Seismologists Charged with Manslaughter for Failing to Predict Earthquake

Have you ever wanted to sue the weather person for his or her inaccurate predictions? Wanted to send her a bill for your ruined shoes when the day was supposed to be sunny, maybe, or send him a bill for your cancelled family reunion pavilion or tent when the weather went foul? In Italy, the government is making it happen by putting seismologists on trial for manslaughter for an earthquake in 2009 that killed 308 people.

Can you imagine where this could lead, if the charges stick or if this team of seven technicians and scientists is convicted? People would be suing weathercasters left and right for failing to predict volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, and tornadoes. It’s funny, because it’s also a double-edged sword: while many people know the weather to be unpredictable, the scientists are still to blame. And isn’t Italy the country where the Pope himself, the leader of one of the biggest organized religions that denounces science on a regular basis, resides? Oh, the irony. We don’t support your spooky scientific theories, nerd people, but we will sue you when you are wrong or you fail to predict the future!

Perhaps the Italian government will start hiring fortune tellers as official consultants next.

The thing is, if these seismologists had really received some information indicating that there would be an earthquake and THEN failed to act upon it, alerting the government and citizens so that they could prepare as best they could, then perhaps they should be fined or suspended or something. But even then, being charged with the actual death of people—which was attributed to Mother Nature instead—is a pretty hefty fee to charge.

The evidence against the team suggests that, at a press conference held days before the quake, the team gave “imprecise, incomplete and contradictory information,” to the public, thereby thwarting efforts that could have been made to save the people who died.

The thing is, seismology is pretty imprecise, incomplete, and contradictory, isn’t it? I mean, where I live, on the New Madrid fault line, we keep hearing about how we are “due” for a big quake—but it’s been overdue for a while, actually. No one knows when it will hit, and that’s why we do need seismologists to keep studying it for us. Even so, like weather people, they simply cannot give us absolute certainties.

I don’t know what information they gave out during that press conference, but unless it was a blatant statement like “There will absolutely, without a doubt, be no earthquakes this week!” I don’t see how horrible it could have been. In fact, the people facing charges claim that they did indicate that a big earthquake would occur in the area soon—so perhaps it is the government that should be sued instead, for not acting in a timely fashion?

In fact, if seismologists can be sued for this, I totally think we should be able to sue the government for losing our jobs, the economy being in the toilet, healthcare, and Justin Bieber.

Another Day, Another Facebook Scandal

While another Facebook scandal is in the air, funnily enough, Facebook isn’t really to blame this time. Yes, they’re sort of suing someone for stupid reasons but hey, Facebook is an American company so by God, let them use their God-given American right to file a lawsuit, will you!

Apparently there are companies out on the Internets declaring that they are the “Face Book of Sex.” These serve as adult social networking sites, where I guess a poke is really a poke.

If the lawsuit was just over the name, I’d dismiss it as frivolity myself; after all, face and book are separate, and they’re also pretty generic words to use. It’s not like they are trademarked individually. Facebook claims that the companies are using their name to ride along the social network’s popularity wave, but honestly, if you’re looking for “Face Book Sex” in the search window, I’m sure a LOT of other sites are going to pop up, too.

That said, if Facebook is suing because they are ALREADY the Face Book of Sex—and aren’t they, by their own creator’s admission? Wasn’t that the original reason why it was created in the first place?—then by all means, go for it, FB. Show the world your right to pimp and pander!

There’s Nothing Natural About Mini Beauty Queens

Last night, I saw the most disturbing commercial I’ve seen in quite a while. It was for a television program called “Toddlers and Tiaras,” and it featured Lady Gaga’s anthem to being yourself, “Born This Way,” while showing footage of a bunch of little girls—toddlers, obviously, under age five—primped up in makeup, showy dresses, much too-old for them hair styles, and worse.

Um, no.

No, TLC, there is nothing “Born This Way” about toddlers in tiaras. And though while researching the program I discovered that most people believe the show exists to make fun of the pageant moms who are shown fussing over their Mini Mes on the show, that sure as hell does not excuse the show at all—or its victims, the girls whose body image is already at stake come adolescence.

