Well, That Doesn't Do Much

I haven't dipped my toe in the Trayvon Martin ordeal because, well, I'm kind of waiting for more facts before I make up my mind as to what my position is on this thing. Crazy, huh? Waiting until there are more concrete facts before deciding anything. Yeah, I'm wild like that. (That doesn't mean I'm totally neutral on the issue. I'd say that I'm leaning toward the shooter totally overreacting and looking for a confrontation. Regardless, a seventeen year old boy shouldn't end up shot and dying in the street.) But see, other people have been forming some pretty strong opinions about this case. One of those people is New York Senator Eric Adams. Senator Adams was on the floor of the Capitol yesterday dressed like this:

I understand the point he's trying to make, but I'm not so sure that a politician wearing a hoodie does a whole lot to dispel the idea that only criminals wear hoodies.

Sphere: Related Content

Here's An Explanation

We finally have some clarification on Jon Kyl's statement that wasn't intended to be factual. I would be referring to his ridiculous statement about Planned Parenthood when he said that about 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does is abortions. In reality, about 3 percent of the Planned Parenthood agenda is abortions. See, when I do the math, that's a pretty big difference. But when that difference was pointed out to Jon Kyl, it was justified by the simple explanation of "that wasn't intended to be a factual statement". (And at first, I got really excited when I heard that because I thought that a politician was finally admitting that he spews crap on purpose. Yeah, but that wasn't what he meant. He was just a moron.) Well, now we have an explanation for the explanation! Don't get too excited, though. It's still lame.

According to the political folks over there at Politico, when "Asked if he regretted the flap, Kyl said Thursday: "I misspoke when I said what I said on the floor – and I said so." And look, I don't know if he said so or not. What I know is that he said 90 percent when it was 3 percent and then someone else said that it wasn't supposed to be the truth. What I also know is that the difference between 3 percent and 90 percent is a little bit more than just "misspeaking". It's kind of like the difference between one's ass and a hole in the ground. No word on whether or not Senator Kyl has been asked about either one of those. But then he was asked about the explanation that his statement was "...not intended to be a factual statement". His reply? "That was not me - that was my press person." Oh, for cryin' out loud.

I really wish that whoever asked him about that explanation had followed it up with "Is that person still your press person?" Because I don't know about you, but I know about me. And if it were me and if I had a press person who was idiotic enough to tell the press that when I speak, my statements are not intended to be factual?! Yeah, they'd be my ex-press person so fast that it would make their newly unemployed head spin. But I'm just going to guess that he's sticking with them. Probably because he was the one that told them to say that in the first place. I'm merely speculating here, of course. But at least it's me doing the speculating and not my press person.

Sphere: Related Content

Not Intended To Be Factual

Here's a new one. Man, I always hate it when I say that. Only because it means that something more ridiculous than previously thought has occurred. It's almost never really good. And I'd guess that probably only about half of the time it's amusing. And this instance follows those guidelines. Not really good and kind of amusing. But only amusing in the way that is so ridiculous that you don't know what else to think.

Let's take a look at some of the profound statements of a one Senator Jon Kyl (R-eally? Arizona.) Senator Kyl is the Senate Minority Whip. I don't know what that is and I don't think that I care. If I had to make an assumption, I'd probably guess it has something to do with Miracle Whip, but I don't know what. Regardless, Senator Kyl had the floor on Friday during the whole budget showdown/will the government shut down debacle of 2011. He said that abortion was “well over 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does.” And for the record, really only about three percent of Planned Parenthood's work has to do with abortion. There's a big difference between almost all and almost none. But that's OK. It wasn't supposed to be factual. Wait. What?

Correct. It wasn't meant to be factual. What was it meant to be? According to the thinking folks over at Think Progress, "...CNN anchor TJ Holmes relayed a statement from Kyl’s office walking back the comment". How do you walk something like that back? It's so far out of the gate, isn't it going to be impossible to walk back? Not if you're a moron, apparently, Kyl's office explained that "his remark was not intended to be a factual statement, but rather to illustrate that Planned Parenthood, a organization that receives millions of dollars in taxpayer funding, does subsidize abortions." But....but...he said....what...whatis going on here?!

