The Verdict Is In
Mood:  cheeky
These people defending Michael Jackson make me sick. Don't they get it yet? As Norm MacDonald once said when it was reported that Jackson was having portraits of a young Shirley Temple delivered to his hospital suite during one of his bleachings: "Don't be confused, folks. Michael Jackson is a homosexual pedophile."

Frozen Yogurt Machine-in-Chief
Now Playing: "Beautiful World" by Devo
Did y'all see Diane Sawyer's interview with the Bushes last night? The First Lady, as ever, was charming. Her husband, as ever, was not charming. Which is one of the reasons people dislike or hate him: he doesn't blow smoke up their asses or play misty for them, like the liar who preceded him. But is Bush's artlessness justification for such a violent rejection of him by the liberal elites? I would imagine that what you witness today in their reaction to him is very similar to what Lyndon Johnson went through after JFK died. Whatever his real merits were, Kennedy could charm the pants off of a heterosexual drill sergeant; Johnson, on the other hand, was a boor. Inasmuch as Johnson had a public sense of humor, it was usually based on crude or broad standards.

I don't necessarily want a leader who stands there and charms the press or the world, but Diane Sawyer sure does. She wants him to be a frozen yogurt machine that she can play on for some smooth and creamy quippery. But that's not what Bush is there for. He's got some big and very serious issues to deal with and I'm not about to castigate him for not being the great wit that Clinton was supposed to be.

Funny don't pay the bills, jerky.

A Perfect Observation
Mood:  suave
Several weeks ago, there was an attractive spokeswoman from an animal shelter in Williamson County on one of the local morning news programs answering viewers' e-mail, as asked by the anchor. One woman had written in to complain about how awful it was that she (the spokeswoman) had advocated getting all of these animals fixed when they, too, have a right to live and breed freely, just as Nature intended.

The spokeswoman, while playfully wrestling with a dog in her lap, patiently explained that dogs and cats are NOT "natural" animals. They are the creation of human beings and the choices of human beings in the procreative cycle of these domestic pets is central to their existence (e.g., variety breeding, etc.).

It's a truly excellent point. You don't find sharpeis or fluffy white Persians walking around in the deep woods, hunting. So, there, beeatch.

Merde in France
If you haven't checked out the greatest blog ever (Merde in France) be sure to use the link under my favorites on your left.

Merde in France is everything a blog should be. It is consistently and brilliantly angry. And it has one enemy, always in its sights.

Exterminate the Loyalists
Mood:  on fire
Now Playing: Some Wagner (real loud to scare the gooks)
The news of these dead-enders committing violence against a free Iraq is pissing me off. I guess you can call them loyalists, but what are they being loyal to? A dictatorial regime where incredible brutality was used to keep people in line. And this is something these brain-damaged sacks of shit want to perpetuate?

I see the footage of these ugly, unwashed young men, hopping around, yelling slogans and being the vermin they are. Do they think of the Ba'athists like young negroes think of Crips and Bloods? Is that what this is? Gangism?

These turds need to snap to: Uncle Sam ain't going anywhere. We're there to mop you fuckers up and wring you out into the sewer. Don't doubt it. You think we're going to expend the lives and treasure we already have just to watch it frittered away because you're too brain-damaged to recognize what your society is becoming? Y'all are some dumb bastards. Uncle Sam has a long history of committing genocidally-proprotioned mop-up jobs for the good of the world and progress, generally. Don't wait around to find out the hard way. Drop your guns and get down on your knees.

Facing West.

Bar Clark
How can Dumbocrats (like Madonna!) support the candidacy of Wesley Clark? The guy's a phoney! He has almost no natural ties to the party and, yet, when he announced his candidacy, he instantly became the runner-up in any poll of Democratic contenders. What sort of fickle, shit-for-brains nonsense is that? Is it because he's a military man and that that will somehow show up or undercut George W. Bush? I mean, their reasoning (if you can call it that) is utterly retarded.

Every time I hear Clark pronounce upon some important question, the noise coming out of his skull are the gears of his hypocrisy and self-contradiction grinding him to a halt. He cannot speak without undermining himself, but who knows what these dumbasses are hearing? It's pathetic.

