British funny-man Lenny Henry has earned a place on my bastard list.
Why, you ask? Am I offended by his easy-going style of comedy, or his other work, or some stupid crap he might have uttered, or even (god forbid) his ethnicity?
None of the above.
It's because he's married to Dawn French.
For those of you on a day-trip from Mars, Dawn French is a British actress and comedienne. She is most famous for being one-half of the "French and Saunders" duo, as well as playing the titular (and I don't use that word lightly) character in the acclaimed "Vicar of Dibley". She also done a bunch of other, lesser known stuff which I shan't mention here, along with many cameos and appearances. Dawn French is one of Britain's most loved celebrities.
She is also, IMNSHO, one of the sexiest women on TV. I don't care what anyone says, in my book there's a whole lotta gorgeous chick right there. And she actually has a working brain atop that voluptuous Rubinesque frame. She has more talent, panache and chutzpah in her little finger than many so-called "glamorous" actresses and certain socialite scum have in their whole boney carcasses. I'd rather stare adoringly at Dawn's pinup than an entire cast of "Top Models", those spoilt whiney mentally-challenged little prepubescents. She could whoop a complete line-up of "Ladettes", that drunken swearing repulsive collection of painted mullets, with one hand behind her back.
The best part is, she doesn't give a rat’s ass what anyone thinks of her. Does Dawn French go around blubbering like, "Ooooohhhhh I'm overweight! All the women's trash mags will take pictures and make fun of me and everyone will laugh and hate me... so I had better go on an ancient-Himalayan orange-peel-and-lemur-dung diet till my skeleton shows!" Oh, no. She goes and gets a lucrative advertising deal with a major chocolate manufacturer, and makes millions. Now that's class.
Twenty-plus years on TV has dulled neither her wit nor her charm nor her splendour, which burns ever brightly like the star she is.
So, Lenny Henry, you have earned my ire because you are Dawn French's he-bitch and the luckiest man on Earth. I would bitch slap you if you weren't so big, although I bet you'd run crying to Dawn. Prick.
Disclaimer: In fact it's me who's the luckiest man on Earth since I met my missus *nervous laugh*... but, you know, artistic hyperbole and all that :]
Disclaimer 2: I don't really hate Lenny Henry... actually I find him a bloody funny guy.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Friday, August 15, 2008
Let's all go to the Lobby....
For today's post I thought I'd borrow the format used by the good folks over at the People who deserve a beatdown blog. I think that is pretty self-explanatory.
Anyway my missus dragged me to the movies the other day, bless her heart. So I have taken the opportunity to make a few observations:
* If you trundle your late ass into the cinema after the movie has started, even after the 20 minutes of ads and promos, and then stand there like a goofy idiot blocking half the screen while you look for a seat, even though the cinema's half empty, you deserve to sit right at the front row.
* If you bring your D-average child to the movies to see something like the "Golden Compass", thinking it's a kid's movie, but actually has a plot more complex than the yawnable Harry Potter series, and every 5 seconds your brat is bleating "What happened?", you deserve to be bitch slapped all the way down the isle.
* If you come to the movies only to sit checking your SMS messages every 2 minutes, with your cell phone's all-white display illuminating the cinema, you deserve to be launched from the projectionist's window.
* If you're so appallingly obese you can barely wedge yourself into the generous cinema seats, and then sit shoveling vittles into your pie hole unceasingly for 2 hours, drowning out the THX sound system with your disgusting chewing-the-cud noises, you should be forced to wear a burlap mu-mu and learn some self-discipline.
* Go to the bathroom *BEFORE* the movie. Other moviegoers do not want to stare at your stupid, incontinent silhouette 2 times during the screening. If you have a bladder the size of a walnut, try geriatric diapers (or staying at home).
* And finally... The person who thought of selling movie snacks wrapped in noisy, crinkly cellophane packaging deserves to be shrink-wrapped in cellophane and catapulted into the sun.
I think that about covers every species of moron that infests the movie cinema.
Anyway my missus dragged me to the movies the other day, bless her heart. So I have taken the opportunity to make a few observations:
* If you trundle your late ass into the cinema after the movie has started, even after the 20 minutes of ads and promos, and then stand there like a goofy idiot blocking half the screen while you look for a seat, even though the cinema's half empty, you deserve to sit right at the front row.
