Archive for February, 2007
I was watching O’Reilly tonight, and he talked to Megan Kelly about SCOTUS’ decision to hear a case brought up from one of the federal appellate courts. The case involved a man named Victor Harris who fled police when being pulled over for driving nearly 75 in a 55 mile per hour zone. When the officer behind him turned on his lights, Harris fled and started driving over 100 miles per hour through downtown streets. More officers joined the chase…one officer’s car was bumped by Harris in the incident. This officer, Coweta County sheriff’s deputy Timothy Scott, pursued Harris and radioed in for permission to perform a maneuver called a “precision intervention technique” where the officer rams the tail side end of the car to make it spin out, ending the chase.
Scott used this move, but Harris’ car ran into a ditch and Harris was paralyzed due to his injuries. Harris sued Deputy Scott, claiming Scott violated his 4th Amendment right protecting him against unreasonable searches and seizures.
I’m no attorney. I’m no expert or even a semi-expert on the law or legal precedent. I do know that personally I see this supposed “victim” as scum. 1. He’s scum for fleeing police out of fear of paying an impound fee (this was his stated reason for fleeing)…He put many lives in danger. He proved his complete disregard for all innocent human life. That alone, for whatever reason, makes him scum in my eyes. 2. He’s just plain vile for having the audacity to sue the officer that ended his deadly ignorance. How can a man live with himself after he does this? How can he sue the officer in question, while playing the role of a victim?
If you ask me, I say the police should be allowed to use deadly force to combat people like Victor Harris- a man who was, no doubt, a deadly driver. Why does a man like Harris get to choose who is allowed to cause deadly mayhem? Why not match deadly driving with deadly force? There is no acceptable reason to allow innocent bystanders to be put in harm’s way when we can end chases with the snap of a finger with deadly force. Maybe this would put the fear into fleeing criminals- you flee, you put innocent lives in danger, you pay for it. End of story. Why allow scumbags like Victor Harris to not only get away with their crimes, but then turn around and sue officers who put their lives at risk to help us? It’s like the ultimate slap in the face to this officer who did his duty to protect us.
I say use deadly force to combat deadly force. A car is a deadly weapon…when you play with a deadly weapon, you sometimes end up with deadly consequences.
I should note…
One of the groups that filed an amicus brief on Harris’ behalf is a group that calls itself the National Police Accountability Project. According to their website, their a project of the National Lawyer’s Guild, which means I trust them as far as I could throw them.
My suspicion that this group shouldn’t be trusted is pretty well spelled out in their news item of this story, where they boldly (and absurdly) state:
“Such a thorough analysis will be instrumental in assisting the Supreme Court in determining that Deputy Scott’s conduct violated Victor Harris’ clearly established right to be free from deadly and excessive force under the Fourth Amendment. This action clearly illustrates NPAP commitment to the protection of the rights of victims of police abuse.” (emphasis mine)
This statement is ludicrous. How is Harris a victim at all, let alone a victim of “police abuse”? Police ending a dangerous chase is considered abuse to these pinhead, brain-dead lawyers? Give me a break…Hopefully The US Supreme Court will have more sense than the lower courts who decided that Scott wasn’t immune from personal liability due to his actions on the job.
I love “jambalaya”- I put it in quotes, because I’ve only ever had the box stuff you make with a seperate package of sausage, and I had a few bowls of it at the Fall Festival last fall. I started out buying Tony Chachere’s Creole Jambalaya mix…I cannot find this stuff in any store anymore. There was a store in my hometown (Boonville, Indiana) that had Tony’s…You add some Eckride skinless smoked sausage to the rice and spices in the box…and you have a meal in about 30 mins.
I switched over to Zatarain’s mix, since that’s all I can ever find now. It’s actually really good for a box mix. I went to Wal-Mart, and I saw these new packets of microwaveable packs of complete meals.
Here’s what they look like:
Now, it’s amazing what they can do with food these days. They can put actual sausage and rice and spices into a bag on a shelf…no need to put it in the fridge, pop it in for 60 seconds and bam- complete “meal.” I have to say, though, this isn’t much of a meal. First- it’s maybe 1/5 of the volume of the box stuff. Second- the rice is actually chewy and the sausage- well, it sure doesn’t taste like or even have the texture of sausage. Or any meat for that matter, unless rubber tires are considered meat.
