Stop Snogging The Students

Now granted, all of those female teachers (in Florida, mostly) who have been busted for having sex with their male students (and not just for extra credit, either!) were totally in the wrong. I, for one, can think of NO reason for an adult woman to sleep with a teenage boy. I mean, have you been around many "men" lately? For the most part, they all ACT like teenage boys. If that's what you're into, no need to go about it literally and nail that paperboy in the third row, ladies. Just go to a bar and pick up some dude. Trust me, it'll be the same! The only difference (if you're lucky) is that you won't have to drive him home when you're done.

But I am from a different school of thought than those that make up the NASUWT over there in the slowly, but surely, getting wackier by the minute UK. NASUWT, which forms an acronym that is difficult, if not impossible to pronounce as a word, (which is the main point of the acronym. It's not just to shorten, it's to inject a little bit of fun into the doldrums of everyday speech.) stands for National Union of Schoolmasters/Union of Women Teachers. I suppose they didn't go with just the National Union of Teachers/Schoolmasters because then the acronym would be NUTS. And while not exactly the most complimentary acronym for the group, believe me, it's pretty accurate.

According to some folks who I am assuming are British and over there across the pond at News of the World, "The NASUWT says it is UNFAIR to treat teachers who have affairs with students who are over 16 as sex offenders, insisting all they are guilty of is an “error of professional judgement." (That rumbling sound you hear is all of those female teachers in Florida rushing to pack up their belongings and hop on the next flight to the UK.) Wait. WHAT?

Oh, it gets better. "In 2001 it became illegal for teachers to have any intimate or sexual affair with any pupil in their school under 18." In two thousand freaking ONE that became illegal? I wasn't already illegal BEFORE then? You know, considering how snotty a lot of Brits are, they sure don't act all that uptight about stuff if this is any indication.

The secretary of the NASUWT, a one Chris Keates, told the Tonight show (not the one with Leno. The one in the UK with that British dude that hosts it.) that the rules and laws that forbid teachers from doing their students (though, over in the UK, because they have to have some weird ass name for everything, they call it 'snogging'. Pretty.) aren't "fair" because a student could be 18. Now, the student could also NOT be 18, but she says that since they COULD, then they can consent and it shouldn't be a problem. She elaborates on this idiocy by saying, "It does seem a step too far — when there has been a consensual relationship — to put that person on a sex offenders register when, in fact, they could have a perfectly legitimate relationship with an 18- year-old still enrolled at another school."

When there has been a consensual relationship? You show me a 14, 15, or 16 year old boy who is NOT going to consent to having sex with his female teacher. One. Just one! Look, let me save you time. You won't find one! Not one! Do you really think that a boy who is in junior high or high school is going to turn down ANY sex? The only reason they're not running around trying to hump stranger's legs is because it's not socially acceptable. They'd be 'snogging' themselves if they could. But they are certainly not turning down ANY sex especially that with their teacher. It will always be consensual. Regardless as to what they say YEARS later.

Take a one Dean Dainty for instance. (Dude. Name change.) He was a-snoggin' his drama teacher (well, that's some drama for ya right there), a one Nicola Prentice when he was 16. He even says that the relationship, which took place back in 2005, was consensual. He does not agree with the position of the NASUWT because he says that sex with the drama teacher "...took a piece of my life away really." Well, of course it did! It took away that part of your life where you weren't having any sex and replaced it with that part of your life where you were having all the sex. There's a pic of Dean below. Is it just me, or does he look like he's wearing a prison jumpsuit there? (Perhaps she also took that piece of his life that contained fashion sense as well.)

Dainty Dean also said, "It took me a long time to get myself back together" after the relationship (which started when Prentice gave him a cell phone (with only one number on it - hers!) for doing well in class. She then started sending him sexually explicit text messages. A cell phone for doing well in drama class?? What does that consist of? Showing up every day?). Again, of course it took you a while to get yourself back together. You had to get used to not having all of the sex. It's a tough adjustment to go from the sex to not the sex. Verrrrrry tough. Believe me. Oh, it gets easier, but not that easy.

And what became of Ms. Prentice. Well, she avoided jail time. The judge in the case felt that she had been punished enough, having lost her teaching position and all. The judge came to this decision after reading a note from Mr. Dainty's mother which expressed that same sentiment. Oh, man. Showing up in court with a note from Mom? That can't be good can it? It's definitely ironic or cliche or something like that. Perhaps ironic. Yeah, there's definitely some irony in that somewhere.

Look, I can't think of any situation in which I think that it would be perfectly OK for a teacher to have sex with her student (or students, depending on how ambitious she is). And there is no way that you can say that it's perfectly OK because the student MIGHT be 18. There's a higher chance that they will NOT be 18. But 18 or not, the kid is going to enjoy the hell out of it. And I'm sure they'll recover. The fact that there is a teacher's union for women that is advocating in favor of relaxing the rules banning teacher-student sex is absurd. Talk about asking for trouble.

