RIP Terri

The disgusting legal battle over a private family matter has come to a tragic end. Terri Schaivo has passed away, 15 years after suffering severe brain damage from which she never recovered. It's a sad end to a sad story, but perhaps now people will stop politicizing this issue and realize that she has found the peace she wanted. R.I.P.

But he likes toilet paper! How bad could he be?

Last week it was reported that a mother is calling on toilet paper giant Purex to change its advertising after her four-year-old son was mauled by a shar pei dog - the breed of dog that is the Purex Rolly mascot. The Shar Pei dog is pictured above. Its that kind of dog that looks like it's been experimented on for awhile and somehow survived. Or was once really really fat and managed to lose it all using Jared's Subway diet, but was left with a ton of loose flab-skin. I always wondered how the poor bastards manage to see. Anyways, apparently the lady's son had approached the dog to pat it because he had been lured into thinking shar peis were a safe breed through the Purex advertising. Alright. Lady. I'm sorry about your son, I really am. It's terrible. But the dog looks funny. I can understand going to pet it. The thing is, if the dog was able and willing to attack the kid, I would think that the dog owners were somehow negligent with their aggressive dog. So talk to them. Blaming toilet paper ads is just silly. I don't try to pet bees because I see a honey-nut cheerios ad. I don't expect a big bald arian man to emerge from my cleanser just because Mr. Clean tends to do so, and the Charmin bear doesn't make me think that going and wiping a bear's ass is a very good idea. Now granted, I'm an adult, so I've learned these lessons. Sometimes the hard way (that bear liked it though). But kids aren't that dumb, he just liked the dog. Stop trying to mine for a quick score based on your kid's suffering.

Maybe the system... works?

What I didnt mention in my last post on the Schiavo case, was that the Federal government's actions are a violation of essential Republican values. Ironically then, Bush's gambit of shoring up his base may in fact be alienating a chunk of it. Today, former Republican representative of Georgia Bob Barr noted that "To simply say that the 'culture of life,' or whatever you call it means that we don't have to pay attention to the principles of federalism or separation of powers is certainly not a conservative viewpoint". Furthermore, Allan Lichtman, who chairs the history department at American University in Washington, noted that "[The Government action] contradicts a lot of what those behind it say they believe: the sanctity of the family, the sacred bond between husband and wife, the ability of all of us to make private decisions without the hand of government intervening, deference to states and localities as opposed to the centralized government,"

Very good points, methinks. It would seem then, that this is another example of the Bush government ruling by a kind of neo-conservativism, instead of the true Republicanism of the past. In place of conservative spending and defecit reduction, they tax the middle class and spend like there's no tomorrow (mainly in Iraq). Instead of personal freedoms, reduced government size and clear seperation of powers, we get this debacle. What accounts for this? A new dedication to the Christian right, while maintaining the pretense of being traditional conservatives. It certainly doesnt hurt that they have the seemingly universal excuse that "this is a post 9/11 world, so things have to be done differently".

Anyways, back to the issue at hand. Fortunately seperation of powers isnt completely dead. Thank god. In a ruling earlier today, the Federal court judge that Bush and his buddies lobbied so hard to get to rejected their petition to overturn the lower court's decision. This is good news for everyone with the good sense to see the dangerous precident that would have been set otherwise. Naturally though, this is being appealed (ugh).

Another interesting development: Angered by the latest political developments in Washington, Michael Schiavo (Terry's husband, who is seeking to have her wishes fulfilled), invited Bush to visit Terry. "Come talk to me. Meet my wife. Talk to my wife and see if you get an answer. Ask her to lift her arm to shake your hand. She won't do it." She won't, Schiavo said, because she can't.

He then made what I think to be a really excellent point: "Instead of worrying about my wife, who was granted her wishes by the state courts the past seven years, they should worry about the pedophiles killing young girls," Schiavo said, referring to a local case. "Why doesn't Congress worry about people not having health insurance? Or the budget? Let's talk about all the children who don't have homes."

Damn right.

Spring has sprung!

... the grass is riz... I wonder where the birdies is.

