The sign is certainly one way to let people know what they think.
Actually, the sign might be referring to humans "doing their business." Which of course is even worse.
Saturday, November 24, 2012
One Way to Stop Dogs, People From "Fertilizing" Your Lawn
Judging by the pic I snapped for this post, somebody in Burlington, Vermont was fed up with people letting dogs do their business on their front lawn.
The sign is certainly one way to let people know what they think.
Actually, the sign might be referring to humans "doing their business." Which of course is even worse.
The sign is certainly one way to let people know what they think.
Actually, the sign might be referring to humans "doing their business." Which of course is even worse.
Friday, November 23, 2012
Predictable Black Friday Violence Vile, Unexplanable
As predictable as it was disgusting, there were reports Friday across the nation of Black Friday violence, in which people rioted, fought, stampeded and otherwise behaved abysmally to grab the Christmas gifts they demanded.
Peace on earth, good will toward men? Not these morons.
I don't think there's a more shameful scene than people rioting in stores on the Friday after Christmas. I don't think any of the people who participate are nearly smart enough to have any self-awareness of how awful they are.
I poked around today looking for information on the psychology of Black Friday rioters and found precious little on the topic. It does seem there's an emptiness in these people that they try to self medicate by being the Top Dog in the holiday shopping wars. If a few heads get smashed, so be it, I guess.
A Christian Science Monitor piece last year suggested the violence is desperation on the part of consumers and retailers to bust out of iffy economic times, come hell or high water.
Look, I know I've complained about people standing in long lines and struggling through clouds to attend the Black Friday festivities. It's not for me, but if you somehow enjoy that kind of thing, even if the deals aren't really as good as advertised, go for it.
The vast majority of people who partake in Black Friday are fine. They're mostly happy, or at least nonviolent. Almost all of them manage to avoid rioting.
The rioters? I hope they don't find what they're shopping for, and I hope the rest of their holiday season really, really sucks. They deserve no better.
Here's a happy little video of morons at a Wal-Mart this year:
The retailers that invite these riots are at least as disgusting as the actual rioters.. They create this onrush by appealing to the way our brains are wired. They create an atmosphere of scarcity by saying the deals are for an hour only, there's limited supplies, limit two per customer, yada, yada, yada.
And then the riots happen. So what if they're employees get trampled, punched, run over, injured, killed? The retailers' disdain for their employees is breathtaking. We have an associate in Aisle 3 killed by a mob? Get rid of the body and hire some other schmuck at minimum wage to face the homicidal mob. As long as we rake in the profits, who cares if a few people die in the process?
There's a lot of good in Christmas. But the Black Friday lunatics, and the retailers that enable them deserve something much worse than a lump of coal from Santa. They just need to crawl back under their disgusting rocks and leave us alone.
Peace on earth, good will toward men? Not these morons.
 |
| A lovely Black Friday scene. Wish you were there? |
I don't think there's a more shameful scene than people rioting in stores on the Friday after Christmas. I don't think any of the people who participate are nearly smart enough to have any self-awareness of how awful they are.
I poked around today looking for information on the psychology of Black Friday rioters and found precious little on the topic. It does seem there's an emptiness in these people that they try to self medicate by being the Top Dog in the holiday shopping wars. If a few heads get smashed, so be it, I guess.
A Christian Science Monitor piece last year suggested the violence is desperation on the part of consumers and retailers to bust out of iffy economic times, come hell or high water.
Look, I know I've complained about people standing in long lines and struggling through clouds to attend the Black Friday festivities. It's not for me, but if you somehow enjoy that kind of thing, even if the deals aren't really as good as advertised, go for it.
The vast majority of people who partake in Black Friday are fine. They're mostly happy, or at least nonviolent. Almost all of them manage to avoid rioting.
The rioters? I hope they don't find what they're shopping for, and I hope the rest of their holiday season really, really sucks. They deserve no better.
Here's a happy little video of morons at a Wal-Mart this year:
The retailers that invite these riots are at least as disgusting as the actual rioters.. They create this onrush by appealing to the way our brains are wired. They create an atmosphere of scarcity by saying the deals are for an hour only, there's limited supplies, limit two per customer, yada, yada, yada.
