Make The Best Of Those Three Hours

Look, it's bound to happen. One night, you're going to be feeling particularly amorous and your partner will not and you're going to get turned down. The reasons for such a turn down don't really matter because you don't care WHY you're not getting any sex and there isn't going to be a reason that will make it OK that you're not getting any sex. That's just how it is. (Yes, it sucks.) But even though the reasons why you're "going it alone" one night will not matter, how you handle it (pun not intended) will matter. These are words of wisdom that had clearly not been heard over there in Kitsap County, WA.

On Tuesday, a 28-year old woman was arrested for stealing her husband's wallet and for assaulting the deputy who was booking her into jail. (Assaulting another individual is never a good idea, but assaulting a police officer is a really bad idea.) Here's what set the little princess off: According to the woman, her husband had told her "they had three hours to quit smoking, drinking, swearing and engaging in some sex acts because they were going to be good Christians now." (I'm curious about the "three hour" time frame he imposed there. It is like in Cinderella where when the clock strikes midnight something turns into a pumpkin? Or like a reverse Midas touch when everything you touch turns into something not gold? I don't get it. But even though I don't get it, I'll tell you what...I sure as hell would have made the best of those three hours, that's for freaking sure. I would have had three hours of smoking, drunken, obscenity laced, sex engaging, that much I would get!)

Well, wouldn't you know it? After the three hours had lapsed, the woman woke him up for the newly forbidden sex acts and was refused. Hilarity then ensued. She then became disappointed and quite angry. That's when the yelling, the crying and door slamming started and the neighbors called the cops. (Just a tip: Yelling, crying and door slamming? Highly ineffective means of getting someone "in the mood". Just so you know. Continue.) According to The Kitsap Sun, "The woman denied any assault had taken place, and repeatedly, without sparing a vulgar euphemism, told the deputies about how unsatisfied she was with her sex life — some of the time carrying around a half-gallon of whiskey while doing so." Now THAT is some fine, fine journalism right there! "Without sparing a vulgar euphemism." That is just excellent. And the toting of the half gallon whiskey jug? Classic. But then it starts to get weird.

As you could probably guess, the woman got into an argument with one of the deputies. And, when you're having an argument with a law enforcement officer, you will do what comes natural in that situation. That's why the woman picked up the family's 20-pound dog and threw it at the deputy. Fortunately, the deputy must have had some sort of airborne-canine-projectile-as-a-weapon training, as he caught the the flying animal the woman hurled at him. (Side note: It's a DOG! You don't THROW your DOG EVER! Let alone at a deputy! And 20 pounds? Good Lord, that woman is freakishly strong.) Now, I'm not exactly an overly religious person, but I don't think that dog hucking is the act of someone who is supposed to be a "good Christian now". No, I don't think that's in the guidelines.

Somehow, the deputies were able to convince the couple that they should separate for the night. I don't know why there needed to be any "convincing". You'd think that would be the logical way for this thing to conclude. Regardless, she ended up leaving. But she felt the need to come back and take her husband's wallet, his military ID and his keys. Of course she did. That was a half gallon of whiskey she was hanging onto earlier.

So the woman was arrested for theft...eventually. She resisted arrest by producing what one of the deputies described as "blood curdling screams". Whilst en route to the jail, she allegedly questioned the manhood of the officer and, in a gesture of goodwill, asked God to forgive the deputy because "he knows not what he does". Then she "donkey kicked" the officer in the shin (of course she did) while he was walking her from the patrol car into the jail.

He might not "know what he does", but at least he knew enough to lock her ass up. And to charge her with second degree theft and third degree assault. That's good enough for me.

Sphere: Related Content

Third Time's Alarming

What's that saying? First time, shame on you; second time, shame on me? It's something like that. So if that covers the first and the second time, what do you do the third time? Well, if you're Stephanie Ragusa of Tampa, FL, you just repeat the first and second time again. So, how would that go? Oh, that's right....have sex with underage boy, get arrested; have sex with underage boy, get arrested; have sex with underage boy, get arrested. Oh, and please try and do all of this within a 6 week time frame. WTF?!

