Gym, what's a gym? Oh, a gym.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1914857-1,00.html

Interesting take on dieting. Essentially excersize doesn't help people lose weight. Excersize has 2 draw backs, first it turns out excersizing doesn't increase people's overall level of movement, because after excersizing people tend to sit around more balancing out with their earlier excersize. Likewise after excersizing people becoming hungrier, and eat more, which can more than balance out the calories you lost from working out. When they looked at a group of children, they found that children ate 100 calories more than burned off, just actually gaining weight instead of losing weight from their excersize. That isn't to say you shouldn't excersize, it's healthier anyway, but if you really want to use it as a weight lose device you have to make sure to keep your calories constant, and not reward yourself with extra food for excorsizing, or take the opportunity to reward yourself by lazing around instead of doing the gardening/housework/whatever you what have done.

Homer: Oh Marge, how could you let me let myself go like this?
Marge: Me? I'm not the one who puts butter in your coffee.

Here's the door to your body, see? And these are oversized novelty germs. That's influenza, that's bronchitis,

and this cute little cuddle-bug is pancreatic cancer. Here's what happens when they all try to get through the door at once. [tries to cram a bunch through the model door. The "germs" get stuck] Woo-woo-woo-woo-woo-woo-woo! Move it, chowderhead! We call it, "Three Stooges Syndrome."
Burns: So what you're saying is, I'm indestructible!
Doctor: Oh, no, no, in fact, even slight breeze could --
Burns: Indestructible.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/03/virus-therapy-hiv/

Sounds like a good idea. If you can't beat them join them. Can't stop the spread of aids, so create a virus that attacks the aids virus whenever it comes into contact with it. It won't cure those people who have it, but if it can arrest its spread, it's a great start.

You go through life, you try to be nice to people, you struggle to resist the urge to punch 'em in the face, and for what?

So some pimply little puke can treat you like dirt because you're not on the team. Well, I'm better than dirt. Well, most kinds of dirt. I mean not that fancy store bought dirt. That stuffs loaded with nutrients. I... I can't compete with that stuff.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pB_TmpSjJI

The whole idea of eminent domain is essentially bogus. It's one thing if there is a war or some other sort of crises situation. But using eminent domain as an economic tool should be illegal. Eminent domain has been twisted to give the government the right to take your property any time they feel like it. This is a basic perversion of the original concept of the founding fathers who had almost used the phrase property instead of happiness in declaring universal rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If the government, or any private developer wants to buy your property they should up the offer until you are willing to pay. If it isn't worth it to them to buy the property from you than it is both morally and economically wrong to take the property by force. By definition if they cannot offer you enough incentive in the form of money or other assets to get you to sell than you are receiving more utility from the building then they would from buying it (otherwise they could keep upping the offer) and thus it decreases total utility to transfer the property (not that it is really relevant because even if you could demonstrate increased total utility it would still be wrong to take the property by force.) This is another example of crony capitalism which is one of the most terrible problems of modern society, the unity of big business with big government. Rather then allowing the free market to run its course as the free market dictates modern corporations/developers/etc convince the government to help them out and close off markets/give them advantages that retard innovation. Unfortunately politicians get all their money from businesses so both republicans and democrats suffer from crony capitalism, the only difference is who their cronies are.

A lifetime of working in a nuclear power plant has given me a healthy green glow. And left me as impotent as a Nevada boxing commisioner

http://notrickszone.com/2011/03/14/even-candles-kill-many-more-than-nuclear-power/

Good article about the relative danger of nuclear power. I'm afraid this accident will essentially kill nuclear power, which was just starting to get on it's feet again as a response to global warming/coal/gas fears. This isn't meant to suggest that nuclear power is not at all dangerous, but simply to put the danger in context. Everything is dangerous. Not a single person has died as a result of the accident at 3 mile island. According to the World Health organization chernobyl caused 4,000 deaths, up until now those are the only deaths attributed to nuclear power. That works out to less than 100 deaths world wide per year for the past 50 years we've been using nuclear power, compared to 126 deaths per year just in the us attributed to candles. It's unclear how many people will die as a result of the problems in japan, but even if that turns out very badly the fact is the death toll attributed to nuclear power is infinitesimal when compared to something like tobacco or alcohol. There may be more deaths caused by just general nuclear proliferation that haven't been properly accounted for. May just the general use of nuclear power plants causes enough general radioactive proliferation that it increases the cancer rates world wide, and that isn't being properly measured. But we know that pollution from coal power plants is absolutely responsible increased death rates, and solar power uses all kinds of chemicals that would have created it's on ecological nightmare had the earthquake/tsunami destroyed the solar panels and washed all the chemicals in the sea/water supplies. Obviously the nuclear problem in japan is very serious, but the lesson to take from it is to have better back up system in place in case of serious problems, not to abandon nuclear power all together.

