Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Freedom From Constrictive Japanese Underwear

Sometimes you hear about a product that is allegedly really popular and you almost start to wonder if you need one yourself. Then you hear that the product is selling like crazy in Japan and that's when you no longer wonder if you need one for yourself. That's when you know that you do not.

That's because for some reason, the folks in Japan go absolutely ape dung over anything that is a) slightly unusual or b) really freaking bizarre. They have this gift of being able to convince themselves that they really need the unnecessary item that is being hawked as the greatest thing next to sliced bread. (And really, the greatest thing next to sliced bread is some sliced cheese. Put that cheese on that bread its next to and what's not to love right there?) And this item is no exception to that rule...er, gift...um...whatever it is that they do.

According to the worldly reporting folks over there at Reuters-UK, there is a product in Japan that is making a comeback and is being touted as "The latest in women's liberation." For cryin' out loud, are we still being liberated? Didn't we do that already? Are we doing it again, because if we are, I didn't get that memo. So what is this comeback product that could liberate us once and for all? Well, if you're going to believe the folks in Japan who claim that their product will liberate women by allowing them "to ditch tight-fit underwear." That's right ladies. Step right up and get your loincloths here. Wait. What?

Loincloths, cloths for the loin, that is correct. Who do they think we are? Wilma Flintstone? Are they kidding? They are not. Japanese lingerie maker Wacoal is claiming that the loincloth is making a comeback. And to that I have to ask, coming back from where? When was it that the women's loincloth was stylish and "in" and when did it go "out" so that it could make it's narrowly anticipated 2009 comeback? Let's see, the 70s were bell bottom, the 80s were big hair, the 90s....the 90s must have sucked because all I can recall are drunken college parties and the Clintons. Odd. Regardless, please note the absence of any mention of 'loincloth' during my stroll down memory lane there.

Wacoal claims the loincloth allows women to ditch the tight fitting underwear. Hey, here's another way to ditch that tight fitting underwear: Get some underwear that isn't so tight! What is so complicated about that?! If you have tight underwear, are you constantly pondering what to do about it as you make repeated, but futile attempts to loosen your undergarments as to allow your nether regions to breathe? I don't think you are. I think you're either buying new underwear or you're going commando. I don't think you find yourself watching an episode of The Flintstones and being jealous that Wilma and Betty are so unrestricted in their groinal movements.

The loincloth is known as fundoshi and was "...the traditional underwear for adult males in old times." Oh, well, nothing will sell your product to women like telling them that it used to be worn by men in old times. Yep, Wacoal seems to think that'll do it as they're "...expecting strong summer demand from women who want more freedom of movement."

Are Japanese women really all that encumbered by their current selection of underwear that their movement is hindered? Really? Is their underwear made out of wood? Lead? Why are they wearing it in the first place? (Hmmm...I've noticed that whenever I'm wearing my oaken pantaloons that I cannot move freely about and my abdomen feels as if it is tightly constricted. I will need more of these immediately to wear all the time!) It doesn't make any sense!

When asked her opinion, one customer responded, "It's easy to wear and quite nice." (Pssst! So is underwear that fits!!) "It's also good for summer and since it's getting warmer, I figured it'd be good for that." Easy to wear? So now you're telling me that their underwear before was tight, restricted movement AND was complicated?! Now along comes summer and that really throws a wrench into the mix. (Not a real wrench! Though the way that they make it sound, it wouldn't surprise me if that was part of the encumberments and complications. A wrench in your panties is surely not the way to start your day.) You'd think that the unacceptable undergarments of yore that the Japanese women have been suffering with were made out of Gortex or flannel or fur or fur-lined Gortex flannel! Why are your loins so warm, madam?!

The report goes on to say that the loincloth will "....emancipate women from the tightness of conventional underwear, which often use rubber and wires, as well as the hassles of finding the right size." Rubber and wires?! Are they buying this underwear at Gitmo?! I've never thought of buying underwear as a "hassle". I'm not a fan of shopping, but really, buying new underwear isn't that much of a chore. (It's rather pleasurable if the need for new underwear is due to having previous underwear...say....pleasurably ripped from your body. I'll go shopping for underwear every day if that's the reason for it!)

