Schnauzers Rule!

Baby Schnauzers

How sweet are these precious little babies? After being at school all day it's so nice to come home to these little "jumpin' beans"! They can't get enough lovin'!!!! Check out their photo album at the link above.

"Greedy Bastards" by SportsGrinder

*I want to preface this by saying that I stole it from The Sports Grinder and I just wanted to post it here for more to see. I agree with people voting with their heads/wallets... I pay taxes therefore I am Republican. There are other reasons of course but I get the point completely and have always felt this way! But I don't think most of the rich and famous support Bush and his cabinet! I think it's quite the opposite... just look at how liberal MTV's Rock the Vote is and how about all the celebrity Kerry endorsements this election (Springsteen, MJ Fox, Sarah Jessica Parker, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, Janine Garafalo)... of course in MJ Fox's defense, he probably supported based on stem cell research so that's a different thing.*


Liberals just don't get it. Didn't get it before, don't get it now, probably won't get it in the future. People are going to do what's in their best interests. Note I didn't say anything about their collective best interest or some other qualifier. People do what's best for them personally. Not everyone, mind you, but a majority will behave in this way.

I mention this as a lead in to an article I ran across online titled "Why most of America’s athletic elite were batting for Bush":

Most of the rich and famous, America's sporting gentry, supported, and in some cases donated money, to the man who will be guiding or misguiding this nation for another four years, George W Bush. Mainly because the sporting gentry are rich and famous. It didn't matter if they were African-Americans who grew up in a ghetto slum. It didn't matter if they were whites or Hispanics who came from farms or factories. What mattered, was now they had made it, and all they care about is keeping it.

Charles Barkley, an African-Amer ican basketball player who was on the 1992 Olympic dream team and now does acerbic commentary for one of the TV networks, explained his stance to his mother after she told him Republicans are only for the rich people.

"But, ma," he countered, "I am rich."

This really isn't hard to understand. People tend to vote with their heads (which some like to call voting with their wallets - whatever). If one candidate's going to take your money and give to others, you're not going to vote for them. Conversely, the candidate that gives you back more of your money will get your vote. Simple. Check the exit polls (???) from the 2004 election - if you make 50K or more a year, you voted for Bush by 55-44%. If you make less than 50K per year, you voted for Kerry by 56-43%. If you are the group that pays the taxes, you vote for Bush. If you're in the group that consumes the taxes, you vote for Kerry. Forget all the crap of late about the blue states paying the taxes with the red states being welfare states. The taxpayers vote republican. People with money vote republican, and they do so because it's in their best interest.

Put it this way - with each passing year, it becomes less and less in the interest of the average American to vote for a Democrat.





posted by TheGrinder at 1:02 PM

Wal-Mart Haircuts....

Now I know we all make fun of Wal-Mart and credit it with the downfall of American culture but let's be real about some very fundamental things. College students, while diverse by nature, have something in common. They are poor and they need to purchase white out and laundry detergent between the hours of 11pm and 3am. In my case, I need a hair cut. Now, if I had a really tricky and unique style to my hair, I might feel it necessary to go to Regis or Vidal Sassoon for my hair care. But I have long straight hair. When I need it trimmed, the task is really quite simple. I want it cut straight across with scissors. While some are understandably skeptical, I trust my Wal-Mart hair technician to do the job for $9.88.
Is this wrong? Am I buying into corporate America like South Park would have us believe? Or am I simply utilizing my resources to my own benefit?


Song of the Day: Perfekte Welle

Food of the Day: Raisinettes

Show of the Day: Mad TV

Animal of the Day: Jackalope

The best part of Birth was the popcorn...

Okay, let me start by saying that I had to drive 30 miles to find a theatre that was even playing this God awful film... but I was sure it would be worth it. The idea for the movie was intriguing and probably the reason most went to check it out. Unfortunately, it was all wrong! The relationship between Anna and her husband is never witnessed before his death. You don't see his face and you never see Anna until ten years later. You just see some man jogging fall over in Central Park and then a baby is born who is conveniently named Sean just like Anna's dead husband. So there is no character development to start and it doesn't get any better. Flashforward and some creepy kid is hanging around Anna's apt. saying "I'm Sean" with an expressionless demeanor until Anna eventually believes him. And while he offers "proof" by giving facts only Anna could know, the audience doesn't care because we never saw her husband and we don't even know if the kid is accurate, it must be assumed. The ending is confusing and ambiguous and Anne Heche's character is neither convincing nor explained at any point in the film. Not really her fault I guess, the writing is just so bad! Sean the child is too easily convinced that he is not Sean and nothing is really explained in a satisfying way. Although some things should be left to the imagination the movie goes nowhere! It's trying too hard to be artsy and it fails miserably...