Christophrenia

There are two different voices in this speech balloon. Is this what schizophrenia looks like in cartoon form?

How stupid is Michael Bay?

SPOILERS!

Here, dear readers, is a sample of the most egregious plot holes in the latest Transformers movie:

1) Why didn't Megatron immediately go to the moon in the first movie to gather the Decepticon reinforcements? Did he get amnesia when he crash landed on Earth?

2) How is it possible the Autobots didn't know Sentinel Prime was on the moon? In the first movie, they made a big deal about having to hide Megatron under the Hoover dam to diguise his homing signal.

3) Optimus uses the Matrix of Leadership to revive Sentinel, but Jazz stays dead? Christ, Jazz never gets a break. Optimus is a military genius but he can't be bothered to spend a couple of seconds to revive one of his warriors when faced by an opponent with a larger army?

4) The Transformers have technology which is advanced enough to teleport an entire planet across lightyears of space, but they can't fix it?

5) Sam gets stuck with a wristwatch which directly transmits what he sees and hears to the Decepticons, but someone manages to sneak into Chicago undetected and repeatedly elude them?

6) This isn't a plot hole, but it merits comment. At one point, Sam gets latched onto a Decepticon with the grappling hook thing and gets flung around like a yoyo for 5 minutes. How the hell did his arm not get ripped off? Or at the very least severely dislocated?

Some more general plot holes in the saga:

1) Transformers are very resilient. However heavily damaged they are, there's also always some magic device lying around capable of reviving them. The Autobots must know this, so why didn't they tell the humans in the first movie to melt the Decepticons down in a steel mill à la Terminator? Pay attention Bay, this is the sort of thing smarter directors think about.

2) Why was the Cube just flying around in space? How could such an essential piece of technology be lost so carelessly? I realize the story needs a reason for them to come to Earth, but c'mon.

3) Why do they need to fix Cybertron? They seemed to do OK on Earth. Would you rebuild a destroyed home if you could easily move into an empty one across the street? How is it possible they were stupid enough to wreck their planet so badly?

Here's how I think it should have unfolded:

1) Decepticons conquer Cybertron; Autobots flee to Earth to hide.

2) Decepticons pursue and adopt disguises. This sets up a kind of suspense as both sides have to try to remain inconspicuous as they hunt/flee from each other.

3) After a skirmish exposes them, the Autobots make an alliance with the humans to defeat them.

4) Good guys win, bad guys lose, and there's still room for a sequel. The trilogy should have climaxed with the Autobots returning to Cybertron and defeating the Decepticons once and for all.

The mistake in these movies is an over-emphasis on the human characters. Newsflash Bay, I went to Transformers to see goddamn Transformers! You need human characters, sure, but they're not the focus of the story.

I liked the first movie despite its flaws, but it's a shame to see the same mistakes repeated and magnified in the other two movies.

The Face of Mayhem

Heritage Foundation FAIL

The Heritage Foundation is a conservative think tank that publishes papers on various public issues. Recently, they published an article in which the opposed legalization of marijuana. I'm pro-legalization, but I figure I'd give them the benefit of the doubt and read the article.

I had hoped there might be some newer arguments or evidence proffered, but it was the same ol' blizzard of bullshit I've seen countless times before. Here are few excerpts with my comments:

Legalization advocates claim that marijuana and alcohol are mild intoxicants and so should be regulated similarly; but as the experience of nearly every culture, over the thousands of years of human history, demonstrates, alcohol is different. Nearly every culture has its own alcoholic preparations, and nearly all have successfully regulated alcohol consumption through cultural norms. The same cannot be said of marijuana. There are several possible explanations for alcohol’s unique status: For most people, it is not addictive; it is rarely consumed to the point of intoxication; low-level consumption is consistent with most manual and intellectual tasks; it has several positive health benefits; and it is formed by the fermentation of many common substances and easily metabolized by the body.

Alcohol is rarely consumed to the point of intoxication? Has this guy ever been on a college campus?

Marijuana advocates often point to the Netherlands as a well-functioning society with a relaxed attitude toward drugs, but they rarely mention that Amsterdam is one of Europe’s most violent cities. In Amsterdam, officials are in the process of closing marijuana dispensaries, or “coffee shops,” because of the crime associated with their operation.[26] Furthermore, the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport has expressed “concern about drug and alcohol use among young people and the social consequences, which range from poor school performance and truancy to serious impairment, including brain damage.”[27]

How about we compare the US to the Netherlands?