Ragusa, 29, was arrested for the third time within the past 6 weeks and charged with unlawful sexual activity with a minor. Would it surprise you to know that she was a middle school teacher in Tampa in January of 2007? Of course it wouldn't. Though it might surprise you to learn that's when she struck up a relationship with a 14 year old student that apparently carried on until March 13, 2008 when she was arrested and charged with having sex with a minor. (That kind of surprised me. Well, until I put it in perspective, that is. I mean, a 14-year old boy isn't really consistent with much. But if he was able to sleep with his teacher? That would speed up the ol' consistency development a little bit now, wouldn't it?)

In February of that same year, she struck up a relationship with another student. But she was trying to go for the more mature students and chose one that was 15-years old this time. And again, the consistency development sped right up in that lad as well and they went at it until she was arrested for the second time on April 15 and charged with (surprise!) having sex with a(nother) minor. (Why does the phrase "lather, rinse, repeat" keep popping into my head?)

Let's see, so between March 13th and April 15th would be 33 days. 33 days she was able to go without getting caught having sex with a minor. That must have been a fluke because on April 28, not even 2 weeks after the second arrest, she was arrested for a third time (as she was coming out of the boy's house at the same time the detective arrived to speak to the boy about the case. Awkward.). And, since consistency would be the theme of this twisted saga, she was charged with having sex with a minor. There might not be a fourth time, as she is in jail waiting a bail hearing. See, when you're already out on bail and then you do the same boneheaded thing again and, oh, yeah, again they tend to not want to let you out on bail anymore. So she's sitting in jail away from teenage boys and awaiting a bail hearing while her lawyers use the time "to prepare". (Prepare themselves or prepare her defense is what I'd like to know.)

Among some of the evidence that tends to point to her being guilty of really enjoying sex with teenage boys would be the cell phone video that one of the boy's friends took of Ragusa and the boy while they were kissing after they had emerged from a bedroom in the boy's house after having sex. Huh? I don't know that I'd be all that big on having one of my friends take a video of me with their cell phone as I'm making out with someone else. I mean, I know I'm not a teenage boy, but I think that's a little odd.

But I don't think it's as odd as the "love notes and gifts" one of the boys said that he had received from Ragusa as well as "a last will and testament that was signed by Ragusa." OK, that's it. WTF? I can overlook the love notes and gifts. (I wonder what she gave him. Directions to her house? Condoms? These little details are always left out!) But I'm having a bit of difficulty noodling through the handwritten will that she's putting in the hands of a 15-year old boy. What was she planning on leaving him? Her orange jumpsuit?

Hopefully, this woman will be able to take a few cold showers while she's in jail awaiting a bail hearing that may or may not take place any time soon. Actually, a good long soak in a tub full of ice might do her some good also. But really, I don't see this ending well for ol' Stephanie there. (I mean, if we're going strictly by the pictures here, she doesn't exactly look upset or anything. Granted, she's probably not enjoying herself as much as when she was having all of the teenager sex, but she doesn't look distraught.) No, I'm seeing more of a 7 years in jail a la Mary Kay Letourneau ending for this one. (Granted, Mary Kay ended up marrying her child sex partner, but that was AFTER the 7 years in jail. See, it just doesn't seem worth it when you put it like that, does it?) Especially if things are starting to catch up to this chick, as it would appear that they are. I mean, she can go over a year having sex with not one, but TWO underage boys and not get caught and then BAM! (and BAM! BAM!) She gets busted three times within 6 weeks. If that's not karma catching up with you, I don't know what is.

Sphere: Related Content

Let Go Of Your Nutz! They're Safe!

Truck Nutz Update!

Remember a little while ago when Senator Carey Baker of Florida was trying to get a little provision tucked away inside of a highway safety bill that would have made it illegal to attach a replica of a sac of bull testicles to the rear bumper of cars? That's right, the Senator with too much time on his hands! Good, you remember. Well, turns out that there was quite the heated debate over there between the Florida lawmakers over this particular item within the bill. And those who see nothing wrong with having your bumper sport an uncanny likeness of male genitalia were the ones who prevailed!

