Ice Skating
Find what you're looking for
Monday, February 14, 2011
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Let's Talk Health Care
Written 01/12/11
I came across this article (can no longer work after 3 pm, it seems) that talks about a Palestinian child who was injured and is now paralyzed as a result of an Israeli air strike on Islamic Jihad in her neighborhood. It is a tragic, albeit, ineluctable circumstance of war. The reason i found this article interesting is because, after much deliberation, Israel has decided to allow her to remain in Israel proper with her family instead of sending her back to Gaza, which is what seemed would happen over the past few months. the reason that it is imperative that she stay in Israel is because Israel is completely footing the bill for her medical care, and is paying rent on a Jerusalem apartment for her father and brother. To this, certain groups have the following to say:
Physicians for Human Rights, which advocated for her in Israeli courts, welcomed the decision but said there are hundreds of other Palestinians injured in Israeli military actions who claim compensation and want access to medical treatment.
I would challenge these motherfuckers to name one country that would provide medical care and housing in their own capital city, free of charge, to an innocent civilian injured during a war. I wouldnt be surprised if you couldnt find one case similar to this one.
Consider this. What if an israeli was injured and that israeli was taken in by the Hamas? Do you think that the Israeli would be provided for, or do you think he would be held hostage, tortured, isolated Dnd eventually be decapitated in a propoganda video and his body mutilated?
This is yet another disturbing example of the double standard that exists when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Israel goes above and beyond, yet she is set upon for not doing enough.
That would be like chastising a shoplifter at safeway while Jared Loughner is shooting up the parking lot. It's when people allow themselves to remain ignorant to these situations that Israel is villified on a world stage. it is unheard of for a warring entity to provide this kind of care for a victim of war - innocent or not. what Israel did today exemplifies her humanity and commitment to peace, but all anyone reads into it is that "oh, it's not enough. Israel should take every injured Palestinian into its hospitals"
Hey, wait - if the Palestinians were there before the Jews, where the fuck are their hospitals? They had 5,000 years to build one and couldn't?
Now, why was this girl injured to begin with?
Islamic Jihad was using a platform near her home to launch missle attacks into israel. The IDF alerted residents that their neighborhood was now a war zone, and the IDF would have to neutralize terrorist activity in the area. the IDF warned residents to flee for their safety. Israel did not choose the location or circumstances of the conflict, but she will be damned if she is going to allow her citizens to be attacked and terrorized because islamic militants choose to use a residential area as a launchpad for attacks. well, anyways, the IDF warned reisdents in arabic, hebrew and english to get out of dodge until the conflict was over. According to Palestinian testimony, whenever residents tried to flee, Islamic gunmen would force them back into their homes hoping that their presence would dissuade the IDF from taking action. Again, this is a state that has to either win the war, or disappear. It's not like if Egypt or Syria or Lebanon loses a war and they lose everything they put on the table and cease to exist. The war against Israel is a war for her existence, as her enemy has sworn in their charter that they will not rest until every "Jew is driven into the sea".
Israel is fighting a war of circumstances now, and they are not on her terms, rather those of the type who have launched over two attacks per day into israel since the start of 2011. Things have gotten so extreme in fact, that the Egyptians and others in the Arab League have warned Hamas to scale things back due to concerns that eventually the Israelis are going to have to respond to these attacks. This kind of behavior reminds me of a little cousin who keeps on picking fights with the big cousin, gets his ass kicked, goes home, cries to mommy, mommy yells at big cousin, little cousin starts instigating agani a week later. It's juvenile behavior. You would never expect anyone not to defend their interests, be it a big cousin, a single Jew or the nation of Israel. Just so happens that in this case, the stakes are a bit higher on both sides.
Monday, February 7, 2011
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Bat-news!