Seriously, Ms. Keates, what is wrong with you? Why would you be for advocating what amounts to giving the green light for teachers and their....students....to....be....snogg.....oh. Oh. I see. It's like that is it? Perhaps, in the future, you might want to considering using just a wee bit more discretion regarding situations that may or may not personally pertain to you. Or to you and any student who may or may not be under 18 that you are currently snogging. Just use some discretion. And for God's sake, get off of him!

Sphere: Related Content

Karma is Karma and Guilty is Guilty

If you've never believed in karma before, if you've never believed in "what goes around comes around" before, if you've never believed in fate before, now might be the time to, if not start believing, at least start giving those things a second thought. All of those take on a certain amount of credibility upon hearing that OJ Simpson (wrongly acquitted double murderer) has been found guilty of all charges against him which arose out of an incident in Las Vegas last year. (Hey, I don't care if the incident occurred in the Lollipop forest when he was surrounded by unicorns, guilty is guilty.)

I had figured that, with twelve charges and all, he would most likely be found guilty of something. But when his attorney gave his closing argument and said something to the effect of "My client might be stupid, but he's not guilty of these charges" that made me a little nervous. Because as anyone can plainly see, he is stupid. And sometimes, as you may or may not be aware, jurors and juries can be stupid sometimes as well. But not on Friday! Nope, on Friday calmer and saner heads prevailed and the jury found him guilty and off to jail he went! Oh, do I sound almost gleeful? I'm sorry, I should be ecstatic upon realizing that the sentencing for the various charges could have him spending the rest of his life in jail. (Do I hear the sounds of justice echoing throughout the land? I think I do!)

The deal was the OJ and five other guys (all of whom, with the exception of OJ, of all people, were convicted felons. What's that saying about lying down with thieves? Whatever it is, I'm pretty sure it's applicable here.) went barging into a hotel room in Vegas where two sports memorabilia dealers were staying, under the presumption that the two guys in the hotel room had OJs belongings (apparently, his belongings are considered "memorabilia". And according to CNN, said "Simpson memorabilia" consisted of "Simpson trinkets, signed Pete Rose baseballs and Joe Montana lithographs". What the hell is a "Simpson trinket"? Key chains? Bobbleheads? What? And Pete Rose baseballs? Pete Rose, the guy who has been banned for life from Major League Baseball due to his questionable behavior? There's a shocker.) They decided that the best way to retrieve said memorabilia would be to get some guns, go into the room, take the stuff and leave. And the problem with that plan is that a) it was thought up by felons, b) the felons thought it was a good idea, and c) it wasn't a good idea (whether you were a felon or not).

The thing that OJ didn't count on, besides not being as invincible as he had grown to believe that he was, is that dirt sells. "Celebrity" dirt sells really well. A photo of Ruben Studdard eating a Klondike bar? A pic of Mary-Kate Olsen just eating? And OJ Simpson? Apparently dirt that follows him around garners a bit more cash than that which follows Mary-Kate or Ruben around. A lot more. That would probably explain why one of the guys who went with OJ on the Sports Trinket Repo Spree had brought along a tape recorder and taped the conversations that went on. That would probably also explain why that same guy ended up selling that tape to the media for $210,000. How convenient. (For that guy, that is. For OJ, eh, not so much.) And how stupid. How incredibly stupid.

Because people who are NOT that stupid? If they believe that someone has stolen their things, do you know what THEY do? That's right, they go to the police and they let them take care of it. (That's what they do. It's right there in their name - the police.) But not OJ, because he's smarter than that. But he's not smarter than the ex-felon who walked away from this thing $210,000 richer and without any charges against him. Go figure. Well, actually, I CAN figure. I can also figure why four of the other five felons didn't have any charges pressed either. It's because they agreed to testify against OJ. (How convenient for them.)

And that leads us to where we are right now. Incidentally, the day that he was found guilty was the very same day, October 2, 13 years ago that he was acquitted of the near beheadings of two people. Now that's some pretty good karma-ing right there. He was found guilty of three counts of various conspiracy, three counts of various burglary, two counts of various assault, two counts of various kidnapping and two counts of using force to do a dumbass thing and one count of keeping the partridge in the pear tree (just for the hell of it). There's video below of the verdicts being read and OJ being handed his ass on a plate (only literally, unfortunately).

So was 13 years too long for karma to work and for justice to set it? Considering that it could have happened right around, oh say, never? Nah, 13 years is long, but it's not too long for something like this. But now that he's going to be in jail for quite some time, what about his vow he made? You know, that vow to find and catch the real killer? He's pretty much combed his way through every golf course in Florida, to no avail. And since I never considered the golf course to be a viable option when considering hideouts for yet-to-be-identified double murderers, maybe that vow won't be broken after all. I suppose he could continue looking for the real killer(s) in jail. It's not like he doesn't have the time to put forth on the effort now.

I guess you can be found guilty of being stupid. And it's a good thing. Finally, the words "OJ Simpson" and "good thing" in almost the same sentence. Finally.

Sphere: Related Content

Got Pork?

