Monday, May 31, 2010

Reverse Natural Selection?

Sometimes, you just have to see things to believe them. And I think that a lot of the times when that is the case, once you see them and once you believe them, that doesn't necessarily mean that you understand them. That's why you're usually left just wondering what in the world is wrong with a lot of people. And that would include wondering what in the world is wrong with the media covering such stories.

Take, for example, the family of Ardi Rizal. Ardi and his family live in Indonesia. And according to the
Washington Post, there has been somewhat of an uproar after "Shocking photos of....Ardi Rizal puffing away on up to 40 cigarettes a day" came to light. Sure, sure. I know a lot of people smoke 40 cigarettes a day. I don't know how in the world that they afford it, but I know that they do it. The thing that makes this a little bit more of a head scratcher is that Ardi is 2. As in "years old". Two years old. Smoking up to 40 cigarettes a day. Wait. He's two and he...? That's right.

While I am usually a huge fan of the Washington Post, I am not a huge fan of how they covered this story. If they were trying to win some sort of a prize for presenting the subject in the most irrelevant manner possible, then they were on top of their game. Other than that, well, I'm just glad I didn't pay for it or anything (even though I still feel a little gypped). They talked to a one Matthew Myers of something called the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids which is located in Washington, D.C. Mr. Myers was quoted as saying, "This reflects a pervasive problem in many low-income countries where tobacco companies market their products to an uneducated public." Really? Are they marketing their products in such a way that it is implied that babies should be smoking cigarettes? No? OK, then. Anything else?

Unfortunately, yes. He also stated that "...anybody, at any age, can buy cigarettes in Indonesia". Wait. What now? Anyone, regardless of age, can buy cigarettes in Indonesia? Oh, now I see why that's a relevant fact! Of course. Because this two-year old wouldn't be able to smoke if he hadn't been able to go out and purchase the cigarettes that he's smoking on his own, right? Of course not! What does that have to do with anything?! Oh, nothing? Let's move on.

Now, a one Seto Mulyadi, who heads the country's child protection commission, "...blamed Ardi's two-pack-a-day habit on advertising and clueless parents." Well, that's a little bit better. Though I'm still not sure what advertising has to do with this. I'm really liking the pointing the finger at the clueless parents, however. It's probably an understatement to say that's the most likely culprit here.

But maybe I'm wrong. Let's check in with this toddler's parents and see if they strike us as being of the clueless bent, shall we? First, we'll hear from the boy's mother, Diana. "He's totally addicted. If he doesn't get cigarettes, he gets angry and screams and batters his head against the wall. He tells me he feels dizzy and sick." She apparently doesn't seem to see her part in all of this. She apparently doesn't seem to think that she is the parent and that she is in control and that, eventually, all of the screaming will subside. Hmm. Yep, there are definitely indicators of cluelessness here. Let's check in with the father next.

But wait. Before we do that, I should probably also mention that not only does this two-year old smoke two packs a day, he also "...weighs 56 pounds. He's too fat to walk far so he gets around on a plastic toy truck." Yeah, see, just when you thought that it couldn't get any sadder, then it does. Let's quell that sadness with anger, OK?

The boy's father, Mohammed, is the moron who gave the kid his first cigarette when he was 18 months old. Nice job, Mohammed. Now your kid is incredibly fat and addicted to cigarettes. How does that make you feel, Mohammed? "He looks pretty healthy to me...I don't see the problem." Really?! He can't walk, you dumbass! Do you see other two-year olds getting around on a plastic toy truck whilst smoking a cigarette? No? Then he's NOT OK, you nitwit!

Seriously, I know that there are different cultures and all of that, but this has so much wrong with it that I really can't even make up anything good to say about it. I guess they're not fortunate enough in Indonesia to have things like Child Protective Services or stuff like that? (That really is a question, as I have absolutely no idea about the social services of the Far East.) Oh, wait. I just read that there is some intervention being attempted with this family. "Concerned officials offered to buy the family a car if Ardi quits." A car?! That's how social services work in Indonesia? They bribe folks to do the right thing?! Grand. Good luck with that, Indonesia. Gooooood luck with that.


The video of this tragic, preventable and completely unnecessary situation is below. If it doesn't load, try clicking here. Oh, yeah, and thanks (I think) to my friend for bringing this to my attention.


Ardi Rizal - The real SMOKING BABY !! free videos" classid=clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000 width=364 height=291 type=application/x-shockwave-flash>

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, May 30, 2010

What Is A Blogger?