* If you bring your D-average child to the movies to see something like the "Golden Compass", thinking it's a kid's movie, but actually has a plot more complex than the yawnable Harry Potter series, and every 5 seconds your brat is bleating "What happened?", you deserve to be bitch slapped all the way down the isle.
* If you come to the movies only to sit checking your SMS messages every 2 minutes, with your cell phone's all-white display illuminating the cinema, you deserve to be launched from the projectionist's window.
* If you're so appallingly obese you can barely wedge yourself into the generous cinema seats, and then sit shoveling vittles into your pie hole unceasingly for 2 hours, drowning out the THX sound system with your disgusting chewing-the-cud noises, you should be forced to wear a burlap mu-mu and learn some self-discipline.
* Go to the bathroom *BEFORE* the movie. Other moviegoers do not want to stare at your stupid, incontinent silhouette 2 times during the screening. If you have a bladder the size of a walnut, try geriatric diapers (or staying at home).
* And finally... The person who thought of selling movie snacks wrapped in noisy, crinkly cellophane packaging deserves to be shrink-wrapped in cellophane and catapulted into the sun.
I think that about covers every species of moron that infests the movie cinema.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
It's That Time of the Quadrayear
I'm not sure if "quadrayear" is the right word for something that comes by every 4 years, but close enough. Of course I refer to the magical Olympic Games. (And by that I mean the Summer Olympics, not that other frolic through the snow invented by Europeans to jealously hog all the medals for themselves.)
Yep, time to stand tall, with hand on heart, and get all warm and fuzzy while the TV plays the latest cocked-up rendition of "We are One" (or whatever your nation's unofficial sporting anthem happens to be), until you are ready to stab chopsticks in your ears.
Here in Australia, as elsewhere I'm sure, this special time affords one the opportunity for refection on the Olympics and sport in general. And I shall begin with a subject closest to my heart -- the amount of my taxpaying money spent on it.
In recent years, the skill and guile of our Aussie athletes has done us proud. By the close of each Olympics we have found ourselves at the dizzying heights near the top medal rankings. Our best effort was 4th overall in 2000 ("the year the PC monster ate the Olympics"), as might have been expected, and in 2004 also. We have beaten out powerhouses like Germany, Japan, Cuba, and the old East-bloc, and made no bones about it. Gone are the dark days of the 70's and 80's, when cowering in shame we got topped even by New Zealand.
These days we perform way beyond what would be expected of a "small" nation, and I admit I get as mooshy as the next guy when one of ours' crosses the lines first. Of course the Olympics will always be a 3-man race between USA, Russia and China, damn their elitist hides, and I shall bitch about that in another post. But for our part we do bloody well.
Indeed many Aussies will decry, "We might not come top-three in the medal tally, but given our small population (21m), we win more medals per capita than any nation on Earth!"
Very true. However, we also spend more taxpayers' money per capita on Olympic sports than any nation on Earth. Millions and millions of dollars poured into teams, athletes, sports scholarships, training, the AIS... and when it comes down to it, it is so a lucky few can spend fifteen minutes basking in Glory's warm spotlight. I won't go into how if we put the same amount of taxpayers' money into developing a cure for cancer as we did into developing a new swimming bodysuit, we might actually save a few lives. Not to mention winning some prestige for this so-called first-world country, at the same time contributing something of actual use to humanity.
Look I don't begrudge any sportsman for pursuing what they love, and making some gain for their hard work. We've produced some remarkable athletes over the years. And everyone loves a hero (although bandied terms like "brave sporting hero" stretches my credulity a tad), especially in this country, where some bold little man sticking it to the upper-crust is a national creed.
But fair's fair.
Firstly, a majority of money goes only to the popular handful of sports -- swimming of course, and track plus a couple of others. However many of our Olympic victories come from unexpected and surprising quarters such as Equestrian; and yet they get bugger-all from the government, having to finance themselves for the most part. So even with no tax handouts they still do us proud.
Secondly, an oft-bleated argument is that dumping money into popular, big-ticket sports encourages everyone to get off their backsides, thereby getting the nation healthier and happier and whatnot. Sorry, this just in: Australia is now the world's fattest country. That's right, we win gold in the obesity category. We even unseated the Yanks at their own game.
So despite all the money going to these sports, it buys nothing but glory for a lucky few followed by lucrative advertising contracts. Meanwhile we climb to the top of the ladder as the unhealthiest nation on Earth.
