ultimate 'your mom' joke

You simply cannot beat this.

Why, because she's German?

No, because she's your mom!

when $49,000,000 is not legit enough

Go to MSU, see Dubai.

Sounds like a better deal than getting a degree from there! Oh Snap!

Can I write off the purchase?

My doctor wecommended Wii-hab for my chronic condition.

vindication anyone?

Britney finally deemed unfit to live on her own!

killing in the name of (electrical modernity)

I'm firmly in support of thermo-nuclear power. Dangerous? Not nearly so much as people believe, and it doesn't even hold a candle to coal.

China has the world's most dangerous mines, and the government has closed thousands of small mines since 2006 in an effort to reduce fatalities by consolidating the industry into larger, more efficient operations. Last year, the number of mining fatalities dropped by one-fifth to 3,786 deaths, still the highest figure in the world. [according to the IHT]

Granted, China is pretty bad from all safety aspects (if I had to bet money on the next nuclear plant disaster, "somewhere in China" would be my first choice).

What? Athletes complaining about steroids in Chinese food? Heck, I won't even touch chicken unless it's been irradiated and has at least 3 head-like growths! I think in the 2008 Olympics, what the world will see is a 2^nd-world country trying desperately (and mostly superficially) to be considered part of the traditional First World.

That's not a knock against China per se, I think they have every right to get there, but I think the speed at which they are trying is going to leave the internal workings of the country as hollow as the old Soviet attempt (and current Russian attempt) to do the same. These things take time to be done right, and even the West still has hiccups similar to the recent cold-weather-induced transportation fiasco this Lunar New Year.

Then again, how can China succeed when the crazy, left-wing, liberal, pinko-commie Western Media^TM is hell-bent on destroying their propaganda? Heck, even Adolf never had it this bad. Poor Rupert - it seems all his travails to placate the Chinese just keep falling up short - damn that villainous Grey Lady! Damn her straight to hell!

Double-duh

Captain Obvious has struck again!


When was the last time real median incomes increased? Not for a long, long time now, during an administration far, far away ...

(PS - I know the above graphic from the Detroit Free Press is not entirely correct, but it's just meant to be a visual illustration)

Duh-vos

I'm continually amazed at how idiotic arguments are not only respected, they actually carry intellectual weight!

His proposed remedy: a code of conduct. "I'm baffled by why SWFs don't get together and put an end to all this discussion by agreeing on some piece of paper that says: We're under no circumstances going to speculate in currencies; we're always going to be a long-term investor; we're never going to use our SWF to pursue any political objective."

The SWF managers protested, as one, that since they had never engaged in any of the activities that Summers expressed concern about, there was no reason to try to regulate them so. "You're talking about how to pre-emptively regulate something that may happen," said Muhammad Al Jasser of Saudi Arabia.

Yes, we are talking about pre-emptive regulation - you don't wait for sovereign fund to exercise political control and then try to legislate, that's just retarded (even if it is the status quo). What's even more amusing is that if these funds already are not engaging in these activities, they they're already compliant with the proposed code of conduct! Oh, wait ...

"We've had a lot of resistance to regulating the hedge funds, and the rating agencies, even though there were failures galore. So, let's be a little bit more balanced." Touché! Kristin Halvorson of Norway responded that while Norway would appreciate having some common rules, the hypothetical examples Summers cited "would never be possible in Norway."

Summers responded with an anecdote about how the Norwegian fund had sold short the shares of Icelandic banks, and the potential political complications those actions raised.

Yes, capitalism in the end does mean we're all just greedy fucks making a beast with [green]backs.

the crux of my problem with capitalism

It's like that Al Pacino quote in The Devil's Advocate,

Let me give you a little inside information about God. God likes to watch - he's a prankster. Think about it. He give man instinct. He gives you this extraordinary gift, and then what does He do? I swear for His own amusement, His own private, cosmic gag reel, He sets the rules in opposition. It's the goof of all time. Look but don't touch. Touch, but don't taste. Taste, don't swallow. Ahaha. And while you're jumpin' from one foot to the next, what is he doing? He's laughin' His sick, fuckin' ass off! He's a tight-ass! He's a SADIST! He's an absentee landlord! Worship that? NEVER!

In order for capitalism to work, you have to weight the incentives appropriately with respect to the outcomes. You don't want rogue traders? Penalize them so they are ruined, no the company (e.g., Barings). Although I am heartened to see that the dehumanizing corporate machine can still be damaged/destroyed by the actions of a single human being, for it signifies that all is not yet lost, it doesn't have to be like this. (That the dehumanizing corporate machine played a role in motivating them to hide their losses longer, and probably also tinged their feelings with more maliciousness than the news media will report, is a debate for a much longer entry.)

