This video cracks my shit up.
Brain damage is so rad, dude.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Monday, August 20, 2007
This news article sucks.
How does this pass as a 'news article?' Don't they know the rules? 'Pics or it didn't happen.'
If we don't get to see pictures of a bear chomping down on some drunks, the internet is of very little use to me. Google Image Search only brings up some random guro...
If we don't get to see pictures of a bear chomping down on some drunks, the internet is of very little use to me. Google Image Search only brings up some random guro...
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Sea of Red
Since I moved back to Nebraska from Seattle, I have acclimatized to the attitude I get from non-Nebraskans about the state where I reside. I'm a big boy, so I can handle the crap, but at times I feel obliged to give back. This is one of those times.
No matter where you are in the world, you will not find more loyal, intense or crazed football fans than in Nebraska. There exist no greater fans in all of college sports than Nebraska fans. Do you want proof? Check out this article from the Kansas City star about the upcoming Nebraska at Missouri football game in October.
It's one thing for a team to sell out 282 consecuctive home games when their stadium seats 80,000 people. Nebraska has done this year after year. On game day, Memorial Stadium is larger than every other city in Nebraska except Omaha and Lincoln. It's larger than any city in the entire state of Wyoming. Love the Huskers or hate the Huskers, that's pretty damned impressive. People can say it's because we have nothing better to do out here, but I will remind you that as long as you have a mom and a sister, I will have something to do.
What's more impressive, and what the above cited article refers to specifically, is the experience that many teams have had when Nebraska comes to town. Notre Dame in 2000. USC in 2006. Major teams with giant fan bases and home games against Nebraska who are nearly outnumbered in their home stadiums! No other team can pull this sort of thing off. It makes me proud that our team forces opposing fans to take drastic steps to prevent us from turning their home stadium into a Nebraska annex. That is top shelf.
No matter where you are in the world, you will not find more loyal, intense or crazed football fans than in Nebraska. There exist no greater fans in all of college sports than Nebraska fans. Do you want proof? Check out this article from the Kansas City star about the upcoming Nebraska at Missouri football game in October.
It's one thing for a team to sell out 282 consecuctive home games when their stadium seats 80,000 people. Nebraska has done this year after year. On game day, Memorial Stadium is larger than every other city in Nebraska except Omaha and Lincoln. It's larger than any city in the entire state of Wyoming. Love the Huskers or hate the Huskers, that's pretty damned impressive. People can say it's because we have nothing better to do out here, but I will remind you that as long as you have a mom and a sister, I will have something to do.
What's more impressive, and what the above cited article refers to specifically, is the experience that many teams have had when Nebraska comes to town. Notre Dame in 2000. USC in 2006. Major teams with giant fan bases and home games against Nebraska who are nearly outnumbered in their home stadiums! No other team can pull this sort of thing off. It makes me proud that our team forces opposing fans to take drastic steps to prevent us from turning their home stadium into a Nebraska annex. That is top shelf.
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
Monday, August 06, 2007
Fair Doesn't Mean Equal Doesn't Mean Identical
My favorite metasite, Fark.com, served me this little article today. For those of you too lazy to actually click over, let me sum it up for you. A single dad writes in to an advice column to state that his single, 30 year old female neighbor often sunbathes topless, although face down. Not a problem, except dad's 14 year old twin boys play baseball in their backyard and occasionally hit a foul ball into her backyard, and when they go to retrieve it, they see her naked back, and maybe some side-boob action. Plus, one time, the woman asked one of the kids to rub some lotion on her back. Dad asks, do I need to put a stop to this? Female advice columnist says absolutely.
The comments from Fark readers contain much of what you'd expect. However, one argument was launched there which bears some analysis. A Farker, defending the advice columnist, said "If this was a 14 year old girl and a 30 year old man, no one would think this was okay. Ergo, it's not okay, our gender biases are just getting in the way of seeing the truth."
I encounter this kind of argument all the time, and the biggest problem is it has a thick patina of credibility. A high truthiness quotient, if you will. The argument is a total sham, and I want to equip all of you with the tools to shove this down the throat of the next person who launches this BS on you.
The whole argument proceeds from the false premise that, in order to treat 2 people fairly, we must treat them identically, i.e., in the case above, because we would condemn lotion rubbing between a 30 year old man and a 14 year old girl, we must/should also condemn lotion rubbing between a 30 year old woman and a 14 year old boy. This false premise ignores the fact that there are almost always logical reasons why you would treat different people differently. For example, assume you run a food shelf and, in an effort to be "fair," your rules are that each person who comes into the store gets 2 cups of rice and beans each day. Single guys and gals will do just fine under this rule, but people with families are now screwed, unless you parade the whole family in. The better rule would be 2 cups of rice and beans per day per household member.
Perennial presidential candidate loser Steve Forbes was best known for his Flat Tax proposal, which also proceeded from this same premise. His idea to tax everyone at the same rate presumed that doing so was the only way to be fair. The problem, of course, is that when you make $20,000, giving 20% of it back to the government leaves you with $16,000, which is not much to live on. When you make $200,000, it leaves you with $160,000, which is more than enough. Even though the process is equal, the results are unfair.