From the good folks over at Switched, this is precisely why I do not refer to myself as a "blogger". When necessary, I will mention that I have a blog, but I never refer to myself as a "blogger". Though after witnessing this man-on-the-street video, I might have to start mentioning my blog more often, if for no other reason than to simply let people know that not all blogs (albeit most) and not all bloggers (albeit most) are moronic. Or I might just keep going about things the way that I have been and continue to behave as if I am in the blogging world, but not of it, as it seems to be working out just fine this way. (As always, if the video doesn't load, you can try clicking here and hope for the best.)

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Guess Their Age

I discovered a new website. (OK, fine. I read about it over yonder at Lemondrop.) And I'm not quite sure why it's so interesting, but it seems to be. The site is Guess My Age and it is exactly what it sounds like it is. You're shown a picture of an individual and your job is to type in how old you think said individual is. Now, unless you've made a living as one of those traveling carnivals guys who does this sort of thing for a very odd living, you might find that it's harder that it sounds like it would be. I have yet to guess someone's age absolutely correctly. I can usually keep it within about ten years either direction, but I'm sure that's not overly comforting to those whom I am guessing are 40 when they're really 30. Yeah. Awkward.

Unless you're preparing for a career as a 7-11 cashier where you'll need to card people for alcohol and cigarette purchases, I really don't see anything useful coming out of this site, other than pure entertainment and efficient time wasting. (Combine the two and you've got yourself one heck of a day at work!) You can load your own photo on there and then check back to see how old people thought that you were. If you're the sort of person who is just fine with uploading photos of yourself to the all of the Internets and being perfectly comfortable with whatever age people guess for you (even if it's older than you really are by quite a few years!), then by all means, upload your photo. If you're the sort of person who is going to upload his or her (but most likely her in this scenario) and think that you're going to learn that everyone thinks that you look at least five to seven years younger than you really are, think again. That's not going to happen. All of the Internets are mean. If you go into something like this looking for an ego boost, you're going to make sure that you have an ample amount of rope with which to use to hang yourself after your little experiment is complete.
Let's take a look at some of the folks that I ran across whilst killing some time today, shall we?

I saw this chick and guessed 26. Her shirt (from what we can see of it) appears to be modest and that alone will rule out that she's still in her teens. She just doesn't appear to be over thirty (no reason for that assumption) and so I went a little higher up from the middle of the road.

This woman's age wasn't overly hard to determine for me. The haircut and the large print, somewhat frockish shirt put her in the over 40 category in my mind. I went with 41. See, now it's people like this chick whose age is difficult to ascertain. I think part of that is because she's probably a lot younger than I would be comfortable with her being and still looking/acting like that. I guessed 17.


Here's one that seemingly gives us a little bit of help. The spiky-haired chap below is drinking a beer. That immediately sets our low cut-off at 21. It's the spiky hair that is going to be a tough one to noodle through, however. Guys don't roll with the times as easily as women do (or want to). The thumbs up sign isn't a good sign and it doesn't seem like it's his first beer ever (due to the dorky grin that he thinks makes him look cool, even though it doesn't) and there is a leather jacket (though possibly pleather), so I'm going with 26.



This chick was fairly easy. That emo hairstyle that she has going on narrows it down to under eighteen. I went with the turbulent adolescent year of 15.


I'm surprised that this guy actually put his photo on there. The leathery skin and the confused look led me to guess 53. I also guessed that he's a two-and-a-half pack a day smoker who drinks Jack Daniels at 10am on weekdays. Sadly, that information is not available at Guess My Age.


I'm also surprised that this guy posted his photo on there as well, as he's awfully goofy looking. And that striped tank top isn't helping matters. I went with 32.


I'm going to wrap this little experiment up with this woman. I guessed 41. There were a variety of factors that led me to that very, very, very wrong conclusion. The hair. The white board with probably some sort of "To Do" list scrawled on it. The frumpy turtleneck. The phone with the cord in the wall. (At least, I'm hoping that it's connected to the wall and that it's not connecting the handset to the phone. It's sort of hard to tell.) This woman would not be happy with my guess.


So, have you been keeping track of your guesses? Let's take it from the top.

  • Number One is 27. My guess was 26. A difference of -1. So far, so good. Nothing offensive there. Yet.

  • Number Two is 43. My guess was 41. A difference of -2. Not too shabby.

  • Number Three is 18. My guess was 17. A difference of -1. I'm not doing too badly at this point. Sadly, that will change.

