They totally shoulda

Rolling Stone was going to put Ricky Gervais on the cover, but they chickened out. It would've been:

Damn, that's GOOD.
Cluck, cluck cluck cluck ... Cluck.


Planned Parenthood Firebombed

Mckinney, Texas. Some fool too stupid to make a proper Molotov Cocktail tried to firebomb a place that doesn't do abortions.  Who didn't see this coming?

Of course, this has nothing to do with the far right Christian TP people. It must have been a brown skinned Arabic speaking Muslim terrorist who swam across the Rio Grande to implement the gay agenda.


Fight them here so we won't have to fight them there

US Constitution, Amendment 14, Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, ... who, having previously taken an oath ... to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same,

Their plan is working, like a fucking charm.

hat tip: Council of Lemurs
original cartoon source

God is not Christian

We have it straight from the horse's mouth ass, the Norway shooter is not a Christian, because

"No one believing in Jesus commits mass murder." 

According to the Bible, God certainly committed mass murder, so He must not believe in Himself. Does that make Him an atheist?


Someone's cutting onions here

Never leave behind a fallen comrade, they say.  This squirrel tries to protect his dead mate's body...


English, Release 3.31

Verity Stob has just downloaded the beta version of English V3.31, and is very excited about it. There’s a ton of new features, for instance 

 The emphatic period

English V2.72 introduced the multiple shriek stop, intended to allow subtle distinction in emphasis. In practice this facility has been abused, and has lost its force. In the following dialogue, it is not clear whose presence is more surprising, Julie’s or Wayne’s:

Who did you see on the High Road???
It was Julie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Who was she with?????
She was with Wayne!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Long term users will recall English V2.96 attempted to persuade heavy emphasisers to group their emphatic punctuation in bunches of five for easy counting

It was Julie !!!!! !!!!! !!!!! !!!!! !!!!! !!!!! !!!
and a V3.03 offered system using a suffix convention to denote the intended repetition

It was Julie !33
but neither has ever been much taken up by the big public.
Now, top punctuation boffins have come up with a solution that reintroduces the power of exclamation but has a built-in mechanism that defeats attempts at repeated-stop hyperbole. Here is the emphatic period in action:

It. Was. Julie.
Ooof. Pretty emphatic stuff, eh? Now watch what happens when the user attempts to introduce more emphasis by tripling the number of full stops used:

It... Was... Julie...
Instead of increasing the impact, the repetition activates the safety feature and introduces an effect of hesitancynot what the writer intended at all.

However, I have to warn you that this feature may not make the final release of V3.31. There has been a legal challenge from the telcos, who stand to lose many £millions per annum if it goes through. Apparently a significant proportion of text traffic comprises teenagers sending !!!s to each other.

read the whole thing at Speculative Grammarian 

Norway: one comment

Not all misogynists are terrorists,
but all terrorists are misogynists.

more at Blag Hag

Worth the Wait?

 Phyllis Siegel, right, kisses her new wife Connie Kopelov, after exchanging vows at the Manhattan City Clerk's office. Sunday, July 24, 2011, the first day New York State's Marriage Equality Act goes into effect.

Phyllis is 76 years old, Connie is 84. 


Hey Kid, Free Candy

Alberta Darling (R-Big Tobacco) and Luthor Olsen (R-Phillip Morris) are evil soulless motherfuckers. That is all.

"... inserting a last-minute budget amendment that makes it easier for tobacco giant Philip Morris to push cancer-causing tobacco products to Wisconsin children – marketing them with fruity flavors and candy-like packaging."
Hey Kiddies--first dose is free! 

This story was hard to believe--fruit flavored cigarettes for kids? WTF?--so I googled it. Well, not cigarettes, snuff, to sell kids. Even Scott Walker wouldn't sink low enough for this bill, but these two pustules tried to make this legal, and for a measly grand (33.3 pieces of silver).  

You'd expect to find people like this sneaking around the school grounds with bags of crack.  


Veggie Terror

The war on Terra has expanded to include vegetables.  Petty bureaucrat and Official Pissant Kevin Rulkowski alerts us to this new growing threat that must be weeded out.  Undocumented vegetables springing up on Amurican soil, none of them have papers, they come in all colors, red, yellow, black and brown. None of them are Christian, and many are homosexual, even hermaphroditic. Some are outright fruits. Shamelessly they pursue their agenda, having indiscriminate sex publicly undermining our morals and the sanctity of marriage, which God intends to be between a man and a woman, not a melon. 

The new rules state that in the interest of National Security(TM) words will now be defined by the reigning local Pissant to mean just what he chooses it to mean -- neither more nor less.