I was definitely not pleased.
And to think- I only bought the dinner kit, because they didn’t have any of the boxes left. I had to buy a generic brand of the box with the rice and the spices mixed in there. I will try that stuff tomorrow, and see if the generic has a generic flavor.
It’s weird. I’m trying to remember the stuff my mom used to cook, but I can’t remember much of it. It’s something that pops up a lot- I’d come into the house, and she’d be cooking dinner. That would be a regular thing. Not so much in the last few years, but still- when she felt good. I just wish I had a box of her recipes. I have no idea how she made a lot of the great food I grew up on.
Looking for information on sausage dishes- I saw a bunch of stuff I had nearly forgotten about. Sausage and potatoes, sausage and cabbage. Stuff like that- stuff she used to make. Stuff that was part of her “repertoire” of meals.
I’m thinking of printing out some of these recipes and trying them myself.
Any ideas are welcome for easy and semi-quick dinners.
It’s not easy for me to find good recipes, because I’m not a big fan of ‘COOKING- cooking.’ I hate frying chicken, for example (actually, I probably would hate cooking it in any manner), because I’m paranoid, and I can never tell when it’s fully cooked. I’m afraid it’s not totally done, and I will drop dead from some bacteria. So, I tend to stay away from from raw chicken. Not a fan of fish or any seafood of any kind, so that leaves sausage- which I’m honestly not that big a fan of. I can eat the skinless, tender, smoked saugage stuff you’d use for the jambayala, but not like breakfast sausage. Not a fan of the stuff in general.
I guess I’m just too picky.
I lied…I said I was going. But I wanted to put forth one question.
Are there any truly funny female comedians? Personally, I’ve yet to see one. I notice this on the drive to work when I listen to Bob And Tom. Whenever they have female comedians on- you can notice a difference. Listening to so many females on the show- I have come to this overall conclusion. While they sometimes say a funny thing every now and then, none of them are truly funny overall…nor are they really that good at the craft. Now, of course, comedy is all about different opinions. But- honestly, I really have never seen a truly funny female comic. Don’t know why.
I’ve also noticed that when they’re on radio shows- you can always tell that a female is acting. Male comics always tell their stories and you feel they’re telling true stories of their personal lives. With females, I always notice it sounds forced. I never believe they’re telling true life stories. That, and most of them have a bad overall rhythm. The guys flow really well usually and it just goes much more smoothly from one life story to the next, the jokes popping up in the stories themselves.
I don’t know- maybe I’m listening to the wrong female comics. Or maybe there truly aren’t many (or any?) truly funny female comedians. Men and women are different afterall, and some things come easier for men, some easier for women. Maybe good comedy is one of those things that just comes easier for men?
What does everyone think of this new comedy central series, Naked Trucker and T-Bones Show?
I hated it after the first episode…but, oddly enough I’ve watched every episode of the series. It’s still fairly stupid, but there have been funny moments throughout. The guy who plays Trucker has been in a number of shows I liked a lot- Freaks And Geeks, and he playd the computer teacher on Ned’s Declassified School Survival Guide.
I forget what else he’s been on, but I’ve seen him all over the place for years…
I watched the Half Hour News Hour on Fox News this weekend as well. It’s basically The Daily Show for conservatives (no one could deny Daily Show is ulta-liberal)…too bad it’s only a weekend show and not a daily show as the comedy central series.
I think I saw it was created by the co-creator of 24? Or maybe I imagined that.
I’d recommend you take a lot at that for the alternative daily show. Hopefully they will run this every night. I never caught RED EYE- which, as far as I can tell from the onscreen guide, is a daily show that runs latenight every night.
I picked up an HDTV this past week. Did I mention this? It’s nice. A 37″ Polaroid LCD. I had to buy a stand and a tower to go with it (well- whatever you want to call the furniture…it’s for the component equipment, as the stand itself only holds 2 items.) I need a few for the DVR, audio receiver, 2 dvd recorders, 25 disc changer, 2 vcr’s. I know- I have too much stuff…but I dub a lot of stuff to DVD from VHS and from DVD to DVD for others who missed their favorite shows from the past.
