A friend of mine posted this. Originally from Sweasel.com

(Do compare the numbers to Bush. No, really. Please do.)

WE’RE. ALL. FUCKED.

I have several posts on craig’s list selling various household shit to raise money for the bar. Today, I received an email from a complete moron: Roger Greer. Do you know him? If you do, please kick him in the balls. I do not know who Roger Greer is or where he comes from but I hope he is stricken with testicle cancer and they only way to stop the pain in his balls is for him to bang his head against the wall non stop. Here is the email: 

Hi how are you?!

Ive seen your post on craigslist… Might thought ill drop you an
email and help you..

Do you currently have work right now? cause I know its hard to got get
a work this days but me and my sister are doing this for 4 months now
since i quit my day job..

It make my life really easy trust me. actually my step mom just
recommend this to me.

and it really helps me alot acually i already quit my day job when i
start doing this.

i like helping people but i want to help people who want to help themself.

ok so the thing that im talking about is called google kit

all i did is get the google kit and then when google send me the kit
after that week

trust me im already making 200 to 800 a day..its not that hard i cant
even believe it either. it really shock me

when i got my first check after a week I got the google kit..

thats the reason i want to help people without expecting in return.

it really change my life imagine not going to your day job every day?

and your earning more than your day job just following this easy steps?

anyway this is their page

http://googlecashprofit.info

Like I told you it already make me up to 800 a day. it really change
my life so its worth a try at least.

Just implement the steps as soon as you recieve your kit and you will
achieve this succes that everybodys looking for.

if you have questions just email me anytime..

Hope you have achieve this goal like i did.
Have a good day.. And Hope you Success

Here is what I wrote to Mr. Roger:

Roger,

I thought I would reply to your sales pitch. I am a little weary about offers made over the internet, never mind ones that are made from someone that pays no attention to detail whatsoever. I think before you send out your next unsolicited sales bullshit, you might want to use the spell-check. Maybe even have someone else proof read your lines of bullshit? Just a thought. I am not sure you know how to read English, you certainly can not write it, but here it goes:
Hi how are you?
I am fine and you?

Ive seen your post on craigslist… Might thought ill drop you an
email and help you..

Thanks. Do not need any help. I am offering a king size mattress for sale. How does that equate to me needing your help?

“Might thought” what the fuck does that mean??

Do you currently have work right now? cause I know its hard to got get
a work this days but me and my sister are doing this for 4 months now
since i quit my day job.

Yes, I have work right now. You suck.

“You know its hard to got get a work this days?” Are you kidding? That is your opening line. Wow.

It make my life really easy trust me. actually my step mom just
recommend this to me.

Seriously, stop killing the English language. Your sales pitch so far sucks. You are also confusing. You have been doing this for 4 months, yet your step mom just recommended this to you? What the hell?

and it really helps me alot acually i already quit my day job when i
start doing this.

The word is correctly spelled ”actually”. You missed the letter “t”. Plus, your sentence is in the wrong tense. “When I started doing this” would be correct you ignorant moron.

i like helping people but i want to help people who want to help themself.

Oh for the love of God. Stop. Please.

ok so the thing that im talking about is called google kit

Does Google know you are a spokesman for them?

all i did is get the google kit and then when google send me the kit
after that week

I am sorry…what?

trust me im already making 200 to 800 a day..its not that hard i cant
even believe it either. it really shock me

Trust you? With what?  “It really shock me” Oh jesus…make it stop.
when i got my first check after a week I got the google kit..

Please have someone that speaks English proof read your crap.

thats the reason i want to help people without expecting in return.

Shithead, you never stated a reason.

it really change my life imagine not going to your day job every day?

I would not want to know what your life was like before.
and your earning more than your day job just following this easy steps?

I earn enough in my day job. Plus benefits, pension, variable supplement, medical, dental, 5 weeks vacation, unlimited sick.

anyway this is their page

Almost correct.

Like I told you it already make me up to 800 a day. it really change
my life so its worth a try at least.

Please shut up.

Just implement the steps as soon as you recieve your kit and you will
achieve this succes that everybodys looking for.

You spelt “success” wrong and…oh nevermind.

if you have questions just email me anytime..

Hope you have achieve this goal like i did.
Have a good day.. And Hope you Success!

“And Hope you Success” Nice. Sign me up!

Scary thing is, Roger Greer probably drives on the same roads as you and me.

473

“And so during these holiday seasons, we thank our blessings.” – GW Bush

[Joel Pett]

CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL: 100 REASONS WHY
Source: UK Daily Express

HERE are the 100 reasons, released in a dossier issued by the European Foundation, why climate change is natural and not man-made:

1) There is “no real scientific proof” that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from man’s activity.