Seriously, anything that is uncommon can't be allowed? That is some Sick Scary shit right there.
update: they dropped the charges. Not because it was pointed out to be specifically legal, but because they didn't like the whole world finding out what incredible assholes they are.  Assholes, like cockroaches, don't like the light of day.  


Breastfeeding Doll

Y'all've probly seen this, it's been on TV, but now there's a doll you can breastfeed.

I like their website; God likes our product, Bill Oragielly hates it.  What more do you need to know?

Predictably, people are losing their shit over this, but I'll be damned if I can follow this guy's reasoning (if he has any)

"Not surprising. With irresponsible sex mis-education having resulted in increased exposure to sexuality earlier and earlier in life, this is just the next step in that promiscuous journey."
WTF? promiscuous? sexuality?  sex? It's babies. Eating.  FFS.


Woman gropes TSA agent

This one sounds like a clear case of self defense.

a Colorado woman is accused of putting her hands on a TSA agent at Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix. Court records show 61-year-old Yukari Mihamae grabbed the left breast of the female agent Thursday at the Terminal 4 checkpoint.

Police say she squeezed and twisted the agent's breast with both hands.
Officers say Mihamae admitted to the crime.
There's no word why she touched the agent.
Mihamae now faces a felony count of sexual abuse

Hey, turnabout is fair play.  Over at the Lake they have a list of what the other side's doing. 
 In the last thirty days, TSA has:

  • Asked a 95-year-old woman to remove her adult diaper (then denied ever asking her to do such a thing)
  • Singled out a woman for a hair search probably because she was African-American
  • After announcing they would try to avoid patting down children, let TSA pat down a 6-year-old boy twice
  • Missed a man who stowed away on a flight from New York to Los Angeles
  • Dismissed concerns about increased risk of cancer from the scanners (although these concerns have been coming from scientists since TSA began to use the scanners)
  • Arrested a mom for refusing to let TSA search her daughter
  • Let a stun gun get on a JetBlue flight to Boston. A cleaning crew found it.
  • And, finally, couldn’t stop a scorpion from getting on a plane to sting a man

Boobs bite back

This is just weird. I don't blame the snake for biting her after that tongue action, but her boobs are  poisonous?!!?


Whale Says Thank You

This is the kind of story I love to find. These guys save a whale who's drowning; she thanks them, starting at 6:18.


Tennessee sees the Light

FINALLY, someone has stepped up to the plate and banned those damned bumper stickers. It will be such a relief to not have to look at these things anymore.

.........errrm.  for people who don't click the links, Tennessee banned stickers that were "obscene and patently offensive ".   This one is definitely that, to me, but I doubt very much if this guy'll be shelling out $50.  [hint: irony].
Those who do click the links can see even more offensive stickers, whooo fun, and read about how they  doan know whut it is, but they knows it's agin' the law if'n a big-bellied southern sheriff doan like it.

Word of the Day

Stumbled over this misspelling, one that's better than the original.


A Salute to single mothers

In this household there's a two-year-old and a two-month-old. That means anything is just not an option if it requires any amount of sustained concentration, like, oh you know, taking a crap.

For that reason I hereby nominate for sainthood every single mother who deals with this situation all on her own, and does not kill her children.

Would you take that bet?

Sam Saurs told his mom he was tired of hearing her complain that her feet hurt in high heels. She bet him he couldn't last a day in heels.
So he not only wore heels he wore a dress, and ended up kicked out of school. Whatever you think about this story, I'm impressed with the kid's moxie. If I'd been him, no way I'd've accepted that bet.


...but words will never hurt me

This blogger took a trip the local toy stores and did a mashup of the words used in advertising toys. He made them into these word clouds, one for toys marketed to boys and one for toys marketed to girls.
Can you tell which is which? Betcha can.
Are you surprised? Betcha ain't.
Are you disgusted? Betcha are.


suggest a clever title and I'll put it here, coz i'm at a loss for words

While I was posting that last post, Huffpo was posting this:

Sex dolls, pot smokers ... srsly, I just can't keep up anymore.

First they came for the sex dolls,

We never got caught so I don't know, but I think that when I was in high school we wouldn't have gotten eight years in prison for leaving a blowup doll there.

 Jonathan Turley the law professor has the question

“The question is what type of society we are creating when our children have to fear that a prank (could) lead them to jail for almost a decade. What type of citizens are we creating who fear the arbitrary use of criminal charges by their government?”

