Friday, June 30, 2006

Why America cannot win in Iraq

At least as long as stuff as outlined in the below article happens.

I feel for the US troops. I do. If the Bush administration had not fucked up the occupation by providing enough troops to guarrantee safety and infrastructure - let alone sack anyone from the former government thus flooding the country with pissed off military veterans and destroy any semblance of administration experience left in the country - then stuff like this might not have happened.

ADF troops are not like this. Unlike the yanks they are trained in peace keeping and peace enforcement to a high standard - the shooting of the trade minister's bodyguard not withstanding. Hearts and minds for example is the bedrock of our ability to look after those in our charge. Our guys are to be commended for their skills and their abilities.

But the yanks, well, fuck me if this doesn't have shades of Vietnam all about it. Macho dickheads in sunnies tromping into the country and driving the people to join an insurgency through abusive dishonourable behaviour. And like Vietnam our guys again did the right thing. We did. If you look at the Australian experience in Vietnam by and large we were not hated, we didn't piss people off, and we looked after those we were in charge of.

However also like Vietnam we got a relatively peaceful area we could call our own and look after it with exceptional ability.


Anway, read this article - as highlighted in Crikey's blogwatch. It's some disturbing reading. And it makes me weep for the utter futility of America trying once again to force countries to adopt an ideology and government they were not ready for by means of blunt force.

It didn't have to be this way. They really could have succeeded had they not made the tremendous blunders they made.

The article is located here

Here's the intro;

Truthdig contributor Nir Rosen, an American reporter who has lived for the last three years in Iraq and who can pass as Middle Eastern, describes what it’s like to live under the boot of a culturally callous—and sometimes criminal—occupying force in Iraq. “The occupation has been one vast extended crime against the Iraqi people, and most of it has occurred unnoticed by the American people and the media.”

By the way let me say this. I supported the invasion of Iraq and I supported it for both WMD and for taking down Hussein. I'm glad he's gone. He was a murderous thug. But I believe now that it was a mistake and containment was the better option - as long as of course the sanctions issue had been corrected and the children of Iraq were not still suffering from the looting of the oil for food program made possible by organisations such as the AWB. I also believe that the US could have succeeded if they had not had fuckwits like Rumsfeld, Bremmer, Cheney, and Wolfowitz in charge. Because if an invasion had happened without those fanatical fuckholes - and there's a good chance it would not have done - the military planners would have got their way with four times as many troops as an initial garrison and co-opting the Iraqi army and bureaucrats into a viable new administration that could have served the Iraqi people well.

The blame for Iraq does not lie on the Iraqis. It lies on Bush and his advisors who chose to ignore numerous studies and assessments from their intelligence and military personnel over what needed to be done to win the peace.

How these people got relected in 2004 is just beyond me. Oh wait, now I remember, the hundreds of millions of dollars they spent and the toxic lies they spread about their more than honourable opponent.

Cause I gotta have faith a faith a faith

I take the Lord's name in vain rather a lot. Both as a cursive, in general conversation, and attacking extreme right wing fuckholes that have distorted the message of Christ - like Pat Robertson or the Hillsong folk. Ditto those in Islam that claim the Koran gives you the moral go ahead to kill innocents. And ditto the Catholic Church that thinks somehow God will be angry if you didn't give HIV to someone because you wore a rubber.

However that being said I have immense respect for anyone that holds a faith dear to their heart. Be they Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, or even Athiest. If you take the time and effort to understand, practice, and revere your faith in a loving, caring manner then you are a far worthier person than me.


I got a tad worried I could have potentially offended some kewl friends that read this blog on occasion so sent them an email about it. Their response?

You know what I (we) value greatly? What I love about you in particular? Honesty. What you see is what you get. Well thought through, wity, low or high brow... all real. 100% grade A quality meat with no artificial flavours or preservatives... I am not(and am yet to be) offended. I would only be offended if you censored yourself in front of me. I am however flattered to be called true believer's... it is (He is) the love and passion of my life.


What a kewl response. And that's exactly what faith should be. Don't be offended by what people say about what you believe when it comes to faith - because how should that impact on what you believe? If you hold your faith true in your heart then dickheads like me making crucifixion or suicide bomber jokes should not phase you. Besides, that says far more about me than it does about the target of said religious humour.

I am a lapsed Christian. I was raised in the church and for the most part had a reasonable experience with it. But I identified being a Christian with enforced religion at a private school and unpleasant memories from being a fatty socially retarded geek in a Christian youth group made of popular pretty types ("my precious"). And I found sermons to be boring - and offensive on occasion because I felt the criticized me unfairly.

Yep, I am pretty egotistical huh? It's all about me.

But I miss that glow you had when you believed. When you knew that no matter what happens in this life, if you believe and your heart is true, then a better life was for you in the hereafter. I miss that greatly especially since I have a morbid fear of death.


Maybe I will go back someday? I'm not ruling it out. I know one thing though. Friends who truly turn the other cheek when it comes to stuff like this make it far more likely that I would.

Whoops

I don't drink much any more. Actually I never really did. I can count the number of times I have been truly snorked drunk on one hand. Pissy - sure - lots. But snorked, maybe 4-5. The last real time was back in October 2004 when the Liberal party fear machine squashed Labor into the ground like Abbott, Costello, and Howard were on a comically driven steam roller.

It's on account of the IBS too though. Alcohol is a trigger and leaves me with severe abdominal pain if I do it.

Today a had a few drinks at a function - maybe 5-6 in an hour and a half. So I got a bit tiddly and knew that IBS pain would land in a couple of hours. And it did. I'm in it right now - as well as feeling a bit hung over because I didn't balance the alcohol with drinking water. As a consequence not feeling well nor sure of my legality to drive I had to cancel on a prospective nerd night which was a bit sad. Since I loves my nerd nights.

When I get tiddly I tend to become a bit blotchy and loud. I am naturally effusive ("thank you", "thank you" {accepts flowers} "thank you") anyway and it just means that slightly pissy HM is greater in volume and pushes the boundaries of taste.

Some examples from today.

Seeing a colleague's arm was heavily stitched up from having a melanoma cut out yelled 'you git the number of the shark that bit ya?!?!' then offered to pretend to be the shark for some 'scar licking action'.

Made numerous jokes about a soon to be departing crusty older boss.

Talked about how I used to keep roaches on a brick under a share house then gather the discarded roaches into a pathetic multi roach effort and go the toke.

And upon seeing an errant chicken wing fall in my neighbour's beer bet an aging hippy $10 I'd drink it then eat the wing, which I succeeded at most admirably. Much to the disgust of the beer's owner (the aging hippy replaced his beer).

The worst thing was that we then embarked on a walking tour of an interesting facility where I spent the first 30 minutes dashing off to the toot to piss clear liquid as the Barcadi Breezers what I sculled came shooting back out devoid of its alcoholy goodness.

All in all a fine day out. But I really wish I had not drunk so much, had balanced it with water, and perhaps didn't eat that beer soaked chicken wing. Which was quite unpleasant.

It reminded me of that time in uni when I commited my first - and last - theft of a half full beer can - only to discover upon drinking the previous owner had sabotaged it with a discarded cig.

As I recall I kept drinking and strained the cig from entering the mouth with my teeth.

Not happy Jan. Not happy at all.

