I'm Back

First of all, let me apologize for my absence. I have no excuse.

Ok, that's actually a lie. I have lots of excuses.

Of course, none of them are any good. My loyal readers, you deserve better. So, here's a few things that have been on my mind. 

1. Here is an example of why you shouldn't try to make your own fireworks. Here's a quote or two from the article:

"The victims ranged in age from 11 months to 52 years. Among them was Tony Watts, 28, who was gravely injured and remains in critical condition when a homemade mortar he was lighting exploded, striking him in the face."

First off, who operates any kind of fireworks anywhere near an 11-month old child? Secondly, wouldn't the sentence read better if you took out the word 'gravely' and inserted 'stupidly?' Here's another gem:

"Sedgwick County sheriff’s Lt. George Mason said it appears Watts was using illegal fireworks."

Well, aren't we observant, Lt. Mason. I'd say you need at least 10 or 15 years on the force before you make that call. I would have never been able to tell.

"He said Watts built a launcher by embedding a three-inch plastic pipe in a five-gallon bucket of cement."

What?!?!?! That's not illegal! I've been making my own launchers like that for years! And now, a quote from the wife:

"He acts like a kid around them, but he’s always been safe,” she said of her husband. “I never thought he would ever be lying in an ICU bed hooked up to machines."

Well darlin', then you obviously didn't think too hard.

2. Here's a little science experiment for everyone to try. Watch this video. At the 2:10 or 2:15 mark, look at your arm. Keep looking. Goosebumps will form. If not, you're not human.

3. That's all for now, but I promise to be better about posting more frequently. As always, comments welcome.

I am "nondisabled."

My faithful readers (all 3 of you) have probably been waiting on a new full-length post for a while now... and I hate to keep you waiting. So here it is. A few weeks ago at work I came across this poster:



This is a poster put out by the Research and Training Center on Independent Living at the University of Kansas. This is a group that no doubt does fine work, so don't take this the wrong way... but this poster is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read. I mean, it's utterly and completely insane. Allow me to explain.

The bottom half of the poster is taken up by a chart which is supposed to give people an idea of the proper words and phrases one should use when talking about disabled persons. It also shows what not to say. I know the picture above is pretty small, so let me break a few of these down for you:

You shouldn't say "able-bodied."

Whoa. What?

Able-bodied?? That's an offensive phrase? Ok, ok, I can see (sort of) how it might be, so what should I replace it with?

"Nondisabled."

I'm really confused. I have full use of all my limbs, as well as full use of my (decent) mental capacity. I also have no psychological or physiological disorders. But I can't call myself "able-bodied." I have to be "non-disabled." Is disabled the normal condition, or is it the other way around?

Let me put it this way: Is it offensive to a disabled person if I say someone is "able-bodied?" Will they automatically assume that that means they are not "able-bodied?" The dictionary definition of 'disabled' is 'persons who are crippled, injured, or incapacitated.' I don't mean to be rude, but being disabled means that your body is not able to do some things that someone with a fully functioning body can do.

To recap: "Disabled" means "not able-bodied." It's not an insult, it's not discriminatory; it's the truth. But that's not the only set of phrases on this list that irked me. Onward we go...

- Don't say "hyper-sensitive," say "person with environmental illness."

That, my friends, is what I like to call a large load of feces.

- Don't say "paralyzed," say "person with a spinal cord injury."

Paralyzed?? This one blows my mind. Let's just get right to it- if you think 'paralyzed' is an offensive term, you are way too sensitive. 

No, wait. Excuse me. You 'are a person with environmental illness.'

- Don't say "wheelchair-bound" or "confined to a wheelchair," say "uses a wheelchair."

Holy crap. I'm going from slightly amused to sort of angry... I mean, really? Who believes this stuff? Tell me, for I want to know, yea verily. One more point, and I'm done.

If someone cannot get from place to place without the use of a wheelchair, isn't it fair to say that they are 'confined to a wheelchair'? I mean, sure, they could get out of the wheelchair, but what would they do? Lie down? Sit in another chair? Let's just think about this logically for a second. Say there's a guy named Bob and he has to use a wheelchair to get around. And I ask Bob, "Bob, what is it like to be confined to a wheelchair?" How many people in that situation are going to be offended and say "How dare you say I'm confined to a wheelchair! I'm not confined; I can get out of it and move around any time I want!"