And then the riots happen. So what if they're employees get trampled, punched, run over, injured, killed? The retailers' disdain for their employees is breathtaking. We have an associate in Aisle 3 killed by a mob? Get rid of the body and hire some other schmuck at minimum wage to face the homicidal mob. As long as we rake in the profits, who cares if a few people die in the process?
There's a lot of good in Christmas. But the Black Friday lunatics, and the retailers that enable them deserve something much worse than a lump of coal from Santa. They just need to crawl back under their disgusting rocks and leave us alone.
Fiona Apple Cancels Tour, Re: Awesome Dedication to Dog
Singer/Songwriter Fiona Apple has disappointed some fans because she has just canceled her South American tour.
While some people would think her reasoning is trivial, it's actually poignant and instructive to all of us, especially dog owners.
Apple said she canceled because her best friend, her 14-year-old pitbull Janet, is dying, and Apple said she wants to be there for Janet.
Apple explained herself in a four page letter she posted to Facebook, and it's a classic rendering of the age old question: When somebody lovingly adopts a dog in trouble and gives the pooch a nice, comfortable life, who benefits more, the adopter or adoptee?
As is often the case, it's hard to tell which won the most in Apple's case. The answer is probably both.
I certainly have new respect for Apple. I was never much of a fan of her music. She's definitely a hugely talented singer and songwriter, but her work just was never my cup of tea.
She had this to say about her own and Janet's perspective as the end approaches:
"I know that she's not sad about aging or dying. Animals have a survival instinct, but a sense of mortality and vanity, they do not. That’s why they are so much more present than people. But I know that she is coming close to point where she will stop being a dog, and instead, be part of everything. She’ll be in the wind, and in the soil, and the snow, and in me, wherever I go.
I just can't leave her now, please understand."
Apple' decision to postpone her tour seems to be a matter of priorities. Here she is again:
"I will not be the woman who puts her career ahead of love and friendship. I am the woman who stays home and bakes Tilapia for my dearest, oldest friend. And helps her be comfortable, and comforted, and safe, and important. Many of us these days, we dread the death of a loved one."
"It is the ugly truth of Life, that keeps us feeling terrified and alone. I wish we could also appreciate the time that lies right beside the end of time. I know that I will feel the most overwhelming knowledge of her, and of her life and of my love for her, in the last moments. I need to do my damnedest to be there for that. Because it will be the most beautiful, the most intense, the most enriching experience of life I've ever known. When she dies."
"So I am staying home, and I am listening to her snore and wheeze, and reveling in the swampiest, most awful breath that ever emanated from an angel. And I am asking for your blessing".
Well, Fiona, for what it's worth, you have my blessing, that's for sure.
While some people would think her reasoning is trivial, it's actually poignant and instructive to all of us, especially dog owners.
 |
| Fiona Apple |
Apple said she canceled because her best friend, her 14-year-old pitbull Janet, is dying, and Apple said she wants to be there for Janet.
Apple explained herself in a four page letter she posted to Facebook, and it's a classic rendering of the age old question: When somebody lovingly adopts a dog in trouble and gives the pooch a nice, comfortable life, who benefits more, the adopter or adoptee?
As is often the case, it's hard to tell which won the most in Apple's case. The answer is probably both.
I certainly have new respect for Apple. I was never much of a fan of her music. She's definitely a hugely talented singer and songwriter, but her work just was never my cup of tea.
She had this to say about her own and Janet's perspective as the end approaches:
"I know that she's not sad about aging or dying. Animals have a survival instinct, but a sense of mortality and vanity, they do not. That’s why they are so much more present than people. But I know that she is coming close to point where she will stop being a dog, and instead, be part of everything. She’ll be in the wind, and in the soil, and the snow, and in me, wherever I go.
I just can't leave her now, please understand."
Apple' decision to postpone her tour seems to be a matter of priorities. Here she is again:
"I will not be the woman who puts her career ahead of love and friendship. I am the woman who stays home and bakes Tilapia for my dearest, oldest friend. And helps her be comfortable, and comforted, and safe, and important. Many of us these days, we dread the death of a loved one."
