First, let me say that I am also not a fan of Blogspot selling its soul, even to benevolent giant Google. What a pain in the ass! Also, I am not a fan that they didn't tell any of us, the authors of the content that draws people to their site and generates the ad revenue they depend on. If I wanted a Google account, I'd have signed up for it by now. I can't see any reason for Blogspot to require me to do so. Except that Google needs more members so they can increase the amount of money they charge for "premium links."
Okay, with that out of the way, on with the show.
CNN recently featured an article about a family in Omaha (this blog's home office locale). The point of the article is that this poor family, with a household income of merely $150,000, is finding it hard to pay their bills. Allow me to make the following observations.
1. Have these people so lost touch with the common man that they believe this article will generate anything other than hatred and contempt?? The family's complaints seem so genuine that they really appear to expect an avalanche of consolative emails. As it is, I just want to have them all killed.
2. The unintentional point of the article appears to be that, if one income earner loses his job, he should not embark on a money-spending spree vaguely disguised as a half-assed investment stategy.
3. This family has 4 kids, ages 9 to 4. At a minimum, this suggests that Mom and Dad's favorite hobby is essentially free. Let me ask this question: WHAT THE FUCK IS UP WITH THAT? Most of the intelligent people I know have had one kid, and said "Wow, this is so much harder than we anticipated. Let's wait at least a few years before having another, if we have another at all." The Schuetts appear to have been under the impression that having babies would soon be illegal, thus they should squeeze out as many as possible in the years they had left. If they're really that hard up, they should sell the youngest daughter. 4-year-old white girls fetch a pretty price on the black market, and it's hard to believe either parent could be all that attached to her. After all, in the scramble to spend time with 4 kids under the age of 10, how many minutes of quality alone-time do you think they've had with her? I'm betting less than 100 hours.
Bottom line: this family falls into the group of people whom I believe it should be legal to hunt for sport. Other members include people who own more than 2 pieces of Abercrombie clothing, men not involved in competitive swimming who own Speedo banana hamocks, and poor people who vote Republican. Darwin's theory needs to be respected, and these people need to be eliminated from the gene pool, lest their genes be passed on. (GPA points out that the parents' genes have already been passed on. But people who carefully read my post will notice that I said the ENTIRE family should be eligible to be hunted, thus solving this problem.)