Hint: None of them. Know why? Because it's not offensive. Political correctness definitely has its place, and some of the suggestions on this poster were good ones. (i.e. don't say "retarded" or "brain damaged") But when political correctness takes precedence over common sense, there's a problem.

Please comment and let me know if you agree/disagree. (Also, reader suggestions are always welcome)

I'm not dead... just resting! (Pining for the fjords, actually...)

Just a note to say that I have the material for another blog, but I haven't written it yet because:

a. Buying and moving into a house is time-consuming.

b. We had water in our basement in two different occasions last week.

c. My parents visited this past weekend, and we had to get the house ready for them.

d. Last night, ESPN Classic showed Game 4 of the 1984 NBA Finals between the Lakers and the Celtics, and I watched it in its entirety instead of writing my blog.

All the above answers are correct, but if you chose D, you'd be the most correct.

So, my apologies, and I'll try to do better tonight.

Flotsam and Jetsam

A random tour around the Internet with your host, Gordie Mcnutterbean! Here's a picture of Gordie:



1. Here's a great story to start things off. 

My favorite part is his attire when he was found. Well, that and their explanation to the cops.

2. In other interesting news stories, Lou Pearlman was sentenced to 25 years in prison for swindling thousands of investors out of their life savings. Who's Lou Pearlman, you ask? He's the man responsible for bringing us these guys:



and these guys:



Are you like me? Do you think that the whole swindling thing wasn't his worst crime? This is the man very much responsible for the dumbing-down of pop music during my formative music-listening years. Because of the 'boy-band' revolution led by Mr. Pearlman, we were subjected to O-Town, LFO, and countless other groups thrown together just because they looked good and could sing a decent harmony. (Yes, Destiny's Child, that includes you)

The pop music industry has only just recently begun to recover from the effects of the boy band phenomenon. Slowly but surely, groups that actually play instruments and write their own songs are emerging as chart-toppers and top-sellers. May the day be hastened when these groups are the majority and groups that do nothing but sing and dance are the minority.

3. Well, that was a long rant just for a little news story, wasn't it? If you've read this far, you deserve a good laugh. As someone who comes from a small town in Kansas, this rings true:



Does this mean I can go to the Dollar Palace in just my boxers, a stained wife-beater, cowboy boots, and a trucker hat? Well, dadgum!

4. And, one more laugh. Any guy that has gotten married and had to get rid of 'guy stuff' can identify with this:



For the record, the Chuck Norris video boxed set would be a steal at any price.

That's all from the Internet for now. This is Gordie Mcnutterbean signing off!

"The List"- Chapter 2

If you need a refresher on what "The List" is, or if you forgot the rules, check out chapter 1. Without unnecessary ado, here's chapter numero dos.

4. Fred Phelps



You could write a book on how wrong this guy is. You might even fill a library. I'm not even sure where to begin... I guess the biggest beef I have with Phelps and his followers is that they base their beliefs on very small, unrelated portions of scripture ripped completely out of context. Then they take those portions of scripture and use them as tools of hatred, malice, and evil. And if you have any doubts that Fred Phelps is pure evil, you obviously haven't been paying attention.

5. Keith Olbermann



I remember watching Olbermann as Dan Patrick's sidekick on Sportscenter when I was junior high and early high school. I always thought he was the best anchor ever... but my, how the times have changed. He's now a pompous windbag with an annoying, condescending tone. In other words, he's the perfect liberal.

Ok, that was probably a little harsh. He's basically the liberal equivalent of Bill O'Reilly, who I also can't stand. So just call O'Reilly number 5A.

6. (Reader suggestions)  Oprah Winfrey, Alec Baldwin, Gavin Newsom



You should all know who the first two are. One is a talk-show host who has built a global empire by telling women exactly what they want to hear, and occasionally giving a bunch of them new cars. The second is a great actor with a bent towards questionable parenting and bad politics. The third is the mayor of San Francisco who recently said of the recent lifting on the gay marriage ban in California: "It's about dignity, it's about human rights, it's about time!"

