air sex champ licks himself into shape

Seriously, you cannot beat this headline. via, um, can’t remember but with a headline like that is must be FARK.

virgin and the living dead. Sounds like the Roxy

Japan’s air sex world champion licks himself into shape

Japan has recently claimed the world air guitar championship, but Weekly Playboy (10/2) notes that less well known is that Japan already had a world champ in another virtual sport — air sex!

Just like air guitar pits competitors prancing around on stage empty handed but acting as though they were playing a hot riff, air sex requires players to simulate sauciness as though with a partner, but actually while alone.

“Air sex was originally invented by guys who Carell is too cute, though.couldn’t get girlfriends, but desperately want to have sex,” J-Taro Sugisaku, the self-professed creator of air sex, tells Weekly Playboy

“You must be warned, though air sex can be very dangerous,” Sugisaku says. “Normally what happens with a display is that you perform the same way you normally would when having sex. I’ve seen guys who put on air sex shows that clearly display they’re still virgins. I’ve also seen other guys perform such incredibly authentic fake fellatio that nobody has been left in any doubt that they could only be bisexual. Let me reiterate: Air sex can be dangerous.”

Japan’s reigning air sex world champion is a feller who goes by the name of Cobra. His theory for successful air sex is that it involves more than just blowing…

Cobra then proceeds to put on an 8 1/2-minute display of air sex for the weekly, with moves including ear nibbling, sphincter licking, attaching a condom while kissing, ejaculation and afterglow. Cobra says that the knack of bogus bonking lies in openness.

“You can’t care about what women watching your performance are thinking about you. When you get down to air sex, you’ve got to immerse yourself in the air sex world,” Cobra says. “Air sex can’t be performed in half-measures. If it is, you’re only asking for trouble.”

Wow, so men can’t fake it either.

Like a virgin...yet unlike

the T factor; thieving Italians in Vancouver

Anybody know these guys? The link to the video was posted over at Waiterblog, so believe me, they’d better not dine out in Vancouver again. I don’t know why, but chefs here tend to be both burly and armed with an interesting and vast assortment of very sharp implements.

Two dirty italians decide to film their dinner and a dash in Vancouver BC. This happened on February 2005. The restaurant was the Rugby Beach Grille. Alessio says: “their service one night sucked real bad and they were rude…so we decided to come back and get our money’s worth…”
Well done boys.

weird al is the shizznit

from Vicus

Not the greatest quality, but worth it for the lyrics

see also Tea Partay. Yo, yo, where my WASPs at?

Lyrics over the jump: Continue reading

BC’s old geologist pwns Canada’s new government

 Stephen Harper does SO eat babies!

It’s a fact: Canadian politics are boring lately. Since Harper went to ground and the media obediently took the oath of Omertà, there’s been very little in the news except the weekly notification of which worthy provincial celebrity has dropped out of the Liberal leadership race, plus bonus polysyllabic mistrals spluttering forth from Ignatieff, who has not yet been informed that he is a walking dead man. 

I think that part of the problem is that the Canadian political establishment is filled with Canadians, and that, further, those Canadians are also politicians. And that, furtherer, those Canadian politicians are in a minority government whose opposition has not yet chosen their leader. It’s a bit like being Frodo and watching the Witch King of Angmar trying to choose which sword with which to skewer you; one tends to get very quiet.

Now, finally, there’s some conflict, some controversy, some life in Canadian politics, and it’s all because of a maverick geologist. CTV has the report.

Isn’t it always? Casting suggestions include: Mel Gibson, Brad Pitt, Jackie Chan, and, of course, George (DemocracyMan) Clooney.

A B.C. scientist fired for lampooning an order to call Stephen Harper’s Tory government “Canada‘s new government” is back on the job.

Geologist Andrew Okulitch said Tuesday he was reinstated as a scientist emeritus with the Geological Survey of Canada after a call from the deputy minister of natural resources.

The 64-year-old Saltspring Island resident, who Canuckistan terroristhas worked for the federal government for 35 years, said he was fired Sept. 5 after he e-mailed an undiplomatic response to a government directive.

The government memo ordered him to use the phrase “new government of Canada” on official correspondence from the Geological Survey of Canada.

Okulitch immediately fired off an e-mail saying civil servants are not paid to mouth political slogans.

He said the policy was “ridiculous and embarrassing” and said he will use Geological Survey of Canada in any official correspondence “as opposed to idiotic buzzwords coined by political hacks.”

Minutes later he received an equally blunt e-mail from the Natural Resources Ministry saying Okulitch‘s misdirected views reflect the decision to immediately remove him from his position…

“They are basically apologizing by reinstating me,” he said…  

Okulitch said the government shouldn’t be ordering the supposedly unbiased civil servants to adopt government slogans.  

Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn said he believes in the new government slogan, but it’s not something bureaucrats are expected to adopt. 

“I’m proud to use it,” he said in Ottawa.  “We’re proud to be the new government of Canada. This is not something that we expect department officials or bureaucrats to use at all.”

The e-mail that went to Okulitch should never have been sent to him, Lunn said…

The Prime Minister’s Office could not be reached for comment on its new slogan.

I prefer this one:

Canuckistan

Olbermann: “The President of the United States owes this country an apology”

Transcript from Crooks and Liars

Finally tonight, a Special Comment about the Rose Garden news conference last Friday.

The President of the United States owes this country an apology. It will not be offered, of course. He does not realize its necessity.

There are now none around him who would tell him – or could. The last of them, it appears, was the very man whose letter provoked the President into the conduct, for which the apology is essential. An apology is this President’s only hope of regaining the slightest measure of confidence, of what has been, for nearly two years, a clear majority of his people.