A one Tomoka Okamura, the Merchandise Director for "Nanafun" Brand Loincloth Underwear explained their reasoning for the loincloth product as, "We wanted young women to have more sense of freedom and release. As we tried to come up with the 'ultimate liberation item' for women, we thought of 'fundoshi'." Again with the "freedom" and the "release". I don't think that you're going to be finding a whole lot of "release" after donning what looks to be Fred Flintstones boxer shorts there. And the brand name "Nanafun"? That sounds like "fun with Nana" and in the US at least, a "Nana" is one's grandmother. Underwear that's fun with your grandmother?? Run for the hills. Now. Scream a little on the way; you'll feel better.

I'm just chalking this whole women's loincloth thing up to the mania-prone Japanese folks. Maybe it's just me and my crazy ways of the west, but I find no logic to be had in any of their rationale for wearing undergarments that look like dishrags on the rack. There's no difference. Look! Behold!



See? I don't need my loins looking as if they need you to wipe your hands on them or as if I'm taking drink orders. I get enough of that with regular underwear.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Monday, March 30, 2009

Just a Twitter Away From an Education


From the 'What could possibly go wrong?' department, we have a story from the folks across the pond at The Guardian which tells us that school children will no longer have to study the Victorians or World War II in a proposal under which the primary school curriculum will be overhauled. Ok, then. I can see not studying the Victorians, perhaps. But that's really based on the fact that I don't know who the Victorians are and I turned out OK. (Not great, but who did?) But not studying World War II seems like a mistake (though I suppose that watching a few Tom Hanks or Matt Damon movies about World War II might suffice enough to get you through just about anything except for Jeopardy! and World War III). But what really seems like a mistake is for the kids to study Twitter and Wikipedia instead. Wait. What?

Are you kidding me? Twitter and Wikipedia? They're hardly substitutes for World War II. (Again, not knowing much about the Victorians, it's really hard to compare.) But according to the proposed curriculum, schools will be able to "...strip away hundreds of specifications about the scientific, geographical and historical knowledge pupils must accumulate before they are 11" in order to "allow schools greater flexibility in what they teach." Greater flexibility? I'd say. To go from teaching something useful and factual (which Wikipedia is not always) to teaching crap seems like the ultimate in flexibility (as long as you're not counting Pamela Anderson, because I've seen that video of her and Tommy Lee and she is definitely the epitome of flexibility).

This new curriculum was created by a one Sir Jim Rose who is the former Ofsted chief (Ofsted = OFfice for STandards in EDucation). He wants to take the 13 current "subject areas" and whittle them down to a concise 6 "learning areas". So, instead of "things you need to know" I guess they'll be taught "there are things in here that you need to know". Yeah, what could possibly go wrong?

These are the basics of some of the "learning areas". Try not to scream.
  • They will become "familiar with blogging, podcasts, Wikipedia and Twitter as sources of information and forms of communication " as well as becoming fluent in handwriting and keyboard skills, and learning how to use a "spellchecker alongside how to spell".

I can't do it. I can't make it to the end of this list without commenting. Learn how to use a spellchecker? Are you kidding me? Um, Control-S. Do I graduate? With honors?

  • "...be able to place historical events within a chronology; to place the periods, events and changes they have studied within a chronological framework, and to understand some of the links between them."
OK, so first there was the Internet. Then bloggers or Wikipedia. I don't know which one figured out that they could just make up crap and have people believe it, no questions asked, first. Then came the podcast, because what's better than making up crap and writing it down than making up crap and talking about it? And finally, Twitter, where you can take all you've made up and broadcast it for the world to see all the live long day.
  • Then there's the stuff about "...children's health, diet and physical activity, as well as their relationships with family and friends. They will be taught about peer pressure, how to deal with bullying and how to negotiate in their relationships." For some reason, colorful paper airplanes are very important in the art of negotiating. Go figure.

How to negotiate? Guys learn that one sooner than girls. ("C'mon, baby. I'll tell you I love you if you have sex with me.") But girls do catch on. ("If you'll pay me the amount of alimony I'm asking for and give me the house and give me the car, I might think about sleeping with you again during this lifetime.")

  • I found this one to be odd: "Less emphasis on the use of calculators than in the current curriculum." (OK, so they'll be sending in their English assignments that they researched on Wikipedia in 140 characters or less via Twitter and they'll be using their trusty abacus for math homework and carving their answers into a rock.)

