this is just plain wrong......

some things, once seen, can never be unseen

I have been enjoying the "John Adams" series on HBO. Adams was truly one of the unsung founding fathers, working tirelessly for the revolution behind the scenes, and being upstaged by Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, et al.

As much as I am enjoying the series, it was quite shocking to see Mr. Adams playing hide the sausage with Abigail. The site of her lying on the chaise with her legs spread wide was more than these old eyes could bear. Had I not seen that image, my life would have been just as rich.

a little piece of eye candy for the chubby chasers......

I hope you're ready for Bush light, because that's exactly where we're headed in November. There is no doubt in my mind that John McCain will win the presidency in November, because Democrats are doing what Democrats do best. They are completely fucking up an election that was handed to them on a silver platter.

The funny thing is, John McCain was a sacrificial lamb. Everyone knows that. The Republicans knew there was no way in hell they were going to win this year, so they gave us a throw-away candidate. Kind of like Bob Dole against Bill Clinton in 1996.

But now, thanks to the antics of Hillary and Barack, McCain is actually climbing in the polls, with most of them showing McCain ahead of both Hillary and Barack.

There are those who say, "well the campaign hasn't really started yet. Just wait until a nominee is chosen." The problem with that argument is that history shows when a party is divided at the convention, it doesn't win in November. One only has to look at the Democrats in 1968 and 1980, and the Republicans in 1976 to see that example. Infighting drains the party, and the bitterness that develops makes it difficult to unite after the convention.

Shame on you Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Shame on you. Thank you for dividing the party and disillusioning everyone who thought we might see some real change this time around. Thank you for bickering over your stupid issues like Barack's minister and Hillary's trip to Bosnia.

I hope you'll sleep well, somewhere other than the White House, after January 20, 2009.

Yet another example that they don't give a shit about you......

So how long has this mortgage crisis been going on? A year? And what has been done to help the people in trouble? Not a damn thing. Oh there's been a lot of talk and rhetoric. But no real action.

The big debate is over whether we should bail out people who got themselves in trouble in the first place. But, of course, I forgot. That only applies to people like you and me.

An investment banker like Bear Stearns gets in trouble and the government suddenly turns into Superman, working at lightning speed, to bail out this firm, that certainly had its' hand in the creation of the entire mortgage crisis.

Every news report I've seen on the mortgage crisis says it's too late for those who are already in trouble. Help will not come in time. Superman will arrive after the school bus loaded with kids falls off the cliff. These people will lose their homes.

But not Bear Stearns. Like Lois Lane, they fell off the roof of a tall building, and Superman heard their screams all the way from Mars, and rushed back to grab them before they mussed their hair.

Yummy!

how the hell did this happen????

Over the last several months, I've been watching the unfolding mortgage crisis from the sideline. I have to admit, I didn't quite understand it until recently.

There seems to be two parts to this. I understand the first one. People purchased homes, that were probably too much for them, using ARM's, with the expectation that they could refinance the home, or sell it at a profit before the ARM started adjusting. Unfortunately for those guys, their property values actually went down. So, at refinance time they had negative equity and were stuck with the increasing ARM rates. Those who had planned to sell were stuck in a home on which the owed more than it was worth. Selling would cost them a fortune.

Part two of this mess has me scratching me head. People who purchased homes they no way in hell could afford. I saw one report on a family in Massachusetts trying to pay for a $350,000 home on a $70,000 yearly income. Raising two kids is expensive enough, without the added burden of a $350,000 mortgage. But the story that truly blew me away was of the woman from Queens who somehow managed to secure a mortgage for a $700,000 house on a yearly income of $35,000!!!!

I repeat. HOW THE HELL DID THAT HAPPEN!!!!!!

I'm no stranger to the whole mortgage process. I've had several. And every time I've applied for a mortgage, I practically had to use a wheelbarrow to bring the paperwork to the bank. They wanted checking account statements, tax returns, pay stubs. They wanted to know how much I spent on toilet paper and other shit. Hell, I'm surprised they didn't ask for a blood sample and urinalysis. The mortgage broker always cautioned me to not do anything to affect my credit until after closing, because they would check it the day of closing, and if anything changed, it could mean starting all over again.

I guess this kind of falls under the category of "let the buyer beware." One would have to be pretty naive to believe that one can afford a $700,000 mortgage on a $35,000 income. The comfort level for me is 1.5 to 2 times my annual income. No more. I know too many "house poor" people, who spend most of their money for their home. That's why I don't feel I can afford a house in the Bay Area. Hell, nobody can, but that didn't stop them from buying those crazy priced houses.

