With Thanksgiving out of the way, now it's probably time that you want to stop thinking about food altogether. Especially those extra 10 pounds you picked up from Aunt Mildread's pumpkin pie... What with all that lard she used for the crust and the tons of whipped topping. Man, that must go straight to the ass.
In any event, I suppose it's a good time to talk about food.
I mean, you had a nice warm home cooked dinner just a few days ago and now you're back to eating fast food. That confuses me. I want to know what changed in the American psyche between the time when everyone accepted family-run restaurants like those along route 66 and now, where no one will eat at a chain with fewer than 100 locations.
And I'm not buying the concept that it's easy to stop at a chain restaurant that you've eaten at 100 times before because you know exactly how and what the food is going to taste like. I realize that Americans aren't exactly known for their culinary adventurism, but to just write off so many potential eating establishments, even ones that are seen on Diner's Drive-in's and Dive's, for the McDonalds assembly line taste is beyond a crime against humanity.
It makes me dread for the future when your weekly rations of Tyson Fortifeed® Chicken gloop is distributed via a system of koch industries pneumatic tubes straight to your halliburton macro-wave™ oven
What? You don't like the way that sounds? I tell you, it's going to be Bobby Flay style delicious!
Okay, it's not. But let's just roll with the assumption there that it's the future, so it has to be cool. Or we can just face reality and realize our food is becoming something of a science experiment. Jamie Oliver did a thing with both UK Students and America Students show them how companies get mechanically separated chicken.
Which got a completely different reaction in the U.S. when he tried it on school children in West Virgina..
I love it. "Because we're hungry!"
They weren't even hungry, they just saw what looked like a fucking chicken nugget and their pill-addled ADHD brains lit up like a Christmas tree set of lights. But then it hit me. I was sort of waiting for Jamie Oliver to explain why those parts of the chicken were bad. I don't think "Because it looks gross" cuts it as a proper explanation.
I mean, in a world where we love to each Veal or goose liver, why should mechanically separated chicken be anything bad? Yeah, I guess adding a ton of food "stabilizers", flavorings and possibly oil are bad, but there's really no difference in the composition of human muscle, bones and connective tissue and those of chickens.
I haven't had a chicken nugget in years, but I do remember them being fairly tasty. So I'm not sure what's all the crying about. Should we only use white breast meat for chicken nuggets? Isn't that like using Kobe Beef for a corn dog or hot dog? Or like using top shelf tequila for a margarita. Sure, it makes you look high end, but you're really not going to taste it masked under all those other flavors.
These chicken nuggets seem like perfectly edible parts of a chicken being eaten. And isn't that what we're going for? Eating as much of the animal you killed. I know if I died for someone's meal, I wouldn't want my parts tossed away. Use every last inch of me for something.
Even if it's pretty gross and you don't want to taste the icky parts of the chicken. I'm sure that if Jamie Oliver brought his show to a group of native American kids, they'll probably astound him with how much they could do with a deer carcass.
If you seriously don't eat or ever consider eating Offal, even in a show of solidarity with the third world in eating whatever you can from the animal, then you're doing it wrong. I eat offal because it's god damn delicious. You should as well. Don't think that you should leave those parts for the vagrants and the coloreds.
Here's 30 seconds of a Vegan's nighmare....
During my brief time working in a kitchen, you learn to appreciate food a bit more and become disgusted with the amount of food that you see thrown away everyday. If there's any reason why you should be upset about mechanically separated chicken it should be because that chicken can probably be more productively turned into chicken stock.
Soup made with chicken stock made from fresh chicken is so damn good. Even at home, you can just throw the carcass in a slow cooker along with the neck bone and some of the giblets and some veggies and water and wake up the next morning with a tasty stock to turn into a soup. Not to mention that in this economy, if you make stock out of the organ bones and neck, you can get at least 5 meals out of a single chicken.
Mechanically separated poultry is a safe and wholesome food product with nutritional characteristics similar to ground poultry. Because of its cake-batter texture, it is ideally suited for use in hot dogs, bologna, nuggets, patties, sausages and luncheon meat-type products.
Then again, HA! The USDA.. yeah, the same people who ban Haggis and yet sell Hotdogs. It's the same USDA who says GM foods are not evil at all and.. well, here we are. But still, I'm going to trust them on this one. I don't think it's okay to say it's bad simply because it looks gross. Being grossed out by the process of food preparation is about as silver spooned as it comes.
Yes, processed food is gross looking and the fact remains that the more processed a food is, the harder it is for your body to absorb the vitamins and nutrients in it, no matter how many vitamin supplment powders and stabliizers you put in it. But should it be a reason to not be able to feed lower income people?
Then you have cone pizza..
You have to admit, that's what America is all about. Do you have an awesome idea? Do you want the freedom to make something out of it? Does it include gross fucking food? Well then, come to the U.S. and all your dreams will come true!
Though I have to admit that I find it morbidly fulfilling that someone poor soul will take a deep and hearty bite into that while it's still hot and burn his lips on molten cheese the likes of which would be 100x more powerful than a hot pocket. All having to resort to going to the emergency room.
So there you have it.. the food of the future.. or. um. yeah. We feed the world indeed.
One of the Holiday films that came out this past weekend was the latest, and what will be the last Disney Princess film for the foreseeable future, according to Disney.
Though, I guess it should be noted that before The Princess and The Frog, Mulan was the last of the "Princess" films back in 1998 if you don't count sequels. Then the one before that was the poorly translated Pocahontas in 95, which ironically enough better fits the title but isn't part of the brand. Others in the bran are Jasmine from Aladdin in 92. Beauty and the Beast in 91. But then you get to a dry spell where before 1990, you have only four princess movies being made over the course of 53 years.
Anyhow, back to this film, it began as a traditional animated story from Disney about Rapunzel. However during pre-production the decision was made to turn it into a CG movie and in 3D from what looks like a really nice sketch character design..
So let's go back to the beginning. The original concept from Disney animation legend Glen Keane was to give the film a distinct look. Where every frame resembled an oil painting, directly inspired by classic Rococo art. This painting, "The Swing" by Jean-Honore Fragonard, was the chief inspiration for the look of the film:
So what you ended up with a little CG animation was something that looked, according to Keane, as "a film of astonishing beauty". If you don't believe me, here's what it would have tried to translate the above painting to in terms of backgrounds.
Here's a couple more shots of what the concept art for how the film was suppose to look was going to be like.