Gitmo Goodness - Now with new improved chunks(tm)

It was announced recently that Bush's vaunted military tribunals were found to be illegal. That's right illegal - though it should be noted that the supreme court in the US suggested he go away and have a chat to Congress about ratifying something that would be say less illegal.

I admit to having a warm slow smug glow about this. Of course I am not involved at all in this on any meaningful level. I am just a puffy white boy with an interest in the rights of the accused. But it's nice to see 'the most conservative court in the history of the US in modern times' actually stick up for the law for a change.

There's hope yet.

They also noted that Gitmo falls under Geneva convention provisions. Which is an added bonus.

There's a rash of these stories on the web. So go find your own if you're interested. Here's the SMH one.

Thursday, June 29, 2006

Ah this did make me smile

Greg Combet, secretary of the ACTU, said at a rally "I recall we used to run the country and it would not be a bad thing if we did again."

Cue applause and laughter. It's the sort of thing you say on the stump. It was a stump speech.

But no, more than that. It was a conspiracy man.

"Mr Combet in this morning's press has blown the cover, given it away," said Mr Howard in an interview with Sky TV.

"He said, very boldly, there used to be a day, a time, when the unions ran Australia and it wouldn't be a bad idea if that came back. Now this reveals in one sentence what this campaign is all about.

"It's not about the welfare of unionists, it's not about getting the unemployed back into work, it's not about boosting their real wages, it's about union power."


That's right man, it's all a plot man. With black helicopters man, and tinfoil hats man. Area 51 man, look to area 51.


See the full story here.

Left: Greg Combet ... evil

I'll just say this. Hands up which party receives known donations from a key support group of a particular brand of ideology. Aha - yes - the ALP.

Now, hands up which party just legislated so secret donations from their ideological supporters can be provided to the party's coffers up to $10,000 at a time.

Why that would be the Liberal party.

Talk about secret plots.

Yes the unions back Labor. It's no secret. Never has been. At least they provide their support out in the open you hippocritical toad.






Drunk surgeon naked on letterbox

It's from an SMH story located here

Here's the intro

The children's doctor was sitting naked on an eastern suburbs letterbox masturbating, when the two women spotted him.

They called police, who found him fully dressed at a bus station on Carr Street, Coogee, reeking of alcohol, dazed and confused early on a Saturday morning.

Nice right? Pretty funny. Disgusted women calling the cops because Sanjay Warrier was going the pull. Fair enough.

Later in the story it drilled down into greater detail.

Two women, Megan Campbell and Amanda Apro, told police they had seen him masturbating on the letterbox while looking directly at them for about five minutes, on December 10, 2005.

Let me bold the best bit.

for about five minutes

Nice one ladies. I wonder what they said?

'Look at him, he's wanking!'

'So he is, let's call the cops ... hello? cops? Yes there's a man wanking on a letter box. Come quickly.'

'What did they say?'

'They're coming as quick as they can.'

'Really ... how long do you think he's going to take?'

'Dunno ... let's find out.'


Seriously ladies. If you're offended by the sight of a dude having a pull. Which is fair enough because it's not a normal thing to see. I have to ask. Why on earth are you hanging around for another five minutes?

So I ask questions ... so what?

I'm stuck in another office for a couple of weeks assessing documents of a commerical nature. It's the first time I've done it. And since I haven't done it before I ask questions.

Today I was fucking hassled by my team mates for doing so.

Well fuck you. If I don't understand something I'm going to ask. Stupid people are the ones that sit there being stupid and not rectifying it. If you explain something and I don't understand it, chances are it's because you explained it in a fucked in the head manner.

I'm not bragging. I'm just saying I got smarts. And if your process is lame and rooted - for example not letting me keyword search documents for terms to make it easier to find information instead of relying on hard copies only - then I will say so. And claiming that 'the electronic document may vary' does not cut the mustard. If it varies it's their fucking fault - not mine.

My team mates said they suspected I was 'the nerdy kid that asked questions and kept people back after the bell went'.

So what ? I ask questions because unlike you I'm here to fucking learn. And if you don't like it shut the fuck up and let me, that's right me, work it all out so you can come crying to me later and whine about 'I don't get it' where upon I can say 'I do, I found out. Remember? Good luck with that.'

Geez that gives me the shits. And to top it off the work leader moans 'I can't start assessing because you're asking questions.'

Well team leader. Try the fuck explaining it first up in a manner that does not require questions. Nor if you're explaining it and I ask a question do you go 'well if you let me finish I will tell you'. Because it embarrasses me and makes me grump and come back here and rant about how your manner is both condascending, patronising, hectoring, and a whole bunch of other words of similiar meaning that I consider a slap in my large egg shaped head.

There is no such thing as a stupid question. Seriously. It may be embarrasing to ask stuff you should by all rights know. But the real danger is stoopid people wandering off and applying themselves in an incorrect manner and causing more work for people like me, with my massive egg head covered poorly in a light scrub of mouse fur coloured hair.

Later the team leader, who moaned again about 'how slow you are' when it was our first day and we'd never done it before, had a pop quiz. Was I able to answer her questions? Yes I fucking was.

And why was that? Because I took the fucking time to ask fucking questions and make notes and even create a cheat sheet of what to do. A cheat sheet she should have had fucking ready to make all our lives better in the first fucking place.

And if she does it again I will take her the fuck aside and say in no uncertain terms 'I am asking questions because I need to know. If you don't like that I am happy to leave this process and go and do my real job instead of sitting around here feeling like a twat because I am trying to do the right thing by this duty and learn what to do properly.'

Rant over.

Wednesday, June 28, 2006

And the card is down...

As you lads might recall the hideous spectre that is the lot of some Australian Aboriginals graced the nation's conscience recently. Mal Brough, federal minister for this portfolio, started talking about how things needed to be fixed. Which was good, but of course talk is cheap.

Instead a whole of goverment approach that tackled every aspect of failing Aboriginal communities, health, law and order, and various other across the board issues to once and for all assist remote and far regional Aboriginals to access services, education, and law and order that we all know and love, Brough elected to play the race card.

Fucking idiot.

He had in his hands an ideal opportunity to fix something that has been broken since white settlement. Instead he wanked on with his law and order summit.

As Chris Graham, editor of the National Indigenous Times, notes in Crikey

Brough promised $130 million as a one-off commitment to the states and territories, but it comes with one big string attached. The states and territories don't get any cash unless they agree to remove Aboriginal customary law as a mitigating circumstance in the legal processes of each jurisdiction.

Currently, Aboriginal people are being treated the same as all other Australians – they are entitled to have their beliefs and their cultural backgrounds taken into account when judges hand down a sentence during a court process. The Howard Government is pushing to ensure Aboriginal people are treated differently to everyone else. This is, of course, the absolute reverse of what the Howard Government says it's all about, but then no-one should be surprised.

Unfucking believable. Wait, I correct myself. Totally believable. Laura Norder combined with the delish combo of silly smelly black people who drink too much, sniff petrol, and rape babies. What more could a racist driven government want at the back of its sail as it drifts towards election time?

I am sick and fucking tired of the subtext that comes from the Howard government. White race good, brown/black race bad. Sure, deny it all you want, but they've spent 10 years telling us that Australians are different because some rape babies and/or want to blow us up, all the while decrying the idea that 'hyphenated Australians' even exist.

Brough, pull your hand off it. Sure it plays well in stump speeches. But you know, you fucking know that this problem will not be fixed by fucked up racist shit like this. Statesmen would look at this problem and see how to solve it. Politicians that play the race card look at the problem and see how to exploit it.

