u235

I'm already sick of the phase "5 to 4". But I know this is just the beginning.

Thanks to big business, in particular energy, insurance and commerce, America will now be subjected to decades of judicial reversal. It's only the beginning but already progress has been rolled back for women, minorities and consumers.

It's a sad toss of the dice that the stupidest president in the history of the US was allowed to choose not one, but two supreme court justices.

His tenure may be over in 2009, but his legacy will live on in the form of archaic judiciary values.

I know I'm not alone in my views, and of all the victims I have the most sympathy for those justices currently on the bench that will have to endure whiplash change.

My work sucks, but damn, I'm sure that yours sucks more.

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (AP) -- A Mickey Mouse lookalike who preached Islamic domination on a Hamas-affiliated children's television program was beaten to death in the show's final episode Friday.

In the final skit, ''Farfour'' was killed by an actor posing as an Israeli official trying to buy Farfour's land. At one point, the mouse called the Israeli a ''terrorist.''

''Farfour was martyred while defending his land,'' said Sara, the teen presenter. He was killed ''by the killers of children,'' she added.

I'm not sure what to add to this. Clearly to live in that area is to live with the spectre of death, poverty and pain. It's also apparent that the broadcasters felt it to be acceptable to abuse a child's icon for the purpose of brainwashing, but to beat it to death?

Damn.

There seems to be a common theme in the religious right these days: science where it suits them, but only to the degree that it meets their needs.

Recently a couple had been trying to have kids, and when they couldn't they turned to science to help them. As a side effect of the medical (not holy) intervention they conceived six. The doctors told them that trying to have six wasn't a good idea, that there would be problems, and that they should reduce the number to increase their chances of survival. This is the same science that they turned to in the first place to conceive right? You'd think that they'd say "Yes, we want a child and a healthy one so we'll do what we have to as insurance."

But no. Now it was back to "faith". Science got you pregnant, but faith will ensure that the doctors will be wrong? Uh no. Four of the six are dead, and the remaining two are in intensive care, but they still have "faith".

If all the babies die then they'll be back to "science" again trying to conceive. Given the time and money wasted on them in the first place I hope they get a back seat to newer couples who are more willing to listen to the doctors.

You were told of the consequences thus it's no surprise that it happened. It wasn't science that let you down, it was either your "faith" or your own lack of intelligence.

Once again, Darwin proves his mettle.

Logically speaking the first child is the eldest child. There's lots of things special about being first in any venue, but recently, it's been diagnosed that eldest kids are often the smarter kids. Ok, well, that comes as no big surprise to many of us. But if our overly-sensitive society that's now a problem rather than a simple statement of collected data.

The knee jerk reaction being published is "Oh that's so unfair to the rest of the kids."

Come the fuck on.

Unfair? How? You can't blame the parents or the child for the birth order of the kids, nor can you switch them around after their born. People can't "take turns" at being the eldest, I'm sorry. Instead of just acknowledging that someone conducted an effective study to uncover supporting data for something most people took for granted, people are how howling about the inherent inequality for subsequent children. There will be a drive to "equalize" family dynamics to make things more "fair".

As far as I'm concerned this is so unspeakably stupid it's almost hard to express. Why this should be a problem for anyone at all is beyond reason. Life does not require justification. Eldest kids are test-subjects for their parents. Eldest kids are stuck with additional responsibilities. Eldest kids face more scrutiny. The list goes on and on. If you want to talk "fair" how does all that weigh into the balance?

Finally, these meddling morons who want to make certain all kids have an even slice of the intelligence pie - is that really what you want? You want the oldest child to be stupider when he's the one in charge of his siblings? Or is it that you want the younger kids smarter so they can better circumvent any authority?

Be careful what you ask for. The current situation works, instead of trying to destroy that balance maybe some analysis needs to be done regarding the public consumption of scientific studies first.

The data? You can't handle the data...