Senator Jim King had voice the most opposition to the banning of the "Truck Nutz". That's probably because he's sporting a set on his vehicle. Well, he was. Until his wife made him remove them because she thought that they were "embarrassing". (I can see where he was coming from. Seems as if he'd already lost one set of Nutz, he didn't want to lose two.)

I didn't hear what it was that made Sen. Baker decide to give up his quest to make the roads of Florida fake-testicle-ornamentation-free. All he said was "there was no outlawing of repugnant dangling particples on trucks in SB 1992." He also added, "I've given up. And I have no intention of trying again." And that makes it sound like everyone's Nutz are safe for a while.

And since Senator King and several others felt rather strongly about being able to display these like-like testicles from their vehicle (because that's what America is all about!), I have a question. Would they have felt so strongly about allowing this practice to continue if, instead of hanging a replica of male genitalia from the bumpers of cars, people were hanging a replica of female genitalia from the bumpers of cars? Chew on that Think about that for a while.

Sphere: Related Content

360 Billion Buck Chuck

It's not so much the stupidity of some people that amazes me. It's more the willingness or the ability of the stupid people to believe (or convince themselves) that they are so much smarter than others. Either that or other people are even dumber than they are. Whatever it is, it's amazing. But at least it makes for stories that are hil-arious. (Hey, if stupid can't hurt (because I think that being stupid should be painful. If it was, perhaps people might try a bit harder not to be morons.), it should at least be funny.)

Take one Charles Ray Fuller of Crowley, Texas. I'll start off by saying that at least the guy has ambition. He has a goal. He seems to know what he wants. It's just his methods of trying to accomplish those things is a bit, um, ridiculous? Misguided? Stupid? Stupid. Let's go with stupid. (I usually try to refrain from words like "stupid", but by the time you're done reading this, you're probably going to wonder why I didn't just go with F-ing idiot.)

Now, Mr. Fuller was a 21-year old with a dream. A dream of one day starting a record business. That day was yesterday. Yesterday was also the day that Mr. Fuller showed exactly what he is truly capable of doing with his life and with his dreams. That is when he tried to cash a $360 billion dollar check. Of his girlfriend's mother. That he forged. That is correct.

The article from the AP says that the "tellers at the Fort Worth bank were immediately suspicious". (Oh, do you think? Why? Because they were conscious?!) It also says, "Perhaps the 10 zeros on a personal check tipped them off." It was a personal check. On top of every thing else that is asinine about this plan, it was a personal check. I can see it now, "Yes, I'd like to cash this check with the "Caribou of Western Yosemite In The Winter" check design, please. That'll be 360 billion dollars please. Small bills." Good Lord.

When asked about the check, Einstein told the employee's that his girlfriend's mother gave him the check to start his record business. (A generous woman, that "girlfriend's mother". Very generous, indeed.) I know you'll be surprised to learn that when they called the woman, she told them she didn't give him permission to take NOR to cash the check. (I'm also thinking she might have mentioned that she didn't HAVE 360 billion dollars in the Caribou account either. Again, so many signs this wouldn't turn out well for ol' Chuck there.)

So, of course he was arrested and charged with forgery. But remember, ol' Chuck, well, that boy's a dreamer. He can't stop at just one charge. No, he felt the need to make sure that he did things right. So he was also charged with unlawfully carrying a weapon (a .25 caliber handgun along with ammo) and he was charged with possessing less than 2 ounces of marijuana. Because of course, every record business owner walks around town (oh, like you think he had a car?! Right.) stoned out of their mind trying to cash forged checks for billions of dollars and packing some heat. Everyone of them. Yep, that's right. They're all like that. Sure they are.

See? Stupid isn't sounding so bad right about now, is it? Yeah, this guy got off easy with "stupid". He should try that as his defense. In this case, it could actually work.