This is what this government has come to. So scared is it of losing the batler Hanson vote it found another way to whip up indignation of the fearful classes that somehow the problem with Aboriginal Australia has boiled down to the fact that their cultural laws excuse them in the rape of babies.

And by the way it doesn't.


If Brough actually cared for the fate of these people he would be calling on the best minds in Australia and overseas, opening up the Howard government bribe chest of surplus money and saying 'guys, take what you need, do it in consultation, and let's fix it so mothers don't ever learn that petrol gets babies to sleep, that Aboriginal Australians can access meaningful resources, and if they get caught in the system of poverty and recidivism that we address this so others don't follow and we help the ones that have.'

It's just that easy. The flesh is willing, but the spirit is weak. Brough allegedly entered politics to make a difference. But all I see is more of the same tired 'look out, black people about' dance of fear for the bigoted element of our society.

It's weak and its pathetic.

"Hey hey, ho ho - CGI of little people has got to go!"

Does CGI mean the end of midget employment in the movies?

Whilst attending the movies in celebration of my completing my 14th year of uni studies I passed the poster for "Little Man", the latest Wayan's brothers movie out and about. On it is a CGI shrunk Wayan's brother staring as the little man.

Then I got to figuring. With CGI as good as it is now, witness the Hobbits in LOTR, does that mean the end of midgets being able to walk into a studio and say in a squeaky voice 'point me to specialist extras'?


There was a time goddam it when little people were given the red carpet treatment in Hollywood. Okay, maybe not red carpet maybe like a carpet offcut or a hall runner treatment. That being little meant you could be an Ewok, a dwarf, a hobbit, circus folk, suspiciously adult babies, stunt doubles for kids ("I'm Milhouse vhen he gets hurt"), ET, or R2D2 – all manner of small goodness.

But now, with CGI does this mean a little person getting a free ride on the floor of the dream factory is now at an end?


The glory days must have been the 1939 Wizard of Oz. Practically every little person in the country was rounded by professional midget wranglers. Likely herded into horse floats and transported en-masse to the west coast. A rumour went around that the little people were feted with keggers and got toasted. Nicely, nicely toasted. But consarnit if Wiki didn't ruin that fine tale with some probable truth – claiming it was all an exaggeration. That sucks. I had this image of glorious technicolour made that much more colourful with tiny technicolour yawns. It would have been kewl.

Of course there is still good niche work for a midget specialist who can talk and actually act, as opposed to prancing around in that odd stumpy way midgets like to do. Tony Cox of Bad Santa, Verne Troyer of Austin Powers fame, and Danny Woodburn who played Mickey in Seinfeld. All top notch actors from the lower shelf.

Left: Tony Cox

I suppose there is probably a drop off in the number of midget people growing to be midgets now. Those that find out while pregnant may choose to terminate, and there's growth hormones harvested from cadavers that can address the condition for some, not to mention arm and leg breaking that goes on for others (their legs and arms get broken, stretched, healed, then broken again until they have gained sufficient limb length - women in China are getting it done now as a career enhancer too).


So maybe this is a natural thing? More CGI means less midget work, but there's less midgets to do the work because fewer are coming up the pipe?


What I'd like to see is a movie featuring a midget actor that is playing a straight dramatic role that incidentally focuses on the fact they are a small person. Sure it will have to cover some things like their using normal sized stuff, but not have them in the movie because their height makes them fantastical or fun to look at as opposed to everyday life.


As a short dude myself – me being 5'4" I think – I used to cop a fair amount of shit. But of course being short and being a dwarf is something completely different. It would suck.
Your entire being would be defined by others largely based on how short you were as opposed to your value as a human being. Much like I am doing right now.

And even if you did want to enter the biz you got Hollywood shrinking Wayan's brothers instead of giving the role to someone like Tony Cox, who could out act a Wayan any day of the week. Plus – he was also black so he had that going for him.

Vote #1 no CGI for little people.

I'm going to go picket a studio with my tiny sign.

Take that into your back face

Well I is done. Fuck me my hand is hurting harder than when I came first and third in a wanking contest (ho, ho).

It's cramped up. Much like the cramped hand as modelled in the episode where George becomes a hand model. As irony would have it cramping that occured due to chronic self love.

I left the exam 25 minutes early. I should have gone back over my answers but my pain threshold had been hit. I said there throbbing nastily away and my words a blur of incomprehension. I just ran into my tutor. I apologised for the crap hand writing and offered to come in and read it to her if I had to.

They actually allow that. There was one guy they had to helicopter back to uni and ask him to read his paper. No fooling - sent a helicopter to get him.

Least that's what they told me.

It's bittersweet. I have finished now, and I doubt I will ever come back to suckle the salty teat that is tertiary study - well that's how I'm feeling at the moment anyway. I worked out that since I joined the public service in 1997 I spent the following years doing uni as well; 1998-1999, 2001-2002, 2004-2006. Fuck me if that isn't a lot of study. Not intensively. Just one unit at a time plodding along.

Of course my newly minted Masters which I get in December (I don't get why I can't say I have it now? Or do I say pending once marks arrive?) is of no practical use to me in my current job. Nor, thanks to my ability to push panel members over and other failures at interview, will I likely be able to use it to get another job.

Still, I finished. And that's something. A big shout out to all the peeps that helped make it possible. To my study buds, to awesome tutors, to my work for letting me do it, to friends that supported me along the way. And most of all to The Wife. Who put up with me having weekends at work and nights late in the office, and let me off domestic duties now and then when stuff was due.

Domestic duties ... hmmm.

Honey, guess what? I've enrolled in another course!

(ducks plate)

Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Good one Building Maintenance

Whilst walking to my car to drive it from a far car park to a closer car park so my post exam study walk out the door at 9 pm wasn't as cold I passed a series of bike racks at my work. It's then I noticed something odd.

My department is pretty big. So there's lots of bike racks. It's fairly secure because there are cameras and the odd guard around.

But even so.

You'd think ... they'd bolt the bike racks down. Yep, every single one of them literally free standing. I gave them an experimental wobble.

All it would take is a a couple of dudes in a truck armed with a clipboard.

"Here for the bike racks mate," says the driver. "Been ordered to take them away with the bikes for a security thing."

"No worries mate," says a guard.

In go the bike racks with bikes. Off drives the truck.

The official looking dude with the clipboard is a common con. Here in the ACT I think more than one pub or club was taken for a ride when the clipboard men turned up with a ute to take the cig machine "for a service".

Serviced alright. With jimmys to get the f_cker open so they could loot it.

I think I've heard of art galleries being done like this. And foyer furniture. Guys in overalls with clipboards come in, look official, brazenly steal stuff and walk off with it. Sometimes they give receipts.

Imagine getting the receipt then realising five minutes later what happened?

Bummer.

Anyway, it's not listed in the wiki on cons, since it's not really a con. Just tricky theft. But if you're curious check out the wiki anyway - located here.

My brother had the Speaker scam tried on him but didn't fall for it.

He did get taken for a couple of hundred quid in the UK once. He was half pissed in a 'Gentleman's Club' in London and he got offered a membership. I'll try and find out the details of how they got it out of him, but I think they were hazy on the total costs. I believe he was half way down the street afterwards when he realised what had happened, and how much they'd taken him for, and when he tried to get the money back he started crying and they gave him a free scotch and coke before saying in a cockney voice "Now, now Mr (HM's Brother) - you voluntarily entered this arrangement and we can't refund your money."