Not “confidence” in his policies nor in his designs nor even in something as narrowly focused as which vision of torture shall prevail — his, or that of the man who has sent him into apoplexy, Colin Powell. In a larger sense, the President needs to regain our confidence, that he has some basic understanding of what this country represents — of what it must maintain if we are to defeat not only terrorists, but if we are also to defeat what is ever more increasingly apparent, as an attempt to re-define the way we live here, and what we mean, when we say the word “freedom.”

Because it is evident now that, if not its architect, this President intends to be the contractor, for this narrowing of the definition of freedom. The President revealed this last Friday, as he fairly spat through his teeth, words of unrestrained fury…

…directed at the man who was once the very symbol of his administration, who was once an ambassador from this administration to its critics, as he had once been an ambassador from the military to its critics. The former Secretary of State, Mr. Powell, had written, simply and candidly and without anger, that “the world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism.”

This President’s response included not merely what is apparently the Presidential equivalent of threatening to hold one’s breath, but — within — it contained one particularly chilling phrase. Mr. President, former Secretary of State Colin Powell says the world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism. If a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and former secretary of state feels this way, don’t you think that Americans and the rest of the world are beginning to wonder whether you’re following a flawed strategy?

BUSH: If there’s any comparison between the compassion and decency of the American people and the terrorist tactics of extremists, it’s flawed logic. It’s just — I simply can’t accept that. It’s unacceptable to think that there’s any kind of comparison between the behavior of the United States of America and the action of Islamic extremists who kill innocent women and children to achieve an objective.

Of course** it’s acceptable to think that there’s “any kind of comparison.” And in this particular debate, it is not only acceptable, it is obviously necessary. Some will think that our actions at Abu Ghraib, or in Guantanamo, or in secret prisons in Eastern Europe, are all too comparable to the actions of the extremists. Some will think that there is no similarity, or, if there is one, it is to the slightest and most unavoidable of degrees.

What all of us will agree on, is that we have the right — we have the duty — to think about the comparison. And, most importantly, that the other guy, whose opinion about this we cannot fathom, has exactly the same right as we do: to think — and say — what his mind and his heart and his conscience tell him, is right.

All of us agree about that.

Except, it seems, this President.

With increasing rage, he and his administration have begun to tell us, we are not permitted to disagree with them, that we cannot be right. That Colin Powell cannot be right.And then there was that one, most awful phrase.

In four simple words last Friday, the President brought into sharp focus what has been only vaguely clear these past five-and-a-half years – the way the terrain at night is perceptible only during an angry flash of lightning, and then, a second later, all again is dark.

It’s unacceptable to think…” he said.

It is never unacceptable… to think.

And when a President says thinking is unacceptable, even on one topic, even in the heat of the moment, even in the turning of a phrase extracted from its context… he takes us toward a new and fearful path — one heretofore the realm of science fiction authors and apocalyptic visionaries.

That flash of lightning freezes at the distant horizon, and we can just make out a world in which authority can actually suggest it has become unacceptable to think. Thus the lightning flash reveals not merely a President we have already seen, the one who believes he has a monopoly on current truth.

It now shows us a President who has decided that of all our commanders-in-chief, ever… he, alone, has had the knowledge necessary to alter and re-shape our inalienable rights. This is a frightening, and a dangerous, delusion, Mr. President.

If Mr. Powell’s letter – cautionary, concerned, predominantly supportive — can induce from you such wrath and such intolerance — what would you say were this statement to be shouted to you by a reporter, or written to you by a colleague?

Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government…”

Those incendiary thoughts came, of course, from a prior holder of your job, Mr. Bush. They were the words of Thomas Jefferson.

He put them in the Declaration of Independence. Mr. Bush, what would you say to something that annti-thetical to the status quo just now? Would you call it “unacceptable” for Jefferson to think such things, or to write them?

Between your confidence in your infallibility, sir, and your demonizing of dissent, and now these rages better suited to a thwarted three-year old, you have left the unnerving sense of a White House coming unglued – a chilling suspicion that perhaps we have not seen the peak of the anger; that we can no longer forecast what next will be said to, or about, anyone… who disagrees.

Or what will next be done to them.  On this newscast last Friday night, Constitiutional law Professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University, suggested that at some point in the near future…some of the “detainees” transferred from secret CIA cells to Guantanamo, will finally get to tell the Red Cross that they have indeed been tortured.

Thus the debate over the Geneva Conventions, might not be about further interrogations of detainees, but about those already conducted, and the possible liability of the administration, for them. That, certainly, could explain Mr. Bush’s fury.

That, at this point, is speculative. But at least it provides an alternative possibility as to why the President’s words were at such variance from the entire history of this country. For, there needs to be some other explanation, Mr. Bush, than that you truly believe we should live in a United States of America in which a thought is unacceptable.

There needs to be a delegation of responsible leaders — Republicans or otherwise — who can sit you down as Barry Goldwater and Hugh Scott once sat Richard Nixon down – and explain the **reality** of the situation you have created.

There needs to be… an apology from the President of the United States.

And more than one.

But, Mr. Bush, the others — for warnings unheeded five years ago, for war unjustified four years ago, for battle unprepared three years ago — they are not weighted with the urgency and necessity of this one. We must know that, to you…thought with which you disagree — and even voice with which you disagree – and even action with which you disagree — are still sacrosanct to you.

The philosopher Voltaire once insisted to another author, “I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write.” Since the nation’s birth, Mr. Bush, we have misquoted and even embellished that statement, but we have served ourselves well, by subscribing to its essence.

Oddly, there are other words of Voltaire’s that are more pertinent still, just now. “Think for yourselves,” he wrote, “and let others enjoy the privilege to do so, too.”  Apologize, sir, for even hinting at an America where a few have that privilege to think — and the rest of us get yelled at by the President.

Anything else, Mr. Bush, is truly… unacceptable.