Man, so many people writing stuff online are morons

Ok, ok... I'll wait while you laugh at the irony of the title.

Now that that's out of the way, I read this article today, and a linked article:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/29/bush.war.funding/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dina-rasor/50-percent-annual-growth_b_74728.html

Note the comments for the second article... I'll paraphrase:
- "Impeach Bush"
- "Bush is a child saying triple my allowance"
- "Bush is backmailing Congress"

Ok, let me say this slowly, so you helmet-wearing retards have a chance of understanding: You Are Morons. Seriously, just don't talk or write anything again, and please, for the love of Hillary, don't reproduce.

Here's a quick recap of how our government works, in case you missed the evolutionary step of walking on two legs (among many, many others):
- Congress (the people you currently like) specify funding for various departments of the government, don't dictate foreign policy, and don't dictate how each department spends its allocated budget
- The Executive (Bush, the anti-Christ to you people) dictates foreign policy, runs the military, and does not dictate the budget allocated to various departments

Now, what Congress is currently trying to do is dictate foreign policy, which is unconstitutional. The president is telling the American people that the result of decreased funding to the military will result in base closures, cutbacks, and other necessary measures to adjust to a change in funding level for that department, which is perfectly reasonable and 100% predictable from Congress' actions. If anything, the leaders of Congress should be impeached, for trying to defy the law and the Constitution by imposing foreign policy. And the morons who post the exact opposite extremist rhetoric due to their blind, zealous dedication to the anti-Bush religion should have their mouths stapled shut and their hands lopped off, for the betterment of the country and the gene pool.

That's my opinion.

HD radio is dumb

Not sure how it is in other parts of the country, but in LA, there are lots of ads on the radio now for HD radio. It's the next cool thing... Listen to the hidden stations and be cool... Get crystal clear audio... Hear new channels...

Hey, HD radio people: fail.

Look, HDTV makes a lot of sense. Analog TV is not near a perfect visual resolution (which would be where pixels are too small for eyes to distinguish), and HDTV is a noticeable improvement. But... my radio is already pretty clear. It's not like you need a lot of bandwidth to represent sound very accurately; it's why MP3 audio files are an order of magnitude smaller than MPx/DIVX video files.

So what do I get if I buy a HD radio receiver? Commercial free radio? Nope. Clearer audio? Not that I'll be able to tell. Better reception? Doubt it. DRM on the radio broadcasts? Possibly. Different/new/interesting content? Nope. So, um... why would I buy this?

Yeah, fail.

F government bailouts

The one thing the government shouldn't do after a risky venture that you don't want repeated goes belly-up is bail out the people who created the bubble and got you into the entire mess in the first place. The one g-damn thing which is the most important not to f up.

Yeah, they are that momentously stupid.

I'm beginning to agree with the calls to abolish the Fed. Either that, or nominate them to replace Al'Queda as the #1 threat the continued wellbeing of the United States. AAAAARG.

F the democrats, part 2

So today, the democrats in Congress passed another war funding bill, again trying to attach a dictation of foreign policy as a rider, and again facing another certain veto from the while house. I'm not sure who they are trying to help, other than the industry which produces the paper the bill is undoubtedly written on (many times) before it is inevitably thrown away.

I'm torn about what to think. On the one hand, the democrats are retarded children, and should be slapped silly for their blatant repeated end-run around the Constitution attempts which accomplish nothing but wasting everyone's time and money, not to mention putting our military people in danger, which is deplorable. On the other hand, by steadfast refusing to do any other work or anything other than temper tantrum wastes of time, they are not passing other legislation which would undoubtedly injure the country more.

So I guess the take-home is that as stupid, brainless, and retarded as passing the same, unconstitutional, waste of time legislation is, be glad the democrats appear content to bash their retarded helmet-wearing heads into that wall over and over and over again, because at least their not running around with their diapers off crapping all over the rest of the metaphorical room. Oh, and F the democrats.

Seriously, F the democrats

Ok, everybody knows social security is running out of money. Everybody knows it's a Ponzi scheme, and everybody knows something drastic is going to happen to it in the next 40 years. It was a bad idea when it was created, it's a bad idea now, and it will be an even worse idea when it collapses, which is pretty much inevitable at this point.

