Old Opinions (2004-2011)
I created this archive because, well, there was a lot of crap on the original
opinion page and I know how hard it is to maintain any kind of attention span when
you're reading this kinda stuff. If you're not new to my web site, you've probably
already seen this stuff, so you can safely click your back button without agonizing
over whether or not you've read my words of wisdom.
04/23/2009: This Just In From DirecTV
So, I came home from work to find that we'd lost power. After restting all of the clocks,
I went to turn on the TV. Imagine my surprise when I got nothing but a blank (blue) screen.
After trying the various things they do to verify that your box is indeed dead (press the
RESET button. If that doesn't work, unplug it andplug it back in, and if that doesn't work,
unplug it, plug it back in and press the power button and the RESET button at the same time
to bring it out of standby mode), I called them.
Twice, I was accidentally hung up on while beginning the diagnostic step. By the 3rd call,
I had built up quite a head of steam. In the process of making me do all that diagnostic
stuff again (yes, for the third time), the next part went something like this:
DTV: Is your box plugged into a power strip or surge suppressor?
DTV, unplug it and plug it directly into the wall.
ME: Exactly what is that going to prove?
DTV: The power coming from the wall outlet is different from the power coming from the
ME: You're kidding, right?
DTV: No sir, it's different.
ME: What retard got you to believe that?
DTV: The power is different.
ME: I want you to bring a voltmeter down here and show me how 120v volts comin' outa
the freakin' wall is DIFFERENT than the 120 volts comin' outa the power strip. No really,
I need you to show me.
DTV: The power really is different.
ME: Is this the part of your brainless script titled "Now Piss The Customer Off By
Making a COMPLETELY Absurd Demand"?
DTV: I'm sorry sir, if you're inconvenienced.
ME: Tell you what, let's just skip the rest of this bullsh*t so that you have an
opportunity to tell me how you're going to fix my problem.
DTV: I have to make sure we've tried everything.
ME: How about if I try reaching through the goddamn phone so I can ring your neck?
DTV: There's no need to talk like that.
Me: Yeah, there's a need. You can't tell that I didn't want to spend 30 minutes on
the phone with some minimum wage idiot going over absurd diagnostic steps? I want my
satellite box replaced because it's BROKEN.
The rest of the phone call was spent arranging the replacement. I wish New Egg
sold satellite service. At least I'd get decent service.
02/01/2009: Who is John Galt?
Two instances - failed banks, and auto manufacturers. This is why the federal
government has n business being involved in business. I was taught that if your
screwed up, then you stand a very good possibility of losing both your financial
security AND your stature in the community.
In my eyes, the big banks did this by approving/buying risky loans. The
"Big 3" did this by NOT paying attention to the world around them, and instead,
catering to the whims of the (grossly under-educated) American consumer.
Seriously, some poor slob walks into a bank to get a loan for a house. The guy
is making just above minimum wage (like his wife, if he has one), and he wants to
buy a house that's WAY outside his ability to pay the mortgage. Despite this,
the asshole loan officer tells the guy he can only get approved if he takes on an
adjustable rate mortgage, but fails to explain the ramifications of these types
of loans. And you can guess what happens.
When the rate is adjusted, the guy STILL can't afford to make the paymments.
Welcome to Foreclosure City, and we hope you like your new domicile. You have your
choice of using a one-room cardboard box, or packing the whole family up and moving
under a freeway overpass.
In my oh-so-humble opinion, we need to let these institutions fail or succeed on
without any assistance or prodding from the U.S. tax payer. Let the chips fall
where they may.
The Big 3
Then we have the auto manufacturers. The American consumer is regularly hammered
by quicking rising (and slowly falling) gas prices, we are essentially at the mercy
of foreign oil suppliers, and supply problems keep whole system in a volatile
state. The problem here is that the American public has to be re-indoctrinated. They
feel a certain entitlement to drive big fancy cars, and pickup trucks that gulp fuel
at an alarming rate.