This carries forward into the realm of employment. All employees have strengths and weaknesses. A good boss finds ways to assign work that plays to his or her employees' strengths, so that in the end, everyone is a more-or-less equal contributor (this is the GOAL, mind you, not how it necessarily turns out, because some people are slacker assholes). In assigning different work to different employees, the boss is not (hopefully) playing favorites, but rather tailoring the work done by each employee to that employee's strengths.
So, the next time someone whips out this "treating everyone the same is the only way to be fair" BS, wallop them a good one. Dumbasses need to be scared away from their weak rhetorical tools.
The comments from Fark readers contain much of what you'd expect. However, one argument was launched there which bears some analysis. A Farker, defending the advice columnist, said "If this was a 14 year old girl and a 30 year old man, no one would think this was okay. Ergo, it's not okay, our gender biases are just getting in the way of seeing the truth."
I encounter this kind of argument all the time, and the biggest problem is it has a thick patina of credibility. A high truthiness quotient, if you will. The argument is a total sham, and I want to equip all of you with the tools to shove this down the throat of the next person who launches this BS on you.
The whole argument proceeds from the false premise that, in order to treat 2 people fairly, we must treat them identically, i.e., in the case above, because we would condemn lotion rubbing between a 30 year old man and a 14 year old girl, we must/should also condemn lotion rubbing between a 30 year old woman and a 14 year old boy. This false premise ignores the fact that there are almost always logical reasons why you would treat different people differently. For example, assume you run a food shelf and, in an effort to be "fair," your rules are that each person who comes into the store gets 2 cups of rice and beans each day. Single guys and gals will do just fine under this rule, but people with families are now screwed, unless you parade the whole family in. The better rule would be 2 cups of rice and beans per day per household member.
Perennial presidential candidate loser Steve Forbes was best known for his Flat Tax proposal, which also proceeded from this same premise. His idea to tax everyone at the same rate presumed that doing so was the only way to be fair. The problem, of course, is that when you make $20,000, giving 20% of it back to the government leaves you with $16,000, which is not much to live on. When you make $200,000, it leaves you with $160,000, which is more than enough. Even though the process is equal, the results are unfair.
This carries forward into the realm of employment. All employees have strengths and weaknesses. A good boss finds ways to assign work that plays to his or her employees' strengths, so that in the end, everyone is a more-or-less equal contributor (this is the GOAL, mind you, not how it necessarily turns out, because some people are slacker assholes). In assigning different work to different employees, the boss is not (hopefully) playing favorites, but rather tailoring the work done by each employee to that employee's strengths.
So, the next time someone whips out this "treating everyone the same is the only way to be fair" BS, wallop them a good one. Dumbasses need to be scared away from their weak rhetorical tools.
Thursday, August 02, 2007
R Kelly trial set to begin in mid-September
I'm sure that CowboyLaw will have an educated opinion on the R. Kelly trial that starts next month, so I thought I'd go the other direction:
R. Kelly - Piss On You (Remix)
"Yeah. 40 oz. of malt liquor make me want to tell you somethin'.
Rollin round, sittin on dubs.
Countin the urs,
Was high on shrubs.
Coolin in my Escalade.
Man I'm paid, I got it made!
Take me to your special place.
Close your eyes,
Show me your face.
I'm gonna piss on it.
Haters wanna hate,
Lovers wanna love.
I don't even want none of the above.
I want to piss on you.
Yes I do. I'll piss on you;
I'll pee on you.
Now your body, your body
Is a Porta-Potty.
And my pee I'd kick;
Like it know's karate. (knows karate)
And you'll never feel quite the same
Once u take a whiff of my Hershey stains.
I want to poop on u too.
I want to pee in your food.
Only thing that make my life complete
Is when I turn your face into a toilet seat.
I'm gonna piss on you.
Haters wanna hate,
Lovers wanna love.
I don't even want none of the above.
I want to piss on you.
Yes I do. I'll piss on you;
I'll pee on you.
Before we start, I'm gonna fart.
I'm gonna fart on you."
R. Kelly - Piss On You (Remix)
"Yeah. 40 oz. of malt liquor make me want to tell you somethin'.
Rollin round, sittin on dubs.
Countin the urs,
Was high on shrubs.
Coolin in my Escalade.
Man I'm paid, I got it made!
Take me to your special place.
Close your eyes,
Show me your face.
I'm gonna piss on it.
Haters wanna hate,
Lovers wanna love.
I don't even want none of the above.
I want to piss on you.
Yes I do. I'll piss on you;
I'll pee on you.
Now your body, your body
Is a Porta-Potty.
And my pee I'd kick;
Like it know's karate. (knows karate)
And you'll never feel quite the same
Once u take a whiff of my Hershey stains.
I want to poop on u too.
I want to pee in your food.
Only thing that make my life complete
Is when I turn your face into a toilet seat.
I'm gonna piss on you.
Haters wanna hate,
Lovers wanna love.
I don't even want none of the above.
I want to piss on you.
Yes I do. I'll piss on you;
I'll pee on you.
Before we start, I'm gonna fart.
I'm gonna fart on you."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)