretty fucking stupid. I'm sure most of the locals and truck drivers already knew about it, but I know for damn sure it wasn't obvious to the out of area drivers.

Finally, Mr Tailgater. I can't go any faster. You know I can't. You know I can't because there is a FUCKING TRACTOR TRAILER in front of me. You can easily see him over my tiny ass car. I can't pass him for the same fucking reason you can't pass him. There is ANOTHER FUCKING TRACTOR TRAILER next to him. So, kindly, back the fuck off. When I can't see your bumper, headlights, or your hood, you're too fucking close.

AARRRRHHHGGGG

LONDON (AP) -- A British performance artist has eaten part of a corgi -- the breed of dog that is the favorite pet of Queen Elizabeth II -- to protest the alleged mistreatment of animals by the royal family.

I wish I had some uniquely defining statement to make, but really it's hard to top the reality of the quote.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration said Tuesday it will fight to keep meatpackers from testing all their animals for mad cow disease .

Why?

Because it would be too expensive...

The Agriculture Department tests less than 1 percent of slaughtered cows for the disease, which can be fatal to humans who eat tainted beef. But Kansas-based Creekstone Farms Premium Beef wants to test all of its cows.

Larger meat companies feared that move because, if Creekstone tested its meat and advertised it as safe, they might have to perform the expensive test, too.

The Agriculture Department regulates the test and argued that widespread testing could lead to a false positive that would harm the meat industry.

In plain english - if all cows were tested some would turn up positive. And our government would rather have a few mad cows go through then have the meat industry suffer from people buying less meat because they were cautious.

"Our" in this case is clearly not the public, since to this administration income is much more valuable than health and safety.

Hey bitch, this is a message to you:

If you don't like Harry Potter, then don't read it. Further if you think it's a bad influence on your children, then use your own parental authority to deprive them while you can. But to think you can force an entire school system to remove the books because you have the retarded idea that a work of fiction can influence a child regarding witchcraft, well, clearly you never should have reproduced in the first place.

Better yet, why not get a good grasp of the english language yourself before you try and convince others that you're not just an attention-grabbing, bible whore?

''I maybe need a whole new case from the ground up,'' Mallory said. The woman, who said two of her four children attend public schools in the county, was not represented by an attorney at the hearing.
[...]
At Tuesday's hearing, Mallory argued in part that witchcraft is a religion practiced by some people and, therefore, the books should be banned because reading them in school violates the constitutional separation of church and state.

No retard, you don't need a new case, you need a new hobby - one that insulates intelligent, thinking people from douche bags like yourself.

One has to wonder why exactly the vice president is so afraid of the public knowing who he talks to and who comes to visit. Logs detailing the comings and goings of visitors to the vice president were destroyed. And there's no coincidence that the visitor log for vice president's residence was secretly added to the list of documents protected as "presidential records" at exactly the same time the whole Abramoff scandal broke, but the question remains... what's there to hide?

Apparently something important, embarrassing or illegal enough not to want people to know.

So the public elected him, but we're not entitled to know what he actually does.

It's illegal to advertise a service and then drum up trade. An example of this is the popup ads that used to claim a computer was infected and then offer to sell anti-virus wares. So how exactly is this different from what Bush has done in Iraq?

In essence by provoking an unfriendly territory through invasion he has ensured that there is ample opportunity to train, not just our own troops, but scores of "terrorists". And it's working. Militants are coming to Iraq to train, and then leaving to export their skills to Jordan, Syria, Indonesia, a myriad of muslim countries around the world many of whom are (at best) neutral to us.

It's charming how Cheney and his lackeys like to claim that they have "prevented" terrorist activities on American soil through the reduction and decimation of privacy. What remains to be seen is just how their legacy of "safety" continues now that chaos has been systematically supported through their "war on terror".

I wonder how many Americans are regretting their vote for the president that was "stupid, like me." There's a reason why we need educated, literate, intelligent people as doctors, lawyers and engineers. And there's a reason why we need them as our statesmen, as history continues to prove. You wouldn't put your health in the hands of a less than capable doctor, why would you put your country in the hands of a deficient politician?

I was reading an article when I was struck by a peculiarity of semantics:

"Elsewhere in Diyala, a U.S. soldier was killed when an explosion hit his vehicle and a second soldier was killed in an explosion in Baghdad, the military said. The deaths brought the number of troops killed this month to at least 102, putting May on pace to become the deadliest month for Americans here in more than 2 1/2 years."

Hit by... "an explosion"?

I don't get it. How do you get hit by a detonation? By the shockwave perhaps? By materials thrown into the air when they fragmented due to the explosive force? I'm still puzzled by the phraseology.

My assessment of the jargon is that the press has been instructed to avoid the use of the words: bomb, IED, mortar or grenade. By saying someone was "hit by an explosion" you avoid touching sensitive spots that the public now twitches from in mental-reflex.

Soon I'm sure we'll be seeing substitutes for "death", "killing", and "combat"...

Unless of course that's what they've been using "liberation", "freedom", and "success" to mean all this time.

Dr. Kevorkian will be released soon. That's right, Dr. Death is getting parole. HE said he's not going to aid in the suicide of any more patients, but will continue to speak out on the issue. His impending release has brought the issue of assisted suicide back into the light a little. Maybe not mainstream, but there is casual discussion about the topic.

I don't really understand the debate. Or at least, I don't understand one side of it. If someone wants to off themselves, what does it have to do with me? So long as they do it in a manner that doesn't risk anyone else's health or property, sayonara.

