A reason to watch your health: Stayin away from teh ghayyy. Consider this headline: “Butch rugby player has stroke. wakes up gay and becomes a hairdresser”. Funny. but.. evidently it happened.
Rugby loving Welshman Chris Birch was a 26 year old musclehead with a job at a bank, had proposed to his girlfriend and weighed…er…a lot (the UK article uses “stone” instead of pounds. too much effort for me to convert). When he suffored a botched “hey guys, check THIS out” moment doing a back flip, he broke his neck and had a stroke. He woke up alive…but with a love for cock. “I was gay [when I woke up] and I still am” he says. “I wasn’t interested in women any more. I was definitely gay. I had never been attracted to a man before – I’d never even had any gay friends. But I didn’t care about who I was before, I had to be true to my feelings.”
Mr Birch’s astonishing change saw him break up with his fiancée, ditch his job in a bank to retrain as a hairdresser and lose eight stone in weight.
He has now moved in with his 19-year-old boyfriend.
The now ex-rugby player, a flanker with his local amateur reserve side, had been attempting a back flip in front of friends on a field when he fell down a grass bank, breaking his neck and suffering the stroke.
He was taken to hospital where his fiancée and family spent days waiting anxiously at his bedside before he delivered the shocking news.
Mr Birch recalled: ‘I was gay when I woke up and I still am. It sounds strange but when I came round I immediately felt different.
‘I wasn’t interested in women any more. I was definitely gay. I had never been attracted to a man before – I’d never even had any gay friends.
‘But I didn’t care about who I was before, I had to be true to my feelings.’
Before the accident Mr Birch, of Ystrad Mynach, South Wales, had spent his weekends watching sport and drinking with his mates.
But he said: ‘Suddenly, I hated everything about my old life. I didn’t get on with my friends, I hated sport and found my job boring.
‘I started to take more pride in my appearance, bleached my hair and started working out. I went from a 19-stone skinhead to an 11-stone preened man.
‘People I used to know barely recognised me and with my new look I became even more confident.’
And here you thought only marijuana would make you gay…
David Brooks in the NY Times has an apt analogy on the presidential candidates that is right up my alley:
In the Marx Brothers movie that is the Republican presidential race, Mitt Romney is Zeppo. He doesn’t spin out one-liners. He’s not the rambunctious one. He’s just the earnest, good-looking guy who wants to be appreciated.
I became a Marx Brothers fan in middle school as part of a trend that my small group of friends fell into at the same time. Everyone wanted to think of themselves as Groucho, but we all knew the comedic values to the Italian wise cracker Chico and the silent miming of Harpo. Zeppo didn’t even really count in our minds, until one day when one of my friends said as much, noting that there is no reason for him to really even be there. Precocious little jerk that I was, I remember experiencing the “ah-ha” moment when I corrected them that Zeppo himself may not be important but “a” Zeppo is important. In fact – it’s crucial. I told them that for our purposes – everyone else is Zeppo. Meaning: because of the anchoring that the straight-man Zeppo provides, we have the liberty to run around being blunt to the point of rudeness (Chico), irresponsibly breaking things (Harpo) and making inappropriate sexual advances that are covered up by frank and stylized speech (Groucho).
For us – Zeppo was our teacher or parents or adults in general, slash, society at large.
For the Republican primary, it’s Zeppo takes the form of one Willard “Mitt” Romney.
But Romney continues to run an impressive presidential campaign. Last week, while the Twitterverse was entranced by Herman Cain, Romney delivered his most important speech yet. It was politically astute and substantively bold, a quality you don’t automatically associate with the Romney campaign. Romney grasped the toughest issue — how to reform entitlements to avoid a fiscal catastrophe — and he sketched out a sophisticated way to address it.
The speech was built around the theme that government should be simpler, smarter and smaller. First, he established his bona fides. Romney reminded his listeners that when he went to work at the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, he inherited a $370 million deficit. He left behind a $100 million surplus that went into an endowment fund.
Then he argued that over the decades government has become bloated and lethargic. In World War II, the Navy commissioned 1,000 ships a year and had 1,000 employees in the purchasing department. Today, Romney said, we commission nine ships a year but have 24,000 employees in the department.
Romney then laid out a measured fiscal strategy, starting with a promise to bring federal spending down to 20 percent of gross domestic product, which is about the precrisis average. He then turned to entitlements.