Lead Pipes
The Dow-Jones is over 10K (good for pension portfolios, see). Old folks got some help paying for their drug habits. And now we got Saddam in Qatar or some such place with a light bulb in his face and a pack of barking dogs on his ass about thangs and stuff. How is Bush supposed to lose his job? He's a shoo-in, but we're still going to have to watch a lot of TV ads and other awkward stumpings. The Dumbocrats know they're going to lose, which is why they want a guy with some "principle" to vote for so that they can live with themselves.

But where is the disgust for Gore with how he snubbed Lieberman? Just think about that, lefties! You all want to "avenge" 2000, but you have no problem with your Great Cheated Heroes falling out with each other? Gore thought that Lieberman was Presidential three years ago and now prefers Dean? Why? Is he running for Dean's Secretary of State? Is he trying to throw a monkey wrench in the Clinton machine?

Jonah Goldberg said the other day that Gore's endorsement of Dean and the positions that Gore is now espousing are damned near dishonorable. I agree absolutely. Gore is a fucking chump trying to find some resonance with the crackpottiest left-wing losers you can find in the Democratic Party. He's completely buttfucking his own legacy --and for what? So that MoveOn.org will keep inviting him to their klaverns? What a joke.

Premonitory, Admonitory
Mood:  celebratory
The entry prior to this one is about as close to a premonition as I've come in a while, for just a few hours later, I would learn that Saddam was captured. Which is to say, at the very most, something must have been in the air.

Everyone is happy that Saddam is in our custody, but the ramifications of the story about him and Abu Nidal and Atta and, ultimately, bin Laden, are apparently not yet fully appreciated. If that link is substantiated, then every anti-war asshole who ever rebuked this Administration is going to have to apologize for their ignorance and blindness. You bet, pardner: it's that serious.

Speaking of human garbage, there's lots of reports from the Sunni cities where everybody's still queer for Saddam that he is believed to still be free. That's right. There's hundreds of thousands of asshole Iraqis who are so brainwashed and ignorant that they can't accept the reality of their situation. And, so, they continue with their suicide bombings and their roadside minings and their RPG launchings. What are they fighting for? Saddam isn't going to be paying them to kill us anymore. The Ba'athists are beat and incapable of mounting anything more than a terrorist insurgency. And that's the thing: these worthless, brain-damaged fuckwads know that they are unwelcome in civil Iraqi society. These are the vermin Saddam released en masse just before the liberation. They know they're going down; they just don't want to go out like suckers.

Let's have more of these cordons and raids. Let's bulldoze the houses of assholes like we were the fucking IDF, baby! We got thousands of humpers and John Waynes, homeboy. We'll let the gooks play the indians and exterminate some bugs. Just look in the eyes of those rodents dancing around Fallujah with portraits of Saddam over their heads: you think brain-damaged sacks of shit like them are good candidates for "re-education"? Get serious. Go cold-blooded.

Saddam and Atta?
Do you recall that, just before Uncle Sam unloaded on Saddam Hussein, one of the biggest sacks of shit ever to emerge from the Palestinian terrorist movement, Abu Nidal, was murdered in his home in Baghdad? Did you ever consider why the one event preceded the other so closely? Could it be that Saddam permitted Mohammad Atta, the so-called leader of the hi-jackers of 11 September, access to Nidal?

That's what the UK's Telegraph is reporting tonight. The governing council in Iraq has found some documentation of just such an arrangement. If it holds up, that will supply the proof that Saddam had links to al-Qaeda in the weeks and months before the attacks.

Oh, Yeaaahhhhh
Mood:  a-ok
That lady in the Overstock.com ads on the TV is making me want to go and lock horns and beat up interlopers and pound on my chest and hoot and holler. Man, is she fines!

Then Let Me Put It This Way
Mood:  don't ask
"Of whom much is given, much is expected."

Certain human beings achieve such a high degree of celebrity and fame and fortune that they each become a law unto themselves. But, in return for that status (and I am a firm believer in this), they make themselves into sacrificial lambs. That's the deal. In exchange for being worshipped, cock-sucked, slack-cut, and pawed over, they ought to be made to stand tall before the man and be burned alive, if necessary. That is to say, there is something of a natural law at work, for a price must be paid for being venerated and enriched beyond one's moral capacity by millions of strangers.

Certain human beings. A small number in any generation or culture. Elevated above the rest and observant of no rule but their own. Stand there and command what you may. Exploit it and live it out, baby. Make every dream a reality because you can.