The key part there is that it not affect others. Jumping off a building stops traffic, and damages people/things that get hit by the falling body. Taking a lethal dose of a drug, not so much. But the culture of life folks think we should enforce societal norms on people that don't believe in them. Some group of people things that suicide is wrong, and if it's a big enough group, it gets to force that opinion on the minority. Democracy in action.

Of course, it's not just suicide. It's any number of things. Seat belts gets me. I understand forcing Gm to put them in, but I don't get why cops should enforce their use. IT messes with natural selection. The argument is that if someone is hurt or killed, the damages are high for the other driver. Simple fix: claims for injuries are not granted when the injured party isn't wearing seat belts. Same effect, but no nanny state BS. Choose to be safe, or choose not to. Let evolution weed out those dumb enough to forgo it's usage.

Or smoking. They're trying real hard to ban smoking. I get it in public buildings. Second hand smoke affects others. But, smoking outside doesn't. Setting up designated smoking areas doesn't. But they're pushing to expand smoking bans everywhere. There is an area of California that tried to ban smoking on the highway. Yes, even in your own car. Trying to protect you from yourself. Because heaven fucking forbid a person make their own choices in life.

Same concept as weed. You can't have pot. Why? Because. It's... umm... bad for you and stuff. Why not go drink a fifth of Jack Daniels instead? See how stupid that sounds? But hey, it must make sense to someone because we sure do lock up a lot of pot smoking people. More limits on the choices people have. All about controlling the population. Even though legalization would bring in untold millions of dollars in tax revenue and remove hundreds of millions of dollars spent in corrections and enforcement.

Nanny states hide behind platitudes. "For your own good" or "think of the {fill in the blank}." Sometimes it's just "improving our society". It's all the same. They want to make YOUR choices with THEIR rule book. That way, they're never forced to confront the fact that not everyone thinks the same way they do. And sometimes, they might even be wrong.

Michael Vick is the quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons. If you pay attention to sports, you know he recently got into some trouble. At a home in his name (I think he said his brother lived there), they found some dogs. Apparently they were being used for dog fights, or some such. There is a lot of controversy concerning it, because Michael says they're not his, and he doesn't live there, he just owns it, but the police say that they think he knew about it.

Whatever, that's the basic part of the story. Famous person may have done wrong and now they're looking into the issue.

Early this week, suddenly, the focus shifted entirely. Suddenly, Clinton Portis was the football player in question. He's a running back for the Washington Redskins. During a recent interview, he was asked about the Vick dog situation.

His reply went sorta like this: He doesn't see what the big deal is. If Vick fights dogs, so be it. Dog fighting isn't good, but there are a lot worse issues in the world, so he's amazed at how much focus the media is putting on this just because of the possibility of a scandal involving a famous player. He suggested that there were probably dozens of other dog fighting rings out there, but they don't get press coverage because they don't involve Vick.

It's a bad PR statement. I admit it. But, it was an off the cuff remark at a press conference for a totally unrelated subject. It's not like he had time to organize his thoughts or vet it through his agent. He just said what he thought.

So naturally... Vick isn't the story anymore. It's all about Portis. Which just drives me up a fucking wall. They've spent almost as much, if not MORE, time talking about Portis's comments than they have about the fucking target of the investigation, Vick. It drives me up a wall, it really does.

Seriously... let's focus on the issue people. The PR gaff isn't the issue. The broken law is the fucking issue. That's not juicy enough for the vultures out there though. They want to see if they can get more famous people involved. Sell more headlines.

Sickening really. People like to shrug it off by saying media is just trying to run their business and sell papers. That's true. But there is also a responsibility to the public to talk about the actual news. Not the concocted hub-bub around celebrities when they're asked about issues that don't directly relate to them.

It may be a business, but their model sucks.

You're an embarassment to yourself and all humans in general. Please find a quiet spot, curl up and wait to die.

Thank you.

Wow. Im really pissed. So I wake to some news today that Congress has supposedly come up with some immigration reform bill that both sides of the aisle have compromised on. On the outside this looks real good however when I found out the details I came unglued. We conservatives have been sold out by our President and our congressional representatives and Im not happy about it.

Those here illegally before Jan 1 2007 can qualify for an Z-visa. The proposed agreement would allow illegal immigrants to come forward and obtain a probationary "Z visa" and — after paying fees and fines of up to $5,000 and returning to their home countries ultimately try for permanent residency, which could take between eight and 13 years.

Um.. excuse me? You cannot find them all now.. how in the hell are you going to find out when they got here? What's to stop them from pouring in en masse now in an attempt to say they've been here since December 2006? Stupid idiots. Um.. ok so how do they intend to do this? How do they figure that we'll be able to collect any money from them? Why is it in their interest to start reporting their wages and paying some silly fine AND having to go back home? Dear god.

In perhaps its most contentious change, the proposed plan would radically shift the entire immigration system from one heavily weighted toward family ties toward one with preferences for those with advanced degrees and sophisticated skills.

Oh so now we're picking and choosing who can come into the US? How can they do this? WHAT?! Anyone who knows me knows Im all against illegal immigration BUT how the hell can we pick and choose who comes in based upon their knowledge and education?!? OMFG

Ok ok.. I need to quit before I stroke out. There are pages and pages of silly little rules that appear to be harder to read than US tax code. Im pissed. This is nothing but more governmental waste and adding even more stupid programs that we'll never be able to keep track of. Even now we cannot find all the welfare fraud so there is no way in hell we'll be able to keep track of all this. They're talking electronic ID systems for all employers, phoning into homeland security to verify a persons status before you employ them etc etc etc etc.