They need to do is stop making these kinds of cars. The federal government needs to
enact a law that says such vehicles can only be sold if they are either a) declared a
"classic vehicle" and sold to a museum for "display purposes only", or b) sold as
scrap (to be crushed/recycled).
The federal government is WAY to lenient on them regarding gas mileage as well.
The car makers are given WAY too much time to meet new federal mileage requirements,
and those requirements are WAY to conservative. Further, U.S. citizens need to
become more supportive of mass transit systems, and those mass transit systems have
to be made much more convenient so they'll be used. For instance, if it was faster,
and if there were a "stop" near both my house and work, I'd use it to commute to/from
The reason the Big 3 are getting away with this is because of the US car-buying
public. Once again, though, I have to say we should let these companies fail if that
is their fate.
The problems for both the banks and the Big 3 harken back to Atlas Shrugged,
where nobody is at fault, and nobody is responsible for fixing anything.
04/03/2007: Political Uncorrectness
Well, it just had to happen. I was looking at my Opinions page and made a mental note
that it’s been almost a year since my last episode of pointless raving (and wondering if
anyone at all reads this stuff), and then along comes something that pisses me off enough
to make a statement.
It seems that some UK schools are dropping the events that comprised the Holocaust
from their history lessons because school officials are afraid it might offend muslim
children. Are we now more interested in political correctness than we are in maintaining
a factual historical record of past events?
07/24/2006: Finally - A Solution
Okay, here’s the solution to the seemingly endless problems in the middle east – Turn
the whole region into a giant glass parking lot. Yeah, yeah, blah blah - millions of
people die - blah blah. You bleeding-heart liberals are starting to get on my nerves, so
how about this:
Truth: Nobody's gonna miss a few million religious zealots fighting over a couple of
acres of sand.
Silver lining: The news media can focus on other parts of the world, our presidents can
find other much more entertaining (and interesting) ways to sabotage their own political
careers, and we'd all be forced to find an alternative fuel because the entire middle east
will be a wasteland for a billion fuckin’ years.
05/15/2006: Psst! Wanna Buy Some Fighter Jets?
Well, it looks like Hugo (Chavez the Clown) is going to sell some F-16s to Iran, but
I don't think there's anything to worry about.
- It'll be weeks before the Iranians figure out that the planes don't run on crude.
- It won't take long for local villagers to disassemble the planes and incorporate
the parts as major structural pieces in their mud huts.
- None of the weapon firing mechanisms are labelled "JIHAD!", so they won't be
able to inflict any damage.
- As a suicide bomber, it would be pretty hard to strap an F-16 around your waist
and walk into a public place without being noticed.
- There would be several false starts as suicide bombers. The first guy would
inadvertantly hook the detonator up to the landing gear circuit and be captured as a result
of being knocked unconscious by the front wheel. The second guy would mistakenly connect
the detonator to the ejection seat because it was labeled "Explosive". The comedy
would continue unabated...
05/07/2006: Not The Sharpest Knives In The Drawer
The "online chat" support people at AT&T are about 2 enzymes short of being identifiable as
"intelligent life" on this planet.
I'm having intermittent synch problems on my modem, and the guy told me to power
cycle the modem. I told him it would disconnect our chat session, and he said that it
wouldn't. Well, it did disconnect us. When I reconnected, of course it was with an
apparently different person who wanted me to answer all the same questions again, and
who also shared the same opinion of how the modem *should* work when I unplug the damn
thing - "That shouldn't happen" was all the idiot said. Well, if that was really the
freakin' case, I wouldn't be talking to the second support person, now would I?
While I'm talking about these online support people, let me say that the chat macros
that generate the overly syrupy "we're sorry you're being inconvenienced" messages just
annoy the hell outa me, and it makes me feel like I'm not chatting with a real person.
Anyway, I got the voice support number, and was transferred to a tier-2 tech rep who
wouldn't help me with the problem because the modem is in bridge mode, saying "We don't
support the modem if it's in bridge mode."
