Totally There

Saw these at Target today. And I realize what that tag says. But those are anything but "barely there".

Sphere: Related Content

He Won't Pay It

The latest celebretard to come out and say that they'd be willing to pay more taxes is none other than Jay-Z. He's got 99 problems, but a tax ain't one. According to the Huffington Post, Mr. Z was on CNN when he uttered this statement: "Me, personally, I wouldn't mind paying more in taxes if it went to the things that really mattered," he said to CNN. "If it went to education, to people in poverty, I wouldn't mind." Oh, good Lord.

If it went to things that really mattered?! Now, I realize that he has just stated what he thinks "matter". Those things being like people in poverty and education. I love it when people like him think that the way to solve a problem is to just throw more money at it. How about if, before the subject of raising taxes comes up, we find places where we can cut? How about if we find waste and stop it? Everyone just wants to spend while there are ineffective programs and departments all over the place that we could cut which would free up or save some money. Why don't any of these people who think that their offer to pay more taxes is so gracious, how come they don't ever mention the incredible waste that is going on?

Well, I think that this next statement of Mr. Z's might answer that question (or at least give you some insight into the answer). He also said: "I think most people with a conscience, with some integrity and moral fiber wouldn't have any problem paying more taxes." Oh, spare me. People with a conscience and moral fiber?! THOSE are the people who wouldn't have a problem paying more taxes?! What about people with half a brain in their head who realize that the amount of waste and fraud and abuse is abundant and that just blindly throwing more money at the same people who are responsible for all of the waste isn't going to do anything?!

And I'm just going to mention again that if someone wants to pay more taxes, they are free to do so. There is a little box on your tax form that you can check if you would like to contribute more than you legally owe. So there you have it, Jay-Z. I will wait to hear back from you after April 15, 2012 when you have paid not only the taxes that you legally owe, but (because you're clearly a man with some integrity and moral fiber) that you also contributed more than you were required. And of course I have no reason to doubt that he'll do that, right? He's obviously very serious about it, so of course he'll check that little box and send in a boatload of more money. And the best part is that he won't even have a problem with it! Yeah. Right. If he ends up voluntarily paying more than he legally owes, I will eat my computer piece by piece. And I'm clearly not worried that something like that would happen because he isn't going to do that. I have yet to see any of these celebretards who say that they're willing to pay more taxes actually do it. Pipe down, Jay-Z.

Sphere: Related Content

Nice Coat, Rick

Remember yesterday's post about Rick Perry's commercial where he comes across as...well...if he didn't come across as anti-gay, he certainly didn't come across as pro-gay. Not that he has to come across as pro-gay. That's not what I'm saying. But he certainly didn't come across as being very accepting that people who are gay are just people. My point here is that the next time (and why do I have the feeling that there's going to actually be a next time?) he might want to do a little research on his attire before making the statements that he made. I mean, if you're going to paint yourself out to be anti-gay, you might want to at least try and differentiate your wardrobe from those that you 'dislike'. I'm just saying. Behold!

Sphere: Related Content

Maybe That's Not Exactly What He Meant

Rick Perry has a new campaign video out. Without jumping directly into hate mode (as it seems so many people seem to be inclined to do about said video), I'm going to say that I hope I know what he was trying to say. I'm going to hope that he was just trying to say that it's OK to celebrate Christmas in school and that people shouldn't worry about any sort of backlash from doing so. I'm going to hope that he was trying to make a comparison by using something that is just as loopy sounding as the whole war on Christmas. Do I think he did a good job with it? God, no. He comes across as a homophobic ass. Do I think it's a terrible commercial that is probably going to do more harm than good? Absolutely. So why am I hoping that he just went about sending his message in the wrong manner? Just because. Because if how he came across is actually how he is, and the fact that he was once thought to be the Republican front runner for their Presidential nomination, well, that can't be good for anything. The video is below. If it doesn't play, try clicking here.

Sphere: Related Content

The Donald Trump Debate

Can someone please explain to me this idiotic ritual that the Republicans who are running for the Presidential nomination seem to engage in when they pander to Donald Trump? Why are they meeting with him? Why do they feel it is so necessary to get his seal of approval (and probably to kiss his ring)? Since when does Donald Trump have anything at all to do with American politics and how they're run?!

I thought that we would have heard the last from The Donald after the tantrum that he put on regarding President Barry's birth certificate. Trump did everything but come right out and say that he didn't believe that President Barry was born in this country. He even said that he had 'investigators' over the in Hawaii and that we wouldn't believe they things that they were finding. (And really, if the 'things' that they were 'finding' were that he was actually born in this country, I highly doubt that I would have been surprised by that.) He made himself look exactly like the tool that he apparently is.