Today is the Vernal Equinox, Vernal meaning Spring, and Equinox meaning "equal night". Basically this means that today the sunny hours equal the non-sunny ones. It also means today marks the first day of spring. I for one am quite pleased that the evil forces of winter are finally subsiding into a muddy green springtime landscape.

Come, fill the cup, and in the fire of Spring
The Winter garment of repentance fling
The bird of Time has but a little way to fly, and lo -
The bird is on the wing!
- Omar Khayyam

Enjoy the nice weather everyone!

Seperation of powers goes straight to hell

You've likely heard the story of Terri Schiavo, a brain-damaged Florida woman whose been on life support for 15 years. Several independant doctors have certified that her brain is damaged beyond all recognition, that she's completely unresponsive to outside stimuli and that there is zero chance of her ever recovering. Taking this into account, and what he thinks her wishes would be, her husband has decided to pull the plug. Seems reasonable to me. Her parents wanted to keep her alive. I don't agree with them, but hey, it's their daughter and their choice to challenge the decision. So far so good. The State Supreme court, the most senior eligable court for this case sided with the husband, so it should be case closed. The reason you've likely heard of this story again and again is because the Judge in the case has been very deliberate and careful not to make any mistakes. He made the ruling, and when even the notion that some evidence hadn't been considered, he delayed pulling the plug. Pretty reasonable right?

Well the Bush government, riled into a nonsensical partisan frenzy has decided to make this a federal case. Literally. Not content to, you know, let the courts do their job, they're trying to intervene. Today, the U.S. Senate passed a bill that could prolong Schiavo's life while a federal court considers her case and while House Republicans, stymied by Democrats, scrambled to bring enough lawmakers back to the Capitol for an emergency vote early Monday. Why is this a bad thing? It's completely out of the Senate's jurstiction to do anything other than comment on their case. You don't get to violate the constitution, part of which defines the seperation of powers (in this case, legislative and judicial), whenever you feel like it. It's really disgusting to me that this administration shows such utter lack of respect for the constitution in some cases (Guantanamo, gay rights, this), yet proclaim it's infallability in others (gun control). It's just so remarkably clear that they're trying to have their cake and eat it too.

Add to that their tactics. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a Texas Republican, told reporters in Washington today that it's possible Schiavo may recover and suggested her husband may have an ulterior motive for wanting her to die. Alright let's ignore that DeLay isn't a doctor, and every Doctor that has personally inspected Schiavo disagrees with his idiotic and unjustified claim. Buddy. It's his wife. It's his decision. You know how much pain and suffering the guy has already gone through? How would you like it if your wife was in a car crash and became a shell of the woman you love, only to have your name slandered on National TV? Not so much fun is it?

This whole thing pisses me off. This is a tragedy, and eveyone should respect the long held system of justice, instead of trying to make political hay out of it.

What a reserved young woman.

Rapper Lil' Kim, always known for being a classy and upstanding young lady, has been found guilty of perjury. She had testified that during a shootout outside a radio station, she somehow hadn't seen two of her close friends firing weapons, claiming that her sunglasses made it too tough to see. As the prosecutor argued, "You would have to believe they were magic sunglasses that only block out your friends who were shooting people". The guy makes a good point. If she was really that blind with her glasses on, I find it difficult to believe she would be able to walk around without running into things. Poor Kimmy now faces a maximum 20 years in prison, where she'll no longer be the dirtiest person around. That's 20 years deprived of her facinatingly poor music and excessively revealed bosom. Frankly, I don't know how the music industry will survive.

Tommy Boy goes bye-bye

ESPN reports today that Tommy Salo, previously the long-time tender for the Edmonton Oilers, has decided to hang up his mediocre equipment and end his mediocre career. Ah well.

I don't have anything against the guy, but he just wasn't particularly good. Which saddened me for awhile there, cause I enjoy cheering on pretty well any Canadian team. Whenever those never-say-die players would somehow squeeze out a miracle goal, there was Tommy at the other end, ready to hand the opposition a soft one. Just to even things up, of course.