What kind of solidified bull methane is that? If it's a function of the modem AT&T
sent me, they should damn well support it.
05/05/2006: Browser Zealotry
Some idiot has suggested that people refuse to allow IE to connect to their web page.
The intent is to advocate the adoption of FireFox as their one and only browser. IMHO,
doing something like this is equally as stupid as purposely coding a site just to
As users (and web site visitors) we should demand that all browsers render a given web
site the SAME WAY (regardless of religious discussions concerning operating system), and
that W3C standards either be supported or not supported instead of being "interpreted"
differently. Currently, Opera 9 s the only (?) browser that passes the Acid2 test.
This is part of the petty daily bullshit that simply wouldn't have to happen if the
browser manufacturers would grow up and stop acting like children fighting over a
05/03/2006: Stupid Headlines
Since the dawn of the printed newspaper, headlines have been used to draw attention to
a story. Generally, a headline draws the reader's attention by using as few words as
possible to convey the associated story's content. Some headlines can be mis-construed in
a number of ways, depending on the reader. Other times, meanings can be mis-constured if
read out-loud. For example, I founds the following gem on The Drudge Retort web site:
"Dike Threatens South Florida"
Now, given our current awareness of gay/lesbian "issues", this is not a headline I
would use to talk about a big wall holding back water from flooding a densely populated
region of the state. Of course, that's just me...
05/02/2006: Trashing The Star-Spangled Banner
By now, everyone has heard about the mexican version of our national anthem. Here's the
whole song, the way it was originally written by Francis Scott Key (and yeah, I'm one of
the roughly 40% of Americans that actually knows the words to the song):
O say, can you see, by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming!
And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there:
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
On the shore, dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected now shines in the stream:
Tis the star-spangled banner! O long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation!
Blest with victory and peace, may the Heaven-rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause, it is just,
And this be our motto: “In God is our trust.”
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
Of course, the Mexicans aren't interested in the true meaning of the song (not that I
expected them to be). Here's the translation of "Our Anthem":
Do you see it arising, by the light of the dawn,
That which we hailed so much when the night fell?
Its stars, its stripes were streaming yesterday
In the fierce combat, as a sign of victory,
The brilliance of battle, in step with freedom,
Throughout the night they said: "It will be defended!"
Oh say you! Does it still wave, its starred beauty,
Over the land of the free, the sacred flag?
Its stars, its stripes, liberty, we are equal.
We are brothers, it is our anthem.
In the fierce combat, as a sign of victory,
The brilliance of battle... (My people, keep fighting!)
...in step with freedom, (Now is the time to break the chains!)
Throughout the night they said: "It will be defended!"
Oh say you! Does it still wave, its starred beauty,
Over the land of the free, the sacred flag?
Now tell me - how the FUCK does that even come close to the original? Here's my
feelings - any imigrant that agrees with these lyrics can kiss my red-white-and-blue redneck ass
and go back to their dismal little 3rd-world country. Their own anthem was written
after we kicked their asses back across the Rio Grande in 1837, and the
sentiment expressed therein is still espoused by their nutcase president,
I (and most of my countrymen) don't mind legal immigration. In fact, I'm all for it.
But illegal immigration is a completely different matter. If I have to follow the rules,
everyone else should have to do the same. I don't believe in "amnesty", or even the "guest
worker" program. I think people should wait their turn and go through the process, and
that all illegal immigrants should be expelled. I refuse to allow illegals to work on my
land, and tell all the contractors (landscaping, construction, etc) not to bring them to my
Their little boycott day has resulted in lighter traffic, and better parking at work, and
my lawn even still got mowed. Total impact on me was basically positive. So they can kiss
04/12/2006: Nice Melons!
At Bellevue Community College in Seattle, a question on a practice test for a math final
read, "Condoleezza holds a watermelon just over the edge of the roof of the 300-foot Federal
Building, and tosses it up with a velocity of 20 feet per second." The question went on to
ask when the watermelon will hit the ground, based on a formula provided. Students, saying
the question propagates a racial stereotype and denigrates US Secretary of State Rice, met
with the chairman of the math department who agreed to remove the question from the
department's files. But the women left feeling the school needed to take a deeper look at
how a racist stereotype could be inserted into the curriculum.
