Google search:
kitties are total bullshit
What? This doesn't even quite make sense. Kitties are bullshit? You mean, like, you don't believe in them or something? Either way, if you can't get on board with kitties, there's something wrong with you.
Saturday, July 09, 2005
So the awful saga of the bombings in London this week continues. Naturally, those in charge are meeting the challenge with more nonsense.
Meanwhile, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said it was crucial to address terrorism's underlying causes, which he listed as deprivation, lack of democracy and the ongoing Middle East conflict.
Yeah, Tony, those things certainly aren't helping to curtail terrorism. But you know, those aren't the only things that foster terrorism...
London Mayor Ken Livingstone said the attack was not related to Britain's participation in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. London, he said, is a symbol of the lifestyle terrorists despise, particularly its multicultural heritage.
Right. Once again, they hate us for our freedom, a completely nonsensical concept, but not for the shit we do to fuck with people around the world every day.
Now, I'm not saying that we're asking for it, but we're asking for it. Well, it's more the world leaders who are asking for it. Sure, we're all complicit in many ways since we live our comfortable lives and don't give a shit about anyone else, coupled with the fact that we elect the stupid leaders who cause all of this shit. But that's all pretty passive compared to "Hey, let's attack this place just because we want to."
While the leaders may be the ones who are really asking for it, the trouble is that they never have to worry about getting it, but that's the nature of war. Those responsible for starting them rarely ever have to suffer. Can we go back to they old school days where the leader (in those days, the king) was right there on the front lines? With the group of fucking cowards ruling the world today, if that were the standard, we'd see a lot less of this bullshit. That goes for parties on both sides, whether in a conventional war or a "war" on terror. Osama won't be strapping a bomb to himself any sooner than George Bush will actually fly a fighter jet into a war zone.
As they always do, The Onion put it best right after September 11th when, in talking about Bush and Osama, they had a headline that read "Privileged Children of Millionaires Square off on World Stage."
Meanwhile, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said it was crucial to address terrorism's underlying causes, which he listed as deprivation, lack of democracy and the ongoing Middle East conflict.
Yeah, Tony, those things certainly aren't helping to curtail terrorism. But you know, those aren't the only things that foster terrorism...
London Mayor Ken Livingstone said the attack was not related to Britain's participation in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. London, he said, is a symbol of the lifestyle terrorists despise, particularly its multicultural heritage.
Right. Once again, they hate us for our freedom, a completely nonsensical concept, but not for the shit we do to fuck with people around the world every day.
Now, I'm not saying that we're asking for it, but we're asking for it. Well, it's more the world leaders who are asking for it. Sure, we're all complicit in many ways since we live our comfortable lives and don't give a shit about anyone else, coupled with the fact that we elect the stupid leaders who cause all of this shit. But that's all pretty passive compared to "Hey, let's attack this place just because we want to."
While the leaders may be the ones who are really asking for it, the trouble is that they never have to worry about getting it, but that's the nature of war. Those responsible for starting them rarely ever have to suffer. Can we go back to they old school days where the leader (in those days, the king) was right there on the front lines? With the group of fucking cowards ruling the world today, if that were the standard, we'd see a lot less of this bullshit. That goes for parties on both sides, whether in a conventional war or a "war" on terror. Osama won't be strapping a bomb to himself any sooner than George Bush will actually fly a fighter jet into a war zone.
As they always do, The Onion put it best right after September 11th when, in talking about Bush and Osama, they had a headline that read "Privileged Children of Millionaires Square off on World Stage."
I fail to see where the "bad parenting" comes in with regards to this. Isn't Canada supposed to be better about stuff like that? Or am I just mixing them up with Europe when they're in fact as dumb as we are? I have it on authority that the age of consent there is 14 -- and I'm trying to refrain from the usual comments -- so that at least shows that they are a bit more liberal about things there. Oh, nevermind. It would help if I read the article thoroughly and saw that it happened here in the US of Stupid, not in Canada. Look, it's late, and I'm tired.
Pharris said after being arrested that she tried to do something special for her son.
See? That's a pretty nice gesture. This kid, and his friends, had to be thinking "best mom ever!" Okay, it's kinda creepy when mom is getting her kid a stripper, but it could be creepier. Like one time when I was watching one of those "America Undercover" specials on HBO, and a mom took her son to a whorehouse in Nevada so he could lose his virginity. That's creepy.
Anyway, enough creepiness:
"We even had grandpa there," she said.
See? Everyone fucking wins! I honestly don't see the crime here. Weird, yeah, but what more does a 16-year-old boy want more than to see some titties? They got the kid what he wanted; leave them alone.