In other words: While the wacky brothers make their mischief – the one who doesn’t appear as important on the surface and doesn’t get the fans of the genre excited is actually the rock that stabilizes the chaos.
At first this looks cool and interesting because it’s different but after a few seconds of study it becomes hard to find a way where this isn’t terrible planning. Looks to me like a silly way to lay out housing. I don’t get it. If the grass was water and these were lilly pad communities then i’d say this is awesome. but. it’s not. so it’s just a big waste of space.
This week in Texas Christian University news: A student government candidate named Graham was told by school admins that his nickname was racist and couldn’t be used, forcing him to put tape over his campaign signs. Who knew that running for Vice President of external affairs would get so…um…racial.
“Hi my name is Graham, like the cracker,” he said.
That’s how McMillan has been introducing himself since high school. It’s even how his friends know him.
“And he was like, ‘I’m Graham, like the cracker, McMillan.’ And he did it so people would remember his name. That’s how I remember him,” said Taylor Slack.
After McMillan put the catchy addition to his name on his campaign posters he got a call from his student advisor.
“That it could be deemed derogatory and had been derogatory. And, I just taped it over,” he said. “TCU provided me with some blue tape so I could cover it up, which was very nice. And, I ran out so I thought why not spice this up a little bit and make it a little more pop. I got some yellow tape in there and found some flames and decided to put that on there too.”
Other students on campus said they understand the word cracker can sometimes have negative racial connotations, but in this case it doesn’t seem harmful.
“I thought since his first name was Graham it really wasn’t a problem, you know,” said Emma Altgelt.
Some of the signs no longer have tape on them. McMillan said that’s because some students have told him they’ve taken it upon themselves to remove it.
He said he’ll likely continue using his favorite catch phrase for introductions with friends.
Read more on myFOXdfw.com: http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/110111-tcu-calls-graham-cracker-signs-offensive#ixzz1ctcTCj3u
Long after the last of the cake has grown stale and the tossed bouquet has wilted, the photos endure, stirring memories and providing vivid proof that the day of one’s dreams took place.
So it is not particularly surprising that one groom, disappointed with his wedding photos, decided to sue. The photographers had missed the last dance and the bouquet toss, the groom, Todd J. Remis of Manhattan, said.
But what is striking, said the studio that took the pictures, is that Mr. Remis’s wedding took place in 2003 and he waited six years to sue. And not only has Mr. Remis demanded to be repaid the $4,100 cost of the photography, he also wants $48,000 to recreate the entire wedding and fly the principals to New York so the celebration can be re-shot by another photographer.
Re-enacting the wedding may pose a particular challenge, the studio pointed out, because the couple divorced and the bride is believed to have moved back to her native Latvia.
I can already see some of you trying to figure out a way to do this with your ex.
Exit question” that IS whats going on here, right? I mean wtf else is in it for this guy to demand the recreation part of it unless he’s just a stealthy Tort reform advocate trying to make another example of why lawsuits need controlling?
I’ve posted about it before in blog and video but I’m just reminding y’all: a lot of corporations don’t pay any income taxes… Now, I think no one should be paying taxes on money they earn cuz that’s stupid (you should be taxed on what you spend, not earn) but thats everyone. Not special breaks for some.
The corporate tax rate is 35%. But an examination of 280 of the nation’s largest corporations suggests that many aren’t paying anything close to that.
The real tax rate paid by a slew of major corporations averages closer to 18.5%, according to a study released Thursday by two liberal tax research groups.
The report issued by Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy paints the corporate tax code as wildly inefficient, filled with loopholes and subject to the influence of lobbyists who carve out special provisions for the companies they represent.
The study looked at 280 companies in the Fortune 500 that were profitable for all three years between 2008 and 2010.
The results: 111 companies paid effective tax rates of less than 17.5% over the three-year period; 98 paid a rate between 17.5% and 30%; and 71 paid more than 30%.
The average rate? 18.5%.
Some companies paid zero. And 30 actually owed less than nothing in income taxes over the three years.
Lower the tax rate and close the loopholes. Problem solved.
I’ve heard Jack Abramoff on a few interviews now that he’s out of jail and his new book sounds pretty good. reveals his secrets on how he bought politicians and proposes ways to make it harder or impossible.
Some interesting stuff – like he said he would always offer a politicians chief of staff a job with him “whenever theyre done in politics” so that from that point on they would pass and do whatever he wanted cuz they knew they had a secure high paying gig after their government one. if that was made illegal, they couldnt do that. -stuff like that.