Maybe they should have used "cracker" in the question instead of "watermelon".
04/11/2006: Ordering DSL - What a Royal Pain In The Ass
I called SBC yesterday to order a) SBC local service, and b) DSL.
The first lady I talked to took 20 minutes to get to the point where we started talking
about the DSL stuff. Our conversation was halted when I said "But wait - I want the
Business Pro-S package with 5 static IP addresses. Is that possible?"
She told me she didn't know but she could transfer me to the DSL rep to coninue my order.
So off I go holding for about 5 minutes in the process.
The next lady picks up the phone I ask her my DSL question, find out I can get the
desired plan, and then she starts asking me the same set of questions the previous lady
did. I asked, "Didn't she save my info in the computer efore transferring me?" She said
no. Then I asked, "Is she running dfown the hall with my paperwork in her hand?" She told
me no again. About 25 minutes later, she tries to end our conversation with the phrase "And
your new phone number will be..."
I stopped her and said, "No, I want to keep the number I have now."
"Well then, you'll have to talk to the Win-Back department. Let me transfer you."
After waiting another five minutes, she comes back on the line and tells me they're
closed for the day. Of course, because it's me that needs to talk to them. So, I asked "Am
I going to have to answer all these questions a third time when I talk to them tomorrow?"
"No sir, I saved all your info."
So, I wait until today, and call the number she gave me to talk to the win-back idiot.
You can probably guess what happened. I spent another 25 minutes answering the SAME set of
questions, only this time, I had to actually argue with the lady because I didn't want
their stinking satellite TV crap. When we got to the DSL part, she told me she couldn't
put the business dsl on a residential line herself, and that I had to call another "direct"
number. At least my basic phone service appears to be "pending" (evidently a fancy word
for the phrase "we may have to ask you all these questions again").
So I call the direct number. The lady that answers starts to automatically ask me all
those questions again. I stopped her and said I just want to order DSL, so she transfers me
to someone else. I guess that number isn't so direct afterall.
After another 30 minutes on the phone, I finally have everything "pending", but phones
service won't start for 5 days, and DSL won't start until 5 days after that.
I don't even have their service yet, and I'm already pissed off at them.
I guess one benefit is that they're all in the US and I didn't have to talk to someone
in India who claims to be "Larry".
Paris Hilton is being considered for the role of Mother Theresa in an upcoming film. My
ability to suspend disbelief has finally been overwhelmed. First, she can't act worth spit
(did you see her in House of Wax?). Second, casting her as Mother Theresa would be
almost as plausible as casting Charles Manson as Gandhi.
Update (04/06/2006): She turned down the role. One can only guess why, but I bet
it was because she didn't like the wardrobe implications. I mean, who wants to walk around
stooped over all day, and dressed in black/white robes?
04/03/2006: Trust us - No, Really
A key DHS official was caught red-handed trying to seduce what he thought was a 14-year
old into having sex. I wonder why that propensity didn't surface during his security
background check for his top-secret clearance? This leads me to ask why it costs the
government $100,000 to conduct just one of these security clearance checks if this kind of
crap slips through. Finally, how does it make you feel to know that the people charged
with our "security" are the same folks that are trying to assualt our kids?
04/01/2006: Don't Let The Door Hit You In The Ass
School CHILDREN protesting proposed immigration reform. Where do they get off? They have
no clue as to the intricacies or financial repercussions of making such changes. They've
not experienced the burdon on their local healthcare infrastructure, and are shielded from
detrimental effects on their education system. Vincente Fox has publicly stated that he
wants to "take back" most of the southwestern United States, and he's doing it by
re-populating the region with Mexicans, implcitly encouraging illegal border crossings by
doing nothing to help the US to prevent it.
