Thursday, December 29, 2005

Here's something new, a chick that's into serial killers.

I'm just like the rest of you conformists.

I take great pride in my individuality. My search for deep authenticity and my commitment towards following a path that can only lead to a "trully" developed self.

But last week I stopped paying so much attention to myself and that's when I began to notice just how crazy the average person is.
You are all fucking insane. Some of the most "normal" people in the world work way to hard at seeming "unique."

Not that any of them would go to the trouble of counting to 8 before entering every doorway, or making sure each and every item of food was touched 3 times before they would eat it. Everybody thinks they have OCD, or they know some anal retentive prick who must have it.

But if all they do is have you wash your hands before witnessing their "bathtub art" all they have is performance art disorder not OCD. Next time you want to have some fun invite a friend over who has O-C-D and feed him peas. Then sit back and watch'em go apeshit.

All that brings me back to my point, that some people try "way to hard" to seem deviant and "evil." And while we all know my roomate THE FRO is evil. [He's EVIL...He's EVIL] I can't sit back and allow the Fro to take a backseat to anybody else's claim of misanthropic Evil.

Therefore; I must submit to you ...Sara. Sara's blog is entitled :


Oh, yes.. dear readers, read on we shall. I found her website while browsing through her boyfriend's webpage which described her thusly:

"My Queen and soulmate. I don't give a fuck what she says, I think she's fuckin' drop-dead gorgeous...!!! "

With three exclamations I just knew she had to be hot. And since her boyfriend doesn't give a shit about what she "says," I knew I wouldn't have to either.

Redgorilla75's description of a nudity proned teen slut bore little resemblance to the identity that I found awaiting me at Love/Murder, where the dying spirit of a 12 year old girl was giving way to the pedestrian desire to be a little strange.
"I like to play the guitar and write songs, I could also be described as a little strange.. "

Yes. A little strange. But not that fucking strange. Shit most surburbanites and 40 year old moms sit at home deconstructing the intricacies of the latest CSI-Miami which places Sara plainly in the middle of squaresville. Put a shaw around her and add 20 years to her tits and she's my Aunt Norma.

"That David Caruso is so cute..."

"Ya, I hear he plays a good cop, pass me another chicken leg will ya?"

Sara's hobbies leave her time to dolittle else but, "investigate systematically the effects of different forms of Lime on dead flesh."

But at least picking at dead flesh has replaced her former worship of all things unicorn and horsey. Fuck was that annoying.

Sunday, December 25, 2005

Strong Atheism Explained-Merry Baby Jesus day to you!

"Strong Atheism is the proposition that we should not suspend judgment about the non-existence of a god or gods. More extensively, it is a positive position against theistic values, semantics and anti-materialism, a rational inquiry in the nature of religious thought, a new way of thinking about religious and spiritual issues."

If you are agnostic about god, be consistent and be agnostic on all knowledge. Be agnostic on the existence of Invisible Pink Unicorns. Quit being pussies, agnostics. I propose a national come of out the closet day for Atheists to be held every December 25th.

Saturday, December 24, 2005

Merry Christmas..Happy Festivus! (For the Rest of Us!)

If you're a heathen like me, then you don't celebrate the birth of Baby Jesus. You'll just have to be content with the second best made up celebration of the year, Festivus! Get your poles here.

Go here for a funny animated video that explains the quirky holiday.

In keeping with my religious beliefs

The Airing of Grievances

will now begin.

I've got a lot of problems with you people, and now you're going to hear about them!"

  • There are only two reasons you should get a tattoo-you've joined the navy, or you're in jail. I am sick of this whole fucking fad. One day you are all gonna wake up and become grandmothers with saggy ass skin. How many grandchildren need to be scarred for life after witnessing Memaw's "tag this" backside tat.
  • stop wearing shiny rocks, it's distracting.
  • the Washington Redskins are going nowhere in the playoffs, so don't get fucking cocky.
  • People who say they are "spiritual" without being religious. That's just baloney and non-sensical and a performative contradiction. See the next post for what these people really should be.