Double bummer.

Humour Rule - Putting "The" in front of something makes it funnier

Family Guy does it a lot.

For example

Instead of "Gays" it becomes "The Gays"

Instead of "Aids" it becomes "The Aids"

Of course it doesn't work with things that already have "The". For example "The Nazis" or "The KKK".

The Circle of Life













It's the circle of life

And it moves us all
Through despair and hope
Through faith and love
Till we find our place
On the path unwinding In the circle
The circle of life

Unwanted local free newspaper arrives in letter box


Unread unwanted local free newspaper arrives in recycling bin

Tomorrow is my last exam

At Homer's work station, a workman brings in a new, nice chair for him.
Carl and Lenny watch.


Homer: Jealous?

Lenny: Well...no, we've got the same chair.

Homer: [smug] You're jealous.

Sunday, June 25, 2006

Oh Christ No

Now from the sixth hour darkness fell upon all the land until the ninth hour.

About the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI ?" that is, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME ?"

Now Paris eyes up a music career

What a farking idiot

Customs arrested a woman at Perth airport for concealing 320 condoms of heroin in her person.

See the story here.

Look I think the war on drugs is dumb. I think human beings are always going to seek out chemical means to trip out and making those illegal just allows things like organised crime to flourish. It should be legal, it should be controlled. And if you do something under the influence of a drug that is illegal then you're a nob and it's no real excuse.

Rant away about that but that's just what I feel.

In this case she's a farking idiot because if one or more had burst she could have died. Let alone the fact that it's illegal.

What's a mule get anyway? 5k? Is that worth the risk to your life? The cost of my shithouse car?

Idiots.

Saturday, June 24, 2006

Futurama is Back!

With thanks to Larry the Watermelon Ranter for the heads up - see the NY post article here.

Boo ya

The Break Up - an HM review where he talks mostly about himself again

The wife and I risked another trip to the movies to spy out some movie goodness.

We selected The Break Up with Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston. We'll, I got to choose it. The Wife probably wanted to see Cars.

We watched it. It was in a smaller cinema - which I prefer - and after negotiating incredibly long lines managed to sit and watch.

This time we had two mobile phone people and a loud talker/repeater. You know, it's the music bit so I can talk now types and who repeat the last section of dialogue - also loudly. Mr Loud Talker was also one of the mobile phone people.

To their credit they had it on vibrate, and one whispered theirs, and loud talker took his outside, so irritating yes, but steps taken to lessen the irritation to others. They still should have turned the phones off but hey at least this is some progress.

The movie. It was ... good. It was not the dramedy I had thought it to be - and while there were funny bits - there was a lot of the raw stuff too. Those stoopid arguments you have as a couple that come out of nowhere then blossom like a mushroom cloud to include all manner of crap.

It was very close to home. We've been together about 10-11 years all up. And in our time we've had some doozies - like me smearing toast on a door because it got interrupted, and even my turning off every light in the house, locking all the doors, and leaving The Wife to come home to a cold, dark, uninviting place because of a fight over the washing up (which I hate - the washing up - and the fights over it).

We've certainly had slammed doors and angry drive or walk offs, but never more than for a couple of hours. It doesn't happen often. Indeed it's rare. And more often than not the fights were because one party was stressed or depressed and not coping well and lashed out.

There's no secret to success with living together - because all of us fight. Basically you have to care enough to make up. And if you don't then maybe it's a sign things are not well.

Relationships are tricky, involved, amazing, dangerous, and insane things. They need care, and they need consideration. And given I am an obstinate, annoying, difficult to live with person, it can't be easy for The Wife.

The Break Up. It will make you think, and you will see stuff in you up there on the screen.

It's worth seeing, but don't expect a laugh-a-thon.

Friday, June 23, 2006

Worst ... snake weasel ... ever





I wonder...

It's been said that the last movie John Howard went and saw in a cinema was Four Weddings and a Funeral. It's on now. Makes sense. It came out around in 1994. Either that or it's his favourite movie.

I wonder if he's watching it tonight? I know he's probably still got that plasma TV he was road testing for Telstra or one of the telecommunications companies - and it's likely this is not his POV.



















But ... do you think there's a good chance he's watching it wearing his Vodaphone tracksuit?













I do. I think it's like his blankey or something.

I wonder what he thought of the funeral scene, where one gay man mourns the death of his long time partner, and offers up the words 'Gareth used to prefer funerals to weddings. He said it was easier to get enthusiastic about a ceremony one had an outside chance of eventually being involved in.'

And do you think at that moment Howard felt that the human race was threatened by the idea that two men who were romantically involved could one day be married?

I do. The bigoted little snake weasel.

(Oh photoshop challenge. A snake weasel with JH glasses and eyebrows. Photoshoppers, start your engines...)

Thursday, June 22, 2006

Ah memories - bought back to life by the good people at Crikey

Christian Kerr of Crikey was commenting on Tony Abbott's child like glee in mentioning failed to materialise tax cuts that were 'L-A-W' according to then PM Keating back in 1987.

Kerr points out the Libs have a lot, a lot of errant crap on their side of the fence.

Like this pearler from an ABC story which can be found here that discussed a certain then opposition leader's views on wages systems.

KIM LANDERS: Nine years ago, when he was Opposition leader, John Howard did make such a pledge. He delivered it to the Young Liberal Convention in Canberra, just a couple of months before winning the 1996 election.

JOHN HOWARD: Under no circumstances will a Howard Government create a wages system that will cause the take home pay of Australians to be cut. Under a Howard Government you cannot be worse off, but you can be better off. I give this rock solid guarantee our policy will not cause a cut in the take home pay of Australian workers.

Of course Howard has done famous other 'never ever' stuff like with the GST. But at least he went to an election on that issue. He didn't with the IR changes.

Oh, they're changes. Not reforms. Because these made it worse. Which is hardly reform.

Performance Art I'd like to see

I'd like to see performance art as an ad. An artist makes up a trippy short film - maybe just 30 seconds - and runs it in ad time. No explanation. No reason. Just sticks it in there. Exposes us drones to a brief flash of coolness.

Other performance art I'd like to see is apparent destruction of a real priceless art work.

Say it gets bought for a poo load of money. Then it gets swapped for a fake in a frame that looks just like the real one. It is taken past all the other sad bidders and outside. Curious, they gather. Then out comes the perfomance artist with a shottie and 'BANG!' (click click) 'BANG' (click click) 'BANG'

That would be kewl.

NERDS!

The above header is a quote from Homer in the College episode of the Simpsons, where Homer decides he is a Jock and yells at the first person he sees. Much to the shock of other students.

On our vigorous constitutionals around our offices at lunch time, and in between trying to gross out Cass with adult or sewerage talk, Techno, Cass and I discuss many esoteric issues. I don't remember how this came up, but topic was touched on. Specifically the issue was what is the difference between Nerds and Geeks.

Turns out the difference depends who you are talking to. The wiki reference was most helpful in this regard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerd

The wiki had a link to another wiki which discussed a reputedly famous web essay on nerd life in general, the essay which can be found here.

Left: NERDS!

Fuck me if it wasn't intensely interesting.


I was an unashamed social failure in high school. I was high strung, socially awkward, overweight, lazy, and very, very irritating. Extremely irritating. I've said this before many times. Had I been a late 90's kid I would have been on Ritalin. Back then they just took me off sugar for three years – and didn't that suck.