And you wouldn't be able to tell this story without a tower that needed long hair to climb up it.
And here is the original Keane character art for Rapunzel:
After the less-than-fairy-tale results for its most recent animated release, "The Princess and the Frog," executives at the Burbank studio believe they know why the acclaimed movie came up short at the box office.
Brace yourself: Boys didn't want to see a movie with "princess" in the title. This time, Disney is taking measures to ensure that doesn't happen again. The studio renamed its next animated film with the girl-centric name "Rapunzel" to the less gender-specific "Tangled."
The makeover of "Rapunzel" is more than cosmetic. Disney can ill afford a moniker that alienates half the potential audience, young boys, who are needed to make an expensive family film a success.
The Princess and the Frog underperformed, which Disney execs blamed on its lack of appeal to boys -- hence the effort to butch up this film's marketing campaign as much as possible. (It's still called Rapunzel in much of the rest of the world, though.)
So thanks to panicky Disney executives for whom a $222 million dollar worldwide gross for The Princess and The Frog was simply not enough to keep the Disney Princess market alive, they pushed Keane out, dumped his project and started over going more towards a boy-appealing Shrek style film.
But I guess we really shouldn't judge a film based on the format it's presented. 3D is just a way to cash in on a new technology right now, so how about the meat and potatoes of the film.. the story. The story on this one after it's all said and done
After receiving the healing powers from a magical flower, the baby Princess Rapunzel is kidnapped from the palace in the middle of the night by Mother Gothel. Mother Gothel knows that the flower's magical powers are now growing within the golden hair of Rapunzel, and to stay young, she must lock Rapunzel in her hidden tower. Rapunzel is now a teenager and her hair has grown to a length of 70-feet.
The beautiful Rapunzel has been in the tower her entire life, and she is curious of the outside world. One day, the bandit Flynn Rider scales the tower and is taken captive by Rapunzel. Rapunzel strikes a deal with the charming thief to act as her guide to travel to the place where the floating lights come from that she has seen every year on her birthday. Rapunzel is about to have the most exciting and magnificent journey of her life.
Okay, that sounds at least interesting. I mean, I've survived through all the other Disney films that have been horribly butchered from the source material to make them cautionary tales to uplifting happily ever after stories, so this one can't be so bad, can it? I mean, I enjoyed the first Shrek, and if it's anything like that, then it should be entertaining.. minus all those stupid Top 40's pop songs.
And even though it's not done in 2D animation, it does look beautiful and I have heard many good things about it. Though not had the chance to see it as I've just caught the latest in Harry Potter films.... Okay, I'm sure that makes me sound like my interest in film is that of a 12 year old.
I have to admit, I'm a kid at heart. At the ripe old age of 30 I still some times walk down the toy isle at the local target or walmart and look at what all the super hero and favorite movie toy tie ins they are out there. Do I buy them? No, not at all. I already wasted so much money on that shit for years and I really have no use for that sort of stuff anymore. But that does make me a pretty good judge of what the hot holiday toys will be.
So perhaps you could use this as a method of buying shit at stores before it sells out and then flipping it online through ebay like the true piece of shit scum that you are. In any case, here's what your little rugrat brats will want from Santa this Christmas.
First off we have what may be the hit toy of the season.. Sing-a-ma jigs.
Yes, I think that this will cause the most significant deaths at Wal*Mart this year and it's really very tragic when you think about it.. Because, look at those things. They're Jim Henson's Lamprey babies waiting to swallow your soul!
What the ever living fuck? I couldn't listen to that for more than 10 seconds before wanting to either kill myself or shoot the computer and then killing myself. How can any parent willingly buy this for their child without wanting to smash it into a million pieces within a half an hour of opening it?
I mean, at least Tickle Me Elmo was somewhat cute and cuddly and didn't look like it was about to latch on to my eyeball and suck out the juice for sustenance. Let's not forget about what else Elmo did in his role giving us one of my favorite moments of SNL this season
But these Sing-a-ma-jigs are just scary looking in that they have teeth when they open their soul sucking mouths. The best Youtube comment has to go to the one in the toys r us video.
I put my dick into one's mouth and had to go to the ER and now my dick is crooked, scarred, and I am unable to maintain an erection. these toys are very poorly labeled and should come with a warning. Parents beware!
Moving on to less demonic toys... well, this one isn't much less demonic. I speak to you about the magic balls of the Fushigi Balls.
Essentially they're just mirrored balls inside plastic or some sort of shit and for some reason they're hard to get a hold of and kids are crazy about them. Mainly because they think they could do some sick stunts to impress the panties off their Jr. High girlfriends. Who could blame them, the commercials make whoever welds them look like some wicked sick wizard.
So I guess that's the selling point there. It's some magical visual effect and about $20 bucks, so it wont hit the parents wallet hard. Though you could probably do all those things with any old ball. It's just something you need to practice a lot with, which given the average attention span of your child, may not actually be a great idea in hindsight.
But the demonic aspect comes into place because it reminds me of Bowie as the Goblin King. That or another less than kid friendly film..
But perhaps that's not a bad thing. Maybe we should play up that evil angle. Hell, Christmas is the celebration of the birth of what will eventually be the first zombie in recorded history. So it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that I realize which toy we would all gladly get trampled in the attempt to attain.
I speak of course of a remote control zombie that comes with a brain-shaped remote control.
How wicked awesome is that? Though I don't think a robotic item would want brains or anything like that. So it sort of breaks the fourth wall in that aspect and loses some of the street cred. Perhaps if it was an actual zombie you could control. Though that never goes as well as you would think and you just end up in a Frankenstein Monster situation of dying by your own stupidity.
At least this one you can just remove the battery and the zombie is dead.
But perhaps your kids aren't into all that evil shit. Maybe you should just stick to the basics. So maybe you should just go for the classics that are worth trampling the necks of your neighbors for.. I speak of course of Mr. Bucket.
How many hours of fun is that? I mean, just think of it. You pick up the balls and put it in its head. uh-oh, better watch out as he's not only blocking you from putting them in there, but he's also spitting them out.
Yes, that's right. He spits out balls. Though he does need to warn you of his history... It's a bit shaded.
Hmm, on second thought, maybe you don't want that toy near your kids. That's all I have in terms of ideas for this holiday season. Maybe you should just stick with booze. I think Booze is probably the best gift. It makes the holiday go over so well.
In any even, whatever you do, just don't end up buying this shit.