I’ve been searching for years, but finally at long last I’ve found a web design slash pedo-perv boy ring with “modern rocketry” company based in Germany.
This NY Times Obit-type article on Andy Rooney today by Richard Severo and Peter Keepnews seemed wildly inappropriate to me for dwelling on “controversial” things he said that people got pissy about.
Time magazine once called him “the most felicitous nonfiction writer in television.” But Mr. Rooney was decidedly not everyone’s cup of tea.
The New York Times columnist Anna Quindlen, for example, took strong issue with Mr. Rooney’s dismissive comments after Kurt Cobain of the band Nirvana committed suicide in 1994. It was not surprising, she wrote, that Mr. Rooney “brought to the issue of youthful despair a mixture of sarcasm and contempt,” but it was “worth noting because in 1994 that sort of attitude is as dated and foolish as believing that cancer is contagious.”
Mr. Rooney’s opinions sometimes landed him in trouble. In 1990, CBS News suspended him without pay in response to complaints that he had made remarks offensive to black and gay people.
The trigger was a December 1989 special, “A Year With Andy Rooney,” in which he said: “There was some recognition in 1989 of the fact that many of the ills which kill us are self-induced. Too much alcohol, too much food, drugs, homosexual unions, cigarettes. They’re all known to lead quite often to premature death.” He later apologized for the statement.
But the gay newspaper The Advocate subsequently quoted him as saying in an interview: “I’ve believed all along that most people are born with equal intelligence, but blacks have watered down their genes because the less intelligent ones are the ones that have the most children. They drop out of school early, do drugs and get pregnant.”
Mr. Rooney denied that he had made such a statement, and because the interview had apparently not been taped, the reporter was unable to prove that he had. “It is a know-nothing statement, which I abhor,” Mr. Rooney said.
He said that he had accepted the suspension rather than end his relationship with CBS News. He said that when he was an Army trainee, he had been arrested in the South because he insisted on riding in the back of a bus with some black soldiers who were friends of his.
Many of his colleagues rushed to his defense. “I know he is not a racist,” Walter Cronkite said.
Mr. Rooney was suspended for three months but was brought back after only one. During his absence, the ratings for “60 Minutes” declined by 20 percent and the network received thousands of letters and telephone calls from viewers who missed his commentaries.
Mr. Rooney generated more criticism in 2002, when he said in an interview on a cable sports show that women had “no business” being sideline television reporters at football games because they did not understand football.
He did it again in 2007, with a newspaper column complaining about the current state of baseball. “I know all about Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig, but today’s baseball stars are all guys named Rodriguez to me,” he wrote.
He subsequently acknowledged that he “probably shouldn’t have said it,” but denied that his intent had been to denigrate Latin American players.
Years ago Michelle Malkin made a similar stink over Rooney saying that “negro” is a perfectly fine word to use and I thought that was equally cheap a criticism as all these others. Wtf is wrong with the word negro other than “racists used to say it along with everyone else when it was in our lexicon”? It’s not a racist word. It’s just not in fashion to say. so what is wrong with Rooney saying he doesn’t see whats wrong with the word? Stupid.
And all these other charges are stupid too but its worse to dwell on them and give them the same stature as other events in his life that actually mattered (good or bad). Shame on you.
Presidential candidate Herman Cain is not going to win the nomination for the Republican party but has been rising in the polls and in response, his critics have been digging through his past to find something salacious to make a story out of. Evidently no one could find anything so the best they could do was make a big deal out of a sexual harassment charge made against him when he was head of the National Restaurant Association. When Cain was head of the NRA it “took care to educate members on sexual harassment law“, whatever that means.
No one can find any details of actual harassment or anything sexual, but the NRA did pay a lady to STFU and leave instead of dealing with the charge so there’s that. A couple other ho’s have come forward to say Cain said inappropriate things in their presence too, but no specifics – which makes them hos. Politico.com is determined to take this story to the bank, however, obsessing over it to cartoonish degrees. They’ve published over 94 stories on this non-story in the past week. Jesus… Maybe their goal is to reach 999?
For those of you not familiar with Herman Cain: his big selling point is that he wants to throw away the current tax system and start with scratch with a 9% income tax, a 9% sales tax and a 9% corporate tax.
The only thing of value that has come from this issue has been the surfacing of the fact that the settlement with the accuser was signed September of 1999 or in other words: 9/99. That, friends, is worth a chuckle.