Speaking of 14-year-olds and sex, Google search:
is it illegal to fuck a 14 year old
You may as well just turn yourself in if you're looking to Google for legal advice. If nothing else, you should at least be hitting ageofconsent.com if you must insist on asking questions of this nature. I honestly can't believe I've never linked that site before.
Pharris said after being arrested that she tried to do something special for her son.
See? That's a pretty nice gesture. This kid, and his friends, had to be thinking "best mom ever!" Okay, it's kinda creepy when mom is getting her kid a stripper, but it could be creepier. Like one time when I was watching one of those "America Undercover" specials on HBO, and a mom took her son to a whorehouse in Nevada so he could lose his virginity. That's creepy.
Anyway, enough creepiness:
"We even had grandpa there," she said.
See? Everyone fucking wins! I honestly don't see the crime here. Weird, yeah, but what more does a 16-year-old boy want more than to see some titties? They got the kid what he wanted; leave them alone.
Speaking of 14-year-olds and sex, Google search:
is it illegal to fuck a 14 year old
You may as well just turn yourself in if you're looking to Google for legal advice. If nothing else, you should at least be hitting ageofconsent.com if you must insist on asking questions of this nature. I honestly can't believe I've never linked that site before.
Thursday, July 07, 2005
Unless if you've been living under some kind of rock, you know what the big story is. There's really not much I can say about that in and of itself since it's all pretty self-evident, but I can nitpick at irrelevant minutiae. For instance, Tony Blair:
"We know these people act in the name of Islam but we also know the vast and overwhelming majority of Muslims here and abroad are decent and law-abiding people who abhor this act of terrorism."
Tony, we know this. You know that we know this. Granted, there are a lot of idiots out there who don't know this, but they're not gonna have their minds changed by you, Tony. I just hate these useless statements that are made just because they feel that they have to make them. It's like whenever I put someone in charge of something, and just out of stupid obligation to myself, I tell them something like "Be careful," even though I know that A) they were gonna be anyway and B) my saying it changes nothing. It's just that there's this stupid part of me that tells myself that if I don't say it, A and B won't hold. It's retarded, and I should stop it. World leaders should especially stop it. The same goes for condemnation of attacks like this. We know that you guys (allegedly) don't approve of what's happened, so quit wasting all our time telling us about that. Maybe you guys could look into doing some actual work someday instead of just standing around reading useless prepared statements.
Speaking of meaningless statements, Jack Straw:
"There's an assumption that this is an al-Qaida-based organisation. It has the hallmarks of an al-Qaida-based organisation and also its ruthlessness."
I'm still very uncomfortable with this assumption business. Shit blows up, and it's automatically Osama. Yes, I know, a group calling itself Al Qaeda Fuckheads in Europe or whatever claimed responsibility, but it still seems dangerous to just be putting all these labels on immediately just so we have someone we can picture in our simple minds when something happens. I mean, al Qaeda affiliates seem to be so loosely tied together that I'm pretty sure all you need to do to get into the club is to say that you're in the club. Do we know that all these groups are really working together in terms of manpower, financing, equipment, etc.? Or is it just common goals and ideology that bind them together? If it's merely the latter in some cases, then we oughta be cautious of oversimplifying. Seems as if that's gotten us into trouble in the past.
It's just like the shit we keep hearing in Iraq. "Al Qaeda-type" fighters, or "Al Qaeda-based" organizations or blah blah blah. Basically, it's "we don't really know what the fuck's going on, but we're going to play fast and loose with the rhetoric so your simple minds have something you can latch onto so that you can get behind us without too much critical thought." For fuck's sake, people. This may have been al Qaeda to the core, and it may have just been some loosely affiliated group, but either way I'm pretty sure that people were blowing shit up and killing civilians long before al Qaeda ever existed. Wait six seconds until you have some facts, then you can start jumping to conclusions.
He said there was no intelligence about other devices but he warned people to be vigilant.
Why is this relevant? We see how good the intelligence was on the bombs that did go off, so...
Meanwhile, Stateside, the usual stupid bullshit is to be expected, and we're delivering. For instance, I was reading bits and pieces of this article, and contained within it was the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard:
Authorities have increased police presence at "United Kingdom-related locations," according to NYPD spokesman Jason Post, who did not elaborate on the locations.
A five-year-old must have thought this one up. Wow, since they bombed stuff in the UK, maybe someone will wanna make a statement and bomb something that's related to the UK that's not even in the UK! You know, I have this miniature of St. Stephen's Tower (the home of Big Ben and the Great Clock of Westminster) in the cabinet where the Girls reside -- maybe I should move it down to the lowest shelf right next to Jetfire just in case someone tries to blow it up.