Lifetime prevalence of marijuana use among those 12+:
US- 36.9%
Netherlands- 17%
Lifetime prevalence of heroin use among those 12+:
US- 1.4%
Netherlands- 0.4%
Per capita spending on criminal justice:
US- €379
Netherlands- €223
Incarceration rate per 100,000:
US- 701
Netherlands- 100
Homicide rate per 100,000:
US- 5.56
Netherlands- 1.51

So, in the Netherlands, where marijuana has been decriminalized to a large degree, the rate of marijuana use is lower, the rate of heroin use is lower, they spend less money on locking people up, they have fewer people in prison, and a much lower murder rate.

From this, we can see that:

1) Decriminalizing marijuana did not lead to a surge in use

2) The "gateway drug" argument is bullshit (use rates of other drugs are lower in the Netherlands)

3) Decriminalizing marijuana did not lead to a surge in crime.

Which country do you think has better drug policy?

source

The lack of FDA approval means that marijuana may come from unknown sources, may be adulterated with foreign substances, or may not even be marijuana at all. Pot buyers have no way to know what they are getting, and there is no regulatory authority with the ability to go after bogus manufacturers and dealers. Even if one overlooks its inherently harmful properties, marijuana that is commonly sold is likely to be far less safe than that studied in the lab or elsewhere.

All excellent reasons for it to be legal.

Inglish Speling Kan And Shood Bee Simpler

Dhis sentens looks strainj wen yue ferst start reeding it, but yue suen see dhat it is not harder tue reed dhan Inglish riten in dhu trudishinul wai. Dhis speling sistem shairs menee similairitees with udher prupoazd sistems. Dhu trikee part with updaiting Inglish speling kums frum dhu vowls. Ie hav choazen dhu vowls ukoarding tue dhu wai dhai ar yuezd in dhu moast komun shoart werds.

Mie vowl sistem, with ekzampuls in parenthesees:

a (hat) ai (rain) ar (bar) aw (law)
e (get) ee (meet) eer (beer) er (fern)
i (in) ie (pie) ier ("fire" wood bee speld "fier")
o (dog) oa (boat) oar (oar) oo (look) oi (oil) ow (how)
u (but) ue (glue)

Ie kunsiderd yuezing "y" tue reprezent dhu long "i" sownd, but Ie thot it best tue yuez "y" as u konsununt oanlee. Unudher difikultee wuz trieing tue desied wich leter tue yuez tue reprezent dhu inishul vowl in werds liek "about" (ubowt) and "attack" (utak).

Mie sistem kuntains noa sielent leters, u refoarm wich wood graitlee simplifie speling eeven if udopted uloan. Ie also eliminaited dhu redundunt leters q and x. Dhu tue novel konsununts ar dhu "zh" diegraf wich Ie yuez foar werds liek "pleasure" (plezher) and "treasure" (trezher) and dhu "dh" diegraf wich Ie and menee udhers yuez tue signifie dhu inishul konsununt in werds liek "the" (dhu) and "them" (dhem). Ie thot ubowt yuezing q tue reprezent dhis sownd, but figyerd dhis wood kawz tue much kunfyuezhin. Ie tried hard tue uvoid distoarting dhu werds tue much with mie nue spelings.

It's intresting tue noat dhat dhu konsept uv standerd speling iz u fairlee reesent wun. U thowsund yeers ugoa, Inglish speling wuz straitfoarwerd, but after sencherees uv ubzoarbing werds frum French, Latin, Greek ulong with dhair respektiv speling kunvenchins, dhu speling grajuelee bekaim moar kaiotic. Peepul speld woards however dhai wonted and spelings differed frum plais tue plais ukoarding tue reejinul proanunseeaishins. Speling wuz larjlee standerdiezd bie printers begining arownd 1500. In moast kaises, dhu printers simplee choas dhu moast komun speling tue bee dhu ufishul wun. Dhis iz dhu reezun wie in Inglish difrent leters ar often yuezd tue reprezent dhu saim sownd and difrent sownds ar reprezented with dhu saim leters.

Defenders uv trudishinul speling ofen argyue dhat trudishunul spelings ar moar byuetiful, giv klues tue dhu werd's oarijin and meening, and dhat lerning tue spel iz u good mentul eksersiez foar children. Just ubowt evree argyuement in faiver uv trudishinul speling fits intue wun uv dhoaz three kategoarees. Ie fiend ol dheez argyuements tue bee radher week.

