Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Oh My, the Truly Special Things that New Year's Eve Means to So Many of Us as the Day Ushers in a Fresh New Year...

I'm nearly giddy and ecstatic over here as I ponder all the bright possibilities that 2014 has to offer. Please allow me to count the ways, in no particular order:

- The New Year means I embark upon my 4th year of being a man (under the Mike Gundy definition). Although, gotta say, this man thing ain't exactly all it's cracked up to be. May I go back to my 20s, if only for a few days?

- The New Year means only 3 more years of the heinous presidency of Barack Obama. Although, after these two rotten parties have stuck us with two of the worst presidents in American history for 13 long years now, I don't exactly have a lot of confidence that we're gonna get a much better offering come 2016.

- The New Year means (prediction time here) a wonderful continuation of the gridlock that's resided in Washington DC since the 2010 midterms: Obama will be the president of course, and the right-winger gop-ers will maintain control of the House in the 2014 midterms. (Tell me, any fellow Independents out there, do you really want an end to gridlock, such that either of these two parties control everything (presidency, House and Senate) ever again? If so, please say "Obamacare" 10 times over and then get back to me.)

-The New Year means just another year of economic malaise across the country and sinful deficit spending by the federal government. Can you say $18 trillion national debt?

- The New Year means just another year of my sports teams (Kansas City and University of Missouri) failing to win much of anything of consequence, but yet again teasing all their fans by having their proverbial "moments."

- The New Year means I'm gonna have to shell out some jack to get a new stinkin' television. The old one went on the fritz, and while it's been nostalgic resurrecting the 13-inch job that I used in college, you have to sit like two feet in front of that son of a bitch to make out a damn thing.

- The New Year means that hot little blonde number on "Game of Thrones" may finally come across the sea and start kicking some ass (and makin' some love) on the mainland. Seems like that one's been in the works for four freakin' years already!

- The New Year means plenty of new violent carnage and hot broads on some of my other favorite TV shows, such as "Banshee," "Strike Back," "Justified," "Ray Donovan," "American Horror Story," "The Walking Dead," "Bates Motel," etc., etc.  That part of the New Year will be cool, leastways.

- The New Year means that one or more hot (but desperate) dolls who were once low-list celebrities will break into porn (or, at the very least, pose for Playboy). Who will it be this year? Kate Gosselin? Courtney Stodden? Ruben Studdard?

-And finally, the New Year (as it seems most years go anymore) means saying goodbye to at least a few old friends and family. And no, Senators and House members who get voted out in November -- you don't count.

So much to look forward to. And please do remind me next year not to count the ways again on the 31st.  It be bringin' down my whole damn day over here!


Friday, December 27, 2013

Beat Them Little Shits Early & Often: Unique Parenting Book From 1994 Still Makes the Rounds on Amazon with a Message that the Only Bad Beating Is No Beating At All...

He ain't no Santa Clause.  It's titled, "To Train Up a Child" -- a "parenting book" written by Michael and Debi Pearl (pictured above) that first found popularity almost 20 years ago. And the book still apparently finds an audience on Amazon -- never mind that it "has been linked to three deaths in seven years."

And this literary classic's continued fandom is little mystery to me. To provide a little taste, just enough to wet your beak: From the info contained in the linked articles, I've attempted to distill the book's purported parenting advice into a sort of rudimentary Ten Commandments for Parents. Here goes (in no particular order):

1. Start the kid young on a regular "training" regiment that involves giving the tot a good beatin' daily with a leather strap or belt.

2. If that's not effective in training up the child, then go to town on the tike with a "one-foot-long ruler" (not 6 inches, mind you, but the full 12).

3. If that too doesn't work, graduate the brat up to a nice wooden yardstick.

4. Still having trouble? Then do a number on the nestling with a "large tree branch."

5. And if all else fails, get yourself a big "rod" and lay the metal down on the lad.

6. If the toddler is particularly quick, elusive and hard to catch, then "do not hesitate" to "sit on him" in order to administer the beatdown.

7. Be sure to "hold him down until he has surrendered."

8. The goal should always be to "defeat him totally."

9. Remember: Your unflinching goal must always be to instill, just like in a young puppy dog or a fledgling member of the Hitler Youth, an "unquestioning obedience" to your authority.