Hello. I'm Leonard Nimoy. The following tale of alien encounters is
true. And by true, I mean false. It's all lies. But they're
entertaining lies. And in the end, isn't that the real truth? The
answer is: No.

Come on, men! Smash those atoms! You there, turn out your pockets. Aha - atoms! One, two, three, four... SIX of them! Take him away!

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/13/nyregion/13homes.html?src=recg&pagewanted=all

This is what is wrong with Unions, and public unions in particular. If this was going on in a private union, it would a scandal, the government would crack down on them, but because it's a public union, and therefore it is the government there's nothing for them to do. They don't dare take on the union, so they can't actually fire any of these people. So what does the governor, the governor who ignored all these problems as attorney general, do? First he proclaims that he is shocked, shocked to find out that there is gambling going on in this establishment, and then he fires the head the department as if that could possibly do anything. So the end result of the union, as is the natural order for a union, is that the bad employees are never punished for their incompetence, negligence or criminal behavior because that would set a bad precedent that employees could be judge based on how well they do the job. But when along comes the accidental could employee, he must be punished and put down in his place. If he were to outshine his fellow employees and demonstrate just how woefully they are doing their jobs it would be bad for everybody. This is not confined to public unions i've heard similar stories about people who worked briefly at one of detroits big 3, work faster than time required by union negotiated rules and you get yelled at by the union. If you've ever seen stand and deliver, it's a similar story. Nobody wants to believe that the children could possibly be taught because if that were true than the teachers would be responsible for failing to teach them. As such a teacher who proves that the children can be taught is a terrible terrible enemy. The sooner we end these unions, the sooner we get back on a road to be a successful country.

We can't bust heads like we used to. But we have our ways. One trick is to tell stories that don't go anywhere. Like the time I caught the ferry to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for m'shoe. So I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt. Which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. Gimme five bees for a quarter, you'd say. Now where was I... oh yeah. The important thing was that I had an onion tied to my belt, which was the style at the time. You couldn't get white onions, because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones...

Revenge List: Bill of Rights, Grandpa, Fat-Free Lard, Gravity, Emmys, Darwin, H2WHOA!, Billy Crystal, God, Soloflex, The Boy, Stern Lecture Plumbing

Econo-Save

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2011-03/gravitys-sworn-enemy-roger-babson-and-gravity-research-foundation

I agree, gravity is for suckers. Man's greatest natural enemy. Gravity, gravity and dinosaurs. one down, one still to go.

Marge! I just realized. I am the "ow" in the word "now."

http://www.copblock.org/1904/the-anti-rave-act-of-2011/

As long as you're in my house you'll do what I do and believe what I believe. So Bart butter your bacon.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4041106,00.html

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=172669

All cultures are not created equal. In modern academia it has been decided that all cultures are different and unique and beautiful, and it is wrong for people from 1 culture to criticize another culture just because it's different. That's idiotic. If racists in the southern US started celebrating and handing out candy because a black family had been murdered, including a baby, everyone would naturally condemn them as being ignorant racist psychopaths. But because it's some palestinians it's okay? No, it's not. There is something wrong with modern muslim society, that is i guess that it is not modern. They are still morally living in the dark ages. So i need to be clear here this isn't a problem solely associated with muslim societies, many of the current problems with muslim societies could also have been found in christian societies through various time periods, but we now recognize that what christians did back then was wrong. I'm sure you could have found people in nazi germany who would have celebrated jewish babies being murdered, but we don't excuse them because they had a different culture, we condemn them. The second article if possible is even worse. And i would like to use another comparison, but nazi germany is really the most legitimate comparison. It boggles the mind that people could treat each other this way, to beat a 14 year old girl to death because her 40 year old cousin raped? (it's not clear if the rape was forcible, or statutory, but either way.) It ranks right next to think how Germans could treat the jews, or now that i think of it how american slave owners might have treated their slaves. But once again modern academics condemn and we as nations are ashamed of what happened in our past, people should be condemning muslims countries for their barbarisms, taking a pass with some notion of the beauty of all cultures.