His remark was not intended to be a factual statement? Why in the hell not?! Isn't that what you're supposed to be doing when you're making an argument for your side? Give your basis in facts?! No? When did that change? Oh, that's right. IT DIDN'T. You can't just say something that is totally false and then pull a Pee Wee Herman on everyone and say, "I meant to do that!" That's not how this works!

I certainly hope that this doesn't become some sort of trend. I hope that all of these clueless politicians don't just start blowing alleged facts out of their arse and then blow over it when they're confronted on their falsehoods by saying that it wasn't supposed to be the truth and that it was supposed to illustrate a point. Oh, believe me. Senator Kyl made a point all right. He made the point that he's clearly not fit for the office that he holds. He made the point that he'll say whatever he needs to in order to sway people whichever way he wants to. He made the point that he isn't about the truth, he's just about what he wants. I can't get behind that. We're just doomed. Doomed, I tell you.

Sphere: Related Content

Call Me Senator

I've become less and less enamored with Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA). Actually, I don't think I was ever all that enamored with her in the first place. Can you be enamored with a potted plant? I don't think that you can. And that's about what I think of Barbara Boxer. My final straw with her was summer of 2009. She was in some sort of hearing where an Army general was testifying. As per how the military is trained, he addressed her as "Ma'am." She didn't like that very much and interrupted him in order to tell him that she preferred being addressed as "Senator" because, as she put it, she "worked so hard to get that title".

That's what she was worried about. Being called "Senator" as opposed to being called "ma'am". Mind you, she called him "sir" as opposed to "General". I'm pretty sure that he worked pretty hard to get that title as well. I guess that he just wasn't as petty as she was and didn't feel the need to point that out to her at the time. He wasn't being disrespectful. If anything, he was treating her with the utmost respect. But whatever. She treated him like crap for no reason is the bottom line. She's a bit of a blowhard. And I'm apparently not the only one who thinks so.

Enter a one David Zucker. Mr. Zucker is a reformed liberal who was also a main part of the group of folks who made such awesome satirical movies such as "Naked Gun" and "Airplane!" That sort of experience really proves to come in handy when one wants to make a video which mocks Barbara Boxer for her elitist position about her, um, well, her position. And it's hilarious. It's win-win. See the awesomeness for yourself below.

By the way, my dislike for Barbara Boxer should be in no way interpreted as an endorsement for Carly Fiorina. While I think Carly has potential, I just don't know about her in the capacity as Senator. That doesn't mean that I think Barbara Boxer should stay put. I hate having only two viable choices. It only serves to make me feel all the more scroomed.

Sphere: Related Content

What Are YOU Smoking, Arlen?

Ancient Senator Arlen Specter was handily defeated the other day over yonder in Pennsylvania. Now, it was probably his stating that the reason that he switched from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party was so that he could be re-elected. I don't doubt that is what he thought. What I can't figure out is why he would be so freaking boneheaded as to actually come out and SAY that's what you were thinking? Does he not quite understand that it makes it sound like it's all about HIM? Apparently not. Because he said it and now he's done.

But I'm pretty sure that it was time for him to go anyway. Look, I don't have anything against people who are old. I don't have anything against people who are ancient. But I do have issues with people who are old and out of touch, but they try and convince you that they're not. Take ol' Robert Byrd. How is that guy still a senator? Seriously. My sources (which are far from trustworthy, as I make them up myself) tell me that Robert Byrd is somewhere around 147 years old and the last coherent thought that he had was midway through the Taft administration. Why do you folks in West Virginia continue to re-elect that man? Not to mention that he used to be a member of the Klan, the man is not fit for civic duty.

But back to Arlen Specter. According to TPM, Arlen Specter did an interview with Andrea Mitchell of MSNBC on May 18. (Side note: Is it just me or does Andrea Mitchell bear an odd resemblance to Barbara Walters? Maybe I wouldn't think it was so odd if they both weren't technically considered to be news reporters/anchors/whatever. Do you think that she's trying to look like that? I have a hard time believing that she naturally looks like that. I'm not implying plastic surgery (but you could make that leap if you wanted to), I'm just sayin'.) She asked him if his opponent was more vigorous than he was. Uh-huh. Remember, Andrea Mitchell is married to Alan Greenspan, so she would know a thing or two about vigor...or a lack thereof.

