Tyra Banks uses race controversy for self-promotion.

“America’s Next Top Model”, featuring Tyra Banks pretending she has talent, is going to have contestants pose as “another race” for a photo shoot. Reality television, fake as it is, has never really been any stranger to controversy. But, leave it to ‘brilliant’ people like Tyra Banks to think that painting white people black for money is a good idea, when it has been frowned upon for decades. It is poor taste. Tyra Banks knew this, and knows it now. She’s not above using it to put her name in the media, though. That’s one thing she and the other reality television regulars are good at. Re-using someone else’s bad ideas.

Tyra Banks used to be influential, attractive, and had success. Now she’s just another reality joke trying to get people to take her seriously. Remember the staged polygraph exam where she pretended to idolize Oprah? Face it, Tyra. You’re a ‘primetime’ copy of what used to happen when celebrities got old and boring. Years ago, they would sell hand cream and designer bath towels at 2AM. Now, they get reality television shows, and beg people to throw them a ratings share. It’d almost count as a regular job, except everyone who has one laughs at you.

Hey, Tyra. Why don’t you get back into modeling? Are you too old? A movie? Write a book? Learn to read? Maybe create a talk show? A magazine? Something?

The Washington Redskins are **SUFFERING** under Daniel Snyder’s ‘leadership’.

The Washington Redskins, as a team, are sucking, and very badly. They’re performing badly. Even some players are questioning the way the team is being run. Fans hate Daniel Snyder. Many vocally, and quite visibly, want him gone. Snyder does not have many friends, if any, among the team’s loyal fans.

What does the team management do, when faced with this overwhelming message? Ban signs at games. That’s right. They apparently think there are still some fans out there that don’t yet know what a complete jackass Daniel Snyder is, and are desperate to keep those fans from seeing any signs on television that might clue them in.

The team has implemented new instructions that signs are not permitted, and security will usher you out if they’re present. The official excuse for the ban is that signs could block other fans’ view, or potentially injure someone. Yeah. Penants have been used in stadiums for decades without deaths. Good time to start saying signs are bad.

In an interview with radio station “The Fan” 106.7 in Washington, Redskins chief officer David Donovan had this to say. “The banners we do have a prohibition against. We don’t care what they say, and we take them down. They get in the way of other people watching the game and people getting poked in the head. That stuff happens.”

The fan banners get in the way of people getting poked in the head? (Sorry, I had to.)

Despite the lies, the signs are being banned to silence team critics. This no-signs rule didn’t exist at all, until fans started getting angry, and being highly vocal and creative with their dislike of Daniel Snyder. So, in addition to every other insult you can throw at him, we can call him a liar, too.

As a further slap in the face to Daniel Snyder, the fucking idiot didn’t even know his stadiums already covered the rule he made up. The Redskins 2009 season guide already has a piece about signs obstructing view or causing injuries, and they’re not allowed to do this.

I think it is quite safe to say at this point ANYONE could do a better job of running the Redskins than Snyder. He’s just another in a long line of rich idiots who think a fat bank account makes you smart or powerful. Sorry, Daniel, but don’t bite the customers. They bite back. Some of us have pretty big teeth.

Why isn’t someone crushing the Somali pirates?

I seem to remember reading, long ago, another organization of pirates attempted to blackmail nations by controlling passage through and around their territory. It led to armed conflict with many deaths.

What I most wonder, now, with all this technology, all these advances, all this ‘growth’, why are criminal thugs still such a threat in the world? Barack Obama wants to send troops to Afghanistan. We’re still in Iraq. How about sending some to Somalia? They’ve just kidnapped a couple of old people, and threatening to shoot them if anyone tries a rescue. That’s certainly not a very smart or well-planned threat. It’s also not very original. We’ve got the U.N., many industrialized nations, and probably more than enough force to cut these bastards down.

But, still we read about ships and hostages seized, ransoms demanded, and the cycle goes on and on. Does anyone in the entire world think that the idiots are going to stop doing this? Not until someone hits them hard. Break their backs. We can’t do it with kind words. We certainly can’t afford to pay them ‘tribute’, if anyone’s got that on their minds. Much like the old days, when you cave in to these people, they keep coming back with more demands. They’re not a government. How about calling them terrorists, and using that as a precursor to moving in? We’re already using it everywhere else. Sure, there’s probably no money to be made taking out Somali thugs in the name of ‘freedom’, but at least it’d be a good deed, and would stop them from harassing every ship that passes through. How about a global War on Piracy? We could hunt down every seafaring thug in the open water.

