Flaw and Order

Recently, here in the fine, fine state of California, some asshat Senator (said asshat being California Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez) introduced a bill that would, according to a story at Fox News (and they're fair and balanced, don't you know?), "...establish a registry of names -- similar to widely used sex offender databases -- to track and make public the identities of people convicted of felony animal abuse." Now, really, how I feel about that isn't exactly what this post is about, but I'm going to tell you what I think anyway.

And what I think is that if they're going to do this, someone is going to have to tell me where it's going to end. What I mean is that I think that sex offender databases are a good thing. I like to know where the perverts are. (Have you blue-dotted your neighborhood today?) But I'm thinking I'd also like to know where all of the folks convicted of assault are at. Add to that the folks convicted of theft, vandalism, burglary, or armed anything. All I'm saying is that it's going to have to stop somewhere and I think it needs to be contained to sex offenders. Otherwise, I think we run the risk of becoming a little too Big Brother-ish for my comfort level.

But I digress. The point here is that the folks in California (at least one of them, anyway) think that animal abuse is such a horrific crime (and it is) that those who perpetrate it and are convicted of it should be entered into some sort of statewide database. That view seems to be radically different from at least one judge in West Virginia. The judge in mention would be a one Kanawha Circuit Judge James Stucky. Let's learn more about him, shall we?

Judge Stucky presided over the sentencing of a one 18-year old (and old enough to know better) Charles Wiant. Mr. Wiant was being sentenced after pleading guilty for killing his neighbor's German shepherd with a bow and arrow. Clearly, Mr. Wiant is an asshat. That much seems cut and dried. What's not so clear is what is wrong with Judge Stucky.

Judge Stucky sentenced Mr. Wiant to spend four weekends in jail and "...serve 50 volunteer hours at the Kanawha-Charleston Animal Shelter, pay $1,000 to the dog's owners and spend a year on unsupervised probation." Hmmm. Now, the article in the Charleston Daily Mail says that the Judge " ...imposed a sentence that was suggested by the victims and recommended by prosecutors in exchange for a guilty plea." Now, while I don't know what the sentencing parameters for something like shooting a German shepherd with a bow and arrow, I know that it doesn't seem unreasonable at all. I don't know that it seems like one would need to make any concessions to such a sentence. I, however, am not Judge Stucky. And Judge Stucky "...agreed to a sentencing arrangement that will allow him to attend the Hank Williams Jr. concert at the Charleston Civic Center on April 2. Wiant's lawyer, Bill Forbes, explained that Wiant's girlfriend already has spent a lot of money on the tickets." Wait. What?

Correct. This convicted and, apparently, admitted (he pled guilty) dog murderer whose weapon of choice was a bow and arrow, will be allowed to go to a Hank Williams Jr. concert because his girlfriend already spent a lot of money on the tickets. Are you freaking kidding me?!

I think that crimes against animals are in some ways more reprehensible than crimes against humans. Regardless though, it's hard for me to be really objective on this one when I'm an animal lover. I definitely do not think that four weekends in jail is any sort of a just sentence. But it is what it is. And it's a sentence. And I don't think that it needs to be altered. And animal lover or not, I certainly don't give a fat rat's ass how much money the convicted's girlfriend spent on concert tickets. Too bad. Maybe she should have chosen a better boyfriend. Perhaps one who wouldn't get his ass thrown in jail for shooting a German shepherd with a bow and arrow and killing it? THAT might be the kind of boyfriend to have. You know, one who doesn't do stuff like that!

Just remember, kids! If you're going to be sentenced to jail in Judge Stucky's courtroom and think that you may be needing a break from the doldrums of prison life once you're in there, make sure that you purchase some pricey concert tickets ahead of time so that the Judge will let you attend! Make it a country music concert just to be on the safe side. Plan ahead!

Sphere: Related Content

Jacket Jackass

Let me ask you a question. Let's say you're a lawyer. OK, let's say that you're a douchebag lawyer. (I realize that's not much of a stretch for you to make and that's the only reason why I threw that in. It's not like I want to make reading this blog some sort of chore for any of you.) And let's say that you're in an airport. Not just any airport. Let's say that you're in the airport in Houston. With me so far? You're a douchebag lawyer at an airport in Houston. Good. Continue.