This move "away from education" is perplexing to me. There are enough idiots out there who (technically) have been educated with a real curriculum. Can you imagine the dough heads that say, Flori-duh, for example, could churn out with a schedule like this? Look, I'm all for research skills and effective communication, but why Wikipedia? If you want to instill some web-based knowledge in their unmolded little brains, what say you start with Google? If you know how to use Google in the most effective and efficient way possible, you're going to be able to kick Wikipedia's ass with the (accurate) information that you'll be able to find. This plan does not thrill me and I'm a bit worried about the education system in general over there. (I'm also a bit worried that something like this will begin to take hold over here in the US. Sadly however, in some schools, teaching crap would be better than what they're currently teaching, which is nothing.)

It would seem that part of the rationale is that kids know about Wikipedia and Twitter and they don't know about World War II, so it's better to teach them about something they know. I thought the whole point of "teaching" something was so that people who didn't know about the subject would learn about it? But now, if they don't know about something then they are going to not be interested in learning about it at all? That seems...what's the word...oh yeah, effing ridiculous. (So it's two words. I misplaced my abacus when I was Twittering.) I hope that someone mentions this to Sir Jim Rose, but I don't know if they will because he's pretty darned scary looking over there. Yipes.

The article in The Guardian states that the "...reforms requiring schoolchildren to study Twitter and blogs would not apply in Wales. The changes would affect primary schools in England only." So there you have it. If you live in England, get your kids into school in Wales. You know, while I'm really curious as to how this is going to turn out, I have a hard time getting excited about social experiments where the end result could be of great detriment to society. Put that in your pipe and Twitter it.

And while you're at it, feel free to follow me on Twitter. (Dear God, I can't believe I just Follow me on Twitter!said that.) You can click on the link in the Twitter section of the sidebar over there on the right, or you can just go to the Twitter website and follow me under my Twitter name (can't believe I just said that either) OpusP. If you don't know what in the hell Twitter is, you're not alone. I still don't think I know what it is. Happy tweeting.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Stupidest Criminal In All The Land

You have to know that if you're being called "the stupidest criminal in the state of Pennsylvania" by a retired police chief (obviously someone who has seen his share of criminals, both the crafty and the inept) it's a pretty good bet that you are, in fact, the world's dumbest criminal.

Meet Jerome Marquis Blanchett (brother to Cate, that is correct. The resemblance is uncanny.).



The 19-year old Mr. Marquis was dubbed "the stupidest criminal in the state Pennsylvania" by a one retired police chief John Comparetto. According to the associates over there at the AP, Chief Camparetto was at a Holiday Inn and was walking "...out of a stall in the men's room when a man pointed a gun in his face and demanded money." (You'd think that he'd want to rob him when he was actually in the stall. It's not like he'd be able to chase you right away or anything. A head start is always beneficial. Just something to think about is all.) But aside from the semantics of this crime, the other issue at hand was that Chief Comparetto wasn't the only cop in the building. No, there were some "...300 other narcotics officers from Pennsylvania and Ohio" nearby at the time because of the Narcotics Law Enforcement Seminar.that was going on. In that Holiday Inn. At that moment. 300 of 'em. Yep.

According to PennLive.com, Comparetto "...handed over $138 and his phone" and our boy genius said that "...if he tried to follow him, he'd kill him." Uh-huh. Well, this shouldn't be too hard. And it wasn't. Comparetto waited for him to leave and then "drew a firearm from his ankle holster and went after Blanchett." How far did our hero get before he was caught? Not as far as you might think. He was taken into custody outside of the Holiday Inn. As he was getting into a cab!

So, he's so dumb that rather than high tailing it out of there, he gets a cab. Now, I don't know where he was planning on going, but if it's me and I have to resort to robbing someone at gunpoint in a freaking public restroom, I am certainly not spending any of my ill-begotten loot on a cab. I'm running! But then again, between me and Einstein there, only one of us is currently in jail and it's not me.

Captain Incompetent was charged with "robbery, making terroristic threats, reckless endangerment, simple assault, carrying a firearm without a license and illegally possessing a firearm." Well, that is quite a busy morning right there! If nothing else, he's a fairly competent multi-tasker as evidenced not only by this debacle, but also by the fact that at the time, "...he was awaiting trial of four previous robbery charges."

Comparetto said,"He was probably the stupidest criminal in the state of Pennsylvania. There was a big sign by the front door that said 'Welcome Pennsylvania Narcotics Officers Association.' He had to walk right past that sign. There were 300 cops in here. There were police cars all over the parking lot. He's not very bright."