I think it was about political expediency. I also think it's not about human rights, since I'm not sure marriage falls under the same category as the ability to vote, be tried by your peers, or have freedom of religion or speech. It's also probably not about dignity, as I very seriously doubt that gay people in California felt 'undignified' because they weren't married.

I do think he should give his speechwriter a raise though.

As always, please comment, and nominate your own names to the list!

More News and Notes

1. Britney Spears can't drive very well.

This is apparently news to some people, and by 'some people,' I mean 'those without a brain.'

2. Did anyone catch any of the interview of President Bush that Politico did in partnership with Yahoo? You can watch clips of it at Yahoo video, among other places. One particular segment stands out, and that is when he is asked why he stopped golfing. His exact quotes are here if you want to read them. I've seen several different editorials and other blogs criticizing this as trivializing the war or caring too much about his legacy, but honestly, I think his sentiment is right on. This is proof that he takes his job and the importance of what he does seriously. He feels that playing golf is a pastime that he can save for later, and really, that makes sense. Remember, as always, I'm coming at this as a somewhat jaded moderate Republican who thinks that Bush has made his share of mistakes.

3. And not to get too political, but it is becoming increasingly obvious that Hillary Clinton needs to give up her bid for the presidency. On the plus side for her, she now has at least one demographic in which she's clearly ahead: uneducated, poor white people.

There are so many jokes... I'm trying to refrain, really, I am.

Deep breaths... ok, ready to go on now.

4. And if you're a Batman fan and haven't seen this yet, shame on you.

I'll try to get another version of "The List" up pretty soon. If you have any ideas, or if you see something worth mentioning, let me know.  Peace.

News and Notes

Just a couple things that have caught my eye recently:

1. As a follow-up to my post about PETA and the Eight Belles incident, here's a poem written about the incident by a lady named Dee Mirich. I'll let you judge for yourself, but as an English major, this is the kind of stuff I live to ridicule.

Affirmed.

2. Need a laugh? Try some Red Meat.

3. Need another laugh? Watch this.

4. And I'm not sure what to think of this... but I think I like it.

That's all I have for you at this point, but I might be back later tonight with some more content. 

"The List"- Chapter 1

This is the first installment of a regular feature on Handbaskets of Fire, simply called "The List." To be included on this list, a person must meet the following requirements:

1. They must be famous.

2. They must be contributing to the decline and/or dumbing down of civilization in some way.

3. If they were put on a shuttle and sent into permanent orbit around the earth, we would all be better off.

So with the rules out of the way, may I present the first names on the list:

1. Al Sharpton



Really, do you need a reason? No, you don't, but I'll give you one. First and foremost, the problem with the Reverend Sharpton is his constant desire to be in the foreground anytime a racial conflict comes up in this country. When I heard that the police officers in New York City were acquitted, my first thought was, "I bet Sharpton will be all over this." Why did I think that? It's probably because I remember his role in the Don Imus 'nappy-headed ho's' scandal. I agree that the police officers probably used excessive force, but was Sharpton there? He doesn't know the facts of the case any more than the rest of us, so his leading a protest and getting arrested serve only to make sure his name gets splattered all over the news. If he wants the country to make progress in race relations, he needs to work on being less divisive, and actually attempt to bring people together. Also, by putting the focus on himself, he takes the focus away from the problem. So Al Sharpton is firmly on my list. Who's next?

2. Joel Osteen



He's a used car salesman trapped in a preacher's body. He spends more on hair gel and teeth whitener than I do on food. He's got Billy Graham's following and Dr. Phil's message. His book reads more like 'The Secret' than anything by C.S. Lewis or Max Lucado or Watchman Nee. He's on my list in a biiiigggg way.

3. Ryan Seacrest



Speaking of hair gel and teeth whitener... I'm sorry if you're a fan of American Idol, but that show needs to go away... quickly. This guy is the ultimate host for that show; he really embodies everything it's about. He's all style, no substance. He's cheesy, somewhat bland, extremely annoying... he's basically Ty Pennington if Ty Pennington were possibly gay and had no personality and no carpentry skills. 

