Wednesday, January 21, 2015

If I were a boy..

* what the hell? I actually wrote an finished this then forgot to post it? In AUGUST? Sigh..I'm gettin old*

An article written and posted to a site called ELITE Daily.   Lets take issue with the site name first.

What makes you elite?  No seriously, I want to know. What makes you elite?  Quite probably nothing but the site creators own hubris.  Same as with a great many sites with similar nom de plumes.

Anyway. This article was called "If I were a boy"  about what these women  would do if they were a boy. In the mistaken belief that there A. Aren't any men out there who DON'T act in the manners in which they are complaining about and B. As if they are any different in the regard of some of what they are complaining about.  I find their specious list amusing, and their contention that they would be any better as men then they SAY men aren't now...highly dubious.  Okay fine, fine. I call bullshit, there you happy?  Yeah I know you've come to expect a certain propensity for foul language and vitriol on my blog.  I'll see if in responding to the rest of the article and the  list itself I can't live down to your expectations. Ya reprobates.  Article in italics and my responses in normal.

When we’re young, we’re told that boys and girls all have the same fair shot to get what they want out of life. We’re taught that everyone has the same right to compete for jobs, and to achieve these dreams

Duh. Everyone has that chance, that does not however mean you are necessarily going to succeed, but if you work diligently and hard you will probably get there.

When we are little, we aren’t jaded enough to believe we can’t aspire to be anything we set our sights on.
But then… we grow up

Or then we fail, and get up, and fail again, and then we get up again and just get..bitter..but I digress. So how do we get jaded germs and virii?

We don’t think we’ll ever be fighting for our right to be heard, to have a voice. We don’t realize men in power will decide how, and when, and where we do what we want to our bodies.

Poppycock. You can do what you want, by and large. Same as the males of the species. 


We don’t even think that the world will write us a set of different rules.
Twelve Elite Daily employees answered what they would do differently if they were men — if they were truly equal – and every answer was different, unique, inspiring and encouraging — and that’s just the beginning.

You are many things. Except for physical strength for starters.  Sorry girls but there are just some things that the female of the species were not meant to be.  Plus...sorry, like it or lump it I really don't give a shit at this point;  Men are hardwired to protect our women.   In part that's the fault of evolution and nature.  Without women to bare the young...the species will die. Period fucking dot.  Without women to raise the kids and keep the home in all manner of means and ways. and be loving wives, to our loving to a great many fellas just ain't worth living.  

We want to hear from you, so tweet, Instagram and Facebook us and let us know what you’d do differently #IfIWereABoy. We’re listening. It’s time everyone else does, too.

Oh I listen but here I'm just hearing..."blah blablah blah blah..waaa waaa...whimper, whine, piss and moan" in cases like this.  You are truly starting to bore the ever loving hell out of me with this bullshit.

Okay now on to the list.

If I were a boy..............................
I wouldn't mistake a woman's kindness for weakness.  -“A warm and friendly disposition doesn’t translate to vulnerability. My kind words and personable nature aren’t an invitation to the bedroom."

Honestly if you are running into the "being sweet and lovable being an invitation to the bedroom" scenario on a regular basis?  Then you REALLY need to look at yourself in the mirror and say "why the fuck am I hanging with these people?"  Because if you don't like their attitudes and behavior, then maybe the problem is YOU, being dumb enough to hang around with people that treat you like shit.  Now if you are complaining because in actuality, it's not that they treat you like shit but don't agree with every single thing you say?  Which is for my money...part of what this whole article comes from...Grow the fuck up.

I'd appreciate a girls ability to express her emotions. - “Men aren’t so lucky; they are conditioned from an early age to keep it all inside.”

Meh...that might be true to a certain extent I suppose. Lord knows I have a hard time crying sometimes, if that's what you mean.  Outside of that? Oh I have ZERO problems expressing my emotions. Neither do most of the folks I know oddly enough. Now in my case due to the gross stupidity I see all the time in the world and from the default setting is ANGRY.  You really want me to express that to you in what my readers know to be my usual way?  No?  Yeah didn't think so.  By the way...probably too late since I've been expressing it since I started this response. Deal with as I will say repeatedly in a bitch.