OK, I do believe I've calmed my ass down enough to continue ranting about this TARP bill that is supposed to save us all from a financial implosion that was, by all accounts, was to have happened about a week ago if nothing was done. Well, here we are, a week later, with nothing having been done and that would include the financial implosion. Oh, sure, stocks are in the tank, credit is tight and everyone is panicking, but it's not so bad that those guys in the House can't take a couple of days off in observance of Rosh Hashanah, right? Sure. The "financial 9/11" can wait a day or two. Why not?

By the way, you know what a tarp is right? Yep, it's a big plastic sheet, the purpose of which is to use it to cover something up. Oh, the thing is still there, but you just can't see it because it's covered with the tarp. Methinks they could have chosen a different acronym for this thing.

OK, so the Senate passed the bill while the House was off Rosh Hashanah-ing. This is the bill that is supposed to set the guidelines for infusing about $700 billion dollars into the financial arena by buying up bad assets from banks that made loans that they had no business making in the first place. The bill was originally 2 pages. Then it was 137. It is now 451 pages long. Correct. 451 pages. And what those pages contain will do either one of two things. It will either a) shock you or b) really, really piss you off. Let's find out which one it is, shall we?

It's hard to say why the House couldn't pass the bill the first time around. No one was really giving any concrete reasoning for voting against it. One has to think, however, that the fact that the entire House is up for re-election in November has something to do with it. Anyway, this bill that the Senate cobbled together includes what they are calling "incentives" and "sweeteners". It includes what I'm calling "pork", "BS" and "bribery".

One minute, we're all freaking out that it's going to be $700 billion. The next minute, these Senators are adding things to it left and right, making the total cost even MORE. Hey, Senate! The reason we were freaking out over the $700 billion dollar price tag was not, I repeat, was NOT because we didn't think it was high enough! It was because that is a ridiculous amount of money! And how do YOU, the Senators, react to a $700 billion dollar price tag? YOU decide this is the perfect time to throw in your pet projects that you've wanted to get done for a long time so that they will HAVE to pass because, as you may have heard, the financial world is coming to an end. Good thing that doomsday was able to wait until you padded this bill full of your own personal agendas.

Now, I'll admit, there are a couple of things that they threw in the bill that I totally agree with. Some of them even have to do directly with the bill itself! But regardless as to whether or not the things that I agree with are a good idea or not, the point is that they have no business being attached to this bill. It's not about that! It's not about an opportunity for legislation that hasn't made it through to suddenly be shoved through by default! How am I and the rest of the public supposed to believe that you even understand the complexity of the financial mess when you're too busy crafting your own sections of the bill that have nothing, repeat, NOTHING to do with the economic crisis. How can you even justify that sort of behavior? Why are you not spending your time trying to figure out if the current plan for helping the distressed banks is going to work or not? Isn't that what you're supposed to be doing and not tending to your own personal projects?

I'll hit some of the finer additions of the now 451 page document that may or may not save our economic ass.

• The limit on the amount of deposits that would be FDIC insured was raised from $100,000 to $250,000. That is an excellent idea and should quell a lot of hyper anxiety. No problems with this AND it's directly related to the original purpose of the bill. Nice choice.
  
  
• They are providing an extension of protections for those millions of middle class families who find themselves getting screwed by the AMT (alternative minimum tax). While this is a good idea, they were supposed to have BEEN doing this for at LEAST the past two years, most likely longer. The fact that they're throwing it in now when it shouldn't even be an issue (because it should already be done) annoys me. Still shouldn't be there.
  
  
• They're including $3.3 billion for rural school aid over the next five years. Right. Because regular public schools, they don't need any aid. They're fine, right? It's the rural ones that need help. You jackasses. Nothing to do with the bill. Shouldn't even be in there.
  
  
• The bill provides $8 billion in tax relief for people in the Midwest, Louisiana and Texas who have been hit by natural disasters. No, you morons! Not the "natural" disasters! The "financial" disaster! We're talking about the financial disaster! And you go and throw this into the....ah, crap. Never mind. It doesn't belong in there.
  
  
• They also felt the need to extend being able to deduct state and local taxes in those states without income taxes (Florida, Texas, etc.). What does this have to do with the banking system? Oh, that's right. Nothing. Shouldn't be in there.
  
  
• They've added the extension of a tax break for homeowners who do not itemize their tax returns. How does someone own a home and not itemize their deductions? Hello? Mortgage interest? That's a HUGE deduction right there. How about instead of a tax break, you just tell them to itemize? How is that my problem? And what the hell is it doing in this bill?

Annoyed yet? Hung yourself? Knotting the rope at least? That wasn't even all of them! AND we're just getting to the good part! Welcome to Title V, otherwise known (by me) as Title WTF. You might want to don a helmet for this section, as you could easily find yourself beating your head upon the nearest solid surface.

