atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,
atomic_fungus
atomic_fungus

#5954: It's like no one has common sense any longer, or something

Always remind yourself that the law is an ass. Okay, we've all watched the police shows where cops read the Miranda warning to the suspects they arrest, though the scene usually cuts after the first clause ("You have the right to remain silent; if you choose to give up that right....") But sometimes they get as far as the second clause, which begins, "You have the right to an attorney."

Any time someone says, "I want a lawyer," regardless of what he says after that it should be regarded as a request for an attorney. But the Louisiana state supreme court has just ruled that saying, "I want a lawyer, dog," is not a request for an attorney, but a request for The Shaggy DA or something. Point is, the Louisiana legal apparatus is insisting that the man never actually requested an attorney.

If the suspect had instead said "I want a lawyer, dude!" or "I want a lawyer, man!" would the court have ruled that he never requested legal assistance when he so clearly did just that?

I mean, according to this decision, someone saying, "I want a lawyer, faggot!" is asking specifically for a gay lawyer, rather than insulting the person he's talking to.

It's a bad and stupid decision over something bleeding obvious, and it's a perversion of civil rights.

* * *

Speaking of bad and stupid, Colin Kaepernick is attempting to sue the various team owners of the NFL for "collusion" and "conspiracy".
The grievance claims the league, and its owners, "have colluded to deprive Mr. Kaepernick of employment rights in retaliation for Mr. Kaepernick's leadership and advocacy for equality and social justice and his bringing awareness to peculiar institutions still undermining racial equality in the United States."
Asshat, you don't have any "employment rights". No one has to hire you if they don't want to; just because you're in the top 1% of football players in the United States doesn't mean football teams are required to employ you. The fact that you're in the bottom 50% of that 1% is half the reason you're unemployed; you have too much baggage attached to your name, and as a professional football player, you're mediocre at best. The costs of employing your dumb ass outweigh the benefits.

Sit down--that seems to be your core comptency--and shut the fuck up.

* * *

Because it's so tasty it makes you want to punch yourself in the face, that's why. The McRib always comes back, every year, because McDonald's has determined that people will buy lots of them if they limit its run to a couple of months per year. It's a great-tasting sandwich, but you get tired of 'em pretty quickly, and they're messy enough that you can't eat them on the go; you need to stop, sit down, and use both hands and plenty of napkins. That's okay to do a couple times a year, but most of time? No.

The McRib always comes back because it makes money for McDonald's.

* * *

A comment here drew my attention. I'll quote some of it here:
It's not just the MSM that is full of crap. It's ALL media, even specialized techno-media.

Case in point: when I was an adolescent (late 60s), I lived and breathed cars. By the time I was in my 20s I had literally thousands of car magazines, and had read every one cover to cover. Then I went to engineering school, and was fortunate enough to get a job as a proving ground test engineer for a Big 3 manufacturer. As part of that job, I got to drive dozens of different cars and trucks from different manufacturers, from all over the world, and all on the same test tracks, and often back to back.

I was shocked, crestfallen, dumbfounded to discover that everything the car magazines had told me was basically ill-informed BS. The cars they liked were often crap. The cars they didn't like were often great. The things they said were important, weren't. The things they thought trivial, weren't. I had wasted 15 years and thousands of dollars (back when a dollar was a dollar) on BS.
Ah, yes, I know what he's talking about. Exactly.

I don't want to delve into the whole "torque versus horsepower" thing again, but I'll mention in passing that the magazine people always gush over horsepower and ignore torque, which is why they rated the mid-90s Dodge Neon higher than the Ford Escort of similar years. Yeah.

No, what this comment reminded me of was the Pontiac Fiero. The kvetching, from car magazines, over the original suspension in that car always made me roll my eyes. I mean, the simple fact is that a 1985 Fiero GT handles like it's on rails; if you know how to drive, that car will do everything you ask of it. Like any mid-engine car you have to watch out for trailing throttle oversteer, but it's got fantastic weight distribution and even the base suspension provides taut and snappy handling. The WS6 suspension is even better.

...but of course, it's not perfect, not like a Porsche or Ferrari. GM built it out of parts it had on hand, so it's garbage. The only good Fiero suspension is the 1988 models.

The 1988 suspension was an improved suspension, yes, which fixed some of the deficits of the early suspension (correcting some--though not all--of the bump steer issue). But it was not the do-all-be-all, and since most drivers never use more than 15-20% of their car's capability, the improvements didn't make a damned bit of difference to the average owner.

Ah, water under the bridge...but there we are.

* * *

Man, it's a dreary day today. Rained all morning. *sigh*
Subscribe

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments