Thursday, October 31, 2013

Scariest Halloween Costumes of 2013

 
Happy Halloween Beards of Fury fans! To all the "bearders," and "beardettes" out there, I want to wish everyone a happy and safe Halloween, and I know Rob shares in the same wishes. This is just a quick post to help any of you out there who may still be wondering who to dress up as this Hallow's Eve. Since I love the horror genre, and all things scary, I have compiled a list of the scariest things out there right now that should, (in theory), scare the shit out of anyone who sees your costume...so here goes the list, (you will have to be a little creative in making them):
  1. The African American unemployment rate since Obama took office
  2. The national debt since Obama took office 
  3. Www.HealthCare.gov - the website might not work but your costume might!
  4. The Benghazi cover up
  5. The Extortion 17 cover up
  6. The IRS
  7. The NSA
  8. Your new healthcare premium
  9. Your new healthcare deductible
  10. Congress
  11. The Fast and Furious cover up
  12. The crime rate in cities like Detroit and Chicago
  13. The "Truckers to Shutdown America," - They're so stupid it's scary
  14. The rising number of "part-time" vs. "full-time" jobs - Huzzah for ObamaCare!
  15. Copy the look of what the faces of our founders would look like if they saw the state of this place today - it should resemble Edvard Munch's "The Scream"
So, there you have it folks, my quick list of some of the scariest things out there right now. Forget vampires, ghouls, and werewolves - if you want to really instill fear into your neighbors, open their eyes to what has been going on around them.

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

Who Determines Wages?

 
Who determines wages? Is it the seller of a good or service? Is it the employer? Is it those nasty, greedy big businessmen, (sorry, businessperson)? I hate to break it to you, but it is none of the above. Want to hear a shocking statement? It is you, the consumer, all consumers in fact, who decide the wages of employees. "I do not believe you," you say. Let me show you, with the help of economist Ludwig von Mises.

You see, businesses sell a good or a service, created by spending and using the factors of production to create that good or service. Those factors of production: land, capital equipment, and human labor. Thus, according to Mises:

"Businessmen are under the necessity of turning out what the consumers ask for and they must sell their wares at prices which the consumers can afford and are prepared to pay. A business operation is a manifest failure if the proceeds from the sales do not reimburse the businessman for all he has expended in producing the article."

According to my Misean to English dictionary: if a business cannot at least recoup the money spent on the three factors of production because the consumer thinks the price is too high, then the business does not last. This means you, the consumer, by your absence of purchasing a good or service because of price, said, "The factors of production are too high; they must be lowered for me to buy your good/service." These factors of production include - guess what? - labor, or, wages, as we stated above. Or, to put it in Mises' words:

"It follows than an employer cannot pay more to an employee than the equivalent of the value of the latter's work, according to the judgment of the buying public, adds to the merchandise. (This is the reason why the movie star gets much more than the charwoman). If he were to pay more, he would not recover his outlays from the purchasers, he would suffer losses and would finally go bankrupt. In paying wages, the employer acts as a mandatory of the consumers as it were. It is upon the consumers that the incidence of the wage payments falls. As the immense majority of the goods produced are bought and consumed by people who are themselves receiving wages and salaries, it is obvious that in spending their earnings the wages and employees themselves are foremost in determining the height of the compensation they and those like them will get."

So there it is, with the help of Mises; consumers decide wages, (and other factors of production), by purchasing or not purchasing a product or service, based on a price they are willing to pay. No minimum wage law can change how you, the consumer, value a good or service, thus valuing one of the three factors of production, wages.

Friday, October 25, 2013

Why Would Sec. Sebelius Resign?


While the US government has rolled out healthcare.gov for everyone to sign up for healthcare, the site is filled with glitches and people are finding themselves unable to sign up. Thankfully President Obama played "Telemarketer-in-Chief" and gave out a 1-800 number to call. The company who made the website blamed the Obama administration for the website's problems and people are pissed millions of our tax dollars went to building the website. People want blood, (figuratively speaking), by means of a firing or resignation. Their target? US Sec. of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius. That's right, because a website is down, they want her out. Seriously? Over a website?

Even if the website being mucked up was a just reason to get rid of Sebelius, what makes you think President Obama would do it?