If I see a Mexican flag flying at any public facility here in San Antonio, I will
personally bring it down. I won't burn it or anything like that, but I will not tolerate a
foreign country's flag being flown over U.S. soil. It doesn't belong here. Finally, if
these people are so enthralled with their country of origin, then by god, I wish they'd go
fuckin' back there.
03/31/2006: Slap and Tickle In Washington
A woman purposely walks AROUND metal detectors and security staff, ignores REPEATED
warnings to stop, and when a police officer attempts to restrain her, she PUNCHES HIM. The
fun doesn't stop there. It turns out she's a congresswoman who forgot her identifying lapel
pin and was not recognized by the security guards. Then hilarity ensues - she actually
accuses the cop of ASSAULT, calls everyone involved racists, and the black community rallies
behind her as if she was just pressed into slavery.
First, NOBODY should get a free pass through a metal detector - NOBODY - even if they're
wearing a super-secret lapel pin and decoder ring! Second, she knew the freakin rules, yet
she IGNORED them. Lastly, she overtly challenged the authority of the police officer when he
attempted to exercise a reasonable level of physical restraint to prevent her from
proceeding further into the building. What kind of message did THAT send to her under-aged
constituants? She should be recalled and replaced by someone that will be more likely to
follow the rules.
It looks like a PDA on steroids, or a less capable game console. It's too big for your
pocket, so I imagine someone will come up with a stylish leather carrying case/purse. BTW,
did anyone catch the blurb on the news showing someone on the Google website while
demonstrating the device? I bet Bill Gates is twisting in the wind over that one,
especially since their new search engine went live on the same day. LOL!
03/09/2006: The Dubai Ports Thing
I don't mind a company owned by a foreigner being in charge of the ports in question.
What I *do* mind is that the company that's about to take over is owned by the country in
question (okay, it's owned by a member of the ruling family - toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe).
In my eyes, that's a clear conflict of interest and it could come back to bite the U.S.
in the ass. Of course, the deal is now off because DPW pulled the plug itself, but you
have to wonder if they'll take it personally, throw a tantrum, and penalize the U.S. in
some other. I'm sure they'd react the same way if a U.S. government-owned company came
over there to control THEIR airport(s).
When the President threatened a veto - even AFTER the House voted 62-2 *against* the
deal, you gotta wonder what's going through the president's head. It's clear that the
country and the legislature didn't want this deal to happen, yet the President continued
headlong down the path. I wonder what Dubai and the UAE had on him that would force him
to be so willing to allow such a deal...
02/07/2006: Muslamic Cartoons
By now, I'm sure everyone is aware of the bru-ha-ha raised by the Danish cartoons
depicting Muhammed (I guess I'd be a little upset too if only one of the five were actually
funny). In any case, it seems there's a frieze at the US Supreme Court that depicts all of
the great law-givers throughout history, and one of them is (you guessed it) Muhammed. It
seems the court has been petititioned to remove Muhammed from the frieze (and the request
was soundly rejected). As long as the court is entertaining suggestions for change to the
frieze, I think we could change it to feature Moe in a cute little spring dress.
02/06/2006: New Words I'd Like to Propose
Given the rash of muslim-related news we've seen in the last five years, I'd like to
propose the following words be added to our daily vocabulary:
- muslimified - that which as been oppressed due to muslamic over-sensitivity
- musliminated - that person or animal which has been assimilated into or made
apologetic to muslim culture, usually through intimidation via death threats
02/01/2006: Playing With the Numbers
The State of the Union speech yielded some pretty interesting figures. But let's crunch
some numbers, shall we?
He said he would reduce our dependancy on mid-east oil by 75%. When you consider that
only 20% of our oil comes from the middle east, that means just a %15 drop in our
dependancy on *imported* oil - not so impressive now, is it.
Now, how do you think they're going to replace that 15%? Why, by drilling in Alaska!
He's an oil man, and he won't allow the country to reduce its dependancy on oil.
Nice try GW, but that dawg just don't hunt.
01/31/2006: What Happened to Our Will to Fight?