It would be good for U.S. business, too. Other nations might look to us as a nation that protects innocent victims. Well, if Barack Obama is interested in our image, anyway.

Home Depot fires employee for wearing religious patriotic pin.

Home Depot has fired Florida employee Trevor Keezor for ‘violating the dress code’. Specifically, he wore a pin on his uniform that had “One nation under God, indivisible.” on it.

Keezor claims he was wearing the pin for over a year without incident. Home Depot chose to fire Keezor, suspiciously, after he began bringing his Bible to read on breaks. To be fair, they didn’t immediately fire him. First, they told him to exchange pins with one that didn’t have a quote from the Pledge of Allegiance (“United We Stand”). He was fired when he opted out of that. Funny, they’d allow him to wear a pin that supported the government, but wasn’t Home Depot stock, and wouldn’t allow him to wear a similar pin that did the same thing? And, all because of the “God” quote? Sounds like a really shady business practice, to me. And, no, you’ll never catch me wearing a “God” pin. My assessment in this case is 100% unbiased. I even shop in Home Depot.

Keezor then hired a lawyer and they plan to sue. The funny part is, they didn’t tell him to change pins when he started wearing the pin. Instead, they chose to tell him to change pins when he brought the Bible, which is personal property and probably not covered in Home Depot’s ‘dress code’. Something tells me this is indeed a case of religious discrimination. Seems to me they waited a long time if it was over the pin. Plus, his lawyer has a point. There are references to “God” all over the place that Home Depot can’t forcibly remove. I wonder which religious stance Keezor’s supervisors hold.

Personally, I think Home Depot would have a better chance in court if they’d banned Keezor’s Bible. As media pressure mounts, it’ll end up looking less like a case of religious persecution and more like a case of punishing employees for visible support of the government. Either way, I’d expect this kind of shit from Walmart, not Home Depot. Are they secretly affiliated?

FDA tells taxpayers what kind of oysters they’re allowed to eat.

The F.D.A. (Food & Drug Administration) is set to ‘ban’ the sale of raw oysters from the Gulf Coast as food items, unless they’re treated in a manner which many experts conclude alters or destroys their unique taste.

What I want to know is, why? The ‘potentially deadly bacteria’ that the F.D.A. says is the problem didn’t just suddenly spring into existence. The offending bacteria, Vibrio vulnificus, kills up to 15 people each year who eat raw oysters. Most of the victims have compromised or weak immune systems. Funny, H1N1 does that, and the F.D.A. isn’t banning the inhalation of air.

The ban would quite possibly destroy a cultural activity enjoyed for generations. Not to mention ruin the “raw bar” industry down here. Plus, all those oyster harvesters would need to seek new jobs. That would mean even more unemployed in the country for Obama to make good on his promise to find work for. And, worse still, it would establish another precedent of ‘big government’ meddling in local culture and community.

The F.D.A. supports a ban largely because consumers aren’t listening to their warnings, and “millions of other people” may not know they’re vulnerable. Really? The F.D.A. knows when consumers aren’t heeding a warning, and know the statistics of the bacteria-related deaths, but they don’t know if people know whether or not they’re vulnerable? Sounds like an excuse.

This comes just after Obama visited New Orleans, claiming that he has ‘cleared’ obstacles, and is working toward the iconic community returning to their glory. Oyster farming and eating has been a business and cultural event for centuries. For some harvesters, the ban has struck people when they are already down, because some have been forced to spend thousands of dollars on ‘upgrades’ to their boats to meet new refrigerating rules.

The F.D.A., who likely don’t eat raw oysters, claim there is no change in taste after the oyster treatment process, which involves heat, freezing temperatures, and exposure to gamma radiation. I don’t think anyone would want to eat an oyster after reading that had been done to it, would you? The F.D.A. cites a California raw oyster ban in 2003 as an example of how the treatment saves lives. Of course, that’s a California matter, not federal.

