Wasted Years

Not that I was thinking about voting for her anyway, but this article cemented my position on Hillary and any other candidate that feels the government needs to get involved in the great health insurance debacle.

Is health insurance a mess? Yup.

Is health care as a whole a mess? Yup.

Do we need nanny government in our lives any more than it already is? Hell no. And we certainly don't need government taking more money out of our paychecks to "achieve coverage for all Americans". When did it become acceptable for the government (or someone running for office) to even think about slapping an American citizen around and tell him what he's going to spend his money on?

tyranny |ˈtirənē|
noun ( pl. -nies)
cruel and oppressive government or rule : refugees who managed to escape Nazi tyranny | the removal of the regime may be the end of a tyranny.
• a nation under such cruel and oppressive government.
• cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control : she resented his rages and his tyranny | figurative the tyranny of the nine-to-five day | his father's tyrannies.
• (esp. in ancient Greece) rule by one who has absolute power without legal right.

I finally did get my car back Saturday - after calling to see if it was done. When I went to pick it up, I figured out why I never received any phone calls - they had my phone number down wrong. A lesser asshole would excuse this as a silly mistake, but since I gave them my phone number TWICE, I find it inexcusable.

It took about five minutes to pay for the work. It took another half hour to actually get my car. When I paid, I was told someone would drive my car around to the pickup area and I'd be all set. No problem, right? Wrong. After standing around for about ten minutes, an older gentleman came up to me and asked me if I was waiting for my car. I answered in the affirmative and he assured me to not worry, it would be up soon. When he came by again fifteen minutes later he stopped again and asked if I was still waiting. When I nodded, he got a pissed off look and stormed off. I could hear him yelling at someone, which gave me a warm tingly feeling.

The old guy pulled my car up, apologized for the wait, and I was on my way. Finally.

Only problem is, my car is still making the same got damn noise it was before they "replaced" the intermediate shaft. I could kill someone over this shit.

Now I have to figure out if I should take it back and bitch or just bite the bullet and find another dealership to take care of it. I'm leaning towards ripping someone apart, but I'd really like to get the damn thing fixed.

It's either that or a gas can and a match.

About a month ago, I took my car in to my regular mechanic to see if he could track down and repair the source of a clunking noise/vibration I could hear/feel while turning. He found the cause - the intermediate shaft in the steering assembly needed to be replaced. Unfortunately, this is a 'dealer only' repair. I cringed when I heard those words. My time working in a garage had impressed upon me, through the stories of other customers, the complete incompetence of our local car dealership service departments.

I finally broke down yesterday and made arrangements to drop the car off Friday morning, figuring I'd be better off not having a car while I'm off from work than having to deal with getting a ride to work and being trapped in my office, a fate worse than death in my opinion. When I called I told the guy I spoke with that I needed the intermediate shaft replaced. He said, "Ahhh. OK!" in a knowing manner and I assumed this meant that all the major players were familiar with the problem, especially since GM issued a technical bulletin for the problem. I dropped the car off this morning (well, yesterday morning now) at 8:30, again specifying that the intermediate shaft needed to be replaced. Since the car was going to be in the dealer's hands, I asked them to check it out front to back and make sure everything else was in decent shape. What the hell, I'm dealing with professionals, right?

One would assume that my stating not once, but twice that the car needed the intermediate shaft replaced would have facilitated a relatively quick repair. And one would be WRONG. When I hadn't heard anything by 4:30, I called to get an update.

Mr. Goodwrench: "Hold on a sec and I'll check on your car for you."
Me: "Thanks."
Mr. Goodwrench: "Sir? OK, the intermediate shaft in your steering assembly needs to be replaced. I have one in stock and that'll run you $239."
Me: (Pulls phone from ear, stares at it, blood pressure doubles) "No shit! Imagine that, since I brought it in to have the intermediate shaft replaced anyway. What are the chances of you figuring out that it needs the part that I brought it in for! Imagine that!"
Mr. Goodwrench: "Oh. Ummmm. I'm sorry about that. Oh, you also need the 60,000 mile maintenance performed. That'll cover all your filters and labor to replace them and would run you $539."
Me: "Yeah I think I'll go with just the shaft replacement, thanks."
Mr. Goodwrench: "OK. I'm sorry about this. Let me see if we can get this done for you before seven" (covers phone and hollers across garage) "Can we get that shaft done tonight?" (comes back on phone) "We can have it done for you in the morning."
Me: (Doubtful of this service department's ability to find their asses with both hands, a flashlight, and a road map) "Fine. Thanks."