That will haunt my dreams and live blissfully in my nightmares.
So now that we're all into the Holiday season and everyone's into the whole Jesus thing, I guess it's time to listen to something the Pope said..
Pope says condoms acceptable 'in certain cases'
Pope Benedict XVI says that condom use is acceptable "in certain cases", notably "to reduce the risk of infection" with HIV, in a book due out Tuesday, apparently softening his once hardline stance.
In a series of interviews published in his native German, the 83-year-old Benedict is asked whether "the Catholic Church is not fundamentally against the use of condoms."
"It of course does not see it as a real and moral solution," the pope replies. Advertisement: Story continues below
"In certain cases, where the intention is to reduce the risk of infection, it can nevertheless be a first step on the way to another, more humane sexuality," said the head of the world's 1.1 billion Catholics.
The new volume, entitled "Light of the World: The Pope, the Church and the Signs of the Times", is based on 20 hours of interviews conducted by German journalist Peter Seewald.
Until now, the Vatican had prohibited the use of any form of contraception -- other than abstinence -- even as a guard against sexually transmitted disease.
Benedict sparked international outcry in March 2009 on a visit to AIDS-ravaged Africa when he told reporters the disease was a tragedy "that cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which even aggravates the problems."
To illustrate his apparent shift in position, Benedict offered the example of a male prostitute using a condom.
"There may be justified individual cases, for example when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be ... a first bit of responsibility, to re-develop the understanding that not everything is permitted and that one may not do everything one wishes," Benedict was quoted as saying.
"But it is not the proper way to deal with the horror of HIV infection."
Well, isn't that something. I'm sure I could fill the rest of this blog with tons of articles and other such stories showing the horrors that the catholic church's standing on condoms has caused the world, especially in third world countries and the massive high number of aids cases in Africa, but that would be too much effort and it's the Holiday season after all.. Gotta rest up as the year comes to a close.
Then again, this won't change anything. No reasonable catholic ever gave a shit about what the Pope said. Hell, it's hard enough to find a reasonable catholic itself. Even if this is a step into the right direction for the Pope to do away with silly nonsense of trying to get the masses to produce like cattle.
But, as the Vatican noted in a longer, Italian version of its statement, the pope's remarks were made in a "colloquial and not magisterial" form. In other words, they represented his private opinions rather than official teaching.
Writing for the Catholic World Report website, US academic Janet Smith, argued: "The Holy Father is simply observing that for some homosexual prostitutes the use of a condom may indicate an awakening of a moral sense."
Ha. What a load of shit. So they pinned it that it was simply his opinion but has no baring on the stance the church has taken. That would be like Obama stating that racism shouldn't exist, but that our nation will still racially profile and the views are simply of that one head leader..
How could the church continue on with this stupid stance that using condoms will still send you to the fiery pits of hell? I guess it's a double win for them if they keep this stance. Those folks who are religious nuts will still be having tons of kids, who at least one or two will be more than willing to give money to the church as a life long member.
Not to mention that the less gay people who are for Jesus, even though the church tells them he hates them, will not use condoms because A.) The church says it's wrong and B.) because it feels a whole lot better. Leading the chances of AIDS in the community that much bigger and killing off the gays for the church.
I guess I should just settle with the Pope at least agreeing with the concept that using condoms should be something folks should practice. I wonder what his stance on double bagging is? Or maybe I just shouldn't take my sexual advice from someone who's not suppose to have sex.
Before you go out this Friday to piss away whatever money you have saved up.. or even worse, give that piece of plastic a work out, perhaps you should remember one important thing... America is bringing back Debtor's Prison!
As a sheriff's deputy dumped the contents of Joy Uhlmeyer's purse into a sealed bag, she begged to know why she had just been arrested while driving home to Richfield after an Easter visit with her elderly mother.
No one had an answer. Uhlmeyer spent a sleepless night in a frigid Anoka County holding cell, her hands tucked under her armpits for warmth. Then, handcuffed in a squad car, she was taken to downtown Minneapolis for booking. Finally, after 16 hours in limbo, jail officials fingerprinted Uhlmeyer and explained her offense -- missing a court hearing over an unpaid debt. "They have no right to do this to me," said the 57-year-old patient care advocate, her voice as soft as a whisper. "Not for a stupid credit card."
It's not a crime to owe money, and debtors' prisons were abolished in the United States in the 19th century. But people are routinely being thrown in jail for failing to pay debts. In Minnesota, which has some of the most creditor-friendly laws in the country, the use of arrest warrants against debtors has jumped 60 percent over the past four years, with 845 cases in 2009, a Star Tribune analysis of state court data has found.
Not every warrant results in an arrest, but in Minnesota many debtors spend up to 48 hours in cells with criminals. Consumer attorneys say such arrests are increasing in many states, including Arkansas, Arizona and Washington, driven by a bad economy, high consumer debt and a growing industry that buys bad debts and employs every means available to collect.
Whether a debtor is locked up depends largely on where the person lives, because enforcement is inconsistent from state to state, and even county to county.
In Illinois and southwest Indiana, some judges jail debtors for missing court-ordered debt payments. In extreme cases, people stay in jail until they raise a minimum payment. In January, a judge sentenced a Kenney, Ill., man "to indefinite incarceration" until he came up with $300 toward a lumber yard debt.
"The law enforcement system has unwittingly become a tool of the debt collectors," said Michael Kinkley, an attorney in Spokane, Wash., who has represented arrested debtors. "The debt collectors are abusing the system and intimidating people, and law enforcement is going along with it."
You know how stuff comes back into fashion in a 20 year cycle? Like how all the 80's tv shows and movies are getting rebooted and how Happy Days was a show in the 70's about characters living in 1950? Well, like all that shit, we're starting to see society revert back to the original state. Only instead of 20 years we're doing it by 200 years.
Take for example the article which clearly shows that the same social system that is bringing back debters jail can one day potentially bring back indentured servitude, child factory labor and if we're lucky, Impressment.
The only plus side to all this is that loom technology advanced to the point where bobbins will no longer come loose. I know I'm excited.
How are we suppose to deal with all this? Historically speaking, those who couldn't pay their debts were made to do so in a way that actually profited the rest of society.... Slave labor. But Americans are too stupid to divorce the concepts of slavery and racism, so there's pretty much no way we'll ever make people work off their debts again. We're sort of stuck with this mess for better or worse.