10. Therefore, behind every good beating or maiming is a "purpose to condition the child's mind and to make them surrender completely to their parents' authority."

So there you have it: All you'd ever want to know about child-rearing in ten simple, violent talking points. If only I'd heard of this book a few days ago when I was in need of a few last minute stocking stuffers. But oh well: They got nunchucks instead.


Wednesday, December 25, 2013

Christmas Spirit: "Daddy Gave Us Matching Boob Jobs!," Say Cali Sisters After Their Plastic Surgeon Old Man Went to Work on 'Em...

He did a real number on 'em, too. To the tune of about 32-C. But ya know...

If your old man's a fisherman, you're going to grow up in a house with the stench of brine about it. If he's a mafia hood, you grow up with spontaneous gifts of TV sets, furs and gaudy jewelry all the time. And the same holds true if the old man's a plastic surgeon, apparently -- boob jobs and Botox all around for Daddy's little girls!

That's certainly the "charmed" life that's been led by Sisters Charm (buxom blonde) and Brittani (bosomy brunette) of Orange County, California (link below/pics above). Their old man is a local plastic surgeon, and just check out the toothsome timelines of these two broads' young lives (both now 25 years old):

- Charm "first went under [Daddy] Michael's knife at the tender age of 10 when she had her protruding belly button reshaped."

- Brittani first wanted a boob job when she was 15, but her parents (Dr. Mike and Mama Penny) went old school, forcing her to wait until she was 18. Says Brittani: "When I graduated high school, Daddy surprised me by saying, 'I've scheduled you in to have your boobs done next week.' I was so excited!"

- But that wasn't before Mama Penny took some further convincing. Says Mama: "Brittani was so insistent that eventually I said, "OK, show me your breasts.' Then I could see why she wanted implants and realized it would be beneficial for her to get her breasts enlarged, so I agreed."

-Three years later, the old man gave Brittani a nose job for her 21st birthday.

- And just so that Sis wouldn't get the upper honker over there, Charm had the old man give her a boob job earlier this year as well. This after Charm became concerned that "exercise had reduced the volume of her chest" (damn pesky healthy livin'). So that bust job was a real no-brainer: "I know I'm in safe hands [with Daddy]," said Charm.

- But there's more to life than just having big pair of fake cans, of course, and both Charm and Brittani make sure to avail themselves of all of the old man's services, "regularly having facial peels and Botox" at Daddy's clinic.

- Crowed Charm: "Every other month I'll get something done to my skin. I also get Botox in my armpits, which helps me stop sweating."

And on that big bowl of raunchy stench, the Rager bids everyone out there, big-bazonga'd or not, a Very Very Ma--mm--ary Christmas!


Monday, December 23, 2013

No Leg to Stand On: Creepy Hardware Store Zombie With No Legs & Only One Arm Turns Out NOT to be a Real Zombie!

Turns out, you see, that he was just pulling your leg. The recent YouTube video appeared to show a real-life, one-limbed member of the undead, as it hissed and snarled at terrified hardware store customers in Joisey. So frightened was one storegoer, in fact, that he took to hurling store merchandise at the ghoul...

But this horror show just didn't have legs, in the end, as the creep was only local prankster Nick Santonastasso -- who ain't even dead. He was born, however, with three missing limbs because of a condition known as Hanhart Syndrome -- which made his little Dawn of the Dead act all the more believable for customers and Net viewers.

Nick says he hopes the stunt will give him a leg up on the competition to land a zombie role on his favorite TV show, AMC's "The Walking Dead" (what else would it be?). I just hope the show -- whose Season 4 will be on its last legs come February -- gives this one-armed, legless little guy a chance to break a leg come Season 5. Just please don't let Michonne hack off his one remaining limb.


Friday, December 20, 2013

Leave It To Beaver: Playboy's Miss January 2013 Dani Mathers Seems to Bear Little or No Actual Resemblance to Her '60s TV Child Star Namesake, Jerry...

[Preface: This one is for my good friend, HAH, who lost an important person today. I've promised HAH this Dani Mathers post for at least a few weeks now, and so finally today I deliver -- Boob Biden and FakeNey Stodden be damned...]