Frankly, those lenders or brokers or whomever approved those crazy mortgages should be thrown in jail. They knew damn good and well those poor people couldn't afford the mortgages, but they got their money so who cares?

So how are they going to fix this mess? Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson came out with suggestions for stricter lending guidelines today. They included things like considering a borrowers ability to pay, verifying employment and income, and appraising the property.

Huh? Shouldn't they have been doing that all along?

Funny comment on one of my posts.

About a year ago, I made an observation that it seemed every guy named Chris must be gay. I induced that idea after adding yet another gay guy named Chris to my Blackberry address book. The name Chris is the most common name in my address book, and every one of them is gay. I mentioned the line from "Steel Magnolias" that all gay men have track lighting, and all gay men are named Mark, Rick, or Steve. And I suggested we add Chris to the list.

Today a guy named Chris posted a comment. He said he did a search for track lighting and my blog came up, and that he was sorry to tell me that all guys named Chris are not gay.

Thanks for the comment Chris. Glad you cleared that up. But, let's see. You're a guy named Chris, and you're searching for track lighting.

I rest my case LOL.

I have a couple of pet peeves about online life. Well, actually several of them. Some I've described before. But there are always new ones on the horizon.

1. Why is it that the guys with the biggest dicks are all bottoms? What's up with that? What a waste.

2. You're not a "cub" if you're over 30. I'm sorry, that's just the way it is.

3. You're definitely not a "boy," or worse, "boi," if you're over 30. Hell, I think 25 may be the cutoff for that one.

4. They say 60 is the new 30, but that doesn't count if you're trying to hook up with me.

5. If you're so closeted that you can't put a face pic on your profile, get offline. There are other places for you. They're called adult book stores and airport men's rooms.

6. If you're trying to entice me with a picture of you jacking off your huge eight inch cock, be sure to clean your fingernails. God, that is such a turn off.

7. I love it when guys say something like "good answer" when I say "no, I don't bareback." Something tells me I would have gotten the same response if I said "yeah I love taking huge loads every night."

8. The fifteen pictures of you on all fours with your ass in the air belies your insistence that you're "versatile."

9. Don't say in your profile how happy you are in your relationship. And how much you love your partner. And you're not looking for anything but friendship. And, "oh by the way, here's a pic of my gaping, freshly fucked hole."

10. If you're 75, and say you like to have fun with older guys, you should just jack off.

So I had an awful day on Monday. In retrospect, it was kind if humorous, but not at the time.

I've been having a problem with a sore foot for the last few weeks. I thought maybe I pulled a muscle or something, but it's been getting worse and worse. I've been hobbling all over the place.

So, I decide to go see a Podiatrist. I would like to see someone in my regular doctor's building, so I go on Cigna's website to find one. The one I found had an appointment for 1:30 on Monday.

Monday comes and I drive to my doctor's building, which is on Hermann in the Museum district. When I get there, this podiatrist's office is nowhere to be found. So I anxiously call their number and tell them I can't find their office. "Oh, we're not in that building anymore. We're at 6560 Fannin." Shit. Fuck. That's in the Medical Center. I hate going there. Traffic is terrible, and you can't find a place to park to save your life.

So it's a shitty day. Raining cats and dogs. I still have time to make it to the Medical Center. They'll hold my place they tell me. I find a garage 4 blocks away from their building. Hobble down Fannin in the rain.

I get to the office and sign in. Then they ask me what brought me in today, and I explained the terrible pain I had in my foot. "Oh, are you looking for a Podiatrist?" I replied in the affirmative. "Isn't this a Podiatry office???" "No. This is an infectious disease specialist."

OH MY GOD! My head starts reeling with the thought of God knows what germs I picked up in there. I quickly head for the door trying to make a break for the men's room. As I'm leaving the lady says "well if you ever need an infectious disease specialist, give us a call." Hell yeah. Next time I get Malaria, you'll be first on my list.

Anyone Thirsty?

AP is reporting that traces of pharmaceuticals are present in the water supplies of at least 24 large American cities. The drugs include antibiotics, anti-convulsants, anti-depressants, heart medicine, and more.

The amounts are in the parts per billion, or even trillion, far below a medical dose. Nevertheless, it's somewhat unnerving to think that we're potentially filling our bodies with other folks' medicine when we have a drink of water.