I'd never tell a woman to smile. - “Because this is my face and no man gets to tell me what I should do. If I want to smile, I’ll smile. No one has the right to dictate my feelings.”

*facepalm*  Idiots. Where in the HELL did you come under the delusion that men are trying to dictate your feelings.  If we're saying "smile"  it's because we guys, do not, like to see the women we care about...unhappy.  To quote the bards Sam And Dave "if something is wrong with my baby, then something is wrong with me"  IOW we hurt with and for you when you're in pain. But unless you tell us oh ladies...[and yes contrary to popular misconception and "I am woman here me roar, I don't nned men" crap, we do care. ] then we can't try and help you solve the problem, just flat out solve it FOR you, or plan what to do with the body/ies  after we fix the problem/s.  As to random strangers...*shrug*  once you smile, we smile back, hell we might even strike up a conversation. Then you express your woes and feel better afterwards we hope.  Besides, here's another newsflash. we like your smiles. Is it wrong to want to see them?  Men's critical decision making ability takes a rapid drop in the presence of a beautiful smiling woman. We still want to see the smiles though because a pretty girls smile is ...a drug? an endorphin rush? something like that, to us.

I wouldn't assume that buying you a drink means you're coming home with me.   “Buying a drink is a great way to break the ice, but that doesn’t mean I have an obligation to ‘hook up’ with you in any way. I am more than capable of buying my own drink, thank you.”

Seriously  if your hangin in places that are basically meat markets [clubs and to some extent some bars] I don't know why the hell you are all shocked and shaken by this shit.    Seriously?  Stop looking to fuck teenagers, men with a teenage boys mentality and find grown ass men for yourselves

I'd educate myself about feminism.  -"I think if more people took the time to understand the true definition and motives, the word would stop being so ‘ugly.’ There’s nothing ugly about equality.”

Oh horse hockey. It's not equality "feminists" seem to  want in many cases. It's role reversal. And in the case of the really extreme "feminists", complete  extermination of the entire male half of the species. Oh and aren't those ladies screeds entertaining to read?  Not.  I think in the case of the rads they need a constant intravenous dose of happy drugs. Or to actually get laid more often. Either way..jesus and you people think I'm a mean son of a bitch?

I'd treat girls as humans that should be respected -“We’re all in this thing together, and we need to help each other understand what makes us different.”

Respect Is..
 a two way street. and that's all I got to say about that one.

I'd be courteous and remember to put the seat down -“Sometimes it’s the smaller, everyday gestures that signify respect. Let’s all be mindful of each other." 

Oh for crying out loud. I forgot to put the fucking toilet seat up. Call out the inquisition!  Ahh skip it...just tie me to a post and burn me'd be quicker.   On this REALLY don't want to start down this road with me, because I can go on and on and enumerate the faults I find with YOU ladies.  Seriously?  Just put it takes 2 seconds.

I'd be able to make choices about my own body. -“Only I have the right to decide what to do with my own body: the type of birth control I use or when and if I have sex. Boys don’t have to worry about the government deciding whether or not they can have an abortion.”

Oh Jesus Jumping H Mother Fucking Christ,  Pogo Sticking Across the Rockies on an Inverted Goddamn CROSS! One, had this conversation repeatedly. tired of fucking having it.  However... If that's a deliberate dig about the Hobby Lobby Decision. Sorry, NO, you are as full of shit as the proverbial christmas goose.  You want birth control? Fine Hobby Lobby will pay for  14 birth prevention drugs/methods.  What Hobby Lobby WON'T pay for is so called "abortificients".  They aren't saying you can't have them, just saying that THEY refuse to pay for them. Seriously if you want them, pay for them yourselves.   Oh and as far as abortions?  Oh you sooo don't want to go down that road with me.
No.  I'm as serious as a heart not go there with me.

I'd stop posting degrading memes about girls on social media -"“I’ll never get why guys think that constantly posting pictures of Kermit the Frog saying how ‘These hoes ain’t loyal’ is going to result in any female respecting them in the social media world or otherwise.”

