Cost of the War in Iraq
(JavaScript Error)
To see more details, click here.


Pedophiles to launch political party

AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - Dutch pedophiles are launching a political party to push for a cut in the legal age for sexual relations to 12 from 16 and the legalization of child pornography and sex with animals, sparking widespread outrage. The Charity, Freedom and Diversity (NVD) party said on its Web site it would be officially registered Wednesday, proclaiming: "We are going to shake The Hague awake!"

The party said it wanted to cut the legal age for sexual relations to 12 and eventually scrap the limit altogether.

"A ban just makes children curious," Ad van den Berg, one of the party's founders, told the Algemeen Dagblad (AD) newspaper. "We want to make pedophilia the subject of discussion," he said, adding the subject had been a taboo since the 1996 Marc Dutroux child abuse scandal in neighboring Belgium.
In the US GWBUSH wiretaps people who are possibly remotely linked to terrorists. If anyone should be monitored, it's pedophiles. They harm more people in the US than terrorists every year.
"We want to get into parliament so we have a voice. Other politicians only talk about us in a negative sense, as if we were criminals," Van den Berg told Reuters.
Uh, thats because you are criminals you moron.
The Netherlands, which already has liberal policies on soft drugs, prostitution and gay marriage, was shocked by the plan. An opinion poll published Tuesday showed that 82 percent wanted the government to do something to stop the new party, while 67 percent said promoting pedophilia should be illegal.
Only 82%. That is sad. So 18% of the people polled think it's okay?
"They make out as if they want more rights for children. But their position that children should be allowed sexual contact from age 12 is of course just in their own interest," anti-pedophile campaigner Ireen van Engelen told the AD daily.

More things that just piss me off
Start Your Own Blog Free!

Michael Moore to Provide Veteran Benefits?

Everyone feels sympathy for those who are injured while serving this country. I support our troops 100%. Personally I believe veterans deserve way more than this country gives them.

GW Bush talks a lot about support for the troops, etc. yet doesn't do much about helping them once they are through serving HIS war in Iraq.

Who Let The Blog Out?

Now a veteran is suing Michael Moore for using a news clip that made him "appear" anti-war. He doesn't say he didn't say the things that were shown in the movie Farenheit 9-11, he says now he was talking about not liking the painkillers he was taking and that Moore has ruined his reputation.

The guy is a double-amputee and a veteran who seved his country so naturally we all want to side with the poor guy because he deserves something.

However, that something is not an 85 million dollar settlement from Moore like he is trying to get. The something he should be getting is better benefits from the US government without the Pentagon trying to take money away from veteran benefits constantly.

Damon is asking for up to $75 million because of "loss of reputation, emotional distress, embarrassment, and personal humiliation."
Click here for the rest of the stunt, I mean story.

More things that just piss me off
Start Your Own Blog Free!

Contextual Advertising Disease

When contextual advertising like google adsense first came out I thought, "what a great idea! Ads based on my content that my readers might be able to actually use and want."

humor blog

Notice I no longer put adsense into my blog. The reason; I don't want to be part of spreading this infectious disease.

I write articles for clients and have to use the web to do research. Everytime I go to search for something now, I have to sort through all of the garbage websites that are built for just google adsense ads.

I'm not talking about websites that have actual content AND have google adsense in addition to that. Nothing wrong with that.

I'm talking about websites that have no content, have spammy content, or even have hidden content where the spammy text is the same color as the background of the page.

Websites like this one, which was number 1 in for the term "make money". How about this one, which was number 1 in google for mancoon cats. Try any of the sites for that search term. They are almost all garbage.


The google adnonsense disease is ruining search on the Internet and google and the other contextual advertising creators don't care.

Google's terms of service say they do not allow websites like those. However, they are not only allowing it, they are ranking them in the top 10 results for search terms.

They can't tell me they can't find those websites that are violating the TOS. They can't miss them. If any google employee uses the web at all they would see them every day.

Blog Hosting

The defenders of this say they are providing another way for people to search the web. What? By having you as the middleman? If it weren't for the garbage parked and monetized domain name disease and the trash websites all about adsense, then the user would find what they are looking for through the search engine.

The user would get to a website that had related content. One that actually had some kind of value. Parked monetized domain names and garbage no content or spammy content websites add no value to the web at all. It's a disease that's killing web search as we know it.

But the ones that are doing it don't care. Give me some clicks and let me earn my two cents! Then you have the adsense gurus promoting more of it and charging people to learn how they too can create more garbage on the web using google adnonsense.

I'll be glad when people start talking about google the way they now talk about Veronica the extinct gopher search tool.

More things that just piss me off
Start Your Own Blog Free!


Pot Doesn't Increase Cancer Risk

In yet another study on marijuana the results were surprising and probably not very pleasing to the bush administration who considers all pot smokers to be supportive of terrorism. I think their are people becoming seriously addicted to marijuana studies.

People who smoke marijuana may be at less risk of developing lung cancer than tobacco smokers, according to a new study.

Bloomberg news reports that in a study of 2,200 people in Los Angeles even heavy marijuana smokers were no more likely to develop lung, head or neck cancer than non-users, in contrast with tobacco users, whose risk increases the more they smoke.