But offend me and stink in my nostrils and I will want nothing but death from you. I will smash you like a graven image. I won't even piss on your rotten corpse for all I think of you. If you even try to make excuses or cry uncle or open your wallet, I swear I will think of ever more cruel and outrageous means to the end of your life. I will applaud your demise like a bad-ass drum solo well delivered.

All moral lepers be damned. No more freaks and fuck-ups. Don't bitch when the candle that burned twice as bright burned half as long. That's the deal. A small number of human beings in any given generation. Take it like a man or whatever the fuck you are: thou owest Nature a death.

Thanks for the Correction, Deepblade
I've been making that mistake forever. Big-time collegiate football is Division I-A, not just "Division I." Smaller, less well-funded programs belong to Division I-AA. I'll have to educate myself as to the criteria that distinguish between the two, but the most important thing is this: if smaller divisions can get it together and have a play-off system, why can't the pre-professional and pre-eminent division of them all have it? Are these asshole university presidents and athletic directors concerned about the graduation rates or the negative impact on exam scores for these young men? No one believes that. No one believes that it would present any kind of financial or logistical or scheduling burden at all. No one believes that a fair and fortunate system of rotating bowls can't be worked out.

To hell with it. Before long, I will be kicking back in a recliner, watching the first round of the Division I-A college football play-offs. These unimaginative losers who run today's major universities are dinosaurs standing in the way of progress.

A Mother's Advice
I've been experiencing a very painful situation the past several days in the area of the greatest sensitivity possible, but had not advised my mother of this until it came up in conversation this evening.

So, now, she is full of advice about how this situation needs to be handled. Of course, everything she suggests is basically what I've already done, but she wants to tell me this stuff anyway, as though I were incapable of figuring it out for myself.

Anyhow, she's a hoot. Nothing like taking medical advice from a Christian Scientist.

The Media's Gone Nuts, Clearly
Mood:  loud
What on Earth has possessed the national and local media to rant and rave like this about getting vaccinated against the flu? Every news outlet has gone absolute ape shit about it and it's FUCKING IRRESPONSIBLE! STOP ALARMING THE PUBLIC for Christ's sake!

You've got dumbasses standing in half-mile-long lines (and in freezing weather, no less) for the chance at what? A vaccine that has about 75 percent effectiveness? A vaccine that won't protect you or your squirmy little runt if you happen to catch one of the strains of flu that that shot doesn't protect against. What are these dopes thinking of? If you catch the flu, ride it out and get some good anti-bodies built up in your system so that you can help your immune system help itself. Quit trying to short-circuit Nature and take your lumps! If you survive, you're way ahead of the dopes who keep getting innoculated and who never build up a natural resistance to anything.

So, go home and ignore these asshole anchors and "experts" who are trying to get you all riled up. If I were a paranoiac, I'd almost believe that this concerted effort to terrorize the public was some kind of a Government test to gauge public response levels.

So, quit eating the G's cheese, bitch!

Losers
Mood:  irritated
Now Playing: Nothing at all: just silence
Am I wrong to want to see Bobby Brown and Whitney Houston dead? Why does anyone care about them at all? They're a pair of flaky drug addicts who need the attention of a prurient media to maintain their interest in life and in each other. But I just want them to die. I want the next thing I hear about them to be that Bobby has pummeled that warbling skeezer-cumjar to death and has gone on a high-speed flight from the police, ending in his violent death when he plows into a lightpole.

Monkeys
Great. They're monkeying with the blog-building interface again. I wish they'd leave it the hell alone. I don't know why they're doing it. The worst of it is the comments sections, which now are all showing zero response. Oh, well...

A Vote of No Confidence?
They say Al Gore is going to endorse Howard Dean's candidacy today, but why is that? Shouldn't that be taken as a rejection of his old partner, the other half of Sore-Loserman 2000, who is still in the hunt? That is to ask, why was Lieberman worthy of the highest considerations in 2000 and not now?

It may just be some practical political math. Lieberman is just too far to the center-right to get the kids hot for him; there's not enough difference between him and the dumbass cowboy-thief in the White House to make him attractive.

But Dean? He throws 'em red meat on cue, baby! He'll even publicly entertain and countenance the suggestion that Bush had foreknowledge of September 11th and permitted New York City and Washington, D.C. to be grievously damaged. He's anti-war and a real rolled-up sleeves tough guy (maybe short on the facts sometimes, but what a rabble-rouser!).