While at said Houston airport, you decide that you're a hungry douchebag and stop at one of the food vendors at the airport food court. Let's say...pizza. Pizza it is. You stop for pizza. Maybe at a place named Famiglia. Maybe not. You're not sure. But what you are pretty sure of is that you want to take off your coat. And not just any coat. You want to take off your Polo leather coat, size extra large (that's XL in clothing lingo) and sporting a spiffy plaid lining and cost you $800. That's right. $800. (I said you were a douchebag lawyer. Why are you surprised?) Still with me? You're coatless and enjoying pizza in the airport. Got it? Good. Continue.

Then, after consuming your pizza, you leave and catch your flight. Oh, wait a minute. You seem to have forgotten your jacket! Dang it! Well, crap. You can always call when you land and see if it's been turned in somewhere. I mean, it probably hasn't. After all, it had a plaid lining! If someone just saw that bad boy lying around without an owner, how long do you think it would last? Ahhh...see? You're with me, aren't you? I thought so!

Now, at some point after you've landed, you call the airport. You call the food court. You call the pizza joint, whatever it was called. No such luck. None of them have your coat. Bummer. Well, I guess the only thing left for you to do is to sue the City of Houston, sue Continental Airlines, and sue the management company of the food court. Wait. What now?

Correct. Meet a one 62-year old William Ogletree. He's a lawyer at Ogletree & Abbott, a law firm in Houston. He is said douchebag alluded to above in my not-so-hypothetical scenario that I laid out. All of those hypothetical things really did happen to Mr. Ogletree and he really is suing all three entities because he believes that they failed to keep his coat in a safe place for him. Wait. They what?

That's right. For some reason, Mr. Ogletree does not seem to be a big believer in personal responsibility. Seriously. He forgets his coat and he thinks that because someone else didn't pick up after him that they are at fault for his coat disappearing. It's an $800 leather coat. What did he think was going to happen to it if he left it lying around? (I'm assuming that the sharp plaid lining wasn't noticeably visible.)

But he is, in fact, suing all three. What a jackass. He states that, in order to avoid everyone "blaming each other" in court "...all of the three entities need to come to an agreement on which party is responsible and notify me (Mr. Jackass), in writing, signed by all three". Uh-huh. He also feels the need to throw in "I am looking forward to discovering how all of you deal with lost property in the airport. I suspect that your record is dismal and that employee theft runs rampant." Well then. (You can click to enlarge the images above and below if you'd like to read this douchebaggery for yourself. If they don't enlarge correctly, try over here at The Smoking Gun. They have this in perfectly readable form. After all, that's where I found it.)

The part of his own argument that Mr. Ogletree fails to grasp is the part which includes the term "lost". Lost property. Property that is lost. It's lost. It's gone. It can't be found. Hence the term, lost! On top of that, who is the one who lost it in the first place? That's right! NOT the airport. NOT the food court! And certainly NOT the airline! (How did he think that he could drag the airline into this whole mess? The plane had nothing to do with it!) How in the world is this anyone's fault other than Mr. Ogletree's?!

I have no idea what Mr. Ogletree's perception of what it means to take responsibility for one's self, but I'm guessing that it's a lot different than mine. While I find it ridiculous that anyone should have to answer to such an asinine lawsuit, I certainly hope that none of the three parties involves caves into this extortionist. You're a grown man, sir. You lost your coat! It's your fault! Get over it! And buy yourself a new coat while you're at it. You're going to need it because I highly doubt you have much of a case here. Moron.

Sphere: Related Content

A Whale of an Idea

Perhaps you've heard about the unfortunate death of the trainer at SeaWorld, a one Dawn Brancheau, after she was grabbed from her poolside platform and thrashed around in the water by a killer whale named Tilikum. I'm not trying to sound insensitive or anything, but it's not like we couldn't have seen this coming, especially since Tilikum has been involved in the deaths of at least two other people over the past 20-ish years (even though one of those deaths was totally the fault of the human involved). It's right there in his name. Killer whale. It's not like he was going around calling himself Benign Whale or anything like that. Killer whale. Seems like a no brainer.

