News Roundup: Anger, Insanity and Nakedness

Let’s do another news roundup. Why? Because I said so! Just kidding. Actually, because there are several little stories we can’t cover in separate articles so here they are all lumped together in a big old steaming pile of news! Get ready for dogs, sex, and Hawaiian Stalinists!

● Item One: Dog Show Gone Wrong. In case you missed it, the Westminster Kennel Club dog show started last night and finishes tonight. I never miss this as I think dogs are great. And much like the Super Bowl, part of the attraction each year is when Pedigree puts out new ads. The last few years have featured David Duchovny talking about dogs with the tag line, “dogs rule.” Here are some samples: We’re for Dogs / Shelter Dogs / Doggie Dentures / Rub My Belly.

Imagine my surprise when these commercials did NOT appear last night. Instead, we got some lame generic commercial for Purina using some nondescript song. Totally forgettable pabulum. Hmm.

So I promptly turned to the internet to discover what had gone wrong. It turns out that Westminster decided to drop Pedigree as a sponsor because they didn’t like Pedigree focusing on shelter dogs. Seriously. Said Westminster’s spokesidiot David Frei:

“Show me an ad with a dog with a smile. Don’t try to shame me. We told Pedigree that and they ignored us. Our show is a celebration of dogs. We’re not promoting purebreds at the expense of non-purebreds. We celebrate all dogs. When we’re seeing puppies behind bars, it takes away from that. Not just because it’s sad, but it’s not our message.”

To quote Bufford T. Justice, “you aaaaasshole.” Over the past few years, Westminster has gotten a bad reputation because of many of the breeding practices associated with purebreds. Specifically, their standards are creating dogs with breathing problems, back problems, bad joints and mental issues. They’ve been protested and some people have even considered legislation against the things they promote.

Pedigree, by comparison, is for all dogs, not just purebreds, and they’ve matched seven million dollars in donations in the last couple years to help the dogs who need it most. Westminster has not.

Westminster is not only stupid, they are shameful. I suggest they fix this by next year or I won’t be back. In the meantime, up yours Westminster, and your little sponsor Purina too.

● Item Two: Accidentally Naked? A high school football coach had to resign the other day when he “accidentally” posted naked pictures of himself on Facebook. How does that happen “accidentally”? Between this and Sandusky and the guy in Syracuse and the various women’s coaches who keep getting fired for inappropriate behavior with their players and the NFL assistant coach who got arrested driving naked through a fast-food drive-thru, something has really gone wrong in coaching.

● Item Three: Bringing Sexy Back. Russian dictator Vladimir Putin wants Russians to have more sex to halt Russia’s population decline. Maybe they need more coaches? Interestingly, the land of mail-order brides and alcoholism actually has finally stabilized population-wise. In the 1990s, there was speculation Russia’s population would fall by a third by 2050, but that didn’t happen and now they’ve even begun to grow by a few thousand over the past few years. Still, it’s a good political strategy for Putin: how can you go wrong telling people to have more sex?

● Item Four: Machete. Liberal Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer just learned a little something about the joys of law and order when he was robbed at machete-point in his Caribbean vacation home by a masked intruder. Being a liberal, he will no doubt draw the wrong lesson and endorse a seven-day waiting period for machetes. . . or vacation homes.

● Item Five: Big Brother Is Watching, Aloha. Finally this item. I’ve said before that Republicans get stupid when you mention terrorists or criminals. Too many “conservatives” will happily throw away all their rights in the name of safety based on false promises and vague assurances that we can trust government not to abuse absolute power. Combine this with the Democratic instinct to monitor and control you and you have the makings for an American police state. Here’s proof.

Hawaii’s legislature is debating a bill which will require Internet providers to keep track of every website their customers visit. Basically, your provider will need to keep a continuing file showing every website you visited in the past two years. In—flipping—sane!

Why would Hawaii do this? Because Republican Representative Kymberly Marcos Pine is being “harassed” by a web designer named Eric Ryan, who claims Pine owes him money. He launched a website called KymPineIsACrook.com where he makes the claim that she stiffed him (but not in a Russian way). She also contends that Ryan hacked her e-mail account. Hence, Hawaii needs “tougher cyber laws.” Of course, the Democrats jumped on this and are pushing this insane bill.

Ok, let’s cut through this.. First, if he’s lying about the money, sue him for slander. Clearly he’s not lying because she’s taken no action in that regard. Secondly, if he has hacked her e-mail, then he’s already committed a crime under the Patriot Act. So no additional laws are needed. Third, even if a law was needed, it is to punish someone for hacking an e-mail account, not a law that requires private companies to spy on all citizens so some messed up Hawaiian legislator can get her Stalin on.

Think about this. One man is harassing her, so she wants the government to keep Stasi-like files on everyone in Hawaii?? How does that make sense? What possible purpose could this serve except to let her see who visited his website. And then what? “Re-education” camps? This is pure totalitarianism, make no mistake. And for those inclined to trust the government’s motives, this should wake you up. This is why government really acts -- because some intolerant a-hole with a grudge and a debt problem decides to use the government to help them in a personal fight.