Nonviolence never solved anything!

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/03/13/time-magazine-headline-wisconsins-governor-wins-he-still-dead-man-wal

No real surprise here. Nobody ever took the chris mathews of the world seriously when they decried violence. The left loves violence, it's their go to move. What they don't like is the tea party so they wanted to take the opportunity to try and smear the tea party. Since then we've got democrat assembly men in wisonsin telling a rublican colleague that she's dead. Democrat congressmen calling on unions to go out into the streets and get bloody. Union members comparing Walker to hitler/putting crosshairs over a picture of him. Serious death threats made to members of wisconsin's senate, and now a national liberal publication call walker a dead man. And where are all the leftist pundits to decry violence in political rhetoric now. Where is Obama to tell people they need to tone down their violent imagery or to denounce violence. They've moved on to new and exciting talking points. Violence got old as soon as they could no longer claim the tea party was violent.

All right, you scrawny beanpoles: becoming a cop is not something that happens overnight. It takes one solid weekend of training to get that badge.

http://abc.daytonsnewssource.com/shared/newsroom/top_stories/videos/wkef_vid_6103.shtml

Well this is certainly good news. I really just don't understand the country i'm living in. First off this shouldn't even be legal, the fact that the federal government is not only encouraging this kind of behavior, but in fact forcing it is mind boggling. Clearly the Justice department needs to change it's name because it has no interest in justice. They should call it the department of creating racial fairness as seen by president obama. And what does this say about cops and firemen that we can just lower the standards willy nilly. Would they do this to make sure there are enough black nuclear technicians. I doubt it. It would be foolish to trust nuclear reactors to the hands of someone less qualified just because we wanted to meet a racial quota. Why isn't it equally egregious to entrust a gun/badge/requirement to mete out justice to someone who is less qualified just because he is black. Likewise for a fireman. What are people afraid that if there are too many white fireman, they won't both to save the black families burning in fires. It is completely inane.

Market research shows people see you as something of an ogre. I ought to club them and eat their bones!

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/mar/10/righthaven-accuses-defendant-running-lawyer-fees-c/

Well i think this is something everybody can support. Some lawyer bullies hopefully getting some cumpanace. I'm not anti-lawyer, but i am anit-bully. Any government agency/corporation/lawyers who take it upon themselves to bully the small guys because they don't have the wherewithal to fight back should be put in their place. It's not the defenses job to keep their costs down, it's the prosecutions job not to start malicious prosecutions in which they will end up liable for the defenses court costs. I hope the judge hammers these guys.

Lamentably, no. My gastronomic rapacity knows no satiety.

http://www.technologyreview.com/biomedicine/35067/?p1=A2&a=f

Conan made a joke about this the other night. I'm overweight let's what my options are 1, i do exercise, or 2 you could put a tiny robot inside me. Better go with the robot. It'd be funny if it wasn't sad. It's really not hard to lose weight, just eat less. There's no fancy trick. Consume fewer calories than you burn. If you really can't stop eating then exercise like a demon. Phelps eats 10,000 calories a day when he's training, because that's how many calories he burns. For him eating is actually a chore that he get's sick of, but he has to eat to keep his weight up. Obviously that's not possible for most people, but just find a happy median between eating less and exercising more instead of paying 20,000 to put a robot inside yourself to tell you when you are full.

Convicted of a crime I didn't even commit. Hah! Attempted murder. Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry?

http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/03/08/socialized-medicine-in-theory-and-in-practice/

No real surprise here. Socialized medicine is not better, just like socialized anything is not better. The only times things should be socialized is when benefits from said things are shared by everyone, like an army. But essentially by definition there is a limit to any economic good. Not everyone can enjoy the good without limitation. In the US the limitation is whether or not you can pay for it. In socialized medicine it's whether or not you can wait for it, or have the political pull to jump the line. No surprise that politicians and government workers in general who may not have the money but will have the political pull prefer a system where politicians get first dibs.