Boggles the mind doesn't it.... maybe it's a case of it is easier to sit, flabby-arsed and artery-clogged, cheering on our elite athletes trained and payed for by our taxpaying money, rather than getting off the couch ourselves. It's being active by proxy -- watching some buff guy or flexible chick winning a race, hoping a bit will rub off.
Or it could have something to do with the fact that hardly any of this taxpayers' money finds its way down to grass-roots level. At schools, at junior leagues, and other community efforts, they have to beg borrow & steal just to acquire basic sporting equipment. We see ads on TV about stores and supermarkets that raised x-amount for schools to purchase balls or lane ropes, so we feel good about shopping at those places. But why should a privileged few get all the best facilities, the best training, the best everything, while schools are forced to turn to a private entities just so they can have lane ropes? It's ridiculous.
There is a double standard at work here; unless you're some elitist sporting organisation, or you show huge promise individually as medal-winning material, the government basically tells you to get stuffed.
The last serious drive by the government to get people active, was the "Life Be In It" campaign. Remember Norm? Most kids today have never heard of Norm. You would think with the national obesity epidemic the bureaucrats would be falling over themselves implementing national health schemes and TV drives, if for no other reason than as an excuse to form committees.
Nope. It's clear the government, and by extension the wallowing populace, is more interested in a moment of shared national glory than in actual, personal, decent quality of life, being-able-to-get-up-out-of-the-lounge-chair-without-a-lifter health.
And we wonder why we are raising a nation of little fat sugar-crazed piggies.
Yep, time to stand tall, with hand on heart, and get all warm and fuzzy while the TV plays the latest cocked-up rendition of "We are One" (or whatever your nation's unofficial sporting anthem happens to be), until you are ready to stab chopsticks in your ears.
Here in Australia, as elsewhere I'm sure, this special time affords one the opportunity for refection on the Olympics and sport in general. And I shall begin with a subject closest to my heart -- the amount of my taxpaying money spent on it.
In recent years, the skill and guile of our Aussie athletes has done us proud. By the close of each Olympics we have found ourselves at the dizzying heights near the top medal rankings. Our best effort was 4th overall in 2000 ("the year the PC monster ate the Olympics"), as might have been expected, and in 2004 also. We have beaten out powerhouses like Germany, Japan, Cuba, and the old East-bloc, and made no bones about it. Gone are the dark days of the 70's and 80's, when cowering in shame we got topped even by New Zealand.
These days we perform way beyond what would be expected of a "small" nation, and I admit I get as mooshy as the next guy when one of ours' crosses the lines first. Of course the Olympics will always be a 3-man race between USA, Russia and China, damn their elitist hides, and I shall bitch about that in another post. But for our part we do bloody well.
Indeed many Aussies will decry, "We might not come top-three in the medal tally, but given our small population (21m), we win more medals per capita than any nation on Earth!"
Very true. However, we also spend more taxpayers' money per capita on Olympic sports than any nation on Earth. Millions and millions of dollars poured into teams, athletes, sports scholarships, training, the AIS... and when it comes down to it, it is so a lucky few can spend fifteen minutes basking in Glory's warm spotlight. I won't go into how if we put the same amount of taxpayers' money into developing a cure for cancer as we did into developing a new swimming bodysuit, we might actually save a few lives. Not to mention winning some prestige for this so-called first-world country, at the same time contributing something of actual use to humanity.
Look I don't begrudge any sportsman for pursuing what they love, and making some gain for their hard work. We've produced some remarkable athletes over the years. And everyone loves a hero (although bandied terms like "brave sporting hero" stretches my credulity a tad), especially in this country, where some bold little man sticking it to the upper-crust is a national creed.
But fair's fair.
Firstly, a majority of money goes only to the popular handful of sports -- swimming of course, and track plus a couple of others. However many of our Olympic victories come from unexpected and surprising quarters such as Equestrian; and yet they get bugger-all from the government, having to finance themselves for the most part. So even with no tax handouts they still do us proud.
Secondly, an oft-bleated argument is that dumping money into popular, big-ticket sports encourages everyone to get off their backsides, thereby getting the nation healthier and happier and whatnot. Sorry, this just in: Australia is now the world's fattest country. That's right, we win gold in the obesity category. We even unseated the Yanks at their own game.