2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.

3) Warmer periods of the Earth’s history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.

4) After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.

5) Throughout the Earth’s history, temperatures have often been warmer than now and CO2 levels have often been higher – more than ten times as high.

6) Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time.

7) The 0.7C increase in the average global temperature over the last hundred years is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.

8 ) The IPCC theory is driven by just 60 scientists and favourable reviewers not the 4,000 usually cited.

9) Leaked e-mails from British climate scientists – in a scandal known as “Climate-gate” – suggest that that has been manipulated to exaggerate global warming

10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years.

11) Politicians and activiists claim rising sea levels are a direct cause of global warming but sea levels rates have been increasing steadily since the last ice age 10,000 ago

12) Philip Stott, Emeritus Professor of Biogeography at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London says climate change is too complicated to be caused by just one factor, whether CO2 or clouds

13) Peter Lilley MP said last month that “fewer people in Britain than in any other country believe in the importance of global warming. That is despite the fact that our Government and our political class—predominantly—are more committed to it than their counterparts in any other country in the world”.

14) In pursuit of the global warming rhetoric, wind farms will do very little to nothing to reduce CO2 emissions

15) Professor Plimer, Professor of Geology and Earth Sciences at the University of Adelaide, stated that the idea of taking a single trace gas in the atmosphere, accusing it and finding it guilty of total responsibility for climate change, is an “absurdity”

16) A Harvard University astrophysicist and geophysicist, Willie Soon, said he is “embarrassed and puzzled” by the shallow science in papers that support the proposition that the earth faces a climate crisis caused by global warming.

17) The science of what determines the earth’s temperature is in fact far from settled or understood.

18) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas, unlike water vapour which is tied to climate concerns, and which we can’t even pretend to control

19) A petition by scientists trying to tell the world that the political and media portrayal of global warming is false was put forward in the Heidelberg Appeal in 1992. Today, more than 4,000 signatories, including 72 Nobel Prize winners, from 106 countries have signed it.

20) It is claimed the average global temperature increased at a dangerously fast rate in the 20th century but the recent rate of average global temperature rise has been between 1 and 2 degrees C per century – within natural rates

21) Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski, Chairman of the Scientific Council of the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw, Poland says the earth’s temperature has more to do with cloud cover and water vapor than CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

22) There is strong evidence from solar studies which suggests that the Earth’s current temperature stasis will be followed by climatic cooling over the next few decades

23) It is myth that receding glaciers are proof of global warming as glaciers have been receding and growing cyclically for many centuries

24) It is a falsehood that the earth’s poles are warming because that is natural variation and while the western Arctic may be getting somewhat warmer we also see that the Eastern Arctic and Greenland are getting colder

25) The IPCC claims climate driven “impacts on biodiversity are significant and of key relevance” but those claims are simply not supported by scientific research

26) The IPCC threat of climate change to the world’s species does not make sense as wild species are at least one million years old, which means they have all been through hundreds of climate cycles

27) Research goes strongly against claims that CO2-induced global warming would cause catastrophic disintegration of the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets.

28) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, rising CO2 levels are our best hope of raising crop yields to feed an ever-growing population

29) The biggest climate change ever experienced on earth took place around 700 million years ago

30) The slight increase in temperature which has been observed since 1900 is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term natural climate cycles

31) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, rising CO2 levels of some so-called “greenhouse gases” may be contributing to higher oxygen levels and global cooling, not warming

32) Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures

33) Today’s CO2 concentration of around 385 ppm is very low compared to most of the earth’s history – we actually live in a carbon-deficient atmosphere

34) It is a myth that CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas because greenhouse gases form about 3% of the atmosphere by volume, and CO2 constitutes about 0.037% of the atmosphere

35) It is a myth that computer models verify that CO2 increases will cause significant global warming because computer models can be made to “verify” anything

36) There is no scientific or statistical evidence whatsoever that global warming will cause more storms and other weather extremes

37) One statement deleted from a UN report in 1996 stated that “none of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases”

38) The world “warmed” by 0.07 +/- 0.07 degrees C from 1999 to 2008, not the 0.20 degrees C expected by the IPCC

39) The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says “it is likely that future tropical cyclones (typhoons and hurricanes) will become more intense” but there has been no increase in the intensity or frequency of tropical cyclones globally

40) Rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere can be shown not only to have a negligible effect on the Earth’s many ecosystems, but in some cases to be a positive help to many organisms