Who was fired after the Benghazi attack? Not Sec. of State Clinton, that's for sure. Was really anything done during or after the attack? We know President Obama got a full night's rest before his trip to a campaign fundraiser in Las Vegas the next day, but was anything else done? <cricket>, <cricket>

Who was fired after the Fast and Furious came to light? Not Attorney General Holder, that's for sure. President Obama is quick to make poster victims out of dead kids but hold someone accountable for a dead ATF agent? Naaaaah.

What about the IRS? They've had a couple doozies lately, from spending 100s of thousands of our tax dollars on stupid videos to extravagant and useless conventions. Oh, and let's not forget their targeting of the Tea Baggers. Sure Lois Lerner retired, but would you want to risk your six figure pension? Yea, I didn't think so.

So friend(s), if no one at the top was fired or forced to resign over a dead ATF agent, a slaughtered ambassador and three others in Libya, outrageous, wasteful spending, or the targeting of a political group by the government...what makes anyone think Sec. Sebelius will be held accountable over a damned website.

Thursday, October 24, 2013

The Real Reason Kids Get Beat Up...

 
Ever get your ass kicked in playing a team sport? We both sure did a time or two - and maybe even three. It sucked a lot, but getting your ass kicked in sports is a part of participating on a team, in a competitive league. In order to avoid being embarrassed on the ice, on the field or on the mat, we practiced. And we practiced. And we practiced some more. Did we always win? No, there were always teams better than the ones we were on, (somewhere), but one thing we never did after losing big was be a pussy. Apparently not everyone thinks the way we do, and while in some cases that may be for the best, here is one which isn't...

A Texas father of a Western Hills High School Cougar football player didn't like seeing his son's team get their asses kicked by the Aledo High Bearcats 91-0 so much that instead of volunteering to help his son's team, he filed a bullying complaint against the Bearcats' coaching staff. That's right, since his son's team lost by so much, the other team must be a bunch of bullies.

Well we would like to know from any crack head who supports the father, why this complaint shouldn't be thrown out. Should the Bearcats have let the other team score? Their coach said his team did everything it could do save take a knee to be nice. If the team sucks, the team sucks. The problem with a lot of parents out there today is that they are teaching their kids that it's okay to be subpar, you can just bitch about it and get shit handed to you for free. We here at Beards of Fury like to call the free stuff "entitlements."

The same parents who put their kids in leagues where there are no scores, or trophies, only "participation" certificates raise kids who grow up with their hands out instead of their thinking caps on.

Now this parent's kid is going to be roaming the halls of his school with everyone laughing at him - not because the team got whipped, but because his dad is a pussy, and apples don't fall far from trees.

We would probably change our names if one of our parents pull this stunt, and we would also change our name if it was a direction on a compass, i.e. "North West," sorry Kanye, while your girlfriend gets "two chubs up" for her sex tape, it wasn't "star on the walk of fame" worthy, but we digress.

Kids have enough to worry about nowadays without one being their parents being the PC Police. Teach them, help them, and once they stop deucing in their diapers, stop babying them.


Tuesday, October 22, 2013

The CFC - A Few Things to Know


Normally, I write with everyone in mind, but today I write for my brothers and sisters in the military. The subject? The Combined Federal Campaign, or "CFC." You know, that group that comes around to your bases once a year and your whole unit gets called down to some auditorium or gymnasium to listen to and then donate money to.

Now, I don't know how every unit conducts this event, but I do know how my unit did it:

(1) We got word we had to go to the gymnasium for the CFC drive;
(2) We filled out an envelope with our names;
(3) It was suggested we bring a few bucks to donate;
(4) If you did not donate something, the First Sergeant, (1stSgt), would probably call you down to his office so he could find out if you had financial problems;
(5) The unit wanted 100% accountability.

While the CFC catalogue is a great way to find organizations to donate to, (I always donated to a multiple sclerosis foundation), the whole "1stSgt is going to ask about your finances if you do not donate," is bullshit. The whole "100% unit accountability" is bullshit, and when you read the fine print in the catalogue - I find the CFC in general to be bullshit. Take a look at the picture at the top, (click on it to make the words bigger), and you will see what I never recall any CFC representative standing in front of my unit ever say; the CFC takes a cut of the donations and it is about 10%, but they elude to the fact it could be more. I know charitable organizations have overhead, and for some it can be quite high, especially those who need to buy medical equipment, however, I find it repulsive that the CFC gets a cut, and again, I never heard any volunteer say the organization takes one. This feeling is further burned into my being because I am sure my unit leaders were not the only ones who wanted 100% participation from their Marines.

