In the wake of the Connecticut school shootings,
calls have come again for gun control. This is a show hubris by
“Blue State” liberals. They must realize that the last time
Democrats called for stricter gun control, the Republicans seized the
issue and gained a majority in the House of Representatives. I do
not think that the Republicans really represent the economic
interests of most “Red Staters.” However, the Republicans were
able to leverage this issue to put them into a position that allows
obstruction of any progressive and needed policy, like health care.
Recent news coverage estimates annual gun deaths in the United States
to be between eight and thirty thousand. While tragic, I have to
wonder how many more millions of lives will be lost due to inadequate
health care that results from an issue, like gun control, that drives
voters to the right.
Tuesday, December 25, 2012
Friday, September 21, 2012
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Christine McKinley Strikes Out Again
On a recent episode of “Brand Meltzer's Decoded”, the crew is investigating the “Alaska Triangle,” an area delimited by the cities of Juneau, Anchorage and Barrow. Apparently there is a much higher rate of disappearance of people and aircraft in this area than in the rest of the state. This triangle contains three of the largest cities in the 49th state, Juneau, Anchorage and Fairbanks as well as the Alaska Pipeline. This is the area where the majority of travel occurs and therefore the greatest chance of disappearance. Engineer Christine McKinley and writer Buddy Levy take a bush plane ride to follow the route taken by Congressmen Nick Begich and Hale Boggs whose plane disappears in Alaska during the 1960s. McKinley notes that the plane's compass is gyrating and says that when a scientific instrument acts in an anomalous fashion, it must indicate an unusual occurrence. It is not unusual for a compass to swing back and forth after a turn. It takes a few seconds to a minute for it to settle on the new heading. The bush plane is also experiencing turbulence, which could also cause compass gyrations. It is not clear if the pilot is making a turn or if they are feeling the effects of turbulence, but Christine McKinley, claiming science assumes the mantle of fool.
Monday, February 27, 2012
2012 Academy Awards Skin-O-Meter Readings
It is now time for the 2012 Skin-O-Meter Ratings for the Academy Awards. We have devised the Skin-O-Meter in order to rate the dresses worn. It is a scale from 0 to 100, with 100 being the top rating. It is just our overall opinion but a high rating will involve copious cleavage filled out appropriately as well other skin, such as leg, display. Selected celebrities are rated. This is an historic appraisal because we have our first perfect score.
Jennifer Lopez 100: Jennifer Lopez is always on the leading edge of cleavage display. With her delightful “Wardrobe Malfunction,” she boosts the art into the stratosphere. We love J. Lo!
Angelina Jolie 82: Not much to see in the upper body area, but she gets points for flashing the gam.
Stacy Kiebler 80: She is attractive and the dress fits nicely.
Melissa McCarthy 50: Frumpy and Dumpy. As a big girl McCarthy needs to go big with cleavage. Draw the eye to your chest.
Alexandra Lamy 83: Good neckline plunge. We would like to see it filled out better.
Kelly Osbourne 72: She has a great figure and the dress shows it but, as with the Grammies, she needs to show off what she's got.
Bo Derek 82: The body still looks good and we get a hint of cleavage.
Melanie Griffith 78: Like Derek she still looks good, but we need to see some more of those famous tatas.
Natalie Portman 77: Very pretty, but as with many of these women, we see skin, but it falls short of what we need.
Sandra Bullock 77: Gets some points for bare back. Otherwise?
Penelope Cruz 78: More of the same.
Gwyneth Paltrow 78: She actually improves because for her less is more. Abandoning the plunging necklines and adopting this form fitting dress is an improvement. We love her topless in “Shakespeare in Love,” but somehow the plunges do not work for her.
Sheri Shepherd 90: Excellent cleavage and bra display. What the Red Carpet should be.
Meryl Streep 75: Goes for the plunge, but we spent the whole evening trying to see something.
Annie Mumlol 88: Her dress shows off her body well and decent chasm.
Sheila E 88: Great fit and encouraging display.