Sexual harassment is a joke because stupid hippies have made it such. Vague terms like “a pattern of behavior” don’t impress people who aren’t morons. If someone grabs your ass and sais “this candy hole be MINE, bitch. Trick or Treat at mah house 9pm ta-NITE if yu wanna keep yo daymn job tomorrah” is sexual harassment. Telling a joke or complimenting someone is not. Since nothing approaching the charges of the the former have been made and no specifics have been given to show us what gradation of the spectrum occurred in between those two, it’s safe to say this is bullshit.
The Cain campaign responded with the following video showcasing his attackers and comparing this line of attack with the smears against Clarence Thomas in the 90s:
This video is half right. CORRECT: This is a high-tech lynching. the use of a non-story to be the story of the century is inexcusable and discredits those acting like there is any “there” there to this. Theres no argument to be made when you contrast this with other sexual accusations, most notably against Bill Clinton.
FALSE: This is not akin to the accusations made against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas who originated the phrase “high tech lynching”. Thomas’s accuser, Anita Hill was a flat out joke and the use of her bullshit accusations were used to try and prevent Thomas from a job he was nominated for. Herman Cain is running for a job in a competition, so it’s not the same situation to start, but even though the accusations against him are bullshit too, they’re no where near the level of bullshit that Anita Hills were for a bunch of reasons. The biggest is that Cains accuser was paid a settlement and left her job over his remarks where as Anita Hill not only never sued and was never paid anything but actually followed Clarence Thomas to a new job after the remarks that allegedly made her so uncomfortable in the workplace, so
Those are important distinctions to make, but like I said – it’s still all bunk. The sum she was paid to this lady is said to be no big deal in terms of the history of these things.
In my opinion, the reported settlement sums – $35,000 and $45,000 – do not exceed “nuisance value.” In fact, the nuisance value of a sexual harassment claim based on the alleged misconduct of the head of an organization in the late 1990s was probably higher than these sums. Sexual harassment claims have much more potential for embarrassment than ordinary discrimination claims. And in the classic “he says, she says” situation, the outcome is usually much harder to predict. Hence the extra incentive to settle regardless of the merits.
On the other hand, a female who truly has experienced inappropriate behavior of a sexual nature might settle a case for as little as $35,000 or less. For example, a woman who is able to move seamlessly into a comparably paying job will sometimes accept a small settlement (or none) in order to be done with the matter. This is especially true if she did not experience major distress, and is unwilling falsely to allege it. The main goal of a woman who has a creepy boss is often to escape the situation, not to relive it in the hope of extorting a big settlement.
In addition, conduct that many would consider inappropriate, especially in a presidential candidate, might not clearly rise to the level of actionable sexual harassment. The law requires that the conduct alleged be “severe or pervasive.” A woman who experienced only a few incidents of inappropriate language or innuendo, without any pinching, groping, or truly lewd behavior, might reasonably take a small settlement for fear that she can’t meet the legal standard. However, the legal standard doesn’t necessarily coincide with the standard we want public figures to adhere to.
But we’ve learned the most about Politico. Look, for example, at this: Politico this morning had a post about how, after Cain blamed Perry for being the source of the sexual-harassment story, Perry promptly turned around and floated Romney as the likely source. Yes, congratulations GOP on the circular firing squad — but that’s not the point. The point is:Politico knows who the source is.
This isn’t a game-show where the host has the answer on his little card and his job is to have the contestants keep guessing until someone stumbles into the right answer. This is supposed to be news coverage — professional journalism about a serious matter with a goal of edifying the reader about what actually happened.
Politico has now framed discovery of the identity of the source as is a noteworthy story. Yet,Politico knows that if the identity of the source is a story, it is only because Politico itself is being coy. Politico has reported that Perry may be the source and that Romney may be the source. Yet, Politico knows precisely whether the Perry campaign or the Romney campaign (or both . . . or neither) is the source. It is thus almost certainly true that at least some of the conflicting allegations Politico is airing are known by Politico to be false. In fact, both the Perry and Romney camps have denied involvement — if it so happens that one of those camps is the source, then Politico knows the denial is a lie, yet it published the denial anyway. That would amount to colluding with its source in order to tarnish Cain while fraudulently portraying its source as above the fray.
Howard Stern says he thinks its a smear job and Robin responds “of course, but that’s what they do in politics”.
I’ve posted about it before in blog and video but I’m just reminding y’all: 