Sphere: Related Content

One Small Step For Dog-Kind

Can you believe that it's already been an entire month since Joy Douglas of Boulder, CO, was busted for dyeing her poodle Cici pink? Joy thought that if she took her poodle and dyed her in beet juice and Kool-Aid that it would raise breast cancer awareness. I don't know if that ever happened. It raised dog-dyeing awareness, but I'm not so sure about the breast cancer part. It also raised the awareness of Humane Society officials. Those officials, who apparently wield a power that I was unaware was able to be possessed by those in the Humane Society, ticketed Joy for violating a city code that forbids people from dyeing animals. That rule was deemed to be necessary in Boulder as a way to prevent people from dyeing creatures such as rabbits or chicks during the Easter season (a very popular time of year for animal dyeing, don't you know?).

So what ever happened in the saga of Joy, Cici and the strangely powerful Humane Society Officials of Boulder, you ask? Well, according to the fine folks over there at The Denver Channel, just today, Joy struck a deal with attorneys that will dismiss the ticket. Of course there are a few provisions attached to that deal. Well, they call them "provisions". I call them "stuff you shouldn't be doing in the first place".

This ticket could have cost Joy $1,000 if it was found that she was guilty of violating the anti-dog-dyeing code. Considering her poodle was bright pink at the time, I think that would have been hard to argue on Joy's part. So, the deal is that if she can somehow refrain from dyeing another dog in the next six months (Hang in there, Joy! You can do it!) then the whole thing will be dropped. But if word gets around again that Joy is up to her ol' dog dipping tricks again, then the original charges will be reinstated. Seems fair. Overall, the whole thing seems lame. But I can live with this.

So Joy keeps her dog and her $1,000, the Humane Society keeps it's unusual power to enforce the many, many aspects of protecting animals from looking like carnival treats and Cici gets to regain and (hopefully) keep her doggie dignity. Hopefully, Joy will be able to not use her Kool-Aid and beet juice for the purposes of evil in the future. And just knowing that, in the future, the dog will be dog colored and won't be wearing any clothes, well, that makes me feel as if my pleas to keep animals looking like animals have finally been heard. Now, if I can just figure out how to get Mondex out of that wetsuit.

Sphere: Related Content

The Misfortune of Being Lesbian In English

I have seen the word "lesbian" in the written media more in the last two days than I probably have in the last two years. And all because of the guy from the island of Lesbos who wants the term "lesbian" to ONLY refer to those from the island and not those from the land of homosexual women. The fact that it's a dude who is all up in arms about this is a bit odd. Maybe he got confused when he learned that "lesbians" (not islanders) like other women and, since he likes other women, maybe he felt that HE should be a lesbian. But, alas, because of our strict rules and regulations (they're right there in the handbook that you're given after the recruitment process is complete and we've received our toaster) he couldn't be a lesbian because of his gender status (and his penis). But with this whole Lesbos island angle (Isn't that where Wonder Woman lived with Debra Winger? Lesbos Island?), he thinks he's found a loophole. (And I'm sure he's found something. I don't know what it is, but it's something all right.)

The dude in reference is Dimitris Lambrou, a Greek man with a flair for sparking international debate over that which is inane. Mr. Lambrou is one of the 'plaintiffs' who are suing the Greek Gay and Lesbian Union (known by the inexplicable acronym of OLKE) in order to get them to stop using the term 'lesbian' to refer to homosexual women, a ridiculous quest for so many reasons, the most glaring of which is it's asinine. Another of which is how he would plan to have this enforced. (My personal response to such a direction would be, "Make me.") I'm having difficulty imagining an international moratorium on the utterance of the term "lesbian" if there are no Greek islanders around. And maybe I just can't imagine it because there's not a chance in hell it's going to happen, so I figure, why waste my time? Regardless, the lawsuit continues.

In many reports in the media, it is referenced that Mr. Lambrou has written a "text" entitled "The Misfortune of Being Lesbian" and "published it on his website". The majority of the media reports simply repeat that phrase and do not provide the name of the website, nor do they provide the content of the text (with the ridiculous title). But, after a long day of irrigating the pipes of the Internet, I came across both, the website and the entire text. I also came across both of them in Greek. I never came across either of them in English.