I really wish I had read the small print while still on active duty. I would have had no problem telling my 1stSgt I didn't give because I am not paying the CFC to train their volunteers, pay for their paper, or fund other "administrative duties." Then, I would have made a direct donation to an organization listed in the CFC catalogue.

Hopefully all you military people reading this haven't sat through your unit's CFC presentation yet. When you do, keep the aforementioned, (that's "previous," for all my Marine friends), information in the back of your mind and use the catalogue to identify possible charities to donate to and research them on the web. Don't do something because you think you have to, because you don't.

Sunday, October 20, 2013

There's No Such Thing as Market Failure

Guess what? There is no such thing as "market failure." Look up at the title of the article; see? It is right up there. Do you know what there is such a thing as? Politicians, academics, and big businessmen who think they know better than you or need the government to help them out because you do not make their business adventures lucrative. Still not a believer? Well, let me turn you into "The Monkees" and show you how market failure is a myth. I will simply show you what the market is and how it cannot fail, and then I will explain how "market failure" is really "government please help my failing business" or, "I am smarter than you, so do what I say." Ready? Good. Let us see what the market is then and how it cannot possibly fail.

The market is easy to define and once it is defined, it cannot fail. The "market" is you, your family, your friends, your neighbors, and everybody else's family, friends, and neighbors voluntarily deciding what goods or services they will spend their money on, how much of their money they will spend on these goods and services, and where they will purchase these goods and services. That is all there is to it. The market is not a mystical creature or some entity. It is simply individuals making voluntary choices. The choices deal with exchange. Here, read what Murray Rothbard had to say on the issue:
 
Each exchange is undertaken as a voluntary agreement between two people or between groups of people represented by agents. These two individuals (or agents) exchange two economic goods, either tangible commodities or nontangible services. Thus, when I buy a newspaper from a news dealer for fifty cents, the news dealer and I exchange two commodities: I give up fifty cents, and the news dealer gives up the newspaper. Or if I work for a corporation, I exchange my labor services, in a mutually agreed way, for a monetary salary; here for corporation is represented by a manager (an agent) with the authority to hire.

So if the market is about individuals voluntarily making choices on how much money they are willing to exchange for goods and services that they value according their tastes, how can a choice be a failure? It cannot. To say somebody chose an iPhone over an Android as a failure is absurd, and vice versa. The absence of purchases is also not a failure. If a person decided never to purchase jeans, and wear other types of pants, again, it would be absurd to call that choice a failure. Choices express opinions. To call an opinion a failure is ridiculous. You may disagree with it, but that is all you can do. There you have it: markets cannot fail. So, why do we hear the words "market failure?" Let us find out.

We hear the phrase "market failure" for two reasons. The first is that some high and mighty individual decided that their choices are far more superior to your choices. For example, a high and mighty asshole is green and believes people should buy electric vehicles. Electric vehicles are not selling like hotcakes as evidenced by the lack of citizenry purchasing them and companies showing loses instead of profits for their vehicles? Then, by God, that is a "market failure." Do you see it? A failure exists because every day people's decisions do not match his decisions. The first reason ties into the second reason: a business made a bad prediction and needs the government to give them subsidies or force people to buy the products they clearly do not want. Look at Solyndra a few years ago, a solar panel company. They were not profiting. To Solyndra, and other lovers of green energy, that is a "market failure." What does that mean? People didn't want solar panels; if they did, the company would have made a profit and would not have needed to be bailed out by the government. They guessed you would fall in love with solar panels; you did not, so it must be " market failure,"  and the government whose decisions are vastly superior to yours for what you desire, stepped in to fix everything. As we all know, Solyndra eventually went out of business. So, those are the reasons why you hear the term "market failure." Understand?