Whilst not academically gifted, because I really didn't give a shit, I was nonetheless a nerd in the sense that I was a pen and paper gamer (as opposed to a Playstation fiend like today's kids). But believe it or not that didn't really matter at my school. And in fact neither did it if you were smart or not. Probably because my school was an aberration in the sense that being a university town, a lot of academics sent their kids to my school.

But what made a difference was difference. Marked difference to the social norm, and not willing to be a part of the bizarrely complex arrangement that is high school socialisation.

I did want to be a part of it. I just didn't cope with the minutia of rules that went with it. I didn't give a shit about clothes, and because I was a chubbo I had no chance with the chicks anyway. Being fat is poison when it comes to the delicate dance that is boy on girl relations in high school. Least, that's what I put it down to. I had weird patterns of behaviour, which marked me as outside the herd which so didn't help.

But I was allowed to join social groups after a fashion – and I even got to go to the odd party. In fact, by the end of year 12 - I was doing okay. I still wasn't cool – not by a long shot. But I wasn't a reviled scumwad either. In terms of the essay I was probably on a table that straddled C-D.

What the essay really bought home to me was this idea of school being a part time prison. It resonated with me strongly. Paul Graham argues that school as a societal system is an aberration. In the old days children were in the workplace as 'junior adults' from an early age – say as farmers in the field, or apprentices in the work shop. Now teens are poorly supervised by distant adults, who are much like prison warders, with kids given largely useless tasks and facts to memorise.


Teenagers he argues have become economically useless save for the fast food industry. So they get put on pause, thrust into this environment, and have to learn the rules of a distorted society that ordinarily they would not be a part of. Here's a kewl snippet.

Instead of depending on some real test, one's rank depends mostly on one's ability to increase one's rank. It's like the court of Louis XIV. There is no external opponent, so the kids become one another's opponents.

When there is some real external test of skill, it isn't painful to be at the bottom of the hierarchy. A rookie on a football team doesn't resent the skill of the veteran; he hopes to be like him one day and is happy to have the chance to learn from him. The veteran may in turn feel a sense of noblesse oblige. And most importantly, their status depends on how well they do against opponents, not on whether they can push the other down.

Court hierarchies are another thing entirely. This type of society debases anyone who enters it. There is neither admiration at the bottom, nor noblesse oblige at the top. It's kill or be killed.

This is to me very true. I saw this happen in my school. Difference was punished, and people used it to move up. Even I did it. I hated myself for it but I can remember in grade 10 picking on this kid that was smaller than me (just) that everyone else hated. I once went up to him in class and punched him for no reason – actually I had a reason – I was pointing out I wasn't him to the others. I like to think I did that once and woke up to myself. I'm pretty sure I did.

He later left school early then killed a girl in a crash where he had been speeding. His life was fucked up by school.

So many lives are fucked up in this distorted unreality. I love modern society. I do. I love the fact we learn and are educated. But there's a lot that resonates about the idea that schools come with the downside of a fucked up culture that causes many people intense pain even after they leave.

I still flash on high school stuff. Lately I've been having intense dreams about being at the school reunion I missed. It's weird. Why should I care so much about what some kids, that's right kids, did to me 16 years ago? I choose to give painful memories power. And I am going to try and do that no longer.

I was different. I was a nob. I was a fat git then, and a fatter lesser git now. Does it matter in the great scheme of things? Hell no.

But my heart goes out to all those kids hitting high school now. To those that invest their time and effort to play the court game, and to those that sit outside it whether by exclusion or choice.

And to those that are unhappy, just remember this. As Paul Graham says adult life is far, far better. Not only do you get to associate with who you are comfortable with and who treasure you, but when people assault you they get their arses slung into court.

So two fingers to those that gave me shit, and a heartfelt sorry to those I gave shit to.

I'm putting this crap behind me. Because I've been in adult land near 20 years now and I friggin' love it.

(On a side note, the wife used to humorously abuse me as I would head off to nerd nights with Techno and pals - screaming 'NERDS!' like Homer as loud as she could through the open kitchen window. Trust me, it was funny. It was even funnier when the gaming lads would see her at group gatherings and ask in a fake hurt voice if it was true, causing her to go pink with embarrassment. Ha! Revenge of the Nerds sweets, Revenge of the Nerds).

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

This is a political over reaction

I am a member of the ALP. Sure, I'm not an ardent member that turns up to every branch meeting and knows the words to 'Keep the Red Flag Flying'. But I am a member nonetheless.

And this is a political sop to 'nail 'em up I say' types who have little understanding of the corrections process.

Iemma is taking Milat's jaffle iron and tellie off him. See the story here.

When someone goes to jail at no point in their sentencing does the judge say 'and you are not to have access to basic resources that other prisoners have access too, such as the tellie or a jaffle iron.' Maybe if they did they could drape a TV week over their wig like the black cloth in the old days of assigning the death penalty?

This is a matter for corrections. And as the article points out giving prisoners access to resources like this makes their lives easier because it helps direct their behaviour. After-all they can take the stuff away when they have been bad.

Prison is boring. And given there are some messed up people in there, boredom is dangerous for inmates and guards both.

The sentence is not about denying them access to the tellie. It's about denying them access to civilisation while they atone for their crime and prepare to re-enter society. Cramming them in a concrete box with nothing to do is a recipe for anger, bitterness, and misbehaviour. Not just to fellow prisoners, but prison guards.

SMH quotes a guard on the decision

"By having that [reward system] in place it gives them something to work towards and gives us additional management tools.

"While we're totally and 100 per cent in support of the families and friends of victims, our position is that he's just another prisoner.''

"So he receives nothing special, and through his behaviour he receives access to the same things [other inmates have].''

"He's one inmate among a whole lot of inmates - there are other inmates that are worse than he is from a management point of view - and if that's what they're going to put in place for Ivan Milat, why not for all the other inmates as well?''

Damn right. Milat maybe a psycho sex killer but enlightened Oz does not have the death penalty, and nor does it chain people in a hole to serve out their time medieval style. We have standards in our corrections system. And bending them for political pressure purposes in this manner demeans the value of this system and demens those unfortunate to be caught in this system in the process.

Besides, he's not living the high life and he's not coming out alive. He's there until he comes out dead. What does it matter to us if he is a better behaved prisoner because he can beat off to Neighbours with the sound turned down? Nothing. But if it means he's less likely to shiv an inmate or guard with a sharpened toothbrush it's worth it.

Give the man back his damn tellie and jaffle iron. And if he tries to assemble a hack saw or eat another stapler, take them off him again.

See how it works?

The Oz Editorial on Lodhi

From today's Australian - editorial found here

Faheem Lodhi's conviction is a tribute to the jury system


FAHEEM Khalid Lodhi could have once looked like a poster boy for multiculturalism. He was a professionally educated man, apparently happy to have made Australia his home. Like tens of thousands of other Muslim migrants his success offered ample evidence of Australia's tradition of tolerance to all who come to this country keen to call it home. But in Lodhi's case, it was all a lie. Whatever he said about Australia, the chilling truth is that he was keen to kill as many of us as he could. Lodhi's conviction on Monday is a chilling confirmation of what has been obvious for years but still hard for some Australians to understand – that there are men in our midst with mass murder on their minds. And beyond giving the police and security services the resources to ensure they are caught before they kill, there is not a damn thing we can do to stop them.