Fortunately, there are a whole lot of pipes and tubes and things that make up the Internet. And amongst those tubes I found Google Translate. Google Translate, while unable to completely decipher the entire text into something comprehensible and readable for those of us operating in English, it did a pretty darn good job overall. I'd give it a "B". (Actually, because it also does translations of things in English into other languages and now I can swear in Greek, I'm giving it a B+. Nice job, Google boys.)

So, here we have the entire "The Misfortune of Being Lesbian" in English straight from Mr. Lambrou's website.

We decided to recognize as I, Lesbians and ladies Maria D. Ρ Rhodes and Kokkoni Ant. Kouvalaki, a global phenomenon, which we think is a symptom of an era, where that which is historically true and general has been replaced by that which is subjective, arbitrary and selfish. I would say for now, that the phenomenon behind an unprovoked aggression by the racism of some certain strange individuals against those that are not characterized by the corresponding peculiarities.

The ownership and usurpation of other property originating from a birthplace home land, which have nothing whatsoever to do with this land, are themselves acts of extreme arbitrariness. When the usurpers and fraudulents simply not only joint property but also attempt to remove the property from the same beneficiaries, then the arbitrariness becomes totalitarian despotism and usurpation becomes forcible removal, theft and possession of the identity of the other. Such behaviour would describe as "reasonable" but typical clinical symptoms would describe a disability. Let us look with a few phrases this phenomenon more precisely

The words Lesbios, Lesbia, Lesbio and Lesbiakos, Lesbiaki, Lesbiako for countless centuries exclusively meant something, which existed for generations and generations of people diachronically their creations, historical, artistic, spiritual, material and everything else mentioned which concerns culture and history island of Lesbos meant quite simply the identifying element of individual and collective consciousness of the common entity and identity of Lesbians. In recent years however, the meanings of these words have almost been lost, almost exclusively and replaced with meanings that have no connection whatsoever with the island.

But the thing has not stopped here. For the characterization of the inhabitants of the island instead of ancient words Lesbians - one, lesbian introduced deliberately and fraudulently used and other "words" arbitrarily constructed and non-existent in all the dictionaries of Ancient and Modern Greek Language. "Lesbian". These are from scratch the zero recently alleged "words" Lesbianos, -, - and Lesbiotis - ISSA - economic (internationally "Lesbonian", "Lesbiot"), to characterize the born, resident and originating from Lesbos

Maybe, if one is not Lesbian, one may not realize the mental and moral rape in existential depth felt by residents and originating from this historic island and this background and the deep existential feeling a Lesbian or a Lesvios in-depth existential involved in the brutal linguistic interception and removal of geographical location of Lesbos Island. It is this mental rape, this moral failure and/or damage, which brutally offends the right to humane identity of every human being, the clients wanted me to express myself through our lawyer, lodging an application for interim measures, which brought the Court of Athens on 10 June 2008, the day Tuesday, former School Building 5 Evelpidon at 9 a.m.

According to the online version of the Oxford Dictionary, the first edition of The Abridged Dictionary of 1911 the word Lesvia (Lesbian) "referred only on the island." The concept of gay women was added much later. The Oxford Dictionary in 1999 on the same website says: "Many words have new meaning or acquired new concepts. For example, the word" sex "in 1911 meant only "Being a man, woman together". "Gay meant ‘full of or disposed to or indicating mirth; light-hearted, sportive’, while "Lesbian" meant simply "from Lesbos" (a Greek island.)

THE TEXT OF THE APPLICATION

interim relief

IN COURT THE "TORCH" WHO CIRCULATES

OK, from what I can tell, this doesn't say a whole hell of a lot. If it does anything, it takes up a hell of a lot of space to say "Why do they have to call themselves "lesbians"? That's OUR word!" And it does so in such a way that you can almost hear the guy whining and stomping his foot as he says it.

Now, in previous interviews, Mr. Lambrou has said that he has nothing against the female loving lesbians. While that sounds pretty good, it doesn't sound good when he continues on about how if the female loving lesbians keep calling themselves lesbians it amounts to a "moral rape" of the chicks from the island! See, now, this is where Mr. Lambrou and I are different (in addition to the fact that I'm not an islander) because when I don't have anything against someone else, I certainly don't go around accusing them of "morally raping" inhabitants of a Greek island! So I'm kind of thinking he might have a little, just a little, something against lesbians.