I will post pics of the setup soon. The black levels are great- the picture is really vivid, crisp, bright, the colors are really nice…a few different video settings depending on what you’re watching. The 10 or so HD channels the cable company offers are nice…watching Life On a Stick on HDNET is a blast. I’m looking into the Dish Network HD package. From calling before, I think the package with all the HD channels (they carry the VOOM networks) is $110 a month. Will see if I can budget for that. Maybe, maybe not. I’d be interesting in the animation and horror HD channels they have though…
I’m off for now. Unfortunately, I need to get to work about an hour early tomorrow due to some technical issues that will require someone to manually tune the satellite receivers. Oh well. Could be worse. That means getting up around 5:30 and being there at 6:30 or around that time. The road here is clear of snow tho, due to the increase in temperature. So, that’s a plus.
Welcome to all the hate-filled loons who are bashing me personally and linking to the site here. I do so love the comments about me living in my mother’s basement- that might be hard as my mother died last year…and that I have no job (funny, considering I’ve been at the same job since 2003 and am currently a supervisor)…that I have no girlfriend (even though I’ve been dating the same girl for nearly 2 years.) I’m a fundie (no, I’m actually not.)
I guess when you can attack a person personally, obsess over them, and get all your information wrong in the process it isn’t worth being right.
Congrats, fools. Next time try to make your personal attacks fact-based. It usually helps. Then again, with such hateful personal diatribes, I wouldn’t hold my breath for ANY civilized person to take any of you seriously.
Honestly tho- don’t you have to worry about people that post long forum threads about you and your personal life, yet their whole point is that I’M some sort of loser and a “tard” (I think the last time I called someone a “tard”, I was in grade school)?? Are people like this really so blind they don’t see the irony?
For me- That’s all I have to say on the subject. Attack me personally all you want. Though you don’t know the first thing about me personally…have fun kids (and I do mean ‘kids’)!
Drudge links to a video of a “heckler” who attended an event with Mitt Romney…the guy said that Mitt did not know the Lord, because he’s a Mormon.
There were boos. People think this sort of attack is uncalled for and just plain wrong.
Silliness. Of course he doesn’t know the Lord. He lives his life based on a book written long after the Biblical Canon was put together…long after the texts from the prophets and apostles were written. Created out of thin air by a man who was 1. racist, 2. insane, and 3. proven wrong time and time again. Smith did not receive wisdom from God. Jesus did not visit the native Americans, and Jesus wasn’t married. Jesus doesn’t live on a star far into the galaxy, and the same goes for the rest of Mormon doctrine.
Only Mormons go to heaven according to their “holy” book. I guess that sits fine with Christians in this country? Saying a Mormon is a Christian is as laughable as saying a Jehovah’s Witness is a Christian- depite their vast denial of Christian scripture. Now, I’d say JW’s are worse- I’d label them a cult…I probably wouldn’t do the same for LDS. LDS doesn’t try to run every aspect of your life and demand obedience to the church the way JW’s do, but still- neither sect is truly Christian.
I’d agree with the so-called “heckler”- a Mormon is, indeed, a Christian “pretender.”
I’m not going into a long post about what is wrong with the religious sect, or how it differs from true Christianity. A quick google search will give you all the information you need to know on the subject. There are even books about the sect and the differences between it and Christianity as it has existed for nearly 2000 years…you can make up your own mind. If you agree and think that the sect isn’t truly Christian- then why is the subject suddenly off limits? Why would the press be making an issue of it at all if it wasn’t truly a concern with many Americans?
Why it IS off-limits to so many people is beyond me. I think this is clearly acceptable dialogue. You can’t just believe any whacky old thing and be accepted- that idea is absurd. What’s next? Embracing scientology and scientologists? Maybe Wicca after that? Some religious ideas are whacky, and some are out of this world. The book of Mormon might be both…but it sure ain’t true Christianity, and I see no problem with someone bringing up this fact with a presidential candidate.
UPDATE: I take it back, I DO have the video of this…
I don’t have the video of this, but Jane Flemming (director of the Young Democrats of America) appeared on the O’Reilly Factor and discussed the Edwards campaign and the two fool bloggers he hired who had made vile anti-Christian comments in the past couple of years.
