Senseless Scribbling of an Idiot #54: Cuckoo for Chicken Nuggets

Give me the chicken nuggets, or else!

What would you do if your child, at two years old, declared that he would not eat anything else ever again except McDonald’s chicken nuggets?  Would you give in to the indulgence or would you roll your eyes and then give your child a plate of broccoli and tell him to get lost?

Most parents would go for the latter, but not the mother of Stacey Irvine.  When she was two years old, Stacey’s mother gave her a box of Chicken McNuggets and ever since then, the girl decided that she would not eat anything else.  Her mother thought there was absolutely nothing wrong with this and allowed the child to eat nothing but Chicken McNuggets for FIFTEEN YEARS.  Stacey Irvine, who is now 17, admits that she eats nuggets morning, noon and night.  While McDonald’s are her favourites, she will occasionally eat store brands.  Sometimes she even gets fries with that.

This is only a quarter of the salt doctors scraped off Stacey's tongue.

Earlier this week, Stacey struggled to breathe and collapsed at work.  She was immediately rushed to the hospital where doctors discovered that she has severe anaemia and inflamed veins on her tongue from the ridiculously high sodium intake from eating nothing but chicken nuggets.  Her body was so depleted of vitamins and nutrients they had to be injected into her.  The doctor warned her if that she stayed on this ridiculous diet she would die sooner rather than later.

After severe nutrient depletion, doctors speculate Stacey will look like this in a week.

Okay, so what is wrong with this whole story?  I am not a parent and sometimes I do not appreciate how difficult it is to bring children up in this world, but I do firmly believe that when you are two years old your parents are the end all-be all.  Two year old children do not have money, nor do they have transportation.  Yes, two year olds throw horrific tantrums and they just love to scream their little heads off, but eventually they get over it.  When Stacey was two years old and begging for a box of chicken nuggets, the mother should have been like, “There aren’t any more.  Deal with it.”  You don’t keep feeding the kid nuggets until they become addicted to it like a crack fiend.

Why do you think this is cute?

Fifteen years later, that is all the girl has eaten.  Stacey claims to have never tasted a fruit or vegetable.  She says she will not eat anything else because everything else is disgusting.  Have you even tried anything else?  If you’ve been shoving chicken nuggets in your craw three times a day for the past fifteen years, I doubt that you have had an opportunity to try anything else.

I am a very finicky eater.  If it smells bad, looks bad or is dubious in origin, I won’t eat it.  I have been known to eat the same thing over and over again, but I can’t imagine eating the same exact thing three times a day for fifteen years—since I was a toddler.  First of all, my parents did not have McDonald’s money like that and secondly, my ass better eat what is put in front of me and like it.  There were plenty of times when I went to bed hungry because whatever my mom had cooked smelled gross, but never, ever did she give in to any of my crybaby tears so I could eat ice cream every meal of the day.

Stacey’s mom is lame because she says she had tried everything, including starvation.  I submit that she indulged her daughter far too long and then when she realized that it was the stupidest decision she ever made, it was way out of control.  The kid got the upper hand and there’s no coming back from that.

How are you 17 years old collapsing from severe nutrient depletion?  That is sad.

Stacey Irvine, this is why you and your mother are losers:

NEWS FLASH: A 20-piece three times a day might kill you.

The Food and Drug Administration recommends 1500-2000 milligrams of sodium per day.  A 10-piece chicken nugget from McDonald’s contains 1140 milligrams.  Eaten three times a day?  That is over 3300 milligrams of sodium fast-tracking its way to high blood pressure and a host of other health problems.

A 10-piece chicken nugget contains 510 calories.  Three times a day?  More than 1500 calories out of a 2000 calorie recommended diet for persons who are at least MODERATELY active.

A 10-piece chicken nugget contains 33 grams of fat.  Three times a day?  She is chomping down on 99 grams of fat which is almost TWICE the recommended allowance of fat, which is 56 grams.

And this is only if she’s eating the 10 piece.  If she is porking down on the 20 piece three times a day, double all numbers and punch yourself in the face.

As soon as it became true addiction, Stacey’s mother should have taken her to a specialist.  She also should have made the girl take some kind of vitamins.  Vitamin supplements should not replace what you find naturally in quality fruits and vegetables, but they help when you know you’re not getting enough.  Then Stacey’s mother should have whooped that ass until she got it into her head:

NO. MORE. CHICKEN. NUGGETS.

Senseless Scribbling of an Idiot #53: You Just Might Be An Idiot

With an IQ of 85, little Katie is a future racist.

In a shocking new study, it has been discovered that people who are racist are actually idiots. According to research, children with low intelligence are more likely to be prejudiced as adults.  Adults with low intelligence have a tendency to espouse socially conservative ideologies.  Conservative values can sometimes lead to prejudice; therefore, all conservative adults with a low IQ are racist.

No, the study did not make a conclusive statement like that, but let’s just put it out there, okay.

Researchers studied children who were born in 1958 and 1970.  The children’s intelligence was assessed at age 1o or 11, and then their intelligence was assessed once more when they were 30 or 33.  In addition, their level of social conservatism and racism were also measured.  To measure social conservatism the subjects were asked how they felt about certain statements such as “Family life suffers if the mother works full time” or “Schools should teach children to obey authority.”  To measure their level of racism, they were asked many questions such as how they felt about working with people of other races.