So here comes Obama's "solution": let's take more money from the "rich" people in the name of increasing funding for social security, and then spend it on other stuff like we always do (last part implied by past actions). WHAT?!? Are you an f-ing moron? I fail to see how that even pretends to be a solution, or anyone outside of a clinical retard would think that's a good idea.

The greatest lasting good a philanthropist could donate to this country (or any other organization) would be an accurate model which correlates key decisions to long-term effects. That way whatever society eventually rises from the ruins of disasters created by moronic decisions can look back and say "for all their supposed good intentions, these decisions destroyed their organization, let's not repeat their horrendous mistakes." If there must be idiots like Obama in the world, and our society has enough bottom-feeding morons that he can be representative of a large chunk of our people, then I just hope the next dominant world power can learn from our incompetence, and just maybe elevate the human race above primate-level thinking ability. It's a dream...

Ironic quote of the... year?

"Nobody is above the law."
- Pakistan's Musharraf
(http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/11/11/asia/pakistan.php)

This after declaring marshal law, jailing protesters, abolishing the country's Constitution and having his aids draft a new one, removing the Supreme Court and installing a puppet court, and declaring his actions constitutional (in opposition to the removed Supreme Court's view). Bravo, giggles all around.

Note: This quote will also be nominated for the "Blatant Bald-Faced Lie of the Year" award, but faces still competition from the Iranian president's "these nuclear reactors are only for generating power", US Fed chairman Bernanke's "we foster a strong dollar", and the National Association of Realtors "this is a great time to buy a house", among others.

Movie sales down

This is kinda a PSA for the movie industry, in addition to a normal rant. Over the last couple of years, gross movie revenue has been down from the years before, and I guess some people are confused as to why that is the case. So, for anyone who doesn't know, consider this free information.

Movie ticket sales are down because the movie going experience has become terrible. Ticket prices have increased, concessions are ridiculously overpriced, and to add insult to injury, theaters are showing commercials before movies. You literally have to show up 30 minutes in advance of you movie, to see 30 minutes of commercials, followed by 20 minutes of trailers, followed by the actual movie. And that's for a movie which is not hot!

Get a clue, people. I am your target audience, and I've basically stopped going to movies because the experience is so bad. Here's what you need to do to get me back in the theater:
- Allow people to bring in food/drink (make the concession prices have to be competitive)
- Only show commercials if the tickets were free; if I paid to see a movie, I don't want to see that crap. That includes the interstitials promoting the theater chains.

That concludes this episode of get an f-ing clue. Stay tuned next time, when we talk about how adding useless crap to a DVD does not justify charging $20+ for something which would be basically free for you to produce without the extra crap, and how people would hate you industry a lot less if prices were less stupidly exorbitant.

Sympathy's gone

So a week ago, I thought the WGA's position was reasonable, the producers were the more greedy of the two groups (by a small margin), and I was sympathetic to their cause. Then today, they blocked the street to my work. So not only am I paying for all the police to stand around and direct traffic to a halt trying to get by their stupid group, but I have to drive through the traffic their creating trying to find a way to my job, which is totally unrelated to the entertainment industry.

Sympathy's gone; I hope the producers hold out forever, and I hope all the WGA people get fired and starve. Self-centered a-holes.

Email address entry confirmation

WFT is up with all these sites requiring people to copy/paste their email address while filling out their stupid "let's play hide the opt-out button" membership forms? I mean, I get that you want to make sure you have the right address to add to your "important marketing announcements" lists. But you can see email addresses fields; I'll know if I mis-typed it. Moreover, it's long, so I'm not going to actually type it twice.

So please, inform me: what benefit do you get from forcing me to copy/paste my email address when filling in your stupid form?

WGA strike opinion

Since everyone else has an opinion, here's mine:

It's utter BS that producers can't negotiate residuals for new media because the formats are too new and volatile. Saying that makes you look stupid and/or greedy (which you undoubtedly are).

Telling the producers that doubling your payment for DVD residuals was a hard and fast requirement of your bargaining position, and sticking to it until a day before the contract ended was moronic, WGA. They have every right to say you didn't negotiate in good faith, because you didn't.

I propose someone comes up with a fixed % value of profits (first runs and residuals) which will go to writers, probably per show format type, probably between 2% and 5%. Then write a contract where the writers get that %, no matter in what format the show is shown or distributed. Then negotiate the %.