• Provisions related to film and television productions. Allows up to $15 MILLION in deductions per film. It's supposed to (get this) "spur domestic production." Spur domestic production of the gazillion dollar film industry in this country!?!? Are you kidding me?!?! (This provision is actually two tax breaks and combined they are worth $478 million over the next ten years. To spur domestic production, mind you. Because if there's one thing we don't do enough of in this country, it's make movies.)
  
  
• My personal favorite: Exemption from excise tax for certain wooden arrows designed for use by children. Wait. Wait. I said WAIT!!! WHAT?! Yep. According to NPR, it's there to "help Rose City Archery Inc. in Oregon. It will save the company 39 cents per arrow." Is it the Civil War again? Do we NEED arrows in bulk?
  
  
• Income averaging for amounts received in connection with the Exxon Valdez litigation. The Exxon Valdez? That was in...1989? 19 years later and they're doing what? Never mind. I don't think my head can take it without exploding.
  


• Sec. 505. Certain farming business machinery and equipment treated as 5-year property. Oh, but only "certain" farming business machinery. Well, good, at least they were using their head here, because if they didn't specify, well, then it would just be wrong.
  
  
• Sec. 506. Modification of penalty on understatement of taxpayer’s liability by tax return preparer. So, if you're a weaselly tax preparer and you go low with what the taxpayer has to pay, you now pay...let me guess...less?
  

Seriously, at this point, if I continue, my head will literally explode. Besides the fact that it's asinine, it's insulting. What a bunch of self serving, self righteous, opportunistic weasels. You see disaster for the country as opportunity for yourselves. That's nice. Thanks for having my best interest in mind when you're voting on this bill.

Hey, Senate! Do you even know HOW the bill helps the banking industry? Do you even know IF the bill helps the banking industry? Do you?! I bet you don't! No, I KNOW you don't! That's because you're too worried about your damn arrow tax and your 2 decade old oil spill and your tractor tax! I want to know who was behind the wooden arrow provision and I want them...mmmm....either hung or shot. I don't know which. But whichever one it is, I want it done publicly. You know, town square, villagers with pitchforks and torches, the whole bit. I'm sure that this is going to sound like the musing of some old geezer, but they have a lot of nerve. A lot of freaking nerve. (There. The 'freaking' part makes it sound less geezer-ish.)

Oh, here we go. Oregon senators Ron Wyden and Gordon Smith are the geniuses behind the wooden arrow provision of this bill. Hand me my pitchfork.

Now, listen, all eight of you who read this, you know me. You know I'm not a political individual, but this isn't about politics. This is about a bunch of people who, during a time of what THEY deemed to be a "national crisis" are running around trying to get things that have nothing to do with the issue at hand done to appease their own self serving egos. It's as if the Senate is really the Reptile House at the zoo. I'm pretty sure that they all have forked tongues (which they can smell with) and they warm themselves by stretching out on a rock in the sun. Snakes. All of them.

Again, I am totally advocating voting for every single challenger for every single seat in the House come November. How bad could it be to have a bunch of new people in there? Worse than this? I cannot imagine that is possible, given this showing by these maroons. See, the thing about starting from scratch is that no one, NO ONE will have any immediate personal agendas. They can all just deal with the issues at hand FIRST and we'll see how that goes.

In the meantime, below are all of the additional tax relief that was included in the TARP bill and all of the other tax provisions and breaks that were included. If you are not seething with anger and the end of the list, then you read it wrong. Just remember, a week ago, this document was TWO pages and NONE of these things even existed. NOW, there are 451 pages, everything below is included and you, you my friend (who am I? John McCain?), you get to pay for them.

• Tax breaks for those impacted by natural disasters
  
• A mental health parity provision providing insurance for mental illness
  
• A Two-year extension of the research-and-development tax credit

TITLE III—EXTENSION OF BUSINESS TAX PROVISIONS

• Sec. 308. Increase in limit on cover over of rum excise tax to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
• Sec. 309. Extension of economic development credit for American Samoa.
• Sec. 310. Extension of mine rescue team training credit.
• Sec. 311. Extension of election to expense advanced mine safety equipment.
• Sec. 312 Deduction allowable with respect to income attributable to domestic production activities in Puerto Rico.
• Sec. 314. Indian employment credit.
• Sec. 315. Accelerated depreciation for business property on Indian reservations. (Casinos)
• Sec. 316. Railroad track maintenance.
• Sec. 317. Seven-year cost recovery period for motor sports racing track facility (This will save NASCAR track builders $109 million this year. Because it's very important to have tracks for a bunch of people turning left.)
• Sec. 318. Expensing of environmental remediation costs.
• Sec. 321. Enhanced deduction for qualified computer contributions.
• Sec. 322. Tax incentives for investment in the District of Columbia.
• Sec. 325. Extension and modification of duty suspension on wool products; wool research fund; wool duty refunds. (Sheep fur! SHEEP FUR! They're worried about SHEEP FUR! In other news, there is a wool research fund.)

Your tax dollars hard at work. All $700 billion plus of them.

Sphere: Related Content

Pork, Anyone?