They've taken a complex problem and turned it into an exponentially complex problem that will require even more tax dollars to fund. On top of all this we're now telling the world that we'll accept you faster if you are an educated person and can contribute to society? Yes Im a proud conservative.. but this is just all wrong.. wrong wrong wrong.

Holy shit someone put a stop to this. This cannot be the USA.. can it?

My boss quit. She started in January or February. Now she's gone.

No real notice or anything.

She packed her stuff up Tuesday night. Left her badge. Went home.

Called out sick on Wednesday. And sometime after work, called and told her boss she quit. Had another job lined up or something.

Notice? You'll notice she's not coming back. Certainly nothing civilized like two weeks.

The thing that gets me is that it was premeditated. She packed her shit up two days ago, let it sit for a day while she was 'sick', then bailed. Now a temp manager is stuck pulling her weight in addition to his normal work. That sucks for him. The only other thing that sucks about her going is that she won't get to see her employee review. From comments around the water cooler, it ranges from poor to very poor. She deserved to get hammered for it.

Normally, that'd would piss me off so much that I'd be screaming and raging at her. But this is not that time.

I'm glad she's gone. She's a bad boss. I was hoping she'd be laid off soon. Barring that, flat out terminated. She did nothing useful. She was a waste of space and money. No people skills. No intelligence. Just some pseudo business-speak mixed with heavy doses of bullshit.

And now she's gone. YAY!

Ding Dong! The Witch is dead. Which old Witch? The Wicked Witch! Ding Dong! The Wicked Witch is dead.

She won't be missed.

Top Ten Chuck Norris Facts

1. Guns don't kill people. Chuck Norris kills People.
2. There is no theory of evolution. Just a list of animals Chuck Norris allows to live.
3. Chuck Norris does not sleep. He waits.
4. The chief export of Chuck Norris is Pain.
5. There is no chin under Chuck Norris' Beard. There is only another fist.
6. Chuck Norris has two speeds. Walk, and Kill.
7. The leading causes of death in the United States are: a. Heart Disease b. Chuck Norris c. Cancer
8. Chuck Norris drives an ice cream truck covered in human skulls.
9. Chuck Norris is my Homeboy.
10. Chuck Norris doesn't go hunting.... CHUCK NORRIS GOES KILLING

reproduced here from www.chucknorrisfacts.com

Yea yea I know its fun when you ruffle up your feathers and flap your wings while mentioning the words BUSH or REPUBLICANS as it makes you feel better. Its ok, its good therapy for you.

Here's some hot topics of current BUSH-bashdom that when broken down you'll find that we must blame all governements, city, state and local as well and not just the current administration and not just BUSH. Please realize this.

The war:
======================
Yes I know its very unpopular.Yes it could have been done very differently.
Yes to just about any complaint you have on the whole matter - I agree with you.

BUT.. remember, Congress is equally responsible. They can yank us out at any time, but they havent since they dont have enough votes amongst themselves. Why cant they get enough votes? Too many of them are concerned about the public eyes and the political fallout if they do vote to pull out. In simple terms they are putting their political futures ahead of what we the people want them to do. Do I think we should pull out? Nope.

But do the majority of Americans think we should pull out? Yup. Fine, then our elected officials should be doing what the majority wants..... right? Yea right.

Gas Prices:
======================
Yes yes.. its very high now. Keep in mind that its close to the same price now as it was in the 60's and 70's after you convert the dollars worth then compared to now - the gas prices are right on par. The big difference in that equation is the cost of each gallon that is tax. Even after conversion its 4x higher now than before. But I guess we have a lot more roads to take care of these days eh?

Common sense should tell us to try to conserve and help fund research for bio fuels that we can use in our EXISTING cars. I dont want to get rid of mine just because its an SUV or buy a new one... quit telling me this. Mind your own business.

The Economy:
=======================
Hardly ever talked about. One of the strongest economies in 3 decades and 4 different administrations. But you dont want to talk about that do ya? Nah.. to hell with the good stuff.. lets just talk about the bad. Ok, i'll keep going.

Illegal Immigration:
=======================
Being here without documentation is against Federal Law.
Being here on expired documentation is against Federal Law.
Erecting a big ass Fence to channel people thru the proper entry points is not.
My only complaint is that the fence isn't completed yet.

Please knock and we'll let you in, we turn very few away, we just want your information so we can collect your taxes so they can be used in our American entitlement systems that you are utilizing now. Nothing is free.. we all pay.

GITMO:
======================
Wonderful place. We need more of them. Torture is good for those who want to kill you.

Global Warming:
======================
Yawn. Chicken or the Egg? Cart or the horse? For every 1000 scientists who claim that this is an issue there are another 1000 scientists who claim it isn't. Im fair about it though and realize reducing pollutants is a good thing regardless of what the scientific community thinks this month. Just don't preach to me about my 'carbon footprint'. Mind your own business.

During election time I try to watch all the televised debates for both Dems and Republicans. On Tuesday night Im watching the Republican Debates happening in South Carolina while keeping an open mind and looking for some very specific things to help me weed out the candidates.

Here's what I looked for:

Those who have fake smiles.
Those who appear to have an monetary agenda.
Those who always have rehearsed answers.
Those who look like a used car salesman.
Those who speak like career bullshitters.
Those who's responses parody a Michael Moore storyboard.
Those who claim to be better than the others because of (insert bullshit reason here).
Those who spout their unrelated qualifications.
Those who answer direct questions with direct unrelated drivel.
Those who wear more makeup than Tammy Fay Baker.