Remember, the market is making decisions, therefore your decision cannot be a failure; it is simply what you desire even though others may disagree with your decision. The only way markets can "fail" is if your decision does not match what others, who think they are more important than you, decide. Now, go forth, knowing your Hulkamania retro, mesh half-shirt is not a failure, but a bad fashion choice.

Thursday, October 17, 2013

Hemp, Hemp, Hooray - Legalize the Shit Today!

When I think back over the years and how I came realize I lean libertarian with my political views, it was when it dawned on me that I support the legalization of marijuana that I said "yea, I feel closer to the libertarian way of thinking." Am I a pothead? No, and in fact I have never smoked a joint or consumed any "special brownies."  I get the munchies because I am a fat man trapped in a Titan's body, not due to any artificial reasons.

Since I have never dabbled in smoking reefer, you must already be on the edge of your seat wondering why I would support such a thing. It's simple really, and can be summed up in two main reasons: (1) the possibility of a lot of tax revenue flowing into the state and federal piggybanks, and (2) why should we really care if people smoke it?

Our government was just shut down for over a week due to a budget fight, financing Obozocare, raising the debt ceiling and probably even Coke vs. Pepsi, (Coke should always win). By legalizing weed for medical or recreational purposes and taxing the hell out of it, it could help avoid future shutdowns. Just think, our veterans could get what's owed them, and families of deceased vets could still receive their benefits. All off the tax dollars of your neighborhood pot smoker(s).

There is a lot of talk, and written studies about pot being a "gateway" drug to other drugs. Well, I must defer to a VP Joe Biden saying with, "that's a bunch of malarkey." I don't think just because someone smokes pot they will try crack or heroine - there is a big difference between smoking a plant and sticking a needle in your arm. Just because people have used more than one drug, that does not mean one led to the other. If anything leads kids to experiment with different drugs, it's going to parties so all you parents out there better stop allowing that immediately. Lock your kids in their rooms and slide their food under the door. Or, better yet - be parents to them and if you don't want them smoking pot, tell them not to and your consequences for them if they do.

And what about alcohol? For the life of me, I cannot recall ever reading a news headline such as "Child Beaten to Death after Dad Smokes Weed," or "Husband Kills Wife for Not Enough Munchies in Pantry." I have however read several concerning people being beaten or murdered by drunk parents and spouses. Furthermore, I don't think the Dodger and Giants fans beat and kill each other after having a few joints - they do it after several drinks. What about driving or operating heavy machinery under the influence of ganja you ask? Well, people drive under the influence of alcohol all the time, and there are laws against that. Laws can be made to regulate the use of weed when it is hopefully legalized one day. Actually - with how much the federal government loves to regulate things, I am surprised it hasn't legalized it already, just so they could regulate it.

Then there are the people who worry about the brain cells of our youth. Seriously? Right now we as a society have the ability to basically look up any knowledge we seek at our fingertips via a phone or a computer. Instead, iPhones are used to play Candy Crush, (with some people spending 100s of dollars a month in order to reach higher levels, while computers are used to search for websites that start and end with "XXX." I don't think a little weed in our lives will make us any dumber than the vast amount of technology we use already does.

So, there you have it folks - reasons to legalize reefer/pot/weed/ganja, etc., etc. Perhaps one day I will dive deeper into the subject of drugs and my desire to legalize/decriminalize all drugs, but we will just stick with marijuana for now. Remember, all you non-believers out there - just because it's not for you it does not mean it shouldn't be for anyone else. There are 100s of great reasons to legalize pot, but only stupid ones not to.

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Default? Default? Don’t Talk about Default!


I know it's not Christmas, (or the holidays for all you politically correct folk out there), and Halloween is just around the corner, but do you hear what I hear? Yes, that is right, the United States of America is headed for a disaster so great if the debt ceiling is not raised. Phrases such as "global crisis," and words like "default," are tossed around by the average citizen and conniving politician. "It has never happened in the history of our country!" Is that true? We always paid our bills? In full? On time? The truth is: default is not automatic if the debt ceiling is not raised and this country has defaulted on more than one occasion.

I'm going to set you on the path of truth. As gravity dropped apples on Sir Isaac Newton's head so he may understand, I am going to drop knowledge so you may understand. How? You will understand the tear "default." You will see the options the country has if it does not raise the debt ceiling. You will also see that yes, the United States has defaulted before, and the sun still rose in the east and set in the west. With that said, let us learn what default is.