Oh for fuck sake!  Do you know who posts some of the most degrading, nasty, shit I have seen about women?   Care to guess?  no?  Other women.   And's a two way street, some of shit that gets posted about men is truly heinous.  If you support that, then, you don't get to whine about the shit posted about women.
  Outside of  that? Everyone has a different sense of humor. What you find disgusting and degrading someone, some where is going to find hilarious. We are not  cut out people. As in we are not all cut out cookies to be shaped the same way. if you want cut out cookies...go fucking bake some, and stop treating people like they're moldable to YOUR expectations instead of their own.   Life is a bitch.

I'd keep my hands to myself. - “It’s bad enough to be fiercely stared down or cat-called by men, but by far one of the most unacceptable things a man can do is grope a woman against her will. A woman’s body is a temple and men have no right touching it unless there is blatant consent for it.”

Ahh okay, so you're under the delusion that women would NEVER do something like this?  Bzzzt! Wrong answer! thank you for playing!.  Been there, and being a horny bastard I  personally generally enjoy being on the receiving end [I prefer having my ears nibbled actually] but that's me.
As to guys doing it to you?  Well you  could always stop your slacktivist/hashtag  complaining about it  and DO something actually meaningful  If someone touches you, punch them. Or on the other end... I have told my young nieces repeatedly that if someone touches you and you don't want  them to[especially if you've told them NO.]  I expect you to break bones to drive home the point that, that is  a no no. Pain is a wonderful teacher.  Which reminds me I need to get my little angels some punch daggers; and other fun, shiny, sharp pointy accoutrements for use against the truly profoundly criminally stupid among my fellow humans.

I'd take the time to have a conversation. - “Giving you my number isn’t a green light to text me at 1 am to have a ‘conversation’ or ask me to ‘hang out.’ Really it’s more intriguing for a guy to want to get to know me in person, not through a screen.”

Ahh got news for you on that one.  A minor peeve if you will.  IF  you spend most of your time on your phone, talking and texting, and surfing the web,  including to people in the same fucking room? Sorry you can't complain about this one.  Plus it depends on what you want to talk about it and HOW you talk about it. We are wired a wee bit different after all.   Don't hem and haw and beat around the bush. Just tell us flat out in plain english. We aren't telepaths who can read your mind while you play word games.

Anyway here's the link to the article but I've reposted it word for word, even if I didn't transfer the images.

As Always  remember TANSTAAFL and...

I now return you to your regularly scheduled inanity and insanity.

Wednesday, May 14, 2014

Nope the democrats don't want total power...

not at freaking all.....

Chuck syphilis for brains Schumer thinks he's qualified to rewrite the 1st amendment of the constitution?  He's not qualified to run a whorehouse. Hell that man isn't qualified to run his own life, let alone hold position in office.

According to the text of the proposed revision to James Madison's 1791 handiwork, sponsored by New Mexico Senator Tom Udall, the states and federal government would have the power to regulate the "raising and spending of money" through a wide range of means "to advance the fundamental principle of political equality for all."

Huh wait, WHAT?  So he wants to rewrite the Constitution so in the name of  "political equality for all"...we the people are supposed to trust this band of felonious mental incompetents currently in decide whats fair and what isn't?

“The First Amendment is sacred, but… the First Amendment is not absolute. By making it absolute, you actually make it less sacred to most Americans. We have to bring some balance to our political system,”  said the vainglorious, egotistical ass known as Chuck Schumer

here's the full text of the proposed amendment..

``Section 1. To advance the fundamental principle of political 
equality for all, and to protect the integrity of the legislative and 
electoral processes, Congress shall have power to regulate the raising 
and spending of money and in-kind equivalents with respect to Federal 
elections, including through setting limits on--
            ``(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for 
        nomination for election to, or for election to, Federal office; 
            ``(2) the amount of funds that may be spent by, in support 
        of, or in opposition to such candidates.
    ``Section 2. To advance the fundamental principle of political 
equality for all, and to protect the integrity of the legislative and 
electoral processes, each State shall have power to regulate the 
raising and spending of money and in-kind equivalents with respect to 
State elections, including through setting limits on--
            ``(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for 
        nomination for election to, or for election to, State office; 
            ``(2) the amount of funds that may be spent by, in support 
        of, or in opposition to such candidates.
    ``Section 3. Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant 
Congress the power to abridge the freedom of the press.
    ``Section 4. Congress and the States shall have power to implement 
and enforce this article by appropriate legislation.''.