The ban would only affect oysters farmed in the Gulf Coast area, even though the bacteria is found in other areas. The ‘logic’ is that the bacteria, though present in other areas, lacks the concentrations found in the Gulf Coast. Does that mean the F.D.A. only cares about destroying industries in financially stricken regions of the country? In addition to clearly altering the taste of the treated oysters, the treatment itself is very expensive. So expensive, many believe that compliance with the ban would run successful businesses into the ground.

Is this what Barack Obama and Washington D.C. mean by ‘helping’ the Gulf Coast?

Also, pardon my French, but, WHAT THE FUCK?! The F.D.A. has been furthering a ‘bacteria scare’ for months. Tomatoes, pistachios, spinach.. Now it’s raw oysters. Pick an industry. Seriously, it almost seems carefully planned. As though some business is losing money, then get the F.D.A. to ban things that their rivals sell. But, I’m no conspiracy theorist. Either way, though, it’s a really offensive way to oversee an industry. Maybe it is time the F.D.A. gets one of Obama’s famous ‘reform’ bills. How about some new people in charge? Ones less inclined to take bribes, falsify records, and lie to the public.

The still-business-friendly truth behind Obama’s climate bill.

Barack Obama wants people to believe he’s not a yes-man to big business. He’ll tout his words. He has to tout his words, because, in the big picture, he hasn’t *DONE* much. He’s claimed much, but the legwork, planning, and execution almost entirely falls on other people.

But, he can’t even talk his way out of the climate bill. The main problem with the bill is that it allows big business to continue polluting. All it takes is buying extra ‘credits’. We’ve heard it before, but to sum it up, we’re supposed to be in a global crisis. Pollution is destroying our atmosphere, warming our eco-system, and pushing civilization slowly towards problems it may not be able to recover from. The whole point of the argument was to fire us up, and get us working to actually stop ourselves from sliding down that path. Obama has made public statements that, if he were honest, suggest he understands pollution is bad, and it needs to be reigned in. It can’t be reigned in, if you allow people to circumvent the standardized cap on pollution, not if they justify a need to pollute more, but simply pay more. At the risk of asking an unpopular question, Mr. Obama, who is paying you to facilitate this? Because, it sure as hell isn’t me.

And, what is it with business being allowed to negotiate ceilings for how much they can pollute? Do they think those billions of dollars they make will suddenly clean the air, when it becomes so thick with toxins everyone needs inhalers or filter masks to take a walk? Seriously. We all know pollution is a growing problem. Yet, they’re allowed to continue doing it. They could be forced to make the switch to methods that will lessen or even halt toxin emissions. Why not? I can’t fire a gun randomly in the air, even if none of the bullets hit anyone. Why do they have a go-head to pollute my air? The ban on smoking at least has proven it is possible to stop polluters from polluting.

I wonder how many of Obama’s other public pushes for ‘change’ have hidden things no one wants. The health reform plan apparently raises coverage costs. The climate reform plan allows companies to still pollute, if they pay kickbacks. What else aren’t we being told?

“The Fourth Kind” is complete fraud, but it’ll draw an audience of ’suckers’.

They’ve been billing “The Fourth Kind”, a film featuring alien abduction, as a fact-based thriller type of film. Except for one problem. It isn’t anything of the sort. It’s another Blair Witch Project, which they had to trick you into the theaters with clever orchestrated bogus reports on the then Sci-Fi Channel. Unfortunately for people who care about integrity, it represents a growing trend in film production and marketing these days. They go the reality television route, lying to our faces, and claiming it’s all ‘true’. But, truth should be cut-and-dry, and in this case, truth can mean sort of true, mostly false, or total fraud. In this movie’s example, it is total fraud.

For starters, they claim the film ‘re-enacts’ actual footage of alien abductees. That’d be fascinating, except no one, in real life, would know when they were going to be abducted by aliens. You can’t re-enact footage that couldn’t possibly exist. To claim you can, is to lie. In fact, if you were trying to sell this ‘footage’ to someone, for money, and they found out, you’d be prosecuted criminally. But, for some reason, film companies have no problem lying to you, for the sake of hyping up a film release.