But what if we could work off our debt? It would be pretty nice if you think about it. No more calls from those student loans, instead you could do a months work for a couple hundred thousand of your debt. But then again, in our modern day's college system, it seems that student loans have a closer relation to indentured servitude than you think. Though making that comparison isn't all that accurate since college doesn't guarantee you a job or any useful skills for that matter.
A funeral home's debt collector threatened to dig her deceased daughter's body up and hang it from a tree unless she paid what she owed for the funeral service. That's when she started recording the calls, capturing such things as, "We're going to have your dog arrested, we're going to shoot him, and we're going to eat him," and, "Are you going to pay this bill or not or am I going to have to kill you?"
Threats of violence are definite breaches of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). Armed with those recordings, the woman could go sue the debt collector in small claims court and collect statutory damages.
Reached for comment, the debt collection agency told KMOV that the recordings were "suspect" and said they sounded like an "unfortunate communication breakdown." They pledged to investigate the incident and said all their employees are given a copy of the FDCPA and are required to follow it.
So before you throw away your money on Friday just realize that stretching out that credit card can eventually land you in debters jail. And unless they make threats on you like this foolish credit collection agency, you're going to have to pay the dues eventually..
This article did make me think about something a little off topic though, how the fuck do the police ever find criminals in NYC if they can't pull over people riding the subway to find out if they have a warrant or not.
Anyway, what am I saying, it's already past midnight. I'm sure you've already got your tents set up in front of Best Buy hoping for that latest and greatest technology piece of shit you'll just forget in a couple of months for the next best thing.
For you people all I have to say is... FUCK YOU, YOU FUCKIN' CAPITALISTIC PIGS!
Ha. just kidding, I'm going to go out and buy $5 dvds like the rest of you mindless sheeple. Or just go to Stone to get my Growler filled with Double Bastard Ale and drink to forget how bad society is. You know, like this family in Florida..
So because some boat-rats landed on the shores of America they decided to have some sort of feast after kissing the dirt below their feet. What they did next was thank the creator, lord and savior for getting them there.
In such tradition we now give thanks on this one thankful day off of work and with a table full of food. Well, that is if you can afford it. Which most everyone can, otherwise you at least have the option of taking advantage of other's guilt of having too much and you get a free meal down at the mission.
The point is, today you're suppose to give thanks. So in that tradition I need to think about what I should give thanks for..
Maybe I'm thankful that the Lord our God has helped we good people to hasten the descent of some 700 pequot Indians into the fiery pits of savage hell. But then again, I wont have the fun of getting together with family and celebrating the time our ancestors committed genocide since I'm neither white and my girlfriend's relatives came to America long after the Indians were wiped out.
Though that in itself is a reason to be thankful. I live in a country that allows me to dissent ineffectually. That and I grew up in an area with enough migrant workers working for slave wages to justify importing Mexican coke to all the local liquor markets.
I'm also thankful for pumpkin pies. Where else can you combine the ingredients of so many delicious things to make a wonderful, spiced custard-filled pastry that you can only enjoy during this season
I should give thanks that it is yet another year that I can proudly say that I have never watched one second of the god damn Thanksgiving Parade. Not once. Why? Who the fuck wakes up early on a work free, food filled day to watch hot air cartoons and pilgrims walking on the streets all in the name of capitalism.
Though BBC America is doing a Treksgiving TNG marathon. So perhaps I should be thankful for that. I guess it's a good way to set up counter programing to all the football fans.
I am most thankful to the turkey that died for the meal I'm going to eat. I can say that I don't have any guilt involved in the death and murder of a bird because I persistently hunted an elder turkey bull past its breeding years on a free range public land. Once it tired I stared deeply into its eyes and we made a connection. He nodded his head and I strangled it personally before weeping and saying a death prayer in its honor.
I see you, brother, and I thank you. Your spirit goes with God, your body stays behind to become part of the people.. the eaten way too much food people. Oh, don't mind me, I'm just jamming a fucking duck and a chicken into your anal cavity. Your spirit has already left, so it won't feel it.
I may be most thankful for all the free booze I will get. As it seems that most families buy the cheap bourbon to get that quarter cup full to put into the yams and other such novelty recipes leaving the left overs to whoever will have them.
I'm most thankful that I'm another year closer to death. Yes, that's right. I'm very thankful for the fact that eventually I will be dead.
It's the most wonderful time of the year... Yes, it's the busiest time of year at airports as people travel to hang out with relatives and get stuffed off Turkey. It really is the busiest times for airports, so that's why I take great joy in the fact that so many people are pissed off towards this whole TSA business. Just take a look at this poll
Reuters' readers were asked whether or not they would change their travel plans to avoid the invasive scans and pat-downs, and a whopping 96 percent (65,708 of 68,513) have thus far said yes.
What do you think about about the new invasive airport security screenings and all the hoopla surrounding them?
* Stop complaining! The new measures are necessary to guarantee security. 10% * They may go too far, but are okay so long as people are given the option to opt out. 7% * Enough with the scans and pat-downs! They're an invasion of civil liberties. 80% * I'm not sure. Maybe I'll feel stronger after my next flight. 3%
I have to admit that my faith in my fellow Americans has been slightly improved upon after reading that. Good for them. Fuck the TSA.
I will refuse a body-scan out of principle. Not out of insecurity. I know it's hard, but try to put yourself in someone else's shoes please. A parent who doesn't want their 5-year old son/daughter to be either ogled or groped. A 16-year old girl who doesn't want middle-aged men making comments about her tits in a back room. A muslim woman who's religion preaches modesty which she now can't have. A pregnant woman who doesn't want to be subjected to poorly understood forms of ionizing radiation. The one guy in fifty million who actually develops cancer because of these machines. And yes, even the guy with crippling social anxiety and a tiny penis.
I don't particularly care if someone laughs at my dick. But there are plenty of reasons people do care about these new 'security' measures. I mean, look at the following picture. Does this person look like much of a threat?
Looking at those uniforms, it's pretty similar to an actual police officers, I'm sure that's on purpose. It's suppose to trigger a subconscious response to submit to whatever they are telling you to do.
It should be mentioned that you can visit any government building in the United States, up to and including the White House, where you may get a chance to speak with the President, and no one will stick a pen down your pants as shown in that picture.
I realize that a lot of dumb people fly and I'm sure TSA workers can get very annoyed at the fact that they deal with so many moronic people every day, but they should look at themselves in the mirror. Is the paycheck worth it?