The study found that children with a less than average IQ had a tendency towards racism.  These people also had a tendency to not have contact with people outside their race.  Socialising outside one’s racial group can be mentally challenging and too difficult for someone with a low IQ.  The less intelligent tend to favour structure and order, something that is highly valued in conservative thought.   Sometimes the complexity of the world is just too difficult to comprehend for someone with a lower IQ.

Thanks to this research, we now know what is wrong with Sarah Palin.

There have been several programs aimed at reducing prejudice and racism, but the subjects may fail to grasp the concept if they are idiots.  Being able to see another person’s viewpoint requires certain cognitive abilities that persons with a low IQ do not have.  Think about this the next time you are arguing with somebody.  You just can’t seem to get through to them; they just don’t seem to understand that ideals like homophobia, racism and misogyny are wrong.  You can stop wasting your breath.  There is now scientific evidence that they are retarded and are incapable of realising the error of their ways.

So now that we have proof that racists are idiots, what do we do about it?  That’s my question.  You can’t make someone get smarter, and these attempts to expand their worldview are now proven to be a waste of time.  Do we just leave these people alone and chalk them up as a lost cause?  Now what?  My next question is what about people who do have the intellectual capacity to understand complex concepts, but yet, are still racist?  What about these people?

I vote to have them shot.

For the record, the studies do not conclude that if you are liberal you are a genius, or if you’re conservative you’re automatically an idiot.

 

 

The full article can be read here.

 

Senseless Scribbling of an Idiot #52: Assassination Fail

By now we’ve all seen the news regarding the Idaho man who shot up the White House the other day. Talk about the world’s lamest assassination attempt. This guy, Ramiro Ortega-Hernandez of Idaho Falls, Idaho has got to be the stupidest of stupid. Either that, or he is mentally unbalanced and needs a heavy dose of medication and weekly therapy for the rest of his life.

I do not in any way condone any action against the government or the President of the United States. I’ll make that clear, but I really have to analyse Ortega’s attempt at assassinating President Obama. I would like to point out the senselessness of what he tried to do. First, he disappeared from his home town in Idaho at the end of October. His family reported him missing. Local authorities say that he’s been in trouble multiple times for drugs, underage drinking, and some other crap. His family said he was obsessed with President Obama, and not in a good way.

So this guy leaves his home town and drives half way cross the country to Washington DC. He parks himself outside the White House and tries to shoot up the place. What is wrong with this picture? Uhm, first of all, the White House is one of the most secure buildings in this country. There are snipers on the roof, alarms, dogs, guards, tanks, you name it, they got it. Of course, the windows are bullet proof. Even if you didn’t already know that for sure, you could assume that. Why would they have the President, his family and his staff just walking aimlessly around in the building and the windows are not bullet proof. Banks have bullet proof windows. The White House has bullet proof windows.

Secondly, this dumbass used his own vehicle. If you’re going to shoot up the place and then abandon your car, so the police can find it, don’t you think they would be able to run the license plate and figure out who the car is registered to? Most criminals steal a car, steal license plates, shave off the VIN numbers, something. I mean, I watch these criminal movies. If I was going to commit a crime, I would not leave my own damn car at the scene so they can just come to my house and arrest my dumb ass as soon as I get home.

On top of that, he left the weapon in the vehicle. So they know who the car belongs to and you have an assault rifle in the back seat…. D’uh! I can’t even keep going because I am laughing so much.

Apparently, he was also obsessed with 11/11/11. He thought the world was going to end. And this, folks, is where I am lost. So if you thought the world was going to end, what is the point of trying to kill somebody? Because if the world is going to end, that means everybody is going to die. Ortega said he was on a mission from God. I don’t understand how that corresponds with 11/11/11 and the world ending. Maybe he thought it was going to get him into heaven or something. He didn’t say all that and they haven’t completed their investigation.

So basically this is a piss-poor attempt at assassination. The worst of it all is that President Obama was not even in the White House at the time of the incident. He was in Australia coordinating a greater military presence to stave off China.  That was in the news.  So he went through all of this so that he could get charged with attempt to assassinate the president or his staff.That carries a penalty of life imprisonment and a $250,000 fine.

As a side bar, I think the fine is idiotic. You try to shoot the president and you get fined? If you are imprisoned for life, where are you getting $250,000 to pay the fine? I’m always confused by these ridiculous fines. Nobody has that kind of money and if they take it out of your wages, can’t you just file for benefits? Thus, the government is kind of paying its own fine.

I’m getting off-track. At any rate, he is currently locked up pending a full investigation, including a mental examination, because clearly, he needs it.

Senseless Scribbling of an Idiot #51: Ode to My iPod

Unless you’ve been under a rock the past 24 hours, you know by now that Steve Jobs has lost his battle with pancreatic cancer.  Normally when famous people die, I just say to myself, “Oh, that’s sad and move on with my life.”  (The only exception, of course, was Michael Jackson, in which I lay in a ball of despair for 72 hours, but that’s another story…).  Most of the time some famous person dying doesn’t really affect my life and I really don’t care.  I know that sounds callous, but it is what it is.