In the great battles between the Stars and the Oilers, poor ol Tommy was always outclassed, be it by Belfour or Turco. Tommy really never had a chance. And then came the real end to his career, in the Sweedish Olympic game against Belarus. Took that puck to the helmet, it bounced up, off his back and in the net. And miracle of miracles, Sweeden lost to Belarus. The poor guy really wasn't the same after that. And now, with the NHL on hiatus, he ends his career in Europe. Maybe it's for the best.

Note to Americans: Put down the fork. Now!

"Oh dear god no!" is what you likely thought upon seeing the above picture. I really can't blame you. Its quite revolting. The idea that a reasonable adult would see their kids are that obese, and then just take em to McDonalds is pretty mind boggling isn't it? Well it's evidently more common than you think. The Globe repots today that, for the first time in the history of America (and pretty well any other country), this generation of kids are likely to have shorter life spans than their parents. Because of obesity. Honestly, when do you finally draw the line? Obesity has been linked in no uncertain terms to diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Plus a couple dozen other potentially fatal diseases. Yet, two thirds of Americans are currently overweight or obese. That's a huge percentage, and it includes kids.

In allowing this to happen, American parents are breaking the unwritten law that your kids should have better, longer lives than you had. That is, I believe, a natural human desire. Too bad it's been overwhelmed by a lusty and evidently uncontrollable desire for fast food and sitting around. Little Jimmy had best enjoy those fries now, cause he's not gonna be able to for much longer.

Joan Crow laws?

An Ontario MP recently brought up the idea of gender bias in consumer pricing. For example, you go into the Gap, and pants for women cost more than similar pants for men. Women's shampoo tends to cost more, as does the haircut itself. It was brought up then, that this was seemingly a violation of the human rights section of the Charter, whereby people can't be biased against for their gender, among other things. Interesting point, but I don't believe women are being bilked in every case.

With the example of Dry Cleaning the MP brought up, I believe there is a case to be made for discrimination. You bring in a shirt, you should pay the same amount for that same shirt regardless of what you look like. Period. Now, if it's silk or casmire or cheeta pelt, you may be paying more, but same shirt same price.

Deodorant is also another clear cut case of women getting the short end of the stick. So to speak. In a seperate study, The Star found like brands of deodorant are about equally priced between the sexes, but the mens was bigger, so they got more bang for their buck. Clearly not fair, especially if you note that A guys smell more (generally), and B that means you have to put more anti-smell crap in each stick. If anything, guys should be paying more (not that I'm advocating that).

That said, I don't think there's bias in every case. With haircuts, women tend to take more time of the stylist, and require a higher level of skill than a simple buzz cut. Better service over longer time = higher price. Makes sense right?

Another one, clothes, is also not as cut and dry as it first seems. The arguement can be made that since womens fasions change so much more than mens, they cost more to keep in stock. Let's say a womens pair of jeans changes fasion twice a year, and a guy's does once a year. Not so unreasonable. That means the shelf life of a womens product is half that of mens. That means the store has to put more work into stocking and reordering new clothes. It also means that once the fasion goes out of style, which happens twice as much in the women's aisle, the store is stuck with overstocked merchandise. Which is hard to sell off at full price. Plus, I'd say it's fair to say that guys are less aware of changing jean fasion than women are. As a result, it's easier for store X to sell off their leftovers to guys at reduced prices, while fasion conscious women will be more loathe to take on yesterday's look.

So while the individual price of womens jeans vs mens jeans doesnt seem reasonable, the overall service costs more to the company over time. The same princible is true throughout retail stores, its just that in clothes stores products are naturally split along gender lines.

Another arguement is that guys are 'nessecity shoppers'. In other words, we just don't give a damn. If deodorant got too expensive, I have a sneaking suspicion entirely too many of us would try and do without. Actually, entirely too many of us currently do. Going on the idea that most people, but men in particular, are idiots, this seems like a pretty realistic fear.

Now, let me be clear: Inequality is bad. If you don't have a reasonable reason for giving uneven treatment to people, you're violating the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and should be forced to stop. But if there is a reasonable cause to charge different amounts, based on service and overall cost to the store to carry item X, I think a case can be made. As always, feel free to argue with me.