After applying my basic rules above I was able to chuck 8 of the 10 candidates within the first 10 minutes of the debates and was left with 2; Huckabee and Tancredo. "Who the hell are these guys?" I asked myself. Never heard of them before. In fact Huckabee resembles Gomer Pyle - you'd think the media would be all over this. But no.

These 2 conducted themselves very very well during the debates;in my opinion much better than the top 3 hopefuls that the media seems to favor. Surprisingly these 2 received some of the loudest applause for their answers! 2 days later and hardly anything at all has been said about anybody else but the 3 media star children: McCain, Romney, and Guiliani - none of which can pass my litmus test above.

Sadly we'll never get to hear much from Tancredo or Huckabee or perhaps other lesser known candidates on the Republican side. Likwise we'll not hear much about the lesser known Democrats when their debates get into full swing.

The media seems to pick and choose whom we should be paying attention to and that really sucks. Most Americans are lazy and will not make an effort to learn about a candidate from either side of the aisle, watch different broadcast news networks to get a broader more complete factual record. Instead they wander to the polls like sheep.

You're a criminal. You've been nailed for a crime. But before you accept judgement you demand (not insist) that all records declare you innocent. While it doesn't erase the fact that you're in the situation because you were caught red handed, you want to give the authorities the finger by making -them- recant the charges.

That's Wolfowitz in a nutshell.

Of course the question remains why a criminal has the leverage to demand such an outrageous deal in the first place. The answer is, that he has big friends who will use their power, not in the name of honesty or justice, but to demonstrate "loyalty".

You know America has a crappy enough reputation as it is, both nationally and internationally. Why the fuck are we allowing our government to support assholes, liars and nepotists against truth and justice?

My take on it is, because that's the kind of people who are in the current administration, and they want to make sure that when it's their turn they'll get the same defense.

Fuck you Wolfowitz. It's probably more than you got from you're "Girlfriend".

If there is any victory to be had in this unpopular war, it's allocated to the marketing strategist that equated money to support. Time and again the line has been used that to shut of or even limit funding for the war is to be unsupportive of the "men and women who are laying their lives on the line in a foreign land."

Ok, it's time to call bullshit on that.

Why is money support? How does funding a "war" ensure that those men and women don't give their lives and their health unnecessarily? The fact is - it doesn't. Just as the military was sending soldiers out without body armor (which costs money), just as the new Stryker APC doesn't protect against roadside bombs (Strykers cost money), in reality money is not the answer.

If you're still having a hard time grasping why giving the current administration unlimited access to funds is NOT the same as protecting our service men and women, consider this: When a heroin addict needs a fix, are you supporting them by giving them money? Or are you better supporting them by helping them get over their addiction?

This war has been an addiction, for the little man at the top who likes to play soldiers with real lives. Giving him the freedom to feed his addiction is not supporting our troops. Honestly supporting them means protecting them, only committing them when really necessary, and giving them hope by telling them when they can come home for good.

A soldier is really being supported when he gets to return to his or her family in one piece. And statistically, the sooner that happens, the better.

Ok so I encountered a new term today "babymoon". From the article I gathered that it's for first-time couples who want to enjoy their remaining moments as a duo before becoming a trio (or more). The article went on to describe the joys of a "spontaneous babymoon" given to one wife by her husband. While I was reading this all I could think of was some woman in Africa or South America or India hauling herself off the field she was tending to give birth and then rest long enough to recover and get back to work.

I'm not sure where the idea that pregnant women and their spouses need to spend a buttload of money just prior to having a baby (where you will be spending a buttload of money to cover hospital expenses, diapers, bottles, car seats... you know actual necessities) came from, but clearly the pre-natal industry has found a potential gold mine.

"A babymoon is not only about pampering, but about slowing down enough to savor the pregnancy," Ms. Perlman said . "It helps mom keep in touch with her sensuality, with her body, and to embrace the change that is happening in her life."

Wtf.

Ok first, "slowing down enough to savor the pregnancy". Correct me here, but most women who are pregnant are pretty slowed down as it is. You don't see 8 month pregnant women turboing from place to place in a frenzy. From my observation it's more along the lines of: heave yourself up from a seat, waddle over to next activity, sit down and perform activity, rest.

And savor? Savor what? The additional 40 lbs you're carrying around? Having a small animal stomp your internal organs as it tries to get comfortable within your abdomen? Or maybe they're referring to hemorrhoids? Or the fact that you can't take any cold or allergy medication other than Tylenol and Sudafed?

Next, "it helps mom keep in touch with her sensuality". Roflmao. No comment. Moving right along.

Finally, "and to embrace the change that is happening in her life". As opposed to what? Rejecting it?

It makes a lot of sense that the only people who would buy into the concept of a "babymoon" are newb parents. Once you've been through the "miracle" you realize what a lot of hype and nonsense all that crap is. Of course it rather has to be that way or humans would be more loathe to reproduce.

Hmmm... maybe that's not such a bad thing.

They did a DNA analysis on a "certified" relic of Jesus and found out that his Y chromosome didn't match his X?

... and we found out to whom the Y really did match?

I guess that enough time has elapsed that bits of information describing the current administration's early workings are leaking out. The latest fervor on what seemed to be a deceased issue, that of the patently illegal e-tapping of american's phones and email, has reached a new low. The news has described how administration officials tried to coerce (and that's using a nice word) the attorney general into renewing the NSA program by trying to force him to sign it while he was extremely sick. To be more descriptive, Ashcroft was in the hospital when the president himself called his wife telling her that he was sending people to his hospital room even though she had said he was too ill to have visitors.

