I want a jet pack!
I want to get me one of these!
Once upon a dreary, while I websurfed, weak and weary,
Over many a strange and spurious website of 'hot chicks galore',
While I clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning,
And my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour.
"'Tis not possible," I muttered, "give me back my cheap hardcore!" -
Quoth the server, "404".
MILLIONS of ambitious executives are risking divorce as long hours take a toll on their sex lives, a study has found.I can guarantee you that the vast majority of these workers are men - I wouldnt be surprised if the proportion was over 95%. I can also guarantee you that most of these men are supporting a wife and kids, meaning the long hours are more a necessity to support the family than something done for fun.
It estimates 45 per cent of high earners working for large global companies have "extreme jobs" that involve working at least 60 hours a week, although many work 100 hours or more.
This just boggles the mind...
How British Airways bans men sitting next to unaccompanied minors
British Airways has been accused of treating all men passengers as potential sex offenders after it was revealed it has banned children from sitting next to male strangers - even if their parents are on the same flight.
The bizarre regulation came to light when a nine-year-old girl was moved from her seat next to a 76-year-old passenger and his wife on a flight from
to Malaga . London
More evidence of the world gone crazy... a Septuagenarian pensioner, SITTING NEXT TO HIS OWN WIFE, is forced to move from his seat because British Airways won't allow children under 16 to sit next to an adult male. What sort of a fucking world are we living in when every male is branded a potential paedophile?
"To my amazement, the stewardess said BA had a rule that no unaccompanied child under 16 may be seated next to an adult male stranger - even if there's a woman on the other side.
"The discussion went on for several minutes but she refused to back down and said we could not take off until the problem was sorted out. I heard her muttering to a colleague that everyone would have to disembark.
Thats right - if the poor old gent didn't vacate his seat, they would empty the entire plane.
Even child protection experts have spoken out about the rule:
Leading child protection campaigner Michele Elliot, director of the children's charity Kidscape, said she was astonished by the BA rule.
"It is utterly absurd. It brands all men as potential sex offenders," she said.
"What message does it send out to children - that men are not to be trusted? Women also abuse children. This is just totally lacking in common sense."
I wonder, then, if British Airways has seen evidence that, in 2004, 58% of perpetrators of child abuse and neglect were female?
And this isn't just from some non-peer reviewed magazine article like most feminazis quote - this is from the U.S Department of Health and Human Services.
But i guess we don't have to worry about it in this part of the world, right???
WRONG!!! Both Qantas and Air New
An airline policy that prevents men from being seated next to unaccompanied children could pave the way for similar discriminatory policies to run rampant, says National's
Dr Mapp yesterday laid a claim with the Human Rights Review Tribunal, saying that Qantas and Air New Zealand's seating policy breached the Human Rights Act. He said the policy discriminated against men and implied they were dangerous.
The seating policy drew criticism from the Green Party and the Human Rights Commission last year after several men were outraged at having to change seats because they were sitting next to unaccompanied children
Just how ridiculous do you think the situation could get?
Well, take the example of UK Member of Parliament (and married father of four) Boris Johnson. Mr Johnson was observed sitting next to a young female on a British Airways flight, and told that he would have to move.
Mr Johnson calmly replied (I don't know how he managed it) that he was actually sitting next to his OWN FUCKING DAUGHTER!
(You can read his quite humorous article about the event here: Come off it folks: How many paedophiles can there be?)
I'm a 31 year old male who travels alone by plane every month for work. If I was told I wasn't allowed to remain in my seat, simply because the absence of a vagina branded me a potential sex offender, I can't even begin to imagine the volcanic eruption that would follow.
WELFARE groups have slammed a plan to give irresponsible parents food and clothing vouchers instead of money in their bank accounts.
Federal cabinet has given preliminary support to the scheme that will quarantine up to 40 per cent of welfare payments to drug-addicted parents and those whose children regularly skip school for use only on food, rent, clothing and bills.
I think this is a GREAT idea. Why NOT ensure that deadbeat parents are forced to at least spend SOME of their welfare cheques on their children – after all, isn't that what the money is for?
Labor and welfare groups said the proposal did not offer solutions.
"This approach is going to leave families in crisis. You're managing symptoms rather than enabling people to address their addictions and crises and move beyond them," ACOSS president Lin Hatfield Dodds said.
How the fuck is it “leaving families in crisis” by ensuring their welfare cheques are used to buy food and clothing, rather than being spent on alcohol and drugs?