41) Researchers who compare and contrast climate change impact on civilizations found warm periods are beneficial to mankind and cold periods harmful

42) The Met Office asserts we are in the hottest decade since records began but this is precisely what the world should expect if the climate is cyclical

43) Rising CO2 levels increase plant growth and make plants more resistant to drought and pests

44) The historical increase in the air’s CO2 content has improved human nutrition by raising crop yields during the past 150 years

45) The increase of the air’s CO2 content has probably helped lengthen human lifespans since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution

46) The IPCC alleges that “climate change currently contributes to the global burden of disease and premature deaths” but the evidence shows that higher temperatures and rising CO2 levels has helped global populations

47) In May of 2004, the Russian Academy of Sciences published a report concluding that the Kyoto Protocol has no scientific grounding at all.

48) The “Climate-gate” scandal pointed to a expensive public campaign of disinformation and the denigration of scientists who opposed the belief that CO2 emissions were causing climate change

49) The head of Britain’s climate change watchdog has predicted households will need to spend up to £15,000 on a full energy efficiency makeover if the Government is to meet its ambitious targets for cutting carbon emissions.

50) Wind power is unlikely to be the answer to our energy needs. The wind power industry argues that there are “no direct subsidies” but it involves a total subsidy of as much as £60 per MWh which falls directly on electricity consumers. This burden will grow in line with attempts to achieve Wind power targets, according to a recent OFGEM report.

51) Wind farms are not an efficient way to produce energy. The British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) accepts a figure of 75 per cent back-up power is required.

52) Global temperatures are below the low end of IPCC predictions not at “at the top end of IPCC estimates”

53) Climate alarmists have raised the concern over acidification of the oceans but Tom Segalstad from Oslo University in Norway , and others, have noted that the composition of ocean water – including CO2, calcium, and water – can act as a buffering agent in the acidification of the oceans.

54) The UN’s IPCC computer models of human-caused global warming predict the emergence of a “hotspot” in the upper troposphere over the tropics. Former researcher in the Australian Department of Climate Change, David Evans, said there is no evidence of such a hotspot

55) The argument that climate change is a of result of global warming caused by human activity is the argument of flat Earthers.

56) The manner in which US President Barack Obama sidestepped Congress to order emission cuts shows how undemocratic and irrational the entire international decision-making process has become with regards to emission-target setting.

57) William Kininmonth, a former head of the National Climate Centre and a consultant to the World Meteorological Organisation, wrote “the likely extent of global temperature rise from a doubling of CO2 is less than 1C. Such warming is well within the envelope of variation experienced during the past 10,000 years and insignificant in the context of glacial cycles during the past million years, when Earth has been predominantly very cold and covered by extensive ice sheets.”

58) Canada has shown the world targets derived from the existing Kyoto commitments were always unrealistic and did not work for the country.

59) In the lead up to the Copenhagen summit, David Davis MP said of previous climate summits, at Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and Kyoto in 1997 that many had promised greater cuts, but “neither happened”, but we are continuing along the same lines.

60) The UK ’s environmental policy has a long-term price tag of about £55 billion, before taking into account the impact on its economic growth.

61) The UN’s panel on climate change warned that Himalayan glaciers could melt to a fifth of current levels by 2035. J. Graham Cogley a professor at Ontario Trent University, claims this inaccurate stating the UN authors got the date from an earlier report wrong by more than 300 years.

62) Under existing Kyoto obligations the EU has attempted to claim success, while actually increasing emissions by 13 per cent, according to Lord Lawson. In addition the EU has pursued this scheme by purchasing “offsets” from countries such as China paying them billions of dollars to destroy atmospheric pollutants, such as CFC-23, which were manufactured purely in order to be destroyed.

63) It is claimed that the average global temperature was relatively unchanging in pre-industrial times but sky-rocketed since 1900, and will increase by several degrees more over the next 100 years according to Penn State University researcher Michael Mann. There is no convincing empirical evidence that past climate was unchanging, nor that 20th century changes in average global temperature were unusual or unnatural.

64) Michael Mann of Penn State University has actually shown that the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age did in fact exist, which contrasts with his earlier work which produced the “hockey stick graph” which showed a constant temperature over the past thousand years or so followed by a recent dramatic upturn.

65) The globe’s current approach to climate change in which major industrialised countries agree to nonsensical targets for their CO2 emissions by a given date, as it has been under the Kyoto system, is very expensive.

66) The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed that a scientific team had emailed one another about using a “trick” for the sake of concealing a “decline” in temperatures when looking at the history of the Earth’s temperature.