Medicinal Marijuana

The findings are a surprise because marijuana smoke has some of the same cancer-causing substances as tobacco smoke, often in higher concentrations, said the senior researcher, Donald Tashkin, a professor at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California-Los Angeles.

One possible explanation is that THC, a key ingredient in marijuana not present in tobacco, may inhibit tumor growth, he said in an interview.
Oops. What was that last part? Medicinal marijuana may actually have a use? What will GW do now? Probably declare the people that did this study as connected to Al Queda.

Start Your Own Blog Free!
More things that just piss me off

Drug Compnies Pay For Study Results

There are so many studies, polls, surveys, etc. that come out every week. They tell us this percentage of this or this percentage of that is how poeple think. Drug studies are supposed to tell us what is safe and what isn't, yada yada yada. However, did you ever stop to think where the money comes from for all of those studies?

If you were to track down the source of the money for each of those polls, surveys or studies, you would see the results are very often in favor of whoever funded the study. If the republican party funds a study, you can bet the results are going to favor republicans. The same goes if democrats fund a study, survey, or poll.

A recent study done here at Things That Just Piss Me Off proves that 75% of Americans make up 3/4 of the population here in the US.

Those who are getting the money to perform the study know they may not be funded again if the study does not come out in favor of the people who paid for the study. So even if the funder of a study does not outright tell the people doing the study to manipulate the results in their favor, those doing the study will do it anyway to ensure their future income from the same source.

Drug Companies Fund Drug Studies

Drug companies fund a growing number of the studies in leading psychiatric journals, and drugs fare much better in these company-funded studies than in trials done independently or by competitors, researchers reported.

According to a report in USA Today about 57 percent of published studies were paid for by drug companies in 2002, compared with 25 percent in 1992, says psychiatrist Igor Galynker of Beth Israel Medical Center in New York City.


There were favorable outcomes for a medication in about:

Eight out of 10 studies paid for by the company that makes the drug.
Five out of 10 studies done with no industry support.
Three out of 10 studies done by competitors of the firm making the drug.
The findings don't prove the companies are knowingly biasing studies, says co-author Robert Kelly Jr., also with Beth Israel. The report didn't look at the evidence for bias in design of the studies.
Now you can say that is all just a coincidence if you want to. Go back and sit on the couch with your remote. This doesn't affect you. For those whose brain has not yet been melted, this should show you to never take any study, survey, or poll seriously without first tracking down who paid for it.

That is not always easy either. All these big companies have to do is set up and fund a foundation somewhere, then let that foundation fund the study. Then it all seems to be on the up and up. For me, all the studies, surveys, and polls I see are not to be trusted. Researching is a business like anything else. If they do not produce a product their customers like they will lose business. It's that simple.

Start Your Own Blog Free!
More things that just piss me off

Tobacco Madness

Ok, some of you are old enough to remember the movie "Reefer Madness" that exaggerated the effects of smoking marijuana. It was intended to scare the public into avoiding it but lied about the topic to do so. Now we have "Tobacco Madness". No one denies that smoking is harmful, but this story is ridiculous.

One Cigarette Can Spark Addiction

Trying just one cigarette may not be so harmless for non-smokers after all, Reuters reports.

Scientists have discovered that a single cigarette has a "sleeper effect" that can increase a person's vulnerability for three years or more to becoming a regular smoker.

"We know that progression from experimenting with one cigarette to being a smoker can take several years," said Jennifer Fidler of University College London.

Study on Smoking

"But for the first time we've shown that there may be a period of dormancy between trying cigarettes and becoming a regular smoker - a 'sleeper effect' or vulnerability to nicotine addition," she added.

Fidler and her team analyzed the impact of smoking a single cigarette on more than 2,000 children, ages 11 to 16, over five years.

Of the 260 children, who by age 11 had tried one cigarette, 18 percent were regular smokers by the time they reached 14. But only 7 percent of 11-year-olds who had never smoked had taken up the habit three years later.
Anyone who is more likely to try something is more likely to do it later. I'll bet you that those who have tried bungee jumping just one time are more likely to try bungeee jumping again later than those who never tried bungee jumping at all. I can put that study out right away. Can a brother get a grant?

Start Your Own Blog Free!
More things that just piss me off


Pentagon Punishes Veterans Again

Influential lawmakers are moving to block for at least a year the Defense Department's plan to raise TRICARE fees, co-payments and deductibles for military retirees under age 65 and their family members.

Defense officials had hoped to begin to phase in the higher rates, the average fee increases for under-65 retirees would be 115 percent, as early as October, 2006.

Enrollment fees for TRICARE Prime would triple for retired officers, double for senior enlisted and rise by 41 percent for retired enlisted in grades E-6 and below.

Deductibles for TRICARE Standard also would rise sharply for under-65 retirees and, for the first time, Standard users among them also would pay an annual enrollment fee.

VietNam Vets
So much for this administration "supporting our troops" as they so often like to say.