Government is evil and those who would use the government to control others are evil.


Also, don't forget that it's Star Trek Tuesday at the film site (LINK), and in honor of Valentine's Day, might I recommend revisiting the Top 25 Romance Films article (LINK).

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Caucus Suckers and Chrysler

I spent last night at the Republican Caucus in Colorado where my attempt to nominate Pancho Villa fell a few votes short of success. I thought I’d share a couple observations with you. Afterwards, let’s talk about this Chrysler advert everyone seems to be talking about. . . endlessly.

● Caucusing: Procedures. The caucus process is an awful process and needs to be replaced. The process goes like this. First, you had to register in advance. Several people were turned away for not being registered. The 36 who remained crammed into a room. The floor was thrown open for speeches and five people demonstrated their ignorance. A vote was held, confirming their ignorance. Then delegates were elected. Those delegates will now go to a county convention, where they hope to be elected to go the state convention. Seriously. Could you design a less efficient and representative system? Sure, by adding a meaningless primary, which Colorado will also have for no reason whatsoever.

● Caucus: Voters. If you ever want to lose your faith in democracy, go to one of these shindigs. The level of idiocy was intense. Five people spoke, all for Santorum. The first woman said, “I’ve never been to a caucus before and I don’t know much about the candidates, but Mr. Santorum seems very moral to me.” The next idiot said, “we tried voting for economics in the past and look where that go us. It’s time we voted for a guy who’s moral and Mr. Santorum, he’s moral. And he’s an economic conservative. He’s got a history of being the only economic conservative.” Idiot number three said, “I just wanted to say a word about Mr. Santorum. He’s pro-life. He opposed partial birth abortion when nobody else would. We need to stop abortion in America and Mr. Santorum is the only one who will do that.” Idiot number four said, “Obama is the most immoral leader we ever had. We need a man who is moral and that’s Mr. Santorum.” Finally, idiot number five said, “Abortion is the biggest issue this country faces and Mr. Santorum is the only one who will stop abortion.”

Then a vote was held: Pastor Rick 25, Romney 10, Paul 1, Newt 0.

● Caucusing: Results. This is the part where you think I’m going to lose my mind. I’ll bet you expect me to rail against the idiots who don’t realize (or care) that Santorum is a socialist, who think tilting at the abortion windmill is more important than political freedom and jobs in this country, who don’t get that Rick can’t be elected because he’s toxic, and who don’t realize that he will never deliver a ban on abortion even if he gets elected. Well, forget about it. I’m over it. All I’ll say is congratulations President Obama on your re-election. You have chosen your opponents wisely.

● The Chrysler Ad: Until yesterday, I saw no reason to comment on the Clint Eastwood Super Bowl ad. There are already 5.2 million screeds written about it and I saw no reason to add another. But as the number of articles just keep piling up, I realized there is something worth saying: Stop!

For those who don’t know, this ad showed Clint Eastwood pimping the turnaround of Chrysler and Detroit. The ad isn’t overtly political, but it sure feels that way and it was enough to get conservative spidey-senses tingling. Indeed, the ad seems to imply that the auto bailout, something Obama considers his number one selling point, has saved Detroit, Chrysler and America, and now everything is great again. In many ways, this felt like the first Obama re-election commercial. Obama even added to this sense by praising the ad and basically thanking Chrysler for the plug.

But then things went wrong. Conservatives screamed foul. This immediately brought out Clint Eastwood to make sure that people knew he was not associated with Obama nor was he endorsing Obama. Then people started mentioning: (1) how the taxpayers lost almost three billion dollars in the Chrysler part of the bailout, (2) how Chrysler is owned by Fiat, an Italian company and not Americans, and makes their cars in Canada and Mexico, not Detroit, and (3) how Detroit is a hopeless basketcase akin to what is shown in Robocop. Suddenly, the whole “Obama is great” gloss began to look like a bitter joke.

Now there’s word that this pro-Detroit ad was actually filmed in New Orleans! How ridiculous is that? Not only did they need to pick another city to highlight Detroit, but this is the second time Fiat has made this mistake in the past few months (Fiat = Chrysler). Indeed, you may recall Fiat being embarrassed when it was revealed that their Jennifer Lopez ads where Lopez talks about New York being her home while seeming to drive through New York were actually shot in L.A. How in the world could the same company make this same huge mistake twice? Does that make you trust their cars?

In the end, this became an incredible embarrassment for Fiat/Chrysler, Detroit and Obama.

BUT conservatives won’t stop whining about it. Indeed, as article after article continues to be written about this, often wrongly accusing Clint Eastwood of selling out, conservatives are coming across like petty, obsessed children.... little Santorums. When you pile on, there comes a point where people feel the attacks have become ridiculous and the sympathies shift. We have reached that point. Take your victory and move on before you snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.... like always.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Taxpayer Funded ObamaCare Lies

With Christmas vacation just around the corner (we’re starting tomorrow), and little going on in the news, it wasn’t too easy to find a topic to write about this morning.