Kristen Wigg 75: Adequate attempt, but does not fill it out well.
Octavia Spencer 83: It is an attractive dress that exhibits her body so well. Like McCarthy, she is a big girl who needs to go big with cleavage. She owes it to larger women everywhere to be more of a sex symbol.
Rooney Mara 60: Takes over Paltrow's crown for non workable low neckline. We love her nude in film and think she would be better served with a skin tight, bra less look.
Michelle Williams 78: Run of the mill for the season.
Viola Davis 90: Nice color dress and we could not keep our eyes off her upper body.
Maya Rudolf 72: Magnificent shape but lacking revelation.
Jane Seymore 85: Although getting older, she shows some of the young ones how to do it.
Nancy O'Dell 88: Exhibits the Great Valley.
Mother Dolores Hart N/A: She is a nun and it would be a sin. We do appreciate that she wears the old school, imperious habit. We think nuns have lost something since they start to dress like peasant girls in the 1970s.
Jennifer Lopez 100: Jennifer Lopez is always on the leading edge of cleavage display. With her delightful “Wardrobe Malfunction,” she boosts the art into the stratosphere. We love J. Lo!
Angelina Jolie 82: Not much to see in the upper body area, but she gets points for flashing the gam.
Stacy Kiebler 80: She is attractive and the dress fits nicely.
Melissa McCarthy 50: Frumpy and Dumpy. As a big girl McCarthy needs to go big with cleavage. Draw the eye to your chest.
Alexandra Lamy 83: Good neckline plunge. We would like to see it filled out better.
Kelly Osbourne 72: She has a great figure and the dress shows it but, as with the Grammies, she needs to show off what she's got.
Bo Derek 82: The body still looks good and we get a hint of cleavage.
Melanie Griffith 78: Like Derek she still looks good, but we need to see some more of those famous tatas.
Natalie Portman 77: Very pretty, but as with many of these women, we see skin, but it falls short of what we need.
Sandra Bullock 77: Gets some points for bare back. Otherwise?
Penelope Cruz 78: More of the same.
Gwyneth Paltrow 78: She actually improves because for her less is more. Abandoning the plunging necklines and adopting this form fitting dress is an improvement. We love her topless in “Shakespeare in Love,” but somehow the plunges do not work for her.
Sheri Shepherd 90: Excellent cleavage and bra display. What the Red Carpet should be.
Meryl Streep 75: Goes for the plunge, but we spent the whole evening trying to see something.
Annie Mumlol 88: Her dress shows off her body well and decent chasm.
Sheila E 88: Great fit and encouraging display.
Kristen Wigg 75: Adequate attempt, but does not fill it out well.
Octavia Spencer 83: It is an attractive dress that exhibits her body so well. Like McCarthy, she is a big girl who needs to go big with cleavage. She owes it to larger women everywhere to be more of a sex symbol.
Rooney Mara 60: Takes over Paltrow's crown for non workable low neckline. We love her nude in film and think she would be better served with a skin tight, bra less look.
Michelle Williams 78: Run of the mill for the season.
Viola Davis 90: Nice color dress and we could not keep our eyes off her upper body.
Maya Rudolf 72: Magnificent shape but lacking revelation.
Jane Seymore 85: Although getting older, she shows some of the young ones how to do it.
Nancy O'Dell 88: Exhibits the Great Valley.
Mother Dolores Hart N/A: She is a nun and it would be a sin. We do appreciate that she wears the old school, imperious habit. We think nuns have lost something since they start to dress like peasant girls in the 1970s.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Corruption in Drug Testing
Ryan Braun of the Milwaukee Brewers has had his fifty game suspension for use of performance enhancing drugs overturned. Apparently, protocols for handling of samples were not followed causing MLB to void the suspension. The sample taker, Dino Laurenzi, Jr., kept Braun's specimen in his home refrigerator instead of turning it over to FedEx as required by Baseball's labor agreement. Last week, Eric Davis, co-host of The Drive on 95.7 The Game, proclaimed that Braun's test was dirty and that he got off on a technicality.