Only one problem. As the article I link below points out...such an amendment would favor current sitting politicians almost exclusively. Making it difficult or next to/actually  impossible to, for anyone from the civilian sector to go up against sitting politicians. Be they dems or repubs.

I'll freely commend anyone and agree with anyone who says that this amendment has about a snowballs chance in hell...or a penniless man's chance in a whorehouse, of passing. However the fact Schumer and his buddies including Tom Udall among others,  has the unmitigated gall to even suggest such a thing should make you anyone currently sitting in office, especially dems but repubs too...anyone you want making decisions for you, over your life?  Because that is exactly where such an amendment leads. To an entrenched elite, that you can only get rid of through bloodshed.
 The same kind of fight our founding fathers fought to FREE us from the same kind of entrenched elite.  The same kind of fight they gave us, their descendants, The US Constitution to keep us from having to fight for as long as possible.  So...from their you think we're failing miserably?  From your own personal perspective...give it some deep thought, same question.  

My own answer?  I'd have thought that would be obvious.

Remember, TANSTAAFL and..........

I now return you to your regularly scheduled inanity and insanity.

Sunday, May 11, 2014

Government Run Amuck..

Ohh this is going to be satifying and emotionally draining because I'm about to get my mad on. Hold on to your heads and if you're offended by foul have been warned.

First lets talk about THIS STORY out of Carolina.
*headdsk* That's right boys and girls...The STATE is trying to tell Parents what they can and can not feed their kids. Are you fucking kidding me?! Uhmmm...nope. Sorry you overwheeningly prideful, power hungry small pricked pussies. NOWHERE in the Constitution is there an article granting you fuckers absolute power. Matter of fact in both The U.S. AND the various State Constitutions, it specifically says that what power is not specifically given over to the government to do, belongs to the people. I'm sorry but there's no mandate in any of the various State Constitutions that specifically gives the government the power to tell us what,where, when,how and who with. Sorry. The Constitutions were written to LIMIT the Governments power over the people...NOT the reverse!

More on this story-

Then there's this disturbing story out of North Carolina-Nope...schools shouldn't have that power. You don't get to do those kind of searches. The cops, MAYBE if there is sufficient probable cause or more importantly EVIDENCE That warrants it. Otherwise...searching any of the female members of MY family that way will get you hospitalized.

There's other stories but...I'll save those for separate posts later.

Remember TANSTAAFL and.......

I now return you to your regularly scheduled inanity and insanity

Children, lets talk about the Constitution.

The Constitution is our founding Document. It is the document that says the Government is of, for and BY the people and the minute it ceases to be so, We the People can behead that government and start over again.  Here's the problem. Too many don't understand that.  Either through ignorance not of their own doing, which is failing to be an excuse anymore with the proliferation of information on the internet.  Or willful ignorance. 

Those who don't understand or are being told /taught that our "rights" and more specifically the Bill of Rights, the 1st 10 amendments that are enunciated in, enumerated in and PROTECTED BY the Constitution, aren't rights at all. They are being told and taught that our rights [that which is due anyone by just claim, legal guarantee or moral principle.]are government granted or allowed privileges.  

This is from a woman's sons 4th grade homework assignment

   The 5th amendment which states the following...

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

but for this discussion I'm focusing on the bit about being compelled to be a witness against oneself aka the right against self incrimination. was held to be a privilege in an opinion of the US Supreme  in a decision in JUNE stated that the 5th Amendment was a privilege not a right.

So the right against self incrimination is not a right at all but a privilege granted by the government to be taken away at the whim of that same government? I don't think so junior. 

If you think this is insane, just wait til you hear what Chuck Schumer has in mind. 