Arlen Specter is 80. It's fair to say that there are a lot of things more vigorous than Arlen Specter. Puppies and baby ducks, for example. Possibly Abe Vigoda. Definitely Betty White. But I find it unlikely that he is more vigorous than his opponent. Of course that's not what he thinks/thought. His response to Andrea Mitchell's question was...well...it was interesting. He said, "When you talk about Sestak being more vigorous, you must be smoking dutch cleanser." Of course. I must be...wait. What now?

Smoking dutch cleanser? What the heck is that? Dutch cleanser? I did a quick search online to see if I could find out what in the heck he was talking about (and, more importantly, if I should be smoking dutch cleanser, whatever it is). It was not easy. It is a rather obscure reference, apparently. Dutch cleanser is apparently a cleaning product akin to Comet and Bon Ami. It's been around since 1906 (so, almost as long as Arlen Specter). That's just the product. I had to dig deeper to find the meaning behind his asking if someone was smoking it.

I only found one other reference of someone using the phrase "smoking Dutch cleanser" on the Inner Webs. Guess who it was? That's right. Arlen Specter.

It was sometime in early February of 2006. According to Time Magazine he used the phrase when he was "Criticizing then Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez during hearings on the Bush administrations warrantless domestic-wiretapping program, saying Gonzalez's responses defied logic and plain English." Wait. Gonzalez's responses defied logic and plain English? But an obscure reference to smoking some sort of turn of the 20th century cleaning product is completely logical? I don't think it is, sir. I just don't think so.

It really didn't help his case for how vigorous he was when he answered Andrea Mitchell and mispronounced Sestak's name. I'm not sure exactly what he said, but it wasn't Sestak.

But even after the odd Dutch cleanser as a mind altering substance reference, he continued to try and make his point about how vigorous he was. He went on with, "Did you see us on the debate? Did you see us on the debate? If you didn't see it, John Bayer (could be Mayor), the moderator, wrote about it, how strong and vibrant I was and how weak he was. You saw that town meeting. That Tea Party guy rushed up at me with his fists clenched. Security wanted to throw him out. I said no, no. And I fought him right there on the spot. Verbally. Beating. Uh, when you talk about vigor, uhhhh....it's all on Arlen Specter's side."

Again, I don't think that you're helping your case when you have to repeat yourself. It's not like she didn't hear you. She's sitting right there. Perhaps you forgot you had just said that? I don't know. But I do like how he implies for a moment that he all but stripped to the waist and knocked out some Tea Party dude before throwing in that he had fought him "verbally". It also didn't help him that after he said, "When you talk about vigor" he really didn't seem to know where he was going with that. And he was talking about himself!

I don't know that you can really make a good point about how vigorous you are by using some Victorian era reference that no one else knows what you're talking about. You're certainly not helping your case. I wonder what we would be thinking if he had answered the question by saying "Are you on glue?" I'm pretty sure I would have thought that was all sorts of awesome. It wouldn't mean that I would think that he needed to or should be re-elected. But at least I'd know that he knew what year it was. I'd also know that he knew that we knew what he was talking about.

Sphere: Related Content

Can YOU Use An ATM?

I know politicians are out of touch. You know politicians are out of touch. You know who the only ones who don't know that politicians are out of touch? Politicians. That is correct.



Take a one Senator Ben Nelson. He is a Senator from Nebraska. Now, in an article that appeared over there in the Omaha World-Herald (I don't know why there is that hyphen between World and Herald. Can't it be both? And if it can't, why aren't they able to just choose one?), Senator Nelson was "...asked this week whether Congress should cap ATM fees". That almost seems like a reasonable question. But in order for it to be completely reasonable, you have to believe that the government should be meddling in private business. Now, I'm all for reasonable fees. (Actually, I'm all for NO fees. It's a freaking ATM. Transferring money around costs the banks pennies. If they're going to charge me three bucks, I'm going to find another ATM. It's pretty simple. Can't the free market and/or supply and demand take care of this on its own? Do we really need to have Congress telling us what to do all of the time? Sweet Mother of God, I hope not.) So, technically, it was a reasonable question.

What wasn't reasonable was Senator Nelson's response. He said, “I've never used an ATM, so I don't know what the fees are,” Nelson said, adding that he gets his cash from bank tellers, just not automatic ones. “It's true, I don't know how to use one." Um, what now? You don't know how to....? An ATM?? Really? Good Lord, man....