And why haven't we heard from the two women that are named in this thing? You'd think that those who have been "morally raped" (by what amounts to nothing more than a moniker/metaphor used by women lovin' up other women across the world) would have spoken up by now. If they're ashamed by their "morally raped" status (because after we're done with our moral raping and pillaging of their island, we brand the initials M.R. on their foreheads and walk them down Main Street during an impromptu Pride Parade.) they could give interviews with that little black rectangle over their eyes. Or a bag over their heads. Actually, they have their heads so far up their arse, I highly doubt anyone will be able to recognize them. Nor would we be able to hear their side of the story (seems like it would be quite muffled from way up there).

Never mind. Forget the interviews. Go back to Paradise Island or wherever the hell it is and just take a little bit more time to get over yourselves. Soon as you're done, come on back. You'll still be welcome. And you'll still be Lesbians. And we'll still be here. And we'll still be lesbians. And everything will be just fine. Kind of like it is right now.

Sphere: Related Content

Fat's Incredible

It's become very clear to me that we need to have that guy in the Philippines who choreographs all of the inmates to upbeat tunes from the 70s and 80s into funky dance numbers and put him to work in US prisons. Something. Because some prisoners have way too much time on their hands.

Case in point would be Broderick Laswell, shown below at his starting weight of 413 pounds in his original mug shot when he was booked into the jail on charges of capital murder back in September, 2007. Progressive photos (courtesy of the good folks over there at The Smoking Gun) of Laswell's weight loss will continue throughout the post. :

According to the fine folks over there at The Morning News - the Local News For Northwest Arkansas, Laswell, an inmate at the Benton County Jail for the past eight months, is claiming that he is (get this) "wasting away". That's correct. The guy has lost 105 pounds in 8 months and he's not happy about it. That's why he has filed a prisoner civil rights lawsuit in Federal court and claimed that the jail does not provide the inmates with enough food. (Did I mention that he started out at 413 pounds! That's a BFP right there. A Big Fat Prisoner).

I don't think it's all that accurate to claim that you're "wasting away" when you still weigh 308 pounds. That's like two people rolled into one in a lot of cases. But look at the guy. I'm not sure that the jail or most other places COULD provide HIM with "enough food" if his goal is to sustain 413 pounds! I guess we could try the zoo (maybe).

According to the BFP, "On several occasions I have started to do some exercising and my vision went blurry and I felt like I was going to pass out. About an hour after each meal my stomach starts to hurt and growl. I feel hungry again." (OK, what kind of exercising? Going from the bunk to the sink in that cell of yours there? How much room could he possibly have in there to exercise? Especially if he's in there with himself! I'm thinking that his vision went blurry and he felt like passing out, not because of the "small portions of food" but because his body wasn't used to exercising EVER.)

His ridiculous claim continues with, "If we are in a small pod all day do next to nothing for physical exercise we should not lose weight. The only reason we lost weight in here is because we are literally are being starved to death." I can see why you might feel like that, but starvation isn't really the case here. See, when you are used to eating enough food to continually increase the human body to the point of 413 pounds, anything less than the bushels of food you were previously consuming is going to seem like bread and water. And when you weigh 413 pounds, you ARE going to lose weight when you're eating a regular amount of calories because your body shouldn't weigh 413 pounds in the first place! You're not supposed to BE 413 pounds. Ever! Did any of those items factor into your decision to file your ridiculous FML? (Feed Me Lawsuit.) Of course they didn't.

"There are noticeable differences on the size of biscuits and cakes, as well as the sides." What does "noticeable differences" mean to this guy? The difference between what he eats and what regular people who don't weigh 413 pounds eat? If that's the case, I'd have to agree that there would be a "noticeable difference" between the two. Laswell also wants hot food to be served to the inmates. Apparently the jail only serves cold food. According to Laswell's claim, "This jail was built with a state of the art kitchen which was priced at a little over 1 million dollars. The tax payers paid for this and it is not being used." Nice of him to be thinking of the taxpayers who are STILL paying for his food, hot or cold, kitchen or not! (I, personally, as someone who is NOT a prisoner, see NO problem with that policy AT ALL. Nice job, Benton County Jail. Nice job.)