"It is the ugly truth of Life, that keeps us feeling terrified and alone. I wish we could also appreciate the time that lies right beside the end of time. I know that I will feel the most overwhelming knowledge of her, and of her life and of my love for her, in the last moments. I need to do my damnedest to be there for that. Because it will be the most beautiful, the most intense, the most enriching experience of life I've ever known. When she dies."
"So I am staying home, and I am listening to her snore and wheeze, and reveling in the swampiest, most awful breath that ever emanated from an angel. And I am asking for your blessing".
Well, Fiona, for what it's worth, you have my blessing, that's for sure.
Thursday, November 22, 2012
Eric Dondero: Obama Hater's Lonely Life
 |
| A probably very lonely Eric Dondero |
"Everybody who voted for Obama is dead to me," Dondero says. I've seen more rational temper tantrums among three year olds, but what do I know about childcare?
It's perfectly understandable that people who voted for Romney three weeks ago are still disappointed that their candidate lost. It's also perfectly understandable if they remain somewhat annoyed with people who didn't vote for Romney.
But talk about ruining your own life with your own temper tantrum! Dondero takes it to a new level.
He won't ever speak to his brother again, he vows, because said brother is a suspected Obama supporter. He won't talk to any coworkers who are Obama partisans, he won't work for any Democratic employer, would spit on the lawn of anybody who is a Democrat, would divorce his wife if he learned she was a Democrat, and won't speak to anyone unless their worldview matches his.
Phew! That has to be exhausting!
He'll spend so much time trying to avoid Democrats and Obama fans he'll have time for nothing else. What will he do if he goes into a store to buy something? Grill the owner on his or political leanings? That'll take forever. And what if the business owners keeps his political leanings close to his chest, just to avoid offending customers?
I'll bet his Thanksgiving day today will be lonely. Who would invite him over? Does anybody want a powder keg like Dondero at the table? What if someone lets slip that they don't think Obamacare is that bad?
So he'll sit along in his room, eating his Hungry Man turkey TV dinner. He can't even watch the Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade. Many of the performers in the parade are probably liberal. And Santa Claus, who makes his annual appearance in the parade, gives gifts. Isn't gift giving Obama-esque in Dondero's mind?
If Dondero is invited to a party, chances are there will be a Democrat there. Will he cause a scene big enough to offend the (Republican) host of the party? Even the most hard core conservatives would find Dondero exhausting after awhile.
All this work Dondero created for himself will accomplish what, exactly? Somehow, I don't think Obama will resign because Dondero continues his temper tantrum. Life will go on, right past Dondero, whoever runs the country.
I know there are limits for everyone as to who they'll have conversations with. I probably wouldn't associate with, say, a white supremicist who burns crosses for a living. But really, writing off a bit over half the U.S. population over a presidential election?
Yep, Dondero sure is pissed. But the thing is, there's a fine line between anger and fear. Sometimes they're one in the same, and I think that's where Dondero is. Yeah, I'm playing armchair shrink here, but I wonder if he's afraid of exposing himself to ideas that he disagrees with. What if the person he disagrees with has a point? He'll have to change his world view a bit. Would that be too traumatic for him?
Like most people, I have conversations all the time with people whose political leanings I disagree with. Sometimes the conversation is a bit boring. Sometimes I find a talk with these people incredibly interesting and enlightening. Every once in awhile, they persuade me to think a little differently on a topic.
What that happens, the world doesn't end. I just end up a little smarter than I was before. And the problem with that is.... what, Mr Dondero?
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Is Britain's Headbutting Cheese Toastie Fighter the Country's Worst and Laziest Man?
You can always count on Britain's Daily Mail to provide us with way to wordy, but highly entertaining news headlines that beg the reader to continue on to the article.
The latest is this: "Love Rat Dad of Nine Children to Eight Women Who Headbutted Ex-Girlfriend in Row Over Cheese Toastie Jailed For Just 20 Days."
Wow, this guy leads a complicated life. When he's not screwing around without protection, he's fighting or doing a messy job of eating a cheese toastie. I'm glad my life isn't that complex.