Why is it that the world needs to be responsible when an individual makes a stupid decision? Further, why is it seemingly impossible for ordinary people to own up to their own mistakes? Case in point, people with SUV's backing over their own children. It's never their fault. It was the auto manufacturer for selling a behemoth vehicle without backup sensors or equipping it with a camera. It was the government's fault for not mandating the use of these technologies. It was the child's fault for running after the parent.

But it absolutely was NOT the fault of the parent for not being aware of their child's location. No, clearly not.

That's crap.

No you don't get any sympathy for buying a vehicle six times larger than you really need. You wanted something the size of a small tank, fine, you got it and you know what? Along with the oversized barge you bought comes the problems of navigating it. You bought a vehicle that makes it harder to see the ground, so where's the wonder that you increase the chances of running over something you can't see? Including your own child?

It's not for the auto industry to instantly make you smart enough or skilled enough to be safe in the vehicle you choose to buy. Nor is it their job to alert you to the changes you need to make in your routine to manage your new status symbol. When you test-drive the car, it's your opportunity to decide how it meets your needs.

Here's the deal, if you choose to buy a vehicle, appliance, device, toy then it's your responsibility to drive, use, function the item in a safe manner. While manufacturers are responsible to ensure that normal operation is hazard free, they are not the ones to shoulder the blame when you, the operator, fuck up.

Ford didn't back the SUV over your kid. You did.

Can you smell the shredder overheating? I can. I predict that in 2008 the paper shredders in the White House, more specifically in the offices of the feral Vice President, will be working overtime. Data won't just be lost, it will be expunged. It will cease to exist, as well as any records of the records.

I'd put money on the fact that the "missing emails" from the RNC accounts in the case of the fired US attourneys is just a drop in the bucket. Given that Cheney has refused to cooperate with any rules or regulations regarding data management and information oversight it's totally predictable that he will do his damndest to ensure that any records of what went on within his offices is destroyed.

It'll make what Anderson did for Enron look like daycamp for preschoolers.

The following is a quote from the esteemed Republican representative from Pennsylvania:

"The Mexico policy exists to draw a bright line between U.S. family planning policy and abortion,...However, it appears that there are some out there who wish to blur this line, (which) is what leads to coercive abortions and forced sterilizations."

Retard. How is funding contraceptives leading to coercive abortions and forced sterilizations? In fact whom, other than perhaps the Chinese, actually does these things? Since the whole issue we're addressing funding for family planning in Mexico City are you inferring that the Mexicans would be doing that? If we funded birth control pills and condoms?

It's not terribly surprising that a republican from Pennsylvania would just spew bullshit rhetoric to try and emotionalize an already emotional issue. Posturing idiots don't have much of an problem with making shit up just to get attention and paint themselves as heros.

Of course the underlying issue is the fact that many organizations that support family planning, also offer abortion services. And in our wisdom, the US feels that we need to force the viewpoints of "some" Americans on the rest of the world by denying ANY funding to those services.

So what about the spread of sexually transmitted disease? What about the fact that the number of abortions will actually RISE if we don't fund contraception? Where do those items fit into your reality... oh that's right they don't because their logic doesn't make you feel like a big man.

Well here's a clue, idiot. You're not a big man. You're a jackass.

An article in the NY Times today addressed the issue of whether crazy people should be allowed to vote. Ok, that's not the nicest way to say it, but that summarizes the concept the most simply. But how do you define crazy?

Would most people say that someone who has been found "criminally insane" crazy? I think most people would. But for how long does that status apply? Ok the court agrees they were nuts when they killed someone, but should they get to vote? What about other people? Those with Alzheimer? People with Downs? People who, by law, are mandated to the care of a guardian or institution? Should those people get to influence elections?

This is actually a bigger issue today, with so many races being decided by a tiny percentage of the votes. One has to wonder what the right to vote actually means to someone who society has judged as incapable of being left to their own judgement.

