Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Tiptoe Tuesday

Thought for Today:
"To escape criticism — do nothing, say nothing, be nothing." — Elbert Hubbard, American author and publisher (1856-1915).

Sudiegirl's response:
Well, I guess I'm screwed.

Well, just another day in the life of me...I do feel kind of bad because I was grumpy this morning and barked at D. I don't like to do that, and even though I feel I'm justified sometimes, I still don't like to bark unless I absolutely have to.

So anyway, I'm feeling kind of poopy because of that, but hopefully it'll be better when he comes to pick me up.

Beyond that, this week is chock full o' office parties, and I want to skip tw
o of them. I just don't like them...I guess I know how the Grinch feels. The Saturday office party should be good, though - Brazilian BBQ. I'm down with any food served to me on a sword. Same with saganaki (the Greek cheese in egg batter that you set on fire...ah yeah).

However, today is chock full o' news, so I'm sharing with you.

First of all, the "Huh?" award is back...

Recipient: Texas State Representative Edmund Kuempel

Reason: This brain trust wants to pass legislation that allows blind people to hunt. To quote the article directly:

AUSTIN, Texas (Reuters) - A Texas lawmaker is aiming to allow the blind to hunt. Texas State Representative Edmund Kuempel has introduced a measure that would allow blind people to hunt any game that sighted people can currently pursue.

He hopes it will be passed after the legislature reconvenes in January though he does not expect it to come into affect until 2008.

"This opens up the fun of hunting to additional people, and I think that's great," Kuempel told Reuters.

Rep. Kuempel (which I think means "I was dropped on my head as an infant" in German) doesn't see any obstacles in the way of this legislation. After all, politicians of all makes and models (so to speak) endorse hunting, and it's big in Texas, you must admit. Also, this guy had enough foresight to actually include the point that a sighted hunter must be present. Gee, that's comforting.

Of course, there's further endorsement from the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department. Terry Erwin, the Hunter Education co-ordinator for Texas Parks & Wildlife, had this to say:

"A blind person can shoot a rifle by mounting an offset pistol scope on the side of the rifle instead of on top," said Terry Erwin, the Austin-based Hunter Education Coordinator with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.

"This allows their companion behind them to peer over their shoulder and help them sight it, but the blind person can pull the trigger," he told Reuters.

Judge's comments:

Well - I wrote about this type of sporting activity when I first started my blog in August of 2004. A blind man in Georgia hunts deer with the help of his steadfast redneck buddies. I thought it was a craptastic idea back then, and my mind hasn't changed much since.

I'm not trying to slam folks with visual disabilities - really, I'm not.

However, this has got to be the DUMBEST piece of legislation I've ever seen. I mean, really...too many things can go wrong. The sighted person can be a responsible hunter, but mistakes happen. And when they happen, he'll be in trouble along with the blind guy that pulled the trigger. Just because this kind of activity is possible for the visually impaired doesn't mean it's a good idea.

It's kind of like that exchange between Bill Murray and Harold Ramis in "Ghostbusters"...

"You remember that time you tried to drill a hole through your head?"
"That would have worked if you hadn't stopped me."

I mean, think about it...two guys are hunting. One is blind, one is sighted.

The gun and sight are set up in the proper manner as described by Mr. Erwin.

However, in a split second after the prey is sighted, a speck of dust flies in the sighted guy's eye, his eye tears up, and it's too late to correct the blind guy...he's already shot a truck belonging to the mayor, with the mayor's wife in it bleeding copiously from a sucking wound in her side.

(OK...I'm being dramatic...shut up...it's my blog.)

This is really stupid. I'm not slighting the great state of Texas, just this yahoo trying to pass the blind hunters legislation. I seriously hope it DOESN'T pass. That's all we need.

However, I am willing to supply unwitting targets so all those sharpshooters can get some practice. Give me a call - we'll talk.


Victory for Borat, and two new inductees for the "Butthead" Society!

Inductees: Two un-named frat boys.

Reason: To quote the article:

A judge rejected a request by two fraternity brothers to block the DVD release of the hit spoof movie "Borat."

West Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Joseph S. Biderman also refused to order the removal of a scene that includes the two men, who claim they had been duped into misbehaving on camera.

In short, these two members of Kappa Kappa STUPID claim they were tricked by Sacha Baron Cohen into making racist/sexist comments and captured on film. Oh, yeah, and they'd been DRINKING. The article states:

The South Carolina fraternity brothers sued Nov. 9, claiming they were tricked into making racist and sexist remarks to British comedian Sacha Baron Cohen in "Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan."

In one scene of the mockumentary, Cohen as rowdy Kazakh journalist Borat hangs out with three men in a motor home and watches the Pamela Anderson- Tommy Lee sex tape. One of the three men did not participate in the lawsuit.

The fraternity brothers claim the filmmakers got them drunk before getting them to sign release forms agreeing to appear in the film. Their names do not appear in the lawsuit.

The film "made plaintiffs the objects of ridicule, humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional and physical distress," the lawsuit claims.

The lawsuit itself will still be happening, but good ol' Joseph S. Biderman will not block the release of Borat's "tour de force" on DVD. (And just an aside...how can you watch the Pamela Anderson - Tommy Lee sex tape without making a sexist comment of some sort? I'd understand if they were watching "Lawrence of Arabia" or something, but Pamela Anderson is just a sexist comment waiting to be uttered.)

Judge's comments:

YEAH!!! WOO-HOO! Me loves Borat!

Now...as far as these three frat boys are concerned, something tells me they got themselves drunk. Yeah, the beer might have been there, but just cause it's there doesn't mean you have to DRINK IT!!! Does that mean you'd drink bleach if it were there instead of booze?

I am so sick of hearing that "it's the booze's fault" or "it's someone else's fault" argument. Really. Nobody can make you do anything you don't want to do.

Furthermore, don't you make your pledges go through humiliation, embarassment, and possible mental/emotional distress? Just look at it that way, maybe...

Unless you were held down and had the stuff forcibly poured down your throat, then you should take responsibility for screwing up and signing something while DRUNK! Boys - seriously - enough is enough. "Animal House" was a long time ago, John Belushi's dead...just give it up. Drink coffee and try to get more than a C average, 'k?

Finally, another "Egg-Suckin' Dog"!

Recipient: Seminole County Judge John Sloop, age 57

Reason: OH my...got a pad and a pencil and a 1/2 hour? Let me tell you about Judge Sloop. The article states that the judge:

...jailed 11 people because they were late for traffic court after being directed to the wrong courtroom.

Of course, you know what happens when you're put in jail, right? Yep - strip search. Strip searches of eleven individuals whose offenses included the following:

The 11 had gone to court on citations ranging from driving with a suspended license to having an illegal tag.

Two other judges, a sheriff and a bailiff tried to intervene, saying these eleven people were not to blame, that they were merely misdirected. Sloop didn't care, apparently.

Of course, there's more - there's ALWAYS more.

Sloop had also been accused of ignoring rules by refusing to release one defendant on a minor charge and treating another with rude and abusive behavior.

Sloop admitted to violating judicial canons but also stated that he has ADHD and has received treatment.

Judge's comments:

Uh - excuse me - isn't treatment for ADHD ongoing? It's supposed to be in one form or another, unless the meds make you worse than the illness.

I am glad he admitted to the mistakes, and as a bipolar patient, I know how symptoms interfere with daily cognitive skills. You make crappy decisions.

However, he's been a judge long enough that some things should come naturally to you. The fact that eleven people were mis-directed as opposed to one should be a big ol' red flag with purple stripes and polka dots, right? Therefore, when multiple folks all have the same claim, common sense should tell you, "Hey...wait a minute...maybe there's something to this."

If you know you have ADHD and try to work around your symptoms, you should just drop the ego and simply check it out for yourself.

In his case, it was not to be. And eleven people were strip-searched.

Do you smell a lawsuit? I do!

So finally - I'm just going to stroll off and create a separate entry for my Yahoo! Answers, Sudiegirl's responses stuff, as I don't want to make this entry any longer than it already is.


Your favorite miscreant,