Steve Jobs dying doesn’t really affect my life but for whatever reason I find myself thinking about it more than I have any other famous person.  I guess you can call me an Apple fangrrl.  Yes, I have an iPod and an iPhone and if I thought I really needed it, I would also have a Macbook and an iPad.  The only reason I don’t have those two items is because I am a person who does not buy things I don’t need, and trust me, I’ve been trying to justify purchasing both for a long time.  At any rate, there’s been questions about which Apple product has been the most innovative of Jobs’ career.  I don’t even know how to begin to answer that but I will tell you that I never go anywhere without my iPod.  When they first came out, I couldn’t afford one and I kinda didn’t see the need to own one.  Sure, it was cool looking but my Discman worked just fine.  It wasn’t until cars started coming with the aux port and you could plug in your iPod and listen to your music in the cdar did I even see how cool the whole thing was.

I would no longer have to lug a book of CDs around with me everywhere I went, driving dangerously with my knee balancing the wheel while I flipped through the book looking for the CD I wanted, only to discover that it was either back in the house or badly scratched and unplayable.   Then some junkie broke into my car and stole all the CDs I had.  I was already a downloading music junkie (I grew up in the days of Napster), so I started burning a whole bunch of CDs but I realised this is so lame.  Drunk John bought me an iPod for Valentine’s Day and that was all she wrote.  Yeah, it sounds so lame but I felt like I was part of the ‘in-crowd’ because I had a pair of white headphones just like everybody else.  When I went to AIT, someone stole my iPod Nano, and the military reimbursed me enough money so I could buy an iPod Classic, only back then I don’t think it was the classic quite yet.  At any rate, that thing had 60GB, which was …. outrageous and I worked my hardest to fill it up with my extensive music collection.  Anybody that knows me knows that I have a very eccentric music taste ranging from death metal to opera and everything in between. 

Sixty gigabytes later, I need a new iPod.  Thankfully, I had an excuse to buy a new one because the old one started acting funny.  I bought a new classic:  120 gigabytes and I am in heaven.  I read somewhere that they might phase out the classic.  I hope they don’t because I love it more than the iPod Touch. 

I can’t even think of how I dealt with music before this.  All the new music I have discovered because I now have the space to store it.  I can listen to an album without fear that I’ve spent my money and wasted it.  I can trade music with friends and discover something new.  And the damn iTunes… what?  No, I don’t buy the music (sorry, guys) but the program is just really so helpful.  What was my life like before that?

I didn’t jump on the iPhone bandwagon until they put out the iPhone 3GS.  I bought the 3G just to test it out.  I now will never own another type of phone ever again.  I am obsessed.  I still have the 3G because I know how these technology people try to get you.  They put out something fancier year after year, making you salivate so much that you just have to have it.  I waited for the iPhone 4 but it just wasn’t enough to make me bite.  I might get the iPhone 4S, but since I’m about to leave for a little while I might hang on just a bit longer so I can get the iPhone 5 that will surely be ready for me to purchase by the time I get back.

I know there are so many Apple haters but the truth is they are good products.  They have revolutionised so many things.  Even if you hate Apple, you have an Android or some other smart phone that is trying its best to imitate an Apple product. So, when it all comes down to it, you’re an Apple fan but you just can’t admit it. 

I’m sorry this man had to leave this earth early.  I hope that he did not suffer.  I hope that he is proud of what he has accomplished.  A hundred years from now, it is possible that Apple will go the way of the Atari, but people will still remember it because the products were new and innovative and opened the door for other innovation. 

The crazy thing is that if I didn’t have an iPhone then I would not have known that Steve Jobs had died.  As President Obama remarked, most of us learned of this man’s death on the product that he invented.  That’s just awesome.

Mr. Jobs, I am at this very moment texting my sister on my iPhone and I’ve got my iPod in my pocket.  The very next song is “Please Don’t Stop the Music” by Rihanna.  That may not have much to do with anything, but this song is for you, all the same.

Senseless Scribbling of an Idiot #50: Let’s Get PC!

“I’m a songwriter. I’ve written loads of music. Why would I try to put out a song and think I’m getting one over on everybody? That’s retarded.”

-Lady Gaga

Lady Gaga wants you to know that comparing her to Madonna is simply retarded.  She is a songwriter who has written loads of music, a lot of it with the same chord progression that has been in use since the disco era.  She’s not the first to use it, nor will she be the last, but she is the first “fucking artist in 25 years” to put it on Top 40 radio.  She’s not a plagiarist, she’s “fucking smart.  Sorry.”

I ain’t mad at her.  I’m one of her “little monsters,” as she calls her fans.  She is a weird chick but I like her music and her political activeness, but the media is out to crucify her…not because she dropped the “F” bomb several times in her interview wit NME magazine, but because she said…………R…E…T…A…R…D…E…D.

Let’s look at public reaction:

Patman says, “The autism rate is 1 in 100. Thats how many parents are offended. She is equating retarded to mean stupid. My daughter is a A student who struggles with her speech and some social issues. Its just ignorance. Welcome to America, right?”

Lara says, “She apologized because she just offended more than half of her demographic.”

Agonyflips wrote, “Mentally Challenge people can NOT help the fact that they are the way they are. So it is offensive to use that term to belittle someone who isn’t mentally handicapped. These people have to work so hard to try to fit into society and every knock against them is hurtful, so do them a favor and skip using the word. Make them feel accepted and appreciated by truly accepting and appreciating them, and not using such a derogatory term, in any context. If you didn’t know it was such a disparaging, depreciatory and repugnant remark, you should know now. Erase it from your vocabulary and if you ever get the chance, volunteer to help those with disabilities–when I was in grade school and volunteered with mentally handicapped children I found it very rewarding and now as a young father with an autistic child, I even more want others to understand how they’re wonderful people or children who deserve the respect and kindness that every person does. I’ve know for 30 years not to use that word… please stop using it too. Thanks.”