Ted Rall has the answer:

Brave New Book: Political Scientist Argues the U.S. is a Police State 

"Where the book becomes indispensable is its last third, focusing on the Clinton, Bush and early Obama administrations. This, the author argues beyond any sane ability to disagree, is when Americans citizens lost our basic freedoms and civil liberties once and for all"

 What I wanna know is what can we do if there's anything we can do about it?


I flunk Geography

One of my readers just pointed out to me that I'm from a non-existent country.  On my "about" page it said

Hi, I'm Uzza. Long ago everyone in Sumeria knew me, and my sisters and I were worshipped all over the Mideast ...

There's no such place as Sumeria--it was Sumer. I attribute this slip to reading too much Conan the Barbarian. On the plus side, it only took, what, three years for anyone to notice.  Sharp guy, that reader. 

(I fixed it)

Is it your fault someone does something you did not consent to?

a little background;
A woman got too drunk, and fearing for her safety, she called the police to assist her in getting home safely. The police raped her.
Rachael Larimore, writing for Slate, excoriates her for

drinking too much and going home with a stranger isn’t a wise idea”
“were it possible for her to go back in time, she would gladly give up the few hours of carefree drinking”
“it does require the exercise of common sense.”

Personal Failure, bless her little heart, jumps all over Larimore,

Rape is the fault of the rapist. She says, and Going home with a “strange man" is also not consent.

Somebody asked my opinion on this. OK.

First get this out of the way; I hate that like night follows day trivializing comparisons spring up between property crime and rape. It implies that a woman has a possession that can be taken from her, instead of is a person whose rights and dignity are violated. These comparisons are prefaced by protestations that raping is much more serious than stealing a laptop, or a bike, or uncovered meat. That's wrong. Rape is not more serious than theft—it is qualitatively different. That some people can't see that is a problem.


Now. Distinguish between doing things, ourselves, and making suggestions for other people to do things. Telling someone else what to do can be insulting and requires tact. Telling someone what they should have done, after the fact, is blaming and hurtful and in most instances should not be done.

Worst is the implied, and false, assumption that some course of action exists that completely eliminates the possibility, with the corollary that the person being criticized chose to not take that imaginary course of action.

Some people profess to believe that Larimore's “suggestions” do not imply consent, but I find that disingenuous. There seems to be more in play, as below.

As for actually doing things ourselves, everyone agrees that we can do things that increase the likelihood that something bad will happen to us.
Yes, everyone agrees that doing those things is stupid. No one argues otherwise.
Matvejevna, in one of these bike stealing comparisons, says

Did I, ... consent to give my bike away? No.
Was it my own fault that my bike got stolen? Yes,
This is a pretty fine hair to split. You did not consent to it but it's your own fault anyway? You would say it was, I would say it wasn't. How does that work? What do you mean exactly when you say “it's your fault”? These words can evoke different things:

you are at fault
you are to blame
you are responsible for
you bear responsibility for
you asked for
you deserve
you got what you were asking for
you got what you deserved
you had it coming, for doing something stupid.

It seems different people have different things in mind when they say “It's her fault.”

Since everyone agrees that there are certain things that can increase our chances of being harmed, and that doing those things is stupid, there are really two other questions being asked here, and both relate to the nonexistent course of action mentioned above.

1) Should a person ever or never do any stupid thing?
Possibly others would answer that no one should do anything stupid. My answer is that yes, not only is it inevitable that all of us do stupid things in our lifetimes, but that making such mistakes is a useful and necessary part of growth.

2) When you do something stupid, should you or do you deserve to be punished? Here I would answer no, and this seems to be the heart of the matter.
Authoritarian types are big on punishment, retribution, vengeance, divine judgment. Woman did something stupid, she deserves the consequences, i.e it's her fault she got raped.
Egalitarian types like me are big on freedom, including the freedom to make mistakes, learn from them, change and grow. Woman made an error in judgment, she doesn't deserve to get raped for it. i.e. it's not her fault.
Excepting the crazies, both sides agree that the rapist is at fault and that is what should be condemned, but effectively he gets a free pass because people ignore that and focus on this minor side issue. He should not get a free pass, and however one feels about cosmic justice, we should be talking about him.
Last point. This topic started when a woman, realizing she was incapacitated, for whatever reason, asked the police for assistance. I see that as an exhibition of common sense. Instead, she is being criticized for not having common sense.
I see that as entrusting her safety to the police. Larimore sees it as “going home with a strange man” (!!). It's hard not to remember where we've heard that before.

But WTF options does Larimore offer her if she, like denelian, finds herself roofied and needs help? She tells us

were it possible for her to go back in time, she would gladly give up the few hours of carefree drinking”

Well, I maintain that she is entitled to a few hours of carefree drinking. Just as is anyone else. That pretty much defines a civilized, free, society. She is also entitled to depend on the police for help when she needs it. We could not ask for a more clear example of cops abusing the power given them by the government. The same applies though to every man who abuses the power given them by privilege; their position in our patriarchal society.