Finally a rich guy who does something interesting with his cash

Jeff Bezos. Doesn't sound like an overly cool name, does it? Well that aside, this dude is pretty awesome. Bezos is the guy who founded Amazon.com, which in itself is pretty impressive. But, having made his bazillion dollars, many people would be content just lounging by the pool with a drink and a very tiny unbrella to keep the drink shaded. Not Jeffy boy. Buddy recently bought up 165,000 acres of desolate ranch land in the middle of Texas. For what you ask? Here's the cool bit: to build his own spaceport. Apparently he plans to build a port along with a reusable rocket that takes off and lands vertically (not like the current NASA craft which are basically planes with big rockets duck taped on the back, and fewer peanuts). Early missions are evidently just for kicks, taking other uber-rich people to the edge of space, though he ultimately wants to set up some sort of space colony. I don't know if this guy is way ahead of the curve or way out of his meds, but either way it's certainly an interesting idea. Godspeed sir!

Give him the damn charms.

"Saint Patrick was a gentleman...Who through strategy and stealth...Drove all the snakes from Ireland...Here's a drinkee to his health! But not too many drinkees...Lest we lose ourselves and then...Forget the good Saint Patrick...And see them snakes again!"

Happy St. Patties Day everyone!

Eat sweet dough!

Every now and then a story comes up that's just amusing in itself. The Rockford Register-Star recently reported that a 51-year-old man faces battery charges after he allegedly threw a cookie at a woman at a BeefaRoo restaurant. Apparently the lady's kid wouldnt stop screaming. Frankly I feel for the guy. How many times have you tried to go out for a nice dinner, only to have it disrupted by an unruly child? I mean, he's clearly going for a classy evening at his local BeefaRoo resturaunt. The name alone just screams class. Given that, it's tough to blame the guy for throwing a cookie at someone. I mean, all things considered it's pretty well the most mature, rational thing to do.

JetsGone

Most of you will know by now that JetsGo, an independant value-priced airliner, declared bankruptcy last Friday. Now, that in itself isnt such a bad thing. In any capitalist economy, businesses fold. When product exceeds demand, someone is gonna feel the pinch. So, while it sucks for all the employees there, that's business. Sorry. It could have been predicted pretty easily too. Falling stocks and accidents on the runway in in the air have hurt JetsGo in recent months, and in the bleeding airline industry post 9/11, that's more than enough to bring even a well run company to it's knees. This however was not a well run company. At least, not by ethical standards.

Picutre yourself the CEO of JetsGo. No no, put down the gun. It's not so bad. But it is bad enough that you see the train at the end of the tunnel from a ways back. So why, why do you royally screw as many people as possible? JetsGo folded at the worst possible time for many people: right at the eve of March break. Tons of families had already bought tickets to sunny shores, and the managment knew that. They knew those people would be unable to recoup their money directly, instead turning to their credit card companies (who I bet are thrilled). I'm sure many customers are just plain screwed on the whole "refund" thing. Knowledgable of all this, JetsGo kept selling tickets for as long as they possibly could. It's not as though they were on the fence about closing down, either. Filing bankruptcy isn't something that can happen overnight. It takes a ton of lawyers, and a consensus by mangement on several levels. It was then, a cold, rational decision to bilk a ton of people out of their money. Enjoy bankruptcy guys.

Boys are pure evil

Irish paper The Sunday Times recently reported a study in which ties to coed schools and higher drinking/smoking rates among female students were supposedly proven. The article reports that "Females attending mixed-sex schools were more likely to have tried cigarettes and alcohol than those going to girls-only institutions. The 15- and 16-year olds surveyed were almost twice as likely to have experimented with smoking if they went to a co-ed school, leading the researcher to conclude that male peers exercised a bad influence." Now, it's entriely possible that this interpretation of the study is in fact what's happening. Us fellows are a generally devious, plotting, debaucherous bunch. But the logic used here seems to me to be a flawed version of post hoc ergo propter hoc - it preceeds, thefore it caused. Just because girls in coed schools drink and smoke more than their private school counterparts does not mean that the boys at their schools are forcing/coercing them into drinking and smoking. I believe a telling statistic here would be whether smoking and drinking rates rose with boys as well as girls in public schools. If that's the case, then I feel this is a fairly obvious case of peer pressure on both sides of the aisle. The boys drink and smoke to seem cooler to the girls, and the girls drink and smoke to seem cooler to the guys. So, maybe they're both at fault, not just us immoral, corruptive guys.