Now, I don't know if he realized that his response wasn't exactly the most down to earth thing that anyone has ever heard or what, but he decided to do the most inadvisable thing that anyone could do in this situation. He tried to make it sound better. And you know how that tends to end. That's right. By making it worse.

He then said, "But I could learn how to do it just like I've . . . I swipe to get my own gas, buy groceries. I know about the holograms.” Oh. My. God. What I want to know is when he learned to "swipe". I also really want to know what he knows about "the holograms" and how he knows it. If I had to guess, I'd probably go with his knowledge being limited to "Ooohh! Shiny!" Turns out, it was worse than that. The article tells us "By “holograms,” Nelson clarified that he meant the bar codes on products read by automatic scanners in the checkout lanes at stores such as Lowe's and Menard's." Wait. HE clarified "holograms" to mean "bar codes"? Where has this man been living since the mid-1970s? Under a rock? Under a holographic rock, was he?And it keeps getting worse!

No, I swear! In an effort to not make himself sound like a complete, out of touch tool, he added, "I go and get my own seating assignment on an airplane...I mean, I'm not without some skills. I just haven't had the need to use an ATM.” ::: sigh :::

Wow. He gets his own seating assignment on an airplane. Yes, he clearly has skills! You might notice that he didn't say he books his own airline flights. He just knows how to go to the airport, stand in line and tell someone his name when he gets to the counter. I'm not so sure that I would call standing a "skill".

Look, how old is this guy? Hmm...it appears he was born in 1941. So he's 69. OK, I get the feeling comfortable with going into the bank to get your cash. My Mom is 78 and my uncle is 80 and they both do that. But they both also know how to use an ATM! They both also know the difference between a freaking bar code and a hologram! And finally, neither one of them would add swiping a card to pay for gas or groceries as one of their "skills".

Sphere: Related Content

Things That Are Younger Than Senator Byrd

Yesterday marked quite the milestone in American politics and I'm not sure that it was for the better. No, yesterday was the day that the ancient, 92-years old tomorrow Robert Byrd, former Klansman and current Senator of West Virginia became the longest serving lawmaker in the US Capitol. That's right. The barely coherent and only sometimes understandable Senator Byrd has served for a total of 20,774 days, according to the Los Angeles Times. Yep. Ever since January 3, 1953, the voting people of West Virginia have decided that Robert Byrd is the man that they want to represent them, though why I can't quite figure out because I'm fairly certain that the man is not fully in control of all of his mental faculties. He might know where he is and who he is most of the time, but other than that, I'm going to guess and say it's a coin flip. You can check out the video below and judge for yourself. But keep in mind, this is a man who is making laws that effect the nation!

Seriously, West Virginia. What are you thinking?! The man can barely hold his head up. Mind you, I'm not making fun of the elderly and/or the infirm. I'm mocking the people of West Virginia for electing someone like that! What was he saying about the Senator from Timbuktu? Never mind. (But say, what do you think really woke him up for a minute there?)

Look, the point is, Robert Byrd is old. Really old. I know some oldsters and I don't know anyone who is as old as he is. That's when I started thinking about how long Robert Byrd has been around. He's been around not only longer than most people, but he's also been around longer than a lot of things (some of which seem as if they've been around forever!). Let's see some things that are younger than Robert Byrd, shall we?

McDonald's is younger than Robert Byrd. The first McDonald's was opened in 1940, but the first franchised McDonald's was opened in 1955, two years after Robert Byrd was first elected to the House.

Kool-Aid. Kool-Aid was invented in 1927. None of its offshoot products ever really took off (who thought that people would want Kool-Aid pie fillings and ice cream mixes anyway?), but Kool-Aid is still going strong today and it is nine years younger than Robert Byrd.

Band-Aids. Band-Aids were invented in 1920 by a one Earle Dickson whose wife, Janice, was apparently very accident prone and was cutting herself almost every day! Good thing the guy was too dense to just figure out to keep all sharp objects away from that chick, otherwise we might never have had Band-Aids a mere 3 years after the birth of Robert Byrd.

The ballpoint pen. That's right. The ballpoint didn't show up until 1938. Robert Byrd would have been a full 21-years old. It must have been strange for him to have to give up his quill and ink well after all that time.