And that's that. Eight hours. They had my car for eight hours just so they could tell me that I needed the part replaced that I had brought it in for anyway. And after eight hours I still had to call to find out what the hell was going on. It better be done tomorrow morning. I have important places to go and don't need to be held up by more stupidity.

If I ever need 'dealer only' service again, I'm torching the fucking car and buying a new one. The hassles of car shopping and a monthly payment will hurt far less than the aggravation of dealing with this service department.

I've been a bit scatter-brained lately and forgot to share the following quote from a supervisor to an employee:

“I understand there are unavoidable circumstances, but do your best to avoid them.”

My brain begins to atrophy when I think about the story behind the quote. I can't share it, but believe me when I say that corporate idiocy is alive and well.

Apparently some bloggers want to unionize.

Take a moment. Read that sentence. Follow the link and read the article. Wrap your head around that one like I've been trying to do for the past ten minutes. Sure, some people do this blogging thing professionally in the form of news posts (take ZDNet for example) - but a union?

Folks, I do this crap for fun and use it as a release method. I don't do it very well, I don't have a topic or a set of topics I focus on. I just do it. For free. Sure, I've got ads all over the place and a tip jar somewhere down there on the left, but I don't realize any kind of profit. And I've never expected to. It'd be nice to cover the costs of domain registration, hosting, and maybe a meal out but I don't expect it. And if that ever became my focus, then this just wouldn't be fun anymore.

Honestly, I've thought of starting a more serious blog and focusing on a topic area and trying to cash in on it. But I already have a job. I like what I do, it pays decent, and comes with some decent benefits. I also have a second job that doesn't pay squat right now, but hopefully someday relatively soon, it will. But it's ok that it doesn't pay me right now, because I love what I'm doing. Hell, I may never realize anything more than finishing some books and getting my ideas onto paper. But that would still be OK. But taking blogging seriously enough to go as far as wanting a union?

Never in a million years.

When you decide you want a union organization to watch out for you while you get on your digital soapbox and spew your opinions out across the internet, it's time to step back from your computer, get outside, and get a life.

This is absolute insanity... from what I understand these poor people were going to a rally in Chicago for imprisoned Border Agents Ramos and Compean. Instead of a peaceful rally they walked into a war zone - one that formed when they acknowledged their affiliation with the Minutemen.

Just remember folks, the aggressors here are all about... they're all about... they stand for... You know what? I don't even know what the hell they're about, outside of mob action against three people. Wow! You sure did a great job in making your point and winning me over to your way of thinking! Way to smash that camera! Way to mob these people and beat on them! You showed them! You sure did! Good job!

Want a cookie? I mean, you're doing such a good job of helping to slowly tear this country apart you deserve something. Wait! How about this?

How about a one-way ticket out of the country? I think I like that treat better.

Assholes.

I saw this article over at ZDNet awhile ago and was going to post about it, but was in the middle of NaNo so I let it go. Today, I'm NaNo-free and in a rant kind of mood.

For you savages that have no clue about how the internet works (how the hell did you get here anyway?) and can't click the link, I'll sum up the article as best I can.

The ACLU (generally not a group I side with) and a group of people sued the federal government over the Child Online Protection Act of 1998 (COPA), claiming the law is unconstitutional. For a brief overview of COPA, I'll refer to the article:

The law would impose a maximum fine of $50,000 a day and up to six months in prison for anyone who uses the Internet to "make any communication for commercial purposes that is available to any minor and that includes any material that is harmful to minors."

On the surface, it seems like a good idea, protecting children from the awful things they might find on the internet. But I have a problem with the law that goes beyond the court battle - the law shouldn't be in place at all. It never should've been introduced and it damn sure never should have been signed. All this craptacular piece of legislature does is take the burden of responsibility off of the parents to monitor and control what their children access on the internet. That's all. Nothing more, nothing less.

But attorneys for the U.S. government called the law necessary to protect young people from sexually explicit material and said Internet filtering technology was not good enough to block offending Web sites from personal computers.

Wrong on both counts! Oh how I love to see my tax dollars at work, funding this complete asshattery!

The law isn't necessary to protect young people from sexually explicit material, PARENTS are necessary to protect young people from sexually explicit material! Wow, what a concept! Parents should be watching their children like hawks, especially on the internet.