There are reasons for technicalities. Human beings are imperfect and subject to mistakes and corruption. In his column in the San Francisco Chronicle, Scott Ostler parodies the late defense attorney, Johnnie Cochran, “'If you don't ship the pee, he must go free.'”
This reference to the O.J. Simpson case was fitting. Setting aside the questions of O.J.'s guilt or innocence, it was at least demonstrated if not proved that Los Angeles Police detectives planted blood evidence around his property. A technician took a blood sample from Simpson and did not turn it in immediately. A detective took blood samples off a fence that DNA testing showed to be Simpson's. Additional testing by the defense showed that the sample contained a preservative that does not occur in the human body. A reasonable conclusion was that the detective had taken some of the blood drawn from O.J. and planted it on the fence.
The point is that Eric Davis can not say for certain that Ryan Bruan's test is dirty. The state of his test is unknown because procedures and protocols are not followed. Ryan Braun says he does not use PEDs and volunteers for a DNA test. He is saying that somehow the specimen he gives is traded for another contaminated one.
Now, what are the reasons that Mr. Laurenzi, or someone else, might substitute for Mr. Braun's specimen? Money and blackmail are the most obvious answers. It is possible that nefarious individuals are threatening innocent ballplayers with substitution of dirty tests for clean ones or offering, for a price, the substitution of clean samples for contaminated ones. Maybe the ballplayers are somehow setting up MLB by managing to substitute dirty tests for clean ones of supposedly innocent players resulting in the discrediting of the program. The players may then be able to resume using steroids without interference. Maybe MLB and certain players are in cahoots, because the steroid era was certainly beneficial for baseball. The preceding scenarios are speculation and examples and there is no implication that anyone acts improperly. It is also speculation to say that Ryan Braun's has a positive test. We just do not know.
There are reasons for technicalities. Human beings are imperfect and subject to mistakes and corruption. In his column in the San Francisco Chronicle, Scott Ostler parodies the late defense attorney, Johnnie Cochran, “'If you don't ship the pee, he must go free.'”
This reference to the O.J. Simpson case was fitting. Setting aside the questions of O.J.'s guilt or innocence, it was at least demonstrated if not proved that Los Angeles Police detectives planted blood evidence around his property. A technician took a blood sample from Simpson and did not turn it in immediately. A detective took blood samples off a fence that DNA testing showed to be Simpson's. Additional testing by the defense showed that the sample contained a preservative that does not occur in the human body. A reasonable conclusion was that the detective had taken some of the blood drawn from O.J. and planted it on the fence.
The point is that Eric Davis can not say for certain that Ryan Bruan's test is dirty. The state of his test is unknown because procedures and protocols are not followed. Ryan Braun says he does not use PEDs and volunteers for a DNA test. He is saying that somehow the specimen he gives is traded for another contaminated one.
Now, what are the reasons that Mr. Laurenzi, or someone else, might substitute for Mr. Braun's specimen? Money and blackmail are the most obvious answers. It is possible that nefarious individuals are threatening innocent ballplayers with substitution of dirty tests for clean ones or offering, for a price, the substitution of clean samples for contaminated ones. Maybe the ballplayers are somehow setting up MLB by managing to substitute dirty tests for clean ones of supposedly innocent players resulting in the discrediting of the program. The players may then be able to resume using steroids without interference. Maybe MLB and certain players are in cahoots, because the steroid era was certainly beneficial for baseball. The preceding scenarios are speculation and examples and there is no implication that anyone acts improperly. It is also speculation to say that Ryan Braun's has a positive test. We just do not know.
Friday, February 17, 2012
The Hypocrit on the Gridiron
During the past football season much has been made of Tim Tebow and the practice of Tebowing, named for the player's habit of kneeling down after a touchdown or win presumably to honor Jesus. If Tim Tebow must thank God publicly for every touchdown and win, should he not also honor Him for interceptions and losses? He might pray for forgiveness, improvement or to give thanks for the lesson in humility. It is funny, but many Bible Thumpers appear as though they have never read the Bible. During the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus pretty much says thou shalt not Tebow (Matt 6:5-6). Tim Tebow certainly puts one in mind of the hypocrite in the temple.