Here's one of my favorite excerpts from his claim: "On average, I have lost about one half pound a day. This is not healthy at all." Dude, what's "not healthy at all" is weighing 413 pounds!! Believe me, losing "one half pound a day" is probably the healthiest thing you've done in a long, long time.

My other favorite part is this: "If an inmate is staying here over a long period of time his or her health decreases and they turn into skin and bones." He phrases this like it's the inmate's choice to stay there. Like he had a whole slew of hotels to choose from and he chose the jail as the place to spend "a long period of time". But "they turn into skin and bones"? THAT is classic. Yes, there are skeletal inmates sitting in corners with cobwebs covering them (just like in the old Scooby Doo cartoons). I still think he doesn't need to worry. It would appear that he has a ways to go before he gets to the "skin and bones" stage.

I know that Mr. Laswell is being detained on a capital murder charge. Should I assume he ate his victim, as he doesn't seem to be capable of doing much else? Well, he knows how to complain about how he's a little uncomfortable in jail, but that's not really something that could kill someone else.

I think there's really only one appropriate response for the judge to say to this guy after he reviews his FML. "So, Mr. Laswell, you want a little cheese with that whine?

Sphere: Related Content

Snorkel Snouted Silliness

OK, OK! I can't take it anymore. People have NO idea what dogs are for! It doesn't seem like it's that difficult of a concept to grasp, but apparently it IS! People seem to think that dogs are for dying different colors, dressing up in funny clothing, dressing up in ANY clothing, assigning them civic duties, putting them of surfboards, putting little blue plastic shoes on them if they're in the German police force, and the list goes on.

But here. Here is what sent me right on over the proverbial canine edge. Meet Mondex, or as I prefer to call him, Scuba Dog:

Sweet mother of God and all that is wrong in the world WTF is that?! It appears to be a DOG dressed as if it were doing to go SCUBA diving. Either that or he's getting ready for a stint in a WWI fighter plane with the Red Baron. (The REAL Red Baron! Not Snoopy! Why? Because Snoopy is a DOG! Dogs don't fly planes!) And I'm guessing he didn't dress himself in that outfit. So what the hell happened?

Mondex was entered in a dog fashion show that took place in a mall that was in Manila. (It's worse than I thought! Now there are organized events in foreign lands promoting dogs with garments!) I'm sure it will not shock you to learn that Mondex won.


OK, I will admit that the picture above makes me laugh. But that doesn't matter. It's still wrong! Clearly, Mondex's owner has way too much time on his or her hands to be able to put together an ensemble such as this. Complete with dive meter gage, air tank, snorkel, flippers, mask, wetsuit, they pretty much covered it all. Unbelievable. Of course, Mondex was never actually IN any water whilst wearing this get-up. Now THAT might have made this all somewhat acceptable. Not entirely, but I'll admit I'd be curious as to how it might turn out.

I guess Mondex didn't have a lot of competition. The competitor who even had a small chance of beating Mondex was Tucker, seen here in his Wild, Wild West Doggie outfit.

He looks a little bit too "human" for me. He also has that look in his eyes that just sort of yelps out. "Please help me. They're making me wear ass-less chaps."

Sphere: Related Content

Google Hot Trends for April 30, 2008

I was going to list a few of the Hot Trends for the last day of April. But as I was looking at the list of the Top 100 Hot Trends for the day I realized a couple of things. One, Google really should consider doing a Hot Trends Monthly version. Just to see how much of the daily randomness would repeat itself throughout the month. Two, they need to find a way to combine all of the Hot Trends for a day that are the same but show up as separate items because of the spelling. Like with Def Leppard yesterday. There was "def leopard" and "deaf leopard". Both wrong, but both the same fabulous group of guys from the 80s.

