Rock out with your cock out.

Saw on the local news today the story of a guy who got up at 5 in the morning walked down to his kitchen to make coffee in and the nude, and was arrested for it. As it turns out some woman decided to take her son on a shortcut through his yard, walked by his window, saw him naked and called the police. Presumably she found it offensive that he was naked in his own home. We are entering a society of nevernudes (see arrested development.) This of course is once again an outrage. The police claim that although he was in his own home, and the people only saw him by trespassing on his property, he wanted them to see him naked and charged him with indecent exposure. It sounded like the cops didn't have a leg to stand on, they said on the news that the cops would have to prove that he knew that the trespassers were out there. I would like to see this woman arrested for trespassing, and the police docked their salary for the day for wasting their time on this issue (their salary should be handed out to the man they arrested to compensate him for their transgression.)

You seem a decent fellow, i hate to kill you. You seem a decent fellow, i hate to die.

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_13591564

So for months insurance companies have been spending hundreds of millions of dollars to support Obama's general health care reform ideas, and when a specific bill comes out, and the criticize one part of it, they are "misleading fear-mongers" who "can't be taken seriously?" Funny no one on the left was critisizing them when they were supporting reform. It seems like at least the people in this article are intentionally misunderstanding the problem insurance companies have, either that or they don't have the brains god gave rocks (entirely possible given that they are public officials.) Death panels aside, this is just insurance companies worried about the economics of making this work.

The insurance companies are complaining that the requirement that offer insurance to anyone regardless of their previous condition is unmanagable because too many people will not buy health insurance until they need it. That is to say i'm a healthy guy so i won't pay for health insurance, instead i'll a 200 dollar fine. Then when i get diagnosed with cancer, i'll go buy insurance and the insurance company has to give it to me and pay for my health care. These people allege that is silly

First off they suggest that the issurance companies complaints are unfair because they assume that people would try to game the system. Really? are you a serious person right now? Why would anyone assume that people would game the system. Just because people have tried to game every system ever created, that's no reason to be a pessimist and assume that people would try to game this system.

Then they discuss that fact that due to government subsidies it wouldn't be that expensive for the poor to pay for health insurance, so they will go ahead and do it.
But the issue was never whether or not the poor who pay for health insurance (they aren't paying for it anyway, the government is) rather it's people who make enough money that don't qualify for government subsidies, but are also healthy enough, (and not super rich) that they'd rather save the money. Why would i for example pay for healthcare. I don't need any, unless something unexpected happens, and if it does i'll get healthcare then. The problem with this is that insurance companies will end up paying the healthcare of people who never put any premiums in. To compensate for that they will have to raise premiums on those paying the whole time so that when others come in they will have left over money. But raising the premiums could cause more people to drop out, which means they'll have to raise premiums more, in an unending circle. Those without any consistent costs (no children, no chronic illness, etc.) will stop paying, because they don't have have to pay just in case something unexpected happens. That's how insurance works. All the healthy people agree to pay into a pool, so that if something unexpected happens to 1 of them, they can be taken care of. If only unhealthy people put into the pool, it can't possibly be big enough to cover the costs.

The insurance companies haven't even said that they are against this legislation, just that you have to make the penalty for not having insurance greater than the cost of having insurance, basically requiring everyone to have insurance. That way everyone is paying premiums the whole time, and that will balance out the costs of those who get sick, with those who don't. But that idea is politcally unpopular. With so many people losing their jobs/losing money even if they have jobs, forcing people to pay for health insurance, and taxing them with big penalties if they don't is far too unpopular so obviously these insurance companies must be evil for suggesting. If the left was really interested in making healthcare work, they would listen to the insurance companies instead of burying their legitimate complaints.

Did i offend you? Good!!!

I could not be more tired of this idea that someone being offended by something is a high crime. If there exist a single person who might find something offensive than clearly it must be done away with. This could not be better illustrated than these cases where people were afraid that the american flag could be offensive. In particular, as far as the articles say, nobody was in fact offended, but there was fear that some might be, and so the flags had to be taken down. The case of the firefighter is particularly stupid. They all wear american flags on their uniform, but a guy can't have one on his locker? What happens if they accidentally save the life of a guy who finds american flags offensive and he sues them for saving his life while wearing an american flag on their uniforms. Oh yeah, that could never happen, because it's mind numbingly stupid, just like being worried that someone would sue over an american flag on a fireman's locker. I guess i shouldn't say never because it could happen. Whatever the penalty for bringing stupid lawsuits to court (covering court costs?) it needs to be increased to curtail ridicioulus lawsuits.