Time flies like an arrow (and fruit flies like a banana). That's why you might not remember what all of the news was about exactly one week ago. That's also why I'm here to explain the unexplainable. (Here's a hint on how it's going to go: It might start with "WTF" and it might end with "they're all idiots". But I'm not giving anything else up. That's all you're getting for right now.)

Last week at this time, we were being told by those in Washington that the country is on the brink of financial doom. We were being told that our financial infrastructure, our stock market, our banking industry, all were on the verge of collapsing. And from that collapse we could expect a world wide Depression that would make the Great Depression look like a day at Disneyland without lines. Pleasant, eh? They had us all digging holes in our backyards to serve as hiding places for our cash. They had us scanning the Internet for recipes on how to boil your belt and what goes best with shoe leather, as we were clearly going to be starving as well.

They made it clear that they had to act NOW in order to avoid the certain disaster that we would face by them doing nothing. The initial idea was to give the Treasury Secretary a blank check for $700 billion dollars (a figure that came out of simply needing "a big number") and allow him to dole it out as he saw fit to financial institutions that had run themselves into the ground through a series of fraudulent actions. That document that would have allowed that was 2 pages long and gave Henry Paulson all of the authority to do whatever he wanted and gave Congress no authority or say so on what he did. How do you think those power mongering weasels over there reacted to that? Correct. With shrieks and shrills that could be likened to that of fornicating banshees.

What happened next was the House got together (as much as they could, which is to say, barely at all) and redrafted the 2 page document to include things like having some oversight and not giving the entire $700 billion all at once and things like that. Now that sounds fairly reasonable. Controlling, but reasonable. That "reason" increased the length of the document from 2 pages to approximately 137. I am not kidding. 137 pages of stuff that is mostly definitions of other stuff that needs to be voted on so that the country isn't ruined and you and I don't end up wearing a barrel. (Because really, barrels have never helped anything. You don't need to be poor and destitute AND ugly.)

OK, fine, so we're saved, right? No. Wait. What? No? Right. No. See, they voted on it, and they voted no. Then do you know what they did? After they wrote 135 additional pages of crap, after they told us we were going to self implode, after they made it sound as if there was NO time left, and after they voted down what had been presented to the public as our only hope, do you know what they did then? Correct. They took two days off for Rosh Hashanah. Wait. Wait. WTF?

Correct. Rosh Hashanah. I was a bit confused too, as I didn't realize that there was such a high number of Jewish members of the House that it warranted a couple of days off right in the middle of Armageddon. Fortunately for me, I happen to know someone who is extremely bright and quick (and really hot) who did a quick calculation/estimate for me and came up with approximately 12 members of the House would be Jewish based on averages. Twelve. I see. And they took the freaking day off? Are they unaware of what the concept of "working on a holiday" is about? They might want to sit down when they learn this: Some people actually DO work on holidays! Yes! Can you believe it! AND those people that DO sometimes work on holidays? They do so when they are NOT in the middle of, as one House member put it, "a financial 9/11." But they took off for Rosh Hashanah. That is when I lost what little, if any, confidence I had in this whole ordeal and immediately went out shopping for a much bigger mattress which to store my life savings beneath.

So while the House was off Rosh Hashanah-ing, the Senate held a little powwow and took a vote on their revised version of the "Troubled Asset Relief Program" aka TARP. (They should have called it COAT - "Cover Our Asses Today.") Their revised version is not 2 pages long either. It's also not 137 pages long. No, this thing is now four hundred and fifty one pages long. 451!!! 22,500% more pages than the original 2. 451 pages. By the time I finish reading the damn thing, the economy will have collapsed AND fixed itself by then! Are you kidding me?!? What the hell is in those 451 pages?!? Actually, forget about that for a minute. How was Rosh Hashanah?

I don't know if I have the stomach for it all in one post. It might have to be divided into two. But let me just say this: Those 451 pages? They're not ALL about the giving financial assistance to the companies that loaned out money for mortgages to people who couldn't afford to pay them back. No, that's what it was supposed to be about. But since not enough of our fine, fine Representatives could come together and agree on passing the bill, they needed to come up with ways that might sway some to change their vote to yes. So they did that by throwing a bunch of other things into this bill as well that have absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with this bill nor with the outcome of the economy. They just figured that if they pandered to some people's desires, projects, and wants that they might be persuaded to vote yes the next time around. Hmmmmm......see, for those of us NOT currently serving in the House, there's a name for that. It's called bribery. You selfish, self serving, rat bastard, weaselly snakes.

Yeah, I was right. This has to be two posts. I need to go yak somewhere. But I am hereby formally advocating to just clean House (literally) and start over. All of the members of the House are up for re-election in November. (Just one of many reasons that some had for voting "no" the first time around for this TARP thing. ) I am formally advocating the voting for every challenger to every incumbent seat in the House. I don't care who they are. All of those who are currently in office over there need to go. Yesterday. Throw them all out and start over. I don't care who the challenger is either. Communist? I'll vote for 'em. Homeless dude? Sure. Your dog? Yes. All of them. I will be voting for every single challenger to House seats out there. If ANY of these bozos are re-elected, you have to wonder WHO the people are who voted for them AGAIN. It's like when I hear that Congress has an 11% approval rating. I don't immediately think, "Wow, they suck." But that's because I already know that. I immediately think, "Who in the hell are you 11% that think that they are doing a good job?! Who are YOU?!?!"