Honestly, I think that putting little girls in pageants should be considered a form of child abuse—or, if that’s simply too strong, then it should just be made illegal. Many people are calling the show “a pedophile’s wet dream,” and while I hate to think of it in those terms, they are certainly right. But what’s disturbing about the show to me is that:

  1. It’s not natural in any way, shape, or form. There is nothing natural or even positive about slathering your child with makeup—whether it’s safe cosmetics or not.
  2. If it’s not safe cosmetics, you’re painting your progeny with chemicals like lead, formaldehyde, and other toxic crap that has been linked to many problems in life. Hell, I wore makeup for a wedding last week and was still feeling the effects three days later. Why the hell would you do this to your daughters?
  3. Your daughters are going to be made into sexual objects for the rest of their lives by our media, government, and society itself. She will learn to hate her body, change it any way she can, and possibly even harm herself all in the name of so-called beauty. Can you not wait for that to happen before you make it occur even earlier? How can you not make yourself sick by doing this?

TLC is promoting and enabling some of the most disturbing child programming ever to be on television, and I don’t know how they can sleep at night when they’re exploiting children so blatantly. There is no way they can actually believe they are broadcasting quality television shows—with regards to this program as well as their many other television shows.

Isn’t TLC supposed to represent The Learning Channel? I don’t think they’ve done that in years. Just as the Discovery Channel morphed into some kind of weird station where dirty jobs and myth busting took over programs about space, dinosaurs, and animals, TLC is now about weird addictions, weddings, and apparently child beauty pageants. If this is what we equate with learning and discovery as a culture, I feel deeply sorry—and worried—about our kids and what learning and discovery means, and will mean, to them.

Who looks more like the Poltergeist Preacher? Harold Camping or Fred Phelps?

Life really does imitate Art.

I can't decide who looks more like that creepy Poltergeist Ghost Preacher - Fred Phelps or Harold Camping. Are they all the same person? If only Zelda Rubinstein (as Tangina Barrons) or Heather O'Rourke (as Carol Anne Freeling) were available to help me out.

Is it possible they are all the same person?

Maybe this video will shed some light on the subject:

"God is in his Holy Temple...."

That didn't help at all - unless the fact that that I won't be sleeping after watching it counts.

Man Arrested for Public Masturbation on an Airplane

You can't join the mile high club unless you have a partner....

Masturbating on airlines is not generally considered good form, nor is it legal, which is why the man caught “red-handed” masturbating on a United Airlines flight recently was arrested.

Kyle Pierce was traveling on a United Airlines flight from Spokane, Washington and bound for Denver, Colorado when the 18-year-old female seated next to him had the misfortune of noticing his masturbatory movements, his penis, and his sticky ejaculation into the aircraft seat. She then heard a small noise from Kyle before he got up from his seat.

The passenger seated next to Kyle Pierce was not the only one to notice what Kyle was up to; the passengers behind him also observed him masturbating. One of the passengers took matters into his own hands by hitting Kyle with a book, at which point Kyle reportedly got up and retreated to the restroom.

Kyle was wearing jeans and cowboy boots and was apparently a bull rider and a 25-year-old college junior. Kyle could be fined up to $5000 or be sentenced to as many as 90 days in jail.

Kyle is not the first person to be given the dubious distinction of joining the solo mile high club; merengue star Elvis Crespo was also caught for the obscene act of masturbating on an airplane in 2009. The FBI investigated the merengue star at that time because the incident took place over United States airspace. In the official police report of the masturbation incident, Elvis Crespo claimed that he had not recollection of masturbating on the plane. 

In a more disturbing incident on American Airlines in 2008, a man masturbated next to a sleeping passenger. When she noticed what was happening, she attempted to get the flight attendants to stop the incident, but they didn’t act in time and the man ejaculated in her on the airplane. It was small consolation to her that he was arrested at LAX and the passenger sitting next to the in-flight masturbator ended up suing American Airlines for $200,000 for not protecting her from the masturbator on the flight.

And, of course not every masturbation incident happens on an airplane. Remember PeeWee Herman and the masturbation allegations against him? To this day, he is still claiming that the incident never happened. His proof? The police report said that he was masturbating with his left hand, but he is right-handed. I’ll let you judge that one for yourself.

Ashton Kutcher Will Replace Charlie Sheen on "Two and a Half Men"

The World Waits With Bated Breath to See How Ashton Handles his New Role

The word on the street, Facebook, Twitter, and the New York Times is that Ashton Kutcher has been picked to step in the all-too-big shoes of Charlie Sheen as the newest star on the world’s stupidest show, “Two and a Half Men.”

 

Ashton Kutcher was not the producer’s first choice; Warner Brothers first tried to land Hugh Grant for the role and then Rob Lowe, which clearly demonstrates the show’s preference for good-looking stars with bad reputations. (Here’s a LINK about Hugh Grant’s 1995 bathroom arrest for any young ones out there who may have forgotten it.)