  • Thumbs Up Dude is 18. I guessed 26 because he was deceiving me with that beer in his hand. That's a difference of +8. If you're old enough to drink beer, you're too old to be doing the thumbs up sign because you're drinking beer. Got it?

  • Number Emo Five is 16. I went with the Emo Rule and guessed 15 for a difference of -1. Hey, if you want to look older, drop the emo look. I'm just sayin'.

  • Jack Daniels is 56. I was being generous in guessing 53. -3 for me with Jack. Now can we guess how long he's been on parole?

  • Striped Shirt Nerd is, in fact, 32! Finally! Only took me seven tries before I guessed one correct!
But all of that doesn't matter. That's because on the last photo, I guessed 41 when in reality, that poor woman is 28. Ooohh! +13! Yeah, whoops. Oh, come on! Like you got that one right! I don't think so! While I can't ascertain whether or not the 18 year old would have been complimented that I thought that she was 26, I'm relatively certain that this 28 year old would eat me for lunch (possibly literally from the looks of it) if she knew I thought she was 41.

I don't know why this site draws one in so easily. Nor will I pretend to know why I spent about half an hour guessing people's ages. It's not like there's a prize or anything. But whatever it is, it does help pass the time.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, May 29, 2010

A Disappointed Idol Fan

You know, I realize that American Idol is one of the top shows on American television. I get that. But when I see videos like the one below, it concerns me about just who the people are who are watching the show. I can only hope (and pray a lot) that the majority are not like the woman below. This woman (seemingly) gets very into American Idol. She seems to have a lot of emotion invested in the show. And it became clear to me after the announcement of the winner, that this woman (with a lot of emotion invested) was not a Lee Dewyze fan. It's hard to say if it was all of the shrieking that she was doing (while her shirtless husband attempted to read on the couch behind her) or if it was her yelling something about how her life was now ruined (and let me tell you, judging from her almost massive girth and the trailer that she seems to live in, I don't know that her life was all that pristine to begin with), but she was upset. Darn near hysterical. You would have thought the Beatles were in town (and that it was 1964).

The entertaining, but slightly unnerving, video of this woman flipping out is below. Please turn your sound down low and make sure that any dogs that have sensitive ears are out of earshot. They'll howl the way that they do when a fire engine drives by. Also, there's a little red box that says "Part 2" that is hovering in the screen the entire time. Don't click on it. It's not a Part 2. It's some sort of "Obama Deception" video. I mean, if you're into that sort of crap, by all means, click away. But if you're clicking because you're expecting to see more of this highly emotional woman, don't bother. You'll just be irritated that the dillweed put it on that video in anticipation that people would click it.


Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Friday, May 28, 2010

American Idol And Simon Cowell Say Farewell

American Idol wrapped up the tenth (and possibly final) season the other night by crowning the adorable former paint salesman Lee Dewyze as our new American Idol. And as is the tradition in the final American Idol show each season, the episode took on the characteristics of a mid-1970s variety show, with every sort of imaginable musical act (in theory) taking the stage. Let's take a look at some of those who graced our presence.

There were the remaining two Bee Gees, Barry and Robin Gibb, singing "How Deep Is Your Love" with the seemingly eight-year old Aaron Kelly and quirky glass blower, Siobhan Magnus. Now, considering that American Idol's target demographic is 18-49 year olds, it's kind of an odd choice to have The Bee Gees on there. That song came out in 1977. And I have nothing against The Bee Gees. How they manage to make what they do sound good is beyond me. I'm just saying that I don't think that the majority of the audience watching that was thinking, "Oooh! The Bee Gees!" I'm guessing the majority were thinking, "Why is Professor Frink singing with a gay Kenny Rogers?"
Hall & Oates were there. Hall was looking a little weathered, shall we say. He was kind of sporting a Jeff Bridges in Crazy Heart sort of look. That is, if Jeff Bridges in Crazy Heart wore aviator sunglasses inside. Oates, on the other hand, had finally shaved off his porn star moustache. Granted, Oates isn't the most attractive fellow out there (which explains the gazillion close-ups of Hall, but only fuzzy, long distance shots of Oates), but losing the moustache really was a plug, so I looked at that as an overall win.

Alice Cooper, whom I thought was dead, but wasn't even though he looked like he was, performed "School's Out" with the Final 12 contestants. I didn't really need to see Crystal Bowersox in a schoolgirl's uniform. I just didn't. It's not that she's unattractive or anything, it's just that there's something wrong with a dreadlocked woman wearing a plaid school skirt. I'm just saying. And Alice was twirling what looked like a baton, but I'm guessing it was his cane to help him walk.