But that brings me to the Hot Trends for April 30. There are many, many repetitive entries that should be combined into one. Those would be:

• Paula Abdul. Paula had a bit of a brain cramp on American Idol Tuesday night, when she was giving her opinion. (I use that term loosely. Can this woman ever finish a complete sentence AND have it make sense? You know when you put your iPod on "Shuffle" and it just randomly picks out songs? When Paula speaks, it's like someone put her vocabulary on "Shuffle". You never know what's coming out nor in what order.) Paula started off reviewing Jason's first song and then she continued on to review the second song that he sang. The problem? He only sang one song. Oooh. Awkward. And people wanted to know about that by phrasing it many different ways. 7 of the Top 100 were Paula Abdul.
  
  
• American Idol. This could probably be grouped with the Paula Abdul one, only it seems as if the searches for Idol were interested in who got booted off, so it's going to be separate. 8 of the Top 100 were American Idol related.
  
  
• Any of the Top Five American Idol finalists or the two Musical Guest Artists (Neil Diamond and Natasha Bedingfield tonight) could be grouped into a category in the Top 100 Hot Trends. 8 of the Top 100 Trends would be in this category.

Those three alone total 23 spots on the list. That makes the Top 100 Hot Trends more like the Top 80 Hot Trends. But it's not like the American Idol related trends are the only ones that repeat.

• There were 5 related to Baskin-Robbins Ice Cream (single scoops of ice cream were 31 cents tonight. The line went around the freaking building at the one over here.).
  
  
• There were 5 related to Sean Avery (New York Rangers hockey forward who was initially thought to have had a heart attack, but that report was later changed to a "ruptured spleen". Those two seem pretty different to me, but what do I know? I don't even like hockey.)
  
  
• There were 5 related to the Federal Reserve board (There was talk that the Fed was going to lower interest rates again. They did not disappoint and lowered the interest rate by a quarter of a point so that prime is now at 2 percent. Again, how does this help? Anything?)

By combining the above three categories into just 3 items, we are now at the Top 68 Hot Trends. This is starting to seem a little useless. And that's disappointing because I love The Goog. I hate to bag on them, but come on. 68 is not 100. Even Paula Abdul could agree with that.

Sphere: Related Content

oKAy?

You think you know a car company. Until you see one of their TV ads in another country. That's when you say, "WTF?" Or, in this case, "WTFF?" (WTF Ford?)

The very smart folks over there at neatorama.com had this ad for the Ford KA. The KA is a CAR that is manufactured in Spain and Brazil. According to Ford's website, the KA is "A small car with big ideas. Fun-loving and spontaneous, the Ford Ka lives for the moment. With its unmistakable styling, superb driving dynamics and a catch-me-if-you-can attitude, this is a small car with big ideas. Whatever you’re into, the Ford Ka wants to be part of the action. " That description makes it sound as if the KA has posted it's profile on match.com and is hoping to meet a nice Hyundai or something.

The profile description continues,"With a passion for life and a mischievous nature, you’ll find Ford Ka where the action is. From the stylish and affordable Ka Studio to the well-appointed Ka Zetec Climate or the racy Sportka SE, the Ford Ka oozes attitude." It could just be me, but I don't think that any product should "ooze" anything. Not even if you're selling ooze itself. No oozing.

The KA interior is described as liking long walks on the beach, candlelit dinners.....and "Because life’s about seizing every opportunity – and creating some fantastic memories, flexible 50/50 split rear seats and a handy glovebox mean you can bring whatever you need for your latest adventure. And with a comfortable and stylish interior you’ll never fail to make a statement." Huh. Creating some "fantastic memories" within the interior of a car that's oozing. Subtle, Ford. Very subtle. But then things start to get weird.

Below is the TV ad for the KA. Um, I don't quite get it.

I suppose that the point is that it has a lot of room and can hold a lot of people. I guess? But couldn't they have made that point without that weird monster creature? It looks like the Grimace (from McDonald's) on steroids. And he's eating everyone in your car. Presumably because your car is oozing people? I don't know but it's odd. (The commercial, that is. I have no clue about the KA. And I question whether or not Ford does either.)

Sphere: Related Content