When pressed if she would fire these two girls, if she had been in charge, she said no. She would let them say what they wanted to say- free speech…and she would not fire them. He then pressed her further and asked her if they made anti-gay comments or anti-black comments if she would fire them, and shocker of shockers- Jane Flemming, ms young Democrat, said- yes, she would fire them immediately.
Lesson? Flemming is fine and dandy with anti-Christian bigots, but she has no tolerance for those who are anti-gay or anti-black. Seems to be a common theme among Democrats. Maybe Americans usually see the Democrats as the party against religion because that’s precisely what they are. Maybe?
It’s always nice to see Flemming make a complete ass of herself on TV tho, so that’s a plus. I just hope that not all young democrats are this ignorant. I do love how Jane refers to herself in the third person when posting to the blog linked in the first paragraph.
Maybe I should try that. Josh Bozeman exposes idiot named Jane. Josh discusses democrat who is fine with anti-christian bigotry, but says an immediate no to anything that is considered anti-gay. Josh says that being against Christianity is a rare thing in the US. Josh also says that being against homosexuality is fairly common in the US. Josh says this means that Jane is a member of the fringe in this country, and she might even be part of the lunatic fringe from seeing her often on TV making a fool of herself as often as possible.
This has been fairly obvious since most E-Mail providers started upping their storage limits. Hotmail, which is the main E-Mail service I use, upped their storage to over 1gb (not even sure what the limit is now) from a much smaller amount (100mb maybe? I forget what the old limit was- all I know is that my E-Mail would be full with around 100 E-Mails)- you often find your easily flooded with mail because there’s just so much space left in your inbox. I think the larger limits are nice. Before, if you went on vacation and didn’t check your mail for a week, depending on how many newsletters you get and how many friends E-Mail you and how often…you might find your box full within a couple of days. All mail after the limit was bounced back to the sender, which meant your personal E-Mails might never get to you, or newsletters would take you off their lists automatically.
Now, I find mysef using only 3% of my storage limit, yet I have a whopping 10, 000 E-Mails. Most of them I will summarily delete, but it takes time to go through all of it, find the stuff you want to keep, actually read it, reply to what you need to reply to, then delete all of that stuff (or save it if you’re into that.)
Last weekend I deleted a bunch of stuff from my inbox and I was down to 6, 500 E-Mails…now over 10, 000. Whew.
Who knew E-Mail would cause such stress. (poor me)
Boring topic, I’m aware…but I’m listening to an audio book and checked my mail and had to share with ‘someone’. If someone was sitting here next to me, I would have told them and left it at that. Unfortunately for you…
No Shocker: Minimum Wage Increases Decrease Middle Class Buying Power and Hurt Unskilled Workers the Most
Minimum wage increases never help anyone. It’s a lose-lose situation for all. This is the lesson of history. A lesson we cannot, for the love of all that is holy, learn over many many years. A lesson being felt by many businesses across the country- this one in Arizona being an example.
Min wage increases decrease the buying power of the middle class. When you make $4 over min wage due to your labor skills and/or experience in the field you work in- you’re buying power is decreased when the min wage goes up and suddenly you make a mere $2 above that min amount that an employer can legally pay.
Furthermore- the workers with the least skills and experience are the ones who get hurt. Those are the ones that politicians and advocacy groups claim to want to help with these increases. Except- when a company has to pay $2 more for every hour each employee on min wage works- take a gander at who are the first employees to be let go…teenagers and low skilled workers. Teenagers are low skilled in general, as they have less experience than most others, due to their time in the workforce. A company pays what the market can bear- a teenager that is highly unskilled in general isn’t a hot comodity. Teens are also more likely to start a job then quit in a few months. Most adults can’t afford to do that, but teens can do it quite easily. The training costs alone, coupled with high turnover is enough for any business to stop hiring teens period.
I didn’t even mention the higher prices that go along with min wage increases. Most companies can’t afford to cut too many jobs…which means they have limited options. The business owner either takes a hit at the wallet, or he raises prices. Higher prices means that the min wage worker, tho making a bit more now, is paying higher prices for everyday items, which means the hike, in large part, is canceled out!