Also as a side note it is interesting that the US has better cancer curing rates than all these countries, but ranks lower in healthcare. My understanding of the reason for this is that when the UN/other ranking agencies rank healthcare, they don't actually rank the quality of the healthcare provided. They rank the quality of the healthcare provided based on what could have been provided. Therefore in their eyes the US falls below a country like turkey, not because the US is worse than turkey, but because the US could be so much better than it is, if only we had universal health care. Canada is doing all it can with the resources available to it, and if only we had universal healthcare we would be able to extend all of our excellent health care to everyone. They assume there is no causal relationship. That the quality of our health care is in no way linked to the private system that doles it out. Of course this makes the rankings purely political diatribes with no basis in fact.

p.s. that quote had nothing to do with the article, i just couldn't think of anything else, and that's a pretty good line.

My tires have been severely damaged! The prophecy has been fulfilled!

http://www.wtsp.com/news/mostpop/story.aspx?storyid=178322&provider=top

Here's more good news. The government against illegally hassling ordinary citizens. And what's worse is that it seems clear that high level government officials were aware that their underlings were illegally hassling US citizens, encouraged this illegal behavior, denied it was going on, and then started a coverup when it seemed like word was getting out. Once again these people should lose their jobs. There is virtually no accountablity for government officials. If the state gets sued and has to give out a big payment for discrimination (of which they are clearly guilty) none of these government officials will lose a dime. All the money will come from tax payers that had nothing to do with it.

At last, those planes are flying where they belong. That's right, over the homes of poor people.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/03/us_dept_of_transportation_data.html

Thanks a lot government. You screwed us again. I wrote about this when it first happened. How stupid it was and how it would just lead to more cancellations. And low and behold it was stupid and it just led to more cancellations. Simple solutions, instead of paying huge fines to the government for no reason, smaller reasonable amounts should be given out to the passengers. They could give out so either 250 dollars or 500 dollars credit for every 2 hours you are on the tarmac for example. Or 250 and 500 after the first three hours, and then 250 and 500 more for every hour there after. The exact details are not important. This would have the double bonus of having an extremely smaller fine limiting the incentive for airplanes to cancel flights which probably could have taken off after all, while also rewarding passengers with money/credit in cases where they had to sit on the tarmac. Only by some government bureaucrats twisted logic could it possibly make sense that some citizens were inconvenienced by having the sit on the plane, i know the perfect solution the airline should give more money to the government. Wait what. How does that follow. Obviously the money should be paid to the injured party, the people on the plane. It's so obvious that any normal person would see it immediately, and it would win a resounding victory in any kind of referendum so of course the government couldn't possibly implant it. With 1 logical policy why people might start expecting more and then where would government officials be.

Oh, I always wanted to be a Teamster. So lazy and surly... mind if I relax next to you?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/06/opinion/06sun1.html?pagewanted=1&_r=3

Now even the new york times is admitting that public employees are drastically overpaid. Not only that, but the times has admitted that when governors have tried to play nice and ask for small concessions in the past, the unions have gotten nasty, and flooded money to attack them preventing any kind of cuts to union benefits. Still the times is not willing to go so far as to admit that there is any kind of problems with unions or with their previous outrageous demands. Still when even the times admits that public employees need to take a pay cut/pay more money into their pension/insurance plans that progress.

Couple of specifics how is that only 2 years the retirement age was raised from 55 to 62? Why were public employees ever allowed to retire at 55? Who considers 55 retirement age except for public employees. Also why are all the cuts to new workers. If the politicians/unions actually cared about protecting worker class people they would force cuts among all union employees. Instead they force all the cuts onto future employees, and because there are so few of them the cuts need to be bigger. So instead of a 3% cut across the board it needs to be a 12% cut to all future employees. That's not protecting families, it's protecting the union members who have already bled the state dry, and will continue to do so because nobody has the political will power to oppose them.