Inglish speling haz chainjed graitlee oaver dhu sencherees. At wut point did it ukwier just dhu riet number uv superflueus leters? Woodint it bee much simpler tue just spel dhu werds dhu wai dhai ar prunownsd? If poaets and rieters wish tue kuntinyue tue yuez dhu trudishunul spelings, dhai ar moar dhan welkum tue due soa, but dhu rest awt tue bee aibul tue yuez an eezeeer wai.
Ie kant help but menchin dhat menee rieters inklueding Shaw, Twain, and Wells advukaited speling refoarm az wel leksikogrufers such az Samuel Johnson and Noah Webster.

Az foar dhu sekund argyuement, oanlee lingwists and udher langgwij prufeshinuls kair ubowt dhu oarijins uv werds. How menee Inglish speekers ar uwair dhat "goodbye" iz u kerupshin uv "God be with ye"? Akchuelee, in menee kaises, dhu "kerekt" speling distoarts dhu ruet werd eeven moar. If "dungeon" wuz speld "dunjin" wood it bee eezeeyer oar harder tue tel dhat it iz derievd frum dhu French werd "donjon"?

Dhu therd argyuement iz dhu weekest uv ol. Given dhu enoarmus difikultees menee children hav in lerning tue reed and dhu problem uv udult iliterusee, how kood eneewun bee upoazd tue refoarm? Kan yue imajin how menee thowsunds uv peepul hav given up on reeding owt uv frustraishin ower ridikyuelus speling sistem? Peepul hue ar trieing tue lern Inglish az u foaren langgwij ar eeven woars of az dhai must kuntend with its bizar speling ulong with ol dhu udher difikultees uv lerning u nue langgwij.

Sum reeders miet think dhat refoarm wood bee reseevd beter if dun in peesmeel. Ie sai yue kant kros u kazum in tue leeps and dhat its beter tue refoarm it ol at wuns and bee dun with it.

Don't Worry, I Got It All Figured Out by Thomas Friedman

After writing several best-selling books on globalization, I get asked a lot "Mr. Friedman, do you have any ideas about how the world should be run?" Well, heck yeah I do. I'm a friggin' genius.

I made a career out of oversimplifying complex geopolitical issues, so I certainly think I'm qualified to offer a multitude of half-baked, social engineering schemes. Smart grids, electric cars, carbon taxes, renewable energy subsidies- I'm for it all. How will this be implemented, you ask? The government will make it so!

The Chinese have figured this out- why can't we? Boy, I tell you, those Chinese are super smart. Their farts smell like cinnamon buns. I wish I could be Chinese so I could be a part of their glorious collective.

I tout government-directed energy policy, even after the incident I described in Hot, Flat, and Crowded where I had to sue my local government to get permission to a put a solar panel in my front yard. Do I have balls or what?

Some of you might be thinking, "but Mr. Friedman, the government has been subsidizing fossil fuel for decades with many adverse results, so why propose even more market distortion?" Because I'm special; I can see into the future. And I don't mean that in a metaphorical way; I can literally see into the future.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to get back to getting peace in the Middle East, curing cancer, and dealing with nuclear waste.

Awaaaaay!!!

Thomas Friedman is an author and columnist for The New York Times. He also has super powers.

America On the Brink by Glenn Beck

Now, more than ever, America teeters on the brink of an abyss. While on vacation with my family last week, I saw more disturbing signs of the coming collapse.

At Yellowstone National Park, my guns were confiscated by the park rangers. It was then I noticed that the park rangers wear brown shirts. Know who else wore brown shirts? Hitler, that's who! Hitler also confiscated guns, just like the park rangers. The guns I brought to protect my family from marauding bears and Canadians were snatched away. Makes you sick, doesn't it?

The park had all kinds of rules. Hmm. I seem to recall another rule-obsessed authoritarian group. What were they called? Oh that's right, the Nazis. It was terrible to be under that kind of oppression. Now I know how the Jews felt.

At the Grand Canyon, I saw a plaque that sent a chill up my spine. You see, this plaque had German on it. I questioned a park ranger about it; he explained that the plaque was written in German for the benefit of German tourists and also had explanations in French and Japanese. I nodded politely, but deep down I knew this was another sign of the coming takeover of the progressive-Nazi-fascist-morlock front. German on a sign in America. Can you hear the coming goosesteps?

Aaaah!!! The Nazis are all over me! Get 'em off! Get 'em off! Get 'em off!

Woowoowoowoowhoopwhoopwhoop!

Glenn Beck is an author and host of a radio and TV show. He is the current world record holder for number of comparisons made to the Third Reich.