Sunday, December 31, 2006

You're welcome, Chiefs fans!

Chiefs fans, I'm sure you're pretty happy tonight. Because of the Broncos loss to the 49ers, your team is now in the playoffs. And let me be the first to say 'Congratulations.'

Of course, we're just a week away from both of our teams being out of the playoffs, and this will all be a moot point, but for seven days, party it up!

I'm actually glad the Donks choked. I didn't want to watch Cutler get taken apart (or carted off on a stretcher?) against a better team next weekend. Any of the other teams in there are better than the Broncos, and it would've been like when we played the Colts a few years ago (when Plummer threw that INT with his left hand). Our defense just didn't perform when it mattered.

To be perfectly honest, I'll be rooting for the Chiefs to pull off some upsets and go all the way. Cuz right now, our little rivalry on this page is pretty one-sided. If they won it all, then they would also have two world championships, and then Cowboylaw would have something else to brag about besides QB ratings.

Happy New Year!

Wednesday, December 27, 2006

To whomever just stole my MP3 player:

Congratulations! You are the new owner of an almost three-year-old Creative Zen Touch 40GB MP3 player! You saw where I kept it in my backpack, and when I went to lunch today, you made a quick 'smash and grab.' You must've been in a real hurry, since there were also cough drops in that pocket, and a couple of them were strewn out on the floor of my cubicle.

You also must not be very bright. Stealing this?
Just look at that monochrome screen! Not even the Blue Man Group would like it. It couldn't show pictures or video if it tried! And the brand name -- 'Creative'. Doesn't that just scream out 'resale value'? Without the software or the charging cable, you'll be lucky if you get 20 bucks for it at a pawn shop.

You also left a $150 pair of noise-cancelling headphones in the bag, and a $140 pair of Bose TriPort headphones sitting on the desk, right above the bag. Either of those would fetch you more resale value than a no-video-playing MP3 player with no software or charging cable. And you won't want to keep it, because once you see the kinds of music and the names of the bands on it, you'll think Lucifer himself cursed it.

I've had things stolen from me before (and honestly, who hasn't?), but this burns me most of all because I didn't have the music on it backed up on my computer at home. I'd guess that I spent about 40 hours ripping and transferring over 1,000 CDs onto it. Unlike an Ipod, you don't have to keep them on your hard drive, and I liked that about this MP3 player. So, to whomever stole it, can you at least bring it back to me for a day, so I can copy all of my music over to my computer? Oh, and while you're at it, can you also DIE IN A FIRE?

So, I'm in the market for a new MP3 player. I'm skeptical about the Zune, as it's still first-generation, and I'd like at least 40GB, but I won't go with an Ipod, because you can't rip CDs in WMV format (and WMV takes up about half the space of regular MP3s). Anyone have any recommendations?

Friday, December 22, 2006

Female Teachers: Make Your Students Folkheros

It seems like we've gone down this road before, but repeated searches of the Blog seemed to suggest this is uncharted territory. So, here we go.

I want to make a simple statement: as far as I'm concerned, there is absolutely nothing wrong with female teachers having sex with their male students, provided that the student is at least 15 and the age difference between them is no more than 20 years. Now, let's talk about why I'm right.

First, as I think we are all becoming aware, this is way more common than most people want to admit. You can check out this link for a Who's Who Among Slutty Female Teachers. As you review the list, you will note one thing: a number of these teachers are relatively hot. Where were all the hot, 20-something female teachers who wanted to screw teenage boys back when I was going to HS? You will also note that a number of these teachers got in trouble simply for performing oral sex. Let me make something quite clear: the only thing a hot female teacher who gives a BJ to one of her students deserves is a medal. Not jail time. How can we call ourselves a first-world nation when we are locking up hot women who's only crime was to fellate a grateful teenager?

People who argue against this sort of thing generally push two relatively lame arguments. I will address each in turn.

1. Male teachers who have sex with their female students go to prison, so we need to be fair and do the same to female teachers.