67) Global temperatures have not risen in any statistically-significant sense for 15 years and have actually been falling for nine years. The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed a scientific team had expressed dismay at the fact global warming was contrary to their predictions and admitted their inability to explain it was “a travesty”.

68) The IPCC predicts that a warmer planet will lead to more extreme weather, including drought, flooding, storms, snow, and wildfires. But over the last century, during which the IPCC claims the world experienced more rapid warming than any time in the past two millennia, the world did not experience significantly greater trends in any of these extreme weather events.

69) In explaining the average temperature standstill we are currently experiencing, the Met Office Hadley Centre ran a series of computer climate predictions and found in many of the computer runs there were decade-long standstills but none for 15 years – so it expects global warming to resume swiftly.

70) Richard Lindzen, Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, wrote: “The notion of a static, unchanging climate is foreign to the history of the Earth or any other planet with a fluid envelope. Such hysteria (over global warming) simply represents the scientific illiteracy of much of the public, the susceptibility of the public to the substitution of repetition for truth.”

71) Despite the 1997 Kyoto Protocol’s status as the flagship of the fight against climate change it has been a failure.

72) The first phase of the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), which ran from 2005 to 2007 was a failure. Huge over-allocation of permits to pollute led to a collapse in the price of carbon from €33 to just €0.20 per tonne meaning the system did not reduce emissions at all.

73) The EU trading scheme, to manage carbon emissions has completely failed and actually allows European businesses to duck out of making their emissions reductions at home by offsetting, which means paying for cuts to be made overseas instead.

74) To date “cap and trade” carbon markets have done almost nothing to reduce emissions.

75) In the United States , the cap-and-trade is an approach designed to control carbon emissions and will impose huge costs upon American citizens via a carbon tax on all goods and services produced in the United States. The average family of four can expect to pay an additional $1700, or £1,043, more each year. It is predicted that the United States will lose more than 2 million jobs as the result of cap-and-trade schemes.

76) Dr Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, has indicated that out of the 21 climate models tracked by the IPCC the differences in warming exhibited by those models is mostly the result of different strengths of positive cloud feedback – and that increasing CO2 is insufficient to explain global-average warming in the last 50 to 100 years.

77) Why should politicians devote our scarce resources in a globally competitive world to a false and ill-defined problem, while ignoring the real problems the entire planet faces, such as: poverty, hunger, disease or terrorism.

78) A proper analysis of ice core records from the past 650,000 years demonstrates that temperature increases have come before, and not resulted from, increases in CO2 by hundreds of years.

79) Since the cause of global warming is mostly natural, then there is in actual fact very little we can do about it. (We are still not able to control the sun).

80) A substantial number of the panel of 2,500 climate scientists on the United Nation’s International Panel on Climate Change, which created a statement on scientific unanimity on climate change and man-made global warming, were found to have serious concerns.

81) The UK’s Met Office has been forced this year to re-examine 160 years of temperature data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made global warming has been shattered by revelations about the data.

82) Politicians and activists push for renewable energy sources such as wind turbines under the rhetoric of climate change, but it is essentially about money – under the system of Renewable Obligations. Much of the money is paid for by consumers in electricity bills. It amounts to £1 billion a year.

83) The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed that a scientific team had tampered with their own data so as to conceal inconsistencies and errors.

84) The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed that a scientific team had campaigned for the removal of a learned journal’s editor, solely because he did not share their willingness to debase science for political purposes.

85) Ice-core data clearly show that temperatures change centuries before concentrations of atmospheric CO2 change. Thus, there appears to be little evidence for insisting that changes in concentrations of CO2 are the cause of past temperature and climate change.

86) There are no experimentally verified processes explaining how CO2 concentrations can fall in a few centuries without falling temperatures – in fact it is changing temperatures which cause changes in CO2 concentrations, which is consistent with experiments that show CO2 is the atmospheric gas most readily absorbed by water.

87) The Government’s Renewable Energy Strategy contains a massive increase in electricity generation by wind power costing around £4 billion a year over the next twenty years. The benefits will be only £4 to £5 billion overall (not per annum). So costs will outnumber benefits by a range of between eleven and seventeen times.

88) Whilst CO2 levels have indeed changed for various reasons, human and otherwise, just as they have throughout history, the CO2 content of the atmosphere has increased since the beginning of the industrial revolution, and the growth rate has now been constant for the past 25 years.

89) It is a myth that CO2 is a pollutant, because nitrogen forms 80% of our atmosphere and human beings could not live in 100% nitrogen either: CO2 is no more a pollutant than nitrogen is and CO2 is essential to life.