What I'm finding extremely entertaining is the various responses after this tragic (yet predictable) event. Man on the street interviews are always good for amusement. I heard one guy say that the "whole system needs to be revamped". The whole system of what exactly? Keeping 12,000 pound creatures in the equivalent of a bathtub and making them do wacky stunts which end up soaking enthralled participants who love nothing more than to watch a tricky orca? That system? Um, OK. I suppose.

The huffy folks over at The Huffington Post alerted us to the fact that following Ms. Brancheau's death, Shamu's Twitter account was shut down. Wait. What now?

Correct. Shamu, the big ol' killer whale that has become the synonymous poster name/child for captive and made to perform orcas, is no longer posting to his Twitter account. ::: sigh ::: Good Lord, people. Did you really think that it was the damned whale that was tweeting?! What kind of person is it who follows Shamu on Twitter? Or ANY animal for that matter? It's not the actual animal who is updating! You know that, right? Right?! Oh, never mind.

But here's the one that I just love, love, love beyond belief. Ready? Again from The Huffington Post, here's the headline: American Family Association: Stone To Death Killer Whale Who Killer Trainer. What the what?

Correct. The American Family Association a "...religious right group, is urging that Tillikum (Tilly), the killer whale that killed a trainer at SeaWorld Orlando, be put down, preferably by stoning." They want to...to...stone the whale? Wh...why....why is that? Well, because the Bible says they should. It does? Apparently so.

They seem to be relying on a passage from Exodus 21:28 which reads "Says the ancient civil code of Israel, "When an ox gores a man or woman to death, the ox shall be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten, but the owner shall not be liable." But...but...but that's talking about an OX. This was a whale. A whale. Not an ox. But for some reason, the AFA equates an ox and a whale. I can't imagine why, as they are clearly nothing alike.

This seemingly whack-a-do group goes on to say that "...the Scripture soberly warns, if one of your animals kills a second time because you didn't kill it after it claimed its first human victim, this time you die right along with your animal." Wait. Who dies right along with the animal? Who in the heck owns the killer whale? SeaWorld? Does that mean all of the employees get stoned as well? No, wait, that wouldn't make sense. What about stock? Does SeaWorld have stock? Are the stockholders going to get pelted in that instance? Seems a bit extreme. I mean, if we're going to start stoning people in this country, can't we start with those Wall Street fellows? You know, just to try it out and all.

The AFA backs up that assertion by citing Exodus 21:29 which says something to the effect of "the ox shall be stoned, and its owner also shall be put to death." Basically, the theory is that if your ox is out and kills someone and you don't stone your ox and then it goes out and does it again, you're just as liable as the ox is. Theoretically, that makes sense, but only right up until you get to the "also shall be put to death" part. That's a bit extreme. Usually.

But let me just ask this: Let's say that we were to go along with the kooky beliefs of the AFA and we now need to stone this whale to death. What, exactly, are we supposed to stone him with? Wouldn't it just be easier to drain the tank? You'd need boulders or something of the equivalent in order to stone a killer whale, wouldn't you? And that would involve some sort of crane and/or derrick, I'd imagine. Perhaps a trebuchet/catapult. This is starting to sound really old-timey. Like the days of King Arthur or something. If it only weren't for the fact that we were talking about doing all of this to a killer whale, it wouldn't be so ridiculous!

Look, you can't kill the whale. It's not the whale's fault. The whale was doing what it does and what it does is be a whale. I'm going to have to assume that the term "killer" wasn't just some catchy moniker that someone came up with for no reason. It's named that for a reason. It wasn't a secret. It's not like the trainer didn't know that it was a killer whale. They didn't tell her "You'll be working with this animal here. It's a (mumble, mumble) whale!" I look at it this way: Three people (one of which was to blame) killed in twenty years? Seems like the people are getting off easy in this situation. It kind of seems like I'd think it would have been more given the circumstances and all. I'm just sayin'. Something to think about. Something other than stoning the whale to death, you morons.