Thursday, December 22, 2005

Hold her right there, Mr. President...You're under arrest!

Bush's impeachable offense!

"Yes, the president committed a federal crime by wiretapping Americans, say constitutional scholars, former intelligence officers and politicians. What's missing is the political will to impeach him."

"Looking at this controversy objectively, you inevitably end up with a question of impeachment," says Jonathan Turley, a professor at the George Washington University School of Law."

Is this how we are finally gonna get this asshole Bush?

For some reason I almost (and I mean almost) feel sorry for Bush II on this one. Let's face it the FISA act that he violated is virtually toothless since, "more than 15,000 have been granted, with only four requests denied since 1979. And in emergency situations, the government can even apply for FISA warrants retroactively."

Why didn't Georgey comply with these "minimal requirements?" Let's say that instead of getting himself into trouble that Bush followed the legal doctrine needed under FISA to spy on Americans. Then the current executive branch's determination to invade our privacy would just be made all the more effective, because now he could make a claim to lawfulness.

Are we really any less secure in an environment in which the court system rubber stamps presidential requests? If not then what's the big deal? There was only a 4000 to 1 shot that the courts would deny any of his requests.

When we have a situation where the executive branch has gotten out of control, we rely upon the checks and balances that were built into the constitution to protect us.

Unfortunately we have been let down by an ineffective and bullied judicial branch, and a legislative body more interested in protecting their own than worrying about us.

Next, Bush will just claim "We're at War," and for most Republicans and too many Americans that'll be enough. We're then more than happy to cede away our civil rights, hell many of you wish some us didn't have so many damn rights in the first place. I'm not sure if we can find enough members of the American populace willing to fight for their rights.

But I guess since we can fuck him, I am all for it!

Source: Salon

P.S. If we do arrest him, I want the monkey to do it!

Update: Looks as if maybe Bush did not break the law after all. Crap.


Christ, I edited this crappy post 12 times and it still reads like shit, all for naught perhaps. At least I got the monkey pic out!

Update Part Deux:

Bush was denied wiretaps, bypassed them

Maybe the courts are working. So let's go impeach his ass.

I've been warning you guys for years...

Well maybe I haven't been warning you for years, but I have sounded the alarm regarding the Surveillance Society that most Western democracies are on the way to becoming.

England will be first country to monitor every car journey "new national surveillance system will hold the records for at least two years."

"Using a network of cameras that can automatically read every passing number plate, the plan is to build a huge database of vehicle movements so that the police and security services can analyse any journey a driver has made over several years."

Big brother is alive and well, when we take into consideration that G.W. thinks it's "ok" to spy on Americans, government is doing it's best to get off the back burner and replace corporations as the biggest threat to our privacy.

Source: Slashdot

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

We will all be drinking urine soon.

Imagine your kinda thirsty, but no 7-11 is around the corner, don't worry now you can just piss yourself.

Just like the guys in these suits, or men lost at sea, one day we will all be forced to drink our own urine. This rancid gift from the guy who gave us the Segway.

I wished he would just stop trying to save the world. First that stupid scooter, now drinking your own urine.

By the way, I am not gonna apologize for the geeky allusion to the Freman "urine drinkers" from Dune. It's not my fault that you were born Post Star Wars*

*For those of you who were born after 1977 this date is a supposed "cut off line" for dating younger "peeps." At least it is a cut off for many in the Generation X cohort who have morals. Thankfully most Gen Xers don't have morals and will date you hot Gen Y's and millenials as long as it's legal in your state. In Alabama I think that age is nine.

Science Watch-Are you sure your science is a science?

Science is in a lot of trouble these days and not just from the Kansas school board. While the Kansas School Board may realize that Evolution is "just a theory that's on shaky ground" there are other so called "legit" sciences that aren't so trustworthy either. Like Astronomy.

Nobel laureate David Gross at the 23rd Solvay Conference in Physics in Brussels, Belgium made the startling confession that "WE DON'T know what we are talking about."