Now that's a nice boss eh?

Regardless of the abusive tactics, Ashcroft refused to sign the document even when he was essentially too sick to move. You have to give the man credit, he clearly was made of some stern stuff. He was even able to lift his head from the pillow and tell them why he still wouldn't sign it.

When the deputy AG, who was witness to this, refused to be browbeaten into signing our president stepped in. In effect he decided that he had the authority to enable the program to continue, regardless.

Nice eh? Laws? What laws?

In in the after word to this nasty little story, the antagonists in question claim that they "saved countless lives" through their noble actions. Uh right yeah, the same way my little cousin prevents rain on a sunny day by doing their "sunny-day dance".

Like the title says: Easy to claim, hard to prove.

Oh, and one of the two goons that tried to harass an ailing man into signing a document against his will? Yeah, that's right - the poster-boy for truth and justice: Gonzales.

My only comment is...

Thank god.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Lawmakers want the government to upgrade safety standards for dangerous ''blind zones'' in new vehicles, to reduce the chances of children being backed over by large sport utility vehicles and trucks.

Any fucking twat that drives an SUV just to get her groceries and pick up her kids deserves what she gets if you ask me.

Actually, no, it's not what we want, and somehow even with sagging sales the American automotive industry keeps pushing crap at consumers.

In an 'oh so witty' response to the presidential candidates call for better fuel economy the car manufacturers insisted that it wasn't something the public was truly interested in. The quote ran something along the lines of "well what Americans want to buy is bigger engines, more towing power and greater seating capacity." Well I suppose the logic here is that if one out of the three statements might be true, then they all might be true.

Still, at over $3 a gallon they're thinking we want less fuel efficient cars? And what about the statement of "towing power". Towing what? There are multitudes of US residents sitting around lamenting the fact that their current vehicle isn't buff enough to tow... their boats? their campers? their trailers with matching snowmobiles? I dunno personally, I don't have any of the above, nor, for that matter, do any of my friends.

At some point you might think that common sense could prevail. After all, if the American car manufacturers really made cars the public wanted, don't you think that maybe, just maybe, they might be able to sell a few?

Now that everyone's got high-speed Internet, there's a trend towards putting more multimedia content on web sites. (Note: I can't say the word "multimedia" without feeling like it's 1995 and I'm reading a Time article about the Information Superhighway. But I still feel like more of a tool when I say "podcast", one of the dumbest words ever invented.) And I don't like it.

I like text. It's easy. It's convenient. Podcasts and videos are neither. With text, you can start reading, then switch away to something else, and come back to read more later. I guess you can pause a video or audio file, but it's harder to scroll back and remind yourself of what just happened. I read very quickly; I can definitely read faster than people can comprehensibly talk. I can skim text briefly to look for interesting parts, which is impossible with video files. Some streaming audio/video sites are blocked at work, so I can't access that content at all. And when I'm on the Internet at home, I have the TV or music on. I can listen to the TV and read something, but I can't watch two videos at once.

I know that some people prefer multimedia. They want to see or hear what happened. And that's fine. But that's no reason to take away my text! Big sites like the New Yorker (which inspired this rant) can certainly afford to pay an intern to transcribe their audio and video pieces. That way the cool kids can podcast and vlog and do whatever they want, while I sit here and read.

I don't normally watch the show. I admit that.

When I heard they were going to have a debate segment focusing on the belief in God, I was intrigued. The people debating... left me with a little bit of a sour taste in my mouth. They chose Kirk Cameron (oh yeah, banana boy!!) and Ray Comfort to represent the religious point of view. Now, for the most part, those two are junior varsity at best. Probably the practice squad. In no way would I consider them serious voices for the religious movement. They initiated the debate by claiming they would prove God's existence without requiring the use of faith, and they would also prove that evolution is a fairy tale. Bold words

Of course, that was until I heard who their opponents would be. The Rational Response Squad (from the Blasphemy Challenge fame) was chosen to represent the atheist / scientific viewpoint. These two are web idols that are every bit as much of a sideshow as Cameron and Comfort. However, they had a much easier position. They didn't have to prove that God doesn't exist, just that Cameron and Comfort failed to prove it.

With neither side well represented, my expectations were fairly low going into the debate. After finding video of the debate, I watched it. It was better than expected. Both sides made a number of fairly standard arguments on the issue. Comfort's opening salvo was an attempt to prove a creator with the argument from design (a painter needs a painting so the universe needs a creator). The RRS shot that down easily with the standard if all things need a creator, who created God. If God doesn't need one, why does the universe.

From there the debate wandered back and forth. The attempts to attack evolution were weak and infantile, but the defense wasn't much better. The Q&A session from the audience was... painful. The crowd was hyped and made even worse points than the participants. At the end of the day, the debate went mostly in favor of the atheists. I admit some bias there, but I also feel the only reason they won the debate is because their requirements were lower. Kirk and Comfort promised to prove God and disprove evolution. They failed on both counts. The RRS was able to poke holes in most of the arguments put forth without messing up too badly.

All and all, a good debate. Not great. But as good as you can expect given the low caliber of the participants. Obviously too long for a half hour TV program though, so we head off to editing. And this is where Nightline takes out the garden hose and starts working on getting the golf ball. Honestly, the editing was atrocious. They spent over a quarter of the time talking about the panel. Far more than needed, particularly focusing on Kirk Cameron, and his ex-celebrity status. They they started the hatchet job.