In other news, birds fly.

For some reason, Reuters saw fit today to report that, should the US and the rest of the civilized world fail to curtail Iran's nuclear wepons program, Israel has drawn up a plan for military action. Well duh. I'm really quite certain that Israel has a military plan drawn up to attack any one of its neighbours. Do you honestly believe that when one of the crazier neighbours is developing the means to completely destroy life as we know it, they're just gonna sit by? "Well, we had plans to do something when they were just being mean, but now that they're getting a gun, we'll leave them be". This is one of the times I completely agree with Israel's position. Its not good for anyone for Iran to get the bomb, including Iranians. Can you say 50 sanctions up the ass of every Iranian businessman? I can.

"Here's to you, investigators!"

Oh Rummy, when will you learn? Apparently never, cause noone's gonna make him. US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon's top brass were exonerated yesterday of accusations that they ordered, or turned a blind eye to, the brutal torture and humiliation of detainees at Iraq's notorious Abu Ghraib prison. Well that's just great. My problem isn't so much that none of the top guys were found guilty. I can picture abuse at Abu Ghraib without a direct order from the big guns. What I don't understand is why there hasn't been a single independant investigation into what anyone would call a devistating human rights abuse case. Honestly, you don't get widespread torture without someone at least hinting at it. It just doesn't happen. Perhaps even more disheartening is the utterly idiotic sentiment espoused by some involved with the case: "I don't need an investigation to tell me that there was no comprehensive or systematic use of inhumane tactics by the American military, because those guys and gals just wouldn't do it," said Senator Jim Talent, a Republican from Missouri. Great, just great. Maybe you don't need an investigation, but would overwhelming evidence do anything for you? No? Alright, just checking.

Vietnamese seeing Orange

One of the great shames of the American army is their use of Agent Orange in the War in Vietnam. U.S. aircraft dropped more than 80 million litres of the chemical on the Southeast Asian country from 1962 to 1971, trying to ruin the crops and to kill the foliage that the Communist forces were using as cover. It didn't work so well. Except for killing civillians and their unborn children. That's because Agent Orange contains dioxin, a highly toxic chemical that has been linked to cancer, diabetes, birth defects, organ dysfunctions and other health problems. So it's with pretty reasonable cause that those affected by the chemical have recently tried to sue the US military for damages. I certainly can't blame them, even though I wouldnt hold out much hope.

Well, the American judge ruled recently, perhaps preditably siding with the military. Now, I would expect the reasoning to be the whole "in times of war, rules go out the window, national security, blah blah blah" routine. But not so. Instead, "the judge ruled that the plaintiffs couldn't prove the herbicide caused their illnesses, noting that there hadn't been sufficient research to draw the link." Again, fair enough I suppose. So long as you don't take this into account: thousands of U.S. war veterans receive disability benefits related to Agent Orange. So the military has in effect already admitted the harm caused by this chemical, when it comes to their own men, but conveniently forgets this point when dealing with Vietnameese. Classy move guys.

That's so full of Shat

Every now and then something of such supreme nerdiness comes to my attention, that I feel it nessicary to spread it like the grim disease it is. So here you go. A poorly photoshopped episode of Star Trek in which Kirk does battle with a Predator. Good to know some people have slightly more free time on their hands than I do. Enjoy.

What did the phone say to the face? SLAP!