My best Net researching efforts this week couldn't seem to pin down whether or not glamour model (Miss January 2013) Dani Mathers is actually related to the old "Beaver Cleaver" child star, Jerry Mathers (2nd pic above). But alas, what the hell does it really matter?

That's Dani above (at 24, young enough to be the Beaver's granddaughter) as she sashayed around a sandy photo shoot in Venice Beach recently. Oh My! (I'm not so sure Ward and June would approve of them duds, BTW).

And I don't mean to be a little hard on the Beaver, either: Before he got old and fat in real life, the Beaver was a cute little guy in the old show, best known for his bad grammar and various hijinks that typically resulting from Eddie Haskell or others "giving him the business."

So the Beaver could conceivably be kin to Dani. It ain't beyond the ol' realm. No foolin', Wally.


Friday, December 13, 2013

Up For Grabs? Following Alleged "Separation" of 19-Year-Old Courtney Stodden From Her 53-Year-Old Hubby, I Question Whether This Big Buxom Fake-Boobed Broad Is Truly Back on the Market...

"TV personality" Stodden this week retreated to a Cali beach for some sunbathing and various self-taken, narcissistic photos of herself (do they have a word for that now?)...

Of course, her old man -- 53-year-old "Green Mile actor" Doug Hutchison (who married Stodden when she was 16) -- was nowhere to be seen after the couple's recent "separation." But how much of this "separation" is just for show, and how much of it is actually real?

To wit (and as reported in the Daily Mail):

- "The couple are still living and working in close quarters."

- "Doug has retained his position as Courtney's co-manager."

- "The pair have continued to share their marital home."

- "Courtney and Doug were recently spotted enjoying a cosy dinner date at Musso and Frank in Hollywood despite their split."

Hardly sounds like Splitsville to me. And hardly necessary to garner publicity either...

As the linked story demonstrates (as well as another story this week about Stodden darkening her hair), all this hot little number has to do to generate some pub is show up somewhere in public with her mighty melons in tow. Hell, it's worked on me more than once over here. 


Wednesday, December 11, 2013

Anything to Avoid Cookin' Supper: Broad Allegedly Caps Her Hubby in Drive-By Shooting as the Old Man Works in His Driveway!

The story's from Warren County, Mississippi, where cops say 58-year-old Mary Lou Neeley pulled up in her car and shot her old man right in the stomach before driving away (link below). Mary Lou now faces aggravated assault charges (BTW, does everyone in Mississippi have two first names plus an external shithouse?).

If you're a man, you gotta hate the precedent set here. This crime is closely akin to the old lady pulling a bank job while hubby's the teller. Or the old lady launching a home invasion against her own house after the old man's hit the hay inside.

I mean, what's next? The old lady mugging the old man out on the street after work? And I swear if I next hear about some wife playing the "Knockout" game on her old man, I'm officially gonna declare that a "War on Men" has erupted. Then all we'd need is a way to tie in the gop-ers as the root cause.


Friday, December 6, 2013

Better First Check the Letter Next to the Name: "Biden Urges Chinese Students to Take Inspiration from Young Americans & Challenge Their Government Leaders"...

Right! 2013 America: Where the citizens have unbridled freedom to speak out in opposition against their government...

Unless you're that cancer patient who recently complained that Obamacare forced him to lose his policy and who was then promptly hit with an IRS audit related to his 2009 tax return (link below).

Or unless you're an insurance company with something critical to say about the botched Obamacare rollout -- which recently resulted in the White House exerting "massive pressure" on insurance companies (i.e. regulatory threats) to keep their mouths shut (link below).

Or unless you're a political group on the opposite side from the leftists, which makes you a natural target to be singled out for IRS harassment (link below).

Or unless you have the nerve to say one word opposing Obama, which results in the gag reflex from the leftist blogosphere and propaganda machine to label you a racist -- with the full acquiescence of their acolyte media (as documented previously in this space).

And jeezal peezal, these are only the examples that I can recall from the past six weeks or so!

So as for Biden, allow me to amend that fool's statements, Chinese students. Here goes: Take inspiration from America and its citizens' right to challenge their government -- just watch out you don't challenge the parts of the government with a "D" next to their name. That course of action tends to end rather badly these days for many of the perpetrators.