I mean, really, if this is the kind of mentality that we have going with our security people, then we're fucked. Gas up the airliners, open the boarders and our airspace, and do whatever else needs to be done to give al Qaeda carte blanche to kill us all, because that's where we're headed if this is what's being done to protect us.
"We know these people act in the name of Islam but we also know the vast and overwhelming majority of Muslims here and abroad are decent and law-abiding people who abhor this act of terrorism."
Tony, we know this. You know that we know this. Granted, there are a lot of idiots out there who don't know this, but they're not gonna have their minds changed by you, Tony. I just hate these useless statements that are made just because they feel that they have to make them. It's like whenever I put someone in charge of something, and just out of stupid obligation to myself, I tell them something like "Be careful," even though I know that A) they were gonna be anyway and B) my saying it changes nothing. It's just that there's this stupid part of me that tells myself that if I don't say it, A and B won't hold. It's retarded, and I should stop it. World leaders should especially stop it. The same goes for condemnation of attacks like this. We know that you guys (allegedly) don't approve of what's happened, so quit wasting all our time telling us about that. Maybe you guys could look into doing some actual work someday instead of just standing around reading useless prepared statements.
Speaking of meaningless statements, Jack Straw:
"There's an assumption that this is an al-Qaida-based organisation. It has the hallmarks of an al-Qaida-based organisation and also its ruthlessness."
I'm still very uncomfortable with this assumption business. Shit blows up, and it's automatically Osama. Yes, I know, a group calling itself Al Qaeda Fuckheads in Europe or whatever claimed responsibility, but it still seems dangerous to just be putting all these labels on immediately just so we have someone we can picture in our simple minds when something happens. I mean, al Qaeda affiliates seem to be so loosely tied together that I'm pretty sure all you need to do to get into the club is to say that you're in the club. Do we know that all these groups are really working together in terms of manpower, financing, equipment, etc.? Or is it just common goals and ideology that bind them together? If it's merely the latter in some cases, then we oughta be cautious of oversimplifying. Seems as if that's gotten us into trouble in the past.
It's just like the shit we keep hearing in Iraq. "Al Qaeda-type" fighters, or "Al Qaeda-based" organizations or blah blah blah. Basically, it's "we don't really know what the fuck's going on, but we're going to play fast and loose with the rhetoric so your simple minds have something you can latch onto so that you can get behind us without too much critical thought." For fuck's sake, people. This may have been al Qaeda to the core, and it may have just been some loosely affiliated group, but either way I'm pretty sure that people were blowing shit up and killing civilians long before al Qaeda ever existed. Wait six seconds until you have some facts, then you can start jumping to conclusions.
He said there was no intelligence about other devices but he warned people to be vigilant.
Why is this relevant? We see how good the intelligence was on the bombs that did go off, so...
Meanwhile, Stateside, the usual stupid bullshit is to be expected, and we're delivering. For instance, I was reading bits and pieces of this article, and contained within it was the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard:
Authorities have increased police presence at "United Kingdom-related locations," according to NYPD spokesman Jason Post, who did not elaborate on the locations.
A five-year-old must have thought this one up. Wow, since they bombed stuff in the UK, maybe someone will wanna make a statement and bomb something that's related to the UK that's not even in the UK! You know, I have this miniature of St. Stephen's Tower (the home of Big Ben and the Great Clock of Westminster) in the cabinet where the Girls reside -- maybe I should move it down to the lowest shelf right next to Jetfire just in case someone tries to blow it up.
I mean, really, if this is the kind of mentality that we have going with our security people, then we're fucked. Gas up the airliners, open the boarders and our airspace, and do whatever else needs to be done to give al Qaeda carte blanche to kill us all, because that's where we're headed if this is what's being done to protect us.
Monday, July 04, 2005
When I fired up my browser the other day and saw that Sandra Day O'Connor is retiring, I immediately said "Oh shit." And we're only in the pre-game warmups now; I can't wait for the real fun to begin. And by "can't wait," what I actually mean is "I wish everyone would die."
Okay, so check this out. There's pretty much no chance that Bush will nominate someone who is anywhere near center. Definitely no one who isn't a hardcore Christian on a mission against things like abortion and gay rights. So we're pretty much fucked on that front.
But would it matter even if the world turned itself inside out and he did nominate a centrist? Who wants to bet that no matter who Bush nominates, every Democrat and liberal will be dead-set against it. Bush could nominate Clinton and the left would go up in flames saying that they're going to try and stop it. And that's exactly what it'll be; nothing but talk about trying to stop it. The most the Democrats can do is filibuster, and we all know that they will, but in the end, I'm all but certain that Bush will get his way.