So despite all the money going to these sports, it buys nothing but glory for a lucky few followed by lucrative advertising contracts. Meanwhile we climb to the top of the ladder as the unhealthiest nation on Earth.
Boggles the mind doesn't it.... maybe it's a case of it is easier to sit, flabby-arsed and artery-clogged, cheering on our elite athletes trained and payed for by our taxpaying money, rather than getting off the couch ourselves. It's being active by proxy -- watching some buff guy or flexible chick winning a race, hoping a bit will rub off.
Or it could have something to do with the fact that hardly any of this taxpayers' money finds its way down to grass-roots level. At schools, at junior leagues, and other community efforts, they have to beg borrow & steal just to acquire basic sporting equipment. We see ads on TV about stores and supermarkets that raised x-amount for schools to purchase balls or lane ropes, so we feel good about shopping at those places. But why should a privileged few get all the best facilities, the best training, the best everything, while schools are forced to turn to a private entities just so they can have lane ropes? It's ridiculous.
There is a double standard at work here; unless you're some elitist sporting organisation, or you show huge promise individually as medal-winning material, the government basically tells you to get stuffed.
The last serious drive by the government to get people active, was the "Life Be In It" campaign. Remember Norm? Most kids today have never heard of Norm. You would think with the national obesity epidemic the bureaucrats would be falling over themselves implementing national health schemes and TV drives, if for no other reason than as an excuse to form committees.
Nope. It's clear the government, and by extension the wallowing populace, is more interested in a moment of shared national glory than in actual, personal, decent quality of life, being-able-to-get-up-out-of-the-lounge-chair-without-a-lifter health.
And we wonder why we are raising a nation of little fat sugar-crazed piggies.
Friday, August 8, 2008
Thanks for Nothing, ABC
In my other blog I was having a belly-ache about how crap TV was when I was a kid. Living in the bush we had (count them) two stations; the local one and the ABC, and the programming afforded by both left a lot to be desired.
But thinking back, ah it wasn't so bad. Afternoons and evenings tended to have ok programming, as long as the friggin cricket and tennis were not on and hogging all the air time. It was all we knew, and we were happy.
Indeed some of my fondest memories are of watching those classic old shows -- Chips, Dallas, BJ Mackay, Kingswood Country, Battlestar Galactica (the original obviously, not the grimy remake), The Curiosity Show, Hawaii 5-0, Sesame Street (again the original, not the PC rubbish nowadays), Wombat, Simon Townsend's Wonderworld, Baa-Baa Black Sheep, Sale of the Century (with Tony Barber, not the succession of grinning poonces who came after him), Mr. Squiggle, anything with Graeme Kennedy in it, The Goodies, Countdown (which I actually hated at the time), Lennox Walker's weather forecasts.... man I could go on and on.
You know, I mean, it was a poor little regional TV station we had, and they did their best. And hey, at least their ad breaks were not three irritating minutes of crass, puerile repetitiveness which insulted your intelligence and assaulted your sensibilities at once, as is the case today.
But "Auntie" ABC had no bloody excuse. While the local channel was airing soaps and "The Mike Walsh Show" throughout the weekday, the ABC would counter with the following in quality entertainment:
7:30am Station opens with test card
8:00am Sesame Street
9:00am Playschool
9:30am Test card
1:00pm News
1:15pm Test card
3:30pm Sesame Street (repeat)
4:30pm Playschool (repeat)
5:00pm (Evening programming)
It's not that the 1970's was so primitive that we had to settle for a whole day of squat on one channel. It's the fact that in the major cities ABC aired cool educational shows, on the exact same channel, all day, every day. But not in the bush; oh no, for us it was a case of the government figured a bunch of dumb hick farmers' kids don't need no educational programming, and so cut costs by airing the test card.
Up your's, ABC.
Ok I know what you're thinking: "What are you whinging about daytime TV for, weren't you supposed to be at school?" Well those educational shows were geared specifically to be shown to classes at school. And besides, there was such a thing as being off sick (and wagging it ;)
Heh... I suppose it is a bit low busting on "Auntie" for what they did 30 years ago. I mean, things have improved ginormously since then, and thank god for that. Maybe there is something to deregulation after all...
But thinking back, ah it wasn't so bad. Afternoons and evenings tended to have ok programming, as long as the friggin cricket and tennis were not on and hogging all the air time. It was all we knew, and we were happy.