The company I work for recently released their coporate policy manual, and one clause in
it really bothered me.
"When deemed necessary,
the company may search and inspect both company property and personal items, including
vehicles, that the employee brings onto company property. Employees shall have no expectation
of privacy while at company offices, on company property, or while performing work at any
location for the company. Refusal to cooperate in a search, inspection, or investigation will
result in disciplinary action up to and including termination of employment."
Since the boss invited comments concerning the manual, I figured I would off the following:
I agree that the
"expectation of privacy" stops at the front door to company offices. But a person that has
taken normal precautions to maintain his privacy, that is, precautions customarily taken by
those seeking to exclude others, is usually a significant factor in determining legitimacy of
expectation. In other words, I have an expectation of privacy where my car is concerned
because it's locked, and I am the exclusive key holder. If an item of interest is not laying
in plain sight, the inspecting party has no reasonable or probable cause to conduct a search
of the vehicle. Finally, since access to the company parking lot is not controlled (anyone
can pull in and park there, as opposed to sites such as military bases), and since the
parking lot is shared with other businesses, the legitimacy of a search of privately owned
vehicles by company officials is further diluted. As such, this policy borders on violating
my 4th Amendment rights.
Before I go further, let me say that I recognize that this is a standard clause in a
corporate policy manual, and that sometimes, it might be in the best interest of a company to
search a vehicle before it's allowed on company property, such as random car inspections when
entering a *controlled* facility (like a military bases, or defense contractors that manufacture
security-sensitive devices or munitions). I say this just to illustrate that I'm not some
nutcase that blindly believes the Constitution is a blanket that wraps all examples, such as
public safety or national security.
Now, regardless of whether I'm right or wrong about an expectation of privacy outside
corporate offices (and I think I'm right to voice such a concern), I've told a couple of
family members about this, and of course my co-workers are aware. The part that REALLY
bothers me is that so many people respond with something like "Big deal, if they want to
search my car so what? I have nothing to hide." The apathy I've experienced regarding
the erosion of our constitutional rights is nothing short of astounding. I spent five years
of my life defending the Constitution, and people around me don't appear to give a rat's
ass about having their rights stripped away from them.
Some folks have suggested that if I don't like the car-search rule, I could easily park
someplace else. Well, using such a "work-around" implies acceptance of the clause as legal,
and therefore a waiver of my constitutional rights.
If we, as Americans, continue to allow government and corporations to whittle away our
rights, pretty soon, we'll be left with no choice but to have another revolution. It's
obvious (to me) that our election process is hopelessly corrupted by corporate special
interests, and that the government cannot dig their way out of the problems on their
01/30/2006: Reporters on the Front Lines
It's a damn shame that Bob Woodruff got hurt in Iraq, but the level of media attention
over this event is astounding. The military experiences THOUSANDS of injuries and deaths,
and all they get is a fucking number in the news ("Another 7 Marines died in Iraq today,
and 17 were injured when..."). What is wrong with that picture?
10/28/2005: Mexico Cracking Down
A few years ago, Steven Cohen was sued for theft via fraud of the domain name sex.com.
Shortly after losing that suit (the plaintiff was awarded $82 million, including interest),
he fled the country. Well, it seems that Cohen was arrested by Mexican authorities on an
Ignoring the obvious lack of priority applicable to this apprehension, let's ponder the
irony of Mexico arresting someone for illgal immigration. This shit really makes me laugh.
10/27/2005: It Was The New Guy - Honest!
Microsoft recently made some shady moves trying to implement a new license that requires
portable devices (iPods, et al) that support multiple media formats - including Microsoft's
media format - to use Microsoft's formats EXCLUSIVELY. When they were called out on the
carpet by a federal judge, they actually tried to blame it on some new guy (what they called
a "lower-level business person") that was unfamiliar with Microsoft's "policy of fair and
open competition through better technology" (what they meant was "policy of fair and
open competition through better technology but only if that technology is comes from Microsoft").