Even being as even handed as possible, the aired program rarely showed anything resembling a debate. One side would present part of a position, then the editors cut to a partial rebuttal from the opposing side. They never let either side really finish statements or thoughts. Further, they edited a lot of the discussion out to show the worst of each side's points. In my personal opinion, they went so far as to edit out a large number of the atheists responses, most importantly the part that framed their position: The religious side had not scientifically proven God's existence. The cut version makes the entire debate come out as a draw. I don't think anyone watching the full version would get that impression.

It's disgusting. I don't know if it's editorial bias or simply an attempt to seem balanced for a national audience. Either way, it's dishonest. The debate did not end the way Nightline displayed. They left so much on the cutting room floor that is changed the result.

I suppose it's more reason for me to go right back to watching the Daily Show and the Colbert Report during Nightline's time slot.

Short and sweet.

A light year is a measure of DISTANCE. Not time. Specifically the distance light travels over a a year. Google says 9,460,730,472,580 kilometers. A real long fucking way. But... still 365 days.

Parsec. It's a distance. Not knowing what the hell Han is talking about in the Star Wars movie, I don't know if he's using it correctly or not, but I know those fanboys out there fuck this one up often enough.

A league is also distance, not a depth. Stupid movie titles aside. Seeing as 20K leagues is about 111,000km, I think it's be pretty rough to be down that far. Since you know, you'd come out the other side of the planet.

For depth, you probably want fathoms (6 feet). Of course, 20K fathoms is 36 km and the Marianas trench is 11 km, so it's still wrong. But hey, at least it's in the right ballpark.

Our most despised lawyer (not for long!!!) is up to his foul tricks again. But even for him, I think this one is special

He's targeting Wendy's. Yes, the hamburger chain.

For lesser mortals, you might wonder what this has to do with his never-ending quest to save his girlfri... I mean, slander the video game industry. But as we've noted before, Jack is not common by any means, nor does his brain function. I mean, I'm sure it controls breathing and drooling and all, but not so much on the cognitive side of things. Kinda like a walking Terri Schiavo

Anyway, you'll love this. He's attacking the hamburger chain for...

Wait for it...

Promoting murder simulators.

Waa? Let me walk you through the drooling mental lapse.

Wendy's is promoting Wii toys in their Kids Meals. The Manhunter sequel will be released for the Wii later this year. Manhunter 2 is obviously a murder simulator. Therefore, bash Wendy's.

He hasn't sued them yet. I assume he will eventually. Right not, he's still in the 'little bitch' stage of letter writing and complaining about it every chance he gets. Any chance for a little more dog shit to dribble out of his mouth I guess.

Can't wait until his disbarment is finalized.

Waiting for a plane isn't terribly much fun if you're a standard passenger. Without the plush lounge, free snacks and lavish bar, the majority of cattle just do our best to be comfortable from one awkward cramped location to the next. Most gate-side waiting areas are pretty scrofulous, with the seats at a minimal level of comfort that probably just barely passes above the standard for "inhumane". Physical accommodations aside, there's the additional pleasure of the amalgam of humanity with which we share space. Depending on the location of the airport and the destination of the flight your fellow passengers can range from:

- Sullen and dour with a 15% chance of openly hostile (Chicago O'Hare, 5am)
- Aloof and snobbish (LAX, 8pm)
- Dazed and oblivious (NY LaGuardia, 5pm)
- Tired and semi-congenial (Boston Logan, 2:30pm)

While those are general categories and there are plenty of gradations in between, the "cell-phone psycho" can be a source of either great public amusement or public exasperation. I was in Logan at 2:30 one afternoon when just such an individual was around, and her overly loud, overly animated, overly lengthy cell-phone monologue was causing consternation amongst the other passengers ("My God, do you know she's been on that phone now for over two hours?" the pale but pudgy woman next to me observed. "Really? I wonder what brand of phone that is, must have a hella good battery," I replied.)

Ignorant to the irritated looks around her, this woman was alternatively howling with laughter, exclaiming emphatically or just flat out chattering with the rapid-fire cadence of an AK-47 with the trigger pinned. And loudly. No one for fifteen meters wasn't aware of her topic of conversation, nor her expressed opinion.

Now I'm not the most social individual, but I do have a certain sense of when my behavior might be annoying to the people around me. One might suppose that if she were to look around she would see the reddish glint in the expression of most of her fellow passengers that could signify a transition from loathing to venomous contempt. Apparently, lacking a healthy sense of self-preservation or simply not caring was a higher priority than pissing off an entire plane full of passengers.

As we eventually boarded, I could hear the muted murmurings within the queue of travelers. My thoughts were that most were either overjoyed to be locked in a metal tube without access to phone service for the next six hours or, more likely, considering how long a delay it might cause to stuff the woman into the jet nacelle as it was warming up.

My money would be on the latter.

Cruising the daily news items I find a rather humorous article out of the UK.

Warning after 'deadly' nail guns stolen
TWO nail guns stolen from a van in Silverknowes could become lethal weapons in the wrong hands, police said today. The orange Paslode Impulse nail guns, worth £500 each, were stolen from a Fiat Scudo van on Silverknowes Road South overnight on Monday.

A police spokeswoman said: "The nail guns are very powerful tools, and in the wrong hands, they could potentially be lethal weapons. "We are very anxious to trace the guns, and appeal to anyone who saw or heard anything suspicious in Silverknowes Road South overnight between Monday and Tuesday this week to contact police straight away.

"We would warn members of the public to be cautious of anyone attempting to sell items fitting this description, that they are likely to be stolen.

"We want to issue a special plea to parents to ensure that their children are aware of the very serious dangers of playing with tools such as these. If these tools have been dumped somewhere, and found by a child, the consequences could be deadly."