Indeed some of my fondest memories are of watching those classic old shows -- Chips, Dallas, BJ Mackay, Kingswood Country, Battlestar Galactica (the original obviously, not the grimy remake), The Curiosity Show, Hawaii 5-0, Sesame Street (again the original, not the PC rubbish nowadays), Wombat, Simon Townsend's Wonderworld, Baa-Baa Black Sheep, Sale of the Century (with Tony Barber, not the succession of grinning poonces who came after him), Mr. Squiggle, anything with Graeme Kennedy in it, The Goodies, Countdown (which I actually hated at the time), Lennox Walker's weather forecasts.... man I could go on and on.
You know, I mean, it was a poor little regional TV station we had, and they did their best. And hey, at least their ad breaks were not three irritating minutes of crass, puerile repetitiveness which insulted your intelligence and assaulted your sensibilities at once, as is the case today.
But "Auntie" ABC had no bloody excuse. While the local channel was airing soaps and "The Mike Walsh Show" throughout the weekday, the ABC would counter with the following in quality entertainment:
7:30am Station opens with test card
8:00am Sesame Street
9:00am Playschool
9:30am Test card
1:00pm News
1:15pm Test card
3:30pm Sesame Street (repeat)
4:30pm Playschool (repeat)
5:00pm (Evening programming)
It's not that the 1970's was so primitive that we had to settle for a whole day of squat on one channel. It's the fact that in the major cities ABC aired cool educational shows, on the exact same channel, all day, every day. But not in the bush; oh no, for us it was a case of the government figured a bunch of dumb hick farmers' kids don't need no educational programming, and so cut costs by airing the test card.
Up your's, ABC.
Ok I know what you're thinking: "What are you whinging about daytime TV for, weren't you supposed to be at school?" Well those educational shows were geared specifically to be shown to classes at school. And besides, there was such a thing as being off sick (and wagging it ;)
Heh... I suppose it is a bit low busting on "Auntie" for what they did 30 years ago. I mean, things have improved ginormously since then, and thank god for that. Maybe there is something to deregulation after all...
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Smartass Quote of the Week
Ever since our hairy antecedents formed their random hooting and babbling into coherent language, lots of stuff has been said by lots of people. The great majority of this stuff is immediately forgettable; indeed, upon listening to your average teenagers at the mall, one might question whether we have reverted back to hooting and babbling.
But occasionally, just occasionally, the noosphere is graced with an utterance of such eloquence and poignancy that the world cannot help but hearken unto it. A piece of wisdom so sublime and moving that we wonder how it could have been divined by any base mortal.
It may seem at odds with the spirit of this blog, but each week (or whatever) I shall bring you one such shining jewel.
The first inaugural SQotW comes from my mate Rooster, who exuded this pearl when I told him I was starting a blog:
"I think you should do a blog on how useless blogs are." --Rooster
Now I think there's something in that for all of us.
But occasionally, just occasionally, the noosphere is graced with an utterance of such eloquence and poignancy that the world cannot help but hearken unto it. A piece of wisdom so sublime and moving that we wonder how it could have been divined by any base mortal.
It may seem at odds with the spirit of this blog, but each week (or whatever) I shall bring you one such shining jewel.
The first inaugural SQotW comes from my mate Rooster, who exuded this pearl when I told him I was starting a blog:
"I think you should do a blog on how useless blogs are." --Rooster
Now I think there's something in that for all of us.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Is it "Dinguses" or "Dingi"?
The burning question that has haunted humanity since the dawn of time... (or at least me since last Saturday):
The plural of dingus, is it "dinguses" or "dingi"?
Let me use it in a few sentences:
* I would push my shopping trolley through the aisle, but I'm blocked in by a couple of dinguses/dingi.
* It's a 3-lane highway, and we have three geriatric dinguses/dingi driving under the speed limit blocking the entire road.
* Why is it all these dinguses/dingi have to use change on the bus instead of a travel card?
* The drive-thru at Macka's is continually full of dinguses/dingi.
* All these dinguses/dingi bitch about the price of fuel, yet they won't give up their 2.5 tonne 10mpg SUV's.
* Each year, 1000's of dinguses/dingi trip over their own clumsy feet leading to astronomical public liability insurance costs.
* It took Channel-10 eight long years to cancel Big Brother, thanks to all the moronic dinguses/dingi who watch it.