Peoples rights are just that RIGHTS.  They aren't privileges that can be taken away as a parent takes away a misbehaving child toy, and rights are far from being toys. They are the guiding light, the principles, the.....natural laws of humanity if you will...that allow us to be free, independent beings. Beholden to nothing and no one but ourselves if we so choose. No one can take them away; unless you allow them to.  So why pray tell are we letting a government that has become a dictatorial commisariat elite and activist judges who like certain politicians would rewrite our founding documents to say what they mean; do so?    They should be held to the same standards as the rest of us. We need to jack these wild feral dogs in our governments  up short, and train them to remember who their masters are.

Remember, TANSTAAFL and..............

I now return you to your regularly scheduled inanity and insanity.

Thursday, May 8, 2014

Nigerian Girls kidnapped by muslim terrorists!

Shocking! Simply SHocking!  The fact this shit happens all day every day around the world not withstanding...
And of course we have the twitthher hashtag campaign for them and the campaign to put the name of a girl on your arm or a tshirt or some shit and wear it til the girls are returned.  Meh. I was going to give them some loving attention but a writer and man I'm fond of reading said it better than me.

Remember TANSTAAFL and...

I now return you to your regularly scheduled inanity and insanity

Monday, May 5, 2014

Cinco De Mayo! Yay! riiiiiiight?

*snort*   Happy holiday that was really only celebrated in ONE town in Mexico and not really observed else where. Until the day when the brewing companies sized up on it to drive up profits and created the massive drinking binge holiday of Cinco De Mayo as we know it today.  Most of you people  don't even know what it is you're supposed to be celebrating do you, you drunken fools?  Many retards think it's Mexican Independence Day. halfwits..THAT is in September. What you're celebrating  is the fucking brewing companies leading you around by the nose like lambs to the slaughter. Congrat U fucking lations.    *slow derisive clap*  

Remember TANSTAAFL  annnd

I now return you to your regularly scheduled inanity and insanity.

Saturday, May 3, 2014

Guns aer bad mmmkaaayyyy...NOT.

Guns are freakin supposes that had the intended victim of the crime in the following link not SHOT his former employee...then at the very least the intended victim would be quite DEAD.  It's entirely possible the attempted murderer might have gone on one of them mass killins you hear hyped about like their fucking sporting events in the news.

Moral of the story? Well golly gee wiz beav!  I guess guns really DO save lives after all! 


Remember TANSTAAFL and...

I now return you to your regularly scheduled inanity and insanity.

Friday, May 2, 2014

A guest post...via "racsim" which don't exist.

Odd as that may seem to you my friends and readers. YEah a guest post. Written by a friend of mine. I may riff off it later. He may give me more material to edit in. It's a hell of a thought and right now I'm just too damn tired to do anything with it but post it. Enjoy germs and virii

Humans and their groups.. Humanity has been on the planet in it’s present for for about a quarter of a million years. That means that if you were to meet a person from 250,000 years ago he would be physically much the same as anyone walking the streets today. There would be no physical difference. Matter of fact...a neanderthal probably wouldn’t draw that much attention...particularly at a tractor pull..but that’s another story. As i was saying...Physically we look the same now as we did a quarter million years ago. How bout our minds? How quickly do our minds change? The deep roots of our consciousness? The crankshaft and gears of our ID? Just guessing...I’d say not much. Probably today’s mental machinery is pretty much the same as it was then. Now consider this. For all that time...people dealt with other people retail. People lived in small groups. Possibly twenty to fify. Call it clans perhaps? These small groups were then subordinate to a larger grouping...possibly a hundred or so. (Side note...consider the Army. Squads, fire teams and the company. the boys that get stuff done...everyone else supports THEIR mission) So...for a quarter million years the ruts are worn into our minds that the proper number of people to deal with...isn’t very many. A few hundred, a few thousand, a million...MORE? Well that’s just insane. Literally insane. Ever notice that the over all intelligence of a group DECREASES as the size increases? It's an inverse relationship. Of course the stupidist is the federal Government. Cant’ get any stupider than that. And that’s the problem.