Complete article here

I mean.. wow. So you take away all their firearms - even from the police and now the the new threat is nailguns. These things have been around for years. These are the self-contained models that dont even need air. They have a small 22 caliber type charge that shoots each nail. These can drive a 20 penny nail into a 4" x 4" post easily... a 9mm handgun would be lucky to penetrate maybe an inch or so in the same wood. Which would you rather be shot with? More importantly if you're the one intending to some harm, which weapon would you choose?

Now some interesting questions come to mind on how this could affect us here in the USA:

1. I wonder if roofing nailers will be included in an assault nailer ban because of the high capacity mags they have? Remember that these things have magazines that hold up to 100 16 penny nails.. which is 4x over the legal limit in any conventional firearm today.

2. What possible sporting use could a nail gun have? Hrm.. they do have belt sander races you know... maybe the new sport could be target shooting with your nailer.

3. Could it be that the nail gun is responsible for the housing collapse?

4. Will future nail gun owners in the US have to attend safety classes and present a certificate of completion to buy one?

5. Will you have to pass a background check before you buy a nail gun?

6. How would the anti-gun zealots have felt about the VT shootings if he would've had a high capacity nailer instead?

7. Will a new lobby sub-group now have to be formed out of the NRA called the NNA? National Nailers Association.

All I can say is WOW.

Hopefully this will show the anti-gun zealots that guns themselves are not the problems, that if you take away the guns the idiots of the world will still find something to cause havoc with. I remember one individual I've argued with even saying that the problem with guns is that they are too easily obtained when someone is looking for an easy way to mass kill. How much easier could it be to head on over to Home Depot and grab one of these babies for $400.00?

LOL suck it anti-gun zealots.

A few months ago, I complained about the band Stuck Mojo. Or, more specifically, about their new fans. They released an anti-Muslim song, and all the anti-Muslim bloggers declared them the greatest band in the history of the universe. At the time, I called it just a conservative phenomenon.

Turns out I was wrong. Rosie O'Donnell is getting fired from The View. Naturally, I don't care. And I'd assume that other intelligent Americans (ie, not fans of The View), also don't care. But I overlooked the fact that there are as many wackos on the left as on the right. See, Rosie likes to talk about politics on her show. She's said repeatedly that she thinks Bush should be impeached. And on at least one occasion, she said that the official 9/11 explanation is a conspiracy, because fire can't melt steel. As a result, she's widely praised among certain leftists. (Such as the ones on the site that inspired me to write this article.)

The people are making the same mistake as the Jihadwatch crowd did for Stuck Mojo. It's possible to admire what someone says without admiring the person for saying it. Rosie O'Donnell is annoying. She's always been annoying. She was a loud, mediocre stand-up comic, then one of the most obnoxious TV personalities of the 90s. And now she's on a crappy morning show for housewives and the chronically unemployed, yammering about celebrities and fashion. The fact that she occasionally throws in a standard Noam Chomsky point along with the discussion of Britney's new hairdo (or lack thereof) doesn't make her a hero. If anything, it makes her into even more of a caricature, and makes it easier for the mainstream media to ignore the left.

I admit I'm a bit astonished by this one. Apparently yet another collateral issue in this war is the status of child custody. When a divorced parent is called to service they often look to their former spouse to care for their child while they are serving half the world away. These are supposed to be temporary arrangements where things are returned to their original state when their tour of duty is over.

But that's not happening.

What is happening is that service members, men and women, who were originally granted primary custody of their child are returning to find their children are now deemed "better off" with the other parent. Why? Because that's where they've been for the last however-many months. Courts have been finalizing these "temporary" arrangements as being in the "best interest" of the child, and even when the law reminds family judges that service people are protected from lawsuits while they are serving, courts are pushing back saying that the interest of the child supercedes all.

So the net result is that service people are at risk of losing access to their children, and perhaps even any access to their children at all if they have a vindictive former spouse. What is to stop an "Ex" from claiming that the service member is now an unfit parent because of the experience of service in a war zone? What if the service member is injured?

It's nice how the hawks like to portray this war as something that America needs to "win". Every time someone says "hey we need to end this" they're called defeatist or unpatriotic. The problem is those people aren't the ones who are really making the sacrifices. If those people are so dedicated to supporting the troops, perhaps they need to ensure our service people are guaranteed a return to the children they left behind. Or maybe those people need to explain to the Mom who no longer has her child at home why this "war" was more important than her family...

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

It's like a new buzzword. The next paradigm or synergy. If you don't like something or it offends you, it must obviously be terrorism! What else could it be?

Take my favorite religious ideology, Catholicism. The Vatican's official newspaper said that recent comments by Andrea Rivera, were terroristic. That the words themselves comprised a terror attack on the church. That they stoked "blind and irrational rage against someone who always speaks in the name of love, love for life and love for man." I assume they're talking about Emperor Palpatine... I mean.. Pope Benedict.

Quick sidetrack... seriously... look at him. He looks like the Emperor. Side by side. Go look. I'll wait.

Anyway, back on topic. Well, those must have been some really bad words. I've said lots of really nasty, mean and spiteful things in my time, but no word of mine has EVER been an act of terrorism. I mean, seriously, really bad. I mean, to take language into a form of terrorism? That's a seriously badass speech.

Or... comedy. That's an alternative I suppose. You see, Rivera is a comic. Apparently an outspoken one. And during a presentation during a concert in Italy, he made a few jokes at the Church's expense because he doesn't agree with some of it's positions. Things like this:

The Pope says he doesn't believe in evolution. I agree, in fact the Church has never evolved.