How do the pharmaceuticals get there? When people take drugs, some of it is absorbed in the body, but a great deal is pissed out. The water treatment process doesn't remove them, so they pass into lakes, streams, etc. From there, it gets back into the water supply.

The government doesn't require testing for drugs in the water supply, and only 28 of the 62 largest water suppliers test for drugs voluntarily. But, of those 28, 24 tested positive for drugs. You do the math.

Philadelphia discovered 56 different pharmaceuticals in their water supply. The water supply for 18.5 million southern Californians was discovered to be tainted with anti-epileptic and anti-anxiety medicines. In northern New Jersey, you'll be drinking angina medicine, along with a dose of the mood stabilizer carbamazepine. And, in San Francisco, you'll get a dose of sex hormones with your H2O. How appropriate. That explains a lot.

Can't Wait For This To Come Out In April

Shelter is the story of a young man from the wrong side of the tracks who gives up his dream of going to art school so he can help his sister raise her young son. He works in a dead end job in a diner, and during his free time, he surfs with his best friend, a guy from the rich part of town. Enter his best friend's brother, and love is in the air.

Is This Really The Best Name They Could Come Up With For This Medicine?

Hmmm

Did Hillary really win the popular vote in the Texas primary? I wonder. Right wing radio talkers, like Rush Limbaugh, were encouraging Texas Republicans to cross over and vote for Hillary, because they think she's beatable and Barack is not.

Now, one would wonder if people would actually outsource their brains to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, but I'm starting to think that may be the case. I personally have spoken with 3 Republicans who crossed over and voted for Hillary for that very reason. And there are reports that many right wing talk stations across the state are receiving calls from people who did just that.

It's possible that Hillary's victory in the popular vote is a phantom one. Only about 100,000 votes separate her and Barack. The Republicans turned out half the number of voters, in a supposedly Republican state. Barack is kicking Hillary's ass in the caucuses, where people of true conviction vote. And we have the anectdotal evidence of the talk radio callers.

The funny part of all of this is that the talk show callers are complaining that they were disenfranchised by voting for Hillary. They had no idea that by signing up for a Democratic voting booth, that they would not have the opportunity to vote for other Republican candidates. What a bunch of idiots.

I guess Churchill said it best when he said the best argument against democracy is to spend 5 minutes in conversation with an average voter.

Your Tax Dollars At Work

Texas is one of four states which have laws banning the sale of dildos and pocket pussies. The law is rarely enforced, mostly in the redneck areas, of which there are many. You can buy sex toys all over the place in Houston, but try to find a buttplug in Dallas, as I did once, and you'll come up short.

There is a loophole in the law. The law technically prohibits the sale of devices "used to stimulate a sexual organ." So as long as you sell them as "novelties," you're fine. It's a stupid law. Probably something you would never have to worry about. But it exists. And, people do sometimes run afoul of it. A woman in Burleson, Texas was arrested for having Tupperware-type parties for housewives where she was selling sex toys. Some of the good Christian women in town took offense and asked the police to investigate. The woman was arrested because she made the mistake of describing how to use the dildos. Apparently the Burleson police thought that middle aged housewives armed with dildos was a threat to the community.

Enter the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. On February 13, 2008, this court overturned the Texas law on the basis that it was not the state's business what people did in the privacy of their own bedrooms (novel concept). Justice Thomas Reavly wrote in his opinion, "Whatever one might think about the use of these devices, government interference in their personal and private use violates the Constitution."

But it doesn't stop there. Idiot Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is going to appeal that decision. He claims that if this law is overturned, it will lead to challenges of other Texas laws regulating sexual behavior like incest, bigamy, and, of course, bestiality.

I love the way right wing politicians, and their partners in crime, the right wing religious Baptist nuts et. al., always raise the specter of bestiality on everything. If we allow gay marriage, it will lead to bestiality. If we allow middle aged housewives to pleasure themselves, it will lead to bestiality. They must believe that every human being has some latent sheep fucker inside him, just waiting for the opportunity to get out. Of course, this is Texas we're talking about. That probably happens more times than we would care to know in the Lone Star state.

What do presidents like Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, and Ronald Reagan have in common? All these former presidents are considered, in some quarters, to have been effective, successful, even great presidents.

They are also among the least experienced presidents in history.

There's been much talk of "experience" in this year's presidential cycle. Hillary is touting hers. Barack is brushing aside his lack of it. John McCain has the trump card with twice as much experience as either one of them.