Well, how retarded can you get?  Some people were even comparing the use of the word “retarded” with the word “nigger,” as if the two could equate.  We’ll talk about that another day.  Let’s tackle this retarded issue, okay?  Patman said the autism rate is 1 in 100 and that’s how many parents are offended by the Lady Gaga’s use of the word “retarded,” because she is equating retarded to mean stupid.  This is kind of a bass-ackward way of explaining things.  People who are mentally challenged are no longer referred to as retarded.  Lady Gaga was insulting people who compared her music to Madonna’s, not people with autism.  Not to say that autistic people cannot enjoy music, but are many of them performing an comparative analysis of these artists’ music?  Probably not.  Patman please get over yourself.

Lara said that Lady Gaga offended more than half her demographic.  Half her demographic is “retarded?”  I don’t think so.

And Agonyflips went into this diatribe about how difficult life can be for mentally challenged people.  I agree with these statements about fitting into society, but I don’t agree that it is offensive to call someone who isn’t mentally challenged a retard.  I think it’s offensive to call a person who is mentally challenged a retard.  Lady Gaga isn’t referring to anybody who actually is mentally challenged.  That isn’t her demographic, so I don’t understand why everyone is getting all upset.  I guess perhaps because when you say retarded images of mentally and physically disabled people spring to mind–but that’s only if you are in acquaintance with someone who is in this situation.  If I say retarded, that is not what I think of.  I think of some idiot.

Yeah… idiot…. dummy…. stupid…. imbecile…. all of these words were used to describe mentally challenged people.  Should they also be stricken from our vocabulary?

What if Lady Gaga had said:

“I’m a songwriter. I’ve written loads of music. Why would I try to put out a song and think I’m getting one over on everybody? That’s stupid.”

or….

“That’s idiotic.”

or….

“That’s dumb.”

or….

“That’s mentally challenged.”

Use of the words mentally challenged is far more PC than retarded, so what if she had said that instead?  Would we even be having this argument?  Or would the argument be even more heated because it might insinuate that she is making fun of mentally challenged people?

Very few people actually made some sense.  One person wrote,  “I wouldn’t be so insensitive as to use it on a person with an actual mental handicap, but when it is used in this kind of context, where it is clearly being used as a synonym for “ridiculous” or “stupid”, it’s PC overkill to be offended by it.”

Thank you.  PC overkill.  If this gets anymore stupid…… idiotic…. ridiculous (is it okay to say ridiculous?) then as Stacey writes, “People will stop doing interviews and simply hand in a pre-written speech that has been approved by a lawyer.”

Senseless Scribbling of an Idiot #49: That’s Just My Baby Daddies

News flash:  a recent study has discovered that at approximately 1 in 5 American mothers has children by two or more baby daddies.

*enter shockingly dramatic music*  Dun..dun…dun…dun..dun…dun…!!!!

The average American already knew this, especially those of us living in inner cities where most of the population has a standard eighth grade education.  The study’s author from University of Michigan says, “This area of study is very new to us.”  I don’t know who “us” is but they need to get it together.  How come they are always doing studies on things that regular folk have already figured out?  We may not have the fancy advanced degrees but we do not need to spend hours in a lab to discover what is already in our faces.

Don’t we already know that women with multiple baby daddies is likely to be disadvantaged?  D’uh.  They are probably under-employed with lower incomes and less education.  No shit, Sherlock.  That is why they have multiple baby daddies in the first place.  Because they don’t really know any better.  According to the study,

We know that women with higher education are delaying both marriage and childbearing for their careers.  Women with lower expectations for education and career don’t see that they will be in a significantly different place in 10 years.  So there’s no reason to wait to have kids.

In other words, when you know that your life sucks and that you probably will never have a high-paying job or an advanced degree there is nothing else for you to do but have a bunch of kids.  In fact, you probably didn’t even have that eye-opening moment of clarity.  Having multiple children by multiple fathers is second nature to you because everyone else around is doing it.  It never occurred to you to do anything else.

The study adds that this type of family structure can be stressful.  No, really?  Thanks for pointing out how difficult it is to figure even the most minute details:  where do each of the kids live?  Which baby daddy pays for what?  Do all the daddies pay for child support?

In a shocking revelation, study discovered that 59 per cent of black mothers, 35 per cent of Hispanic mothers and 22 per cent of white mothers reported having multiple baby daddies.  In some cases, two different baby daddies comes from divorce.  According to the study, 43 per cent of the mothers were married when the first kid was born, but later got divorced and had another kid by someone else.

The study claims that young women do not know how difficult it is to be a single mother and that it is even more difficult to have multiple children by multiple fathers, and that too many young women are deciding to have kids before marriage.

I hope that they did not waste precious government money trying to figure out this “mystery.”  It’s not a news flash that more young women are increasingly having children while not in a stable relationship.  I won’t use the term marriage for many reasons I won’t get into, but the point is that a lot of women are having kids with fathers that really have no interest in family life.  More and more young women are having multiple children with multiple fathers, and that’s just bizarre to me but not a great shock.  I know many people with children, almost none of them are married.  Most of them never were married.