Actually, it gets worse. Subsequent reports indicate this guy, Keith McDonald, fathered 15 kids by 14 women, and doesn't really support any of them, according to the Mirror
Supposedly, two other women are pregnant by this (alleged!) loser.
Now, I know there are some highly unfunny issues here. Domestic violence, irresponsible parenthood, irrationality.
But you can't resist the complete awful train wreckiness of the guy. The girlfriend in the cheese toastie incident said she just "hoovered" the carpet when he got cheese toastie crumbs all over the place, and that's what started the latest fight.
He did get that 20 day sentence for the assault over the cheese toastie. What the hell is a cheese toastie anyway?
A larger issue: Hasn't this guy ever heard of a condom? I know he doesn't have much money, having spent all his cash on cheese toasties, but condoms aren't that expensive. He tells reporters he doesn't want to "get the snip"
He also tells reporters: "I can't wear a condom. I just don't like it."
Well, I don't like you, either, Keith.
Ladies, if you want my opinion, you can do better than this guy. Anybody can do better than this guy. He's not even good looking, for gawd sakes!
He's unemployed, too, according to reports. The Mirror says he told them he doesn't want to get a job "because it gets boring."
Now, he's supposedly finally being investigated by the Child Support Agency. And shouldn't somebody be trying to get him to find a job? If he's got the energy to have all that sex, he's got the energy to work, even if the job is boring.
Then the unemployment benefits could instead go to somebody who really can't work over there in Britain. What a concept!
MacDonald, 25, has been well known in the British press for a few years now. It's shocking that nobody has cracked down on him.
I don't buy some conservatives' argument that everyone who gets any form of social welfare is a lazy bum, but this guy proves that a few, at least in Britain, certainly are pretty much worthless sloths, at least if the media reports about MacDonald are to be believed.
If I were a British taxpayer, I'd be at MacDonald's house, shaking him down for a partial refund on my taxes.
Too bad stupidity isn't a crime in Britain. If what all the tabloids say about MacDonald is true, he would get a life sentence.
The latest is this: "Love Rat Dad of Nine Children to Eight Women Who Headbutted Ex-Girlfriend in Row Over Cheese Toastie Jailed For Just 20 Days."
 |
| Worl'd worst father? Keith MacDonald of Britain |
Wow, this guy leads a complicated life. When he's not screwing around without protection, he's fighting or doing a messy job of eating a cheese toastie. I'm glad my life isn't that complex.
Actually, it gets worse. Subsequent reports indicate this guy, Keith McDonald, fathered 15 kids by 14 women, and doesn't really support any of them, according to the Mirror
Supposedly, two other women are pregnant by this (alleged!) loser.
Now, I know there are some highly unfunny issues here. Domestic violence, irresponsible parenthood, irrationality.
But you can't resist the complete awful train wreckiness of the guy. The girlfriend in the cheese toastie incident said she just "hoovered" the carpet when he got cheese toastie crumbs all over the place, and that's what started the latest fight.
He did get that 20 day sentence for the assault over the cheese toastie. What the hell is a cheese toastie anyway?
A larger issue: Hasn't this guy ever heard of a condom? I know he doesn't have much money, having spent all his cash on cheese toasties, but condoms aren't that expensive. He tells reporters he doesn't want to "get the snip"
He also tells reporters: "I can't wear a condom. I just don't like it."
Well, I don't like you, either, Keith.
Ladies, if you want my opinion, you can do better than this guy. Anybody can do better than this guy. He's not even good looking, for gawd sakes!
He's unemployed, too, according to reports. The Mirror says he told them he doesn't want to get a job "because it gets boring."
Now, he's supposedly finally being investigated by the Child Support Agency. And shouldn't somebody be trying to get him to find a job? If he's got the energy to have all that sex, he's got the energy to work, even if the job is boring.
Then the unemployment benefits could instead go to somebody who really can't work over there in Britain. What a concept!
MacDonald, 25, has been well known in the British press for a few years now. It's shocking that nobody has cracked down on him.
I don't buy some conservatives' argument that everyone who gets any form of social welfare is a lazy bum, but this guy proves that a few, at least in Britain, certainly are pretty much worthless sloths, at least if the media reports about MacDonald are to be believed.