Even if there's a lot of bad fliers, it can be easily explained by a lack of experience using the method of travel and general exhaustion that flying actually has on a person. You have to admit that airports and security check points in general are overwhelming and intimidating if you don't have to got through them normally.
Yup, back of the hand alright... then again, I don't blame her..
You have workers who are barking commands at you and treating you like you're a terrorist and all of a sudden it becomes a situation of US vs THEM. The whole notion that you're guilty till proven innocent.
Why can't the TSA officer involved in all this and doing this for a living take into account that the average flier only gets on a plane and has to go through this process once or twice every couple of years.
Then you have those who are coming back or going to a destination like a vacation. By the time you get to the airport it's usually when you're really exhausted from your long trip and can easily get confused. What you need is some rest and not to be treated like a criminal attempting to take down a plane.
I know I flew a lot during the post 9/11 world and I can tell you that even with my massive amount of miles, it has happened to me many times. So just blaming the public for being ignorant and stupid seems like it's shortsighted and not really much of a solution.
Besides that, I've said it before and I'll say it again, what does this security theater really do for your safety? If it was actually helpful wouldn't you see this force implemented in other places. What will the government do if there was some terrorist attack in a crowded subway car or in the ports, which are all poorly secured.
Looks like you're smuggling something here, sir.
TSA is a perfect example of the old "protecting you from yesterday's threats tomorrow" type of bureaucracy, so I'd pretty much exclude everyone. It's all bullshit anyway. As Bruce Schneier said back in 2005:
Exactly two things have made airline travel safer since 9/11: reinforcement of cockpit doors, and passengers who now know that they may have to fight back. Everything else -- Secure Flight and Trusted Traveler included -- is security theater. We would all be a lot safer if, instead, we implemented enhanced baggage security -- both ensuring that a passenger's bags don't fly unless he does, and explosives screening for all baggage -- as well as background checks and increased screening for airport employees.
Then we could take all the money we save and apply it to intelligence, investigation and emergency response. These are security measures that pay dividends regardless of what the terrorists are planning next, whether it's the movie plot threat of the moment, or something entirely different.
A woman tries to have containers of breast milk she's carrying hand-screened instead of passed through the x-ray machine. Breast milk is considered a medical liquid under the TSA's own regulations, which means she has a perfect right to make this request, and the TSA, again by its own stated rules, will comply.
What happens instead is that she's scolded by the TSA, left standing in the clear "special screening" cubicle for over an hour until she misses her flight, and has a real police officer called over to tell her that she is being a disruptive passenger.
Eventually a supervisor is called over. The woman shows him a copy of the TSA's guidelines, printed out from their own website and brought with her, as the TSA itself suggests. The response? According to her, the supervisor tells her, "Well, the rules don't apply to you today."
According to the woman the TSA was rude and verbally abusive to her, but the security camera footage has no sound. However, the TSA hasn't denied her version of events, and even if you can't hear what's being said, the video (in four parts, all taken from the TSA's own cameras) is pretty damning with just what you see of the interaction.
In all honestly, the real power of the TSA is the ability to make people miss their flights. No matter how well you follow the rules, they can make up some stupid reason to keep you there for an extra half hour and then whoops! Sorry about that.. oh wait, not even a sorry.
And since they've been getting so much bad press, they decided to not include 12 year old and under kids into the whole scanners, but now it's Pilots who finally get the pass.
Which is smart because, let's fucking be honest here.. Given the amount of radiation pilots are exposed to on a yearly basis just flying, I can't really imagine why they would opt in to going through more machines that send radiation bouncing off their bodies. Also, they're the goddamn pilot. If they wanted to take down a plane, they don't need to sneak in a bomb. They could just crash it.
I have an idea that these machines really don't have much to do with the War on Terror and is instead sounding like a move for the war on drugs. Liquids, gels and powders either don't make good explosives or require a detonator to go off. However, these substances do describe all commonly smuggled drugs. And what better mule to carry drugs than an pilot.
They should be checking Kim K.'s ass, as that would be the place she would smuggle midgets in with.
The worse of it is that no one is even paying attention to who gets the money in all this. The machines cost somewhere around $100,000 each and they plan on selling 500 this quarter and another 1000 the next quarter. Which means that the former director of the TSA gets his paycheck.
Our nations security, dignity, and time is being sold on a lie because there is a buck in it. Not like Micheal Chertoff, the former director who is cashing in on all this with his company who makes the machine ever has to fly commercial anyway. So he wouldn't know what it would feel like to be treated like a terrorist.
Michael Chertoff's "Chertoff Group" which he has admitted owning RapidScan Systems, one of the two manufacturers of the of the full-body scanners, simply wants to take millions of dollars of your tax money while simultaneously convincing you that it's for your safety.
Turn and cough please.
I mean, it's really obviously a money-making scheme for those with stock involved here. It's actually pretty awful that if this was a movie we'd all be bitching about how unrealistic it is because the plan is so fucking obvious. And yet this point is ignored because it's not as visceral or easy to relate to as the TSA getting their grope on.
There really isn't any point to any of it anyway. It prevents nothing. In fact, the one thing we've done since 9/11 that actually would have prevented 9/11 was reinforcing and locking the cockpit door, everything else is completely reactionary. It's better to gut the TSA to 1/8th its current budget and go back to metal detectors and employ air marshals to fly on each plane and call it a day.
Grabbing a kids junk isn't going to find the bomb someone made him swallow or otherwise jammed inside of him. So, yeah, the threat level remains the same. Firing the junk grabbers on the other hand, at least gives us infrastructure budget to be used in a more helpful manner.
....
And it's not even a case of bad screeners either. You can't just say to fire them for going against the TSA policy because.. at the current moment TSA has no policy. They pull it out of their ass as they go along. No one knows what the rules are. We're directed to the website, when the website doesn't say what the screener says, we're told that it's all part of "dynamic security" so that the terrorist don't exploit a weakness. In short, you're just making the fucking rules up as we're playing the game.
You have a bunch of people who don't know their polices and apply them so inconsistently, then they wonder why people get pissed off. Like in the situation where a cancer survivor had to remove her fake breast in public. Only that's not what the policy states to do.
I also love it when people start quoting shit like in this article..
But John Drake, 36, of York, Maine, flying yesterday with his family to San Jose, Calif., for Thanksgiving, had no complaints: “Travel is not a birth-given right. It’s a choice. And it’s up to our government to make sure we’re safe while we do it.” He called Opt Out Day “the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard of.”
