Archive for the ‘(language)’ Category

The Battle of Thermopylae

Wednesday, March 30th, 2011
Aside from writing this filthy little column, one of my many side jobs is as an event coordinator for an outdoor music and arts festival called San Diego IndieFest (SDIF).

The producers of SDIF, Danielle LoPresti and Alicia Champion, are two deeply committed, commie, lefty, pinko socialist, community-organizing-activist guerrilla-types who rage against the enemies of gay rights, feminism, environmentalism and independent arts.

I admire these guerls and respect all their causes, with the exception of one that I find particularly annoying. I’m talking about their campaign to abolish the word “pussy” (as it pertains to weakness or fragility). So devoted are they to this cause that they scold me every time I use it in their presence, which is often because Alicia happens to be a fan of Bostonian sporting outfits, and if there’s one word that describes the players or fans of Bostonian sporting outfits, it’s the P-word—and I don’t mean pugnacious. (more…)

Share

All These AssFaces
(Anti-pot activists fabricate reasons for prohibition)

Thursday, April 1st, 2010
Future anti-marijuana activist

Future anti-marijuana activist

About a week ago, on MSNBC, I saw this anti-pot guy I’d never encountered before. His name was David Evans of the Drug Free America Foundation and I knew—before he opened his mouth, before the host ever revealed who he was or to which side of the argument he subscribed—that I hated his giant, ugly assface.”

The debate kicked off with the not-at-all-assface-having Jeffrey Miron, head of Harvard undergraduate studies and author of the report “The Budgetary Implications of Drug Prohibition,” which found that if pot prohibition is repealed, the state of California will earn (via taxation) $16 billion annually and save (via non-enforcement) $12 billion—a net turnaround of $28 billion.

After which, Evans—who looks as though Buck Henry, Larry Craig and a bucketful of faces that resemble ass had their DNA fused together in a horrible plasma transporter accident—countered that legalizing marijuana will increase usage by 30 percent and that the financial burden to the state will actually rise.

First of all, 30 percent is clearly a bullshit statistic. That number is so spurious, it’s offensive to actual piles of bullshit. Notice that he doesn’t cite a source. Not that it matters. I wouldn’t care if he got that number from The Bureau of the Smartest People in the Universe Who Have Never Ever Been Wrong about Anything Ever, there is just no way marijuana use will rise by 30 percent if made legal. Seriously, who isn’t getting stoned these days who wants to get stoned? (more…)

Share

Sticks and Stones

Thursday, March 18th, 2010

The French Parliament is considering legislation that will outlaw “psychological violence” directed at a spouse or any cohabitating domestic partners.

Though the language of the law is gender-nonspecific, it targets the atrocious problem the Frogs are having with those old-world, misogynistic, Neanderthalian males who tear women down by, you know, calling them fat, accusing them of infidelity, deriding their terrible taste in chick-flicks and similar types of bastardatry. (more…)

Share

Welcoming the Ants

Tuesday, November 10th, 2009

welcoming the ants

Responding to the recent car-bombing of a Peshawar market, Secretary of State Clinton told the Pakistan press, and the world, that the attacks were, “cowardly,” which couldn’t be farther from the truth.

Just Google the phrase cowardly act and see how many people have no idea what coward even means. For example, the first three hits are links to: an article about a hit and run murder in Toronto, an assault on an elderly man by a teenager with a baseball bat, and a man who attacked an Australian Constable with a flying head-butt to protect an elderly man from being tasered—all of which were described as “cowardly acts.” (more…)

Share

Evil and Pathetic

Friday, July 13th, 2007

I’ve been hearing a particular term a lot lately. This term is actually many centuries old, but it seems that during the past two or three years or so, it’s really gained popularity.

The term is ‘moral relativism,” and it has been hijacked by Bill O’Reilly and his fellow hardcore, right-wing, often-Christian TV and radio blabbermouth types who splash it around like high-school swimming-pool bullies shoving chlorinated tsunamis into the eyes of defenseless nerdlings.

Like ‘unpatriotic” and ‘against the troops,” ‘moral relativism” has become a term of bludgeoning and marginalization. It’s usually employed when discussing hot-button issues like gay marriage, abortion, drugs, prostitution and/or pornography. Whenever anyone–usually of the liberal and libertarian ilk–defends such unwholesome activities, O’Reilly and other hardcore, right-wing, often-Christian blabbermouths announce that these defenders are ‘moral relativists,” then shut off their microphones and shout them down to size.

(more…)

Share