Okay, so check this out. There's pretty much no chance that Bush will nominate someone who is anywhere near center. Definitely no one who isn't a hardcore Christian on a mission against things like abortion and gay rights. So we're pretty much fucked on that front.
But would it matter even if the world turned itself inside out and he did nominate a centrist? Who wants to bet that no matter who Bush nominates, every Democrat and liberal will be dead-set against it. Bush could nominate Clinton and the left would go up in flames saying that they're going to try and stop it. And that's exactly what it'll be; nothing but talk about trying to stop it. The most the Democrats can do is filibuster, and we all know that they will, but in the end, I'm all but certain that Bush will get his way.
Like usual, this is nothing but Puritanism that wastes a bunch of fucking time. If a female teacher shows up with her breasts totally exposed or a male teacher shows up with his schlong hanging out, that might be a problem. Well, except in the case of the female teacher and her male students should the teacher be attractive.
District 11 in Colorado Springs, Colorado...
Big shocker finding the Springs involved in this article.
... hair curlers are disallowed in Harris County...
What?
School administrators say inappropriate dress is most often an issue with younger teachers, whose trendy clothing and casual style can make it hard to distinguish them from their students.
Uhhh, you can usually distinguish teachers -- even the younger ones -- from their students by picking out the lone adult amongst a bunch of kids. The only place this could almost be relevant is with a very young teacher or student teacher who's in charge of older high schoolers. Really, though, this one is just a pathetic excuse for being uptight.
"I don't think I'm taken as seriously if I'm dressed down and I don't think I take my job as seriously if I'm dressed down," he said. "When I dress more professionally, I think I teach better, I think I'm received better, and I think I show more respect for my profession."
When I first read this particular quote, I was like, that's all fucking stupid. Your teaching ability is based on what clothes you're wearing? Wow, if that's not the sign of a shitty teacher, then I don't know what is. I dunno if you're going to be "received better" since these are kids you're dealing with and not other professionals. And the notion of showing "more respect" for your profession is just some arbitrary nonsense that you and a bunch of others just made up. But once I got through all that, I went back and re-read that he's a fucking BAND TEACHER, which means that the man is a total joke to begin with.
But the school board still does not allow Capri pants because those stop only around the midcalf.
I'm almost OK with this since Capri pants are fucking stupid. What are you, preparing for the flood, lady? Either pick out some pants or pick out some shorts and get on with it already.
In Houston, the Aldine Independent School District's policy is cut-and-dried... Their sideburns cannot extend beyond the earlobe.
But can they be triangle shaped?
I'd love it if one of these days this country stopped getting hysterical over irrelevant shit just for the sake of getting hysterical. Maybe we oughta be more concerned with how teachers are teaching as opposed to what they're wearing. I don't think it takes a genius to see when something really crosses the line (as with the aforementioned cock example), but otherwise, leave these fucking people alone and let them do their jobs. Hey, I know what'll make these cretins happy: just force all teachers to wear burqas. Freedom is on the march!
District 11 in Colorado Springs, Colorado...
Big shocker finding the Springs involved in this article.
... hair curlers are disallowed in Harris County...
What?
School administrators say inappropriate dress is most often an issue with younger teachers, whose trendy clothing and casual style can make it hard to distinguish them from their students.
Uhhh, you can usually distinguish teachers -- even the younger ones -- from their students by picking out the lone adult amongst a bunch of kids. The only place this could almost be relevant is with a very young teacher or student teacher who's in charge of older high schoolers. Really, though, this one is just a pathetic excuse for being uptight.
"I don't think I'm taken as seriously if I'm dressed down and I don't think I take my job as seriously if I'm dressed down," he said. "When I dress more professionally, I think I teach better, I think I'm received better, and I think I show more respect for my profession."
When I first read this particular quote, I was like, that's all fucking stupid. Your teaching ability is based on what clothes you're wearing? Wow, if that's not the sign of a shitty teacher, then I don't know what is. I dunno if you're going to be "received better" since these are kids you're dealing with and not other professionals. And the notion of showing "more respect" for your profession is just some arbitrary nonsense that you and a bunch of others just made up. But once I got through all that, I went back and re-read that he's a fucking BAND TEACHER, which means that the man is a total joke to begin with.
But the school board still does not allow Capri pants because those stop only around the midcalf.
I'm almost OK with this since Capri pants are fucking stupid. What are you, preparing for the flood, lady? Either pick out some pants or pick out some shorts and get on with it already.