Shut the motherfucking fuck up. Traveling is not a birth-given right? We should have to check in with the police station for permission before we leave our hometowns, and notify the police in te cities we visit when we arrive. Just like a good totalitarian state, I say. The government knows what's best for us!
It's bad enough they're making outrageous shit for not following their strict rules.
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is warning that any would-be commercial airline passenger who enters an airport checkpoint and then refuses to undergo the method of inspection designated by TSA will not be allowed to fly and also will not be permitted to simply leave the airport.
That person will have to remain on the premises to be questioned by the TSA and possibly by local law enforcement. Anyone refusing faces fines up to $11,000 and possible arrest.
They've implemented that right now. Why? it's purely punitive measure, made in response to the constant public outrage of last week and because it's the Holiday travel rush. It's the TSA saying, in clear terms, "You are the enemy, and we are the authority".
Yeah.. she's not hiding anything there...
Even if we have this little Fourth Amendment in our Constitution...
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Yup, it sounds pretty cut and dry.
And it's not that they can save your image. I mean, that is terrible, but the fact that when they asked them if they could save the image, the TSA flat out lied about it. So it brings into question what else they are lying about.
But the worse part of this whole situation is that Michael Chertoff, the guy at the DHS who pushed hard for these scanners, is financially connected to the company that makes them. And that they're being crammed down our throats. Someone's making a huge amount of money off irradiating us under the impression that it makes us safer.
Of course, they'll just flat out deny that there was any conflict of interest, but yes it's absolutely disgusting that not only are people's rights being trampled, it's likely being implemented so one of the executives can make a nice gain.
I bet that the terrorist are so pleased with how hysterical we've all become. I'm confused by how people forget that the point of terrorism is to create a heightened state of anxiety and fear in the culture targeted, but yet somehow don't see that this is sort of intense violating reaction in order to protect us.
A Houghton Lake man says he was so aggressively patted down by an agent at a Detroit Metro Airport security checkpoint this month that it caused the lid on his urostomy bag to come loose, spilling urine on his shirt and pants.. . .
Sawyer said he and his wife were heading to catch a plane to Orlando on Nov. 7 when he went through the airport’s new full-body scanner and was then selected to be patted down by a TSA agent.
Sawyer said that after asking the agents for a more discreet pat-down, he was taken to a private area.
Sawyer said one agent began the pat-down, but when he began sliding his hand firmly down his chest, he said he told the security officer that the pressure could pull the lid off his urostomy bag — which, Sawyer said, is what happened.
“When I got out of the room my wife knew something was wrong and I just broke down crying,” he said. “I was just so embarrassed, so humiliated.”
He said once through security, he changed his bag, but didn’t have time to change his clothing and had to board the plane soaked in urine.
“I was embarrassed to death,” Sawyer said.
He said he was diagnosed with bladder cancer in 2007 and had to have a procedure that left him with a urostomy bag to catch re-routed urine. . .
Still, Sawyer said it didn’t ruin his trip with his wife.
“Nothing,” he said, “absolutely nothing, ruins our good time.”
I have to say, "I'm just doing my job" has never been an acceptable excuse for anything. I'm not sure why people think that doing bad things is okay if you're doing it for money.
It's also a bit comical. Looking up what you can bring on the plane, I noticed that you can bring your knitting needles as carry on, but not a nail clipper... I just have to wonder how that makes any sense. I mean, yeah, everyone should know that it is possible to blow up a plane or take over it with nail clippers, but with Knitting needles you're not going to do anything but make a neat Doctor Who scarf.
...it comes down to how do we give the highest level of confidence to everybody on that flight that everybody else has been properly screened
Not the highest level of safety, but the highest level of passenger confidence. Security theater has been directly unmasked by the TSA.
I mean, how else do you force everyone to go through their incredibly dangerous and expensive machines while punishing the ones who would argue with it to ensure their contract stays as strong as it does? You grab their junk and say that there's potentially a risk of a bomb being kept in an area they value more than anything else. If that doesn't work they'll just start doing wrist deep anal searches.
I have to ask why everyone assumes that people are asking for more security and a better feeling of safety... Who the fuck is asking for more security? Does "people" mean the people who are making money from the TSA? Because the average traveler is much more nervous about something happening with the plane itself, or with the fact that they'll be defying gravity in a few moments and flying. They're less afraid of terrorist because.. the amount of terrorist attacks is fucking small!
Buy a man dinner first before you touch my mini anaconda, nigga!
Unless we get another underwear/shoe/mustache/anal cavity bomber this holiday season, the TSA will probably be under significant pressure to change their practices. Hell, and even if we do, they'll be shown as the king with no clothing that they are.
There's a point where you put too much security and you hit some sort of safety diminishing returns somewhere past taking off shoes and a little before body scans and groping. And I have to say, the shoe threat was stupid. The guy was trying to light C-4 with a lighter. C-4 doesn't explode from just applying fire to it, it'll burn, but that's about it.
We are so far past that diminishing returns point that it's not even funny. The TSA is only continuing to get funding by employing terror techniques to scare the average American into giving them more money to ensure their safety. That's right. How ironic is that shit, the TSA is a terrorist organization and while we fight this war on terror we created one to terrorize our own population. Isn't it about time that we see the TSA as useful as putting up a sign that says "Please don't attack us"
So of course the TSA is digging in their heels on this one, because the makers of the device spent 4.3 million this year paying off the government for the right to put these into place. There's nothing that makes officials fight tooth and nail more than the prospect of losing lobbyist money. Yes, corruption happens. A lot.
But Javier, why are you talking about next year's comic con so early? Why, I'll tell you Billy. It's because Comic Con International has made it so exclusive next year that no one is invited! That's right. No one!
You see, no one can get tickets for it. Originally con registration was suppose to be opened up on November 1st. A bit later than last year, but hey, around that time last year is when tickets sold out on this much popular event. So they pushed back the date on when you could start buying tickets. Only problem was that on November 1st, the site taking the registration process crashed. And I mean it crashed and burned in a way only a Nascar fan could enjoy.
They then decided to close down the possibility of registration for three weeks while they took care of the problems that made the site crash on the 1st. You know, to make sure that they could handle such a massive amount of people at one time. So now registration was going to be open on the 22nd of November. Today.
Guess what happened....