The politicians and talking heads are using the term "default" incorrectly. The politicians use the word to mean "missing any payment to fund government" as well as "paying the interest on Treasury Bills," (bonds). The meaning of the word "default" is the "failure to pay back a loan," (Sullivan and Sheffrin, "Economics: Principles in Action"). A Loan consists of the principal, interest, and date of repayment, i.e. a bond. All monies that fund the government are not loans. No person loaned money to government programs, social security, or Medicare; these are funded through taxation. However, people loaned money to the government with the purchase of government bonds, just like a bond in the private sector. Think of it this way: if corporation "X" was using revenue to support a charity, yet fell on hard times and was going out of business, not paying bondholders is a default; not paying the charity is just unfortunate. Now that we understand "default," let us see what options the government has if the debt ceiling is not raised.

Just because the debt ceiling is not raised, it does not mean an automatic default. What is does mean is that the government cannot borrow more money to pay its debt. Therefore, the government has two options. First, it can prioritize. The government expects to take in $250 billion a month in revenue; the interest due a month is about $30 billion. Simple subtraction tell us the government can pay its bondholders their interest. That means no default; however, now the government must prioritize what it will pay after that. Second, the government can do what private businesses do when facing the same situation: sell assets. You know, the government can do both of these things. So, there is no automatic default if the debt limit is not raised. Let us now see those times when this country did default.

In John S. Chamberlain's article, "A Short History of US Credit Defaults," he shows us that the government defaulted on at least five occasions: the first issuance of debt in 1775, in 1862, in 1934, and in 1979, (some economists will even tell you that if the government has to print money and purposely set interests rates low, then it has already defaulted, but that is a different topic). Life went on. Let us review, shall we?

A default is when a loan cannot be paid; only the purchase of government bonds are loans. All other funding is through taxation and not paying that funding is not a default. Not raising the debt ceiling does not equate to a default: the government has the money to pay bondholders; the government can even sell assets, or do both. Even if there is a default, it has happened before, and life carried on.

So there you have it. You are now learned. Do not let the government scare you. Do not fall victim to their whipped up hysteria. Why do they want to do this? Maybe it is because they know they do not have to default and will prioritize. However, what happens if voters who were promised certain things from politicians are no longer a priority? What if they fall into "nonessential discretionary expenditures" as Chamberlain puts it? Then they no longer vote for those politicians who made them such, and what politician wants that?

Sunday, October 13, 2013

Crocs Should Be Shot!



The other day something terrible happened that I really didn't want to talk about but I feel I must. I was in the store buying myself a replacement beard comb when I witnessed something horrific. This lady, if I can even call her that, was standing in line wearing a pair of pink Crocs. I was mortified. It's been so long since I'd seen them in public that I thought they had all been put away in shame. Maybe the fashion police are on furlough. Not to mention the color scheme suggests that she actually put some thought into it while purchasing them and it wasn't just a drunken lazy purchase. Unfortunately the horror didn't end there.

Later that day I went to Five Guys Burgers and Fries to help reach my daily intake of dead animal flesh and to my dismay there was an entire family wearing Crocs! First off what is a man doing wearing Crocs? Any man caught wearing Crocs must forfeit his man card for up to one year, during which time he must adhere to a strict regiment of red meat, weight training and hardcore porn. Only after they have done this will their man card suspension be lifted. I'm also concerned about the children wearing Crocs. Since they don't have a choice in the matter it's almost a form of child abuse. The children might not know what harm has been done until later in life when they look back at pictures and see themselves wearing these rubber pieces of shit. They might wonder what other forms of neglect their parents put them through. Children + Crocs = Poor parenting.

My first thought when I saw these tragedies was to quickly run over and forcibly remove the Crocs while yelling "You're free! Run! It can't hurt you anymore!" but I have rule about letting Crocs touch my skin. It's a rule to live by. I honestly feel that if I touch one, I might contract some sort of fashion herpes. It could spread and I might start wearing dad jeans or something.

I have to remember that these people made the conscious decision to wear rubber clogs with Swiss cheese holes in them. I am all about freedom and choice after all. I can only show my concern and hope that they someday come to their senses and they will bury them in a hole so deep and so dark that not even Smeagol could find them.