In Houston, the Aldine Independent School District's policy is cut-and-dried... Their sideburns cannot extend beyond the earlobe.
But can they be triangle shaped?
I'd love it if one of these days this country stopped getting hysterical over irrelevant shit just for the sake of getting hysterical. Maybe we oughta be more concerned with how teachers are teaching as opposed to what they're wearing. I don't think it takes a genius to see when something really crosses the line (as with the aforementioned cock example), but otherwise, leave these fucking people alone and let them do their jobs. Hey, I know what'll make these cretins happy: just force all teachers to wear burqas. Freedom is on the march!
Okay, this article is worth it just for the joke about the Air Force in one of the opening paragraphs, but it also gives me yet another chance to make fun of fat people. I mean, seriously, who cares if people are too fat to join up? Or too fat to stay in service? These people sound like perfect front-line candidates to me. Then everyone else can be a part of Operation: Get Behind the Fatties.
USARIEM, as it is known...
Is US'ARIEM run by a guy they call Dr. Van Gelder, by any chance? I'm just asking.
"We now try to return them better than when they joined the Army with the promise that they will 'be all they can be."
Yeah, assuming that you don't send them home dead. What they've got going thanks to shit like Iraq is one helluva weight loss program.
USARIEM, as it is known...
Is US'ARIEM run by a guy they call Dr. Van Gelder, by any chance? I'm just asking.
"We now try to return them better than when they joined the Army with the promise that they will 'be all they can be."
Yeah, assuming that you don't send them home dead. What they've got going thanks to shit like Iraq is one helluva weight loss program.
It is July 4, 2005. But where are the flying cars? I was promised flying cars. I don't see any any flying cars. Why? Why? Why?
It seemed like something was up when KOC showed up in late June without giving the Doteasy page for having exceeded bandwidth on a free account, but nothing new has shown up, so right now Galvin is looking like nothing more than a cockteaser.
It seemed like something was up when KOC showed up in late June without giving the Doteasy page for having exceeded bandwidth on a free account, but nothing new has shown up, so right now Galvin is looking like nothing more than a cockteaser.
Sunday, July 03, 2005
Fireworks
Spam:
Wanna Cum Like Pornstar?
Um, no. If you've watched enough porno, at least the standard shit, you will have noticed that many porno guys are fucking with a semi-flaccid cock, and then when they pull out to cum on the chick (which they ALWYAS do... for some reason, we've gotta have visual ID that he has indeed cum) it's this weak-ass load. I'm always sitting there thinking "That's not enough!" Okay, I've never actually thought that particular line, but looking back, I should have. But really, I am always disappointed. You have this monster cock and that's all that you can muster in the semen department?
Now, I guess I can understand why the cocks never seem to be fully hard and why the load is always miniscule. If you've fucked 15 women over the past several hours, all to orgasm, well, it's gonna get tired. Hey, I know when I've been beating it for several hours straight or something, it just quits. That doesn't make porno guy any less impressive; it must be the big cock that has me expecting more, even if the cock can't get fully hard. To get back to the impetus for this impotent post, when I haven't been totally abusing my cock, I can put out a load that puts any porno guy to shame. So no thanks.
Oh, and if any ladies are getting wet over the "several hours straight" comment, you can dry yourselves up now. I'm pretty sure that my masturbatory stamina doesn't translate to real-world results.
Wanna Cum Like Pornstar?
Um, no. If you've watched enough porno, at least the standard shit, you will have noticed that many porno guys are fucking with a semi-flaccid cock, and then when they pull out to cum on the chick (which they ALWYAS do... for some reason, we've gotta have visual ID that he has indeed cum) it's this weak-ass load. I'm always sitting there thinking "That's not enough!" Okay, I've never actually thought that particular line, but looking back, I should have. But really, I am always disappointed. You have this monster cock and that's all that you can muster in the semen department?
Now, I guess I can understand why the cocks never seem to be fully hard and why the load is always miniscule. If you've fucked 15 women over the past several hours, all to orgasm, well, it's gonna get tired. Hey, I know when I've been beating it for several hours straight or something, it just quits. That doesn't make porno guy any less impressive; it must be the big cock that has me expecting more, even if the cock can't get fully hard. To get back to the impetus for this impotent post, when I haven't been totally abusing my cock, I can put out a load that puts any porno guy to shame. So no thanks.
Oh, and if any ladies are getting wet over the "several hours straight" comment, you can dry yourselves up now. I'm pretty sure that my masturbatory stamina doesn't translate to real-world results.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