There is certainly no point in assuming Lodhi was motivated by issues that Australians can, let alone should address. Rather, he is just the most recent recruit to the regiment of fanatics who believe that their own opinions and prejudices give them some sort of religiously inspired licence to kill. After the September 11 attacks on the US, we heard how these mass murders were a response by dispossesed Muslims to oppression from the West. These were always idiotic arguments; the bombers were not living in poverty, nor were any of them persecuted for their religion. And attempts to find any sense in Islamic terror attacks have become ever more absurd with each new Islamic terrorist conspiracy to kill. Murdering commuters in Madrid accomplished nothing. The London Tube bombers were to all outward appearances ordinary Englishmen with nothing to gain by killing their countrymen and women. It is almost impossible to find sense in the scheme of the young Canadian conspirators who allegedly planned to behead their Prime Minister as a way of forcing their nation's armed forces to pull out of Afghanistan. Certainly, we will not know whether any of the 20 or so of the Australian residents who have been charged with terror offences in the past six months planned to do the rest of us harm until they face courts. But Lodhi did.

His conviction vindicates the Howard Government's terror laws, which were called divisive and discriminatory when they were first proposed. But it also affirms the importance of maintaining a balance between the state's duty to protect us from terror attack with the rights of everyone in Australia. Federal Police chief Mick Keelty has made an argument for terrorism cases to be heard by a judge alone, as the British did in the generation-long campaign against terrorists in Northern Ireland. Given the high stakes involved, this will make sense to many ordinary Australians. Judges are discreet and disciplined, they understand the importance of keeping operational secrets. They are also unlikely to be swayed by an emotive case. And calls to protect the civil liberties of people charged with terror offences must be balanced against those most basic human rights – to be safe in our persons and property. True enough. But juries almost always ensure justice is done. The jury in the Lodhi trial agreed with three of the prosecution's claims but was not convinced by a fourth, that he was acquiring information on military bases as part of his preparations for a terror attack. Even so, the police and security services have ample reason to be pleased with this outcome. And it is all the more credible for the way Lodhi was judged by a jury of ordinary Australians on the evidence before them. The trial gave the lie to Islamic extremists who proclaim they are persecuted by the police and security services. Of course, the sort of people who make excuses for terrorism anywhere in the world will not amend their opinions, whatever the facts. But that is no reason to change the way terror suspects are tried, when Lodhi's conviction demonstrates Australia's system is working well.
-----------------

What I take umbrage is this line. 'His conviction vindicates the Howard Government's terror laws, which were called divisive and discriminatory when they were first proposed.'

No it doesn't, it doesn't at all. How it doesn't is the preventative detention aspects. Lodhi was not detained in a preventative manner, nor was he prevented of telling people where he was. And when he was arrested people were allowed to discuss it openly in a public forum without being arrested. All of these laws are currently in play and belong to the broad sweep of anti-terror laws Howard bought in. This case proves nothing as far as they are concerned.

The laws are divisive and they are discriminatory. Yes the conspiracy charge laws stuck, though I for one am uncomfortable with their nature. Because I for one could be at risk of circumstantial evidence had I been investigated years before. I did an explosives course once, and I once owned a copy of the anarchist's cook book - a net print out from a friend that was given to me 'cause I thought it sounded interesting - not because I wanted to blow stuff up. Being nearly killed on three occasions during my course was enough to wipe out the romance of explosives for me.

As for now I have copies of Mein Kamph and Marquis de Sade tracts on my bookshelf - which came from a modern history course a friend of mine went through - and she gave me the books because I like books and reading all manner of stuff.

I have a bunch of books on nerd related topics which includes armaments and explosives. I have books on terrorism and transnational crime because of my uni course. I have books on espionage and a series of espionage thrillers because it's a personal interest.

But the flip side is that I am a whitey of an anglo background. So my threat level is naturally less. Make me a muslim who attended a mosque where a radical once spoke and I may appear on a watch list had the above been known.

Lodhi was sprung lying on the how and why, and from my reading of the case it appears he was up to something. Nothing proven as specifically planned - however it was enough to convict him under these new laws. And now he faces life in jail not because of anything he specifically planned to do. But because he had a bunch of freaky shit in his house, was a muslim, lied his arse off about what he planned to do with whatever to various people, and because he had ties to certain figures like Willie Brigette.

I worry about these laws being misued because there is enough scope for them to be misused - especially given possesion is enough to convict, not proven specific intent. Because it's a lot easier to cast suppositions about what's in a person's house than it is about what they specifically planned to do with it. And there is too the issue of planted items. It may not be the police - hell it could be a rival to the suspect who then dobbed them in themselves. And if people don't think the cops fit people up on occasion then read about Tim Anderson's experiences with the NSW special branch.

That being said however AFP and ASIO are professional, well trained, and almost to a man or woman highly ethical. Indeed this was evidenced in the tapes of the raid of Lodhi's house where Lodhi himself agreed they had conducted it with fairness and respect, as well as identifying the items found as his. Of course this professional ethical nature may change in the future, and there is always the chance of a bad seed getting in, or the aforementioned planting of material by another involved person outside those agencies.

But at least the Oz is right. A jury got to hear the evidence and decide. And if we have to have these laws at least 12 people have to agree (unless its majority verdict) as opposed to one person. I put great store in judges because they're experienced in law and crime. But at the same time I'd rather a multiple number of people are engaged in the decision process on guilt than a lone person who may face pressures to convict on evidence that is suspect.

I still don't like these laws, and I don't think they are neccesary. But Lodhi was convicted on evidence provided by a jury on these laws so that has to be respected.

However, as I pointed out, his arrest was public and he was charged with specific crimes. Those preventative laws are yet to be tested ... as far as I know. Because of course its against the law to disclose such things in some cases.

Now how is that not a threat to civil liberties? Terrorism works when we take fear and change our lives radically to address that fear. And that radical change includes seeking out the Daddy political party to save us from the nasty terrorist. Howard's government, and to a limited extent state ALP governments, have all played up the terror threat for political purposes. And that irks me greatly. Because they give fuckwits who spread hate oxygen and make people vote not for what they hope for but for what they fear.

And how to we grow as a people if we think every unattended package is a bomb, every burka has a suicide belt, or every brown person with an Arabic name is a potential hijacker?

Just the exam left now

I got my assignment back. I got 15 1/2 out of 20. Which is pretty good. And considering the amount of work I stuck into it then it was well earned.

Except Summer School next to me revealed he'd gotten 17, for the second time. And he turned up to like three tutes out of 12.

Mind you he's sick. He looks like Tom Hanks from Philadelphia. No, he doesn't have HIV/AIDs, some fatigue related illness. Hence why he missed class.

But I slogged my guts out on it, and on the talk, and still got less than no show man.

Why Summer School? Summer School was a legendary teen movie from the 80's about, yes, Summer School. Summer School as is my understanding is a US thing where if you fuck up in the school year you have to go back on the break and repeat courses. Something like that. Anyway, in the movie this dude asks for the toilet key in the first class. He leaves. He doesn't return until the day of the final exams, hands in the key, and tops the class.

It shits me.

I like Summer School. He's a dude. But man I totally nailed the question, the topic, and all associated research and still got less. And I had been grade grubbing like a MoFo with linked articles sent to the tutor outside of class.

Maybe that's it? My overt lips locked on my tutor's arse?