So if your scoring at home: take out your giant black magic marker and cross through these entries in your encylopedia.

Sciences that aren't Science or at least not anymore.

  1. String theory
  2. "Political" Science
  3. Phrenology
  4. Eugenics
  5. UFO-ology
  6. Forensics
  7. Scientology

Stay tuned to this website for the latest updates on SienceWatch.

Know your science!

Thursday, December 15, 2005

A reply to my critics...

In order to respond adequetly to the comments my last post received, I felt it necessary to post a rebuttal in the form of another post.

First, foxxy your link works fine so, huh?

Second, I am glad I anticipated all of your arguments before I wrote that little entry. I too would have attacked the author's presumed racism and his class bias. Some of your arguments are well thought out, but I wasn't debating your fine points I was giving a strategic lesson on how to frame the issues. I too would have used the exact same arguments against the blog entry myself if I felt the position of that author reflected an agreement with any of the points both commentators made. It's not that author dismisses the commentators points...

It's just they all miss the point!

"We can't imprison or execute on general principle." I don't recall making a defense of such a proposition. I recall trying to identify why those who are undecided and in the middle are wary of the "extremist" positions those of us on the left make. Proposing a slowdown to the Prison Industrial Complex is extremist, and we need to make better arguments for doing so. Defending obvious criminals is a strategy that will get you 1% of the vote and a PETA bumper sticker on your Volkswagen. Great. Skinny chicks and shitty BBQ's do not make for an electorate that can take down the great political machine of the Republican right.

"I am so against the death penalty." Good, so am I , but I still don't go around defending convicted drug lords, and murderers. Why do you? Why not come out against the institutional incarceration of most crimes? Why not make an argument that says 2 million people in the US are wrongly imprisoned and silenced as part of the "surveilance society." Why not defend truly innocent people and get on the DNA bandwagon with that OJ lawyer?

No, no, no..instead lefties support idiots like Tookie. Tookie's defenders want to give him a funeral that "befits a statesman." That's fucking ludicrous. This guy is not Neslon Mandela, this guy is a thug. I say defend the common man. Defend the ordinary drug user in the ghettos. Attack the system that convicts and arrests more African-Americans than whites even as they commit the same crime. But go out of your way to defend this ass-hole? Why? The whole point to that blog entry was to give some strategy to a bunch clueless Dem's and liberals.

I was not sticking up for whitey, aka George Bush or the enormous "war crimes" wrought by American foreign policy. That's the kind of obsfucation by conflation I would expect from the right, not the left. I agree we should go and get "G.W.", but in what way do the war crimes of someone else (evil George) have to do with the guilt or innocence of another (Tookie)? By your logic since some people commit murder, we shouldn't lock up thieves or men who assault and batter their wives (their crimes aren't as heinous). Even if your illogic was true, why defend an obvious lightning rod like Tookie?

Of all the people out there to defend, we pick a creep like this Crip gangsta? Foolish. That's why the right always wins. They understand people's "gut reaction" to this kinda liberal nonsense.

And until the left figures this out, we will go a long way allowing those in the right-wing war machine to paint us as soft, pansy, cut and run- traitors. Let's take the fish out the barrel for 'em at least.

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Knee-Jerk Liberals (Don't worry I still am one!)

Boo-Hoo!! A mass murderer was just executed. Let's all gather around with candles and pay homage to cold-blooded murderer. Now I see why all the nut jobs out there call us "Knee Jerk." I just don't like "getting it."

Two of my favorite people ( here and here) had to go out there and profess their love for a sadistic, evil creep who was is responsible for hundreds of deaths and worse the loss of thousands of souls to the gangsta lifestyle.

Foxxylove excerpts from Trey Ellis' post article the improbable story that "All the evidence in the case against Mr. Williams is circumstantial and all of the witnesses against him suspect (and felons themselves, the key witness currently in jail in Canada for armed robbery). Even if Mr. Williams had not turned his life around in prison there is still enough reasonable doubt surrounding his case to lock him up forever instead of killing him."