Ok, so I'm sure by now that we are all aware that both Anne Hathaway and Tom Hardy have been cast in the new bat-picture The Dark Knight Rises as Catwoman and Bane. Upon the announcement of their casting, it was widely believed that that would be it as far as the heavy hitters go. Well, I guess we were all wrong because now it looks like the great Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Inception, 500 Days of Summer, 3rd Rock From The Sun) is in talks to join the cast. There is no word yet as to who he might play, but speculatino ranges from Edward Nygma (known popularly as The Riddler), Dr. Hugo Strange and even Dick Grayson / Robin, despite director Christopher Nolan's assurances that Robin would still be in diapers at this early point in the career of the Caped Crusader.
Obviously, I consider this all to be the stuff of rumor mills until we hear word from somebody directly involved, but this isn't one of those far-out rumors (Yul Brynner starring as Batgirl), so it does hold some water. If this is true, Gordon-Levitt would be an outstanding addition to an already phenomenal cast.
The way things currently stand we have a cream of the crop cast including returning cast members Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne / Batman - Bale was out of this world in The Fighter - he takes his work to another level. We've got the great veteran Michael Caine as Alfred, the immutable Gary Oldman as Commissioner Gordon and Morgan Freeman as Lucious Fox. Throw those guys in the ring with the gorgeous Hathaway and the incredible Tom Hardy and you've got youself a hell of an ensemble to work with.
As always: In Nolan We Trust.
Obviously, I consider this all to be the stuff of rumor mills until we hear word from somebody directly involved, but this isn't one of those far-out rumors (Yul Brynner starring as Batgirl), so it does hold some water. If this is true, Gordon-Levitt would be an outstanding addition to an already phenomenal cast.
The way things currently stand we have a cream of the crop cast including returning cast members Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne / Batman - Bale was out of this world in The Fighter - he takes his work to another level. We've got the great veteran Michael Caine as Alfred, the immutable Gary Oldman as Commissioner Gordon and Morgan Freeman as Lucious Fox. Throw those guys in the ring with the gorgeous Hathaway and the incredible Tom Hardy and you've got youself a hell of an ensemble to work with.
As always: In Nolan We Trust.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Play Time's Over

OK, my time off was great, but I think we all agree that it's time I made my triumphant return to the sad, lonely world of the globber.
I'm guessing it's too late to go about wishing everybody a Happy New Year, right? Well fuck you, then. I ain't gettin' paid for this.
Anyways, I fully expect viewership to be at an all time low, but I'm sort of used to that already, so don't feel too bad. My life sucks a lot more for a lot of different reasons. Pity me for those.
What's the difference between myself and Christopher Reeve?
I'm back on the horse.
(My apologies to all those that I just offended. Even I hate myself for making that joke. Terrible.)
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Thursday, November 25, 2010
Thursday, November 18, 2010
War on Paper
I was doing my daily news roundup when i came across something interesting. i caught a headline accusing George W. Bush or plagiarizing from other books from his newly-released (and fantastically insightful) memoirs. I thought "uh-oh. He just fucked himself." Then i saw where the accusatory article was posted. Huffingtonpost.com. This is basically a website that panders to the left and churns out political bullshit at an alarming rate. In fact, i would say that the HP does more to widen the gap between our separate ideologies in America than almost every other medium. Just out of curiosity, i decided to check out the allegations for myself. The first thing we see is a thinly veiled insult hurled at the former President. Way to instantly call your credibility into question, guys.
So, I flipped through the fifteen or so examples that they provided and I was surprised at what I saw. I would say that a good 100% of the plagiarism allegations stem from quotes spoken, in most cases, by or to the President himself. Basically, imagine I wrote a post about Bush's first meeting after the 9/11 attacks and quoted the most important part of that meeting, which was when Bush looked around the room and said: "I just want to make sure that all of us did agree to this plan, right?" before Bush released the book. This is what HP would refer to as "plagiarism".
There are many other instances that are exactly like that. There were hundreds of books written about W's Presidency and the War on Terror. Should Bush just have omitted everything that was mentioned in every other book? Just because someone wrote about it first doesn't mean he shouldn't include it in his own memoirs.
The key problem here is that HP makes no distinction between plagiarism and historical overlapping. If i wrote a book about Nagasaki, wouldn't you expect me to mention the A-bomb, even though it was mentioned a hundred times already? If I was writing about Pearl Harbor, I would be foolish not to quote "a day that will live in infamy." That, my dear friends, is not plagiarism.