And internet filtering technology is good enough to block offending websites. I should know, our hardware-based filter stops a ton of inappropriate material from getting through to the computers in Little Johnny's third grade classroom. But the thing to remember is filtering technology is not "set it and forget it". All filters need to be updated regularly (ours updates at midnight every day) in order to be effective. But that's where mom and dad come in again. A responsible parent shouldn't have a problem with making sure the filter is up-to-date to ensure their child isn't exposed to the crap that's on the internet.

Is content filtering 100% effective? No, it isn't. But it will block the majority of the inappropriate material that a child shouldn't be exposed to. Any decent filtering solution will provide the user with the option to manually add a website that isn't in it's records.

We don't need another law to take the job of responsible parenting off of our plate. All we need is for parents to do their jobs and raise their kids.

If that's too much to handle, don't have kids.

"Entertainers" crack me up -

West apparently was so disappointed at not winning for best video that he crashed the stage Thursday when the award was being presented to Justice and Simian for We Are Your Friends.

In a tirade riddled with several expletives, West said he should have won the prize for his video Touch the Sky, because it "cost a million dollars, Pamela Anderson was in it. I was jumping across canyons."

"If I don't win, the awards show loses credibility," West said on the star-studded show, broadcast live to 17 countries.

Blah blah blah - hey Kanye if you paid a million dollars for that, you should get a refund. It sucks.

Today was a fun day at ye olde Seventh Level Of Hell�! A number of middle school students decided to 'protest' the whole immigration reform issue. It's being called a 'walkout', but since several sources have indicated that the students never went to school, but met at a local park to begin their day, it wasn't exactly a 'walkout'. No, these kids skipped school to protest.

The best part was listening to a guy on the radio talking about asking the kids what they were marching for. Their answers: Immigration reform and amnesty. When asked what that meant however, they couldn't really explain it. Hmmm... guess you should've spent your morning in school learning what those terms mean dumb asses.

Aside from the trampling and destruction of two American flags, I haven't heard anything about it being a violent protest in any way shape or form. Which is good. The people on the radio calling in were pissed off about traffic being obstructed and the lack of enforcement of truancy laws. I can see that... I really can.

A couple of days ago, Jess was telling me about a news report she had watched about thirteen-year-old twins who are in a band that's somewhat successful, depending on what circles you run in.

By that I mean the girls sing racist songs. They're a big hit with white nationalists.

They're thirteen.

I was at Bob's house yesterday, setting up his DSL. Once everything was up and running, a link to the video of the Primetime report was on my niece's homepage, so we watched it. HOLY SHIT. That's all I can say to the video. Watching it and listening to these little Hitlers-in-training sent shivers up my spine and made my skin crawl.

Did I mention they're thirteen?

Scary stuff.

And I am now stuck here, in this insane Chicago weather, with BRONCHITIS. Again. This is the third time during the pregnancy, so apparently my son likes to hear Mommy cough. Joy.
Remind me why I'm doing this again? Maybe I'll remember in another 60 days or so...
~Lari

I was skimming through a forum for the city I live in when I hit upon a topic concerning our school board. A comment had been made about how a private individual who has no affiliation with the board or school district (except to pull the strings of certain board members) seems to have a racist agenda. This individual is black.

In the next sentence his racism was referred to as "reverse racism".

What the fuck kind of term is "reverse racism"? How did that abortion of a term become an acceptable part of the english language?

Racism (rac�ism) n.

2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Can somebody explain to me what exactly "reverse racism" is? Is it the opposite of racism? Is it racism spelled backwards? What exactly is this "reverse racism" bullshit?!?

It seems to me that racism is racism, whether it's a white person discriminating against a black person or a black person discriminating against a white person.

Pay attention...

THERE IS NO SUCH FUCKING THING AS "REVERSE FUCKING RACISM"!

Repeat three times and call me in the morning.

Sometimes I wonder what the causes behind cases like this one are, but then it comes to me:

Booze, drugs, or incest.

Or a combination of all three.

Lots of people are successful parents... their kids are well-behaved, they listen, the parents are responsible, etc.

And then you have these award winners:

Garland Family Sues Car Maker Over Toddler's Death.

By DON WALL / WFAA-TV

The family of a Garland girl who was accidentally killed last month when her father ran over her is suing a major car manufacturer for negligence.

On October 9, David Clemens backed up his Infiniti SUV and tragically ran over and killed two-and-a-half-year-old Adrianna.