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/politics/Firefight-Over-the-Red-White-and-Blue-64647657.html

http://www.katu.com/news/local/64059697.html

Also offensive? Halloween costumes. Get over yourself. People are on the lookout for things to be offenended by. As marge said about ultimate fighting "call me a kill joy but i think that because this is not to my taste, no one else should be able to enjoy it" you don't like the costume don't wear it, don't associate with people who wear it. It seems like people now have their profession to be going around finding things to be offended by, and trying to get other people on board by explaining to them why they should be offended. Limbaugh owning a football team and Imus' comments a couple years ago seem like prominent examples, but there plenty of examples all over from every political corner. Why don't you stop getting offended and get overyourself. Or feel free to be as offended as you want, but it keep it to yourself.

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/around-town/shopping/Illegal-Alien-Halloween-Costume-64648452.html

Steven Seagal in Cock Puncher

I watched the end of an officer and a gentleman on tv the other day. First off the cut out the part where the black sergent is training the new group of troops and says "the only thing that comes from (insert state) is steers and queers, and i don't see any horns on you, so you must be a queer." I don't see the point of cutting that out. Even if you are pro gay rights, what's wrong with demonstrating what the military was like back than. That movie was made in the early 80s, and What the sergeant says/does was considered totally fine, i'm sure the american public didn't bat an eye, except possibly to laugh. So why do we now have to pretend it didn't happen. But much worse was the fight scene between richard gere and the sargeant. They are fighting and it looks like gere had the upper hand and is about to win, and then the sergeant punches him in the groin. And they cut that out. They left part of the fight, but cut out the cock punch. So you can show people being murdered, you can show rotting corpses, you can shows where torture people, but you can't show a cock punch. Now i'm no fan of cock punching, i was as disturbed as anyone to read about adrien beltre's injury. (for those who are unaware, he's a baseball player, who doesn't wear a cup and got struck by a funny bounce of a ground ball directly in el testicles. The injury being as described as: some tearing of the testicle and apparently is some internal bleeding in there.) I don't remember if he needed surgery, or how much time he missed, I think he was on the DL for at least a month. Any crotch shots are certainly unfortunate, but hardly any more obscene than the gruesome violence that is allowed on tv.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091011/ap_on_re_us/us_calif_drunken_driving

why don't they have these in every car? You can buy breathalyzers, one of my friends has one. Set up a breathalyzer in every car so that it won't start unless you breathe bellow a .08 or whatever the limit is. Hell we'll assume that they aren't completely accurate and and set it up so that the limit is a.12 to leave room for margin of error. Who could possibly aruge against that. I uunderstand that theory that if you are not a criminal/have no history of drunk driving etc. what right does the state have to put a monitor in nyour car, and most importantly, make you pay for it. BUt the fact of the matter is they already make you pay for airbags, and i'm sure this would be significantly cheaper (it probably already is, but certainly would be if ever mass produced already built into cars) and would probably save more live than airbags also. As an added benefit the drinking age could be lowered back down to 18. THe justification for increasing the drinking age was druunk driving accidents by teens, with this technology that is no longer an issue. This would make too sense all around to ever become law.

Thanks for the update bigben

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091011/people_nm/us_polanski

Polanksi's lawyer is concerned about his state of mind and claims the director is depressed in njail, and should be allowed out on bail. Really? he's depressed in jail? that's shocking, i'm shocked, i just don't know what to say...except, good. You're supposed to be depressed in njail. I would be concerned about his state of mind if he wasn't depressed in jail. And obviously someone who once fled a country shouuld never be allowed to post bail again, that's just foolish.

http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20091008_Breakfast_at_school_now_is_on_the_principal.html?page=2&c=y

So remeber that article about the kid biking to school, and i said next the school system will be investigating what kids eat for breakfast. Well i thought at the time that i was joking, but it turns out i wasn't because the prophecy has been fulfilled. i have no problem with thhe school making breakfast availble for kids if they want it. I never ate breakfast in highschool, not because we didn't have the money for breakfast, but because i would rather sleep for 10 more minutes than get up and fry an egg. If they have studies that show food helps kids learn, than by all means make food available, but they aren't just making it available they are basically forcing kids to eat their breakfast by threatening principlas who don't get enough of their kids to eat the state provided breakfast. I can't imagine what the point of that could possibly be unless they want to use it as a political tool in the future to say look how awesome this program is, 90% of kids are now eating healthy breakfasts.

Surrender! you mean you wish to surrender to me? very well i accept.

a quick moment to not the success of purple and twins this past weekend. On saturday the Northwestern football team won. Not a huge win, but every win is important for them to try and maintain the steps up they have taken recently. On sunday the MN twins won allowing them to come back from 7 games down with 21 left to play in the season to secure a season tie with the tigers. On monday the vikings manhandled the packers, and tonight the twins beat the tigers in their 1 game tie-breaker to make it to the playoffs. Well done all around. The twins now have to fly to new york, and 20 hours after their emotionally draining win against the tigers take on the yankees in a series they are widely expect to be demolished in, but hey once you get in the playoffs anything can happen.

(in case it wasn't clear the yankees are prince humperdink, and the twins are wesley.)