 So, there you have it: Three people headed into orbit if I have any say in the matter. Please comment; let me know if you think I'm right on or dead wrong. Also, feel free to suggest other names for the List.

Overreaction 101: PETA

Look, I like horses. You like horses too, somewhere down deep in the depths of your soul. They're beautiful animals, full of strength, and yet graceful and sleek. They're also pretty fast, and for that reason, and because too many people in this country are compulsive gamblers, horse racing is a pretty big deal. That brings us to what happened this past weekend at the Kentucky Derby. If you've been hiding under a rock, and don't know I'm talking about, read this.

Now, that's tragic stuff... but not as tragic as PETA's response, which you can find here.

For fun, let's break this down, shall we?

"Just after crossing the finish line in the Kentucky Derby on May 3, 2008, a young filly named Eight Belles collapsed when both of her front ankles snapped. She was euthanized in the dirt where she lay, the latest victim of the dirty business of thoroughbred racing."

Good Lord. You know what I like about PETA? They're never overdramatic.

But for the sake of argument, let's take this logic at face value and try to ignore the sentimentality. According to PETA, Eight Belles is a victim, not of bad luck, but of the 'dirty business of thoroughbred racing.' I can't wait for them to explain...

"Eight Belles' death is yet another reminder that these horses are raced when they are so young that their bones have not properly formed, and they are often raced on surfaces that are too hard for their bones—like the hard track at Churchill Downs. Eight Belles' jockey whipped her mercilessly as she came down the final stretch. This is no great surprise, since trainers, owners, and jockeys are all driven by the desire to make money, leaving the horses to suffer terribly."

Blech. Seriously, what kind of schlock is this? Where is the evidence that these horses' bones aren't properly formed? What about evidence that the tracks are too hard? Any evidence? No? Nothing? What do we have then?

Oh yeah, I forgot... more overdramatic word choice intended to stir up people's emotions. Take 'mercilessly,' for instance... really, PETA? Eight Belles' jockey is about 3'7'' and weighs about 42 pounds, and he is causing this giant animal enormous amounts of suffering?

And by the way, these horses 'suffer' so 'terribly' that they receive better medical care than at least half the children on this planet, and they never go hungry, and they never sleep out in the cold, or suffer from terrible heat. I'd say getting whipped for a minute or two once a week is an ok price to pay for that treatment. But back to PETA...

"PETA is calling on the racing industry to suspend the jockey and trainer, to bar the owner from racing at the track, and, at the very least, to stop using young horses who are so susceptible to these types of horrific injuries. We're also demanding that the industry stop racing horses on hard tracks and switch to softer, synthetic surfaces, which would spare horses' bones and joints, in addition to calling for a permanent ban on the use of whips. Help PETA call for an end to cruelty masquerading as sport by using the form below to take action today."

Where to begin?? First of all, PETA's call to suspend the jockey, trainer, and owner are ludicrous. They made the decision to euthanize the horse because it couldn't walk, and would never walk again. How is that a bad decision?? Isn't it better to end the horse's suffering quickly? Isn't PETA lamenting the 'suffering' that Eight Belles went through while being whipped 'mercilessly?' Isn't having both legs broken going to cause more suffering than being momentarily whipped?

Now, in case you missed it, PETA does make a good suggestion in the middle of this inane blather. The switch to softer surfaces would be a good idea... I really see no downside to that. But banning the use of whips?? I'm sorry, but that screams overreaction... but hey, that's PETA's specialty!

And now, they end with a bang:

"Although Eight Belles' death, like Barbaro's before hers, made headlines, countless lesser-known horses suffer similar fates—their broken legs and battered bodies are simply hidden from public view. Most racehorses end up broken down or cast off or are sent to Europe for slaughter."

Whoa... proof?  Anything?  No?  Good job PETA, you've managed to inflame, encite, and annoy all at the same time, and you did it without a shred of logic or evidence. Give yourselves a pat on the back... just make sure you don't kill a fly while doing it.