Voting is supposed to be everyone's right and duty as a citizen. Putting aside the cocktards who don't vote because they don't care, is it fair to say that only "normal" people should be able to vote? If the only criteria is the ability to fill out a voter registration form, is that enough to be part of the machine that selects legislators at all levels, including local? If there were an extreme case, where lets say a small town had more patients in a mental institution than they did citizens, and those patients decided to elect one of their own as police chief, is that unfair? And to whom?

I'm not going to offer my own opinion here, but just these thoughts for consideration. At what point is someone who has been removed from society or who has their daily decisions handled by someone else a viable contributor? Where's the line and if there's any question as to their capacity, should they be allowed to vote?

On the other hand maybe it's a novel concept to use votes from the "non compos mentis" as a yardstick. Imagine the news reporting, instead of Red vs Blue, the number of people that voted like "a mass murderer" or "your crazy old uncle". There actually might be some utility in that.

When our current president took office, a man from the state of oil and energy, the cost of a gallon of gas was about a dollar fifty. Today it's more than twice that, and these prices are here to stay. The energy industry has found that it's not just acceptable to exploit the consumer, but that it's acceptable ~and sustainable.

On the one hand automobile manufacturers, coal and energy companies have found that their lobbyists can neutralize any attempt to reduce emissions or encourage the development of alternate energy sources. On the other, the oil giants argue that if America is going to invest in alternative fuels, why the hell should they increase their processing capacity to lower the price of gas?

And we, the consumer, are basically, totally and completely screwed. Without increased refining capacity the oil magnates won't be dropping the price of fuel (and subsequently managing and maintaining their lock on higher prices). Without alternatives we will be forced to pay their demands.

Now one might think that a man elected by the people would have their interests at heart. But those people would be idiots and retards. His only interest is ensuring that his buddies get their rewards for putting him in office. As usual, the rich get richer and the rest of us are left to pay for it, in one way or another.

01/20/09. It can't come soon enough.

But it's going to take decades to undo the damage he's done.

To all the people who are critical of any plan to put a date on a withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, read the following quote see how it sits:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Stabilizing Iraq could take as long as a decade, says the U.S. commander in Baghdad.

So... ready to support a decade of involvement? Care to estimate how many lives that equates to? If this is really what it takes are you willing to support it to be "successful"?

Pony up bitches, now's the time. Either you're with it or you're not...

Who is David McDade? Well he's the Douglas County District Attorney. In Georgia. Apparently his brand of "law" involves intimidation of victims, or more specifically a victim's mother. Let's review the details of the case.

It all starts with oral sex.

No really. Seems a seventeen year old boy got a blowjob from a fifteen year old girl. And because it was a blowjob and not actual sex it landed the boy, an "A" student and accomplished athlete in jail. For years. (If it had just been sex he would have gotten off lightly under a "Romeo and Juliet" provision.) Instead he got hit with "aggravated child molestation".

Now since then the Georgia legislature has fixed the loophole to make certain that this bullshit doesn't happen to anyone else - however - their justice system refused to apply it retroactively to the boy in prison. And their Supreme Court agreed.

Assholes.

Ahem, anyway moving on. The case was sent back and then thrown out by a state judge who characterized the case as a grave miscarriage of justice and ordered the boy finally free (it happened in 2005).

But, because he could, Attorney General Thurbert Baker (another jackass), appealed the ruling and kept the kid in jail.

Back to David McDade again. Turns out that the "victim" already said it was consensual and her mother never wanted to take the case to court in the first place. She even said so in a newspaper interview. The next day Darth McDade, tape recorder in hand, visits the mother and threatens her with charges of child neglect if she didn't cooperate by supporting the case against the boy.

And the Governor is suggesting that the whole case is "casing Georgia in a bad light".

Gee, ya think?

"Gay" marriage had a victory today. The Massachusetts legislature declined to put the issue before their public by voting (fairly overwhelmingly) against it. Deval Patrick, the Governor, had characterized the issue as "distracting" from other more important issues and "divisive" as well. It seems that while 62 legislators had voted to give the referendum consideration, that once they considered it they no longer wanted to support it. Fair 'nuf if you ask me. They came, they pondered, and they decided. Against in this case.