It’s a thing.  I don’t know what it is, but it’s just something that people do.  Conducting a survey to figure this out seems lame.  How about conduct a survey to figure out how to lessen this problem?  We know why this happens.  Can we figure out how to not make it happen.  The author of this survey made a valid point when she said “women with higher education delay marriage and kids….”  Key words:  women with higher education.  “Women with lower expectations” are the ones who are having a bunch of kids.

Why don’t we help them raise their expectations?  We spend so much time and money trying to figure out the “why fors” when we could just attempt to combat the problem.  More money to more education, especially in lower income, disadvantaged areas and you will see this “phenomenon” start to back trend.

Senseless Scribbling of an Idiot #48: Just Lock Up All the Little Bastards

For people who have problems with children, I have an easy solution for you:  lock all the little bastards up in jail until they get 18.  Then you won’t have a problem anymore.

Teachers, parents, neighbours, anybody… if you know a child that any kind of problem, no matter how large or small, just put him in jail and everything should work itself out.  Or at least, that is what the American justice systems thinks should be done.

I just finished watching a news story on CNN about an 11 year old boy who drew a disturbing picture in school.  The boy drew stick figures of himself shooting three teachers.  Yes, I know this is alarming.  With the rate of school shootings these days, this is not something we should sleep on.  But let me give you further details.  The boy was in a counseling session with a licensed therapist.  The therapist asked him to draw out his emotions instead of acting them out in class.  The boy drew the picture as requested.  The therapist saw the picture and was properly alarmed by it.  She told the teachers and the boy’s parents about the drawings, as she should have done.  After further counseling, she decided the boy was not an immediate danger to his classroom.  After his counseling session, he went back to class.  He had no problems.  He went home.

Later that night, the police arrived at his house and arrested him.  They put him in handcuffs and put him in back of a squad car.  His mother requested that she be allowed to drive him to the police station.  She was told no.  She requested to be present during the booking process, in which he was fingerprinted, had his photo taken and put into a detention cell.  She was told no.

The boy was charged with a misdemeanor, interfering with school officials (or something to that effect).  At first, even though the school was aware of the drawings from the very beginning, the school was not going to press charges.  But after speaking with the police, they decided they would go ahead and press charges.

Overreact, much?

Look, I am not saying that pictures of a kid shooting up his teachers is not serious.  It is serious.  It needs to be addressed.  His counseling should be ramped up.  His parents should be notified (which they were).  His teachers need to be on watch (which they were informed).  If the boy is determined to be a real threat, he needs to be removed from school.  After speaking with the boy when he drew the pictures the counselor decided he was not a threat.  So why was he arrested?

How is arresting an 11 year old child who has no prior criminal or behavioural issues helping him?  Kids do not draw disturbing pictures for no reason.  Sometimes the kid truly is crazy and has violence on his mind.  Sometimes the kid is drawing these things to bring attention to something else.  The kid wants to shoot his teachers.  Why?  Is a teacher abusing him?  Or is a teacher just being a little hard on him?  Is some other authority figure abusing him?  Is he being bullied?  What is his home life like?  Are his parents real parents, or are they absent, negligent or abusive?  Did the boy have a habit of acting up in class?  Has he made threats before?  Did he draw other crazy pictures?  Does he say or do mean things to other kids or animals?  Did they even assess all of this?

I am not sure arresting him is going to help him.  Let’s say he really is crazy and he likes doing shit like this because it amuses him.  Maybe arresting him will really push him over the edge.  Or what if this pointing to a more serious problem, like abuse?  How is arresting him going to address that?

The boy is seeing a school counselor right now.  After a drawing like that, he may need to see a different type of therapist.  Maybe he has some kind of chemical imbalance and may need to be medicated.  Did anybody drop by and do an investigation of his home?  Maybe his home is the type of environment that breeds violence.  Did anybody see if the boy has real access to weapons?  I mean, there’s so many other things they could have done before arresting.

A lot of people are saying, “Oh, if you don’t do anything, you’ll be sorry when he follows up on his threats.”  I agree.  I’m not saying post the damn drawing up on the fridge.  I’m saying take real action.  He’s 11.  There is a reason he drew this picture.  Get to the root of the problem.  If you find out the boy has an arsenal stashed away under his bed, okay, yeah arrest his little ass.

But I think police activity makes situations even worse.  It makes criminals out of kids who probably just need some mental help.  I know that school shootings and violent children is very serious.  I am not making light of that at all, but you can’t kill a mosquito with a shotgun.  Overreacting to every little thing is not the answer.  This kid will have a record that may impede him from succeeding.  Schools may not want to accept him if they find out he has this type of charge on his record.  That is setting him for failure instead of getting him the help that he needs.

Senseless Scribbling of an Idiot #47: Wikileaks Is Worse Than Porn

Have you been looking at the Wikileaks site?  If so, shame on you, you naughty person you.  Okay, maybe it’s not that serious but it seems a number of employers are making it that serious.  I’ve come across several articles on major news sites that indicate many employers are banning their employees from looking at the Wikileaks site on their servers.  Of course, employers have the right to do this.  They’ve managed to cut out almost everything exciting about the internet:  YouTube, Facebook, even some email sites are not permitted, depending on where you work.  Wikileaks is right up there with porn, they way they are making it seem.  You know if you’re caught looking at porn at work it’s all over.  Porn will get you fired.  Wikileaks will get you a firing squad.