But, just how important is "experience" when it comes to being president? Time magazine asked that question this week in a very interesting article. Time compared the resume of all 42 presidents, and the results were surprising. The data Time used was the amount of time each president spent in either an elected office, or high federal office, before he became president.

You may remember James Buchanan. He was, without question, the single most experienced official before becoming president. His presidency is not considered one of the better ones. He was so concerned about pleasing everyone that his policies probably exacerbated the tensions between north and south. He was, by the way, succeeded by one of our least experienced presidents, Abraham Lincoln. Mr. Lincoln was succeeded by the second most experienced president, Andrew Johnson. Another winner who had the distinction of being the only impeached president until Bill Clinton came along.

The list of presidents who had extensive government resumes, along with mediocre or failed presidencies, is long: Martin Van Buren, John Tyler, James Garfield, and Gerald Ford, to name a few. Lyndon Johnson had a very impressive resume, and was very skilled and successful as Senate Majority Leader. But his presidency got bogged down in the Vietnam War. His successes in civil rights and "Great Society" programs are far overshadowed by a war that he escalated.

The message is pretty clear. Experience in government does not translate into a successful presidency. In fact, a long pre-presidential career is more likely to be a harbinger of a failed presidency instead of a successful one.

Of course, lack of experience does not guarantee a good president either. Among our least experienced presidents, we have Ulysses S. Grant and George W. Bush.

I Would Absolutely Fucking Shit My Pants

This is some incredible video from Hamburg. A Lufthansa Airbus was attempting to land on a blustery day, when it was hit with wind gusts estimated at 155 mph.

Way To Go GM!

Who would have thought that an American auto company would reveal the most ingenious, talked about concept car at this year's auto shows? Well, that's exactly what happened with GM's Chevy Volt.

The Volt uses a large battery which is charged from your home's electric current. The battery will power the car for the first 40 miles. After that, the 50mpg 3 cylinder engine kicks in. But, instead of powering the car, the engine produces a charge for the battery. Kind of like talking on your cell phone while it's charging at the same time.

If you drive less than 40 miles a day, you would literally use no gas at all. But, if you drive 60-100 miles a day, between the battery and the engine, you'll get somewhere between 100 and 150 mpg. Not bad, huh?

And, the engine can easily be converted to burn either conventional gas, or American made ethanol or even bio-diesel. You could pull up to McDonald's and fill up on their left over grease. Hell, that could start a whole new industry for McDonald's.

The big problem right now is getting the battery ready for mass production. GM is saying it probably won't be ready until sometime between 2010 and 2012. Sure would be nice if they could get that going a bit faster.

I'm really pulling for GM. This kind of innovation could get the American auto industry back on track, not to mention allowing us to tell the middle east to go to fucking hell where they belong.

WE'RE #1

Well the United States has set another record that we shouldn't be proud of. According to a study released by the non-partisan Pew Center, the land of the free leads the world in, not only the percentage of its citizens who are incarcerated, but also the sheer number of prisoners.

Currently 1 in 100 Americans are behind bars. That percentage is higher than any other country in the world. In raw numbers, that's 2.3 MILLION people. And that means more Americans are incarcerated than even the far more populous (and communist) China.

And over half of the people in jail are there for non-violent crimes.

Logically, this can lead to only one of two conclusions. Either Americans or a particularly unlawful bunch of people, or American jurisprudence is particularly harsh. I think the later is more likely.

When will Americans wake up and realize that our justice system is cruel and mean-spirited? And it doesn't prevent crime? If so many of our citizens are in jail, one would think we would have a lower crime rate. Not so. More enlightened western industrialized nations (meaning all of them), which have more benign justice systems, also have much lower crime rates than America. Imagine that.

If you can't worry about your fellow citizens, then worry about yourself. Every one of us, on occasion, will do something that, under our strict sentencing guidelines, could get us thrown in jail. Get angry with someone and punch them, and you're looking at 10 years in prison on an felony assault charge.

And if you don't worry about yourself, worry about your children. Because, God knows, kids do stupid things. Get caught with a joint, and there goes your college education. Shoot another kid in the ass with a bb gun, and you have a felony assault rapsheet. Accidentally run a red light and kill someone, and you're in prison for 10-20 years. Hell, Laura Bush did that when she was 17. If the legal system had been as harsh then as it is now, her life would have been completely different.