The federal government apparently decided that it nipped this problem in the bud, and is
not worthy of further consideration. IMHO, someone's gotta start kicking Microsoft in the
freakin head so they get through their thick skulls that they can't pull that kinda shit.
On a side-note, I wonder how Steve Balmer likes being referred to as a "lower-level business person"...
08/23/2005: Al Qaeda Training
Like any well-disciplined armed force (tongue planted firmly in cheek), Al Qaeda
probably makes sure it's personnel are aware of all aspects of an upcoming mission.
Last Friday, the mission was apparently to fire upon and damage/sink American warships
anchored/moored at the port of Aqaba in Jordan.
I'm sure most folks out there are familiar with Murphy's Law - If something
can go wrong, it *will* go wrong - and it looks like Murphy was sitting in on
the pre-mission briefing. The images accompanying this article are the flash
cards they used to train their operatives how to recognize certain objects, and
were recently smuggled out of the middle east. I think it's pretty clear what the
problem might be...
The following flash card images are copyright (c) 2005 by Angry
Towel-Head Training Aids, Mountainous Region, Afghanistan. Caption translations
provided by Akbar Al Hassan Ahmed Sirak Abu Mohammad Kal Amir Zarcowi Abdullah
al-Sihly (we call him "Joe" for short).
The latest pork-filled energy bill will have the federal government subsidizing
"big oil", despite their recent all time record profits for the last fiscal year.
I know I'm not the only one that has a problem wit this, but nobody's doing
anything about it. Meanwhile, gas prices are going through the freakin' roof, and
we're just bending over the trunklids of our cars and takin' it in the fuckin
shorts with nary a whimper!
The only thing people seem to be saying is "Gee, Fred, prices went up another seven
cents today." And then someone else says, "Yeah, but at least it wasn't 15 cents
like yesterday.", like big oil is doing us a goddamn favor!
Where's the righteous indignation?! Where's the anger!? Where is the determination
to fight our way to our feet and refuse to continue to be butt-fucked by big oil?
05/30/2004: Finally, Microsoft Gets It Right
Everybody knows how hard it is to make Windows (any version you happen to name) more
secure. Well it seems Microsoft finally got it right. A few weeks ago, they released a
security patch which has the effect of rendering Windows completely un-usable by refusing
to allow the user to log in. Finally - a secure version of windows.
03/18/2004: Let's Just Set Fire To The Constitution
Check out HR 3920 folks, brought to you by the nice folks representing Kentucky in the
House of Representitives:
HR 3920 IH
H. R. 3920
To allow Congress to reverse the judgments of the United States Supreme Court.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 9, 2004
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky (for himself, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. EVERETT, Mr. POMBO, Mr. COBLE,
Mr. COLLINS, Mr. GOODE, Mr. PITTS, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. HEFLEY, Mr. DOOLITTLE,
and Mr. KINGSTON) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee
on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions
as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
To allow Congress to reverse the judgments of the United States Supreme Court.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America
in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL REVERSAL OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS.
The Congress may, if two thirds of each House agree, reverse a judgment of the United
States Supreme Court
(1) if that judgment is handed down after the date of the enactment of this Act; and
(2) to the extent that judgment concerns the constitutionality of an Act of Congress.
SEC. 3. PROCEDURE.
The procedure for reversing a judgment under section 2 shall be, as near as may be and
consistent with the authority of each House of Congress to adopt its own rules of
proceeding, the same as that used for considering whether or not to override a veto of
legislation by the President.
SEC. 4. BASIS FOR ENACTMENT.
This Act is enacted pursuant to the power of Congress under article III, section 2, of
the Constitution of the United States.
This piece of legislative bullshit proposes that Congress could override decisions
made by the US Supreme Court. Pardon me, but have any of these idiots been made aware
of our system of "checks and balances"? This bill would effectively politicize the
Supreme Court, thus making the court as effective as a kickstand on a Sherman tank.