 

Ashton Kutcher won’t be earning as much cashola as Charlie Sheen once was; the poor Hollywood victim of noted cougar Demi Moore will only be earning $600-800,000 per episode for the TV sitcom. Perhaps Ashton Kutcher can get himself another girlfriend or two, start bragging about having sex with hookers, or check himself into rehab so he can earn as much money for “Two and a Half Men” as Charlie Sheen. I’m sure that Ashton Kutcher’s mom, I mean, Demi Moore, will help him out strategically with his next contract negotiations and career path.

 

It will be interesting to see how the show will replace Charlie Sheen with Ashton Kutcher. Ashton Kutcher is almost young enough to be Charlie Sheen’s son. (Ashton Kutcher was born in 1979 and Charlie Sheen was born in 1965.) Of course, given the intelligence of the fans of “Two and a Half Men,” people might not notice the difference. Afterall, all of Charlie Sheen’s drinking and carousing has left him with an extremely youthful appearance.

 

I’m also a little concerned that Ashton Kutcher is too clean cut for the role. Charlie Sheen’s reputation hasn’t just been ruined by his drinking and womanizing; he “accidentally” shot former fiancée Kelly Preston in the arm, and he was later arrested for pulling a knife on his wife Brooke Mueller. (I really don’t want Ashton to have to resort to domestic violence just to get the ratings up; I kind of like Demi Moore.)

 

Do you think that Ashton’s character will have a new name and turn up as a long lost brother? Or do you think the show writers will be lazy and leave the show exactly as it is? Will Ashton Kutcher’s character only date older women? Will he act as stupid as he did on “That 70’s Show?”

 

If you can stand to watch an entire episode just to find out the answers to these burning questions and more, please let me know.

 

Lady Gaga's Fashion Column: Pretentious and Annoying


 

Whether she is riding in egg-cocoons or attractively dressed raw flesh dripping with blood, it is stunningly obvious to everyone in the entire pop-loving culture world that Lady Gaga loves nothing better than making a grand entrance when the cameras are turned on. However, the fashion world hasn’t quite decided whether or not this makes Lady Gaga a great fashion writer.

 

In her new fashion column in V Magazine, Gaga explains that she is a librarian of pop culture fashion; as a warning to anyone daring to criticize her writing, she states that anyone should be able to understand her fashion column. Despite the ferocity of her warning, the “critics” haven’t remained silent about Gaga’s fashion column, which has been called “pretentious,” "annoying," and worse. Gawker, who broke the story, was not all that impressed with Lady Gaga’s column and neither was Media Bistro who wrote: 

 

“Essentially Gaga writes as pretentiously as possible, lecturing readers about how much fashion knowledge she has and why she’s so transcendent as an artist.”

 

In the column, Gaga discusses her inspirations for fashion on her music videos. And, although she is a self-proclaimed librarian of fashion, Gaga’s truthful fashion inspiration is derived from more than just books and fashion magazines. For example, the artist prides herself on her in-depth knowledge of biology. Regarding her mini-egg parade:

 

the Hussein Chalayan vessel I wore at the Grammys wasn’t inspired by a chicken. It was stolen from an egg. But the transformation, the context, and the approach taken to reinterpret the meaning of birth and rebirth in terms of fame on a fucking red carpet?—?this is what creates the modernity of the statement. The past undergoes mitosis, becoming the originality of the future.

 

Gaga’s “Born This Way" video was inspired by her youth; the specific inspiration for the video was apparently a combination of Bazooka bubble gum and memories of freely dancing with her mother as a kid. While the video was made to reach out to all audiences, she felt a strong need to connect with the younger generation in the video.

 

Like most who read the column, I am uncertain as to who Lady Gaga is trying to reach out to with her fashion commentary and incredibly well-documented sources. Was it really necessary to use the word “mitosis” to describe a re-birth? You know, given that she likes to reach out to the youth audience and all? And, while she does list several names that inspired her, she fails to explain how they inspired her.

 

Of course, because she is Gaga and because she wears meat on occasion, her fashion column will still be a success.

 

 

 

 

 

Lady Gaga and Our Culture

How the Internet helped create a Monster

I want to talk about Lady Gaga for a minute. Yes, I know if you read one more article about this woman you might explode but I am going to extrapolate on her in a much bigger perspective on her than just her music and looks. This is the exact musical act we deserve as a country. She is a beautiful representation of who we are and please don’t think that’s a compliment.

Her reign towards the top has really only happened in the last three or four years. But if you were to read about her in most articles you would think she’s been around for decades and decades to come. Whether she does this has nothing to do with her music. Yes, we all know about the image and the clothes and the baiting use of taboo topics. These are all the things I expect from my pop singers then why do we treat her as a revolutionary in pop music. Sure her songs her catchy and she clearly has some talent but so does Rhianna. She’s in the same business and actually has a lot more bigger hits but the way you read the press she’s a footnote to Lady Gaga giant career. Whether or not this has something to do with the color of her skin is for a different article completely.