90) Politicians and climate activists make claims to rising sea levels but certain members in the IPCC chose an area to measure in Hong Kong that is subsiding. They used the record reading of 2.3 mm per year rise of sea level.

91) The accepted global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998.

92) If one factors in non-greenhouse influences such as El Nino events and large volcanic eruptions, lower atmosphere satellite-based temperature measurements show little, if any, global warming since 1979, a period over which atmospheric CO2 has increased by 55 ppm (17 per cent).

93) US President Barack Obama pledged to cut emissions by 2050 to equal those of 1910 when there were 92 million Americans. In 2050, there will be 420 million Americans, so Obama’s promise means that emissions per head will be approximately what they were in 1875. It simply will not happen.

94) The European Union has already agreed to cut emissions by 20 percent to 2020, compared with 1990 levels, and is willing to increase the target to 30 percent. However, these are unachievable and the EU has already massively failed with its Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), as EU emissions actually rose by 0.8 percent from 2005 to 2006 and are known to be well above the Kyoto goal.

95) Australia has stated it wants to slash greenhouse emissions by up to 25 percent below 2000 levels by 2020, but the pledges were so unpopular that the country’s Senate has voted against the carbon trading Bill, and the Opposition’s Party leader has now been ousted by a climate change sceptic.

96) Canada plans to reduce emissions by 20 percent compared with 2006 levels by 2020, representing approximately a 3 percent cut from 1990 levels but it simultaneously defends its Alberta tar sands emissions and its record as one of the world’s highest per-capita emissions setters.

97) India plans to reduce the ratio of emissions to production by 20-25 percent compared with 2005 levels by 2020, but all Government officials insist that since India has to grow for its development and poverty alleviation, it has to emit, because the economy is driven by carbon.

98) The Leipzig Declaration in 1996, was signed by 110 scientists who said: “We – along with many of our fellow citizens – are apprehensive about the climate treaty conference scheduled for Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997” and “based on all the evidence available to us, we cannot subscribe to the politically inspired world view that envisages climate catastrophes and calls for hasty actions.”

99) A US Oregon Petition Project stated “We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of CO2, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

100) A report by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change concluded “We find no support for the IPCC’s claim that climate observations during the twentieth century are either unprecedented or provide evidence of an anthropogenic effect on climate.”

At least for the moment. He says he has to be a better Man, Husband and Father…………..I say…………………

NO SHIT SHERLOCK, YOU FUCKING MORON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You should have thought of had that Brainstorm before you started sticking your cock in every hole you could find!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The PGA is crying over The Boinker’s Semi-Retirement, as without The Boinker, the PGA will most likely lose half their audience in addition to Millions of Dollars in Revenue from Advertisers  and the like.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the PGA is paying the Boinker’s Sponsors like Nike, Gatorade and others Big Bucks to keep him on the Payroll. If the Sponsors drop the Boinker, that will be the Death Noll for the PGA and the Boinker.The advertisers should grow a set of Balls and drop The Boinker like the Asshole he is. If it was anyone else besides The Boinker that pulled the Shit that he did, you can bet the farm that the Sponsors would have dropped that person already. i guess if it was Woods who Hit his Wife instead of the other way around, there’s a good chance some Sponsors would have dropped him already. Maybe the Sponsors haven’t dropped The Boinker yet because most of the Head Honchos of Nike, Gatorade, etc., have also Cheated on their Wives!!!! and they don’t want to be seen as hypocrites.

If Woods never came back to the game of golf, WHO GIVES A FUCKING SHIT???

I Don’t, and neither should Anyone else. Life goes on. And so does Golf. And so do the 2 Wars that we are in. And so does the Poor state of the Economy. And so does the High Unemployment Rate., and on and on and on. You get the idea.

Btw, I mentioned in my other Post that Tiger “Boinker” Woods should do commercials for The Bunny Ranch. Maybe he can get Trojan as a Sponser. Which begs the question; Did Tiger Woods use Condoms when he Fucked all of these Women, which included Porno Stars and the like. Yeah…………he must have, as I am sure that the Well Being of his wife was Foremost in his Mind.   Yeah, right, and if you believe that one, I got a SpaceShip that landed in the Forest that I want to show you!!!!!!!!!

Species Name: Slutticus Shallowius

This is the true story of seven guidos and guidettes, picked to share their venereal diseases in a house together at the Jersey Shore and unfortunately have their skanky escapades taped, to find out what happens when these douchebags stop being whores that no one cared about and start getting a TV show on MTV that people won’t be able to avert their eyes from, like a bad car wreck.”