So Dean can energize the base because he's the anti-Bush (so far as we know). The sooner he can take the lead against the other losers and put it away, the faster the DNC can back him and make him a real choice. But, no matter how much the Dumbocrats love this guy, he ain't gonna do nothing in the South come next November. He won't win a single state south of the Line, nor will he win anything in the Midwest.

Smart traitors like Gore (yep, he's still a traitor to his country, so far as I'm concerned) know what Dean's chances are, of course, and so they know that, come 2008, the pendulum may have swung far enough back to the Left that Hillary might make that her time to shine. That is to say, no one's going to beat George W. Bush in 2004 and, so, they may as well throw Dean in with the red meat.

Anyway, I want to hear how Gore rationalizes not backing his old partner. And what will old Joe say? Hmmm...

Playblah
This past weekend, for the first time in probably 15 years or more, I was able to purchase a copy of Playboy magazine at a 7-11. The reason why this matters is because the Southland Corporation (which may or may not still own 7-11) famously succumbed years ago to the political pressure of such great divines as Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority to stop all sales of pornographic magazines in their stores. (Apparently, there was no such pressure to stop the sale of tobacco or alcohol or other shit that does actual harm to our society.)

These days, of course, the magazine racks at 7-11 are absolutely alive with the bare skin of hundreds of well-oiled and air-brushed sluts and celebrities, so what possible difference can it still make to ban Playboy? After all, that magazine is probably the least pornographic thing on any rack it rests upon.

I know this because the copy I bought was their 50th anniversary issue. And, Jesus, what a bore! Eight bucks for yet another helping of Hugh Hefner's retarded tastes? He has absolutely retreated into a vanilla fantasy world where every woman should have blonde hair and fake tits. Whatever happened to real and beautiful women? Or, even brunettes? I have paid as little attention to Playboy as possible in the past five or six years because Hefner has no fucking taste!

Compare the 25th Anniversary Playmate Candy Loving to the 50th Anniversary Playmate (whose name I can't recall and for good reason). Candy was a full-figured, dark-haired woman of great beauty. She had a face to remember. And she was as natural as God's bounty. What's this newest girl all about? Very blonde hair, a dime-a-dozen face, and a 34C chest. What the hell? What a thoroughly boring choice for the 50th Anniversary! You'd think they could've come up with a woman on a level with their best, but no. We have to suffer more of Hefner's stunted ideals. More of the same old shots of famous celebrities from the dim past, like Ursula Andress or Joan Collins. More self-congratulatory crap about the "Playboy Philosophy" or retrospectives of Nagel or Neiman or some other aesthetic grotesquerie. Hef's stuff is desiccated and dead. And that's why Playboy is no longer relevant.

Taking the C out of the BCS
Mood:  irritated
The joke and judgement expressed in the title of this entry has been made so many times in the media the past few days (and years) that I didn't want to be left out. Yes, indeed, the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) is an enormous, fraudulent loaf of bovinity that casts discredit on Division I-A collegiate football.

Essentially, computers are used to select the two teams that will play for the national championship. These computer rankings, I found out today while listening to the nauseatingly self-important Jim Rhome on the radio, expressly exclude the final rankings of the coaches' poll and the AP sportswriters' poll. In other words, there's no real reason to even poll the coaches or sportswriters at any point in the season since their rankings are ignored by the BCS computers. What kind of fiction is that to abide? It's a laugh.

Why is the most important and profitable Division I-A collegiate sport in America denied the right to settle its national championships in a play-off system? Name me any other sport at any level of collegiate athletics that is as corrupt and fucked up as Division I-A football. You can't because there isn't any. And, yet, people abide this bullshit because, I guess, they don't want to offend or challenge the authority of the big school athletic directors or the conference chairmen. Why? Are these men a part of some super-secret cult of Templars and magicians? Can't they be made to implement a play-off system where the national football championship is earned outright by playing for it?! What the fuck?! This can't be a novel idea, you know.

Used to be that the big-time bowls were hosted by the conference champions and there was a strong relationship between the two. But that hasn't been the case in years. Here in Texas, there ain't no more Southwestern Conference and the Cotton Bowl now belongs by name to whichever oil company is riding highest. Yes, the SWC used to host the Cotton Bowl, but no more.

Some decrepit old geriatrics whose opinion no longer matters believe that the bowl system is just great because even lesser teams get to go somewhere and earn a little revenue for the school. It's like a big end-of-the-year vacation for the team. They can feel good about themselves or whatever the reasoning is. I don't know. It's a lot of crap, frankly.