Monday, February 13, 2012
2012 Grammy Award Skin-O-Meter Readings
The Skin-O-Meter is cranked up and the results from the 2012 Grammy Awards are in. The Skin-O-Meter rates dresses worn. It is a scale from 0 to 100, with 100 being the top rating. It is just our overall opinion but a high rating involves copious cleavage filled out appropriately as well other skin, such as leg, display. We rate selected luminaries.
We expect the Grammies to be at the forefront of female skin spectacle. This year is a disappointment. Let us hope this is not a continuing trend.
Nicki Minaj 50: Come on girl. We get the rebellion with the Nun in Red and the Bishop. But bishops like to see some skin.
Adel 50: Swept the competition and appears to have some curvature. SKIN? Next time try to show off more.
Katy Perry 50: Shows nice curves, but that is all.
Rihanna 90: Beautiful woman with plunging neckline that shows great cleavage from the side.
Taylor Swift 60: Form fitting dress with open neck, but we do not see much.
Kelly Rowland 78: Shows admirable figure well and a hint of cleavage through lace.
Malin Acherman 75: Good try. If she fills it out better the score is higher.
Fergie 75: Well, at least we get to see her undies.
Flo Rida's Date 95: Cleavage popping out all over the place. This is what we like to see.
Ledisi 88: Cleavage to commendable effect.
Taraji P. Henson 87: Delightful cleavage.
Paris Hilton 58: Well meaning try, but nothing to show.
Amber Rose 78: Yellow dress is hot with charming leg split and bare shoulder.
Kelly Osbourne 78: Lovely shape fitting dress.
Anne V 80: Points for leg exhibition and plunge.
Hillary Scott 78: Shows us some leg and top is somewhat low cut.
We expect the Grammies to be at the forefront of female skin spectacle. This year is a disappointment. Let us hope this is not a continuing trend.
Nicki Minaj 50: Come on girl. We get the rebellion with the Nun in Red and the Bishop. But bishops like to see some skin.
Adel 50: Swept the competition and appears to have some curvature. SKIN? Next time try to show off more.
Katy Perry 50: Shows nice curves, but that is all.
Rihanna 90: Beautiful woman with plunging neckline that shows great cleavage from the side.
Taylor Swift 60: Form fitting dress with open neck, but we do not see much.
Kelly Rowland 78: Shows admirable figure well and a hint of cleavage through lace.
Malin Acherman 75: Good try. If she fills it out better the score is higher.
Fergie 75: Well, at least we get to see her undies.
Flo Rida's Date 95: Cleavage popping out all over the place. This is what we like to see.
Ledisi 88: Cleavage to commendable effect.
Taraji P. Henson 87: Delightful cleavage.
Paris Hilton 58: Well meaning try, but nothing to show.
Amber Rose 78: Yellow dress is hot with charming leg split and bare shoulder.
Kelly Osbourne 78: Lovely shape fitting dress.
Anne V 80: Points for leg exhibition and plunge.
Hillary Scott 78: Shows us some leg and top is somewhat low cut.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Occupy HUNC
I got an email from a friend who told me that he is concerned about losing his job because business is so slow. Since he is in his early sixties he does not think he will work again. His plan is to retire at 62 and turn over his Social Security to a low cost senior housing program, “And just exist.” This conjures visions of 21st Century Apocalyptic Hell for me.