It only took one episode of the monstrosity that is “Jersey Shore,” to realize that the Jersey Shore should be nuked from existence.  For those of you who haven’t gotten a chance to see MTV’s newest groundbreaking docu-series, I’ll give you the recipe for the show:

1 gigantic bucket of hair gel

2 parts noticeable fake tan

A buttload of obnoxious N.J. accents

A generous helping of fist pumping to House music

A tub of protein powder

Topped off with a name for your abs or tits

You combine all of these ingredients and you have just created: “The Even Trashier Real World”  Who ever thought that would be possible? Now I’ll admit to the fact that “The Real World” has always been a guilty pleasure of mine.  Maybe it has to do with the fact that it is the original reality show, or maybe that it first premiered back when I was 12 years old and has somewhat of a nostalgic feeling for me.  Whatever it is, I can’t explain it, and I’m definitely not proud of it, but for fucks sake, these “Jersey Shore” retards make the “The Real World”ers look like card carrying members of MENSA.

Cause I know you all are dying to meet everybody’s favorite guido/guidettes…so here ya go:

In a world where “Jersey Shore” didn’t exist to remind us just how shockingly sick some people in this country are:

• The country of Italy wouldn’t have to issue a press release stating that they take offense to these guidos/guidettes referring to themselves as Italian Americans.  Actually, all Italian’s, everywhere, are ashamed of these jackasses.
• “Jersey Shore” wouldn’t have been able to set a record for the most uses of the word “bro” and Affliction shirts worn in the same hour of television.
• We, as normal, functioning members of society, would have no douchebag litmus test to compare ourselves to.
• These seven roomates wouldn’t have the footage from their time on “Jersey Shore” to show their children to explain why they were born with herpes.
• DVD sales of “The Sopranos” would plummet.
• MTV would find some other group of young, naive, dumb kids to exploit for their own financial gain.  Oh you guidos…why are you so desperate for attention?
• All of America would’ve been jipped out of their opportunity to see the oblivious trainwreck that is “Snooki.”  There ya go Snooki, way to make ya mother proud.
• There would be four less future goomah’s and four less future mechanic’s in the world.

“Douchebag Shore” may be the greatest show ever created…but it’s not.  Instead it’s a display of the dregs of society and I promise you that after watching one episode you will feel compelled to read “War and Peace” to try and recoup the brain cells you just dissolved by watching this crap.  I yearn for the days when MTV used to have quality programming like “Undressed” and “Beavis and Butthead.”  That’s right, “Beavis and Butthead” is more intellectually stimulating than “Jersey Shore.”  But I guess I just have to suck it up, because like the shitfests before it, “The Hills,” “My Super Sweet 16,” and “True Life: I’m Addicted to Porn,”  “Jersey Shore” is on its way to developing a huge following and I’m sure the paparazzi will be following them around in no time.  Kill me.

But one has to have dreams right?

Just to be clear, I vote for who I want to vote for, and that hasn’t been a Republican since Regan because the Republicans have been running morons. Let’s get cranky here. George W Bush, was a silver spoon frat boy who would never even have been considered for the presidency if it hadn’t been for his father. Before that was his father, who would never have been considered for the presidency if it he hadn’t been Regan’s vice president. Okay, Bush Sr. wasn’t too bad, really. He at least had the qualifications, although I never really agreed with his policies – particularly on leaving Iraq in the hands of Saddam, but that’s water under the bridge. I’m not particular happy with the Democrats either, but the Republicans flat-out piss me off.

Eight years of having a silver-spoon frat boy run the country have left me somewhat disgusted with conservatives. Now, to be fair, GWB may have been comparable to a monkey, but he was sly. He used the religious right like tissue paper. He galvanized conservative Christians in this country and played the abortion card like an ace in the hole. Before W, Christians were much more divided between the parties. But W sucked them, and he won the election – barely. (There are those that still dispute that he was even elected, and they have more evidence on their side than the “birthers” ever will have against Obama). Four years later, he convinced them again against Kerry – barely. Fully half the country was pissed off for eight years. Did it make abortion illegal? No. Of course not. But that wasn’t the goal. The goal was to get elected.

So along comes John McCane – the guy the Republicans should have run in the first place, and ten times more qualified than W. At least in as far as his policies have been. And who does he pick as his running mate? He decides to take a gamble on this woman from Alaska because he knows that he needs to appeal to women and moderates. It was a legitimate tactic. The thing is, he miscalculated. He probably had no idea that Palin was an absolute moron. Did she cost him the election? It’s really hard to say. It didn’t help him any, there’s no doubt about that. Sure, it galvanized conservative’s, but they weren’t his problem. They would have voted for him anyway. For the rest of us… she was a big no-no. I was torn between the two parties until McCane picked miss idiot.