I find that funny. Even if I didn't, I think it's a long way from terrorism. Have we seriously diluted that word down to the point that a opposing viewpoint should be labeled like that? Really? I mean, damn. I don't know what Italy's law on the issue is, but I don't see how the bar could be THAT low. At some point, as a society, we have to allow those that disagree with us to speak out against us. We have to accept that not everyone agree with us and they have the right to express themselves. That's part of what makes a society free.

I know Italy isn't the most free country in the world, but it's a long way from the back of the pack too. This is a basic right to speak. Not fucking terrorism.

Honestly, the entire business just helps the Palpatine connection.

Thank you for prompting me to visit a website/blog I have not visited in a long time - exmormon.org. I found this gem and nearly fell off my seat laughing. Perhaps my mind is too dirty to really feel the spirit of God when I read this . . .

From www.lds.org/conference/talk/display/0,5232,23-1-690-8,00.html

Exmormon.org note: This talk is for real. It is not a parody. It was given by an Apostle of the Mormon Church, a spokesman for God, in the April 2007 conference. Excerpts are below in quotations. Bold was added for emphasis. To read the talk in its entirety, click on the lds.org link above.

“Ye Must Be Born Again or The Parable of The Pickle”
Elder David A. Bednar
Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

Through faith in Christ, we can be spiritually prepared and cleansed from sin, immersed in and saturated with His gospel, and purified and sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise…

As an adult I have reflected upon the things I observed in our kitchen during canning season. This morning I want to discuss some of the spiritual lessons we can learn from the process by which a cucumber becomes a pickle. I invite the Holy Ghost to be with us as we consider the significance of those lessons for me and for you as we come unto Christ and are spiritually reborn.

Cucumbers and Pickles

A pickle is a cucumber that has been transformed according to a specific recipe and series of steps. The first steps in the process of changing a cucumber into a pickle are preparing and cleaning. I remember many hours spent on the back porch of my home removing stems from and scrubbing dirt off of the cucumbers we had picked. My mom was very particular about the preparing and cleaning of the cucumbers. She had high standards of cleanliness and always inspected my work to make sure this important task was properly completed.

The next steps in this process of change are immersing and saturating the cucumbers in salt brine for an extended period of time. To prepare the brine, my mom always used a recipe she learned from her mother—a recipe with special ingredients and precise procedures. Cucumbers can only become pickles if they are totally and completely immersed in the brine for the prescribed time period. The curing process gradually alters the composition of the cucumber and produces the transparent appearance and distinctive taste of a pickle. An occasional sprinkle of or dip in the brine cannot produce the necessary transformation. Rather, steady, sustained, and complete immersion is required for the desired change to occur.

The final step in the process requires the sealing of the cured pickles in jars that have been sterilized and purified. The pickles are packed in canning jars, covered with boiling hot brine, and processed in a boiling-water-bath canner. All impurities must be removed from both the pickles and the bottles so the finished product can be protected and preserved. As this procedure is properly followed, the pickles can be stored and enjoyed for a long period of time.

To summarize, a cucumber becomes a pickle as it is prepared and cleaned, immersed in and saturated with salt brine, and sealed in a sterilized container. This procedure requires time and cannot be hurried, and none of the essential steps can be ignored or avoided. …

Preparing and Cleaning

Just as a cucumber must be prepared and cleaned before it can be changed into a pickle, so you and I can be prepared with "the words of faith and of good doctrine" (1 Timothy 4:6) and initially cleansed through the ordinances and covenants administered by the authority of the Aaronic Priesthood.

Immersing and Saturating

Just as a cucumber is transformed into a pickle as it is immersed in and saturated with salt brine… “

The talk goes on for awhile then this:

”My beloved brothers and sisters, I pray this parable of the pickle may help us to evaluate our lives and to better understand the eternal importance of spiritual rebirth. With Alma, "I speak in the energy of my soul" (Alma 5:43).”

Life is hard enough for students in schools today. You have violence, drugs, and sex. You have paranoid overreactions by to violence, drugs and sex.

For example, take Gig Harbor High School. They had a surveillance system installed in the school. Laudable move, and it gives them a nice tool. What is unacceptable is how the Dean of Students, Keith Nelson, decided to use it.

You see, he saw something he didn't like. Two student kissing in between classes. I know, it's harsh to imagine high school students having the AUDACITY of kissing each other, but it happened. So, naturally, he responded. Not by warning the students to knock it off. Nope. Sure, that's what he would have done in most cases. In this case, he ran to the video recorder and grabbed the tape, then showed it to the parents of both students.

What made this case special? Oh, they were both girls. Lesbianism in our schools!!! IMPOSSIBLE.

One student was removed from school by her parents.

Of course, that's not the only twist. The allegation goes on to say that the reason for Keith's reaction was religious. Apparently, he attends the same Mormon church as the parents. And we all know that lesbianism is not high on the list of Mormon values, right? The school and Dean both deny that claim, but hey, take it for what it's worth.

All of that said, I have to give some kudos here to the school. They did make some changes. They made it clear that the video system is not to be used for this type of policing, or to be shown to parents. They also removed the Dean. Sadly, they just re-assigned him to be an assistant superintendent or something. I would have fired him, but hey, I'm not known for being forgiving either. More kudos go out to the student body, many of whom walked out of school to protest. Very mature way to accept and support fellow students' lifestyles. Sadly, more mature than a shit for brains like Nelson. Of course, he sets the bar pretty low.