Sphere: Related Content

That's Not Curling

When the Winter Olympics roll around, I'm always fascinated by the whole sport of curling. It's like someone heaves a cement Roomba down the ice and then two other guys go after it with Swiffers. I think of it as the tidiest of all Olympic events. It's quite odd. And I guess that over there in Australia, two of the news anchors on Channel 9 were explaining and/or demonstrating the finer nuances of curling via the Wii console. Yeah, see, the thing is that if you're watching them while they're playing the game, it doesn't look so much like they're involved in curling. No, it looks a little bit more like they're doing something else. And I found it to be highly amusing.

Sphere: Related Content

They Smoke Crack in San Francisco!

When was the last time you were in San Francisco (if ever)? Recently? Within the last year? Two years? Five years? Doesn't matter. Chances are that when you were there, you noticed that there are parts of the city (say like Haight) that are rather, how shall we say, bum ridden. That's right. San Francisco has become rather bummy. They're everywhere. Kind of like the swallows returning to San Juan Capistrano every year. Only the bums are always there. They never leave, so they don't have to return. But when you think San Fran, you think bums.

I might be painting the wrong picture by describing some of these outdoor inhabitants as bums. That might be too generous of a term. They're the chronically homeless by choice. They're the drug indulging. They're the publicly defecating. (That's right. Publicly defecating. What? You've never seen someone poo in public? You've clearly never been to the Haight.)

Now, the mayor of San Francisco, a one pretty, pretty Gavin Newsom, has always been a proponent of the, shall we say, "disadvantaged". (We could even use the term "underadvantaged". But really who we're talking about are the folks who lounge about on the the curbs and sidewalks and doorways of businesses and engage in their less than savory lifestyle.) But suddenly, the pretty pretty mayor has spoken out in favor of what is called a sit/lie ordinance.

What is a sit/lie ordinance? It's just what it sounds like. (And if you think it sounds ridiculous that one is necessary, you're right on!) It's an ordinance that prohibits sitting or lying on public grounds such as on sidewalks and in doorways. And up until recently, the pretty, pretty mayor was against it. According to the folks over there at SF Gate, Newsom was "telling The Chronicle editorial board earlier this month it (the ordinance) was just too divisive to support." Too divisive?

I don't know about you, but when it comes to me and those who prefer to sit and lie, I prefer a bit of division. In fact, I encourage it. Please. Divide me from that portion of society and do it now. Divisive? Hell yes, it's divisive. That's the frigging point. But if it's so "divisive", why is Gavin suddenly all for it?

It would seem that the mayor "...took his 5 1/2-month-old daughter for a stroll on Haight Street one Saturday morning." A stroll? On Haight Street? How'd that go for you, Mister Mayor? "As God is my witness, there's a guy on the sidewalk smoking crack," Newsom said. Wait. What now?

As God as his witness? Does he actually think that we need convincing of this? Has he NEVER walked on the streets of the fine, fine city that he is mayor of? What in the hell does he mean "As God is my witness"? We KNOW!

Let me get this straight. Gavin Newsom has been mayor of San Francisco since 2003 and he didn't know that people lounged around in doorways of businesses and smoked crack?! Welcome to the city, Gavin! Where in the hell have you been?! Could he be more out of touch? I don't think that he could! That is unbelievable to me.

So now that he is personally effected, now it's an issue. Never mind all of these people that have witnessed this problem getting worse and worse and worse over the years (probably most recently during the past seven years that he has been the mayor, as a matter of fact). Never mind all of their reasons that they had for wanting a sit and lie ordinance. Do you really think that NO ONE ever said to him "Hey, there are people smoking drugs in the doorway of my business." I'm pretty sure that they did. What did he think? That they were just making it up? I realize that he has done his best in an attempt to turn San Francisco into some sort of utopian haven for the displaced in the world. But I had no idea that he was THAT clueless.

Wake up, Gavin. There are people in your city smoking crack on the streets. There are people in your city defecating on sidewalks. There are even prostitutes! I know! Can you imagine?! I guess we all know what to do the next time that some sort of public issue needs addressing in San Francisco. I guess we know that we need to pull Gavin down off his high horse and give him a first hand look at what people are talking about in order for him to take any sort of action that is not nothing. What a joke. I can't wait to see how hard he pushes for this to be passed now that he is personally affected. Well, at least we know where his priorities are and they certainly aren't with the citizens of San Francisco, that's for sure.