Wednesday, December 4, 2013

The Crying Lame: Latest Tear-Jerker from "Leaker" of the House John "Party Time" Boehner Has Him All Choked Up Over Once Having to Perform Manual Labor For His Old Man!

Man. This gop-er career politician just can't seem to ever give an interview without letting the tears fly. The latest incident had Party Time appearing on Sunday's "60 Minutes" and getting the saltwater flowing when asked whether he ever takes being in the U.S. House for granted:

"Never. Listen, for a guy who grew up mopping floors at my dad's bar, it's pretty humbling experience [getting emotional as he spoke]." (First link below).

Gosh, you'd think being another elected slimeball in the House is the stuff of legends or something, or that having to push a mop to make a buck is far beneath any self-respecting human being.

But I guess I can sort of see where Party Time's coming from: Once forced to clean up the boozy spills and other debris left behind by drunken bar-goers, now it's Party Time who gets the last laugh -- as he regularly knocks off before 5:00 p.m. to go party it up with some drinks and a pack of smokes at the latest congressional happy hour (second link below).

Perhaps next Party Time can get a good cry going as he bemoans the lack of tanning salons in daddy's old neighborhood and how the pasty light tones of his teenage flesh caused the schoolkids to hum "Whiter Shade of Pale" every time he showed up. A damaged childhood, this guy.


Monday, December 2, 2013

What Second Amendment? "New York Man Charged with Harrassment for Repeatedly Firing Civil War Cannon at Neighbors' Homes"...

Hello! The cannon was unloaded, people! (Link below). Nobody was gonna get hurt over there!

This story worries me. It brings me distress. Am I gonna get tossed in the hoosegow the next time I feel like blasting off my Gatling Gun out on the back forty? Or thrown in the freezer if I choose to spray around my Tommy Gun as part of a reenactment of the St. Valentine's Day Massacre? As is my constitutional right. Even if I don't maim anyone?

Where have you gone, Charlton Heston? New York Cannon Man and I turned our lonely eyes to you. Boo, hoo, hoo.


Postscript:  My old friend, Jimmy Van Gobble, died about 2 years ago tonight.  I miss him a lot.  Always will.

Friday, November 29, 2013

Some Broads Are Just Better Suited as MILFs Than Book Authors: Kate Gosselin's New Cookbook Gets Panned by Critics as "Sordid Attempt to Stay Relevant"!

How does one go wrong, exactly, with a damn cookbook? Well leave it to Kate Gosselin to provide the recipe (links below)...

The 38-year-old Gosselin calls it "Love Is in the Mix," but most critics haven't seemed to love a single thing about the cookbook since its recent release.  For one thing, critics say, the pages turn more like a family photo album than a cookbook, chock full of "rehashed old photos" of "Jon and Kate Plus 8."

Then the book goes full-on big bowl of wrong with the actual cooking recipes that it does contain, critics have howled.  As examples:

-  "Rehashed Internet recipes."
-  "Not so original."
-  "A terrible waste of time and money."
-  "I'm not sure why this was even published."
-  "Recycled from the back of soup cans."

But even leaving aside their "canned" nature, the recipes are also reportedly very difficult to follow, leaving it up to the reader to decide how much of a particular ingredient to include. Wrote one Amazon reviewer:

"The measurements are insane. 2 or 3 cloves of garlic? 2 or 3 cups of rice? What is it? 2 or 3???"

The book's also been described as "clearly a last-gasp attempt to cash in on the Gosselin name." But as these things go, it seems there's always another gasp...

And with Octomom and Teen Mom as pioneers paving the way, maybe next we'll see Kate in porn?? Now, there's some soup cans I would actually take a look at.


Wednesday, November 27, 2013

Finding the Racist Under Every Bed, Part 2: UCLA Professor "Corrects Minority Students' Capitalization & Grammar, Is Accused of Racism"...

...The racist conduct at issue apparently extends to correcting punctuation as well. Oh, the humanity. I just worry what these aggrieved students might be forced to endure next at UCLA?

Receiving a "B" maybe? Having incorrect multiple choice answers marked wrong? Being called on in class when they really didn't want to be? Receiving a markdown for too many absences?