I haven’t looked at the Wikileaks site.  At first I wasn’t really interested but since the media is making such a huge deal out of it, I admit my curiosity is piqued.  Why all the hush-hush?  It is because some of the documents are allegedly classified and nobody is allowed to look at them anyway?  Or is it because the government is embarrassed at what we might see?  Who knows since nobody is allowed to look at that damn thing besides reporters.

According to a recent article on CNN, the White House Office of Management and Budget has declared it forbidden for federal employees and contractors working for the government from looking at publicly leaked documents coming from any Wikileaks site.  You can’t use your personal computer or mobile device and you damn sure can’t use your work terminal.  The Air Force has decided to follow along with this and I’m sure it’s only a matter of time before the rest of the services jump on the bandwagon.

I am neither for or against Julian Assange and his Wikileaks crap, and all the other competitor sites that have started publishing these documents.  I have mixed feelings about the whole charade.  According to my co-worker this makes me a Communist.  I’m not sure how, but here’s my point of view:  I do not think it is funny or in the best interests of anyone to put American servicemembers’ lives in danger.  However you choose to believe, there are many people undercover throughout the world doing what we need to do for the greater good of the US.  I know some people don’t believe that, but we won’t go there right now.

However, once the cat is out of the bag, you can’t shove that bitch back in there.  Telling the American public that we can’t look at something that’s already out is kind of like telling rubberneckers to stop looking at car accidents on the side of the road.  It ain’t gonna happen.  So I’m not allowed to look at the Wikileaks crap and all I’ve got to go on is whatever Fox News is telling me.  That can’t be good for anybody.  My mind has gone crazy in imagining what is on this site that is so juicy the government doesn’t want me to look at it.  In fact, my imagination is so crazy I can’t even fathom what it could possibly be.

And what about all the non-military stuff?  According to what I heard on the news there’s other stuff that is gonna be leaked that doesn’t necessarily have to do with the government and military; it has to do with corporations and foreign governments and stuff like that.  I can’t look at that either?  I wanna know if there’s some huge Apple-Microsoft conspiracy.  I want to know what companies are really doing with my credit card number.  I’m being ridiculous of course, and just throwing out anything but who knows what’s out there?

Thanks to this blockade, I’m never gonna know.

I think the government is taking the wrong approach.  Yes, we need to protect people in sensitive positions, but the public does have a right to know some things.  It’s like the politicians just want us to blindly support them.  They offer no transparency.  I found it funny that my co-worker said I was the Communist because I didn’t have a real opinion about Assange.  I think it’s our own government that is a little Communist because they’d like to keep us in the dark.  I think this is the reason that some people are looking at Assange as a hero.  Right now, the government is the bad guy.  Assange put something out there and now the government is all pissed.  If you look at it, you’ll never work in this town again!  What is it that’s so bad that you don’t want your own people to know?  I think that question has some merit.  If you let me look at it then I can judge on my own if this is something I truly needed to see and I can judge Assange.  Should he have put this out there?

If it has been secret all this time, let it stay secret.  But if it’s already out there, it ain’t a secret no more.  I don’t understand why Uncle Sam can’t see this, but these days it seems that nothing coming from Washington is making a whole lot of sense.  Since I like getting paid I won’t bother with the Wikileaks site or anything related to it.  But if you have nothing to lose, go and look at it.  Inform yourself.  I think it’s your American right.  Then you can decide for yourself if Julian Assange is truly a hero or if he needs his ass kicked, without the media bias.

 

Senseless Scribbling of an Idiot #46: No Cell Phones, Texting, Talking or Thinking While Driving

Just like everybody else I am annoyed when I am speeding down the highway and I come behind some randomly slow person holding up progress.  Of course, traffick is such that I can’t go around this person and I’m stuck for about three miles travelling at an absurd 55 miles an hour while this lunatic swerves all over the road blissfully unaware that he has a string of cars lined up behind him.

Let’s play a little game I like to call Old, Asian Or On a Cellphone.

If you selected Cellphone then you win a prize.  Most of the time, the idiot is on a cell phone and for some reason, his brain is too simple to accomplish two tasks at once.  Because of this widespread malady, many state governments have passed laws banning hand-held cell phone usage while driving.  Maryland recently enacted its version of the law on 1 October.  No hand-held cell phone usage or texting while driving.

I am guilty of talking on my cell phone will driving.  I don’t do it often, but I have done it in the past and I probably will in the future.  For my own part,  I don’t usually talk on the phone and drive at night, during bad weather or when the traffick is very heavy.  I also don’t place calls while driving.  I usually answer a call or I’m already on the phone when I get in the car.  I’m guilty.  I know it, but it is what it is.

I would also like to mention that I DO NOT text while driving.  I have texted at stop lights and when traffick has come to a stand still but I do not text when the car is in motion.  I know many people can make the argument about how dangerous it is to talk on the cell phone and drive.  I believe that it is, but I believe that texting and driving is the absolute worst.  It’s right up there with drinking and driving and you all know how I feel about drinking and driving.

For some people talking on the phone and driving is a distraction.  Not so for me and many other people.  We have the ability to multi-task.  Some of us know how to put the best of our focus on the most important task at hand.  To be truthful, when I’m driving and talking on the phone, I barely hear the phone conversation which is why I don’t talk and drive as much as other people do.  I am paying more attention to the road than the person talking and I end up having to be like, “What? What happened?” or the other person can quickly tell that I am not paying attention to them because I’m like, “Yeah.  Uh-huh.  Yup.  Sure.  Yes,” when they are suggesting that they’d like to come punch me in the face.