Now, I will admit that I think that male teachers who sex up their female (or male) students should indeed go to the pokey. But the reason is more complicated than you may think. All the men reading this who have reached a certain age and are comfortable with themselves should have realized by now that if they were dropped back in HS, they could get more ass than a bike seat. Teenagers are incredibly clumsy, uncomfortable, unsure, anxious idiots. If I could keep my charming wit and add Lord Bling's mediocre good looks, I could bag absolutely anyone I went to HS with. That's the nature of the game. It'd be like letting the Jacksonville Jaguars play against a prep high shool team. It really doesn't matter that the Jags aren't that good, they're good enough and they're up against an opponent who simply isn't equipped to deal with them. And that's why teenage girls are off-limits to older men: we really are capable of charming their cute little panties off and then having our disgusting way with them. In comparison, there is little that any teenage boy wants more than to have someone touch his quivering dong. So, I'm not worried about some smooth-talking woman teacher charming a guy's pants off, because no charm needs to be involved. Any woman who is not hag-like can go up to any teenage guy, look him square in the eye, and say "Let's go back to my place and fuck for a few days," and the guy will go into a zombie-like trance and follow her home.

The basic problem with this argument is that it assumes that we need to treat men and women identically. We don't; we need only treat them fairly. Indeed, the law has always said that it is fair to draw distinctions between men and women so long as those distinctions are based on legitimate biological differences and not mere stereotypes. For example, every men's restroom has a urinal. No women's restrooms have urinals. We are not treating the sexes identically, but we are treating each sex fairly. Same thing here. There is a fundamental biological difference between teenage boys and teenage girls: teenage boys will willingly have sex with anything that walks upright. We need to recognize this difference, and legislate accordingly.

2. Teenage boys lack the maturity to give meaningful consent to sex.

This argument lies at the heart of the problem, because the idea behind age of consent laws is that, until a certain age, people lack the capacity to give informed consent to have sex. The problem is that anyone who thinks a 15-year-old guy lacks the capacity to give informed conset to have sex is, no pun intended, fucking nuts. 15-year-old guys think about sex 95% of their waking lives. I think that the proper age of consent for men should be 15. From 15 on, rock on.

Frankly, I think that's also about the right age for consent for women. But, to some people, that's going to seem low. So, let's use 16. At 16, we as a society have determined that a woman is sufficiently mature to slide behind the wheel of her dad's Lincoln Navigator, blow down the freeway going 90, penetrate a family driving a Toyota Prius, and kill 4 people. You can't be old enough to endanger my life and yet to young to consent to bumping uglies. Thus, I suggest this slogan: "If she's old enough to kill, she's old enough to thrill." I fully realize that several other slogans already exist on this topic, many of which set the trigger date much younger. It is because of the effectiveness of these slogans that I think we need one of our own for this initiative.

Finally, everyone needs to recognize one simple truth: a teenage guy who nails a hot (or even average-looking) teacher is going to be remembered for years as a legend in his school. Band geeks will make up songs about him. He will be worshipped by half the male population of the school. Is this guy really the victim of a crime? A crime whose punishment, frequently, is several years in prison? I think not.

So, here's to you Ms. Hot Teacher Who Nails Teenage Boys. You're doing God's work.

Oh, and Merry Christmas!

Thursday, December 21, 2006

Children will believe anything you tell them

Santa likes Sailor Jerry Rum with his Coke.

Christmas is a magical time of year. Mostly because it provides evidence that children are incredibly guillable. Maybe it's because we don't teach them enough science in school. Overall, people under the age of 25 are very poor consumers of information. Do they ask for evidence to support the existance of Santa Claus? Hell no. Do they question how a fatass can go down a chimney when squirrels die attempting such ridiculous feats? Nope.

One of the things that encourages childrens' belief in implausable things is our very own government. NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) actually has a website, where kids can track Santa Claus and his journey around the world, using the latest in military surveillance technology. Despite being horrible at developing appropriate acronyms, NORAD represents the "eye in the sky" for our military and our children.