Prohibition. From the time that Robert Byrd was 3 years old until the time that he would have been turning 16, America was an allegedly dry country. Granted, during that time, all of the lawmakers were sure boozing it up, perhaps piquing Senator Byrd's interest in entering the public service domain.

FM Radio. FM radio hit the airwaves just in time for Robert Byrd's 21st birthday in 1938.

Betty Crocker cake mixes. OK, seriously?! He's older than cake mix?! Well, considering that Betty Crocker commercialized their cake mix around 1947, Robert Byrd has 30 years on the cake mix.

The credit card. For 33 years, clear up until 1950 when Diner's Club first came up with the idea of paying for things with plastic (and then later claiming bankruptcy and not having to pay for it at all), Robert Byrd was paying in cash.

And just a few more little tidbits....In 1917 when Robert Byrd was born....

...gasoline was 18.45 cents a gallon.

...postage stamps were three cents.

...111 people reported their income at over $1 million.

...the average annual income was $368.56. Yes, that's per year.

Congratulations, Senator Byrd?

Sphere: Related Content

Step Away From the Panda, You Pervert

If you hire people to work for you, I think you need to have some sort of a screening process in place to weed out those that could potentially be, say, damaging to your reputation. Embarrassing even. Now imagine if you were a Pennsylvania State Senator. And you found out that you had a staffer who was arrested and charged "...with attempted sexual exploitation of children, unlawful contact with a minor and criminal solicitation to commit sexual abuse of children." While dressed like a panda. Wait. A pannn....WTF?!

Correct. A panda. Those cute and charming black and white creatures predominantly found in China but shipped here to the US to spend time in zoos to the delight of gazillions of tourists who think it's perfectly natural to be standing 5 feet away from a panda in downtown Washington, DC. And speaking of Washington, DC, did I mention that this pervert worked for a Senator?!

I'm getting ahead of myself here. A one Alan David Berlin, age old-enough-to-know-better-at-40, is a former staffer of Pennsylvania State Senator Jane Orie-R. No, I do not know why her political party that she represents would be important here, but the article over there at the metronews.ca.edmonton felt the need to include it, so I did as well. Plus, why not just bait the waters a little bit more with yet another reason for people to attack the character of the Republicans. (Though you have to admit, saying that they want to fornicate with omnivorous Asian mammals could really be hard to top. So really, by putting out there that she's a Republican, this story could end all of the back biting once and for all! Who'd a thunk it?) I say that he's a 'former' staffer of Senator Orie because he was fired on Friday. He was arrested on Thursday. I don't think that those two are completely independent of one another. Just a hunch, but I'm guessing that once your employer gets wind of the fact that you've been trying to solicit panda sex from, wait for it, a 15-year old boy, you're going to get fired. Soon. As soon as possible.

It would seem that Mr. Berlin had "...used Internet chats and instant messages to proposition the Harrisburg-area boy, including talking about dressing up in animal costumes and engaging in various sex acts." That according to the state Attorney General, a one Tom Corbett. He disclosed that these untoward events occurred "...in April and May, (and he) discussed various sex acts with the boy." Mr. Berlin (who I am really tempted to repeatedly call 'The Pervert') also suggested that he "...travel to the boy's home and have sex with him in the backyard while his parents slept." Oh. I see. While his parents slept. Oh, well, good! Because it would have been a completely different story if his parents had been awake! OF COURSE WHILE HIS PARENTS SLEPT! Because other than that one details, what could possibly go wrong?! Please.

Apparently, Berlin (aka The Pervert) (Sorry! I can't help it!) had worked for the Senate since 1993. For some inexplicable reason, this story included a quote from a one Mike Sarfert, who was the chief counsel for Senator Orie, when he said that Berlin (aka The Pervert) "...did not work on major legislation but assisted with grants for things such as roadwork." Um, what?

What difference does that make?! Didn't work on major legislation! Did work on major legislation! Who the hell cares?! I don't care if he worked on the railroad all the live long day! He wanted to have sex with a boy dressed like a panda! The only thing I care about as far as his employment duties are concerned is whether or not they involved any sort of zookeeping responsibilities! I don't care what he DID for the Senator! I care about what he wanted to DO to a panda! And the boy! For hell's sake, can people not FOCUS?!?!