"Further along with that concept is the idea the individuals are getting more and more powerful. Consider a modern day redneck...say..Mark Wandry with his toys. He could take out a squad of cavalary of a hundred years ago...or a company of pike men a thousand years ago...or a whole army of swords men...two thousand years ago...all by his little lonesome" 
Elon musk is more powerful today than, say, a small european COUNTRY was prior to WWI.

Remember TANSTAAFL and..

I now return you to your regularly scheduled inanity and insanity


Thursday, May 1, 2014

"Freedom of Speech" or is it really anymore?

Buckle up it's gonna be a bumpy ride,and I really don't give FLYING FUCK what anyone thinks of this one.

Everyday in the news and across the internet, the publishing world etc, examples that Freedom of Speech is dead, or on it's way it's way to dying.  Now it's freedom of speech for thee but not for me. Or you can say freedom of speech for me but not for thee. Pick whichever version makes you happy.

Freedom of speech, but only so long as it's politically correct, officially approved by the committee speech. Go against the borg gestalt and the gestalt will actively destroy you or make a damn good attempt at it. 

How can I say such things? Open your fucking eyes and ears people.  Here's the most recent example. An NBA team owner makes offensive comments.  So he's been banned from the NBA and is being fined $2.5million dollars by the league. How did this come to light?  Oh I don't know...maybe that supposed mistress he was supposedly fucking on the side that was recording everything he said, decided there was more money in controversy and writing a best selling memoir.

Or maybe it's because she's being SUED by the wife of 50yrs of  Donald Sterling, for the return of an almost $2million dollar duplex, a range rover, a ferrari and 2 Bentleys that sterling bought for his supposed mistress. Personally I wonder if he can even get it up with viagra.  I also doubt his heart would approve of the strain

Which as I said, tells me this is about money.

Then there was what Cliven Bundy said. Not even gonna bother to link to the news stories and such in this one. If you haven't heard of this one you've been living under a rock.  Note in his case whether what he said is "racist" or not is fucking irrelevant. The fact that the government sent out more fire power for a rancher who is refusing to kowtow to a government run amok, that is the relevant story. or as a lady on youtube put it...

Then there was a question in the music world of is Avril Lavignes latest video racist and insensitive

No, by the way it's FUCKING ENTERTAINMENT YOU ASSHATS get a grip.
It's not racist...hell the fans of hello kitty and anime fucking WALLOW in the goddamn "stereotypes", so what makes you so fucking special to be able to call this insensitive? Go pound sand you twatwaffles.

And then there was the brouhaha's over the Hugo Awards..

Starting with Jonathon Ross being asked and accepting to host. Here's one take on it..

here's another take, by Neil Gaiman..

Because of a bunch of vocal attacks on him..Ross said fuck it, and withdrew.

Then there was the Tempest in an Tea Cup over the nominations. 

HEre's a  lonnng post about it by one of the receivers  of vitriol because he DARED to ask his fans to vote to get one of his books on the nominations list. Something that is apparently fine for others if they're of the right political slant[read leftist and even John Scalzi darling of the set will say  he's done it himself and I HATE Scalzi's politics] but is an abomination if your a libertarian, a conservative or even a slightly right leaning centrist.

My response to both those "controversies"?  Well to them that is stirring the poisonous brew with a spoon of concentrated hatred I say...get over yourselves.

Ahh then of course Larry previous made INTERNATIONAL news with his response to Alex Daily MacFarlane's whining demand  that  she wants "an end* to the default of binary gender in science fiction stories."  You ran read that miserable vomitous mass here:

Or you can follow the link to it from Larry's response to it and the guardian article from the following post. Note if you go this route through prepared for a LOT of reading. This one is link heavy and for good reason.

Yes for those that apparently haven't felt the heavy *smack* of the clue by four..I am a fan of Larry's and agree with every goddamn word he's said about ALL the aforementioned literary whining, childishly stupid tempests in teacups.  Larry first response was a scathing reply that perhaps a good STORY  should come before filling some, race, gender, social justice quota in books.  For which he got steaming pile of camel dung tossed at him.