Adults, on the other hand, know better than to simply believe something because NORAD has satelite imagery that proves its existance. Grown-up Americans would never, say, invade a country, simply because NORAD had satelite intelligence that was interpreted by people that wanted to invade said country that showed weapons of mass destruction. The American people require evidence prior to getting behind such a dangerous and expensive venture. And they would surely have a plan and an exit strategy. Absolutely.

Next time you're amazed by the crazy shit that kids will believe, take a good look around. They learned it by watching you.

Wednesday, December 20, 2006


Imagine if a president won an election with 95 percent of the popular vote. Now THAT would be some 'political capital' to spend in Washington. I mean, talk about a majority:


So, can we stop spending 'hundreds of millions of dollars' for the other five percent? No amount of money spent on abstinence 'education' is going to change people's hormones. Bible-thumper: 'Hey there little Timmy, God loves you.' Timmy: 'Yeah, but not as much as I love poon.'

Any hour now, we're going to see Tony Snow at the White House podium, answering a question about this poll, saying, "Well, a portion of those surveyed were homosexual, and since we won't let them get married, that inflated the results."

No wonder the terrorists 'hate our freedom.' They get their dicks cut off for just thinking about pre-marital sex, and we're running around like Caligula on a spring break bender.

Tuesday, December 19, 2006

Monday, December 18, 2006

Expense Reports

Those of you who watch regularly probably saw this already, but it was too good not to post here as well.

The sort of traveling that I often do for work is not quite on the same level as travel writers or foreign correspondants. Some of the items listed on the expense reports are quality. As a result, I'm turning this article in with my next expense report, so they don't complain about my $50 non-itemized receipt to a place called Bob's Beer Imporium (where I only ate dinner and had Coke to drink).

An example of why Iraq is a Clusterfuck

I read something this morning that completely encapsulates why we should have never invaded Iraq, but did anyway. This article by Cliff May posted on illustrates perfectly how idealism has no place in determining our foreign and military policies. May was actually an advisor to the Iraq Study Group (ISG), the committee who recently reported that things in Iraq are a giant mess, which will not be easy to fix.

May's thesis is essentially that the ISG got it wrong in their report. As part of what he describes as a minority on the committee, he feels that his views are more reflective of what the American people feel, and that the ISG report reflects the opinions of the "political class" and that "Americans disagree. Gallup polls have consistently found no less than 60 percent of us believe the U.S. has not been defeated and can still win." Here is actual recent poll data on Iraq from a number of national polls. I'll let you analyze the data to see if you agree with his conclusions.

May's view is that we can still "win" in Iraq. Here's how he proposes that we do this (with some additional commentary from me):

1) Stabilize Baghdad. Wow. Why hasn't the military been trying to do this? Oh wait, they have been. Putting more troops or different commanders, as May suggests, will just pull out the commanders who probably actually understand Baghdad and make for a more "target-rich environment" for the insurgents.

2)We are at war with al-Qaeda in Iraq, so we can't leave or WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!! I take exception to this comment, because the only reason al-Qaeda is in Iraq in the first place is because we tossed out a brutal dictatorship and gave them an opportunity. There was no link between Saddam and al-Qaeda, and saying it 1000 doesn't make it so.

3)Hunt down insurgents. Again, I think this has been occurring. May's strategy seems to be stating the obvious, and pretending that it's not current policy. While we're on this, I have an idea too. I think we should print money to exchange for goods and services. Isn't that a radical idea?

4) Deal with Syria and Iran. This is actually a good idea. The problem is that May offers contradicting vague strategies on how exactly we should do this. On one hand he says that we should "make sure that they know that we can and will hurt them" and then finishes by saying "once they understand we have the power and the will to take them on, sitting down to talk may make sense". Let's call it diplomacy by carpet bombing.

5) Accelerate training of Iraqi forces. He must not have read about how the Bush Administration has been pushing this for over 2 years now. We'll stand down when they can stand up ring a bell? As we've discovered through our experience in Iraq, simply training these people doesn't mean they won't be threatened, killed, or rounded up and turned to the dark side by the insurgency.