Look, are you just fiddling around with me or what?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1218473/Airline-goes-green-asking-passengers-use-toilet-boarding.html

So a japanese airline is asking people to go to the bathroom before boarding so they weigh less, and it takes less fuel to fly the plane. Really? that's your suggestion? cause airplane bathrooms are so fantastic i was intentionally holding it in just for the chance to go to the bathroom in the airplane. Who doesn't already go to the bathroom before boarding if possible. Who is sitting around thinking well i could go to the bathroom now, but ah, what the hell i'll just wait and go on the plane.

Embiggen is a perfectly cromulent word.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/09/14/lcross-impact-site-picked/

Why would i link to a relatively uninteresting article about the possibility of ice on the moon? Because of the directions immediately following the photograph. Click to embiggen. I've got something for you to embiggen... that photo...

Ahh, vampire dinosaur...you can't make that stuff up.

http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=847190

What possible right could a school have to tell a child how they may or may not transport themselves to school. What's next, the school telling children what they may or may not eat for breakfast before leaving for school. It boggles my mind that any school system could possibly think that this is acceptable, but of course the worst part is that a police officer showed up essentially to further reprimand the child. So obviously all other crime in the city has been solved. Because this child was committing no crime, was making use of public roads while in the company of a parent, both of whom were taking proper saftey praucotions. Even if we accepted the right of the school to create such a policy, it is not a legal issue. It is up to the school to disipline a student for not adhering to their policy, not the police. Are the police going to be called in the intimidate the next student who doesn't do his homework? Everyone harassing these 2 law abiding citizens ought to be ashamed, and if possible disciplined for gross stupidity.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/093009dnmetsmokingfeud.3ed620b.html

Once again, it doesn't so much bother me that people complain that their neighbors in a smoking townhouse are smoking. You expect people to be stupid, but the fact that a judge actually signed a restraining order forbiding someone from smoking in their own home in a dwelling that is advertised as allowing smoking is something so preposterous nobody could make it up, because nobody would believe it. You don't like smoke go to a building that doesn't allow smoking. This is no different that a judge telling someone with a dog that they have to get rid of it because their neighbor is allergic to dogs, but knowingly and willingly rented an apartment in a building that allows pets. This judge is obviously anti smoking, and more interested in carrying out a political position than maintaining justice. She ought to lose her position, and be disbarred for this miscarriage of justice.

You mean he wins? jesus grandpa, what di you read me this thing for

So Hollywood's elite has started a petition saying they think roman polanski should be free. Possibly even worse, whoopi goldberg came out and said "I know it wasn't rape-rape. I think it was something else, but I don't believe it was rape-rape." where am i living right now? what kind of a world is this. Just to be clear polanksi was a middle aged man, who invited a 13 year old girl over to take modeling pictures of her. He took naked photos of her (already a crime) than gave her champagne (another crime) then gave her a quaalude (another crime) and then had sex with her (another crime) and she claims the sex was not consensual which makes it essentially unspeakably evil (he claims it was consensual, but otherwise doesn't dispute the account.) Of course consent is not an issue because it's statutory rape in any case. In what universe is that not rape-rape. If all these hollywood elites want to sign a petition saying that they don't think statutory rape should be a crime, then they should do that. At least that would be a legitimate statement of political belief. but they don't believe that, they think statutory rape shouldn't be a crime if one of their friends does it. This is no different than the friends of murderer signing a petition that they think he should be let free. This case is not even questionably, it's not like and 18 year old with a 15 year old or anything near that, it's a middle aged man who got a 13 year drunk and then had sex with. For this he spent a month and half in jail, before fleeing the country, and his supporters feel like he has already done his time.

I don't remember the exact details but i read about some highschool football player a few years ago who was 18 and a video tape surfaced of a 16 year old girl giving him oral sex. (i don't remember the exact details but along those lines) this was determined statutory rape, and for this he was sentenced to 15 years in jail, or somehting along those lines. If you want to get bent out of shape over statutory rape laws, sign petition to free people like this. People who have been caught up in a system intended to protect children from the roman polanksis of the world, but sometimes ensnare the wrong people. (my understanding is that in some states anyone below age 18 or 17 cannot give consent even to have sex with someone of the same age, so if 2 16 year olds have sex, they have both raped each other, and could both be imprisoned for rape.)

I wonder what all of these hollywood elites have to say about polygamist communities where young girls are married off to older men. I guarantee if they found out about a 13 year old girl being married to a middle aged man nobody would come out saying it isn't rape rape. They wouldn't be out signing petitions saying the polygamists shouldn't be prosecuted. Polanski has already won, having gotten to live out basically his entire life, but if justice exists for the wealthy and famous (we see repeatedly that it does not) he will never spend another day as a free man, and maybe in jail he'll gain some perspective and understanding about what that girl was feeling as he sodomized her (shawshank style.)