Sphere: Related Content

Odd Keyword Searches

People find this blog by a variety of means. (And God bless those Google boys.) But regardless as to which search engine they are using (and the majority of the time, it is a search engine), they have to put in keywords to find what they're looking for. As I have a little program called Stat Counter which keeps track of a multitude of things for me here at the blog, I am privy to what the keywords are that people are searching for. It's usually pretty easy to tell what's in the news on certain days because a lot of searches will have keywords pertaining to a hot news item. But other days, the search keywords just look like a cornucopia of crap with a one way ticket straight to this blog. I don't know if that's good or bad, but I'm going to share with you some of the search terms that brought folks here yesterday. Let's begin.

I had two requests for "rachel raye naked red tube". I don't even know what in the hell that could possible mean. Red tube? I can assume that they mean the cute and perky little cooking chick, Rachel Ray, but I have no idea what in the world the "red tube" is referring to. I can't even guess. Whatever. I certainly hope that this blog post helped them out: The Possibility of the Misperception of Scarves

I had a couple of chicken queries yesterday. One was for "chicken says weatherforcast". (Thank God that people don't need to know how to spell, nor separate words in order to find this blog.) The other was for "one legged chicken". Oddly enough, both of those inquiries were likely directed to this post: Today's News - Now With Chickens!

I receive an unimaginable number of hits from people looking for whores in London. Whores in London. Hookers in London. Prostitutes in London. People want to pay for sex when they're in London, that's for sure! Cheap whores in London. Cheapest hookers in London. Oddly enough, I get almost no inquiries for things like "How to tell if I'm riddled with chlamydia after a trip to Europe." Almost never. But I have gotten plenty of mileage, thanks to the wonderment that is the European hooker, out of this post: Economical Hookers In London. (In fact, if you Google "hookers in london" the first result will be this blog! That's a fact that brings me an equal amount of pride and shame at the same time.)

There's not a day that goes by that someone doesn't inquire as to whether or not Annette Funicello is dead. I don't know why that is. Seriously. No other celebrity on my end of things has had their mortality wondered about than Annette Funicello. I cannot explain it. Nope. Can't even come close. And the post that folks are directed to, Who Are These People & Why Are They Hot?, isn't really going to help you understand that either. But I'm here to tell you, she's alive. And I'm also here to tell you, you'll know when she's dead.

Sometimes the search terms just make me laugh. There was "i got tricked to pose nude on chatroulette" that just made me howl with laughter. Really? Tricked? By a computer? Man, do I want to know the back story on THAT one. What really has me confused is that came up not once, but twice. There are at least TWO morons out there who, inexplicably, took off their clothes with their webcam activated as they were logged onto Chat Roulette. Wow. Who are you people? And why are you looking to blogs for what to do about what ails you? Put your damn clothes on and read a book, for cryin' out loud! "what do you mean by nope" was another one that was quite a head scratcher for me. What does that even mean? Nope means nope! Nope! It's not like it's all cryptic or anything. It means nope! Odd, yet hilarious.

Look, the point to all of this is that regardless as to how you found this blog and whether or not you found it with or without your clothes on, I just wanted to say thanks. Thanks

Sphere: Related Content

No @#$&!?* Cussing?!

There's a whole lot of problems going on in California right now. The unemployment rate for the state is hovering somewhere around 12.7. The budget is far from balanced. The state is going broke. The population of illegal immigrants in this state is sky high. And corruption abounds up there in the State Capitol. So with all of that going on, I'm having a really hard time grasping why it is that the California State Assembly passed a resolution making the first week of March "Cuss Free Week". Wait. What now?

Correct. Cuss Free Week. I swear. Now, if you're asking yourself what the #$*! Cuss Free Week is, well, are you in for a surprise. Granted, just because it was passed by the @#*&$! State Assembly doesn't guarantee that it's going to happen. It still have to be passed by the &*%#@ Senate for it to go into effect. But that's not really the crux of my anger over this stupid #*$&%* idea. My anger stems from BS like this getting passed at all.