Can you imagine the good professor ever holding up a white person to such ridicule? Of course not. And that's why Prof is now going to be given the opportunity to exonerate himself by proving a negative, i.e. that he's not a racist. Yeah, good luck with that one, pal.


Monday, November 25, 2013

Left-u-cation: "Obama Biography Required Reading for Fourth Graders" in Illinois, "Casts White Americans Who Disagree with Obama's Politics as Racist." Well, This Racist Has a Few Questions...

To wit:

1. When in the hell did Jimmy Carter and Oprah Winfrey start writing children's books?

2. Given that Carter delivered some of the worst presidential speeches in American history, what publisher in her right mind would hire him to pen a book?

3. Is there any tentacle of our archaic capitalist system that Oprah won't exploit to make a buck? Damn one percenter billionaires.

4. If a man limits expressing disagreement with Obama to when he's out in a forest by himself, is he still a racist?

5. Even if he double dog promises never to blaspheme like that ever again?


Friday, November 22, 2013

"We Didn't Use the Nuclear Option!" (Until Now): democrat party Goes Nuclear to Allow Obama's Judicial & Executive Branch Nominees to be Confirmed in the Senate on a Simple Majority Vote That Ends Any Filibuster...

I can still recall arguing with a pack of leftists one night on the Facebook in the past few years.  I got my procedural gimmicks mixed up and mistakenly used the term "nuclear option" instead of "reconciliation" to describe the procedural maneuver that the democrat party abused to foist Obamacare into law on a mere 51 votes in the Senate in 2010...

You'd have thunk that I had just accused Bill Clinton of being a philanderer and a liar or something! "We didn't use the nuclear option!," screamed the leftists, as if mixing up the names of the two 51-vote procedural gimmicks was even worth more than a passing mention by them. But indeed, it allowed the leftists to ignore the substance of my argument (that Obamacare passed in highly slimeball fashion) and instead focus all attention on my reference to the wrong gimmick name...

Now democrat party and its Leftist Base Unanimously Cheer Use of the Nuclear Option

So how ironic (more like predictable) it is this week, a year or two later, that the democrat party (at Obama's behest and on a straight party-line vote) used that same dreaded "nuclear option" to pass what effectively amounted to an historic Senate rules change (normally requiring 67 votes) with only 51 votes. The rule change itself (technically called "establishing a precedent" rather than a strict change of the rules) permits the confirmation of presidential judicial and executive branch nominees by 51 votes instead of 60 (i.e., it now only takes 51 votes to end a filibuster on a nominee).

Never mind that ending filibusters on presidential nominations in the Senate (as best as I can tell) has required at least 60 votes for the past 225 years. Never mind that 60 votes served as a crucial check on the power of presidents of both parties to nominate radical ideologue judges (just wait until Obama gets going on that one now).

Never mind, either, that these same leftists would be out marching in the streets if the right-winger gop-ers ever attempted such a sleazy, "un-American," "naked power grab" (as VP Joe Biden and the above-pictured Senate majority leader Harry Reid referred to the nuclear option in 2005 when there was an "R" next to the president's name -- both Biden and Reid, like Obama, take an opposite position now than they did then). Hypocrites. As usual. But the ends do always justify the means, right leftists?

Meanwhile gop-ers Look as Hapless, Clueless and Powerless As Ever In Their Response

Meantime it appears the gop-ers didn't put up much of a fight on this one, almost content to let the democrat party have its way this time. The gop-ers' standard talking point has been to take smug satisfaction in the fact that the democrat party's move will allow gop-ers to more easily confirm their own presidential nominees, with 51 votes ending any filibuster, when the gop-ers win the presidency. But two huge problems with that line of thinking...

First, how incredibly presumptuous of the gop-ers to think that they will win the presidency anytime soon. It could happen, but it also may be awhile. For example, odds are (although certainly not assured) that we're looking at up to 8 years of Hillary Clinton starting 2017. Good grief, that's a whole lotta years of leftist presidents stacking the federal judiciary with leftist ideologues. Scary proposition. Which is now reality.