Alanis Morissette was there and sang "You Oughta Know" with Crystal Bowersox. I'm not a fan of censoring song lyrics. Mainly because they sound ridiculous when you do. Such was the case in this instance. "You Oughta Know" is about how Morissette's boyfriend (presumably, and strangely, to have been Dave Coulier from "Full House" fame) dumped her and moved on with some other chick as if nothing had ever happened. And if you think that she took that well, you'd be mistaken. She was angry. It's an angry song. It's a kick ass, angry song. So, when they change the line "Would she go down on you in a theatre" to "Would she go down with you to the theatre" it really loses quite a bit. Seriously. You think some chick is that angry because a guy's new girlfriend won't go with him to the movies but she would? It just doesn't work.


While I wasn't sure that Alice Cooper was still alive, I also wasn't sure that Bret Michaels wasn't going to be dead. As a big fan of the 1980s hair bands, I've been pulling for Bret lately. He came out and sang "Every Rose Has Its Thorn" with who will likely be a future Abercrombie & Fitch model, Casey James. That boy doesn't seem like he could spell "cat" if you spotted him the C and the T. It's a good thing he's pretty. But back to Bret. I really enjoy the bandana and the cowboy hat, but I'm starting to think that he's wearing it to cover up some sort of male pattern baldness or something. He always has one or the other on. And I'm kind of thinking that with his recent brain hemorrhage that there would have been a little scalpal shaving going on. You know. So they could stop the bleeding in his brain.


And in somewhat of a surprise move, Janet Jackson came out and performed two songs with lasers! Ooohhhhhh! Now, you'll remember that it was Ms. Jackson who bore her nipple for 9/32nds of a millisecond during a Super Bowl halftime show a gazillion years ago. Apparently, the folks at Fox weren't willing to risk having one of her breasticles or some other part of female anatomy come popping out during this show, so they had her in some sort of skin tight scuba outfit, as if she were getting ready to dive down and plug that oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico. And she may be 44, but she rocked it. Nice job, Ms. Jackson (if you're nasty).


And since this was Simon Cowell's last episode of American Idol (as he's moving on to produce the American version of "The X Factor" and make another gazillion dollars), it only made sense to have the incredibly wacky Paula Abdul make an appearance. She gave a rather flat, yet probably heartfelt (as much as someone that pilled up can be heartfelt) speech which included a line that I'm pretty sure she never envisioned herself saying. She said, "American Idol is not going to be the same without you. But as only I can tell you,it will go on." I really don't think that she anticipated the show going on without her. I think that's why she was holding out for more money. Granted, she deserved it. But I don't think that she thought that they were going to call her bluff. Sorry, Paula. If it's any consolation, I think America misses you and your unintelligible antics.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, May 27, 2010

Is That A Burrito In Your Pants Or Are You Just Happy To See Me?


I almost hesitate to start off with a quote from the article over there at WFTV.com in (of course) Orlando, Flori-duh. I mean, it sums things up really well, but I don't know if I can do any better than what they've already wrote. Some acts are hard to follow and this might just be one of them. I guess I'd better suck it up and give it a shot. Here we go...Today we learned that "The Brevard County doctor who was arrested for groping a woman while dressed as Captain America with a burrito in his pants will not go to jail." See what I mean?

Wait. Captain America? With a...a...burrito? Was it? I don't know that I really want to know, but I know that I really have to ask. What in the hell was he doing with a burrito in his pants? Was it a snack for later? Good Lord, I certainly hope not. Let's continue and see if we can noodle this one through, shall we?

The article that I linked to is rather brief. It does say, however, that "...Doctor Raymond Adamcik will take part in a diversion program for first time offenders". There is a program for people dressed like superheroes with a south-of-the-border delicacy cradled within their undergarments?! Don't get me wrong. Those people are definitely in need of some sort of program. I'm just stunned that one exists, is all. What do you call that, anyway? Never mind. I'm not sure that any of us really want to know.

The circumstances are a bit vague if I'm just referring to that article as well. And really, the circumstances that are cited raise more questions than they seem to answer. When I read, "Adamcik was arrested in April during a bar crawl for medical professionals", I really want to know more. Not much more, but more. For instance, what sort of medical professionals go on a bar crawl dressed as wacky superheroes? That seems like a fairly relevant question for one to pose, doesn't it?