Yeah, that three week time frame to make sure it was well prepared to handle the massive amount of people jumping on the website at the same time was just not what they thought it would be and the site took a massive dump. Might I add that the name of the registration site company is called EPIC. Maybe they should consider a name change.
Now the Comic Con website has the following message under a huge red banner of REGISTRATION IS CLOSED:
"Once more, unfortunately, there have been issues with Comic-Con registration. So we have again decided to close it down. We are well aware that many people have taken time from work, school or other activities and others woke up very early. There really is no way to convey our level of regret for this turn of events. We are currently researching our registration options."
Here's a solution.. you don't need to hype the sells of your tickets. It would be like the local prostitute saying she can only take customers from 6:31 to 6:40 on Thursdays. Guess what's going to happen.. Everyone is going to come at that time... ugh, that's a terrible image. Okay, sorry about that. Ugh. Get it out of my mind!
But you get the point, there's no need to make an already popular event even more sought after. Wait for the actual event to start shattering nerds dreams and getting them frustrated. You're starting too soon, Comic Con.
Oh, I can't wait till Hotel reservations start forming... Ha!
You're a mean one, house of representatives.... Only in America can you honestly have the possiblity of going from a bad situation to an even worse one. Like in the situation with those who are still collecting unemployment benefits and probably need them most during this time of year...
Nov 18 (Reuters) - An effort to continue assistance for millions of jobless people who will see their benefits run out in coming weeks failed in the U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday. By a vote of 258 to 154, the proposal to extend jobless benefits for three months fell short of the two-thirds margin needed to pass the House under special rules that limit debate.
The House could take up the measure again under normal rules that only require a simple majority for passage, but Congress has little time to act before benefits expire on Nov. 30. Lawmakers are not expected to be in town next week and the Senate has not scheduled a vote.
Congress has let jobless benefits lapse twice already this year as Republicans insisted that their cost -- $160 billion in the last fiscal year -- be offset with cuts elsewhere to prevent the nation's $14 trillion debt from growing further.
If the measure is not renewed, some 2 million Americans by the end of the year will stop getting the weekly checks that help them make ends meet as they look for work, according to the National Employment Law Project.
(Reporting by Andy Sullivan, Editing by Sandra Maler)
Welp, I'm sorry you haven't felt the trickle down effect of tax cuts for the rich and are still relying on your unemployment benefits to get you by, but you have a Happy Holiday season.
Uh no, now people will actually have to do some work for a living. But hey, I hear hunger is a good motivator... You know, even though the average is somewhere around 5.5 people are looking for work for every available position out there right now.
It's pretty amazing that democrats won't even get any shit done as a lame duck congress. It would cost them nothing politically and yet here we are. The democrats are crassly using unemployment benefits as a wedge against the incoming republican congress.. though that shouldn't come as any sort of shock.
Though to be fair, I'm probably giving them too much credit here and they're probably doing it as a political ploy to discredit their opposition rather than to appease their paymasters. Just a clear sign that this is just history fulfilling itself. Capital creating the conditions for its destruction.
On the other hand, this article reminded me that the cool part about growing up in the East side of Los Angeles was desperately clawing to stay afloat and scrapping recycled can money together from time to time was a great way to prepare one for all kinds of bitterness and disappointment that is life in modern America.
Besides, if these poor people are too broke to not be able to make ends meet, how could they afford to vote for Bristol Palin 9,000 times on Dancing with the Stars? Answer me that! In other words, we're all fucked - but those on unemployment are double fucked.
So.. this is an odd story, but apparently The Incredible Hulk doesn't like Mexicans.
Television 'Hulk' actor Lou Ferrigno has joined an Arizona sheriff's posse targeting illegal immigrants in the Phoenix valley area, the sheriff's office said on Wednesday.
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio said Ferrigno, 59, a body builder who donned green makeup to star in the popular 1970s television series 'The Incredible Hulk,' was among 56 people sworn in as volunteers for an armed immigration posse.
Arpaio said the posse would work with sheriff's deputies in operations targeting smugglers and businesses suspected of employing illegal immigrants in the county, among other duties.
Arizona passed a tough law earlier this year requiring police to determine the immigration status of people they suspected were in the country illegally. Key parts were stayed by a U.S. federal judge before it came into effect in late July.
You would think that after being misunderstood as a monster by the greater public, he would at least be able to relate to the plight of the brown man. Nope, not at all, the Green Monster is all full of rage against Mexicans trying to cross our boarders.
Let's just hope this doesn't give Jeph Loeb the idea to add Brown Hulk into the Hulk family next to Red Hulk.
Though you better watch out. I know for a fact that as soon as he solves this whole Mexican problem, he's just going to hit the highway and hitchhike on outta town to the next city. In some ways, I would say that such a roaming nomad is worse than an illegal immigrant. At least they want to set up house where ever they land.
I do have to wonder what a has been semi-retard can do to stop them crazy illegals from crossing the boarder? I mean, let's be real, was there a comic/sci-fi convention in Arizona and Lou had an extra hour to kill?
This is a dude who I have never seen turn down the chance to do a convention and potentially make $10 from each fool who has the nostalgic sense to buy from his table in the C-list celebrity area. I also have to say that he's a bit of a douche. So perhaps I shouldn't be too surprise by this move to join the Arizona Posse.
So I guess you wouldn't like Hulk when he's finding illegals in town. And all that nonsense. Let's face it, it must have been a slow news day and they wanted to link it back to the highlight that ABC is developing a brand new Hulk television series. Besides that, any news piece where a celeb, even a z-lister like Lou talks bad about immigrants will always get attention.
Watching The Financial Crisis Sink With Style - Old Bank Ads
Even though I know full well working in Television that the sole purpose of programing is to deliver commercials, I do find most of them comical, if not offensive. You see, I work for the Television industry and I loath myself. Why do you think the characters in Mad Men drink all the time? You would to if your business was lying to people.
Then you mix in another scummy industry - Banking, and you got yourself a combination that is total shit. It's pretty comical to look back to the past and see how shitty the ads were and how funny they are in the wake of the current economic situation we are going through right now.
WaMu may not have known where to find good financial talent, but they sure had an eye for casting directors!
If only those fans were holding pitch forks and torches. Yeah, now that would be an accurate ad.
The next ad is yet another WaMu one. I like to point those out because.. well, let's just say WaMu pissed me off so much with their fees. But hey, were they very helpful with giving people who otherwise didn't deserve it a loan!