Also, the film guarantees that it was created from ‘archival’ footage, and a story which revolves around a psychiatrist studying sleep-deprived patients. The story also talks about an unexplained disappearance of locals. However, the disappearance has been explained by both locals of Nome, Alaska, where the film is set, and the F.B.I., but I guess the film company knows something that locals and the feds don’t. No one involved suggested alien involvement. In fact, officially it was serial murders and alcoholism. Anyone who is familiar with cold climates knows that when people get drunk and try to walk home, they often wander off-course and freeze to death. It is widely reported every winter. Serial murders are also not that uncommon in the world.

The psychiatrist’s name is Abagail (or Abigail, depending) Tyler. There had been a fake biography site made up so she would appear to be a real doctor, but despite being manufactured to look like an Alaskan Psychiatry website, the account was hosted from another state, and, checking the root domain revealed no content. State websites have front ends. The website was owned by a company in Arizona, not by anyone located in Alaska. Yep, fraud. Quite organized, as I believe it is criminal to provide false records attempting to pass someone off as a genuine doctor. It’d be legal if the bio were tagged as fictional, but it wasn’t. Apparently it was meant (when it was online) to be linked to from another site, and designed to look like an official Alaska state archive. Alaska might like to have a talk with the studio, too.

The film studio, NBC Universal, has no official comment, on the allegations. Of course, they don’t care. By the time most audiences figure out they’ve been lied to, they’ll have already paid the ticket price, and given the studio their box office gold.

Residents of Nome, Alaska, have stated that the film is extremely insensitive to families who have lost real people to real problems. The acting police chief for Nome, Dallas Massie, has not been presented, by anyone, that the disappearances were caused by aliens.

I think it’s ridiculous that a film or even a television studio needs to commit crimes and lie to viewers just to get ratings and box office success. It also indicates that the studio staff doesn’t believe in the talent or vision of the product they are marketing. There have been vast numbers of movies and television series that succeeded without having to lie to people. Are the studios trying to tell us they’re now unable to think of ways to produce this level of quality?

On a final note, even the scenery of “Nome” isn’t real. The film was shot in Bulgaria. The mountainous terrain doesn’t exist in the real city. The trees don’t. In fact, a local of Nome, Alaska, seeing this film, would have no clue it was supposed to be Nome. So, there’s apparently no truth to this film, at all. Except that Nome exists, Alaska exists, and people did actually disappear. Just no aliens, no Abigail or Abagail Tyler, no mountains, and no sleep study.

Roman Polanski re-trial a colossal waste of taxpayer money?

At first, I was probably like many of you. Roman Polanski, prolific film director and internationally-known celebrity, was charged with having sex with a 13 year old girl when he was in his early 40’s, after drugging the girl.

The charges were carried out in trial. He plead guilty in what was probably a plea agreement, and he was ordered to have a 90-day psych exam. The judge, through whatever machinations, decided after his release from the court-ordered psychiatric evaluation (the only order given at that point), that he should be sent to jail, and then deported. Everyone involved who examined Polanski recommended against jail time. In fact, it was widely expected that the director would be given probation. Expectations suddenly changed when a then-Deputy D.A. had a conversation with the judge. The Deputy D.A., David Wells, apparently convinced the judge to threaten Polanski with a harsher sentence. I guess back in the 1970’s they didn’t have all parties represented when having private judge-to-prosectution talks. Anyway, after hearing about what was going on, Roman Polanski decided to flee jurisdiction.

The events were, and still are, highly suspicious. In 1988, the girl sued Polanski in civil court, and Polanski agreed to pay her as part of an agreement.

Flash-forward to 2009, and Roman Polanski arrives in Switzerland. He’s supposed to be given a Lifetime Achievement Award at the Zurich Film Festival, only he doesn’t make it past the airport. It was later revealed that he was arrested at the request of the U.S. government, who had at that point not even written out a formal request of extradition. The Swiss government claimed his arrest was “routine”. Polanski hired counsel to appeal the extradition, which has been officially requested on paper (now).