Here's one of the dumbest product changes I've ever heard of. Now I don't know about you, but I generally avoid paying for things that cause me pain. In fact, I go to great lengths to purchase only things that will either give me pleasure of some kind, or alliviate some pain I've already got cooking. Evidently there's a market for painful things, cause Samsung plans to release in March a mobile phone that lets you zap, slap or tickle the person you're talking to over the phone. While talking on the phone, if you don't like what you hear, you can send a sensation that feels like a slap in the face. Now, dont get me wrong. This would be really damn fun at first, assuming you're the slapper and not the slapee. I can just imagine some drunken frat guys devising all manner of idiotic things to do with such a device. But what actual use does this have? Forget the use, but explain to me why I would want to pay to be slapped. I would pay to be able to slap the other person, fine, but I'm not likely to be buying them a new phone now am I? 50 bucks says they stumbled upon batteries that would randomly shock the phone's user, and they're just making this up as a new 'feature' to cover their asses.

Look at that legitimately pious man!

50 cent. A twit, yes. Overplayed, yup. Most definetly overrated. Though well produced. But a religious figure? Please.

Anyone else tired to death of a guy singing about raping and killing, then thanking God for inspiration? I dont have a problem with the lyrics, but you cant have it both ways. Either you follow the teachings of whatever religion you're involved with, or you don't. Same thing goes for wearing massive diamond encrusted platinum crosses. I realize that by this point it's become little more than a fashion statement, but honestly its ridiculous. I would no more wear a cross while singing about killing people than I would wear a fur coat with at PETA patch embroidered on it. It's a direct contradiction of terms.

Beyond that, who the hell is gonna buy 50 as an actually religious guy? Fiffy: You were a drug dealer at 16. You hid your drugs in your 14 yr old girlfirend's pants. You are not a nice man. Don't try to pass yourself off as one.

Quentin to bust out more fake blood

Alright, so this isn't exactly commentary on par with my usual bitching, but this is just plain cool news. Director Quentin Tarantino, the silly looking genius who brought the world Pulp Fiction et al, is in talks to write and direct a new instalment in the Friday the 13th horror franchise. Now, I should admit something straight up. I've never seen a Friday the 13th film. At least not all the way through. Wait, I've seen Freddy vs. Jason. But that was honestly so thoroughly horrible, that I'll be nice and not count it.

Seems like my boy Quentin is everywhere these days, mainly on side projects or ones not entirely created by him... He was rumoured to be working on a Bond movie, but I think that died. He's filming an ep (the season finale?) of CSI. He's guest directing a scene or two of Sin CIty, which will be absolutely amazing. And now this. Hey man, as long as the quality stays with the quantity, I've got zero to complain about.

Play this game and you will kill policemen

Well, the reactionary American politicians are at it again. This time they're targeting good ol wholesome video games. Alright, not the wholesome ones, the violent ones. A bill under consideration in Washington state would hold videogame developers accountable for violent acts ostensibly inspired by a particular game. Barring the difficulty in proving that someone acted based on a video game as opposed to, say, a violent movie, it's silly to single video games out for this punishment. Their arguement is that "If you sit up and watch this and play these games over and over again... it seems that this is alright to walk up and hit a police officer over the head with a bat." C'mon now.

Believe it or not, playing NHL 2005 doesn't help my wrist shot. Playing flight sims doesn't mean I can land a lear jet. And were aliens to invade earth, my gameplay in Halflife 2 really wouldn't help out much. Unless it would somehow assist my shitting myself. People don't emulate video games any more than they do movies. If they do imitate what they see on their TV screens, I'd say they're certifiable idiots, and would be just as likely to imitate a squirrel jumping from tree to tree. These are disturbed people, and should be given mental counciling, not have their favourate games taken away. I'm sure they'll be way more receptive to calm, non-violent actions when the game they've spent 100 hours playing and building up is suddenly taken away by their parents, for fear of this new law. Good call there.

Guns don't kill people, crazy people don't kill people, weed kills people. Duh.

