Denis Leary: Gimme a regular.
Barista: What?
DL: Coffee!
B: What flavor?
DL: Coffee flavored!
...no.
But even though I think Starbuck's coffee is hipster jerk fuel, I still have to side with them when it comes to this issue. Why? Because I know that some Christian groups need to get a freaking grip already for Christ's sake! Jesus!
And I mean that literally--"for Christ's sake", I mean--because morons like these are making the rest of us look bad. They make all Christians look stupid and prudish.
They are upset over a freaking cartoon. There's nothing wrong with the logo; there's nothing wrong with the original 1971 logo, either. Their reaction to this can be summed thus: "OH NOES THE BOOBIEZ!" Come on already. This is ludicrous.
I really envy people who have lives which are so freaking perfect that they have the time to get upset over something stupid like this. I wish I had that kind of life, where everything was so wonderful and pleasant that a picture of a mermaid's boobs would upset me.
Speaking of stupid, this fits, too. Short form: Girl is going to prom with a gay male friend. The gay male wants to wear a dress instead of a tux.
...
You know, I think my brain just broke. It's like throwing "1 ÷ 0" at an old mechanical calculator which doesn't have error detection--it keeps grinding and grinding but can never find an answer. The stupid, it burns.
Okay, let the moron wear a dress. If he wants to look like an complete fool--if he wants to go to his senior prom dressed like a drag queen--let him. WTF. Who cares? That's what high school kids do. They make utter idiots of themselves, while telling themselves that they're just trying to have fun. In 20 years most of them will look at the pictures and think, "WTF, why did that asshat have to do that?"
I'd say the kid himself would, but let's face it: the life expectancy for homosexuals is not very good, and besides, in 20 years he'll probably wear dresses all the time anyway. (That is assuming, of course, that President Barak Hussein Obama's withdrawal from Iraq doesn't end up setting the stage for a Muslim takeover of America, the enactment of Sha'ria, and the subsequent execution of homosexuals and rape victims.)
Let's continue the theme! Ten things which you think make you look cool, but which emphatically do not. Including doing a web site that's grey text on a maroon background! Everybody wins! (But a reload of the page fixed it, so now it's grey text on a white background FTW.) (And the comments are hilarious; the poster obviously touched many raw nerves. "Foot hats"! Awesome.)
This ABC news page slowed Mozilla Firefox to a crawl. Be warned. But it discusses Clinton supporters who would rather sit out the election than vote Obama.
"We have a plan to campaign against the Democratic nominee," [Clinton Supporters Count Too] said in a press release Thursday. "We have the (wo)manpower and the money to make our threat real.Okay, the little thing first: "(wo)manpower"? Can we please just dispense with this idiotic notion that it's sexist to say "manpower" when you're talking about a woman? "Man" is the generic term for "human being". "Woman" is a special term for identifying females. Men don't get that. Only women. So when you say a post is "manned" you mean there's a person occupying that post. You don't need to say "manned or womanned"--not only doesn't it make any freaking sense, but it's depreciating the value of "woman".
People who rely on deconstructionist views of the world would do well to consider that fact. "Chairman" applies to whoever is in charge, male or female, because "man" is the generic term.
...look, I could go on and on and on about the anthropology of linguistics and semantics, but it'll just end up derailing my entire discussion of this issue, so nevermind. My main point about this is that women who want Hillary to be the nominee are saying they won't vote if she isn't. And while I'm sure this myopic view is limited to a certain minor fraction of the moonbat left, it's not going to be geographically isolated, either.
Not that I care. The more myopic the moonbats, the bigger chance we have of not electing a Demokrat in November. John McCain isn't much better than Hillary or Barak Hussein Obama, but he is a bit better than either Demokrat.
The stupidity is on a roll! But this is about fuel-saving tips that don't work and they're all correct on why. It's pretty good information.
"States" seizing safety deposit boxes. The article headline says "states" but it primarily mentions California, so I don't know what's going on. Still, it's an interesting read.
* * *
New additions to THE LIST, by the way:
34) When a Democrat, speaking on foreign soil, is critical of a Republican President or presidential candidate, it's a show of statesmanship.
35) When a Republican, speaking on foreign soil, is critical of a Democrat President or presidential candidate, it's unfair and a violation of an unwritten rule.
36) Roe v. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court decision to enhance civil rights despite the fact that it contravened the will of the people, because the people were wrong and judges are better qualified to make important rules for our society.
37) The Supreme Court decision in the 2000 election to allow Forida to certify its election results was "judicial activism" and it's unfair that judges were allowed to do something like that when the will of the people had not yet been determined. (Even though no recount ever showed Al Gore winning Florida.)
* * *
Friday morning, and I feel pretty good! I want to go outside and get something done.
...the pharmacist's instruction for ciprofloxacin says not to engage in exercise or "vigorous physical activity" because of the risk of "ruptured tendons". That just sounds horrible, and painful. Well, I've got a few days left on this prescription.
I'm going to have to mow the grass on Saturday or Sunday, though--no choice about that. Oh well.
* * *
This Ebay auction for a 1986 Fiero GT is insane. And stupid: $15,500 for an '86 Fiero? This guy is high--smokin' a bit too much of the whackity crackity, IMHO.
When I bought my '85 Fiero, in 2002, I paid $2,500 for it, and it had 48,000 miles on it.
Don't get me wrong; it's a nice-looking car. But it's not any $15,500 car. It's worth, at most, one-quarter that amount. My offer for it--were I in the market for a Fiero--would be $3,500; $4,000 at most, if it were in especially good shape.
And that would only be after I had inspected it thoroughly and verified that the rear upper frame rails and trunk corners were not rusted. And after I had test-driven it to ensure that everything worked correctly.
* * *
Still, I gotta say: "Slutbucks"? WTF.