Second, and maybe just as significantly, these gop-ers don't even seem to be considering this fact:  If gop-ers win a presidential election at a point in time when the democrat party still holds a majority in the Senate, then the democrat party in the lame-duck period following the election could simply use the nuclear option again and, with 51 votes, change the rule back to the way it was (60 votes necessary to end a filibuster on a presidential nominee).

Yes, that would mean the democrat party having the unmitigated gall to use an extraordinary, hyper-partisan tactic, the nuclear option, (1) not only to change an historic rule when it benefits them politically (as they do now), but also (2) to simply change the rule back when the original rule benefits them politically. The stuff of banana republics, you might ask? Something that would never happen in this country? Well, I've got only one thing to say to that: Look at the people you're dealing with here.


Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Lost Opportunity: Obama Leaves Out "Under God" From His Out-of-Town Recording of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address on its 150th Anniversary -- But Why Stop There?

Why stop at a paltry two words? If you're gonna start omitting or changing the things you don't like in Lincoln's historic Address (Obama blames the omission on the "copy" that he was given to read -- right, just a coincidence!) -- then why not go to town and really inject some leftist 20 percenter wisdom into the old yarn? I'll even get Obama started with a rough working draft that maybe he can put to use next year:

"Four score and seven years ago, our so-called founding fathers, every single one of whom was a slaveholder, brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty for white English guys, and dedicated to the proposition that all white English men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil set of internal workplace violence incidents, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived without an abortion and so dedicated, can long endure.  We are met on a lousy battle-field of that violence -- I only wish we could have used drone strikes here instead of boots on the ground.

We have come to dedicate a portion of that field to the federal government, as not only a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live, but also as a nice spot for some new roads and bridges. It is all together fair and socially just that we should do this. After all, you couldn't build that.

But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate -- we cannot consecrate -- we cannot hallow -- this ground and future site of more infrastructure investment. The army corpse-men, living and dead, who ravaged each other here like animals, have consecrated it, almost as much as the federal government's incredible power to add to it.

The world will little note, nor remember what we say here nearly as long as they'll remember my Nobel Prize, but it can never forget what they did here and what the government will do here in the future.  It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work that we still have to do in my final three years in office. I still have one campaign left in me.

It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great tasks remaining before us -- righting the sinking Obamacare ship and passing an omnibus immigration bill, which shall forever cement my legacy -- that we here highly resolve that these dead military guys shall not have died just so that we would allow a good crisis to go to waste -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of progress -- and that government, sweet government, of democrat party people, by the intellectual people, for all the dumb people out there, shall not perish from the earth, lest we get to the point where America really deserves that."

So give that one a try next time, Obama. If you get any pushback, just blame it on someone giving you the "Rager Copy" of the Address.


Monday, November 18, 2013

LOL: Literally! "Football Coach Fired After He Planned Party for 12-Year-Olds at HOOTERS, Then Refused to Change Venue, Insisting 'It's Not a Strip Club'"!

He's Corbett Middle School football coach Randy Burbach, and a part of me says this dude's a man after my own heart for taking his crew of 12-year-olds to the Jantzen Beach Hooters near Portland, Oregon (link below).  But the other part of me screams, What an Idiot!

If I had a 12-year-old son, I don't think I'd have any problem taking him to a Hooters.  It's just a bar-and-grill food joint (and pretty tasty at that).  So what if the broads there who serve you tend to have great racks and show off a fair amount of cleavage?  Is that so wrong?

But alas, many people out there don't quite see the world on the same terms that I do.  And if I'm lookin' to take a team of 12-year-old kids to get some eats at some local joint, then Hooters ain't it... 

You see, in this life, a man -- particularly one acting as a leader of young people -- needs to look a few clicks down the ol' road when it comes to his decision-making.  He needs to see and consider the obvious fact that many parents of 12-year-old boys are gonna be none too appreciative of plans that place the boys in front of a bunch of scantily-clad gazongas.

And guess what, Coacher -- that's their right.  They're the kids' parents, not you.  You (like me) might not have a problem with 12-year-olds at Hooters, but the fact that they, the parents, do have an issue with it should be given the ultimate respect.

Or put much more simply, what are ya thinkin', You Fool?!?  But many thanks to Coach Burbach for giving me a big laugh with that quoted headline that resulted from his ill-conceived decision.  In these rotten times, we need all the big laughs we can get.