My research study

Directions: Please only fill this study out if you are an undergraduate male. The results will be used to determine evolutionary characteristics of human beings.

Which woman would make a better mate?
A. secretary with small boobs
B. high powered CEO with jugs that are naturally bigger than Pamela Anderson Lee
C. porn star with fake boobs

Which woman would make a better mate?
A. secretary who may put out some when married because she is tired from working all day
B. high powered CEO who will get buck wild on command and let you slip it in from behind
C. porn star who may put out some when married because she is tired from working all day

What do you like best about porn stars?
A. risk of HIV infection
B. seeing her on-screen with other dudes
C. silicon

What do you like best about high-powered CEOs?
A. they make obscene amounts of cash
B. they have to work so hard that they only have time for one man, and may have been so career-driven up to this point that they are still virgins, dude
C. ugly chicks don’t tend to get ahead

What do you like best about secretaries?
A. some did not graduate from high school
B. makes coffee
C. may not make enough money to go to the gym, buy make-up, or pay for your beer

Which woman would make a better mate?
A. secretary
B. high powered CEO
C. porn star

—

Research note: Only the final question will be used in our research study– the rest can be disregarded. This study will conclusively determine the evolutionary characteristics of the species.

Maureen Dowd wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post about a study done at the University of Michigan that suggests men want to marry women who are less powerful than they are– in essence, men want to marry the nanny or the secretary. It’s a study that has been published in a journal of evolution and I just heard it on NPR, so it’s getting a lot of attention.

Whoa! A study using college undergraduates? Um, these “scientists” are aware that college males’ mate selection often boils down the drunkest girl left at the party at the end of the night, right? Of course college boys don’t want to marry CEOs. College boys can’t even begin to identify with women, much less successful, motivated women. It’s hard to blame them, too; why would you identify yourself as someone who wants certain characteristics in a mate when you can’t imagine that anyone with those characteristics could possibly ever want you?

Are you seriously going to base a discussion on what “men” want by looking at undergraduate males? And MAUREEN FUCKING DOWD, who I think is awesome, is giving creedence to this line of thought? Look, if you were to survey a healthy cross-section of men from a number of age groups, demographics, and cultures, and you had the same findings (and would that suprise me?– no), then Maureen Dowd should write about it and it should be on “On Point.”

But people, this was a study that looked at 120 college boys. I call that a frat party, not a serious research study. BOO, American media, for reporting this kind of crap.

I’ve stayed pretty quiet with the political linky-linky since the election, but there are some good post-election sites out there that I want to share.

Turn Your Back on Bush :: Snarky!
Pretzels for the Prez :: Sadistic!
Drinking Liberally :: Delicious!

So, I’m listening to NPR after work, as I am often wont to do, and I’m hearing some fella from a Washington Military Thinktank talk about how the DOD had prepared for a war against a nation’s standing army, and that is not what we’re fighting in Iraq. So a lot of the technology and the simulations they had prepared were moot when fighting an insurgency. And he mentioned that one key thing missing was the ability to speak the language.

That’s when it hit me: the next step for the U.S. Army is to work on translation software and extremely portable hardware. I’m not talking about translating messages or intel, I’m talking some serious Star Trek shit. I’m talking about earpieces that can pick up what’s being said and translate it directly into your ear.

Now, see, if there’s some cheap-ass (read: free) translation software that can help Scott say “rimjob” to his computer, then damn, the military ought to be able to do this. And I know that the military’s budget isn’t unlimited, but let’s look at why. In the past, the military has wanted to build guns, planes, body armor, that kind of shit. But who funds the military? Congress, man, Congress. A bunch of old white guys that aren’t going to have to fight in the next war. So they want to maintain American security, but they aren’t really all that interested in funding planes they can’t fly, guns they can’t fire, and flak jackets that they won’t wear because a) they have a guy to jump in front of bullets for them, or b) the bulk underneath their jackets might be mistaken for a direct line to Karl Rove.

But a universal language translator, man, Congress could use that. The most obvious application would be to program Republicanese and Democratese, the languages of spin, into them, and then each party would understand what the other’s bullshit really means. Imagine that these guys could be on the Senate floor, blubbering away, and the C-SPAN watchers would not see a perceptible difference, but the opposition party would be hearing, “I’m insecure, I have a small dick, and I don’t want to go back to being a lawyer, so I’m voting for this shit because I want to be re-elected by the dipshits in my home state. But vote for my energy bill and fuck it, I won’t carry on about this abortion shit.”

I’m just not really convinced that intelligent, honest discourse would be much of an incentive for those guys to fund the translation equipment, though, so I came up with a better one: miles and miles of PUSSY! Whole continents of it! Imagine, Congressman, your next fact-finding trip could take you to Malaysia, where you could lose the press,find a brothel, and negotiate the price of that 14-year-old tart down to roughly 32 cents American. Protection details might score some tail for the President, but not for you, Congressman. So, if you can speak and understand the language, I’m sure you’ll bag the exotic ladies; hey, you may even score some hash on your next trip to Singapore. And even your wife knows, what happens in Singapore stays in Singapore.

A universal translator would also help you understand that last ODB lyric that stumped you.

One part military-industrial complex, one part Viagra-fueled whore binges… I smell legislation!

Here’s an exceedingly depressing thought: I’ve been buying Republican!

It’s a pretty well-established practice for a company to buy another company largely for the name. Let’s take for example the recent “merger” between First Union and Wachovia. First Union gets burned by some shady lending practices, the image is tarnished a little, and FAPPO!– the merger happens, First Union is gone, and the well-respected Wachovia remains.