I did find another story over at
WFTV.com that gave a few more details on what in the world went on in the first place (which was in 2007, by the way. Why this has taken so long is beyond me.). See, "Everything was fine until...Captain America started getting too forward with a burrito he kept tucked inside his blue tights." The fact that he was there at all with a burrito in his pants, regardless as to which defender of truth, justice and the American way he was dressed as, really doesn't indicate everything was fine.

And it went from "not fine" to "effing weird" really quickly. The doctor (yes, he's really a doctor) "...was asking women if they want to touch it. When one refused, he allegedly took out the burrito and groped her." Ah, yes. The ol' "Wanna touch my burrito?" pick up line. I'm surprised it ended as poorly as it did. Seems like such a winner.

After the woman called the police, there was kind of a problem. See, "...there were so many cartoon characters in the bar at the time, all Captain America's were asked to go outside for a possible identification." It's not likely he would have been able to get away with it, as "The woman pointed out Adamcik and the burrito was found in his boot." In his boot?! What the hell kind of boots does Captain America have where you can shove a burrito in them? What else was in there? Did they find any chalupas? (No, that's not a euphemism.) While I don't know about the chalupas, I do know that I found a mugshot of Captain Gordita Grundle there. Behold!


Charming. Do we have it in color? Maybe a little closer up? Of course we do. Behold!
It still isn't clear why it took three years to resolve, but the article did state that after the arrest "Adamcik was checking himself into a rehab program ". There are rehab programs for something like this?! For reals?? Then again, I guess if there are rehab programs for made up crap like sex addiction, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that there are rehab programs for tucking Mexican delicacies within the coverings of one's nether regions. I shouldn't be surprised. But I kind of am. Just a little bit. A little.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Governmental Brownies

You are aware of the fact that the government is extremely inefficient in many, many ways, aren't you? You have to be. It doesn't matter who the President is. It doesn't matter which party controls Congress. None of that matters. Government itself is its own entity. And it's a poorly functioning one at best. Don't believe me? Then you've been living under a rock. A very efficient rock.

Have you ever made brownies? Yes. Brownies. You know, you can buy one of those boxed mixes in the store for a couple of bucks and they're really quite efficient. I think all you do is add an egg and some oil or water or something, pour it into some sort of pan and bake the sucker for about 40 minutes. It's not hard. The instructions are right there on the side of the box. I'm pretty sure that a rhesus monkey could do it if you gave him all of the ingredients beforehand. (It's not like you could really expect the monkey to go to the store and buy all of the stuff. Monkeys are pretty short. They'd never be able to hand the money up to the cashier.)

But according to the taxpayer funded folks over at
NPR, the government is not quite as bright as the rhesus monkeys. That's because the government's rules and regulations needed to bake brownies is twenty six pages long. Wait. What now?

Correct. 26 pages of how to bake brownies in the government. To which I ask, "Are you effing kidding me?" Oh, but they're not. Oh, no. That's why sections like Section 3.2.6 (the section covering the eggs) not only tells you which kinds of eggs are acceptable, but also references another section, as it reads (only in part) "Whole eggs may be liquid or frozen and shall have been processed and labeled in accordance with the Regulations Governing the Inspection of Eggs and Egg Products (7 CFR Part 59)." Good Lord, man.

Now if you ask a one Jeremy Whitsitt, who has something to do with something called the Department of Defense Combat Feeding Directorate (The ol' DDCFD), there's a reason for this. It's not a reason that makes any sense to me, but it's a reason. He says, "One thing we like to say is, 'What would happen if you cooked a meal, stored it in a stifling hot warehouse, dropped it out of an airplane, dragged it through the mud, left it out with bugs and vermin, and ate it three years later?'" If it were a military meal, Whitsitt says, it would still be edible and maybe even tasty." Um, OK...? Sounds....delicious. Or...something.

The article at NPR goes on to state that "Brownies made from the Pentagon’s recipe will probably last about three years if they're packaged properly." Wait. What now? If they're packaged properly? Sooooo, you're telling me that's it's about the packaging? Yet, there is a twenty six page document on how to make the freaking things? Who in the world cares how they're made? Doesn't it seem like it would be all about the packaging? Do we really need twenty six pages on how to make a brownie?