We need to take a look at the last ten years to get a good look out our culture. We’ve seen the dawning of the internet, it’s stronghold on our culture via social networking, not mention reality TV. I feel all three of these things feed into making Lady Gaga the sensation that she is. Reality television over the last ten years have given a lot of people in this country and inflated sense of worth. It seems to take people who are inconsequential to our lives seem important. It also seems to make people believe they can become overnight sensations without the work. Even though Lady Gaga has only been around for years but everything she does is considered amazing and shocking and should be documented in every detail. She doesn’t even have to do anything original it’s already considered important whether it is or not. For the most part Lady Gaga retreads a lot of Madonna’s act except this time it’s blown even more out of proportion. You factor in the internet and social networking and this only exasperates the situation.

Lady Gaga wears a bunch of Kermit the Frogs for an outfit and it’s everywhere. This isn’t even shocking or musical it’s just a bad fashion sense yet it was everywhere. People used to talk about the cable news and its twenty-four hour cycle they have to fill. So every story would be come inflated to fill the time. The internet has created the same problem and the same vacuum to fill. Lady Gaga fills this perfectly. She dresses weird, gives strange sound bites, and all in all provokes a reaction in people. Good enough for any pop star but with this giant internet vacuum that needs to fill stories everything is elaborated on more and more. With social networking people get to weigh in and your thoughts become personalized. If someone doesn’t like your opinion on Lady Gaga then it becomes an attack on you; which then makes Lady Gaga seem way more important to you than she ever really was. Then blogs are written about her all the time to fill up the again that internet vacuum. As is this article which is just as guilty of what I am talking about. So people are taking personal stands and writing about her all the time which then makes her seem all the more important. This is not the case. She is the same as every pop star for every decade. She seems completely of the moment but will seem completely dated when the moment passes her. She seems like she might have the brains to stick around and reinvent herself. In three years we will start seeing the stripped down Lady Gaga no costumes just music. And then five years after that she’ll bring back the costumes and the fireworks.

The question that has to be asked will she matter. If our culture continues into this vacuum where everything seems important then she just might be the artist for the decade. So Lady Gaga is our representative mediocre talent and a whole lot ego. Hmm I wonder why we are in the mess we are in. I am not saying Lady Gaga is the cause of this; not at all, she is the direct result of that problem.

The douche bag obsession

As a product of the reality television, internet, and information generation, I am no stranger to new trends. For me, up until recently, this was completely ok—after all, I am usually open-minded and intrigued by new ideas. However, this new trend I simply cannot accept.

This new trend is the source of much confusion, and many people absolutely hate them. They are extremely irritating and prevent others from penetrating the very spotlight they selfishly are taking advantage of. They make sure that in the end, no one has fun. In addition to condoms, the widespread acceptance of the douche-bag is becoming far too prevalent.

I do realize that much like the unemployment rate, there will always be a natural percentage rate of douche-bags within modern society. However, it is like we are in a period of recession in terms of popular culture. The douche-bag rate has recently increased by heights that would make Neil Armstrong blush. If you don’t believe me, I have several examples of douche-nozzles that exhibit repulsive behavior on a regular basis: Donald Trump- Easily one of the biggest douche-mover’s of all time.

During his comedy central roast, I think Anthony Jeselnik summed it up the best, “The only difference between you and Michael Douglas from the movie Wall Street, is that no one is going to be sad when you get cancer.”

Gucci Mane- An “artist” that strings together series of lines that consist of mumbling, gibberish, and nonsensical word-play to form what some actually consider music. However, he really sealed his douche-fate with a tattoo of an ice cream cone on his face.

Justin Bieber- Happy to perform the cheesiest of crowd-pleasing pop music; some speculate he has yet to undergo certain biological processes of an adolescent. Waka Flocka Flame- Proof that talent isn’t necessary to obtain a record deal.

The Kardashian whores- Socialites that are famous for absolutely nothing. They also have TV shows that feature them doing absolutely nothing.

Jersey Shore- People who are an insult to real Italians—proof of this lies almost entirely in their attire and fake tans.

Unfortunately, despite their behavior, people just can’t get enough of the douche bag lifestyle. People love watching douche-bags live and perform—I suppose it’s similar to an addiction. It’s a shame there isn’t a 12-step process to extradite these douche-bags back to mental capacities which exceed that of an aborted fetus.

Pages