That in no way came back to bite them in the ass. But the best ads were the ones making fun of the "stupid old bank practices". I mean, yeah.. those ancient fools don't know shit about banking. How did they survive....
Man, that's sticking it to the Bankers! I bet that black guy really pissed off some white conservatives. No wonder it was so cut through when CHASE bought them out and gave them the finger.
Those stodgy old bankers operated under regulations that made them unable to ruin the world economy in 5 years. Bring back the good ol' days.
I could watch these all day. I know there are way more like highlighting how stupidly easy it is to get a home loan. Like this next one for Country Wide Home Loan
Damn! Lost another loan to Ditech!
That just shows you why we're in the mess that we are in. My favorite story from WaMu employees is how one person was told by their loan-supervising boss to accept, as proof that someone makes $75,000 a year being a mariachi, a picture of that person in a mariachi outfit in front of a house.
There was a delusional guy at work who always gave people bad financial advice and then he bought tons of WaMu stock like, right as they tanked and he thought he was going to get so rich when they bounced back. Ah, that was a good laugh.
You now have to submit blood samples to get a home loan. Thanks to all those poor fuckers who bought homes they couldn't afford and then got themselves fired from their shitty jobs.
Though I have to point out the one commercial I never got and one that I blame for the mentality that most people have these days. That is that if a place doesn't take credit cards then it's a total waste. Cash only? What the fuck!
Do you use currency? Then FUCK YOU! Every time I go to get a smoothie everyone pays with a card and I get a glare for using cash. I don't fucking get it. Why the hell would you not have $5 on your persons at all times? Is it really bad to carry a $20 on you in case you want a small snack? I don't even carry my credit card around with me because I work with a lot of magnetic equipment. That and I don't like the temptation of spending money I should otherwise save.
So there you have it. Some old banking commercials that highlight why we're in the financial situation we are in and why I'm completely laughing about it.
Ah, the internet. Just when I think there's no lower you can go, you find a way to get there.. You see, only on the internet can your one click mean the death of something. If you go to BIRTHorNOT you can cast your vote on if the pregnant couple on the website gets an abortion or if the kid lives. According to Gawker..
The Arnolds are having a baby. Unless the public votes to have the child aborted. Meet the couple behind Birthornot.com, where "you can vote and choose whether we abort or keep our unborn child."
Pete and Alisha Arnold, both 30, both tech professionals, live in the Minneapolis suburb of Apple Valley and have been married for 10 years. Since September, they've blogged about their expected child at birthornot.com, posting health updates about the mother and the fetus (which will be 17 weeks-old tomorrow), and ultrasound pictures and video. But at the top of the blog is a poll hosted by PollDaddy.com. The question: "Should We Give Birth or Have an Abortion?" "Give Birth" has 46 percent of the vote at the moment, with "Have an Abortion" at 54 percent. The poll closes on December 7th.
Vote on Whether This Couple Gets an AbortionPete told us over the phone that on that day he plans to check Polldaddy's records to make sure there hasn't been any double-voting or other evidence of fraud and then he and Alisha will use the results to decide whether to keep the baby. They'll have two days to make a decision before the 20th week of Alisha's pregnancy ends, and, with it, her last chance to get an abortion. The poll will influence their decision heavily, the couple said by phone this evening, but it won't be binding. "It's kind of like Congress. They might vote for something, but the president has the final veto. If it's overwhelming one way or the other, that will carry a lot more weight."
That someone would do this is almost impossible to believe, of course. We asked the Arnolds if this was some sort of a prank. "No, it's not. We are taking this very seriously," Pete replied. We then asked if this was some sort of convoluted pro-life stunt. Alisha laughed. "It's definitely not a pro-life campaign," she said. "I believe in a woman's right to choose."
According to the couple, they've been unsure about whether they're ready to be parents and have concluded that the best way to proceed is to ask random people on the Internet if they should have the child. (Tests have revealed that the fetus is a boy.) Alisha said that two pregnancies ended in two miscarriages in the past year and a half. During the second pregnancy, the couple bought the birthornot.com domain, and were in the process of deciding whether to put the birth up to a vote when they lost the baby. When Alisha got pregnant a third time a few months ago, they decided to launch birthornot.com.
Pete, who described himself as a Libertarian, framed the couple's majority-rule abortion as kind of an extreme civics lesson that he hoped would bring the abortion debate home. "Voting is such an important part of who we are as a people," Pete said. "Here's a chance where people can be heard about whether they are pro-choice or whether they are pro-life, and it makes a difference in the real world."
That's right America, text your vote to America's next extremely bad judgment call! Normal phone rates apply.
Yes, that's right. A child's life hangs in the balance on your clicking of a mouse. Now, I have to be upfront and say that I voted for an abortion. The father is a self described Libertarian. There's no other choice than to flush it and be done with it.
You should always vote yes to killing another human. Especially if they're libertarians. Don't be one of those pansies who vote for life even if you're pro-choice because you don't feel you have the power to say if another human should live or die. Especially when the soon-to-be-father wears fucking Jorts.
Looking at their profile one would wonder why they aren't at a home town buffet. But you'll also learn that they have had two horrible miscarriages before.
I don't get how anyone who had two miscarriages before can even come up with an idea to ask random people on the internet on if they should have an abortion or not. Though I guess mother nature has already did the voting the two previous times. Time for man to take over.
I guess you could possibly vote for them to keep the baby so that they have to one day explain to a teenage kid that they should thank the internet for the chance to be breathing. If they don't, I'll print out this website and mail it to them. The post office holds letters for a good 15 years before sending them, right? Back to the Future wouldn't lie to me, would they?
But really, what a shitty life you're getting into when your worthless parents are sourcing out the opinions of random strangers for the sake of your life. Then again, is it any better if your birth is used as a marketing ploy to get more google ad dollars by your parents? Because that's the only logical conclusion I could think of.
That this is simply some desperate attention grabbing headline so that their page views skyrockets and they get some extra google ad revenue. How else do you think they'll be able to afford all those awesome jorts..
Once was a writer, tho, you see words to your left, so I guess I'm still that to some degree.
You can find my scribbles and mind ranting on this and various other places as a means to keep the creative, satirical and costco talk muscles worked out.
Was once apart of the tv industry, but I'm sure the NDA's are still in effect so let's move on from that. Now I spend my time slinging beer and keeping a building in one piece.
Posts