Hell, O.J. had blood all over him and he got off, right? He is the admitted head of the leading gang of L.A. ( the world basically.) WE know he killed people. Since when is circumstantial evidence not enough to convict? Circumstantial sure got my boy Scott Peterson(I know that guy is innocent!) Not only that, but this gangsta thug inculcated his macho, anti-social world view on the developing minds of hundreds if not thousands of young people. No amount of remorse or high school prison visits can equal the score now. The Weltanschauung of our youth today can be traced back to Stanley "Tookie" Williams. War crimes against humanity. That's a legacy no one can support.

My other good friend Jeezebel concluded she might have missed something because the "contradictory justice system claims as its primary goal is to reform the prisoners productive [and make them] contributors to a civilized society and not [for] retribution or revenge for the crimes that they have committed."

Sorry, but WTF are you talking about here sweetie? One of stated goals of "the justice system" in the United States is REVENGE. It might be nice if we lived in a country that tried "rehabilitation," but we don't. People want revenge, when their car is keyed, they would like to see the guy who did it have his balls cut off. Our justice system mirrors this attitude.

Why do so many liberals feel sorry for this guy? Because they have no systematic view of justice or of society. Look there are plenty of good examples when the criminal justice system is out of control. I am not for the death penalty but killing murderers is hardly one of 'em. Liberals should be just as outraged by serial killer or an exploiter of the disadvantaged as republicans. Don't we (also) believe that the first right people have is to live?

This A-hole "Tookie" Williams violated the basic civil rights of thousands. He killed many himself, or by example, by his order, or by his general method of business. Wanna know how should feel about this guy? Imagine he is the Patriot Act and you a re a pile of library records, Tookie liked to burn the shit out of library records, getting angry yet? If I was the parent of one of the boys he indoctrinated into criminality or one of his victims, I wouldn't give a shit that he turned his life around. He owed that to society by that point. It gets him no free pass or brownie points, or even an extension on his forfeited life.

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

You may find this shocking, but Bill O' Reilly is a nutjob!

I was watching last night's edition of the Factor when the great cheese head, taking a breather from his WAR ON CHRISTMAS, bloviated about the "far left's hatred of free speech."

What was Mr. O' Reilly's example? Four protestors at a Hillary Rhodam speech heckled her position on the War in Iraq.

"Am I the only one who thinks this?" (That heckling speech is proof of the left's mistrust of free speech.)

Um,... in a word ...Ya. I realize that Bill's show is infotainment -he does not however.

First, why do four kids in Chicago determine what the "Far Left" is?

You'd have to be some kind a moron not to realize that your descriptor "far left" is an amorphous metaphor designed to inflame right-winger's worst fears and not really an attempt at describing a particular group or position. The Far Left is a splintered and fractured set of people with many conflicting values and ideas. Many commies are pro-violence, right?

It is also quite disingenuous to claim that protesting and heckling is the same thing as silencing a person's right to speak. These kids were protesting an elected official. They weren't passing laws saying you can't say "fuck" on TV at 6 am, nor were they suggesting that dissent was tratorious like the far right often does.

Did they engage in polite behavior? No. Was it disruptive? Of course it was, but they weren't saying Hillary was not entitled to her ideas nor suggesting she was not entitled to a place to say them. They were saying that as an elected official who supports killing and a war--"We oppose you."

While peace groups are mainstream far left, not everyone of us is a complete pacifist.

Many in the far left may like "acting up" but many also prefer to do their protesting outside while respecting a groups right to gather uninterrupted inside, but we should not conflate that right with free speech.

Mr. O'Reilly shows neither how 4 kids from Chicago constitute a true picture of the far left or how a targeted "direct action" protest (itself a form of free speech) implies a distaste for the right of others to hold a view point different from their own.

Hey, maybe now I will make it on to O'Reilly's list of left-winged smear blogs!!