Of course not everyone was happy with the decision...

Bob Francis of Everet, Mass.,said marriage was "a biblical issue," adding, "If I'm a homosexual and I continue to participate in homosexual acts and I think it’s O.K., that’s a problem."

Attention Mr.Francis. Let me help clue you in to something. First, this is the U.S of A. and we have a little concept in place called "separation of church and state." If you don't know what this is then maybe you need to go back to school or perhaps educate yourself by looking it up on the web.

On the other hand, if you do know what it is, and you still chose to make that retarded remark then perhaps you need to move to a place where the Bible makes the rules - like say Louisiana, South America or perhaps the Saudi Arabia (well they call it the Koran there but you'll find all the same stuff in it more or less).

Retard.

Besides, I'm pretty certain that no homosexual male would come within fifty feet of you since you're clearly too stupid to even be coherent. See homosexuals ~are homosexuals because they know (they don't have to think) that's what is right for them. And since they're homosexual they will commit "homosexual acts" because well, that's what they are after all.

It's hard for anyone to understand muslim nations these days. They claim to be 'advanced' enough to control nuclear power, and yet they freely give weapons and explosives to other muslims to kill... more muslims. They claim to be civilized, and yet women are treated less fairly than cattle and their religious elders make proclamations such as "If a woman wants to go uncovered in the presence of an un-related man she must breast feed him five times." Right. That's beyond the typical "wtf-stupid" concept. It's clearly laughable. But now it's a formal "rule".

Now of course, after asking for independence and the liberty to control their own territory the Palestinians show that they only government they support is out and out anarchy. They're busily killing each other at a phenomenal rate, grinding their impoverished, isolated nation into oblivion.

Guns, violence, death, mutilation, oppression, starvation, abuse, humiliation, rhetoric, posturing, suicide, and despair seem to be the hallmarks of the "true" muslim state. It's hard to argue with this given the evidence on a daily basis. Why this is what the current muslim ideology is beyond comprehension. But at the rate they're going they will do a far better job of killing themselves off than any other race or religion could ever do.

The Special Olympics is seeking greater recognition by looking for sponsorship from big cities such as New York. While they have had a great deal of success in smaller towns and venues they appear to find the lack of support from larger, more urban locations to be disappointing. Unfortunately there remains a fundamental line drawn that very often supporters of those with disabilities don't like to acknowledge. To summarize in brief, being "special" does not put you on par with the "gifted".

It's not cruel, most especially when you consider that even "average" or "normal" people aren't on par with premier athletes either. In fact there isn't even an internationally recognized competition for "normal" people called the 'Ordinary Olympics'. Sorry, that's just how it works. No one will pay to see Joe-Armchair wheeze through a 100 meter dash, so it shouldn't be all that offensive to the disabled to understand that no one wants to see them either.

''I think in this day and age, New Yorkers are looking, like everybody else, for something to believe in,'' said Shriver, whose mother, Eunice Kennedy Shriver, founded Special Olympics in 1968. ''And I think they can believe in our athletes, and I think our athletes have a vision for the future that's better than any politician or any business leader or any celebrity out there.

Yes, if you read that quote as an euphemism, it's fine to see their effort and dedication as a tribute to the human spirit in overcoming adversity. But to say that they have a superior "vision for the future"? In the sense that they aren't as ready to pick up guns and kill, exploit, murder and extort, yes I guess so. To say they're ready to lead an international quorum to solve all the world's woes? No, I don't think so.

I actually don't believe the participants or the families of the participants have such lofty aspirations, just the organizers and supporters who want to support both a cause and themselves.

I have a knee-jerk reaction to bumper stickers. Often if I find the advertised message offensive, retarded or just plain asinine (e.g. 'I love Cats, they taste great with sauce', '"W"', 'No Jesus, No Peace') I feel free to immediately cast aspersions on their thinking, their looks and their lives. Hell if you feel comfortable enough to glue your message to the side of your car, you're clearly comfortable enough to receive my opinion on it.