Plus I got in just under the max word limit each time and she hates reading long essays. Hell a fellow student, who got 16/20, got just over the limit and had just nine footnotes. Nine! That's it! I had 53.

I should have learned my lesson.

Ah fuck it you go how you go.

But let me touch on the salient lesson.

The study bud.

I had never really had study buds before this program. Sure I was stuck in group presentations - which sucked the arse - and in forced parings. But never in a mutual support network kind of way.

And it rawks. Sharing sources, proofing each other's assignments, finding kewl articles and pinging them to each other. Even having a mini brief on the topic in the library before we went in.

It made the course bearable, even fun.

So kudos to mah study buds, past and present. May our friendships continue post uni and into the distant future. I can't imagine a nicer group of people to have ever been locked in the throes of academia with.

Exam is the last thing. Then I am done. My study bud calculated she was on
49.875% going into the exam. She was mildly debating not going :). Mildly. She'll be there.

Study buds forever!

(PS If you're grappling with the tertiary monkey, get yourself a study bud today. They're clinically proven to make your study life easier and social life richer)

(PPS Update - my study bud is on 50.75%. I was off by nearly a mark.)

Clinically Proven?

There was an ad just on for some product featuring a jogging woman. It began with an A - the product, not the woman.

She said the product, not her, was 'Clinically Proven'.

What does that mean exactly? Are there standards for that? Is there some sort of agency that authorises you to use that phrase? Can bikies who make backyard speed use that term.

'This is clinically proven mate, to rip your fucking tits off'.

I'd like to see that in an ad. A big stonking bikie that says something is clinically proven to fuck you up.

Left: Clinically proven?

Perhaps his fist?


(Scene. Bikie is standing there, in the semi dark, lit poorly lit by a flickering street light).

BIKIE (waving fist): I'm clinically proven to fuck you up if you do not buy (PRODUCT).

Obviously it would need to be a Gen Y product like an energy drink with hohova beans in it or something.

Anyway - clinically proven. The when and the where. I'd like to know.

Tuesday, June 20, 2006

Miscellaneous Funkster

Some random facts about the wife. Many of you know her only as Toastus Interuptus or the beautiful brown eyed eye roller. And there's far more to her than just interfering with the consumption of cooked bread products or humorous eye realignments. Much more.

Let's see, from the top of my head.

She is very generous - she'll do things like get a load of wood or groceries for a friend a bit tight on cash, or send flowers or a hamper to a loved one that's in the mopes.

She has an infectous laugh and has asthma. Which means sometimes she laughs so hard she chokes and has to use a puffer, all the while everyone else is laughing. She has accused me of doing this deliberately on occasion. It's just that her laugh is so kewl I want to keep her laughing. Not kill her. But I do go a bit far sometimes.

She has a freckle on her nose that's very cute.

I once cut her hair and was pissed off about having to do so. I did a bad job because I was in a bad mood. She got very upset when she saw how much came off. Not quite 'shave for charity' levels but a significant amount. I learned that day that her hair, and indeed any woman's hair, is rather important to them - especially her hair because it's beautiful. I kept that hair in a box. I still have it. It's very cute. And in 50 years time I can probably clone her from it.

With my army of The Wife clones I will launch myself into the business world, because the wife does all the finances in our house. I have no head for it. Is by her and her alone that our heads are above debt. I would likely blow our money on stupid things if she wasn't there to keep a watch on it. And with my clone army, and some seed money, I could slowly become richer and richer, afford more clones, then I don't know, have a party or something.

And at that party the wife could serve her lasange. It's to be eaten to be believed - it's awesome. Hopefully one of the clones will also have the recipe.

She is passionate about pretty much everything she does. From boring chores to her job. It's pretty inspiring and occasionally annoying - only because I fall short of expectations sometimes. She has trouble seeing why you should do a half arsed job at something - which is tricky since I am a quarter arse job man most of the time.

Tonight I was headed out and she made me schnitzel burgers for the trip and wrapped them in foil. I felt like a 1930's miner sent off with a hearty meal before headed'down'hole. They were delish. Not the miners - the burgers. I'm sure the miners would have tasted fine had they also been wrapped in foil and prepared for my consumption.

She puts up with my shit.

She makes me laugh and laugh and laugh.

She knows almost all the words to every Madonna song there is. And sounds like her when she sings.

She kicks arse at Singstar(tm).

I have never beaten her at Monopoly or Gin Rummy.

She lets me choose books for her to read.

If you're broken she will do her best to fix you. If you're sad she will try and cheer you up.

That's just the briefest of snapshots. She is in otherwords pretty damn kewl. And she lets me go off and game now and then even if she thinks the hobby is a tad nerdy and lame.

Monday, June 19, 2006

Tales of Buckwheat

As you know I have a baby with the one eyebrow in my office. My nemisis. A rival. A foe.

Left: Baby Gerald

Well, not really. She just annoys me because she's an ignorant bigot that talks shit.

Wait, is that tautology? No, some bigots are educated. Look at Windshuttle - he's got degrees and everything. That's my opinion by the way, feel free to disagree. I still think he's a bigot.


Hey HM, any idiot can get a degree or other qualifications. You got like nearly three all up and you're a moonbat according to some wingnuts out there. And we know how dangerously loony such folk are. And it's likely you have a small penis and girls laugh at you too.

Okay - good point. Moving on.

Buckwheat got her promotion without interview. I expected as much - I knew it was going to happen. And I really can't complain since I got both of my jobs on application only. Of course the difference is I wrote my applications and deserved the jobs. I'm not sure who wrote hers. I seriously doubt she did. She intimated as much when I asked her.

I was annoyed but got over it 'cause there's no use getting mad over someone getting a job that way in the public service. Otherwise your head would explode in a shower of bloody brain froth.

What has annoyed me however is my coming back to work after a day off on Friday sick with the flu to discover the workmen had been in to move work stations around.

The end result is that Buckwheat is !*$%#*$#(!@ now on the other side of my work station wall!

Arrrggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh. She's so fucking loud and never shuts the fuck up. And her irritating drivel drives me to distraction. She doesn't get the social cues that most of us know when we're being asked to go away such as use of words like 'I'm a bit busy right now' or backing away from her like she was a rattlesnake.

Today it was "Aw I saw a movie last night, China Moon. It was a bit racy. It was about [cue incredibly long recount of plot]"

This is the same woman that complained about my heavy typing being 'loud and irritating'. Least I don't spend all day wasting valuable oxygen that beavers and other woodland creatures could use.

I'm just going to go spare. I can feel it. I can totally feel it. I'm going to have to go on corridor circuits just to let off steam at being so close. She really is a fucked in the head total and utter waste of space and energy. She does less work than I do, but hey at least I'm fucking productive and produce things. I may not be Mr Super-work but I get my work done and produce a pretty good product. All she produces is poo poos and wee wees and carbon dioxide - carbon dioxide that is exhaled in the process of ensuring loud and annoying nonsense crap is burbling out her pie hole.

Hate - Hate - Hate - Seethe - Hate

Look - I am not a great person. In fact I am a bad person. I wouldn't trust me with money, passed out people while I have access to shaving cream and bowls of warm water, vulnerable attractive women, small children, treasured heirlooms, cooked mince, your bathroom cabinet ("so a tube of that eh?"), your car (speed bumps at 80!), explosives (failed the tafe course), your books that I am interested in, and a whole host of other well liked object de yours.