6) Be a peace broker between Shiites and Sunnis. Despite not saying exactly how we can manage to negotiate peace between two groups that have been fighting for 2000 years, May feels that this is the key to peace in Iraq. No kidding. It's like saying we'd only have peace if they'd just stop fighting.

Needless to say, May will not be getting Nobel Peace Prize for his progressive suggestions regarding our strategy in Iraq. I'm relieved that the ISG didn't listen to his advice, because frankly, it's just the status quo, which is the entire reason that the ISG was formed in the first place. The strategy outlined by May would be fantastic if it were even the least bit realistic. His idealism and partisanship have blinded him to the reality that Iraq is not going to be a peaceful place anytime soon, regardless of what we decide to do.

Those of you who read this regularly know that despite my opposition to our involvement in Iraq, I don't feel that we should pull out either. But, that does not mean that we should continue to use the same antiquated framework of "victory" as a measuring stick for when we get out of there. There is no realistic condition by which we can say we've won this war.

Sunday, December 17, 2006

Poor Omahans (Omahaites? Omahonians? Who Cares?)

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.)

Friday, December 15, 2006

Issues with the new beta

Well folks, you may have not noticed much different on this site, but has decided to merge with Google, and they are now doing some sort of beta test for the site. However, my employer uses an internet watchdog program called 'Websense,' and this program does not like the new software. While at work, I can get to this site, but I can't post anything on it, nor can I read or post comments. That is going to be a huge problem for me, because all but maybe three of my posts in the past year or so have been written while I was at work, either during downtime or lunch breaks. I don't go on the computer at home very often. So as it stands, you may not be seeing much of me anymore. Maybe that's a good thing for everyone?

Wednesday, December 13, 2006

Deja Vu?

Not a single month goes by these days without another leader of a giant Evangelical Christian church resigning in the wake of revelations regarding homosexual behavior. The above cited article also states:

Barnes was confronted by an associate pastor of the church who received an anonymous phone call from a person who heard someone was threatening to go public with the names of Barnes and other evangelical leaders who engaged in homosexual behavior, Ames said.

For those of you who missed the important part (other evangelical leaders), it would appear that Paul Barnes is not the only gay leader of an evangelical church. I know, very shocking, like finding out that Clay Aiken was gay. Who would have guessed that?

The most hypocritical part of the entire thing, as I pointed out in my previous post on this issue, is that the CHRISTIANS who are members of this church are kicking their gay leaders to the curb. Forgiveness? That's SO New Testament.

The ultimate irony is that the church elders, who probably touch kids in the naughty place each weekend, are kicking these dudes out for being sinners. We are all sinners (some of us just don't give a shit about it). The entire point of joining a church is that God will only forgive you for your sins if you go to a building and sit for an hour every Sunday and leave some money behind, if you follow tht sort of thinking that is the basis of the SUPER MEGA CHURCH. Jesus loves giant churches that make millions of dollars a year.

If these churches are kicking these fellers out for sinning, what's the point of going to church, if they're just going to kick you out for the entire reason you're supposed to be there in the first place?

Also, while the church elders might not be gay, I'm sure they are still commiting other sins, like say maybe hating gay people? Should they be kicked out of their church to for being hateful towards gays? If they did that, would there be anyone left to pay for the giant church and the horrible christian rock band that plays during the service?

Friday, December 08, 2006

Benny Hinn is my hero.

I've flipped through channels before, and stopped on this guy multiple times. He is truly amazing. And so is the person who put this video together!

People actually buy into this shit?

Wednesday, December 06, 2006

We're 0-2!

The second annual Weblog Awards Finalists were announced today (click here for the full list), and 'Ryan the Angry Midget and Friends' failed to make a single list once again. Either this was due to a lack of campaigning on our part, or they just don't like our mix of leftist political rants and Donks vs. Cheats debates. Either way, this picture sums up our struggle:

Meanwhile, that blow hole of a site by the self-obsessed, morbidly-obese, Rocky Dennis-lookalike Harry Knowles got nominated for Best Culture Blog. There truly is no justice in this world.