Now, one year after the election, miss bimbo has written a book (well, written might be a strong word in this case) and she’s quit her position as Gov of Alaska and gone on a book tour. How is this helping her? Well, it’s making her a lot of money, and apparently it’s convincing a lot of people that maybe she wouldn’t be such a bad person to lead the free world after all. I have relatives who say, “she’s fascinating,” and “I’m really interested in what she has to say.”

Look, my fellow Americans, let’s nip this in the bud. If she were running for office and you would vote for this woman, please have a long critical look at who she really is, how she has answered very important critical questions, and how she would operate as a president. Don’t consider voting for her because she’s a woman and you’re a woman. Don’t consider voting for her because she’s a Christian and you’re a Christian. Don’t consider voting for her because she’s “folksy” and down to earth, and you’re “folksy” and down to earth. Don’t consider voting for her because she’s a “real” American and you’re a “real” American.

Consider voting for her because she would make the right decisions for the country. Consider voting for her because she’s wise, and kind, and won’t crack under pressure, and knows how to handle herself in front of other leaders, and can represent US interests to foreign dignitaries. Or, since she’s not any of these things, maybe you should consider NOT voting for her. Maybe you should consider how the US appeared to the rest of the world when we had eight years of a guy who looked and acted like a chimp, got us into two wars, and put us into the worst recession since the great depression.

Because as bad as things were under W, they’d be worse under Palin.

• Top Ten Stupid Things Palin has Said
  What? Only Ten? There are more every day, but you’ll have to start your own list for that.

• The Irrefutable Stupidity of Sarah Palin
  In case the top ten stupid things weren’t enough, here are actually videos of her being an idiot.

Or just a dumbass?    Limbaugh pretends that he doesn’t know the difference between a life or death service like health care and a product of choice like a blue car.  Well maybe he really isn’t pretending and he really doesn’t know.  Okay, so Limbaugh, in my opinion, is a dumbass.

Commie care and Marxist medicine are wrong for financial and poltical reasons and not for anything derived from the ruminations of a college drop out.

In order to show Rush the Magic Nazi true respect he should always be greeted with:  Seig Heil, and where’s the Cross Burning you Satan Worshiping, Draft Dodging, Nazi War Criminal!

Helium

Google Keywords

How to Sell your Ideas

Sharing a bathroom in College

Google Search Tips

Government Telling you what to do

Fortune Teller

Giving away Free Stuff Improves the Bottom Line

Buying Local

Bukisa

How to use up that Extra Beer

Freezing Your Green Ass Off

How to Travel Naked

Sacred Geometries

Associated Content

Rush Limbaugh

How to Bankrupt a Nation

How to Eat as much as you want and Still Lose Weight

How to Celebrate 090909

Delicious Monsters

How to Lie

Grey Goo

Tears of Stone Angels

Unmasking Swine Flu

Cyber Rainbows and Digital Dreams

eHow

There is no minimum daily requirement for refined sugar

Celebrate 090909

Nakations

Online Job Search

Safe Surfing

Sacred Geometries

Poetry

Free Short Poems

Editor’s Note: This is the type of article that is written when you react to something without thinking. Let it be a lesson to us all.–rosebowldreaming

Unbelievable.

During Krissy Cox’s time at Northwestern, the football team is 6th in the Big Ten in total and conference wins. They have a 27-22 overall record and have been bowl eligible the past three years.

Yet today, a trash feature in ESPN the Magazine had a piece called “6 things you should know about cheering for a losing team.”

And guess what (censored) was featured?

Northwestern “cheerleader” Krissy Cox.

First of all, she shouldn’t have agreed to the interview in the first place, since it’s a blatant lie that NU is bad at sports.

But what she says in the interview is just stupid.

Some examples include “worrying that the cheer leading squad will be dissolved” because for some reason she thinks  NU is bad at sports. Ms. Cox, I think you should be more worried about getting KICKED OFF THE TEAM for granting this interview.

She talks about it being really hard to cheer when the team is losing by 40…yeah Krissy, NU loses by 40 ALL THE TIME. Jesus Christ.

The other stuff is just irrelevant drivel that has no substance and is not worth repeating.

I sincerely hope she’s not allowed to travel to NU’s EXCELLENT BOWL DESTINATION on the ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT’S DIME for granting this interview.