I’m in agreement with the laws that ban cell phone usage and driving.  Most people just can’t do both.  Yes, there are a few of us that can, but the majority of people just cannot drive and talk at the same time.  I don’t know what it is about having the cell phone in your hand that makes you distracted.  Is it the conversation?  Is it the actual phone up to your head?  I don’t know.  Because if it’s the conversation, do these people also get distracted by conversations with people who are in the car with them?  If it’s the actual phone, do these people also get distracted if they have a cup of coffee in their hand?  I don’t know.

At any rate, I just read an article on MSNBC (not CNN this time) that the Secretary of the Department of Transportation is proposing a plan that would DISABLE cell phones in vehicles that are moving faster than a certain speed (I heard walking speed).  There would be some type of device or software or whatever either in the car or in cell phone towers that would send some kind of jamming signal blocking the phone from being utilised while the car is in motion.

I think this is the stupidest idea I have heard in a very long time.  It’s not that I’m against safety measures to prevent people from doing dumb things, it’s that I think this is not the way to end distracted driving deaths.

There are already laws in place to stop my talking and driving at the same time.  Why not continue to use the laws you already have in place?  If I see a cop, just like I do every other time when I’m doing something dumb, I straighten up my act.  I tell my caller that I’ll call them back in a minute or I put the phone down, or I slow down from my excessive speeding, whatever.

So you want to block cell phone usage in a moving vehicle?  What about my passenger?  She can’t use her cell phone either?  Last week, SF and I went to NY.  She drove and I navigated via my cell phone.  Under this new “law,” she and I would just be driving willy-nilly until we, hopefully, ended up where we needed to be.  Sure, we could always print out a map or whatever, but what about in those instances you come upon where the road is randomly closed or there’s an accident and you need to go around?

To my opponents who say, “What about your GPS?”  I, for one, don’t have GPS because it’s lame, but SF does have GPS.  So does my other friend who uses her GPS INCESSANTLY.  She is more distracted by her GPS than she is by her cell phone.  She doesn’t really talk on her cell phone and drive, but she does fuck around with her radio enough to make me a little perturbed when we get on the road.  She’s one of those chronic channel changers, always flipping through stations and her CDs looking for a certain song.  She is paying more attention to the damn radio than she is to the road.  What about her?

I think you should send a jamming device to stop all radios, CD players and MP3 players in cars so drivers won’t be so distracted.

I also think you should ban children from riding in cars because they are a major distraction.  My same friend who likes to mess with her GPS and radio while driving also has two children that distract while driving.  The two kids are fully of energy and they are always getting into things.  She has to look in the rearview every five seconds to make sure one is “touching” the other or somehow annoying the other kid.  Then when the two start screaming and crying and carrying on, she has to take her eyes off the road so she can carry on right with them.  If one of them has a dropped a toy, she automatically reaches for it, sending the car swerving all over the road.

As a matter of fact, I think we should ban ALL FOREIGN OBJECTS from inside vehicles.  This way, you can’t accidentally drop something and then reach for it and potentially cause an accident.

I also would like to propose a no talking ban in the car.  If you happen to have passengers (which I think we should ban as well) you cannot speak to the passengers in the car just in case you’re one of those people who gets distracted from conversations while driving.  The conversation could potentially become so heated or intriguing that you will stop paying attention to the road and cause an accident.

We also need to consider banning billboards, neon signs on buildings, anything distracting out on the road ways that could make me look elsewhere other than the road in front of me.  It may be a good idea to install some sort of devise to my head so that my head can only look forward.  When the car is put into reverse the devise will release allowing me to reverse the car properly.  Once the car is put back into drive, the devise will clamp on my head again so that my eyes are forward once again.

Ultimately, I envision some kind of mind control devise that will prevent me from thinking about anything other than driving.  I occasionally get lost in my thoughts while driving and go into what I call “auto-pilot,” where you know where you’re going but you’re not really paying attention and you kinda just drive.  This is dangerous.  The mind control device will prevent my mind from wandering into unnecessary thoughts like what I’m going to wear to the holiday party and what did the guy mean by he’ll “call me tomorrow?”  Does he mean tomorrow in guy time or tomorrow in normal people time?  See how distracting that is?

The bottom line is that there are many things the government can implement to keep people from being distracted while driving.  None of them are a good idea.  Like I say for everything, education is the key.  Many people just don’t realise how dangerous texting/cell phone use while driving can be.  Everybody always says, “No, I drive fine.  I can do both.”  Most people really can’t.  It’s the same thing with drinking and driving.  Everybody always claims they can drive better while drunk.  They say that until they get into a serious accident and they kill and maim themselves or someone else.

My proposition:  hit them where it counts.

Right now, in the state of Maryland, for first time offenders found talking/texting while driving, it’s only a $50 fine.  What’s $50?  Barely anything.  That’s enough for me to go to dinner and have a glass of wine.  For some people, okay yeah $50 is a lot of money but it’s really nothing.  You’re going to keep risking it, just like people do when it comes to illegally parking.  Illegal parking isn’t expensive (only until you don’t pay the first notice) and that’s why people keep doing it.