Many of you have likely heard of the tragic deaths of four RCMP officers who were attempting to reposess a car in Alberta, this last week. As they progressed they stumbled upon a small weed grow-op (around 20 plants). They also stumbled upon Jim Roszko, a man with a long criminal history and considered a "time bomb" by area residents. This particular bomb was armed with a legally aquired high powered rifle, with which he proceeded to shoot dead all four officers. Now, you tell me what the problem here is. There is no evidence whatsoever that Roszko was high at the time, but there is a mountain of evidence that he was known to be mentally disturbed. How then, has the judicial system allowed a man who had multiple violent charges and several convictions A continue to be free, and B buy a rifle. Methinks we won't see Ralph Klein (Alberta's Premier) make any firey pro-gun speeches in the near future. Nor will we see anyone acclaim the efficacy of the mental health services in Canada. Alas, what we apparently see is people using this tragic incident to make political hay, especially rallying against weed. One letter in The Globe and Mail today summarized this idiotic side quite nicely: "I hope all the potheads and their pals think of these murdered RCMP members when they're rolling their joints." Yeesh.

If you want make blog press item!

Alright. I'm generally not the "bite the hand that feeds" type, but I found this amusing. wbloggar is a blogging program. It lets you make incredibly intelligent posts such as this one on your incredibly attractive website, also such as this one. Incredibly. However, literate they ain't. On their main page, they advertise a new 'translation tool' for their newest version of the program. Now, I would imagine, when trying to get people to use a program that works intimately with language, it's a good idea to, you know, actually speak it. They evidently do not. Here's their sales pitch: "If you want make w.bloggar v4.00 speaks your language just get the Translation Tool and do it, it's simple and fast!". I know what you're thinking. "I want make and do it! Please! Let me make and do it blog tool currently!"
Me too my friend, me too.

Someone had a dumb idea. That person has been canned.

US food giant Kraft has decided to halt production of sweets shaped like roadkill - animals run over by cars. These included shaped like flattened snakes, chickens and squirrels with track marks on their bodies. Now, I'm not about to complain about how it's a fairly disgusting idea for candy. It is. But to each his own. If junior wants to eat roadkill shaped candies, so be it. I honestly don't think it'll make him think roadkill is delicious. And if it does.... junior is stupid, and will likely believe any old thing. Also, I don't think it's going to make anyone intentionally hit animals with their car, in hopes of making massive delicious candies. Although, if someone got really high while eating these things and went out driving..... nah. Couldn't happen.

What I find remarkable is the Kraft spokesperson's explanation for the recall: "We understand how this product could be misinterpreted, and we respect that point of view". You understand how it could be misinterpreted? What interpretation were you going for exactly? Honestly buddy, there is no overreaching analysis that can be applied to candies, regardless of their shape... barring something sexual. And I'll leave that to Freud. You got pressured by animal groups, and are recalling your dumbassed product. Please don't BS me.

This man is a twit. And it shows.

The vaguely constipated looking man pictured above is President Niyazov, of Turkmenistan. Looks stern and overwhelmingly dim, doesn't he? Judge this book by it's cover. In case you were wondering where Turkmenistan is... I also do not know. But wherever it is, I'm hoping they dont have democracy. Because that would mean they elected this boob. He is a leader who enjoys spending government money on vast projects that glorify his regime. Now, that alone does not a fool make. Lord knows, should I ever have a regime of note, I will endevour to glorify it. However, his ideas to increase funding to that end are a tad odd. There are few able doctors and little medicine in rural Turkmen hospitals, and last year President Niyazov sacked 15,000 medical workers, replacing them with army conscripts. That's right. Army conscripts manning hospitals instead of doctors and nurses. Always wanting to kick his insanity up a notch, Niyazov has recently announced to close all hospitals outside the country's capital, Ashgabat. His reasoning? I shit you not: "Why do we need such hospitals? If people are ill, they can come to Ashgabat." Good times.

Backstreet's back. Alright? (I guess)

Well I suppose we all knew this day would come. That bearded "badass" one with the drinking problem would finally beat rehab... or his parole officer... and the good ol boys would reunite. Apprently they'll be touring later this year, to fill the notable lack of boybands. Just when I thought we had that disease licked. Apprently though they're limiting their shows to smaller "more intimate settings". Gosh, I can't possibly imagine why. Its a shame all their fans have turned 25 by now. The whole 'tween' phase was very much their financial lifeblood. Good luck Backstreet! I enjoyed your death the first time, lord knows the sequel should be just as pitiful!