Friday, October 11, 2013

Choke the Chicken, Not Yourself


It turns out that Ariel Castro, the creepy kidnapper, may have died during autoerotic asphyxiation (aka The Carradine). For those of you that don't know, that's the act of choking one's self while jerking off. What ever happened to a bottle of Jergens, some tissue and calling it good? Maybe it's like the adrenalin junkie of jerking off. Great risks but great rewards.

This news got me thinking about past autoerotic asphyxiation practitioners and why people do it. Famous people have died from it, such as Michael Hutchence from INXS and David Carradine of Kung Fu fame. What is the thrill from it? Is the lack of oxygen or the lack of control a turn on? Having almost drowned once I found the experience to be less than boner-worthy. The thought of almost dying doesn't doesn't fill my pants with cream, it fills my mind with fear.

Arousal during choking doesn't end there. I've been with a number of women that have wanted some light to heavy choke action during coitus and as a true gentleman I obliged. It's not as extreme as wrapping a belt around one's own neck and hanging from a door like some sort of half-naked Halloween decoration but it shows a large group of people like some sort of such an act during sex. It made me wonder how it all got started, where it came from. One would think that naturally an orgasm and being choked wouldn't go together. Anybody ever see a rat start busting one as a boa constricts it? Probably not. But maybe for humans it was a form of self defense. Think about what happens when some people get off. They flail around and bite down. Maybe prehistoric humans started flailing, biting and J'ing in their P's when they were attacked. That might make them too dangerous for the predator to try and finish off. Who wants to hunt something that's trying to bite you while shooting love juice everywhere? I'd find easier prey. Whatever the reason, modern humans need to remember one rule, USE A SPOTTER PEOPLE!.

It should be noted that I listened to INXS while writing this post, to get me in the proper mindset...and to get the creative "juices" flowing.

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

T2SDA - Highway Terrorists

Throughout the history of mankind, people have thought up some pretty stupid shit: sticking forks in light sockets, playing in traffic, and teaching women how to read, (I kid). That being said, what is planned for 11-13 October by a group of truck drivers takes the cake - they are planning on wreaking havoc on the highways in the DC area.

While I support their overall argument that our elected officials have been doing a poor job of running our country, the group's idea for "getting even" is retarded - pure and simple.

Apparently group's plan is drive at a top speed of 55 MPH on the highways surrounding the nation's capitol, and in doing so pissing off everyone else driving. Back in 2010 French truckers did something like this, so right off the bat, the fact that these truckers were inspired by the French should tell everyone the group is filled with morons, and more than likely - cowards.

The truckers plan on controlling the highway, covering three lanes - leaving the left lane open for emergency vehicles. If you are in a civilian vehicle and don't have a "T2SDA," (Truckers to Shut Down America), sign in your vehicle, plan on getting blocked by the dipshits in the big rigs.  Earl Conlon, who according to USA Today is in charge of logistics for this event, said "If cops decide to give us a hard time, we're going to lock the brakes up, we're going to stop right there, we're going to be a three lane roadblock." How nice.

Tell me truckers, how will emergency vehicles be able to move expeditiously in the left lane if every other normal human being ("normal" being anyone not participating in this event), is also in the left lane trying to get by your stupid asses? Furthermore, what if a normal Joe Schmo needs to get to a hospital fast and they didn't think about putting a "T2SDA" sign in their window before heading off to the hospital to survive? What if they die en route to the hospital due to your intentionally planned traffic jam? What then? Well, Messieurs Conlon and Pete Santilli, (apparently the group's official spokesman), I hope the family of Joe Schmo sues the ever living shit out of you and the rest of the event organizers. If it's me doing the suing, I wouldn't stop until I literally owned you all, and your great, great, great-first cousin, once removed was still making a direct deposit of their paycheck into my heir's bank account.

The bikers who recently rode in DC abided by the laws, and didn't make a mess of the roads or threaten to do so. They just rode. I equate you with those bikers in NYC who attacked the family of three in their SUV and pulled the father out of the car. You aren't martyrs - you're thugs.