At his arraignment in court, District Judge Michael J. Smith told him "You're a danger to have on the street" and then set his bail at $1 million. As he was being led out of the courtroom, a reporter asked him for a comment, to which he replied, "I'm smooth."

"I'm smooth"? What the hell does that mean? "I'm smooth." Does he have extremely supple skin that he is very proud of? Is he a seal? A dolphin? What other place in this story could "smooth" have if not in relation to one of those aquatic creatures?! (Which are known to some as 'charismatic megafauna.' Don't ask.) He's not smooth at all! He's Stooges material at best!

The screen shot below is from a video on KDFW Fox 4 News. If someone could explain to me why or how or what a photo of Mr. Marquis is doing propped up next to what appears to be a sink in (assumedly) a public restroom, I'd appreciate it. It's one of the stranger things I've seen in a news cast in a while and I just don't get it.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, March 28, 2009

Obscenely Accurate

Gotta hand it to the folks over there at The Onion. They're definitely funny people, those Onion people. Satire, comedy, parody, all at their best. But they might have outdone themselves this time. It's definitely going to be hard to top.

The folks over there at The Onion have put together a video of fictional news coverage of the new release of a fictional Sony product. Now, even though the product is fictional, I could almost swear that I own at least one of them! No, actually, I know I own at least one of them, which is why I'm pretty sure that I own more than one of them. I'm just guessing, but I'd have to assume the stupid wireless router that I've been trying to get to work correctly so that the damn Wi-Fi connection won't keep shutting itself off whenever it effing feels like it is part of Sony's fictional product line.

That's why I can't believe that they're trying to get us to believe that it's really a "fictional" product. Like I said, I know I have at least one of those. I know several people who have lived (barely) through the exact same experience with their products that The Onion depicts with theirs. It's real.



You know, the other thing that's real about this video is the language. Usually this is a family-ish language sort of blog (but only if the "family" is your Uncle Dave who drinks), but not today as this video contains graphic language. Foul, obscene, graphic language. BUT....it's foul, obscene, graphic language that is essential to the message being conveyed. It can't be bleeped and you need your sound up and your speakers on. So make sure that your viewing/listening area is free of all small children, priests, nuns, all Popes, small pets (they frighten easily), and any old relatives without a sense of humor (especially those who always pretend they can't hear anything, but they SO can. They'll cause more trouble for you than they're worth. Most of the time. Check their will before adhering to that philosophy. Always check the will.). Enjoy.



See what I mean? How many of those do YOU own? Show it to your friends and see how many they own, too! The Onion has several other videos over yonder at the YouTube, but it's only fair that I mention that I can't imagine any would be funnier than that which you just watched. Nice job, Onion guys. If nothing else, it's earned you permanent Linkage on this blog. What more could you ask for? Now, if you'll excuse me, I believe I have a new, revolutionary product that I need to spend time with. (Stupid G-D router...)

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Friday, March 27, 2009

Birdnapped!

Gordo, the skateboarding parrot is missing. Correct, missing. Oh, wait. The other part? The parrot and the skateboard? Yeah, I thought that was a little odd, too. Here's the scoop on that:

According to the Whittier Daily News, a one 47-year old Fred Mireles of Baldwin Park reported that his parrot, Gordo, had been stolen out of his cage which was on the porch of Mireles' house at 10:30am on Wednesday. Gordo, a green Malaysian parrot from Guatemala, had been known around town as the parrot who could ride a skateboard. Yes, a skateboard. He learned how to ride the skateboard a couple of years ago while MIreles was recovering from being hit by a car. (Why yes, this is as straightforward and as weird as it sounds. It's hard to sugarcoat something so cut and dried.)

"I almost died about two years back and he helped me." See, according to Mireles, two years ago he was hit by a car and "... part of his rehabilitation was exercise. That's when Mireles made Gordo the mini-skateboard." Of course it was. If part of your rehabilitiation was exercise, the first thing that you'd be inclined to do is to make a little skateboard for your Guatamalan parrot. Makes perfect sense to me. It's the natural chain of events, really.

"It pressed me to walk. (Gordo) was my physical therapist." Does insurance cover that? A skateboarding parrot that moonlights as a physical therapist for a recovering mini-skateboard builder? It probably requires a separate form for sure.