Make it fucking expensive to text/talk and drive.  How about a minimum $500 ticket for first time offense?  Second time, $750.  Third time, $1500.  I bet after that first $500 ticket you will think twice.  After the second ticket worth $750 you will be so pissed that you won’t even bring your damn cell phone in the car with you just in case you give the perception of talking on the phone and driving.

Let’s say you cause a serious accident because you were on the phone and driving.  After the investigation is complete and they’ve found that you were at fault, the penalties should be the same as drunk driving.  Drunk driving in most states is damn expensive.  Most people who drink and drive are people with serious problems.  They know the consequences and yet they do it anyway.  Regular everyday people are deterred from drinking and driving because nobody wants to pay thousands of dollars in court fees and lawyers fees and all that other mess.

I think the government should enforce the laws it already has and create stiff penalties for the violators of those laws.  As much as I would be annoyed that I can’t talk on my phone and drive at the risk of a $500 ticket, I can assure you that I am too cheap to risk it.  Fifty bucks is dinner, $500 is rent money.  And then if you’re like me and you don’t pay the shit when you first get the ticket and it just keeps going up and up and up.  I shudder to think.

Putting some kind of locking mechanism in the car that prevents cell phone usage is stupid and potentially dangerous.  The danger is limited but still there is a threat.  Picture the woman who was kidnapped and thrown into the trunk of her own car.  She was rescued because she still had her cell phone on her and could call 911…. while the car was in motion. With this new locking mechanism, she’d probably be buried in some unmarked grave in the woods somewhere.  Picture the little girl who called 911 after her drunk ass mother went on a joyride with all the kids in the backseat.  The little girl took her mom’s cell phone and called 911….while the car was in motion.  Picture the mother in labour who spoke to paramedics while her husband drove them to the hospital in a snowstorm.  She was on the phone with the paramedics getting instructions on how to handle the difficult labour….while the car was in motion.

In all these cases, the people on the phone wasn’t the driver.  But since the car was in motion none of them would have been able to use their phone if the government has its way.  I recognise that these events are few and far between, but still, I think they shouldn’t be ignored.

Like I said, we should really educate the people about the dangers of driving distracted.  Just like they when it became mandatory to wear a safety belt.  Just like they did when drinking and driving became a serious problem.  You can do the same thing for texting/talking without going to such extreme and lame measures.   And if they don’t get a clue, just fine their asses, make them come to court, and go through some remedial driving training.  I bet then you will see some changes.

Senseless Scribbling of an Idiot #45: Abortion or Not, You Guys Pick For Me

What would you do if your parents came up to you and said, “Honey, you know the only reason we had you is because all our Facebook friends decided against abortion?”  Would you feel like a piece of crap?  Yeah.  Or maybe your parents might say something like, “I knew we should not have had you.  Everybody on Twitter voted for the abortion.”

So apparently there is a couple from Minnesota who just can’t make the decision to have their baby or not on their own.  Instead of asking close friends and family for advice, they’ve turned to an internet poll.  They are asking random strangers:  should we abort our baby or have the baby?  What do you think of these people?  Do you think they are some young kids who are clueless and scared of impending parenthood?  Oh no, this couple has been married for at least thirty years.  This is not their first pregnancy.  They attempted to get pregnant twice before but both pregnancies ended in miscarriage.

This is a bizarre situation.  I have no idea whether this is some kind of media ploy or are they really serious about asking everybody else on what they should do with this kid.  They are posting pictures of the sonogram on their website.  You can cast your vote on what you think they should.  Have the kid or abort it for no reason other than people on the internet say you should.

I’m kind of at a loss for words because I think this is some kind of media thing.  You would think that nobody in their right mind would do such a thing, but then other people have tried to sell their babies for sex, money, drugs and everything else of value in the world.  I wonder if it’s even legal.  Sadly, it probably is.  Abortion is legal in all 50 states and they are just asking people the question if they should do it or not.

The father said he is uncertain and he wants to use his indecision to engage in a pro-choice/pro-life debate.  Somehow I don’t think using an actual unborn fetus in a debate is the right thing to do, but that’s just me.  If I had to make a decision on whether I wanted to have an abortion, I wouldn’t ask my Facebook friends.  This is something that you reserve for your closest friends and family.  And then if I had to make a decision about an abortion it would be an extreme thing.  It wouldn’t just be random like… Oh, I’m gonna have a baby, should I get an abortion?  Like I’m deciding what colour to paint the nursery or something.

Sometimes some things just go beyond human decency.  I’m all for for freedom of speech.  I’m all for pro-choice.  I’m all for the person being able to make whatever decisions he feels best, but like I always say just because you can doesn’t mean you should.  So what if they do decide to have the kid?  What do they tell the kid?  Someday he’s gonna find out that he was apart of some internet experiment and that his very fate was balanced precariously in the hands of a large inept population bored one night and surfing the internet.  What if the couple does decide to have the kid and something happens?  They may not believe in it, but I believe that it would be karma coming back to them.  What if they have an abortion based on everybody else’s opinion and they come to completely regret that decision?

People just don’t think.  I think it’s sad in this country that we have to be licensed for every little thing:  driving, practicing a certain profession, etc, but you can just arbitrarily bring a new life in the world without any education, skill or knowledge of what you’re doing.  You can abandon it, neglect it or kill it without any kind of thought.  That’s kind of fucked up, but that’s our country and we supposedly live in the greatest place on earth.

But then, yet, we have people like this who can get up on the internet and ask the world whether or not they should abort their baby.