* I wish you dinguses/dingi would leave some comments.
If I'm not mistaken, dingus is from the Latin. So one would expect the correct plural to be "dingi". But there are many counter examples in English where this rule does not apply, so perhaps it is "dinguses". Indeed Firefox spell check flags "dinguses" as the correct one; but I don't know. (It also flags "color" and "aluminum" as correct, godammit.)
Can someone help me? In the meantime, I'll just have to reword the sentences such that I don't need to use the plural.
* I wish I had a dollar for every dingus I had to stop myself punching in the face, I'd be a rich man.
The plural of dingus, is it "dinguses" or "dingi"?
Let me use it in a few sentences:
* I would push my shopping trolley through the aisle, but I'm blocked in by a couple of dinguses/dingi.
* It's a 3-lane highway, and we have three geriatric dinguses/dingi driving under the speed limit blocking the entire road.
* Why is it all these dinguses/dingi have to use change on the bus instead of a travel card?
* The drive-thru at Macka's is continually full of dinguses/dingi.
* All these dinguses/dingi bitch about the price of fuel, yet they won't give up their 2.5 tonne 10mpg SUV's.
* Each year, 1000's of dinguses/dingi trip over their own clumsy feet leading to astronomical public liability insurance costs.
* It took Channel-10 eight long years to cancel Big Brother, thanks to all the moronic dinguses/dingi who watch it.
* I wish you dinguses/dingi would leave some comments.
If I'm not mistaken, dingus is from the Latin. So one would expect the correct plural to be "dingi". But there are many counter examples in English where this rule does not apply, so perhaps it is "dinguses". Indeed Firefox spell check flags "dinguses" as the correct one; but I don't know. (It also flags "color" and "aluminum" as correct, godammit.)
Can someone help me? In the meantime, I'll just have to reword the sentences such that I don't need to use the plural.
* I wish I had a dollar for every dingus I had to stop myself punching in the face, I'd be a rich man.
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Redneck-1, Lawnmower-0
"Only in America"... it's become a cliché. But it's a cliché that keeps on giving. And giving and giving.
Who remembers that old Simpsons episode, the one where Homer buys a handgun? He joins the NRA, then proceeds to use his gun for everything -- opening beer cans, turning off the TV, extinguishing lights.
Well today's gem comes straight from Matt Groening's playbook. In the small quiet town of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (home of Lenny & Squiggy, for those who remember actual scripted television), a man, let's call him Bubba, was frustrated with his lawnmower continually breaking down. So he shot it.
That's right. Bubba went into his house, fetched his shotgun, came out, and with one blast sent his hapless mower to gardening-tool heaven.
Ok everyone have a good laugh.
What grade-A moron. The guy was a booze-head for one, according to the news article, and for some reason that doesn't surprise me. Anger management issues were probably also thrown in to the mix.
As the cops were leading him away his attitude was, "Hey it's my goddam lawnmower and my goddam yard!" as one would expect. Not one skerrick of remorse or reflection that, I dunno, a ricochet pellet or piece of blown-away lawnmower could have struck a child playing metres away in a neighbouring yard. But then that doesn't surprise me, either.
Anyway the guy could get six years in the pokey -- but not for grossly unsafe handling of a firearm. No, because it was a sawn-off shotgun. Oh yes, I forgot to mention it was a "liquor-store special." If it wasn't a sawn-off he'd probably get nothing more than a wrist-slap for "disorderly conduct".
Jesus Christ.
Now, I don't think our Yankee cousins are any more or less susceptible to blind rage than the rest of us. Indeed, I myself have wrecked my fair share of dodgy computer equipment in a maddened frenzy of frustration. When you have fixed something and fixed it and fixed it, and it still breaks down, sometimes it is better to destroy the thing utterly lest you waste another moment on the hopeless cause.
However, those of us in other less manly countries might use hammers, tyre irons, sporting equipment, even our bare hands to send the offending item to its grave. But such mundane means are far beneath the Yanks. Nope, nothing less than 2oz of buckshot will do the trick.
Look, I'm not some skinny-wristed tofu-eating nancy boy. I firmly believe it's every man's inalienable right to protect himself and his own, with whatever tools are at his disposal. That includes shootin' irons. Don't even get me started on the sit-down-to-pee restrictions we have on firearm ownership in my country.