All of the avian rehabbing seems to have gone well as "Mireles would drive in his car with Gordo on his shoulder, take Gordo out mountain biking....The two would take daily walks together." Wait a minute. Mountain biking? How come he isn't Gordo the mountain biking parrot? How does he steer with his wings? He's a bird; they don't have opposable thumbs which would make it extremely difficult to grip anything! I think I'd rather hear about the mountain biking than the skateboard. A skateboard you just stand there. Give him a push and Wwhhheeeee! Down the hill he goes. You can get any animal that you can get to sit still long enough to do that! Yep, I'm definitely no longer impressed by the skateboard, but I am thoroughly intrigued by the mountain biking part. Sadly, that isn't what the article was about, so we're all left hanging. But I digress.

Mireles is clearly upset about the ripping off of his Gordo. He tried to explain it to those of us without a skateboarding parrot by saying, "I'm 47 years old and I don't have a child. (He) was like my kid. I'm devastated." Hey, wait a minute. Remember that lady that had the chimp who ripped off the other woman's face? That woman treated that monkey like a child also. Bubble baths. Hair combing. Champagne before bed. (Yep. A grown woman snuggling up in bed to a buzzed monkey after a couple of glasses of champagne each night. NOT normal.) I certainly hope that Mireles and Gordo weren't sharing champagne before bed each night. (I want to say that I hope that Gordo wasn't combing Mireles' hair, but again, he's a parrot and I'd kind of like to see how that's done. Just for curiosity sake. I'm certainly not advocating any sort of human-bird inter-species relations, that's for sure.)

Truthfully though, it's not looking good for either Mireles or Gordo in regard to Gordo being returned. But Mireles says that there's a better chance of the perpetrator getting caught "...because Gordo is so well-known in the area." On top of that, the birdnapper might have a problem on his hands because ",,,Gordo isn't used to strangers." As Mireles explained, "They are up against a can of worms because once (Gordo) realizes he doesn't belong there, he's going to start biting."

Well, there's nothing worse than being up against....a....can of worms? Right. Because they're all wiggly and dirty and stuff....right? Let's just hope Gordo doesn't mind worms and bites the crap out of the birdnapper so that he can return home and hop on his little skateboard and be tugged around the neighborhood once again. Godspeed, little skateboarding parrot. Godspeed.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, March 26, 2009

The Ticking Biological Clock of a Drunken Lesbian

Here's one you don't hear every day (thank God): "Woman attacks wife.....

".....with turkey baster full of sperm."

Sweet mother of God, what?!

Correct. Unfortunately correct. A woman, (one who is partial to other women and thus dubbed a lesbian) a one Jennifer Lighten of Pittsfield, Massachusetts, was at home when her wife, a one Stephanie Lighten (I said she was her wife! You were warned), who was said to be rather "liquored up", allegedly "...threw Jennifer on the couch, grabbed at her clothes and threatened to impregnate her." Yeah, yeah, threaten all you want! You're a chick, right? Whaddaya gonna do about it? Well, that's when things started to get a little weird.

According to Lez Get Real, the phrase "threatened to impregnate her" meant that "...Stephanie had a ‘turkey baster and her brother’s semen in a sealed container.’ " Oh. So that's what she's gonna do about it. I see. All rightee then, everyone? All together now: Eeeewwwwwww!!!!!

See, this was a problem because "Jennifer said she told Stephanie that she didn’t want to get pregnant.” You don't say? Well, I can't imagine that if she did want to get pregnant that she'd want to do it like that, by God! But that wasn't good enough for Stephanie. Oh. I mean, allegedly it wasn't good enough because even after Jennifer ran into the bathroom and locked the door, Stephanie broke down the door! Well, she sounds like she'd make a fine mother! What else?

I guess she wasn't very good at breaking down bathroom doors in an attempt to get at her wife so she could impregnate her with the sperm of her brother that she was storing in a handheld poultry moistening device as she hurt her wrist and went to get an ice pack. Jennifer, sensing that since she wasn't currently trying to bash down the door that it would be a good time to make a run for it. So she did. Oh. Allegedly.

Jennifer hops in their SUV and would have made a clean getaway except that Stephanie, ready and raring to go after icing up her door impact injury, jumped on the side of car" and "...was hanging on the SUV door handle, trying to get in.” What the hell? Did she think OctoMom was in there, because that's how folks are behaving over at her place!