There is a very simple reason why corporate types never "learn": you want companies in dangerous industries to be safe and stop killing people? Set the financial incentives such that death carries such an unwieldy burden that companies will avoid it at literally any cost. Want people to stop polluting? Make it financially inconvenient. Since corporations are legally bound to seek profit, only those incentives that damage their profits (existing, or the ability to generate more) will be heeded. Stop treating inconveniences as "externalities" or think that lifecycle analyses are attempts to boil the ocean - if you penalize for noncompliance, it shall be done!

It is that simple.

complaint department, ground floor

I can't imagine what the denizens of an autocratic island paradise could possibly have complained about. Actually, the complaints sound like something out of high school, which might actually be a pretty good argument for the style of life there.

we heart Pakistan

Does this article ever give me confidence in our "allies" in Pakistan:

Kidwai said any decision on using a nuclear weapon would rest with the 10-member National Command Authority chaired by the president, "hopefully by consensus but at least by majority." The decision would be conveyed to the Strategic Plans Division and then through the military chain of command.

Kidwai acknowledged that two Pakistani nuclear scientists had met with Osama bin Laden in Kandahar, Afghanistan, during the rule of the Taliban regime. But a three-month investigation held after the Sept. 11 attacks on America had cleared the two men and established "nothing dangerous had happened."

So not only does it only take six (6) Pakistani officials to decide to launch a nuke, these same officials don't believe that meeting with Osama bin Laden constitutes danger! Seriously, what the fuck?

was it all slimy when it arrived?

snail mail earns its nickname!

So they can take the time to calculate a snail's trek, but they can also die flying to an air safety meeting? Does not compute!

Fans of information conveyance methodologies, rejoice!

awesome!

Awesome: redux! (this is also cool - another take on the below)

"Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know."

Hemingway quotes.

Agree: "All good books are alike in that they are truer than if they had really happened."

Yes! "That is what we are supposed to do when we are at our best - make it all up - but make it up so truly that later it will happen that way."

Me too: "All my life I've looked at words as though I were seeing them for the first time."

Concur: "All our words from loose using have lost their edge."

Disagree: "All modern American literature comes from one book by Mark Twain called Huckleberry Finn."

weeping

I felt extremely sympathetic to the plight of our nation's insurers when I read how they've struggled in the wake of 9/11 and Katrina. I mean, how terrible is this?

The loss ratio for property-casualty insurance companies, or the percentage of premiums paid out to policyholders as benefits, was 54.6 percent last year, according to the study, up from 53.3 percent in 2006 but far below the 75 percent level of the late 1980s.

The study — based on insurance industry data and companies' financial reports — estimates that the insurance industry's net income after taxes in 2007 will be $65 billion, down from the record $67.6 billion set in 2006 but above 2005's $48.8 billion.

I can understand how emotional someone can get over those numbers.

"The absence of any major storm or earthquake has allowed insurers to post two modestly profitable years. But it wasn't long ago, 2004 and 2005, when our industry suffered record natural-catastrophe losses," Marc Racicot, president of the American Insurance Association, said in a statement.

Certainly our incompetent government is partly to blame for this travesty.

Insurace companies have received about $4 billion in subsidies, the report says, since the federal Terrorism Risk Insurance Act took effect in November 2002 after insurers' costs from the Sept. 11 attacks hit $32 billion. The backstop under the act, in which the government agrees to reimburse insurers up to $100 billion in the event of another attack by foreign terrorists, was extended for another seven years under legislation enacted by Congress last month and signed into law by President Bush.

I mean, on top of all of this you have completely frivolous claims - how is one to cope? I'm surprised the insurers even stay in business.

No Wonder They Hate Us: Part 151,000 (and counting)

This is definitely a lowball estimate. I mean, some of the people trying to count the death toll ended up in the morgue!

Oh, and no matter the tactics, remember: Iraq isn't just a pure numbers game, it's about winning the hearts and minds of the broader Muslim community. We can achieve that simply by our disregard for international treaties and conventions, which illustrates that we have bigger guns (dicks) than any other nation and we are more willing (gay) to shove said weaponry down any opposition's throats (die, sandniggaz, die!).

My favorite tidbits:

To Jordan's offense [um - shouldn't that be "defense"?]
Maj. Kris Poppe, Jordan's attorney, said he argued that Jordan "faced these very serious charges for a long period of time, that he had been found not guilty of any offense related to the abuse of detainees, and that he had a stellar record."

