What’s the big freakin’ deal?

Media outlets everywhere are declaring their outrage over this New Yorker cover, which depicts Barack Obama dressed as a Muslim, his wife in militant garb, a flag burning in the fireplace and a picture of Osama Bin Laden hanging on the wall.  More subtly, the two are giving each other a “terrorist fist jab” as FOX news likes to call it.

Which brings me to the point:  The media has regularly helped push all of these rumors through their sensationalist reporting of trivialities.  If these supposedly respectable news organizations had avoided giving so much airtime to such idiotic allegations, perhaps so many people wouldn’t have been inclined to believe them when they saw them in their inboxes.  But these same fucking people in the media are absolutely freaking out about how “irresponsible” this cover is.  Of course, the story inside the magazine is actually about the way this smear-machine has helped wrongly perpetuate the rumors illustrated on the cover.

If the New Yorker was irresponsible, it’s only because the majority of Americans who already believe these rumors are too stupid to actually read the article.  But then…what’s the real damage caused in that case?  A bunch of morons continue being morons because they literally judge a book by its cover?

In any case, the cartoon has inadvertently (or with brilliant foresight?) done exactly what it was supposed to do.  In the end, the insanely huge amount of backlash has pushed their message (along with an explanation of their intent) in front of every news camera in the fucking nation.  The New Yorker has done more to point out what a terrorist Obama isn’t than anyone yet.

Am I the only one who thinks the media obsession with celebrity babies is a little creepy?  Apparently Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are going to be selling the first pictures of their new twins to some magazine for 11-20 million dollars.  To their credit, they’re only being good little capitalists.  If the market has determined that baby pictures are worth millions, they might as well utilize it, right?  Besides, they will almost certainly donate that money to charity.

The scary part isn’t that the parents are willing to capitalize on this crap…it’s that the demand exists in the first place.  Are Americans really so pathetic that they actually clamor to simply see something that came out of a famous person’s uterus?  Don’t all babies pretty much look like this, anyway?

I’m sick of the rationalization of celebrity worship, too.  Every time some piece of shit with a camera harasses a star while they take the trash out, we say that it’s just part of the job.  Celebrities should, in fact, even enjoy the violations of peace and privacy because they chose to create art for a living.  It just means that they’re important, right?

That’s complete bullshit and anyone who disagrees is an idiot.  Nobody deserves to be constantly stalked just because of their profession.  All TMZ-style paparazzi should be shot.  As should anyone still referring to couples by combining their first names, à la “Brangelina.”

McCain won’t know if you blog (or if I Blort™) about what an economically ignorant, completely insane, peanut-headed maniac he is.  He doesn’t know how to use the internet.

You can add this to the growing list of things he hasn’t kept up with the times on, along with “not calling Asian people ‘gooks’.”

Some piece of shit named Scott Hoover is suing the Virginia lottery because he bought a scratch ticket and later discovered that the top prize for that game had already been awarded.  What the fuck did he expect?  Of course some people are going to end up playing after the top prize has been awarded!  That’s the obvious nature of a random lottery.  The only other possibilities are absolutely ridiculous:

1. The lottery could instantly go collect all unsold tickets the moment a top prize is collected.  Unscratched tickets could be refunded for full purchase price!  Of course, since the prizes awarded are directly proportional to the amount of tickets created (and therefore sold), this solution would eventually destroy the lottery as we know it.
2. The lottery could magically ensure that only the very last person to purchase a ticket will be the big winner!  Magic!

And where does it end?  What if the winning ticket is in someone’s glovebox for awhile and they don’t know it?  Should the lottery still be responsible for all those poor souls “wasting” their money on 2nd prize or lower?  Perhaps everyone could sue the winner instead for not scratching sooner!

Besides…the lottery never alleges that each ticket will have the real opportunity to win the top prize.  It only alleges that every ticket has the statistical opportunity to win a prize (and that a top prize will at some point be awarded to somebody).  If there’s still a single break-even ticket out there, who has the right to complain?

It’s not like they’re being shady here.  This douchebag, Hoover, used public records to determine (after the fact) that someone had already won the top prize.  Public records!  So, the availability of the top prize is public record?  What’s the fucking problem then?!  If he’s only willing to buy a lottery ticket to which the top prize hasn’t yet been awarded, he can just do the research beforehand next time!

Otherwise, I guess he’ll just have to live with a few gambles when he’s gambling.

Media outlets in Iran indicate that its president, as well as several top-level government employees, have stated that they are unwilling to rule out a nuclear strike against America.  More disturbing is the footage of an Iranian presidential candidate gleefully singing during a campaign stop (to applause and laughter) about bombing the United States.

Wait…nevermind.  I get confused sometimes.  It’s actually the opposite.  We’re the ones doing that stuff.  Funny, though, to think of the reaction it would illicit if the tables were turned.