Sphere: Related Content

Vice Presidential Debates And Parlor Games

Oooh, oooh, oooh! Just in time! Plenty of time before the debate tonight to get in on this one. Finally! Someone has come up with a way to, at the very least, help people to try to focus on what is being said during the debate. Let's face it, most politicians? Windbags. Old, boring, pasty white windbags. And what do windbags do best? That's right, they blow wind. Cliche filled wind, usually. "Would that it were." "The war in Iraq." "Weapons of mass destruction." "Is it over yet?" OK, that last one was mine, but you know what I mean.

The folks (or folk, really. I know nothing about them and the site only popped up a few days ago from what I can tell, and that's not very much either.) over at Palin Bingo have come up with a grand idea to keep people interested in the debate without having to get face-planted drunk via some collegiate drinking game format. The guys over at Times of the Internet say that "Palin Bingo is the latest craze to the sweep the Internet. Trundle on over to the new Palin Bingo website in order to learn the rules to play yourself." And so I did just that. It was exciting. I'd never trundled before.

The concept and the rules are simple (as the term "bingo" would imply already). Each player receives their own Palin Bingo card. Instead of the usual bingo numbers, the Palin Bingo card is filled with terms that it is assumed she is likely to utter at some point during the debate. Whenever the Governor of Alaska (that would be Sarah Palin for those of you who are new to consciousness) says one of those words or phrases, you mark off that box. Get five in a row going up or down, across or diagonal, and you win!

They even included a center space that you get to check off automatically. But instead of calling it the 'FREE' space like in traditional bingo (because really, nothing having to do with any politician is ever 'free'), they call it the 'Air Space'. I don't know if that's supposed to be a play on the term 'Air Head', but it is clever. And there's a lovely picture of Sarah Palin right there in the Air Space. You know, just in case you forget who you're supposed to be listening to. Or to give you something pleasant to look at when Joe Biden is speaking.

And if you'd like to see more words or phrases added to these cards, they even provide you with a blank Palin Bingo card so that you can make your own! So I did. Because I started thinking about it and if you've seen Tina Fey do Sarah Palin on Saturday Night Live, you know that the similarity in their appearance is remarkable. And if you've seen Tina Fey do Sarah Palin on Saturday Night Live, you know that the similarity in their speaking ability is almost zero. What if they try and substitute Sarah Palin with Tina Fey? (You know, sort of a last ditch effort for something. I don't know what exactly. I hadn't thought my hair brained conspiracy theory out that far. But it would be funny! I did think of that!) You're still going to want to play bingo, aren't you? Of course you are. So I came up with a bingo card just in case Tina Fey gets slipped into the mix some how. (And if Sarah Palin utters any of the items on my card, it's going to be a hellaciously amusing four years in the White House if her and McCain get elected.)

Those guys thought of everything. How come I'm not thinking of things like this? Oh. Right. Too busy wiping up drool. Got it.

Anything that can keep people watching something that has the potential to be informative in regard to their decision at the polls in November is a good thing. If it still doesn't do it for you, then by all means, add some alcohol to the mix. Because really, being drunk around election time? Not so bad. Being drunk when it's not election time? Still not so bad.

Sphere: Related Content

Moderate Fakeroversy

Ah, another day, another fake controversy (also known, by me, as a fakeroversy) rears its head in the election world. A world which, quite frankly, I'm really glad I'm not a part of other than that of annoyed and distrusting spectator. Today's fakeroversy brought to you by that Michele Malkin chick. Yes, shocking. I know.

Do you know who Gwen Ifill is? No? Good, then that makes all of us. Gwen Ifill (pronounced, I'm assuming, like the Tower) is an author and, according to a one David Bauder of the AP, a PBS journalist. Now, I don't know if there is a difference between a PBS journalist and a journalist who works for PBS, that's just what the article said. Regardless, this Gwen woman seems to be very accomplished, having held positions at "The New York Times, the Washington Post and NBC News." In addition to that "She moderated the 2004 vice presidential debate between Dick Cheney and John Edwards." And after the vice presidential debate on Thursday, she'll be able to add moderator of that to her resume as well. That is also the dock from which the USS Fakeroversy will be launched.

See, Gwen is writing a book, scheduled to be released on January 20, 2009 the day of the Inauguration, and is tentatively called "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama". Catchy. "Age of Obama". Is that like the Age of Aquarius? Probably not, huh? Well, whatever it means, the book itself, according to the description over at Amazon.com "...surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama's stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African American politicians forging a bold new path to political power." OK, fair enough. So what's up Michele Malkin's ass about it? Guess.

You got it. She thinks that Gwen should not be the moderator for the debate because, according to what she wrote in the New York Post, Ifill is "so far in the tank for the Democratic presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out." Um, wait. What?