Wherever there's corruption, though, they say follow the money. And that's the real answer to why big-time college football is so dirty. These AD's and conference big-shots figure they can keep the bowl system under their thumbs and be the ones to make 2 or 3 million off of the big bowls. But these myopic shitheads are cutting their own throats. For one thing, those purses get spread around to all of the schools in any given conference. And, if you have a bad-assed team playing in a second-tier bowl, you're not making dick ---not for your own school or the conference. Some of the pay-outs in the minor bowls are pathetic. Hardly worth chartering the plane.

So what do bad-assed teams do? They settle for whatever rank some goddamned computer gives them. Isn't that wrong? Don't you know those boys would like to show the country what they've got? We got us a team here in Austin (you've heard of the Longhorns, right?) and they could probably kick a lot of ass if only they were afforded the opportunity to show they can. But they're getting packed off to some lame-assed bowl in San Diego a few days before Christmas. They may get a fair viewership and they'll get their little pay-out (maybe a million or so?), but it goes nowhere. Their season isn't compensated with the knowledge they've won the Poulan Weedeater Bowl. Who gives a damn?

But! But! If the powers that be would pull their collective heads out of their communal ass and recognize just how much greater bowl revenue could be under a play-off system, they might just be made to go for it. They should have long ago. Nobody watches the little bowls except for the wankers that attend them, some alumni, and the die-hard college football fan who's hard up for some action while the wife's out buying Christmas gifts. There's no TV ad revenue worth anything with those bowls.

But consider a Division I-A college football play-off system where every single bowl counted for something! The TV ad revenue would be pouring in! Let's put together a 16-team field of the nation's best and let the boys play for it! Rotate the rounds among the different venues every season. Fine, let these sportswriters and computers seed the field ---and then get the hell out of the way! It's undemocratic to let computers pick the best. It's elitist, the fix-is-in bullshit and the fans need to rise up and denounce the way things are being run.

Consider this: Oklahoma got their asses beat this past weekend by Kansas State. It wasn't a squeaker or anything like it; it was an ass-kicking. So, who gets to play for the National Championship? Oklahoma. Why? Because big-time college football is run by an oligarchy of asshole-politicians. It's time to demand a change.

Standardize the length of the college football season to 11 or 12 games, institute a 16-team play-off system seeded by the infrastructure now in place, and let the boys play. The best programs are already at a professional level, so an extra four games maximum to determine the true champion is no problem at all. No more frustration, folks. Write your old schools. Tell your senators and congressmen. We shouldn't have to live with such an unfair system anymore.

Lying, Seditious Bastards
Mood:  don't ask
All nine of the "major" candidates for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination are participating in a big klavern in Florida today. The common theme? That the current President masterminded and pulled off some great electoral scam, thereby stealing the White House.

It isn't possible to describe how much this pisses me off. These sorry fucks are a lot of lying, seditious bastards who are ignorant of the historical truth (willfully or otherwise), but cynical enough to know that their party's base consists of enough conspiracists, idiots, and assholes to make the so-called theft of the state's electoral votes in 2000 a worthwhile rallying point. No matter what side you're on, this kind of sick manipulation of the truth is a dangerous and demagogic trick to be playing.

Here's what the best and brightest of the Democratic Party explicitly and publicly believe: George W. Bush is an illegitimate President. He colluded with his brother (and their family and friends) to steal the election in Florida by means of police intimidation, ballot box stuffing and destroying, and the bribery of state officials and judges. None of this is true, of course, but these liberal craphounds are happy to repeat it at every turn and to spread the sedition in this belief everywhere they go. It's irresponsible. They have no evidence of any such crimes; they just have their grievances and delusions.

I even hear that Howard Dean recently suggested that he might give credence to the lie that the Saudis had warned Bush that September 11th was coming! What on Earth? This ill-informed fuck is the Democratic Party's frontrunner? Pathetic.

I can't wait for these people to be exposed as the losers and liars they are. Eleven months is a long time, but it'll be SO sweet. They're going to lose Florida, the Congress, the White House, and their dignity. And I will be laughing big horse's ass laughs in the face of these Dumbocrats, especially Terry McAuliffe. Man, I'd love to find out where he'll be Election Night and be there so that I can get right up in his lying face and say: "You lose again, asshole! Four more years of George W. Bush and, this time, they're gonna HAVE to fire you!"

Ha, ha, ha....