And what else did Mr. Conlon say was the group's goal? Only that President Obama, (who I do not support in the least), resigns, and oh yea, Rep. Pelosi and Sen. Feinstein are placed under arrest. While the group says this is not true - it would be humorous to watch them all get arrested for attempted kidnapping. I'd be in the front row of that trial - eating popcorn.

If you want to make changes to our country, get people motivated to vote in new leaders. Inspire people to want change - don't make us hate you, and perhaps more so your moms for not aborting you.

Friday, October 4, 2013

Beards - The Keystone to Peace in Our Time


Looking back in history, at the men remembered for their good and the men remembered for their wickedness, we see the "good" all have one thing in common - beards, while the "evil" also have something in common - no beards. Don't believe us? Well, here's a quick look at some prime examples:

The Good (aka Men with Beards):

  • God - Always depicted with a beard, created mankind and everything else - He's awesome
  • Jesus - Was the son of God, turned water into wine! -Definitely a good guy
  • Moses - Freed the Israelites from Egypt, parted the Red Sea - A good man
  • Generals Grant & Lee - Met at Appomattox Court House, made peace - Two good men
  • Abraham Lincoln - Preserved the Union, freed the slaves - Awesome guy
  • Zeus & Odin - Ancient gods, knew how to kick ass - Clearly good dudes
  • Gandolf - Helped his furry footed friends defeat Sauron - A bitchin' wizard
  • Merlin - Advised King Arthur, most likely told Arthur to grow a beard - Righteous
  • Sean Connery - Best actor of all time, fights for Scottish independence - A great man
  • Chuck Norris - Do you really need an explanation for this guy? - The man, the myth

The Bad (aka Men without Beards):
  • Hitler - Had millions murdered, and ruined the Charlie Chaplin mustache  - Piece of shit
  • Sauron - Hates Gandalf, hobbits, dwarves, and elves, corrupted Sauroman - Really bad
  • Jefferson Davis - Only had a goatee, (clearly jealous of Abe's beard) - Jerk face
  • Julius Caesar - Enslaved his enemies, tried to conquer the world - Evil
  • Nazis in General - Murderous monsters, followed Hitler - Dickheads
  • 9-11 Hijackers - Flew planes into buildings, killing thousands, led us to two wars - Assholes
  • Pretty Much Everyone in US Government - No beards, no clue, no balls - ALL PUSSIES

So, there you have it - an abbreviated comparison of good and evil throughout time. The "good" all have/had beards, while the roots of evil do/did not.

Maybe if we sit a few bearded representatives down with bearded Muslim and Jewish leaders. we could work out a real peace and not just fake smiles and clammy handshakes.

To the Nobel Prize committee: we await your announcement of our upcoming Nobel Peace Prize - Lord knows our plan for true peace is more than President Obama has come up with - that is, unless you consider supporting the overthrow of at least 3 world leaders peaceful.

Wednesday, October 2, 2013

Congress- Worthless as Tits on a Boar Hog


Originally I was going to use the title "Worthless as Tits on a Man" but the fact is that when a girl gives them attention during coitus it can be rather titillating...no pun intended. Tits on a boar are useless though, much like our congress. A government shutdown says it all. They're paid to do a job that they honestly don't do very well. In most areas of work that gets you fired.

When there is a government shutdown, you know that our Congress runs as smoothly as a well oiled turd. Coach a team with the efficiency of Congress and you're going to be a one season coach. When a business shuts down because of leadership it's called bad management. Everyone is out of a job at that point. For Congress it's practically part of the job. The shutdown mostly comes from a stalemate on Obamacare, which is a steaming pile in itself to discuss at another time, but still they should be embarrassed. I mean in 2005 with two wars going on and a struggling economy these geniuses were concerned about performance enhancing drugs in sports. It's your job to manage the nation not sports! Anything to skip out on real work I guess.

The worst part of it all is that while everyday low-level government workers aren't getting paid, these dickholes are still getting their fat checks. It has to do with the Twenty-seventh Amendment which prohibits any law that increases or decreases the pay of Congress from taking effect until the next term. The Constitution however is a living document, hence the amendments. Which means it can be fixed. Perhaps the Twenty-seventh Amendment should be amended. When the government you're paid to manage gets shut down, you don't get paid. Makes sense to me. Then again I'm blessed with this rare quality called common sense.