I know at least three other men in their late fifties to early sixties who have lost or may loose jobs. Most have had relationships end and I imagine may have to consider such an existence. Where is the revolution when you need it? Of course, there is the Occupy Wall Street et al movements. This movement, especially the Occupy Oakland division, seems to be more of a field of play for the young and anarchistic. In Oakland last weekend the Occupiers went on a rampage destroying city property, including a 100 year old architect's model of city hall. The motives of some of these protesters/rioters are questionable. If these were right wing demonstrations, ala 1930s Germany, many of the current crop would participate. One thing is clear; neither Democrats nor Republicans are really acting to solve these problems and I think more radical solutions are necessary and Occupy does not appear to be it. They have changed the tenor of the discussion, but then they blow all they have gained with scenes like last weekend.
I know at least three other men in their late fifties to early sixties who have lost or may loose jobs. Most have had relationships end and I imagine may have to consider such an existence. Where is the revolution when you need it? Of course, there is the Occupy Wall Street et al movements. This movement, especially the Occupy Oakland division, seems to be more of a field of play for the young and anarchistic. In Oakland last weekend the Occupiers went on a rampage destroying city property, including a 100 year old architect's model of city hall. The motives of some of these protesters/rioters are questionable. If these were right wing demonstrations, ala 1930s Germany, many of the current crop would participate. One thing is clear; neither Democrats nor Republicans are really acting to solve these problems and I think more radical solutions are necessary and Occupy does not appear to be it. They have changed the tenor of the discussion, but then they blow all they have gained with scenes like last weekend.
Friday, January 27, 2012
Mychael Urban On Board
It is pleasing to hear that at least one local sports personality views coincide with Carpe HUNC. Today Mychael Urban says on 95.7 The Game that sports owners are billionaires and their purpose in sports is to finance championships (see Carpe HUNC of July 26, 2011) and that As' owner Lew “Boob” Wolff is not fulfilling this function. Too many in the media say that these teams must be run as a business, but they ignore the reality that ownership of a sports franchise, race horses, race cars, racing yachts, etc. are mostly for the massage of wealthy egos. The media must stop coddling these guys and hold their feet to the fire for lack of aggressiveness in putting a winning team on the field.
Giant's fans beware! With Tim Lincecum signing a two year deal and with no appreciable upgrade to the offense it looks like ownership is satisfied with one championship ring and may be willing to go the way of the As. If the Giants stay barely competitive, the turnstiles will keep turning for a couple of years and the owners will not have to invest in a top hitter. They may trade Lincecum next year near the deadline, dump the rest of his salary and continue to collect more money until the team finally declines. Bay area fans deserve better.
Giant's fans beware! With Tim Lincecum signing a two year deal and with no appreciable upgrade to the offense it looks like ownership is satisfied with one championship ring and may be willing to go the way of the As. If the Giants stay barely competitive, the turnstiles will keep turning for a couple of years and the owners will not have to invest in a top hitter. They may trade Lincecum next year near the deadline, dump the rest of his salary and continue to collect more money until the team finally declines. Bay area fans deserve better.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Brandon Tierney and Creeping Dodgerism
During recent thirtieth celebrations of Dwight Clark's “The Catch,” 95.7 The Game's Brandon Tierney commemorates with a replay of the sound byte of Vince Scully's television call. First of all, Tierney should play Lon Simmon's great radio call. Secondly, Tierney gives a sigh of satisfaction and makes a remark about the great Vince Scully. Scully is an icon in the broadcasting industry and it is understandable that the local announcers respect and admire him. However, they should reserve this for the broadcasters' club, because this is nothing less than Creeping Dodgerism. Even though Vince Scully is doing a network NFL playoff game, fans in the Bay Area identify him as a symbol of the Los Angeles Dodgers and, as such, the locus of all evil in the world. When the Anti-Christ appears he shall be a Dodger fan. Tierney also whines about the choking performance of Alex Rodriguez. A's fans enjoy this, except if he is playing against the Dodgers in the World Series. Some might say that local fans benefit from an outsider's view. They already have this with the Eastern SPorts Networt (ESPN) and they crave dedication in local programming. Brandon Tierney is a newcomer to the area, but he needs to be taught proper values by those around him, possibly the likes of Greg Papa or Mychael Urban. The most important of the local values someone representing Bay Area sports must champion is proper Dodger hate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)