Well, after you run across someone doing something like Berlin (aka The Pervert) was, if you're law enforcement, you get a warrant to search their place. And they did. That's when they learned that pandas were not the only thing that Berlin (aka The Pervert) apparently had a penchant for. "Authorities also found a wolf costume and cat-type costume...but the panda costume has not been found." So, wait. It's definitely a wolf costume, but it's only a cat type costume? What does that mean? "Cat type"? Like a big house cat "cat type? Like Tony the Tiger "cat type"? Like Halle Berry as the Catwoman "cat type"? What does that mean? It won't make this any better (or worse!) but at this point, details are essential for the very fact that we have already been told about the longing for the panda. We have a picture in our heads (admit it!) of someone in a panda suit. We need to know what the "cat type" costume consists of so that we can add it to our list of images floating around in our heads (and without our consent, might I add).

A one spokesman for the attorney general, a one Nils Frederiksen, said that "Berlin (aka The Pervert) used the costumes as an entree to solicit the boy." Wait. What?!

The kid was 15 right? And this dude, The Pervert (No more aka-ing this guy. He's worth of full pervert declaration at this point!) thought that a panda suit was his in? Now, aside from the fact that I don't know if a panda suit would entice any boy, really, regardless of age. But I'm really hoping that it is not some unknown fantasy amongst throngs of teenage boys to engage in some sort of interspecies coital relations!

But here's my favorite quote from the good Mr. Frederiksen. "It's one thing to be interested in the furry culture, it's another thing to make arrangements to have sex with a teenage boy." ::: blink ::: ::: blink :::

"The furry culture"? Like mold? It's a furry culture. Oooooohh. THAT furry culture. Yikes. Well, in that case, yes. Yes, it is. Well said, sir. Well said.

Fortunately, this guy is sitting in jail with a $250,000 bail. Now, granted, knowing the salaries of some government workers, he might be able to afford that no problem. But let's hope not. Instead, let's hope that this little story makes its way around to some of the other inmates. Some of the burlier inmates. Some of the more sexually deprived and burly inmates. Let's hope they get wind of The Pervert's Follies and act accordingly. Accordingly according to prisoners, of course. I'm not suggesting any sort of leniency for this type of thing. Hell, no! That guy's interested in pandas? Hopefully Bubba will be able to give him a little tutorial on bamboo and wazoo! Should be quite enlightening for him. As it should be.

Sphere: Related Content

What Kind of Trespassing?

So if you're 20 years old and you're arrested for providing a sex act (to the husband of a US senator, nonetheless), it makes sense to take the plea agreement that they offer you and plead guilty to a lesser charge, doesn't it? Sure it does. Especially is the "lesser charge" to "providing a sex act" is "trespassing". Wait. What?

Apparently, a one Alycia Martin, a 21-year old chick from Westland, Michigan had pled guilty under something called the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act. (Are you guys SURE she's 21? Because from the looks of that picture over there, she's looking more like 12 than 21. Was the booking officer dyslexic? Actually, I probably shouldn't complain. She looks older than she did in her booking photo, below on the left.) Basically, if you're young (and I guess in Michigan, 21 is considered "young". I guess "young" is different than "old enough to know better") and you successfully complete your probation, the charge disappears from your record. Other states (and grown-ups) know it as a "plea in abeyance". So in August, Ms. Martin will return to court and they'll see how she did. How nice.

Now, she was only 20 when she was arrested for hooking herself out. But when she was arrested, she had just finished performing $150 worth of a sex act on a Thomas Athans. (No word on how much sex $150 gets you in Michigan. Eliot Spitzer's hookers don't even answer your call for $150.) He would be the husband of US Senator Debbie Stabenow, D-Lansing. (His designation would probably be Thomas Athans, A-Asshat.) And while it's never a good idea to be paying a hooker for sex, it's really not a good idea when your spouse is a Senator. Yeah, that's a really bad idea. (And although it's a bad idea, I kind of get it. I mean, if you want some, you want some. And even if you have a spouse, that doesn't mean you're getting some. (Their pics are below. You tell me if that looks like a match made in heaven to you.) And at least with a hooker (otherwise known as a whore) you don't have to worry about all of the things that usually come with (pun probably intended) someone you're having sex with. You don't have to worry about calling them, you don't have to talk to them, you don't have to worry if you're they're "type". ("Type", very important to some; "type" also not very flexible for some. Unfortunately. For them, probably.), so many things.