Yes, that is significant because as we all know the statue of limitations is a very important matter in torture - just ask those 80-something Nazi war criminals how grateful they are that the minds of the world have forgotten their acts.

Rowe agreed. [no shit] "In light of the nature of the offense that Jordan had been found guilty of committing and the substantial evidence in mitigation at trial and in post-trial matters submitted by defense counsel, Rowe determined that an administrative reprimand was a fair and appropriate disposition of the matter," Joanna P. Hawkins, a military spokeswoman, said in a statement.

I mean, how serious of an offense is offending a suspected terrorist? It ranks right below a raspberry and just above giving someone's tongue a paper cut if I recall my CIA world torture guidebook correctly ...

Jordan: 'I'm gratified and glad'
"I'm still a little bit shocked by it all, but I'm gratified and glad that Gen. Rowe saw it for what it really is," he said. "I don't know if any officer needed to be held accountable, but I obviously don't believe it should have been me."

Obviously, since the accountability of decision-makers for horrible decisions is what makes Bush so popular in the US. Why shouldn't it be the same for the rest of the world - being so envious of our 'freedoms' after all, they should be ecstatic! Aren't all mens hearts and minds created equal in the eyes of our vengeful Christian God?

I've got yer ABM treaty right here!

Any wonder why Putin's anti-Western posturing is so popular among the majority of Russians? To wit:

Clinton did not venture into the Middle East to bring his stature to bear on negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians until his second term. His administration refused to submit the UN Kyoto Protocol on climate change for ratification and did not support the new International Criminal Court. But Clinton's charm and persuasion helped to shield America from criticism.

The Bush administration continued these policies, using a much blunter tone. It unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty it signed with the former Soviet Union in 1972, which forbade the testing and deployment of a ballistic missile defense system. It signed a pact with India, supporting its nuclear weapons program, which further undermined the nuclear nonproliferation treaty.

Yet when President Vladimir Putin of Russia suspended participation in the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe last month, there was an outcry by the United States and the Europeans. They cast Putin as a potential spoiler of the post-Cold War order, ignoring what Washington had done earlier.

So far, neither Republican nor Democrat candidates have suggested returning to the ABM treaty.

holy tubs of lard, Batman!

How can people be so dumb? We're not sheep, we're cud-chewing cows. A couple highlights.

"Many obesity studies have shown that, in developed countries, the less educated you are, the more likely you are to become obese." = you're dumb

"She couldn't explain why her weight had got to this extreme point, but suggested to me that being born premature may have been a factor." = you're fucking stupid. Here's an explanation: you consumed more calories than you expended. It ain't yo momma's fault, it's fucking YOURS!

it's all downhill from there

LMFAO!

Lip service to South Africa’s new kissing law:
Teens express outrage with public displays of affection

"We're young. We need to experiment," Natalie Winston, 12, said before the protest here. "When you're 21, you're old already, and ugly."

Obviously this naive young lady has never seen a porn film (and should, post-haste!). Or underwear models. Or women in general, lol. I love the added insult of "and ugly," at the end, that's really high class!

bredia mainwashing

What are the odds? How can people be so seriously paranoid?

again, the myth of the liberal media

I could go on for many pages, but this example sums up the argument nicely:

Thus, in 1994, Time celebrated the Republican victory in the midterm elections by putting a herd of charging elephants on its cover. But its response to the Democratic victory of 2006—a victory in which House Democrats achieved a larger majority, both in seats and in the popular vote, than the Republicans ever did in their 12-year reign—was a pair of overlapping red and blue circles, with the headline "The center is the place to be."

Remember George W. and his "mandate"? Bush won essentially by one state (Ohio, which I believe could have easily been rigged). In contrast, when Clinton was unquestionably demolished Dole in 1996 for re-election (supposedly as the Republicans were surging in popularity), he never made the same type of grandiose statement about the power vested in him.

This is why I always feel like the Democrats play nicer/more humbly at politics than (and get burned harder for it by) the Republicans. I also find it ironic that Republican candidates of extremely dubious experience (Reagan) are touted as heroes, yet candidates like Clinton (and Obama especially) are consistently questioned about their experience. Why isn't the same standard applied to the likes of Mitt Romney - what experiences make him any better suited for President than Clinton? Than Obama? Because he wants to 'double' Guantanamo? Morons.

Of course, the conservative counter-argument is that the ones in power shouldn't gloat, lest they reveal their power and suffer the wrath of the misled public. But wait, do the Reps take their own advice? See above.