03/18/2004: Same-sex Marriages
Okay, IMHO, that's just gross. Call 'em queers, homos, fags, pillow-biters, or whatever
you want, but who gives a rat's ass if they want to marry each other? Certainly, an
amendment to the Constitution should be completely out of the freakin' question.
Getting married isn't a basic human right - it's a religious edict. The only thing any
government should care about is whether or not you of legal age. Beyond that, who really
gives a fuck? If you're hung up on some religion that forbids same-sex marriage, then I
guess you have the right to be mortified and even self-righteous.
By the way, when all this crap was being over-covered by the various news agencies, why
weren't there any really hot lesbo babes on camera? You know, like the impossibly gorgeous
ones that we've all seen on our favorite porn site(s).
Lastly, most of these morons (the fags) only got married as an act of social
disobedience - their 15 minutes of fame.
03/18/2004: Drunk Drivers
How many times have you heard a news report about a person getting caught driving drunk
for the ump-teenth time (usually after killing or maiming an innocent person who happend
to be unlucky enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time)? Well, I have a
I think if they blow an BAC that meets or exceeds the legal limit (which IMHO is WAY to
lenient), the cop should put a bullet in their head right then and there, and the corpse
should be allowed to rot by the side of the road to serve as a warning to others.
03/18/2004: Immigration Idea
Maybe we should require anyone applying for citizenship to server in the military.
No, not in some back-area job, but right on the front lines. If they're willing to risk
taking a bullet in defense of this country, then they deserve the right to learn English
and become a citizen.
03/18/2004: Camilo Mejia - Conscientious Objector or Good Old Fashioned Coward?
For those of you that haven't bothered to keep up, this is the guy that joined the
military (voluntarily), went to Iraq, came home on leave, and then went AWOL for a few
months. He followed this up by turning himself in and claiming conscientious objector
status. I knew a guy in the Navy that did this - he was a follower of the "Church of
Scientology", so that should tell you a little something about him - and it took him
MONTHS to get approved as an objector and finally discharged. Mind you, this was back
in the mid-70's just after the ship's last cruise to the 'Nam.
Mejia is about as religiously conscious as one of my freshly squeezed out turds. It's
more likely he's just a fuckin' coward. Desserters in time of war are supposed to be
shot. If he's so religious that he feels the need to dessert, then meeting his maker a
little earlier than plannned shouldn't ruffle his yellow-bellied chicken feathers. I
think he should do the honorable thing and just shoot himself.
In fact, why don't all you weak-minded fuckers that are like this guy just go jump
off something really tall?
03/17/2004: Darwin Award Nominee?
I know, today has been busy on the ol' Opinions Page - I found
this write-up on the web. I don't know how
truthful it is, but I almost crapped my pants I was laughing so hard. I copied it in
it's entirety (I hope nobody minds), and I merely reformatted it to make it more readable.
03/17/2004: High-Water Crossings - I Get It Now
I know why we have such a problem here in San Antonio with people getting swept away
at high-water crossings during heavy rains. The water flowing through one of these areas
flows at a higher velocity than the Rio Grande, and the ignorant immigrants simply aren't
expecting the water to be moving that quickly. They see a dark, foreboding expanse of
water and feel compelled to cross it. Maybe one way to stop this foolishness is to have
a border patrol truck parked at all of the problem areas.
03/17/2004: George Bush - A Very Real Threat To Our Constitution
Did you know that if you show up where Bush is going to drive/walk by, and if you're
carrying what the SS (Secret Service) consider to be anti-Bush literature, signage, or
anything else indicating that you're not pleased with how Bush is running things, you
will be ushered (forcibly if necessary) to a special fenced-in containment area as much
as a MILE away from where Bush will be? The press won't see you, the President won't
see you, and if you stray from this containment area, you will be ARRESTED.
Technically speaking, this is not a violation of our right to free speech, but it is
censorship in every sense of the term. Now, the SS will claim that they don't want to
take any chances with security, but that's a load of horseshit. I'm sorry, but I don't
remember seeing the resolution on the ballot that converted this country to a FUCKING