That's my opinion.

Investing quandry

So say you were convinced that your currency was going to be devalued by some large amount every year for the foreseeable future; say 10% real inflation (or more) per year. Say you didn't want to move out of the country, but you wanted to make as much money as possible in investments. Furthermore, say you thought housing was going to tank for the next few years, domestic stocks were going to suffer, and you payed roughly 50% tax on gains.

What do you invest in? Just a hypothetical...

Taxes and Inflation

Been thinking about this for a while...

There needs to be a real measure of inflation, other than the BS CPI, which is basically made-up by the government. Once we have a real inflation index, the tax brackets should be automatically adjusted for inflation, and your income should be reduced by the inflated value of your net assets.

So, for example, say I have $100,000 in net assets, and there's 10% real inflation in a tax year. That would mean that the first $10,000 in income I make is tax-free (doesn't count toward graduated tax, effectively "below the scale"), because that's the effective natural increase in the dollar value of my net assets due to real inflation. The effect of this would be that if I'm only keeping pace with inflation (not gaining or losing any real net assets), I would not pay any taxes.

Contrast to the current system, where inflation is great for the government, and absolutely screws people who try to save money. To exemplify the point, say real inflation was 50% one year. If I have $100,000 in cash, I have to make $50,000 on it to keep up with inflation. But wait... I have a 33% tax rate, so I actually need to make $75,000 to end up with $50,000, just to keep up. But there's no way to avoid having to make 50% more return than inflation just to break even in net value, because you're taxed on your dollar gains, not your actual gains. You're much better off spending every penny you get; at least your salary will scale roughly with real inflation. No wonder nobody in the US saves any money, and everyone is in debt up to their eyeballs: the government promotes it.

Issues like this make me wish that not all the politicians running the country were actively screwing the people.

Tecate lite commercials

If I ever get really rich, I'm going to start a public interest group to take out advertising spots to advocate how stupid other ads are, and/or provide more information after ads which are distortive, misleading, or just dumb.

Take, for example, Tecate Lite's recent ads, where the woman complains about beer bottles, and the man defends them as not beer, but rather cervesa. Now in case you don't know, cervesa is Spanish for beer. So either the guy doesn't know Spanish (he disproves this later), or he's a moron.

But moreover, the company making the spot is telling the listeners that they are morons, because you're expected to buy into this argument and realize the because they are using the Spanish word for beer, the product is better than normal beer, and sexy, and cool. No matter what you think about various beer brands (including Tecate you morons), using a different language does not change the nature of the product, nor does it make you cool for implying that your target audience is stupid enough to buy into it.

My hypothetical public service company would take out a follow-up spot, and clarify that the company is saying that people who buy this product are morons, and if you don't understand why, then by all means go ahead and buy it. And while you're at it, drink yourself to a Darwin award for the good of our species.

Bush's AG nominee

Something just has to be said, and this blog seems as good of place as any. Normally, I've been pretty anti-democrat thinking recently, with their constant stream of "whaa, whaa, Iraq bad, whaa" bs and their constant "spend more" "solutions" to every ill facing America. But, in this case, it's the Republican's who are looking retarded.

Normally, I'd be chiding Congress for wasting time blocking nominations, wasting time passing "statement" legislation, wasting time loading up bills with pork barrel spending, wasting time grandstanding, and generally just being asses. Not that they have stopped doing any of those things (see their approval rating), but for the AG hearings, surprisingly, they have a good point. The AD nominee should be able to state, clearly, for the record, if certain practices legally constitute torture or not; period, full stop.

Sure, if you say it is torture, Congress is going to demand you (as AG) put an end to it (which you should do with this answer), and/or investigate the Executive (which you should refuse to do, unless it continues in your tenure). Sure, if you say it's not, the Democrats are going to paint you as a torture supporter who's catering to Bush's interpretation of the laws, and may not support you. Yes, it's a lose/lose proposition to answer it clearly. But... THAT'S YOUR GD JOB! Someone who can't clearly answer that, or any other clearly explained legal question, has no business being the Attorney General for the United States. The job where you dodge all the questions with malleable answers is in the press secretary area.

I hate to say it, but Congress, in the case, is in the right. Send this guy to the press room, and make Bush produce someone with the testicles (actual or effective, his choice).