Then there was this a bunch of bullshit from Dartmouth College..
This time, the fracas is over a fundraiser for cardiac care that the Phi Delta Alpha fraternity and the Alpha Phi sorority had planned to jointly sponsor, reports Campus Reform.
Problems arose because a single student, junior Daniela Hernandez, was offended by the party’s theme of “Phiesta.”

Now while I agree with part of her reasoning....

" “the Americanization of Cinco de Mayo and its construction as a drinking holiday in the United States, cultural appropriation and the inappropriate usage of cultural clothing, and the exploitation of groups of people and cultures for the sake of business opportunities”—and, apparently, charity opportunities."  

It was the monetization, hell a commercialization of a "holiday" that most of mexico didn't bother to celebrate so the beer companies can sell more beer.   However......

I realized upon further reading that Ms Hernandez  ain't got much love for the school either...

"It was sadly unsurprising that a culturally-themed party was seen as a casual venture for such a privileged institution such as Dartmouth,” Hernandez proclaimed." 

And yet.......?
Hmm I wonder?   A query for you Ms Hernandez. If you  really have that much disdain for such a "privileged institution";  then WHAT in all the multiple fucking levels of hell are you doing there young lady?  If you really have that much disdain...why are you not going to school? or some school with a less than "privileged" background ethos. Like say a local junior college or a STATE college.   Or even.*gasp* dare I say of the online degree factories?  My inquiring mind would kinda like to know the answer you deceitful dimwit.  One also wonders if you're paying all your own freight for school, in which case I applaud you for that at least.  Or if you got a scholarship for that school?  Inquiring minds want to know..
Phi Delt president Taylor Catchcart explained why the Greek organizations folded.
“We felt that the possibility of offending even one member of the Dartmouth community was not worth the potential benefits of having the fundraiser,” he said." 

Meaning you didn't have the BALLS to stand up to one vociferous, hypocritical jackass?  Wow.

I won't even bother with the whining from a teenager about McDonalds happy meals.

So, do we really have freedom of speech anymore? Some days I wonder

Remember TANSTAAFL and..

I now return you to your regularly scheduled inanity and insanity.


Wednesday, April 30, 2014

Oh the flaming brain damage. that "studies" sometimes.

just a short one boys and girls..

There was this "study" by Cornell University that "finds" that kids who hold with their hands and eat food on the bone,cob etc, iow rending with their front teeth...are more aggressive than those that use utensils to cut up and chew their food. 

Ahh so kids that "Writing in the journal Eating Behaviors, lead author Brian Wansink, professor and director of the Cornell Food and Brand Lab, and colleagues describe how they found kids aged 6 to 10 were much rowdier when given foods they had to bite with their front teeth - such as corn on the cob, drumsticks and whole apples - than when these foods had been cut up."

Are you serious? who the fuck comes up with this shit? and how much money did this "study" cost? Arrrgh!! *headdesk*

Hmm...I can do both, I love love love corn on the cob, chicken wings, fried chicken, celery sticks, beef jerky, tacos, gyros,  couple other foods that fall in the "eat with your hands and rend with your front teeth" category. Hmm dost this make me a homicidal maniac?  Well I must be according to this study. In case that last bit wasn't clear that was scorn and scathing contempt, you were detecting in my text voice there. 

No as a matter of fact I DON'T buy this line of bullshit.  What makes children rowdy is a lack of parenting and discipline.  Even thorough application of  both sometimes isn't sufficient with a sufficiently independent child.  What they eat and how they eat, has fuck all to do with behavior. Outside of insane amounts of sugar that leads to kids bouncing off the walls.

 "Prof. Wansink says the bottom line of their study is if you want to sit down to "a nice quiet, relaxing meal with your kids, cut up their food." *snort* hahahaha...good thing I wasn't eating when I read that bit or someone might owe me a new keyboard.   Yes cut up the food and make it easier and more manageable for them to play with it with their fingers and give them more ammo for the ensuing food fight.....

*rubs head*

Remember TANSTAAFL and...

I now return you to your regularly scheduled inanity and insanity.