These candidates make me want to vomit in terror.

http://www.longislandlawyerblog.com/mother-of-3-arrested-for-taking-pictures-of-tourist-attraction-at-airport

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/mar/24/prison-rape-and-government/

This certainly makes me want to vomit in terror. When did we become a society where police officers were above the law. Where they could do whatever they want without fear of repercussions. The sheriff in the first article is clearly guilty of kidnapping/false imprisonment and top of that it's is undoubtedly a hate crime. He should obviously be stripped of his position that fact that he hasn't been is a disgrace to our society. I do root for her in her lawsuit except that it would be the cop who ends up paying, it will be normal people who would never dream of being the abusive dick face that this cop was. He needs to be sent to prison stripped of all possessions, his pension/savings/whatever he owns needs to be turned over to this woman. Hopefully he doesn't have a family, but if he does that's just too bad, it's no different than having a drug dealer for a father/husband. They should go to prison and you need to start over with nothing. Similarly in the second article (i didn't read all the way through) but the fact that cops are raping prisoners and getting away with it, and even when there complaints that are investigated and found to be true virtually never charged with a crime and sometimes even keeping their jobs? I mean what the hell. Cops just have too much power in modern society. They all stick together which i can understand, but it is very wrong. But worse attorneys don't want to piss cops off, so they never prosecute them, and politicians don't want to piss cops off, so they never say anything, and the result is that cops have complete impunity. There was some cop in connecticut was was driving 130 miles an hour while either texting or talking on the phone to his girlfriend or both (i don't remember) and killed 2 girls. So what happens to him? The judges and attorneys in the case agree to hush it up, and not only does he get no jail time for what is clearly manslaughter, he gets awarded disability benefits. Until some newspaper finds out about it and shines a light on the whole situation. The bad PR hopefully forced them to do something, I don't remember all the details, i think i wrote about in this blog about a year ago. But police officers are virtually never held to account for their actions. As officers of the law they aught to be held to a stricter standard and punished more severely for breaking the law, instead they virtually immune from prosecution.

If you're lame enough to vote, vote for me.

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/02/28/opinion-the-lefts-unhealthy-koch-habit/

This has been an often reported idea that the left is attack the Koch brothers to get them to stop spending money. I don't think this is true. They are missing out on a fundamental aspect of leftist psychology. Specifically leftists are absolutely certain that they are right. Not only are they certain they are right, they are certain all reasonable people agree with them. Of course to some extent this is true of all people, certainly i think i'm right in my convictions otherwise i wouldn't bother discussing them. I but can understand how a reasonable person could disagree, most leftists cannot. So for them there has to be a reason behind the fact that people aren't agreeing with them. Racism is a popular reason. Well of course they don't like Obama, they're racists. I've heard this from leftist friends of mine. Why are they racist says I? You think it's just a coincidence that people all got mad and started protesting when a black man became president is the response. Actual evidence of racism not required. Stupidity. That's an old stand by. Conservatives are dumb rednecks who love guns and religion and don't know the difference between shit and shinola. That's why conservative public figures are so often portrayed as dumb, just like liberals are often portrayed as wusses. It fits into the oppositions preconceived notions. But when you lose an election as spectacularly as the democrats did last year you can't just blame racism and stupidity, there were just too many people who switched votes. So you need something else to blame. Conservatives would blame the policies, but leftists know that's impossible. They have the right policies, and everyone agrees with their policies. It is simply not a possibility that could enter a leftists head that a majority of the US disagrees with their policies. So there must be another factor. Trickery. Republicans have used big money to deceive the public into believing all these lies and misconceptions. But the goal isn't to stem specific money, the Koch money is such a tiny amount of total money as to be practically irrelevant. The goal is to convince people that they have been tricked. To stir outrage among the people who voted republican, so that next time they see an ad for a republican they think, well that's just big corporations trying to trick me. That's the goal. To delegitimize the election, and any future elections. Those people elected to office by a majority of voters don't actually represent a majority of voters. They got in by trickery and deceit. That's the real goal.

I don't have any opinions anymore. All I know is that no one is better than anyone else and everyone is the best at everything.

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2011/03/longhorns-17-badgers-1.html

Speaks for itself. Also to the continuing trend in society to ignore math. I don't really understand why it is acceptable to belittle math as something that people don't want to learn and ignore it when confronted by it.

Mr. Simpson, this government computer can process over nine tax returns per day. Did you really think you could fool it?