But it's just like my old granpappy used to say: "When all you carry is a hammer, every problem begins to look like a stuck-out nail."
What sh*ts me the most, is it's psychotic knobs like Bubba that wreck it for the rest of us: Their cretinous acts only give ammunition (harhar) to the blubbering bleeding-heart gun control pencil-necks who take guns away from law abiding citizens and place them firmly into the hands of those who obtain them illegally, i.e. criminals. Oh and psychos.
Thanks a f*cking bunch Bubba, you thoughtless pisshead.
Who remembers that old Simpsons episode, the one where Homer buys a handgun? He joins the NRA, then proceeds to use his gun for everything -- opening beer cans, turning off the TV, extinguishing lights.
Well today's gem comes straight from Matt Groening's playbook. In the small quiet town of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (home of Lenny & Squiggy, for those who remember actual scripted television), a man, let's call him Bubba, was frustrated with his lawnmower continually breaking down. So he shot it.
That's right. Bubba went into his house, fetched his shotgun, came out, and with one blast sent his hapless mower to gardening-tool heaven.
Ok everyone have a good laugh.
What grade-A moron. The guy was a booze-head for one, according to the news article, and for some reason that doesn't surprise me. Anger management issues were probably also thrown in to the mix.
As the cops were leading him away his attitude was, "Hey it's my goddam lawnmower and my goddam yard!" as one would expect. Not one skerrick of remorse or reflection that, I dunno, a ricochet pellet or piece of blown-away lawnmower could have struck a child playing metres away in a neighbouring yard. But then that doesn't surprise me, either.
Anyway the guy could get six years in the pokey -- but not for grossly unsafe handling of a firearm. No, because it was a sawn-off shotgun. Oh yes, I forgot to mention it was a "liquor-store special." If it wasn't a sawn-off he'd probably get nothing more than a wrist-slap for "disorderly conduct".
Jesus Christ.
Now, I don't think our Yankee cousins are any more or less susceptible to blind rage than the rest of us. Indeed, I myself have wrecked my fair share of dodgy computer equipment in a maddened frenzy of frustration. When you have fixed something and fixed it and fixed it, and it still breaks down, sometimes it is better to destroy the thing utterly lest you waste another moment on the hopeless cause.
However, those of us in other less manly countries might use hammers, tyre irons, sporting equipment, even our bare hands to send the offending item to its grave. But such mundane means are far beneath the Yanks. Nope, nothing less than 2oz of buckshot will do the trick.
Look, I'm not some skinny-wristed tofu-eating nancy boy. I firmly believe it's every man's inalienable right to protect himself and his own, with whatever tools are at his disposal. That includes shootin' irons. Don't even get me started on the sit-down-to-pee restrictions we have on firearm ownership in my country.
But it's just like my old granpappy used to say: "When all you carry is a hammer, every problem begins to look like a stuck-out nail."
What sh*ts me the most, is it's psychotic knobs like Bubba that wreck it for the rest of us: Their cretinous acts only give ammunition (harhar) to the blubbering bleeding-heart gun control pencil-necks who take guns away from law abiding citizens and place them firmly into the hands of those who obtain them illegally, i.e. criminals. Oh and psychos.
Thanks a f*cking bunch Bubba, you thoughtless pisshead.
Friday, August 1, 2008
Friggin Nice One, Channel 10
For my first real post I thought I'd have a go at the Australian media. A fat juicy target for the slinging of pies of crankiness, to be sure.
Last night Channel 10 (and the other TV stations) ran a breaking story: Someone had secretly captured video of the opening ceremony rehearsal for the Beijing Olympics, and posted it up to youtube. And the Chinese authorities were pissed.
Now, ok, some little South Korean journalist twat wants to film some Chinese prancing about on his phone cam and upload to youtube. Don't care. I won't go into how, IMHO, the Chinese government and Olympic organisers have every right to be pissed. I won't go into how it was a gross violation of the trust placed in the journos that they would not spill the beans early. I won't comment on how many people had worked extremely hard, and the Chinese government (i.e. the people) spent a lot of money, to wow the a world with a spectacular show which will now be a flop because the world has seen it already.
Honestly, care_factor = 0.