And now what is happening? Why, he's holding his own debate, that's what! How does that happen? Why does he get to hold a debate? (Can anyone do that? Because I've got some questions! Oh, boy, do I have questions.) He's a reality TV show host/star. That's how most people know who he is these days. If he didn't have Celebrity Apprentice, would we be having this conversation? I don't think that we would. And if that is the case, why him? How is he any better than Kim Kardashian? She's a reality show star. Is she going to host a debate next?! Dear Lord. I can't even go there.



So far, however, some of the Republican candidates have shown at least a shred of common sense (which is a trait that has been absent from most of the previous debates so far). Ron Paul, Jon Huntsman and Mitt Romney have all said that they won't be attending Donald Trump's debate. The only ones who have committed to going are Newt Gingrich (who might be really smart, but seems to be a soulless, unethical weasel) and Rick Santorum (who doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of locking up the nomination). I can see why Newt would go as him and Donald Trump both seem to be self-important blowhards who love themselves an awful lot. And as far as Rick Santorum goes, well, his showing up to this thing really accentuates just one more reason why we don't want him anywhere near the presidency.


This thing needs to not happen. Donald Trump needs no encouragement in this arena. We need serious debates with people that are actually invested in the process and not out for their own personal promotion. And really, I know we're doomed, but why speed up the process by letting Donald Trump do whatever he wants?

Sphere: Related Content

Just Some Stuff

How about just a post about some random things? Yes? Good. Let's start with when I Googled "put Christ back in Christmas" and ended up with this:

Went to Walmart today and saw these. Now, they might be a lot of things, but barely there is not one of them.

The neighbor down the street has gone full retard this Yuletide season. Thank God that he's actually around the bend, otherwise I think I'd have a hard time falling asleep.

My friend sent me this picture that he snapped when passing by the Occupy Santa Cruz gathering. He said it appeared to be about 20 of your typical Santa Cruz hippie type just hanging out amidst the very strong aroma of marijuana.

Also from Santa Cruz, this poster asking for help in locating a missing key to a BMW. If he would only reword his poster, it would really help me give half a crap.

Am I the only one that sees a smiling woman with wild hair driving on this lamp? I noticed it the other day and now I can't unsee it.

Then there was this at a grocery store the other day. I cannot even imagine the sound that thing made as she dragged it all over the store. You'd think that would have tipped her off that it wasn't for personal use.

And finally, if you have to set a mousetrap, you might want to check it often. That's because mice, apparently, don't give an eff. I mean, in this case, they actually do, but they really don't.

Sphere: Related Content

Dogs Don't Need Clothes

Some people live in climates where it will snow when it's wintertime. I don't have snow here. I have this. (And while it was really freaking cold outside, dogs don't need clothes. They're dogs. The not needing clothes is implied. And I think he knows that. He looks a little humiliated.)

Sphere: Related Content

Another Jerry Sandusky Interview

Who in the hell is Jerry Sandusky's lawyer? I need to know so that I can make sure that, should the need ever arise (and I can't for the life of me imagine a scenario in which it would) and I need a lawyer, I can make damn sure that I don't hire him. Good Lord. Is his lawyer authorizing these interviews that Sandusky is giving to the press? Oh. Wait. Did I not mention that Sandusky gave another interview, this time on camera? And did I mention that (to no real surprise) that it comes off as a complete disaster if he is still going to try to maintain his innocence (which he seems to be doing, albeit poorly)? I left those out? My bad. Here's the interview Sandusky did with a reporter who appears to be from the New York Times (The actual interview part is only about 2:45 in length. Also, try to not be annoyed when the Good Morning America guy pronounces it as 'lenth'.):

"Those allegations are false. I didn't do those things....I don't know." Right, Jerry. It's all just craaaaaaaaazy that you're being charged with at least forty counts of child touching in one form or another. "I don't know." Yeah, that's really not the best defense and it certainly is probably the worst explanation ever.


In regard to what Joe Paterno said to him after Paterno learned of the allegations against Sandusky: "I don't know that he didn't know. I know that he didn't never said anything to me." I'm going to overlook the "didn't never" debacle simply because this is just so full of crap that grammatical correctness should probably be the least of Sandusky's worries after this interview aired. Oh, and way to throw Paterno under the bus. I'm not saying that Paterno doesn't deserve to be under the bus (as he most likely does and I'd really like to be driving said bus), but way to go.


When asked about his reaction to being confronted with the time that Mike McQueary (allegedly) saw him raping a little boy in the Penn State showers: "Yeah...uh...I told him that it didn't happen. And uh, you know, in my mind, there wasn't inappropriate behavior." Oh. My. God. So, he's just one of those guys who thinks that the man-boy love is perfectly all right, isn't he? What do those sickos call themselves? NAMBLA? Given that answer (and that he was smiling about it and appeared to be adjusting his shoes when he was responding), I'm leaning in that direction. So, in his mind, raping a little boy isn't inappropriate at all. Ok, then. (By the way, it SO is!) Wow. This guy is weird. Way to go, Penn State, for letting him continue to roam your campus and bring young boys there for freaking years! The whole campus should just be burned the to ground and rebuilt or something. This whole thing makes me sick.