First of all, that analogy, that simile, that comparison, allegory, whatever the hell it was, that doesn't make any sense. I mean, this hypothetical "tank" that she mentions.....there's no oxygen there? What kind of a "tank" is it, exactly? Fish? Septic? Sherman? (It's clearly not a THINK tank.) She needs a delivery of oxygen, via a line? What the hell is an "oxygen delivery line"? Each one of those words conjures up a different image for me. Oxygen = Oxygen TV Network. Delivery = childbirth. Line = conga. So, in my head, I have a conga line of pregnant women giving birth on the Oxygen channel. It's not pretty. Nor is it accurate. But that's about how much sense that comment made.

Aside from the colorful parables that she tries to spin, is she unaware of what a debate moderator does? The only reason that they're called "moderators" is because "question asking person" didn't sound important enough. That's what they do. They sit there at that little table, shrouded in mostly darkness with a heavenly light shining down upon them and they shuffle their papers a lot. (I think that's because they really need more light than just that one beam they're getting there. You people can't light the place up? Is this some environmental, go-green, save the planet thing? Can't you just use those swirly ass light bulbs and make it so they can see?) Then they ask the question. Then they sit there while the question is answered. Then, when the little egg timer goes off, they get their egg and then they tell the other person that they can answer the question. It's not hard! It's very simple.

And it's very simple for a reason. That's because, in general, people in politics are idiots. A lot of the debates tend to play out like a bad episode of "Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?" (And the answer is almost always "No".) The only people more idiotic than the politicians themselves (usually) are the commentators, the analysts, the talk show pundits and Michelle Malkin. Not necessarily in that order, mind you. Anyway, it HAS to be a simple format otherwise instead of a debate, we'd be treated to something that would turn out to be akin to a WWF match with suits and ties flailing about. And I will totally admit, I would rather see THAT than the debates that we do end up seeing. Absolutely. I'll take WWF Debating over BAP (Boring Ass Politician) Debating any day. But I am, sadly, the only one voting for that format, so instead they go with a moderator.

What does Malkin think Gwen Ifill is going to DO at the debate, exactly? I guess I can assume that, since she's "in the tank for Obama" she would do things like.....what? Flirt with Joe Biden? ("Close enough! And might I also say that is a lovely tie you're wearing tonight! Did you do something with your hair? Get your teeth whitened? You look great!" ::wink:: ::wink::) Give Joe Biden really easy questions like, "Senator Biden, what is the name of your running mate? Barack Obama IS correct! Very good, Senator!" And then give Sarah Palin questions like, "Governor Palin, what is the cubed root of 54,321? NO. You can't use a paper and pencil OR that fancy little calculator on your Blackberry. Maybe you should show Senator McCain how the Blackberry works, since he keeps talking into a basket of fruit whenever he hears the phone ring and he goes to answer his Blackberry. And while I have your attention, would you please stop saying 'Well, this is how we do it in Alaska.' I'm tired of reminding you, Governor, you're not IN Alaska anymore! Get over it!" I find all of those things extremely unlikely to occur at the hands of Gwen Ifill, the impartial debate moderator.

When asked to comment on the fakeroversy, Ifill responded (in a way that should make anyone who might have thought that maybe they should be concerned about this realize that she's extremely intelligent, sees what's going on, and will do a fine job), "I've got a pretty long track record covering politics and news, so I'm not particularly worried that one-day blog chatter is going to destroy my reputation. The proof is in the pudding. They can watch the debate tomorrow night and make their own decisions about whether or not I've done my job." A most excellent answer. I DO like pudding!

I don't understand some people. Actually, I don't understand a lot of people. But the ones that really have my scratching my head are the people who try to make something out of nothing, seemingly for the purpose of promoting themselves. The problem with that is there are too many soft-headed individuals out there who will fall for anything and believe anything that they read (assuming they can read. Soft headed individuals? Not the sharpest tools in the shed.), especially if that something is on the Internet.

Gwen Ifill also has a broken foot or ankle or some bone below the knee. Since she's not moderating Dancing With The Stars, I think that will also be a non issue as well. So with no controversies surrounding the moderator, just watch the debate. After all, Joe Biden is a rather charming fellow who has an excellent sense of humor. And I've heard that Sarah Palin is a kick ass debater. And I'm hoping that she really is. But I'll tell you this much right now: If she mentions that she can see Russia from her house, someone needs to call time out and get Tina Fey in there in her place immediately. After all, at that point, we might as well get some entertainment out of the whole thing one last time before the election rolls around.

Sphere: Related Content

The War Against Trangendered Stick Figures

From the ever expanding file of "What in the hell is wrong with you?" we shall visit Manchester University over there in the United Kingdom, where I'm hoping there is an academic department that can study why people continue to evolve into soft headed, helmet needed, societal veal calves. And do you want to know who they can start with to figure out why this phenomenon is so prominent these days? Of course you do.