But what got right up my schnoz was Channel 10's reaction to the story. For during every ad break from 7pm till the late news, we were subjected to an unending sequence of misleading "breaking news" teasers; we had to look at fathead anchor Sandra Silly barfing deceptively with lines such as:
"The shocking Olympics video"
"The video the Chinese authorities don't want you to see"
"The Chinese government is in an uproar"
"Embarrassment over a video"
The connotations of these sound bites is obvious. They were supposed to stir in us, the viewers, all the cliches that have been built over the years about Chinese authority: Thug cops beating down on protesters, doors being kicked in, news cameras being confiscated, skinny old professors in prison, book burnings, tanks rolling through public squares, etc.
What we got, instead, was a spoiler for the Olympics opening ceremony.
Pretty freakin' lame, Channel 10 and the other TV stations.
The worst part is, all the TV stations, as well as news.com and all the rest, then went and aired the video. Rather than showing a modicum of respect and sensitivity to the Olympic organisers, they plastered the pirated thing for everyone to see.
Way to spoil everyone's day, dickheads.
All this, of course, comes on the heels of the stories of China blocking certain websites. The poor journos over there were in an uproar over that one. There were charges of human right violations, freedom of information and the like, which only served to bolster the connotations I mentioned earlier.
But what I want to know is, what are the journos there for anyway? To report on the Olympics or surf the web all day? Ah, you say, but they need the net for information and stuff... Ok, so what did reporters do *before* the net? Oh that's right, they got off their soft arses and pounded the pavement. They left their $500/night hotel rooms and actually got down onto the street, pen and pad in hand, and did some reporting.
Anyway the whole Opening Ceremony video scandal was nothing but an exercise in extreme lameness. Way to go, Australian Media, way to spoil what might have been a great show while at the same time treating your viewers like a pack of drooling cretins. And you, Channel 10, just when I think there's hope after you cancelled that steaming pile of shite called Big Brother.
Last night Channel 10 (and the other TV stations) ran a breaking story: Someone had secretly captured video of the opening ceremony rehearsal for the Beijing Olympics, and posted it up to youtube. And the Chinese authorities were pissed.
Now, ok, some little South Korean journalist twat wants to film some Chinese prancing about on his phone cam and upload to youtube. Don't care. I won't go into how, IMHO, the Chinese government and Olympic organisers have every right to be pissed. I won't go into how it was a gross violation of the trust placed in the journos that they would not spill the beans early. I won't comment on how many people had worked extremely hard, and the Chinese government (i.e. the people) spent a lot of money, to wow the a world with a spectacular show which will now be a flop because the world has seen it already.
Honestly, care_factor = 0.
But what got right up my schnoz was Channel 10's reaction to the story. For during every ad break from 7pm till the late news, we were subjected to an unending sequence of misleading "breaking news" teasers; we had to look at fathead anchor Sandra Silly barfing deceptively with lines such as:
"The shocking Olympics video"
"The video the Chinese authorities don't want you to see"
"The Chinese government is in an uproar"
"Embarrassment over a video"
The connotations of these sound bites is obvious. They were supposed to stir in us, the viewers, all the cliches that have been built over the years about Chinese authority: Thug cops beating down on protesters, doors being kicked in, news cameras being confiscated, skinny old professors in prison, book burnings, tanks rolling through public squares, etc.
What we got, instead, was a spoiler for the Olympics opening ceremony.
Pretty freakin' lame, Channel 10 and the other TV stations.
The worst part is, all the TV stations, as well as news.com and all the rest, then went and aired the video. Rather than showing a modicum of respect and sensitivity to the Olympic organisers, they plastered the pirated thing for everyone to see.
Way to spoil everyone's day, dickheads.
All this, of course, comes on the heels of the stories of China blocking certain websites. The poor journos over there were in an uproar over that one. There were charges of human right violations, freedom of information and the like, which only served to bolster the connotations I mentioned earlier.
But what I want to know is, what are the journos there for anyway? To report on the Olympics or surf the web all day? Ah, you say, but they need the net for information and stuff... Ok, so what did reporters do *before* the net? Oh that's right, they got off their soft arses and pounded the pavement. They left their $500/night hotel rooms and actually got down onto the street, pen and pad in hand, and did some reporting.
Anyway the whole Opening Ceremony video scandal was nothing but an exercise in extreme lameness. Way to go, Australian Media, way to spoil what might have been a great show while at the same time treating your viewers like a pack of drooling cretins. And you, Channel 10, just when I think there's hope after you cancelled that steaming pile of shite called Big Brother.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