You’re buying power decreases, low-skilled workers who are most vulnerable lose their jobs, prices rise…you’re left wondering who benefits. In general, when the wage hikes take place, no one benefits. History has shown that to be quite clear. But, we’ll never learn. Politicians will pander, ignoring top economists who do this for a living…advocates for low-waged workers will keep their jobs while those they claim to fight for lose theirs. It’s a neverending cycle that can only be broken with common sense and sound financial decisions on the part of lawmakers everywhere.
I cannot believe there’s a controversy over the SNICKERS Super Bowl ad where the two guys accidentally kiss and then “do something manly” afterwards to fix that situation.
Apparently- some homosexual groups (whatever the hell that means) complained about this ad- there’s nothing wrong with being gay. There’s nothing unmanly about being gay. You shouldn’t have to do something manly after a gay experience.
I’m really not sure what the precise complaint is. I do know that there’s absolutely no reason to think that this would be offensive.
Gwhine that being gay isn’t unmanly. I think most of us would see two guys kissing as the epitome of being “unmanly”- but call me a kook for going with the norm!
I see the suicide prevention folks are upset about the GM ad where the robot jumps from the bridge after being laid off from the plant he worked in. Another group of whiners with nothing to do but whine about something that shouldn’t bother them. You’re free to whine, as long as I’m free to say you’re whiny for doing so…
Don’t get me started with advertising to begin with- 99% of it is wasted cash…it’s like tossing money into a hole in the ground. I didn’t have an urge for a SNICKERS after seeing what I thought was a semi-humorous commercial…nor will I go out and buy a GM-made vehicle because of the semi-humorous robot ad.
No one goes out to buy a SNICKERS because they see a SNICKERS commercial. If you don’t SNICKERS exists, and you can buy one in any store on earth- you’re been living in a rock, and 1, 000 SNICKERS ads wouldn’t make you want to buy their candy.
Super Bowl commercials can be entertaining…but let’s get real- these commercials aren’t causing people to go out and buy any of these products. Most people aren’t mindless fools who buy products based on a catchy commercial. People buy the candy bars they like think taste good (shocking concept, I know). People buy the cars they can afford, that have the features they want, that have the body styles they desire.
My favorite ad? Definitely the Bud Light hitchhiker commercial. Will I ever buy Bud Light? Since I don’t drink- no. If I did drink- no again…I’d buy the beer that I think has a nice flavor…not the beer I saw an ad for. The commercial and the product just don’t connect for me, and I’m guessing this is the same for nearly everyone out there as well.
Back to the main topic- whiny people annoy. They often whine for no reason. Whining with a reason can be a good thing…this stuff here is just absurd. Not shocking tho. This is what you get with the current culture- people who are far out of the norm who demand that the rest of us embrace them for being out of the norm. Ain’t gonna happen. Good luck next time.
So, what’s the outcome of this and other complaints lodged by gay activists? The conclusions are as follows:
1. Gays love to wear short shorts and march in parades with many other gays. They like to do this while kissing each other and humping other gays in front of men, women, and children- basically anyone who will watch their antics.
2. Gays love to whine about gay-related issues. If they think that someone is upset by their ‘gayness’- it’s time to complain. If someone doesn’t embrace their lifestyle decisions- complain. Demand the offending item be put to a quick death…demand that those bad ‘gay-haters’ be punished. Maybe sensitivity training would be the best idea.
3. Gays love to hold their wrists all funny near their waistline…
4. Gays love to attend events where they can chant gay songs and talk badly about conservatives who don’t love them enough.
5. Gays have an accent uniquely their own.
6. Gays LOVE a parade.
7. Gays love to dress in drag.
8. Gays love Cher
9. Gays don’t like Snickers?
Hey- maybe these are wrong. But, look at the media, look at the gay “rights groups” or gay “activist” groups and find a better conclusion. Can I be blamed for the message they constantly choose to send to us?
When you have something to truly be upset about, come back and talk to us. When you have a legitimate complaint, complain in front of everyone. But, until then- back off. Most of us don’t embrace your lives, and we never will. Whining about a silly commercial is just going to make it worse for you.