Is it really any wonder that Iran decided to inform us that they would retaliate in the event of an attack?  Our leaders are so comfortable with the thought of a preemptive strike that they have no problem throwing around completely idiotic questions like, “Should we nuke Iran?”  It’s almost as if people neither care nor understand exactly what a nuclear explosion entails.  If we’re willing to casually throw around the idea of that kind of mass death and destruction, it certainly makes me wonder who the real terrorists are.  Of course, according to the horrible FOX News, Iran is actually just starting some random shit here.  Their headline for the story is Iran Begins War Game With Warning to U.S., Israel (and FOX…don’t forget to remind your readers about the time some tiny Iranian speedboats “threatened” our giant warships!).  So, let me get this straight.  When a sovereign nation informs an aggressive country (who is constantly making threats and invading other countries) that they will defend themselves if attacked first…they are “beginning war games?”

We’re constantly making threats against millions of innocent lives over the possibility that Iran’s nuclear program isn’t just about power like they claim.  What if it is, though?  Hell…even if Iran really did build a nuclear weapon, how would that affect America?  Any missile coming from Iran would likely be shot down over the ocean.  Following that, we really would decimate them (and if they had actually attacked us…I’d be all for it).  So what are we so worried about, anyway?

Headline:  Family Cleared in JonBenet Ramsey’s Death

Oh, good! Now I can go back to 12 years of not giving a shit about the JonBenet Ramsey case. I wonder how many other murdered little girls have received zero media coverage during that time?

An atheist soldier is suing the Army for allegedly discriminating against non-believers like himself.  I’m not sure I would normally take one man’s word for it in a case like this, but it’s somewhat more convincing that he is suing only for the rights of future soldiers (as opposed to some frivolous monetary amount).

It also reminds me of a particularly disturbing sentiment expressed by the previous Chief of Operations at my job…one which almost seems to substantiate the charge a bit in my mind. During his very first speech to the employees, he proudly informed us all that he was a military man and said that for many months he had been “in Iraq, doing the Lord’s work.”  Somehow I don’t think he was referring to a missionary effort.

Who would make such an obviously divisive statement on their first day of leading a company? You want to tell us about your leadership background…fine. Your belief that Jesus loves it when we kill Iraqis? Keep that the hell to yourself.  Of course, that’s not the only time I’ve heard wartime military service described as “doing the Lord’s work.” It really makes you wonder what Bible some of these people are reading…

This isn’t really that new, though.  Take a look at Mark Twain’s War Prayer, written in response to the US invasion of the Philippines (1898-1902):

“O Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth to battle – be Thou near them! With them – in spirit – we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with little children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames of summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it – for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen.”

Ranked from most to least frequently, here is where I learn all I need to know about what’s going on in the world:

1) Lew Rockwell
2) The Daily Show/The Colbert Report
3) Word of mouth
4) cnn.com

The last one I only resort to when I really have absolutely nothing better to do.  CNN isn’t even the best of the major media outlets (although it’s by far not the worst…that dishonor goes to FOX News), but it simply has the most user-friendly layout to me.

“In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas.”  So says Supreme Court Justice, Stephen Breyer, in his dissent from today’s majority ruling striking down D.C.’s 1979 handgun ban, which for almost 30 years has somehow failed to end gun violence in the district (evidently, those damned criminals refuse to recognize the bans).  I don’t care what side of the issue you’re on, though…that’s a pretty idiotic statement.  I’m sorry, but if I was a good American citizen living in a crime-ridden urban area, my house is exactly where I would want my loaded handgun to be.

So, which houses should handguns be allowed in?  Should rich, white people in gated communities be able to protect their homes and loved ones in such a manner?  If so, why can’t people in crime-ridden urban areas?  Aren’t they the ones who would be most in need of that protection?  Of course not!  According to Steven Breyer, there are no victims in the ghetto, only troublemakers.  After all, if you wanted to be safe, you would just move to a better neighborhood, right?

As Sam Kinison once said in regards to the world hunger problem:  “Live where the food is!”  At least 1 out of 9 Supreme Court judges apparently believe in logic like that.

Oklahoma recently passed a resolution (by a huge margin) declaring it’s sovereignty under the 10th amendment.  How do we get Colorado to follow suit?  Here’s the text of the resolution:

STATE OF OKLAHOMA
2nd Session of the 51st Legislature (2008)
HOUSE JOINT
RESOLUTION 1089 By: Key

AS INTRODUCED
A Joint Resolution claiming sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over certain powers; serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates; and directing distribution.

WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”; and
WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and
WHEREAS, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and
WHEREAS, today, in 2008, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and
WHEREAS, many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and
WHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE SENATE OF THE 2ND SESSION OF THE 51ST OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE:

THAT the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.
THAT this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.
THAT a copy of this resolution be distributed to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate of each state’s legislature of the United States of America, and each member of the Oklahoma Congressional Delegation.

http://www.okhouse.gov/51LEG/Leg_Votesxx.aspx?include=okh01983.txt

http://www.ok-safe.com/files/documents/1/HJR1089_int.pdf