If I were a British taxpayer, I'd be at MacDonald's house, shaking him down for a partial refund on my taxes.
Too bad stupidity isn't a crime in Britain. If what all the tabloids say about MacDonald is true, he would get a life sentence.
$3,000 For a 75-Foot Ambulance Ride?
An 84 year old guy in California went to the doctor, saying he had a dizzy spell. His doctor figured the man needed an MRI, which was available in a hospital just 75 feet away from the doctor's office.
The elderly man didn't feel too bad, so he said he's walk next door to the hospital. Makes sense, right?
Uh-uh! The requirement was he needed to ride an ambulance to the hospital, and the trip would cost him $3,000.
The news is worse than the headline. It's not an isolated case of somebody trying to spectacularly rip off an old guy, but instead a bad example of the state of health care in the Grand Old US of A.
I don't have any answers here on how to solve this, but the whole set of circumstances is ridiculous.
They didn't want the guy to walk the 75 feet to the hospital because if he had another dizzy spell and keeled over, it might have been, in some lawyers' minds, the doctor's and the hospital's fault. They would have been sued, and that would be bad.
Also, the doctor said he didn't want to put his patient at risk.
The people responsible for the $3,000 ambulance bill say they know damn well a 75-foot ambulance trip did not set them back Three Grand. The problem is, a lot of people who get carted off to the hospital can't pay the subsequent ambulance bill. The money has to come from somewhere, so essentially, people who can afford ambulance trips subsidize the whole thing.
The guy's insurance paid for part of the ambulance ride, but he was still on the hook for more than half of it.
Once this whole thing caught the attention of the local media, the hospital waived the pricey hospital ride.
But this make me wonder. How much more are we paying extra for medical care than would normally be fair? And how do we know if the price we pay is the going rate or inflated? You can't easily comparison shop for say, emergency room treatment for car crash injuries.
I guess the only solution is to never get sick or hurt, and ignore any aches and pains. It's pretty clear to me why people avoid going to the doctor when they're sick, and wait until things get way out of control. They hope the problem goes away, rather than deal with the expense.
What's worse? Illness or bankruptcy? Seems like nowadays, we often have to choose between health and financial solvency. You can't have both.
The elderly man didn't feel too bad, so he said he's walk next door to the hospital. Makes sense, right?
Uh-uh! The requirement was he needed to ride an ambulance to the hospital, and the trip would cost him $3,000.
The news is worse than the headline. It's not an isolated case of somebody trying to spectacularly rip off an old guy, but instead a bad example of the state of health care in the Grand Old US of A.
 |
| Would you pay $3,000 to be driven next door in this? |
I don't have any answers here on how to solve this, but the whole set of circumstances is ridiculous.
They didn't want the guy to walk the 75 feet to the hospital because if he had another dizzy spell and keeled over, it might have been, in some lawyers' minds, the doctor's and the hospital's fault. They would have been sued, and that would be bad.
Also, the doctor said he didn't want to put his patient at risk.
The people responsible for the $3,000 ambulance bill say they know damn well a 75-foot ambulance trip did not set them back Three Grand. The problem is, a lot of people who get carted off to the hospital can't pay the subsequent ambulance bill. The money has to come from somewhere, so essentially, people who can afford ambulance trips subsidize the whole thing.
The guy's insurance paid for part of the ambulance ride, but he was still on the hook for more than half of it.
Once this whole thing caught the attention of the local media, the hospital waived the pricey hospital ride.
But this make me wonder. How much more are we paying extra for medical care than would normally be fair? And how do we know if the price we pay is the going rate or inflated? You can't easily comparison shop for say, emergency room treatment for car crash injuries.
I guess the only solution is to never get sick or hurt, and ignore any aches and pains. It's pretty clear to me why people avoid going to the doctor when they're sick, and wait until things get way out of control. They hope the problem goes away, rather than deal with the expense.
What's worse? Illness or bankruptcy? Seems like nowadays, we often have to choose between health and financial solvency. You can't have both.
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Thoughts on the Great Twinkie Crisis of 2012
The Great Twinkie Crisis of 2012 rolls on, and nobody is sure if the company that makes Twinkies and a bunch of other really bad for you stuff, Hostess, will stay in business, or whether somebody else will take over Twinkie production.