We are entitled to drink, to do stupid things, and to rely on police protection even when we do them. This woman may have been naive to think she could be safe around a NYC cop, but for me it's a long ways from that to “it's her fault”.

Here's a fact. The question “Can the police be trusted?” immediately, with no intervening steps, morphed into “Is the woman to blame?” That, to me, is deeply disturbing.


FuckForForests ?!?

Wow, man, like, I woke up this morning, lit up a fatty, went online, and I was like back in the sixties. This is far out, man. 

**clicking this picture is **Definitely NSFW** see, I even pruded out the homepage for you.

What is moral, when we do not respect nature? War and nature destruction is normalized, while public lovemaking and nudity is considered offensive and criminalized.
When you show a film with animals fucking it is called a nature program. But if you show humans fucking, it is called porn and gets given an age limit or censorship.

This is a group in I guess Europe, who want to use porn for a good cause.

Sex is often shown to attract us to buy all kind of bullshit products and ideas, so why not for a good cause?
By showing the beauty of love, nudity and real sexual adventures - we wish to direct attention to, and collect money for threatened nature.

I've got no quarrel with that, it sounds like a good idea. The world can use more idealistic, uhh, whatever this is. It's more and more obvious the hippies were right.

I gotta admit I just can't wrap my mind around this whole site though. Am I just having flashbacks?


Rape Trees


"...an estimated 70 percent of women who cross through the Arizona desert without a male companion end up the victims of sexual assault. The rapists, who are often the very human smugglers these women have paid to guide them, then hang their victims’ underwear on tree limbs as trophies for other crossers to see."

read the rest



Just got this message from Blogger. Can anyone translate what it means?
Here's a closeup:

Blogger has been notified, according to the terms of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), that certain content in your blog is alleged to infringe upon the copyrights of others. As a result, we have reset the post(s) to "draft" status. (If we did not do so, we would be subject to a claim of copyright infringement, regardless of its merits. The URL(s) of the allegedly infringing post(s) may be found at the end of this message.) This means your post - and any images, links or other content - is not gone. You may edit the post to remove the offending content and republish, at which point the post in question will be visible to your readers again.

A bit of background: the DMCA is a United States copyright law that provides guidelines for online service provider liability in case of copyright infringement. If you believe you have the rights to post the content at issue here, you can file a counter-claim. For more information on our DMCA policy, including how to file a counter-claim, please see http://www.google.com/dmca.html.

The notice that we received, with any personally identifying information removed, will be posted online by a service called Chilling Effects at http://www.chillingeffects.org
. We do this in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). You can search for the DMCA notice associated with the removal of your content by going to the Chilling Effects search page at http://www.chillingeffects.org/search.cgi, and entering in the URL of the blog post that was removed. If it is brought to our attention that you have republished the post without removing the content/link in question, then we will delete your post and count it as a violation on your account. Repeated violations to our Terms of Service may result in further remedial action taken against your Blogger account including deleting your blog and/or terminating your account. If you have legal questions about this notification, you should retain your own legal counsel.


The Blogger Team

Affected URLs:


That's a post about Ted Nugent. All I can figure, means he's an asshole. We knew that.

Crooked Tables

So here's this great comic, from SMBC, of course, and before I can post I see that it's already been done, by Margarita del Norte, on her blog From the Top of the World. But that's OK, because you should just go there anyway and read her blog, because it kicks ass.

Evil Arts

Kung-Fu, karate, Ju-Jitsu, Judo, etc, all … substitute for religion and philosophy a kick, punch, chop, eyeball attack, joint dislocation , neck choke, throw and other things that are injurious to humans. (33)

Karate … is an evil weapon and an evil art. This art is used to kill or injure other human beings. (97) 

Now I ask you, if you are a civilized person and believe in God, please do not practice Karate, Kung-Fu, or any other Oriental Martial Art. (226)
---Mitose, James. What is True Self Defense? 

It's pretty hard to argue with that.


Candian Please

July 1st is Canada Day, so that's gives me a reason to post this just because I like it.

Julia Bentley and Andrew Gunadie, via Sabina

milk of inhuman kindness

Basic hyoomanity, hoo haz it?

This species? Haz.

This species? Haz.

This species? Not so much.

This species REALLY has it.  Fer sure click this one. It'll leave you feeling good and make up for the old gay bashing bag above.  Maybe she'll get reincarnated as a dolphin and learn the right way to behave.