When the police arrived they then "....arrested a very intoxicated Stephanie Lighten outside her home." That must have been a pleasant encounter. Stephanie Lighten - Baster WielderEven moreso after they "... confiscated the weapon, plus a container of semen and some aluminum foil, which was originally was used to hold the semen." All right, just wait one minute! This is a whole lot of really bizarre information to digest all at once! The weapon? Um, the turkey baster? The container of....reproductive fluid, is that the...what? Ammunition for the weapon? And the aluminum foil? That has me pretty perplexed, as I'm fairly certain that the penis was originally used to hold the semen. But aside from that technicality, I still don't get where aluminum foil has any part to play in the forced reproductive process involving kitchen gadgets and a whole lotta liquor.

Stephanie was charged with domestic assault and battery. If you're wondering why she wasn't charged with assault with intent to rape (which apparently was the other choice) it was because Jennifer "...declined to go forward with any charges of assault with intent to rape, because she did not believe Stephanie was going to sexually assault her with the syringe." Um, what? You don't believe...you didn't think.....but she....and you.....and all the foil !!! What?!

Honeybabe, what did you think she was going to do with it? Show you how to keep a 14-lb. turkey all moist and juicy before guests arrive? I don't think that was it! I guess that it shouldn't surprise me that Stephanie now "....alleges that the police have lied about the assault." Um, we're you drunk?

According to the folks over at Lez Get Real, Stephanie has stated that Stephanie Lighten - March 12 photo"...she believes that the police are lying in large part because her brother, Nicholas Lighten, was assaulted by a police officer who was then removed from the police force. Nicholas Lighten was punched in the face by Officer Patrick Duffy while Mr. Lighten was on the ground handcuffed. An internal investigation found Duffy to be in violation of police procedures and he was let go." That happened in 2006! HOW exactly does that play into your denying that you were going to impregnate your wife against her will with the sperm of your brother who was once punched by a cop 3 years ago? I just don't see the connection.

Although I do see the connection between a)someone who gets all liquored up and then procures the sperm of her brother and uses aluminum foil in some way and a turkey baster in another way and then tries to force some, any or all of the above onto or into her not-wanting-to-get-pregnant wife, and b) someone who would say that the police just made that story up because her brother was punched by a cop 3 years ago. I see that connection. The commonality in both of those examples is that the person is crazy! That's the thread that binds those two together right there.


I'm going to just guess and say that these two are going to be together for a long, long time. I have the feeling that there will unfortunately be more colorful antics in their future. So thank God for the Internet, otherwise the rest of the entire world might never know about it. Keep that in mind there, ladies, the next time that you're thinking of skipping those family planning classes and just venturing out on your own. If nothing else, remember that the Internet knows all. And it never, ever forgets.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

These Weren't Too Big

I'm OVER hearing "too big to fail" in regard to the AIG debacle. As I believe I've asked before, how is "too big to fail" any different than "too big to succeed"? If you can't "fail", then why bother trying to "succeed"? And as I've seen happen with so many things lately, the AIG outrage is directed in the wrong direction. Was it sucky of them to huge, multi-million dollar bonuses when they ran the company into the ground? Well, sure. But are you going to tell me that if it was wrote in your contract that you get a bonus at the end of the year no matter what that you're not going to take it? Sure you are. But regardless as to whether or not that's despicable behavior, let's just remember that it wouldn't have been possible without the help of Congress, who allowed the terms of the taxpayer money that AIG received to include wording that specified the executives receiving bonuses. Be mad about it because you should. But be mad at Congress.

And I'm going to have to assume that it was Congress, in an attempt to deflect some, any or all of the blame off of themselves, who came up with the "too big to fail" explanation as to why blindly handing over bazillions of dollars is necessary. Along with using "too big to fail" as a justification for these bailout/spending bills, it also seems to carry with it the unsaid implication that "too big to fail" also means "won't fail". I know they say it like it's supposed to mean "can't fail", but the "won't fail" is implied instead because if it couldn't fail then we wouldn't need to fund its not failing.

And, like almost everything else that has been attempted during this economic nightmare, it's misleading and installs false hope. Really, there have been a lot of things which carried the implication of "too big to fail". Let's review, shall we?



















Oh, yeah. We're doomed for sure. Still not convinced? Fine, one more example of our impending doomage, though it really doesn't fit the "too big to fail" category, it's definitely a sign of something. (If nothing else, at least it's something amusing!)

The final sign of doom: Nancy Pelosi looks like Gloria Allred. Behold!

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content