Like millions of deeply concerned Americans, I have many questions about this dire sitution. Among them:
Could we raid all the old abandoned Cold War bomb shelters and take the Twinkies out of there and serve them to a desperate nation? I'm sure they haven't spoiled yet. My colleague Aki Soga raises another point: If we remove Twinkies from Cold War bomb shelters, what will keep the radiation out of said bomb shelters?
What does Little Debbie think of this whole situation? Sure, she looks like a sweet, innocent girl, but I bet she did something underhanded to Hostess to increase her market share. Never trust a 1930s or 1940s girl in a cute hat. They'll get you every time.
If Hostess executives get in trouble for allegedly give themselves big fat pay raises when the company was going under, can they use the Twinkie defense and get off scott free?" For that matter, if union representatives made too many unreasonable wage and benefit demands, could they also use the Twinkie defense?
Will the fortunes of Dow Chemical plummet because, at least for now, they are not supplying Hostess with critical Twinkie ingredients?
Will the worst Twinkie hoarders be featured on the television show "Hoarders?" If so, will any of the hoarders kill the host of Hoarders for trying to eat one of their Twinkies?
If Twinkie production resumes, can we use Twinkies as sandbags to protect property from the next really bad storm?
Or, if Twinkie production resumes and the United States gets even more ticked off at Iran for possibly developing nuclear weapons, can we bomb Iran with millions of Twinkies so that everybody there gets so fat on them they will become incapable of making, moving or launching nuclear warheads?
Hostess makes Wonder Bread, too. If sales of Wonder Bread have been lackluster, could they rebrand Wonder Brand as a wonderful kitchen sponge? The bread is perhaps even a Quicker Picker Upper than Bounty.
If Hostess and Twinkies become just part of American history, will the Smithsonian build a Twinkie museum? If so who would guard the Twinkies without being tempted to eat them?
I'm sure readers here have other questions. If you are concerned like the rest of America, please feel free to post your urgent questions in the comments section.
Like millions of deeply concerned Americans, I have many questions about this dire sitution. Among them:
 |
| Who knew this would become the biggest crisis of 2012? |
Could we raid all the old abandoned Cold War bomb shelters and take the Twinkies out of there and serve them to a desperate nation? I'm sure they haven't spoiled yet. My colleague Aki Soga raises another point: If we remove Twinkies from Cold War bomb shelters, what will keep the radiation out of said bomb shelters?
What does Little Debbie think of this whole situation? Sure, she looks like a sweet, innocent girl, but I bet she did something underhanded to Hostess to increase her market share. Never trust a 1930s or 1940s girl in a cute hat. They'll get you every time.
 |
| Was the underhanded Little Debbie involved in the potential death of Twinkies? |
If Hostess executives get in trouble for allegedly give themselves big fat pay raises when the company was going under, can they use the Twinkie defense and get off scott free?" For that matter, if union representatives made too many unreasonable wage and benefit demands, could they also use the Twinkie defense?
Will the fortunes of Dow Chemical plummet because, at least for now, they are not supplying Hostess with critical Twinkie ingredients?
Will the worst Twinkie hoarders be featured on the television show "Hoarders?" If so, will any of the hoarders kill the host of Hoarders for trying to eat one of their Twinkies?
If Twinkie production resumes, can we use Twinkies as sandbags to protect property from the next really bad storm?
Or, if Twinkie production resumes and the United States gets even more ticked off at Iran for possibly developing nuclear weapons, can we bomb Iran with millions of Twinkies so that everybody there gets so fat on them they will become incapable of making, moving or launching nuclear warheads?
Hostess makes Wonder Bread, too. If sales of Wonder Bread have been lackluster, could they rebrand Wonder Brand as a wonderful kitchen sponge? The bread is perhaps even a Quicker Picker Upper than Bounty.
If Hostess and Twinkies become just part of American history, will the Smithsonian build a Twinkie museum? If so who would guard the Twinkies without being tempted to eat them?
I'm sure readers here have other questions. If you are concerned like the rest of America, please feel free to post your urgent questions in the comments section.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)