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/queens/tsa_staff_jet_blew_it_Y7NcXScFd0oS2HNvkypthP

Could the TSA have hired a worse spokesperson. I mean it's okay with me cause i'm anti TSA anyway, but just so stupid. As if it's not bad enough that let the guy through with the box cutters (and from what i've read this is routine. The government has frequent tests to see if TSA agents can agents trying to sneak through with weapons, and their failure rate is truly embarrassing or at least it would be if they released the results, but they refuse to.) But that's the no real point here. The point is that they compound their failure to catch the box cutters, by claiming it doesn't even matter. Even if a terrorist got on the plane with box cutters it wouldn't matter because there are new procedures (in particular pilots with locked doors) which make it irrelevant. Really. So it doesn't matter if you don't do you jobs. So if that's true why are you being paid to fail to do a job which is pointless anyway. Obviously the TSA should be disbanded.

Side note I was watching the terminator a couple of months ago, and at the same time i read about how the head of the TSA would stop allowing airports to switch to private contractors to replace the TSA and realized what the perfect analogy for government agencies is. They are skynet, originally built to help humans, but then they become too big, and become self aware. Instead of doing their original job of helping humans they have a new job of protecting themselves. In the case of the TSA there was a lot of bad publicity, and it was written in the original law authorizing the TSA that airports would be allowed to opt out and hire private companies to do the same job. Nobody cared for a while but with the bad publicity, airports started opting out. And then pistole, head of the TSA declared he didn't see any benefit to that, so he wouldn't let any knew airports opt out. Yeah of course there's no benefit to the TSA, it will make them look bad, the point isn't to benefit the TSA, it's to benefit people. Now Obama wants to unionize the TSA. Just like skynet it has become self aware, is attacking anyone it sees as a threat and consolidating it's position.

When i grow up, I want to be in the better ford center.

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/03/unlike-probably-everyone-else-watching.html

Totally agree that charlie sheen is winning at life. Made millions of dollars check, going to private islands with his exwife, a porn star (bree olson), and his nanny in tow, check doing a suitcase worth of drugs check. I'm not saying it's exactly the lifestyle i would choose for myself in position, but he's enjoying himself, so why does everyone else have a problem. He's clean and ready to show up for work, so why is everyone so down on the fact that he's been acting a little crazy. If it works for him it doesn't bother me. I never thought his show was funny, or worth watching just to watch, only if i had to wait 20 minutes for another show, and don't want to do anything else. But i wouldn't stop watching it just because he's acting crazy, he acts like a drunk womanizer on the show, and now people are upset that he's acting like drunk high womanizer in real life? I say go charlie sheen. Winning Duh.

Oh cruel Fate, why do you mock me?

Why is it hard for people to understand that words mean what the they mean. You can't just make up weird ideas in your head about how words mean something other than what they mean. I just saw a commercial for Matt Damon's new movie. It's not entirely clear, but it seems like the suggestion is that there is some overarching institution that monitors and controls the actions of everyone on the planet in an effort to maximize happiness. You didn't get that job because they determined that if you did than you would give up on your dream to be a writer and that's, or you missed that date with the hot girl because this way you both find your really true love. Okay fine. But then the narrator of the commercials says this friday (the opening of the movie) if you believe in choice, if you believe in fate, then fight for it. Suggesting that matt damon in an effort to combat this overarching organization must fight for choice (to be with the girl that they don't want her to be with) and fate (because they are fated to be together.) Except that anyone with any understanding of words realizes that of course those 2 things are opposites. If you have fate, then you do not have free choice. Your choices were by definition predestined to lead down a certain path be it love or job or whatever. And if you have free will, then you cannot have fate because every day you are making all kinds of decisions that change what your future is. Meanwhile a professional writer who was highly paid created this commercial which the movie company is spending millions of dollars to broadcast over the air, and nobody seems to care that it makes no god damn sense.

I guess to be fair the problem is that people like to believe in both at the same time. That they are in control of their destiny, and yet also that they were meant to be with the person they ultimately fall in love in with. So maybe they are trying to tap into both of those emotions at the same time, but do you really need to put 2 completely opposite ideas 5 seconds apart and pretend that they are the same.