When asked about his bizarre response to Bob Costas when Costas asked him if he was sexually attracted to young boys, he said: "I was sitting there saying just 'What in the world is this question?'" Yeah, it's a head scratcher all right. You're charged with over forty counts of child touching and someone asks you if you're sexually attracted to young boys. Completely out of the blue! Who would have seen that coming?!


And trying to explain that question is where he dooms himself. He actually says, "Am I gonna be...If I say "No, I'm not attracted to boys" that's not the truth because I'm attracted to young people. Boys...girls..." And then he stops talking because off camera, someone is speaking loudly to him. The voice over on the video suggests it might be his dumbass lawyer who was apparently cool with him doing this sort of interview in the first place.


Whatever. This is just irritating me to the point where my commentary is going to end here. This guy obviously has a jackass for an attorney and I'm actually glad about that. I hate it when these sorts of scumbags have some slick lawyer who can get them off on some sort of technicality even though they're obviously guilty as hell. Sandusky is guilty as hell and if all goes well, he'll be spending the rest of his life in prison (where one can only hope that he'll get a taste of some of his own behavior that he didn't think was inappropriate). These interviews are just too damning for him to get off, especially when he's being represented by a lawyer who not only lets him do these sorts of things, but hangs out and watches as they go down. I hope his trial is televised because with his idiot lawyer at the helm, Sandusky will probably take the stand. THAT is something that I'd like to see, as he will get torn to shreds by the prosecutors. Bring it on.

Sphere: Related Content

I'm Ready For My Close Up, Mr. DeMille

I have just stumbled upon a rather disturbing Tumblr called Celebrity Close Up. It's just what it sounds like it is. It's a bunch of really close pictures of celebrities. And I mean close. Like scary close. Like so close, you really don't want to ever look at that celebrity again. I'll give you some examples. (All examples are being provided with neither permission, nor malice.) Here is the lovely (from far away) Zooey Deschanel. As you can see, she clearly bleaches that little moustache of hers. Behold!

Um, yeah. Back off! Seriously, I feel like I'm intruding on her personal space. Or maybe it's more like I feel as if she's intruding on mine. Whatever it is, it creeps me out. It doesn't creep me out as much as this close up of fashion designer John Galliano, however.

See, that just scares me. And that's no where near as big and as close up as they appear on the actual Tumblr. And I don't want to steal/borrow all of their stuff when you could (and should) just go over there and see for yourself. Just try and position yourself as far away from your monitor as you can. You'll only hurt yourself if you don't.

Sphere: Related Content

A Real Piece Of Work

I always think that I'm not going to be surprised by people. And then what happens? You guessed it. I get surprised. And in this case, my surprise turned to anger very quickly.



Let's meet a woman named Angel Adams. Ms. Adams lives somewhere in Florida (shocking, I know) with her twelve children. That's right. TWELVE. And technically, she has fifteen, but I guess she must have misplaced the other three because they don't live with her. Now, Ms. Adams doesn't have any job or any way to support herself. She had a baby daddy who managed to father ten of those children, but he was arrested and left her to fend for herself.



When I said "fend for herself" I meant that she was left to get all that she could out of all of the social service programs and welfare programs that she possibly could. That got a little tricky after she was evicted from her apartment for (wait for it) having twelve children in there with her. She ended up at a motel and that's where the news cameras caught up with her. Good thing, too. If they hadn't, we never would have been able to see the tantrum that she throws, as she is demanding that SOMEONE be responsible for her children. Wait. What now?



Correct. SOMEONE needs to pay. Her exact words were "Somebody needs to pay for alllllllllllll my children! And my and Gary, and all our suffering and our pain! Somebody needs to be held accountable! Somebody needs to pay!” Uh, OK. See, now my first question is "Shouldn't YOU be responsible?" But of course, the guy who was doing the story didn't ask her that. Why not? Because the media sucks, that's why. What else would explain a reporter not asking the most basic of questions?! (Another thing that we don't know? What the baby daddy was arrested for. Why don't we know? Because the media sucks. Now you're catching on! But I digress.)



This woman is one of the most delusional people that I have had the displeasure of learning about in a long time. FIFTEEN children. No job. Apparently no knowledge of modern methods of birth control. And not grateful enough that social services pays her rent and her utilities. OK, then. You really need to see this woman. Below is a montage of her various appearances on the local news. The really good stuff happens early on, though. Right around 1:50-ish is where it starts to get good.

Sphere: Related Content