Maybe we don't. After all, "The Pentagon actually updated its official brownie specifications recently." Oh, good! I'm glad to know that's what the Pentagon is doing these days. Updating official brownie specifications. That will help find bin Laden. But apparently, "The new document has been streamlined and expanded to cover things like lemon poppy seed cake and chocolate banana nut muffin tops." Oh, thank God for the streamlining, not to mention the lemon poppy sees and the chocolate banana nuts with which to top the military muffins! (Kinda makes you forget that we're the most powerful nation on Earth there for a minute, doesn't it?) Did I just say that it was a streamlined document? Then why is it now thirty one pages?! I don't know either, but to see for yourself, the document is below. If it doesn't load, just click the handy link. Your tax dollars hard at work folks!

MIL-C-44072C

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Lindsay Lohan: The Gift That Keeps On Giving

I've been waiting for this day for a long time. In some ways, I had hoped that it would never come. But in other ways (a lot of other ways), I couldn't wait for it to arrive. And now that day is finally here! That's right. Lindsay Lohan is in trouble again. Woo-hoo!

Do I really enjoy watching the fall of the once bright and shining star? Yeah, I kinda do. If they weren't such douchebags on their way up, their fall down might not be so enjoyable. But they are and it is and that's why we're at where we are today. And I think it's only going to get better.

Here's the scoop: According to the huffy folks over at
The Huffington Post, Lindsay Lohan "...has been on probation since August 2007 after pleading guilty to misdemeanor drug charges and no contest to three driving charges." Now, see, she was supposed to be in court for stuff related to her probation this last Thursday Yeah, but see, she was in Cannes. Allegedly for the Cannes Film Festival. I don't recall reading anywhere about her actually attending any films. Parties? Yes. Films? Not so much.

Now, she fully intended to be back in the States for her court date. Oh, sure! Of course, she did! Absolutely. But....well....someone stole her passport. Yeah. That's it. Someone stole her passport. Uh-huh. So she couldn't come back. Not without a passport. Yeah, that's the ticket. Dog ate my homework. She lost her passport. But don't worry. She managed to find a way to pass the time. Behold!


Huh. Interesting way for someone who is on probation to pass the time. Is that cocaine? Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. It's hard to tell, especially if you're asking Lindsay because she told
Radar Online "That's a set up that's so untrue.” Now, she didn't say how it's a set-up or what is untrue, but that's what she said. I'm thinking she would have been better off (and probably more believable) if she had just gone with "Nuh-UH!"

OH, wait! I just read over at
Huffington Post that she explains the photo with the "white powder" (and her holding what appear to be short tubes similar to the kind used as substance snorting implements) as "I thought I was taking a picture with a fan." Uh-huh. That's how you pose for your fan pictures? What kind of a fan was this? Ceiling fan?

So, she misses her court date and the prosecutor and the judge are not happy. The judge issues a warrant which is recalled almost immediately because someone posted the $100,000 bond to get the warrant recalled. I didn't know that you could do that. I thought you had to at least show up in person and then get the bond posted. Maybe there are different rules for the has-been and strung out.

And yesterday was court! Woo-hoo! She showed up to court wearing a shirt that was pretty much opened up all the way down to the lower end of her sternum. If she actually had any breasts, they would have been falling out all over the place. The judge ended up ordering her to wear an alcohol monitoring bracelet and also required her to submit to drug and alcohol testing every week. As you can imagine, that did not sit well with Lindsay. Her attorney tried to argue that the alcohol monitoring bracelet would interfere with her plans to shoot a movie (currently titled "Machete" and sounding like quite a winner) in Texas.

Now, I don't know how abstaining from drinking alcohol is going to interfere with a movie shoot in any of our southern states. And fortunately, the judge wasn't aware of any reasons either. When Lindsay's lawyer did protest too much, the judge said "...that she was prepared to spend a half-hour reading Lohan and (her attorney) a list of her reasons for ordering the bracelet, drug tests and an alcohol-education program." Half an hour? That's it?

Look, she's had one of these bracelets on before. That was three years ago back in 2007. She's had plenty of time to continue to wreck the train that is her life. Will she be able to pull it off again this time? She's going to have to go until at least July when her next hearing is. (I think that's when they will be discussing her "losing" her passport.) She's going to be missing at least one of the prime summer drinking months (the prime months being all of them), not to mention all of the prime coke snorting days (those seem to be all of them for her as well). And honestly, I can't tell you which way I want this one to turn out. On the one hand, I'm all for anyone getting their act cleaned up. But on the other hand, this could get pretty entertaining if she keeps going down this road. Let's see if she can make it until July without any problems and then decide, shall we? That seems fair, considering that I'm not sure that she can make it until Thursday without any problems.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content