Then again, I doubt she even knows NU is going to a bowl again this year.

pero wag maging stupido…

“is still an idiot, and there is really no reason to use other words and expressions unless it is to hide our true meaning and to reduce the offensiveness of the biblical message. But what perverse reason is there to obscure biblical teachings? The truth is that the critics of this approach are poor interpreters of Scripture, compromisers with the world, and traitors to Christ and his cause. They defy that which Christ approved and practiced. I dare not and wish not defy my Lord, but I will crush his critics any day.”

Further up the document we read,

“As for “moron” and “feces,” even these are biblical words. The word “moron” is derived from the Greek moros. Paul uses it in Romans 1:22. There it is translated “fools,” but of course that means the same thing as “morons,” and indeed could have been just as easily and correctly translated as such. As for “feces,” Paul uses a word that is translated “dung” or “refuse” to refer to his former life as an unbeliever in Philippians 3:8. Thayer’s Lexicon explains that the word can refer to “any refuse, as the excrement of animals.” Both the meanings of these words and the contexts in which they appear agree with the way I use them against the unbelievers.”

- Vincent Cheung

So said Rush Limbaugh on his radio show last week. Certainly Mr. Limbaugh is entitled to his opinion. It’s guaranteed by the United States Constitution. However, the statement reflects a great deal of incivility and lack of respect for another person, and the office of the president. Rush might disagree with that third one, but to demean the occupant demeans the office.

The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines moron as “usually offensive : a person affected with mild mental retardation” or “a very stupid person.” Whether one agrees with President Obama or his politics, it is inarguable that he got where he is today because he is intelligent, and not a moron.

Today, American is a politically polarized nation. And few seem willing to move toward the center and keep the nation moving. Rather, the prevalence seems to be for everyone, especially politicians, to choose up sides, go to their respective corners, and refuse to budge. Much of this is done in the name of doing what is best for America. Perhaps the nation would be in better shape if everyone were required to read John Stuart Mill’s essay On Liberty. The gist of it is that in any polarized situation both the truth of the matter and the solution lie somewhere in between the polar opposites.

Mr. Limbaugh and others must take responsibility for much of the polarization and incivility in America today. Name calling, when done by a public person of celebrity, which Mr. Limbaugh is, like it or not, empowers others to also engage in name calling and other disruptions. The Tea Baggers are an example.

Only when groups of opposites determine to find common ground and move the nation forward will things get better. Until then there will be Republicans, Democrats and other political parties, conservatives and liberals, and haves and have nots. And America will lose, with everyone pointing the finger of responsibility at others instead of at themselves.

Finally, it seems to me that those who, to win the day, must resort to name-calling instead of honest discussion and debate on any issue are losers, no matter the outcome.

Perhaps Ed Begley (who makes his living by inducing others to consume massive amounts of energy) only gets this way with people who disagree with him:

http://video.foxnews.com/11904096/the-science-is-very-clear

But just in case, after Jonestown, there is any lack of awareness of the occult violence of liberalism, just check out the video.  Liberal violence is well documented, though.  Every society that has tried to implement liberal socialism has had to resort to coercion.  So let’s go on to Begley’s sophomoric arguments.

He objected to a physics professor voicing an opinion regarding global warming.  Guess what, Ed, all the “science” that climate “scientists” claim ownership of comes from physics.  The difference is that physics does not respond to politics and climate science does.  Begley, you are an overeducated moron.  I would take the opinion of a legitimate physicists over that of a “climate scientist” any day, any time, on any subject.  Physicists do math, climate scientists do spin.

And then regarding your comment to Stewart Varney that “You don’t get to spoil the commons”.  Begley, just another confirmation that you have received education that far exceeds your intelligence.  When Hardin described the Tragedy of the Commons in 1968, he thereby clearly explained the reason that liberal socialism is bound to fail.  ”The Commons” will always be spoiled, even Nazi Germany and Communist Russia with their coercive secret police apparatus could not prevent it.  Well, Ed, maybe what’s needed to make the liberal socialist “Commons” work is simply more of your anger and violence.

Congratulations, Ed Begley, you refresh the memory of the lesson that Jim Jones taught us back in 1978.  Every generation needs to be reminded.  Liberal socialism equals violence and coercion.  You’ve done your duty.

G’nite all, and may God continue to bless America.

PS: Ed, peer reviewed journals are and will remain only the beginning.  Watch “Longitude” (a truly worthwhile piece of media) to see how little changes regarding the corruption of the scientific establishment.  If you get all your information from peer reviewed journals, you are either wrong or uninformed a lot of the time.  The contradictions inherent to social liberalism in the United States are mind boggling and do result in the most amazing moral convolutions.