On the one hand, we’ve got the FCC trying to seize control over the internet, ostensibly to keep it free but more truthfully doing the bidding of certain companies. On the other, we’ve got Rahm Emanuel’s desperate prayers that Santa bring him a Chicago residence. Or you’ve got START probably passing the Senate, giving Obama another victory that the Democrats will trumpet and the public will ignore. Or you’ve got redistricting. Redistricting is kind of fun, as it looks like the Republicans are likely to add at least six permanent votes in the House and the Electoral College. . . I guess people really don’t like high taxes and run-amok liberalism after all?

But none of these things have caught my interest as much as the commercials intended to brainwash the public into thinking that ObamaCare isn’t such a bad thing. Grrrrr.

I’m sure you remember the first ad: that one involved the ghost of Andy Griffith’s zombie corpse as he sure does tell us how this new health care law is a gosh darn good thing. It won’t cost anything and it will make us all young again. . . because it’s magic, and golly, let’s all vote Democratic because they passed it. Grrrrr.

These ads ran only in September and October (just in time to help the Democrats re-election campaign) and they cost taxpayers $3,184,000. And, frankly, they should be illegal. Federal law prohibits the use of government money to lobby. This is lobbying. Agencies are allowed to use various means to spread the word about new programs or changes in the law, but this is not that. These ads cross the line into advocating, like when Griffith (who worked for free -- another violation of Federal law) tells us that he thinks this here health care law is a mighty fine thing. That’s an opinion, not a fact.

Moreover, the ad is misleading. Both Judicial Watch and FactCheck.org (which is associated with the University of Pennsylvania) have concluded as much. Said FactCheck:

“Would the sheriff of Mayberry mislead you about Medicare? Alas, yes. In a new TV spot from the Obama administration, actor Andy Griffith, famous for his 1960s portrayal of the top law enforcement official in the fictional town of Mayberry, N.C., touts benefits of the new health care law. Griffith tells his fellow senior citizens, ‘like always, we’ll have our guaranteed [Medicare] benefits.’ But the truth is that the new [Obamacare] law is guaranteed to result in benefit cuts for one class of Medicare beneficiaries -- those in private Medicare Advantage plans.”

If this had been a company making these kinds of false claims, the FTC would have made them issue a retraction, which I’m thinking is a good idea. . . right before the next election.

Further, these ads were produced by Obama insider Catherine “Kiki” McLean, which reeks of both politics and crony politics, just as Hillary’s pollster “coincidentally” got contracts under the Stimulus Plan that matched the debt Hillary owed him. Grrrr.

Now they’re at it again with a new ad. This time they have two black women sitting around a table as one tells the other about all the great things they're going to get from ObamaCare. Grrrr. The government is not Santa. It’s job is not to give you things, and to encourage that attitude is infuriating, especially when the point of these ads is so clearly to shore up Obama supporters rather than advise people on specific, factual benefits.

(Apparently, they are also buying ads on google now, including paying to have search results lead you to their webpages.)

These are the sorts of things the Justice Department needs to look at, but we don’t have a Justice Department at the moment. So this will fall on Congress in the next session. Congress needs to look into this and take appropriate steps to end this practice. And if that takes retaliating by authorizing ads that will make the Democrats scream bloody murder so they will agree to stop the government from doing this, then so be it. I’m thinking a retraction of the lies told in the 2010 ads would be nice. . . to air, say, in October 2012.

Come on Santa, how about a little rule of law this year?!

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

“That Certain Part Of The Male Anatomy” -- Huh?

I like to think of myself as a keen observer of the modern world. But lately, something has arise that, frankly, has me stumped. According to a, oh how shall I put this. . . b*tch goddess on late night television, my performance may not be what it used to be. It’s not exactly clear what she’s talking about, but in her angry, condescending way, she seems quite certain that something on me is not up to standards anymore.

Apparently, it’s not my fault, but, as I age, a loss of testosterone causes things to shrink. Indeed, a much more pleasant young lady informs me that if I take the pills she is offering, "a certain part" of my anatomy will again become larger.

Here’s the problem though. I’m not entirely sure what part of my anatomy they’re talking about, because they never do tell me. So I got to looking. And sure enough, it turns out they are right. My elbows seem to be smaller than they were when I was younger. . . I’ve got EDS (Elbonic Definitive Shrinkage)!

Now I was always raised to believe that it’s not the size of your elbows that matter, it’s the range of motion. But I will admit to being concerned. This issue seems to be very important to these two ladies, and I wonder how it will affect my social life if I don’t rectify this situation immediately.

So I’ve debated taking these pills. Unfortunately, the FDA has not evaluated their claims. Thus, I am concerned about adverse side-effects. What if my elbows go limp or lock up, or God-forbid I become double jointed? And if they do grow again, will my shirts still fit?

I wish I knew the answers.

Damn you late night television for making me insecure.
[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...