They can start with people like Manchester University’s women's officer Jennie Killip. (Women's officer. That sounds so militant. And yet, it's so not.) According to the blokes over there at The Mail Online, "Anyone caught short at Manchester University will have to decide whether to use the 'toilets' or the 'toilets with urinals' after the women's and men's were re-named to avoided offending transgender students." Oh, sweet mother of God, make it stop. Make. It. Stop. WTF?!?

Apparently, "a number" (It doesn't say what number. Could be two. Could be three hundred. But usually when you're given the amount of "a number", that number is most likely one or zero. And that means that it has nothing to do with the "number" of complaints or problems, but rather the personal agenda of those who are keeping "the number" a big, fat secret.) of women who considered themselves to be transgender said that they were "uncomfortable using men's loos." To which I say, "Then use the women's loos. After all, you're a woman." To which Manchester University said, "Oh, I see. Well, then, we'll just put a sign that says "Toilets With Urinals" on top of the stick figure drawing on the door of the loo that represents a man. And then we'll put a sign that says "Toilets" on top of the stick figure drawing on the door of the loo that represents a woman." Wait. What?

Now, I know that there is a subtle difference in the way that I would have handled that situation and the way that the University chose to handle that situation and you might not have caught the difference right away, so I'm going to make sure that the differences are blatantly obvious. See, my way of dealing with it made sense and did not include pandering. The University's way of dealing with it was completely ridiculous and made NO sense whatsoever. And I can back that assertion up, too.

Jennie Killip, who seems to be the individual who has spearheaded this "politically correct/and-justice-for-all" movement, was quoted in the University's newspaper, The Student Direct, as saying, "'Toilets are very much, you know, for boys and for girls, so we’ve taken away that overtly gendered aspect." Now, until I read that, I was unaware that it was possible for one to contradict themselves in such a short period of time. Yes, they ARE very much for boys and girls. But then you take that away when you just said that's what they're for. And it's not an "overtly gendered aspect". It's a men's room and a ladies' room! And regardless as to whether you like it or not, there ARE TWO different and separate genders!

She continued with her diatribe of idiocy by saying, "A trans-student who does not identify themselves as a man would have to face abuse and violence if they used the "other" toilet." I can't possibly imagine why that would be if the individual who doesn't identify themselves as a man and is considered "transgendered" would face abuse. After all, we're assuming that, due to the "transgendered" label, they look like a woman. Thus, they shouldn't have to "face abuse" from other women. (Unless they're going to stand there and pee in the sink. THEN there'd be some abusing.) I mean, if a guy who looks like a lumberjack comes into the women's restroom, sure, people are going to have a problem with it. But that's not what transgendered is implying. There's a difference between living as a transgendered individual and looking like a lumberjack, but waking up one morning and thinking, "I feel pretty!"

And her non-sensical blatherment, spewed seemingly to perpetuate her own ideals, continued with, "'If you were born female, still present quite feminine, but define as a man you should be able to go into the men's toilets - if that's how you define." Again, NOT transgender, per se. What if I was born female (I was) and I still present quite feminine (most of the time) but define as a African gazelle? Are you going to provide me with a lounge of elimination in the motif of the Serengeti? I think not. (Why am I not surprised that this chick has green hair?)

And the asinine cherry on top of this internal agenda driven sundae came when Greenie concluded with, "You don't necessarily have had to have gender reassignment surgery, but you could just define yourself as a man, feel very masculine in yourself, feel that in fact being a woman is not who you are.'" And again, she's correct and doesn't realize it and therefore went screaming in the opposite (and wrong) direction. See, if you've had the gender reassignment surgery, you're not transgender, you're transsexual. And that would be different. Aside from that, by leaving it up to personal definition, you're not only going to get the transgendered individuals using the restroom of their choice, you're going to get the NOT transgendered individuals (ie, sickos, perverts, horny frat boys, etc.) using the restroom of THEIR choice. You know I'm right. This can't possibly end well (though hilarity MAY ensue at some point).

I would have been more in favor of, yet still mocked incessantly, if they had just made all of the restrooms, ie, loos, all for one and one for all. Then there would clearly be no discrimination toward anyone. But instead, what do they do? They put a little sign (without even using a fancy font) on the chest of the stick figure that says "Toilets With Urinals". Um, we can still SEE the stick figure! We KNOW you mean that's the men's restroom! Won't the transgendered folk STILL feel uncomfortable if they can SEE the stick figure? This isn't a war against the division of society and gender discrimination, this is a war against asexual stick figures designed to provide universal guidance in ALL languages!

It also appears to be a parade celebrating the demise of rationality, not to mention the surge of being horrified if someone thinks that they are offended for a reason that may or may not be valid. And the grandmaster of the parade seems to have had her sanity effected by all of the chemicals in her bright green hair dye (a look which, when combined with this asinine stunt, is not going to help her be taken very seriously by, oh, just about everyone). Tell me, Greenie, which restroom do YOU identify with? The one with just toilets, the one with toilets and urinals, or the one that says The Great Gazoo?

Sphere: Related Content