But, while all that may be the case I at least don't faff on about wankery in a loud and obnoxious manner and offend everyone in earshot.

After-all, I have a blog at blogspot for that...

HM's lame attempt at an insult

We were cruising home along our narrow street when we came across a truck partially blocking the road.

It had 'Snapped on Tools' emblazoned on the side.

Naturally, I made a funny.

'Snap this MoFo,' I growled, Dick Cheney style, as we squeezed past.

The wife laughed. Not in a good 'that's funny' way. But the more 'crickets and coyotes in the background' tumbleweed kind of way.

I think it was because I didn't actually do any action for the 'this' part. Normally that's the place you give the bird, or, if an action adventure, shoot someone in the face (Dick Cheney style).

Wouldn't that be great if Cheney had said the post tense of that?

'Mr Vice President, what were your first words when you shot your friend in the face?'

'Well Katie, that's an interesting question. In fact I said - heh heh and this is pretty funny - snap that mofo.'

(cue crickets and coyotes...)

Sunday, June 18, 2006

Where HM gets some bad news and has to share it

(rustles battered black book as he juggles with phone)

"Yeah ... hi ... yeah Cindy? ... who? ... oh ... can you get your mum, thanks ... yeah, hello Cindy? Yeah, hi it's Harrangueman ... remember from uni? ... yeah, er, not so good ... no, no in fact, this why I'm calling ... yeah, look I discovered I have this thing ... yeah ... not good ... it's likely I had it even back then and, well, the doc said I should call people I've been with ... yeah, that night, yeah I figured you'd forgotten ... well, you, you better get to a doctor ... ask them to test for Dusky Thrush."

Saturday, June 17, 2006

Return to the Bat Cave

I'm always wary of selecting a title at the DVD rental place when it's the only copy they have. Not the only one left, but the only copy full stop.

Basically because if there's only one, chances are the shop doesn't think much of it. It's like the Highlander tag 'There can be only one' applied in the not good Las Vegas way.

Despite that, and despite the rolling of beautiful brown eyes by the wife, I got out Return to the Bat Cave (IMDB link here) starring Burt Ward and Adam West in a sort of break the fourth wall where are they now TV movie about them in the present and the series back in the past.

The actors are re-united and have to solve who stole the Batmobile from a charity auction. The clues as to who was behind it lie in their past which of course allows us to travel back in time to see how they were during the TV series beginning, middle, and end.

It was ... not suckful. It had some funny bits in it. Ward and West took the piss out of themselves and their show, and the young Ward and West were spot on in looks and mannerisms.

All up, if you liked the show as a kid like me - and being Ozzers were saw it repeated about a thousand times - I think you'd probably like this. But get it on special as part of a three movie deal or something.

To the video/DVD shop !

(cue spinning bat symbol)

Actually, no, I really have to go to the shop and take it back.

Oh bits revealed

(SPOILER)
.
.
.
.
.
.
Burt Ward was apparently a black belt in Take Me on Do and could read 30,000 words a minute. He also had to take pills to shrink his schmeckle because the Catholic League complained his teen bulge was too bulgy in his ... tight ... pants.

Friday, June 16, 2006

Gittin' down at Gitmo

Apparently Bush has actually recognised that Gitmo has done some damage to US reputation.

That's almost up there with getting him to admit that Global Warming exists (as opposed to Climate Change).

Check out the Washington Post article here

Good to see that he can actually admit when things haven't gone the way they planned.

Also I note with interest that there's been talk of the Afghanis held there being extradited back home. Presumably to face trials. Well, I hope so at least. According to Crikey (who linked to this article) an Afghani delegation declared they believed half of them were not guilty of serious crimes and should be let go - see the article here.

Maybe Junardi will be free at last, free at last, thank God almighty free at last.

Oh Crikey also highlighted Richard Ackland's SMH column on this - worth a read if pro or anti Gitmo - see here

Here's the coda; "
Far from being grave, the charges are a fudge and any half-decent court would chuck them out. Only a military commission packed to the rafters with non-lawyer military officers could be expected to swallow them."

It seems the US supreme court may see it the same way and find the commissions unlawful. Will be interesting to see...

Why don't the Greens and the Democrats join forces?

I was a write in member of the Dems for a few years before joining the ALP after the October election of 2004.

I liked the Dems policies and back when I joined them I considered their 'watchers' role to be important.

I moved the Labor because I realised I despised the coalition government and now was the time to pick sides.

The Greens and the Dems appeal to the same educated left of centre base. Least that's my reading of it. And in the 2004 election the Dems unfortunately preferenced against the Greens in most senate tickets - since they were largely appealing to the same small segment of the populace.

The Greens are on the ascendant. And I wish them the best of luck. So maybe the Dems, whose policies are pretty much in line with the Greens, should consider a merger. Become the Australian Democratic Greens party or something. Present a united educated leftist front instead of having to battle each other and strip votes away and allow dickwads like Fielding to get up.

Of course I an an ALP man now. But if someone had to have balance of power in the Senate I'd rather it be Greens and Dems that the Coalition any day of the week. And a merger just might help that happen if the ALP are unable to get control of the Senate (which I doubt).

Thursday, June 15, 2006

Kudos to Gary Humphries

It was a vain effort and I am sure he likely knew it would be given Mr Holy Steve Fielding sitting in some sort of religious pose - a golden aura around his saintly head - ready to vote against it anyway because he is a bigoted fuckwit distorting the message of Christ.

The senate voted over the gay issue. Not sure why cause it had already been blocked. Maybe to try and overturn the decision? Anyway Humphries crossed the floor in the defence of the ACT to bring forth its own laws, and because according to the radio report I heard, Stanhope had declared his intention to bring those laws in before the 2004 state election. To Humphries as Stanners had won and had made this plan clear to the people before the election then Humphries felt Stanhope deserved to get it up. The senator being the first Liberal senator to cross the floor in the 10 years of the Howard government. Stanhope also having been the person that beat Humphries in the 2001 election back when Humphries was chief minister.

So kudos Senator Humphries. We may not see eye to eye all the time, but well done on this one. I appreciate it whenever politicians put the people ahead of politics.

See the article here

Changes afoot at HM's work

We're going through a restructure. This is probably the fifth I've gone through. My government agency does this quite a bit.

The end result is HM gets moved into a proper branch with directors, deputy directors, and director generals etc which he has not had to endure for a while.

I was a specialist that kind of hung off to the side of a super boss. A bit like the white stuff you get in the corner of your mouth.

Geez Cyrus the Virus would love me.

Anyway, we had the big 'this is what is happening' re-org meeting whereupon I met my new boss. Who seems lovely. Really, really nice. So my fears are allayed somewhat.

Except, in true HM style the following happened.

I returned to my desk and being around 3ish checked out the Sydney Morning Herald website. I'm always interested in what other people are looking at so I checked out the top ten.

I pulled up the following article - see here

I was reading it away as you do when my new boss tapped me on the shoulder to discuss a time to discuss the move.

This is the pic that went with the article that was emblazoned on my super large screen.

Un-fucking-believable.

Way to make a first impression. It's up there with sneezing a goober on her.

Or like my recent job interview where I slammed a panelist into a wall and knocked him over.

I have a gift I swear to gawd.

Oh, I also discovered the IT lads caught up with the blog concept and have blocked HM's site from view. So no more checking comments during work time for me. Thank you IT lads. Way to remove one of the few workplace pleasures I had left.

Assholes.