Why is this $&*@#& necessary?! Don't get me wrong. I like the idea of everyone not cussing. I am not a fan of the swearing (even though I can do so like a sailor). It makes me insane when people are swearing and there are young children around. They don't need to hear that. No one does, really. But that doesn't mean that I want some sort of stupid ass legislation passed as what will amount to nothing more than a free good measure at best. Let's see how this line of BS got started, shall we?

It would seem that the whole idea was inspired by a one McKay Hatch who founded a No Cussing Club at his middle school two years ago. Apparently the feel good idea took off and now his website, Nocussing.com, boasts that there are over 35,000 members worldwide. That's great, I suppose. I will definitely give kudos to McKay for getting this movement started. I'm sure he's been beaten up more times than I can imagine over this (and numerous other things I'm guessing). But let's be realistic. 35,000 worldwide? Listen, there's a Facebook page called "Can this pickle get more fans than Nickleback?" Do you know how many people are a fan of that pickle? 1,529,277 right now as I'm writing this. Over one and a half million folks are a fan of that particular pickle. That is over 43.5 times the number of people worldwide in the No Cussing Club. I'm not trying to diss the No Cussing Club, I'm just trying to put it in effing perspective is all.

The California bill (which is ACR 112. Remember that because you won't find it in any other article you read about this crap, which is why I had to look it up. Can't the Legislature pass a "No Crappy Media Reporting Week"? My God, at least that might get something done.) was written up by Assembly Members Portantino and Smyth. If you are a California voter, please make note of those two names and vote against them when they are up for re-election. We cannot continue to have them in the Assembly wasting the taxpayers money and time on garbage like this. Portantino and Smyth. Don't forget. Out!

Wait. I just read the final version of the bill. There are other co-authors that have climbed aboard this s**t-train. The other coauthors of this piece of crap are: Assembly Members Jones, Solorio, Adams, Beall, Bradford, Caballero, Chesbro, Coto, Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Fong, Furutani, Galgiani, Gilmore, Hayashi, Huffman, Jeffries, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Niello, Nielsen, V. Manuel Perez, Salas, Skinner, Audra Strickland, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Tran, Villines, and Yamada. Make a note. Print this out. Vote these folks out of office when that time comes! What a bunch of softheads.

Basically, all the bill does is give you a bunch of flowerly prose on why cussing is bad and how a bunch of people have decided to follow McKay's suggestion and not cuss. It also goes on to say that for the No Cussing Week, that businesses or whatever else you are should have a jar with a label on it available in a public place. That way, if you are guilty of screaming "You stupid M-F-er!!" when the mail clerk mixes up your mail again, you put some monetary amount in the jar. The bill then suggests that at the end of the week, the amount in the jar be donated to a charity. A charity!?

The M-F-ing state is going M-F-ing broke!! And you *!#&^?$#s want to go the money to a bleeping charity?! Why in the world isn't it going back to the M-F-ing bankrupt state?! For cryin' out loud, what is wrong with you a-holes?!

But then I started thinking about it. What if I did want to stop cussing? My BFF has given up cussing for Lent. (It's not going all that great, by the way. Sorry, friend! Heart you!) And she has some spectacular cuss hybrids that she tends spout out when needed. And they are spec-tacular. What is she supposed to use instead? I figured that McKay's website, being as he's so into this being so important and all, would have some suggestions. And I was right. It did have some suggestions. For a price. What the $*?#!@?

That's right. He wants to charge you two bucks to download his e-book which seems to be titled "Oh, Pickles! Sassafras! Barnacles! & other G-rated substitutes for cuss words". I guess you get the three on the cover for free. It claims to have over 100 others inside, but you're going to need to pony up two effing dollars if you want to know those. What a scam.

If you'd like to read this stupid-#$@&^! bill you can find it here. I could go off on a tangent about how something like this could be interpreted as the government trying to censor the people in a land which is ruled by it's First Amendment, that of the right to free speech. I could go off on that tangent. But I'm not going to. That's because I'm way too irate about the Assembly wasting time and money (Good God, how much money is this thing going to cost?!) with something that is feel-good at best. There are REAL PROBLEMS out there to be solved!! Do they need a list?! I'll give them a list and I won't even charge them two bucks for it!!

Sphere: Related Content