This wonderful merger has led to a corner in Chapel Hill where a Wachovia branch sits directly across the street from a Wachovia branch. I like to imagine that they will one day war– all of the pirates go to one Wachovia, all of the rest os us go to the other one, and the average joe’s Wachovia will be boarded violently and unexpectedly by the pirate Wachovia.

But, pirate fantasties aside, I think that our foreign policy team in Washington needs to look into this strategy. We’ve made a miserable mess of things in the Middle East and bungled the Iraq situation so badly that terrorists could recruit Mickey Mouse if they wanted to. Kids in schools are growing up learning to hate America, even though they could not necessarily find it on a map. American troupes are an unwelcome sight.

Why don’t we just buy some small country that hasn’t offended anyone and take their name? I’m going to vote for Iceland. Iceland offends no one, it’s been the home to one of the most successful winter Olympics in years, it’s main export is Bjork, and it may or may not be made out of actual ice. No one hates Iceland; some people don’t know it’s there.

My original proposal was that maybe we could buy Canada, because along with the name we might get the national health care. But we’d also get Quebec, which I don’t think we really want, and Celine Dion. There’s no Icelandic Celene Dion.

The effects of a name change would be immediate and sweeping. Expect celebrations from Muslim extremists, who would be thrilled at the thought that all American troops were out of the middle east. (Ignore the thousands of Icelandic troops now stationed in your country, please. Iceland offends no one.)

A generation raised to believe that Americans are evil would be left without an enemy. It would be some serious work to re-educate all of them to think that Icelanders (Icelandics?) are evil. You have to collect all the old textbooks, print up new ones, and get them out to schools, and the kids are probably still going to be saying “Americans are evil” for a couple years out of habit. Do you think that anyone wants to put forth that kind of effort? Probably not– textbooks are expensive!

Recruiting terrorists would be more difficult if we took Iceland’s name, too. In addition to the fact that Iceland offends no one, you’d have a really hard time convincing people to join your cell and go to Iceland to await orders for terrorist activities. They’d think they were being punished. “Listen to the name of the place,” they would say. “I don’t want to go there. It sounds too cold. Send me someplace more temperate. I’d like to bomb Aruba, please.”

The people of Iceland would benefit, too. I’m not sure how just yet, but I’m reasonably sure that being on the U.N. Security Council would be worth something. Oh, and they could visit Nebraska without a passport. Mmmm, Nebraska.

So, I’m starting a fund for us to buy Iceland. I’ve got $75 in there, and I figure if you guys chip in another 140 bucks or so, we’d have a pretty good downpayment. Let’s hope Bjork doesn’t have a hit single between now and then. That would probably drive the price up.

I don’t usually link to Daily Kos, because hell, he’s the blog posterboy for the left, and I think a lot of his support comes from the same arrogant, thoughtless liberal zealots, whose right-leanning counterparts I denounce so frequently. But Wade sent me a link to this article (written not by Kos, but by Pericles), and it’s absolutely fantastic. Read. Read. Read. How and Why bin Laden Will Strike Again?

Rush Limbaugh quote-from Nov. 3, 1988:

“And now the liberals want to stop President Reagan from selling chemical warfare agents and military equipment to Saddam Hussein, and why? Because Saddam ‘allegedly’ gassed a few Kurds in his own country. Mark my words. All of this talk of Saddam Hussein being a ‘war criminal’ or ‘committing crimes against humanity’ is the same old thing. LIBERAL HATE SPEECH! And speaking of poison gas . . .

I SAY WE ROUND UP ALL THE DRUG ADDICTS AND GAS THEM TOO!”

Dear Black People,

We don’t really hate you. Sure, we fought long and hard to keep you segregated, and sure, we used to lynch you. But we had to come out against the recent ballot measure that would have removed racist and segregationist language from our state constitution, which looks now like it will be voted down. It’s not because we aren’t offended by the language– it would be politically wrong of us to say that we aren’t. No sir, it’s because if we vote to remove that language, the devil will use it to gain a foothold! If we remove that language, we’ll open ourselves up to all kinds of new taxes! (Never mind that we’re the leaders who would have to propose and pass the new taxes.)

Now, surely you can’t be mad at us, black people, because loving economic freedom and religious flexibility puts us in a position where we have to continue to appear to hate you. I think we can all agree that if we truly hated you, we’d open up the possibility that you could be taxed more, and we’d open up the possibilities that someone, somewhere down the road might remove some of the protections for private Christian schools.

We hope you’ll vote for us again in the future, even though it really, really looks like we detest you on the basis of your skin color.

Love,
A Healthy Smattering of Your State’s Politicians

We don’t really hate you. Sure, we fought long and hard to keep you segregated, and sure, we used to lynch you. But we had to come out against the recent ballot measure that would have removed racist and segregationist language from our state constitution, which looks now like it will be voted down. It’s not because we aren’t offended by the language– it would be pretty morally ambiguous of us to say that we aren’t. No sir, it’s because if we vote to remove that language, the devil will use it to gain a foothold! If we remove that language, we’ll lose protections for our Christian schools! Never mind that we right-wing Christians have a strong base needed to elect the leaders who would have to support legislation that shifted support away from these private schools back to the woefully-funded private schools.

Now, surely you can’t be mad at us, black people, because loving Jesus puts us in a position where we have to continue to appear to hate you. I think we can all agree that if we truly hated you, we’d support an amendment that opens the possibility that you could be taxed more.

We hope you’ll continue to praise Jesus and support Christian causes, even though it really, really looks like lots of us Christians detest you on the basis of your skin color.

Love,
The Christian Right

I worry that it was my wife who sent me this link…

http://www.marryanamerican.ca/

If there were an EU-quivalent, I would be worried that she would be headed for some divorce papers…