My point is, the victim doesn’t want a trial. I don’t mention her name because, unlike some people, I respect her privacy and right to live her life as she wishes. Polanski doesn’t want a trial, obviously, given the circumstances of the original one. In fact, he’s been the target of subsequent (proven false by fact and eyewitnesses) claims of sexual assault by at least one aspiring model. It has been more than three decades since the original trial.

Here’s the clincher. The most Roman Polanski can face, as a result of what happened so long ago, is a mere 2 years locked up. Yes, the U.S. government has expended diplomatic resources, made a big public stink, and angered film makers all over the world, for a 2-year sentence. I could walk outside, right now, and commit an offense with more jail time attached. I wouldn’t need to be extradited, and I can guarantee you I wouldn’t make national news.

This is, in my opinion, less a zealous prosecution of a crime, and more a zealous persecution of “the man that got away”, and the man who, inadvertently, exposed how corrupt the U.S. justice system truly can be. Polanski has not only evaded capture, for decades, but he has been a highly visible embarrassment to our government. He’ll be doing time for that, despite what anyone claims. And, he’s been captured with our tax dollars. Something tells me, also, that part of the ‘deal’ to arrest Polanski involved us letting Swiss Bank “tax shelters” go free. You know, those rich people Obama claims he wants to tax. Trust me, a deal of some kind was made. It is highly doubtful that the Swiss government, notorious for remaining neutral in politics for over a century, would agree to a diplomatic incident without an incentive. The only thing we have on them is their banks sheltering rich people’s tax money.

So, like I imagine at least a few people are also thinking, what I most want to know from our government, right now, is how much money is this extradition and re-trial going to cost us? And, don’t give us the justice finally reached speech. It’s a load of bullshit.

Awards for nothing.

Barack Obama, commander-in-chief during a multi-country war, wins a Nobel prize for “peace”, while making decisions that will ultimately bring our nation further into a war posture.

Now, the wife of Japan’s Prime Minister is given an award for looking good in a pair of jeans. Well, at least she actually wore the jeans, and apparently looked good. Can I pick up my trophy for expedient nose-picking?

These days, they hand out honorary degrees, commemorative trophies, plaques, and statuettes, for just showing up. I have to wonder, why bother doing anything? I mean, if you’re famous, and they’re going to hand you freebie titles despite anything you’ve actually done, what’s the incentive?

All I ask, if you’re going to be considered for something, make it notable, and make it something the winner has to have actually done. No awards for thoughts. No awards for looks. No awards for collecting dust. Make it worth having.

The Heene family’s stunt could have been planned with media help.

There has been ’speculation’ (so far) that the “balloon boy” hoax could have also involved an unnamed media outlet. Sheriff Alderden wouldn’t name the media outlet, but hinted it was a show that “blurs the line between entertainment and news”, and that it had a deal of some kind with regard to the balloon incident. The hazy bit is whether the deal may have been arranged before the incident.

Gawker.com says it wasn’t them. Of course, I don’t think they have a “show”, so it probably can’t be them. I’m guessing it’d have to be a televised media outlet, but radio is also a show.

The authorities are wise to consider going after the media accomplices in this. If there’s enough negative air involved, there’s a good chance the media outlet will end up backing out of the whole thing, leaving Richard Heene with no money to pay his fines, and no audience to fuel his acting delusion.

It isn’t really a big stretch to believe a media outlet could have been in on this. TLC is getting harpooned (proverbially) over the Gosselin fiasco, losing viewers, and still they’re trying to keep the show on the air. Just about every television network has some form of reality program, scripted fraud disguised as a documentary. There’s a reason why they have it. It’s the same as NBC’s Jay Leno Show. It’s cheap to make. Paying a bunch of idiots with no talent to act up in front of a camera is cheap. Wiring up a house with cameras and microphones is cheap, too. No rental of a sound-stage. Plus, without a blockbuster Hollywood face in the show, no need to pay a blockbuster Hollywood salary to your main ’star’.

Richard Heene’s show might have been interesting to watch. But, the sad part is they didn’t need to do anything illegal to sell it. Because they decided to go that route, there won’t be a show, and everyone involved will be taking a major public nosedive. Let’s make sure that this isn’t repeated later, by boycotting whichever show or network was a conspirator. If enough people decide not to watch, they’ll lose their financial capital.