"You just can't imagine the absence that is in our hearts right now with the loss of our daughter," mother Rachel Clemens said. "She rocked our world ... she was everything to us."

The family is suing Nissan, the parent company of Infiniti. They claim new back-up video cameras or sensors which detect objects behind a vehicle were available, and should have been installed in their SUV.

"This manufacturer was already putting it on some of its other vehicles, and it should have put it on this one," attorney Windle Turley said.

In a phone interview with News 8, Nissan/Infiniti spokesman Kyle Bazemore said the child's death was "very sad, very tragic," but added that even when an SUV comes equipped with a back-up video camera, it's not fool-proof.

"It's a convenience; it's not a substitute for proper reversing procedures," Bazemore said. "Drivers should always turn around and look."

"Yes, it's our responsibility, but so many tragic things have happened with children because of that," Rachel Clemens said.

Some research suggests as SUVs get bigger, so does the blind spot to the rear. Consumer groups estimate between 150 and 200 people - mostly toddlers - are killed in back-up accidents every year. Increasingly, consumers are demanding the new technology.

"As you can see, if you had a child laying on a tricycle or bicycle, laying behind you, you would be able to see that sitting in the driveway," said John Boyd of JR's Custom Auto as he demonstrated one of the back-up cameras.

"Our contention is that safety of this nature should not be optional, ever," Turley said.

The Clemens family believes if their SUV had a back-up camera, Adrianna would still be alive.

"She was my pride and joy," Rachel Clemens said. "She was a wonderful two-year-old that always had a smile on her face."

Turley said this is not just a case against Nissan; it's a case against the auto industry.

Source: WFAA.com

Hmmm... I don't seem to see anywhere in that article where - oh wait, maybe ther-... no... oh, that paragraph ther- no, not there either. You know what's missing?

The part where the parents ADMIT THEIR GOD DAMNED IRRESPONSIBILITY IN WATCHING THEIR DAUGHTER!!!!!

What fucking parent in their right fucking mind, lets a two year old child play outside unsupervised in the fucking driveway? And why the fuck is it Nissan's fault? Backup cameras are optional. Let's all say that word together...

optional

Which means they don't automatically come with the vehicle. But I think it'd be safe to say that when Mr and Mrs "I'm Too Fucking Dumb To Be A Parent" bought their vehicle they were presented with a list of optional equipment that could be added to their vehicle.

Her: "Oh look honey. Let's get a backup camera for safety, since we're always too busy shooting heroin to watch our daughter."

Him: "Bitch, are you high? If we do that I can't get my 50 disc CD changer."

Oh and this isn't a case against Nissan... it's a case against the auto industry. Yeah... they're gonna send a message with this one:

"Watch our children and be responsible for their every waking move because we're too incompetent to be parents. If you don't we're gonna try to sue the shit out of you."

Found via Gut Rumbles and Grunt Doc

Evidently there's nothing more important than banning P2P networks.

Proponents argue that the bill focuses on curbing illegal activity on the Internet. "In the film 'Chitty Chitty Bang Bang,' the leering 'Child Catcher' lured children into danger with false promises of 'free lollipops,'" said Senate Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. "Tragically, some corporations now seem to think that they can legally profit by inducing children to steal; that they can legally lure children and others with false promises of 'free music.'"

I'm failing to see how P2P software makers are inducing children to steal and I can't remember the last time a P2P company said, "O.K. kiddies! Let's go steal music and rip off the RIAA!"

This is right up there with the RIAA suing a twelve year old (The link to the story in that post is dead, but I sum it up pretty quick).

I salute you Orrin Hatch for looking past the real issues of homelessness, poverty, starvation, disease, crime, unemployment, and all the other problems in our country and pissing away your ability to do some good, all so you can get the evil 'Child Catching' P2P networks.

And I offer my salute with a song.

I'm failing to see what the mother in this story is trying to achieve... except maybe a quick buck if she wins.

More proof that it's too easy to sue people.

And I thought the kid who emailed threats to the CIA was stupid. This guy decided to hold a nail gun to his head and pull the trigger.

And the World's Sorriest Excuse For A Father Award goes to Robert Lee Crider of Texas, who decided getting hammered while responsible for the well-being of his eleven year old son would be a good idea. And then decided having his son drive would be an even better idea.

Man... people like this just make me feel that much better about myself.

I've done some pretty stupid things in my day, but this kid makes those stupid things look like the work of a genius.

I can't help but wonder what was going through this kid's head while he was typing that email.