Monday, December 04, 2006

Bowling for Controversy

Michigan fans are up in arms about what they feel is their team getting the shaft by the BCS this weekend. While the arguement that the current bowl system is broken is a valid one, the fact that Michigan fans (or the fans of any team) are trying to justify their team's credentials over another is foolish. If your opinion is that the system is broken, it's pointless to try to create a scenario where your favorite team should be chosen over another. You can't say a system is broken and then use it to try to make an arguement for your team. Logical fallacy.

As of this morning, 90% of respondents to an poll were in favor of a playoff for determining the national champion in college football. It's important to point out that the fact that 90% of people believe this will not make it so. The current system is simple economics. Many people have lots of money invested in the current system of bowl games, and unless you provide them with a guarantee that whatever replacement system is adopted would provide the same financial benefits, it ain't going to change.

Despite this obvious fact, proponents of the current system do not make this arguement in public. They claim that a playoff would add too many games to the season. But, my brother-in-law Ringo has a plan that I think is viable. Probably makes too much sense to even think about implementing it, but here's how it goes -

-Eliminate the extra game that was just added to the season this year, along with the conference championship and the bowl game for a given team, and you have compensated for every game that would be added in a 16 team playoff. And only two teams would be playing 3 extra games. 8 teams would only have one extra game, since they would be eliminated in the first round of said playoff.

I think this makes good sense. You like the bowls? Keep the some of the bowl games to include all the teams that don't make the playoff. Have the same corporations sponsor different games throughout the playoffs. This is not difficult to envision how this could actually result in more money than the current system.

Despite the foolishness of the current system, the people in charge of these decisions are not stupid people. They have probably discussed such a proposition before. The fact is that the current system only works if you have two undefeated teams at the end of each season, which has not happened more often than it has happened since the BCS came to pass.

If you like the current system, please just admit it's because of the money.

Sunday, December 03, 2006

Ryan's More Popular Doppleganger

Goat Porn Amy and I went to a Hal Sparks comedy set on Friday, and I have just one thing to say: Hal looks a hell of a lot like the Midget. This photo illustrates some of the similarities, but really the likeness is spookily close. In fact, it distracted me through much of his set.

That said, his set was decent. Hal is not a comedian by training, and I presume he's venturing into comedy as another outlet for his twin talents of acting and thinking up funny stuff. While many people would view this as the complete comedian toolset, Hal's performance demonstrates why great comedy is as good as it actually is. Hal was good. He was funny. GPA and I laughed a lot, and not just because of the 2-drink minimum. But there were some chinks in the armor (and if you really want a detailed discussion, we can do it in the comments section). That said, he's certainly in the top 33% of comedians I've seen live. And, not to toot my own horn, but that list includes Lewis Black (3 times), Mitch Hedberg (twice, a number not likely to increase), Patton Oswalt, and a ton of lesser-knowns.

Also, they were recording Hal's set that night for a DVD/CD combo, so you can rush out, buy the DVD, and listen to me laughing. I'll tell you which jokes feature me as the guy laughing noticably harder than other people.

Sabrina Matthews opened for Hal, and was fantastic. Depending on your frame of reference, Sabrina looks like either (1) a slightly taller, slightly plumper, slightly butcher Patton Oswalt, or (2) a typical Nebraska farmer's wife. If she comes to your local comedy club, go see her.

Saturday, December 02, 2006

Door to Door Athiests

Special thanks to Brenwah for sending this along. A friendly reminder that the contributors of Ryan the Angry Midget don't care what you believe in. Just don't show up at my house.

I would be interested to see some stats from the Mormon church about how many people they've actually converted going door to door. Something tells me it's about as effective as telemarketing since the Do Not Call list came to pass and they started leaving ambiguous messages to call an 800 number about a very important business matter. Am I the only one getting messages from Jacob Weinstein?

Either way, don't show up at my door step trying to sell your religion and I won't point out how ridiculous it is to belong to a church that was started because of bunch of old white dudes got tired of only being able to have one wife.