I don't want to get too political, but this article is pretty much a case of character assassination. HP either wants to either derail book sales or discredit Bush, but they only succeeded in discrediting themselves.
Now, I'm not going to lie. I hate any political organization that distorts facts to incite fear, hatred and distrust. It's stupid and disgusting and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Maybe i am unable to provide you with an unbiased report on this, so I'll leave it to the professionals at Plagiarismtoday.com. Why don't you see what they have to say?
So, I flipped through the fifteen or so examples that they provided and I was surprised at what I saw. I would say that a good 100% of the plagiarism allegations stem from quotes spoken, in most cases, by or to the President himself. Basically, imagine I wrote a post about Bush's first meeting after the 9/11 attacks and quoted the most important part of that meeting, which was when Bush looked around the room and said: "I just want to make sure that all of us did agree to this plan, right?" before Bush released the book. This is what HP would refer to as "plagiarism".
There are many other instances that are exactly like that. There were hundreds of books written about W's Presidency and the War on Terror. Should Bush just have omitted everything that was mentioned in every other book? Just because someone wrote about it first doesn't mean he shouldn't include it in his own memoirs.
The key problem here is that HP makes no distinction between plagiarism and historical overlapping. If i wrote a book about Nagasaki, wouldn't you expect me to mention the A-bomb, even though it was mentioned a hundred times already? If I was writing about Pearl Harbor, I would be foolish not to quote "a day that will live in infamy." That, my dear friends, is not plagiarism.
I don't want to get too political, but this article is pretty much a case of character assassination. HP either wants to either derail book sales or discredit Bush, but they only succeeded in discrediting themselves.
Now, I'm not going to lie. I hate any political organization that distorts facts to incite fear, hatred and distrust. It's stupid and disgusting and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Maybe i am unable to provide you with an unbiased report on this, so I'll leave it to the professionals at Plagiarismtoday.com. Why don't you see what they have to say?
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Monday, November 15, 2010
Some Thoughts About Derek Jeter
![]() |
| He can take his pick. Any or all. |
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Jewbilation
I don't care who you are, what god you pray to or what you believe, this is freaking hilarious. Where else would we find Danny Trejo, Tracy Morgan, Lindsay Lohan, Gilbert Gottfried and Keifer Sutherland all advocating the same cause? This video was directed by Judd Apatow noted director of films such as 40 Year Old Virgin, I Love You, Man and many many more. The video is worth watching even if it's just to see Sir Patrick Stewart call people pricks. In fact, i suggest we get started on a national grassroots campaign to have this preserved in the Library of Congress.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
What's The Worst That Could Happen?
In a recent speech in Jakarta, Indonesia, noted Kenyan and American President Barack Obama issued a statement saying that Israeli plans to build housing in the cramped Israeli capitol of Jerusalem is "never helpful when it comes to peace negotiations." He also called on Israel to immediately recognize a Palestinian state. Yeah, that's the same (as of yet non existent) Palestinian state that refuses to recognize the Israeli state that's been around for 62 years. Do you wanna know what else is unhelpful to the peace process? Kidnapping, for one. How about launching missiles at civilian areas? Assaulting motorists trying to drive home from the hospital? That's probably worse than building homes in your nation's capitol. It appears that Obama is not familiar with the alternative here. What are the Israelis supposed to do? Should they all jam into one section of western jerusalem and surround themselves with enemies? This seems eerily familiar - A huge number of Jews being told that they can only live in this certain area - let's call it a "ghetto". Next, let's surround them with a group of people who have vowed to not stop until there is not one Jew left on their soil. Dammit, you know, this rings a bell, but I just can't seem to put my finger on it. Maybe Helen Thomas was right when she said that the Jews should just go back to Germany - I mean, why did we ever leave to begin with? Pardon, but I just feel like I'm missing something here. Maybe I'm crazy, Maybe The President is right. Seriously, What's the worst that can happen?
Monday, November 8, 2010
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