Of all categories of stickers none will piss me off faster than right-to-life bullshit. Having a 'I'm pro-life and I vote' sticker is a clear signal to me to flip someone off, cut them off or block them in behind the slowest 'wide-load' vehicle on the three lane highway. The other day, however, as I was about to give the finger to the 'clearly too old to reproduce, but not too old to fuck with other people's lives' Octogenarians, I had to pause. Their sticker said "Choose Life, your mother did".

The first response was "well yeah so did Stalin's mom, Hitler's mom and Barbara Bush." But then I thought about it some more. While phrased as a command it still had the word "choose" highlighted. Choose. That's important. The inference there is that they support a women's right to decide, which is quite different than trying to change the laws to deny women their right to control their body and their future.

"Choose life". Well ok, so long as you support the ability to choose otherwise, then I can wholeheartedly support your right to express your opinion and try and change individual opinions through conversation, advertising or other media.

... and the rich don't walk?

The premier high-ho Paris now gets "house arrest" instead of time in jail after consulting with "medical personnel'.

What the fuck ok? Who says all people are created equal?

The bitch spent all of 5 days in jail.

Unless the medical reasons involved being 'violated with a johnny-brush' I don't see what reason she has of being excused from doing the time she's been given.

The Post said she was seen crying as she cracked “under the pressure of prison,” according to unidentified people. A blogger at The Los Angeles Times saw a lesson for everyone: “Crying works! Who knew?” -The Lede

It's not that anyone really needs evidence that the people guiding our current government are retards who just go with their "gut instincts" before implementing policy, but some examples are just more frustrating than others. An excellent example being the new rules that to travel to Mexico, Canada or the Caribbean you now need a passport.

Lo and behold, there has been a massive crush (and resulting massive delay) for people trying to get passports to visit the most common vacation areas for Americans today. ...And the government is surprised? Yes, indeed they are surprised. 'Wow, who'da thunk, yukk, yukk... {drool}.'

Now with a ten week wait to get a passport people are desperately trying to use the more expensive expediting services, to little or no avail.

Just how fucking retarded can our administration be? Did they not realize how many people take cruises? Visit Cancun? Retreat to Montreal or Quebec City for a summer trip?

Further, explain to me exactly why it really even matters that US Citizens even need passports to go to these locations when the fucking border employees willingly ignore alarms and alerts that are actually raised (taking the Typhoid-Lawyer guy as an example)?

This is just further evidence of just how out of touch our law makers are with reality. I promise that none of them will have to wait seven hours, standing outside a building in the sun to get their passports (or better yet, be told they now need to wait ten weeks to get one).

Nice going retards.

By now everyone knows the story. This self proclaimed "very well-educated, successful, intelligent person" decided to ignore advice and later, commands not to travel because he has a deadly disease. The excuses: that he felt fine, that he was never really told not to travel, that it was his long planned wedding and honeymoon. Essentially, this arrogant fuck decided that his travel plans were more important than giving a deadly disease to scores of innocent people who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

So T.B. Speaker hits Rome and is told "don't get on a plane, don't fly - the germ you're carrying is an extremely hard to kill, drug resistant type." So now he knows right? What does the bastard do? Hop a plane to Prague to fly to Montreal and sneak back into the US so he can get better medical care. Hello asshole? If it mattered to you that much maybe you shouldn't have left the US in the first place?

When the border agent scans his passport warning signs begin flashing like Las Vegas informing the worker not to let him go, to put on protective gear, to call for assistance... and - he's let go anyway. Wonderful.

Now Andrew is a lawyer, that means when he gets sued by an angry mob of people who now have to worry for the next 20 years if they have TB, he should be able to stand up and explain to everyone why his fun time in Europe was more important than the lives and health of everyone around him.