Of course Labor don’t like the voucher plan – it doesn’t involve penalizing hard workers and business owners while throwing even more money at current welfare recipients. And the fact that ACOSS, the ultra left wing socialist group who'd like income tax for working slobs set at 60%, dislike it surprises me even less.
Opposition Leader Kim Beazley said the Government needed to put more effort into training welfare recipients, not punishing them.
Yet again, blithering idiot Beazley runs to the left, trying to drum up popular support by offering.. well.. not a single idea of his own. In typical Beazley fashion, he knows he doesn’t want the Coalition’s plan – but he doesn’t have one of his own. Again, no surprises there.
I DO think there should be a provision in the tax system for providing for people who genuinely can’t look after themselves, those receiving disability support pensions for example. There should also be some provision for helping people out of work get back on their feet – this is what unemployment benefits are really for in the first place.
But for fucks sake, there has to be some sort of limit. How can an able bodied man or woman NOT be able to find a job for 5 years? Any sort of job, to contribute to the community that has provided for THEM for the past half decade? Every week you hear of employers lamenting the lack of staff prepared to do a day’s work, because the welfare system makes it too attractive NOT to work. I've heard plenty of people say “Theres no point working – after tax I only get a little bit more than the dole”
I think anything which even attempts to reverse this mentality has got to be a step in the right direction.
I headed off to the local Coles this afternoon to do a bit of shopping. The supermarket is in a small shopping centre, maybe another 15 or 20 shops in there. Theres a notice board on the entrance for people to place notices – mostly cars or furniture for sale, rooms for rent, that sort of thing. Its not a big noticeboard, so most days its pretty full up with sheets of paper advertising stuff.
So, as I've been known to do, Im standing there reading the board, trying to decide between having my tarot cards read or buying a 1995 Hyundai Excel (with aircon), when this chick jumps out of a car her mother has parked in a disabled spot, waiting for her. The chick marches up, sheet of paper in hand, and searches the board for somewhere to put her ad. Finding none, she grabs an ad off the board (for a unit for rent), scrunches it into a ball, takes the thumbtacks that were holding it up, and puts her ad in its place.
I turn to her and say “Are you right?”
She huffs “Mind your own business” in reply and traipses back to the car.
I almost missed it - someone less attuned to the phenomenon may have. But when she looked at me, I saw it, if only for a second .… that unmistakable gleam in the eye .… I knew I’d seen it before.
That’s right – she was an ENTITLEMENT PRINCESS.
"A female who believes that she should receive special treatment from all who come into contact with her. She is a condescending, self-centered, nasty little bitch."
As she jumped back into Mummy’s new BMZ Z5 (actually, from the glimpse I had of Mummy and the preening she was doing in the mirror, she looked like she hadn't done a days work in her life, so Im assuming its Daddy's car - but I digress), I took a peek at her ad – she was also advertising a unit for rent. She looked about 19, so she probably tried the year out of home after school, maybe with a friend of similar background and outlook on the world. After 9 months or so, it got tiring paying for things, doing the housework, and not having access to Daddy’s credit card, so she decides to skip out on the lease and leave someone else to move in while she moves back home.
So, by taking down someone elses ad, she’s not only fucked over someone that had the nerve to put their notice up first, she seems to have deliberately chosen someone advertising the same thing she was – after all, it IS all about ME! ME! ME!
Mind you, Im a pretty quick thinker, so this entire exchange has taken less than 60 seconds, and I wander off to buy something for dinner. And, being somewhat prone to my own particular method of righting all thats wrong with the world, I decide to make some helpful changes to her ad on the way back. Into the shopping basket with the steak and veggies goes a brand, spanking new black texta, extra wide.
Her ad now takes pride of place in the middle of the noticeboard, with one small edit. Where it used to say:
Available immediately – call Kate on XXXX-XXXX, it now says
Available immediately – I've been hospitalised due to multiple sexually transmitted diseases – call Kate on XXXX-XXXX.
Hope she gets some interesting replies.
This writing seeks to educate men about the realities of what he may be getting himself into when he marries. An informed decision is less likely to be one that is later regretted. The intent is not to dissuade men from marrying, but to encourage them in communicating frankly their concerns and expectations of marriage with their potential spouses. The aim of this writing is to also enlighten women with some of the reasons why increasing numbers of successful eligible unmarried men, who otherwise prefer monogamous long-term relationships, are turning their backs on marriage.
Ted Haggard - Fundamentalist Arsehat
First Haggard claimed he had never met the hooker, then changed his story and said that, while he HAD met the man, he had never engaged in sexual activity with him - he just bought drugs and got a massage. Riiiiiight.......
Check out the following Daily Show clip, with insight in typical Jon Stewart fashion.