But back to the plea bargain. How does one "bargain" one's way down from "prostitution" to "trespassing"? Trespassing is being on someone's property without their permission. Now, in this case, the only way that I could see "trespassing" being a charge would be if by "property" they meant "his penis" and by "being on someone's property" they meant "her on him." But I really don't think that was the case. I'm not thinking that the $150 was for her to get off OF him. Get him off? Perhaps. But that's hardly trespassing.

Well, I guess if it was his wife who pressed the charges, THEN I could see where it might be "trespassing", but it still doesn't make a whole heck of a lot of sense either way.

Oh, and hey, whoring yourself out chick over there? Yeah, listen cupcake, what say you maybe get yourself out of the hooker biz and maybe take a couple of classes somewhere. What? No, CLASSES! I said CLASSES! Not asses. CLASSES! Geez. (Yeah, I can't see it ending well. Not after that.)

Sphere: Related Content

Bye, Bye Byrd-ie

Hey, people in West Virginia! What is the matter with you? What is the dealio with Senator Robert Byrd?! He has been a Senator since 1959 and by all calculations is approximately 148 years old. (148, yes, that is correct.) Why do you people continue to elect this man? He does not appear to be completely cognizant (if at all cognizant) of his surroundings and of the procedures going on around him. He seems to ramble, get lost in his own words, and his latest lapse into a world much different from those of the able minded included shouting out to his late wife Erma while speaking on the floor of the Senate!

I could delve into the whole "Why are you continuing to re-elect a guy who was a Klansman?" angle of this thing, but I'll just go with "It's the South" and leave it at that. This is the freaking US SENATE!! This man, this babbling elderly gentleman, this is who is governing and enacting the rules of this country! WHY?!?

I feel bad for his aide or his assistant or his bellhop or whoever the guy is next to him in the clip below. The poor guy has clearly worked for this man for more than just a week. Or maybe it's the other way around. Maybe he has only worked for him for just a week and that is why he always has this pained, afraid, oh-my-God-what-is-he-doing-now look on his face the entire time. I don't blame him. There has been more than one instance where I was seriously afraid that Senator Byrd might have had a stroke standing up there when talking. He would pause for long periods of time and then just look around with this expression that seemed to say, "Toto, we're not in Kansas anymore." He also gets this look on his face (at least two or three times whenever he's speaking) as if he has just discovered a conspiracy amongst his peers. He just glares and stares as if he's thinking, "Ah-ha! Gotcha!"

Below is a clip that goes for approximately four painful minutes. It is of Senator Methuselah Byrd giving Ted Kennedy's eulogy. Wait. What? Ted Kennedy's not dead? Are you sure? Because the way this guy was going on and on, you'd have thought that he was currently among the dearly departed. Perhaps it was all of the weeping that had me wondering about Senator Kennedy's current mortality status. Yes, "the weeping". The weeping combined with the cries of "Ted! Ted!" also had me thinking maybe Ted had taken a turn for the worse, perhaps when I wasn't paying attention. But no, not so much. It's after calling out to Ted that he calls out to Erma. Who? Erma. You know. His deceased wife. It's toward the end that you get a sense of how difficult it is for Senator Byrd to act in the capacity of which is expected of a US Senator. (That is, in case you hadn't caught on to that somewhere after "Ted!" and somewhere before "Erma".) That's when he leans to his nervous aide and whispers, "Do I do this part now?" :::sigh::::

Look, I'm not bagging on the guy just because he's old. Everyone gets old. Everyone loses a step or two. It's how it works. (I think it's done that way so that death doesn't come as a total shock to us. Otherwise, if we were always all healthy and fine all the time and then one day we wake up dead, we'd be pretty pissed about it. The way it works now, though? When we wake up dead we're probably inclined to think, "Well, I guess I had a pretty good run. Could have been worse.") But continuing to serve as a US Senator is NOT how it works.

Come on, West Virginia people! Use your votes for something productive. Do you really think that everything that is supposed to be getting accomplished is even coming close be being accomplished when there are people like the Senator that YOU continue to elect time and time again, still serving in what is clearly a very limited capacity (at best)? When was the last time he did anything very Senator-y-ish? I don't know either. But it's a waste of a Senate seat if you're asking me.

Sphere: Related Content