TRICARE retail pharmacy co-payments too would increase under the plan. To learn more, read article "Higher TRICARE Fees for Retirees Run Aground" by Tom Philpott.
Click here to let your senators know how you feel!


AT&T and the NSA Wiretapping

The archived statemaents Mark Klein made in the case about AT&T and the NSA working together to spy on American citizens can be found by clicking here.

More things that just piss me off
Start Your Own Blog Free!


Vint Cerf Answers Questions! Or Did He?


Self Centered People

When did people in the US become so self-centered. I mean we all are to a certain degree. We tend to put our own interests at the top of our priorities. But that's not what I'm talking about here.

I'm talking about people that don't even seem to realize that other people even have any priorities besides fulfilling their priorities.

You see it every day. People who stop in front of you to talk with someone even though there is a line of cars waiting on them. Their priority right now is to talk to whoever they are talking to and the fact thaty all the cars behind them have places to go makes no difference whatsoever.

People in line at the fast food restaurant that stand there talking while they are going through the line, then get to the cashier and look up at the menu and say . . . "uh, what do I want, let me see." They could have been deciding that all along while they were in line and they wouldn't be holding up the people behind them, but that isn't important to them.

The convenience of others has no consequence to these people. The whole world revolves around them and everything and everyone is just there to do their bidding if they get noticed at all.

These are the same people that if you ask them to do anything the first concern they have is "What's in it for me?" "What do I get out of it?" "I don't do anything for free!" Yet they are also the same people unwilling to pay others to do the things they ask or will be as late as possible paying others for the services they do perform. The only thing that was important is that they got what they wanted and your needs are not important.

People who cut in line or rush in to take a parking place or people who turn left at the light even though those going straight had the right away all belong in this category of asshole.

This "me me me, my name is jimmy so gimme gimme gimme" attitude seems to be like a disease that is spreading in epidemic proportion. Forget the bird flu, lets get rid of the "Me Flu".

More things that just piss me off
Start Your Own Blog Free!


New Blog All About ICANN

Okay, there are a lot of things that just piss me off, but ICANN is taking up too much space on my blog, so I have created an entire blog devoted to the things about ICANN that just piss me off. The address is

If you want a blog about something that just pisses you off, I'll host you for free! No adsense ads, nothing, just free. Go to Start Your Own Blog Free!

More things that just piss me off



Well, did you all think this issues would go away? Of course the Us Government influenced ICANN's decision to block the XXX TLD. No I don't say allegedly. It's too obvious for me to be shy about calling a spade a spade.

Now, don't misunderstand this article. I am not a supporter of the XXX TLD. For one thing it will do absolutely nothing to control or inhibit porn on the Internet. Porn websites will still be placed on every TLD there is and with dot XXX they would just have a whole other TLD to build websites on.

It won't increase or decrease the amount of porn on the Internet. The christian right was saying, "It would add legitimacy to the porn industry. They are wrong. The supreme court of the United States of America already did that.

Start Your Own Blog Free!

As a christian I hate being associated with "the christian right" who seek to influence our government to legislate morality.

As a christian it is my duty to teach people what is right and what is wrong. It's up to each individual whether or not they wish to live a moral life and follow Jesus Christ. Christ said he wants followers to come to him willingly.

Did he lobby the jews to pass laws accepting his word as law? No. He taught people and demonstrated through his own actions what it means to live right. He hoped they would follow his example.

So, back to the domain/TLD XXX. It's not an issue about porn since as I said before it will not affect porn in any way. It's an issue about the freedom to create new TLDs without government interference, without special interest groups deciding what is right or wrong, and without ICANN blocking my rights to start a business, even if that business is selling domain names and managing a TLD.

ICANN refusing individuals or companies the right to start a new TLD is restraint of trade and illegal.

Click here to learn more about what actually happened with the whole XXX TLD mess.

More things that just piss me off


You Will Watch My Advertisement! Now Mister!

Start Your Own Blog Free!
Okay, one of the latest patents from Phillips is really gonna piss people off! Using the technology built into TVs meant to create broadcast flags, Phillips says it can force viewers to watch commercials even if they don't want to.

If implemented, a commercial would come on, you would try to flip over to some other channel and the remote won't work and neither will the buttons on the TV itself. (Yes they really do still put buttons on some TVs that you can use to change channels, but you have to get out of the chair).

This technology would even prevent you from recording a show, then fast forward through the commercials on the recording.

The idea is to keep you from channel surfing during commercials and advertisers will adopt it quickly to make sure you watch the drivel they spout every five minutes during your favorite show.

Phillips TV

The Rest of The Story

More things that just piss me off


Welcome New Blog to the Blogroll - Intelligence Warzone

I've added some new links to my blogroll on the right, check them out. Don't forget to check out the Intelligence Warzone and Who Let The Blog Out?

Start Your Own Blog Free!
More things that just piss me off

Vint Cerf Answers Questions Including My Own

Vint Cerf, inventer of email, head of ICANN, and Google's "Internet Evangelist" agreed to answer questions on a public website, Circle ID, and I was there with a ton of them. Many of them are questions or topics I have posted here often.

I am reposting the questions I asked him, his answers, and my responses here and will add a link where you can see all the other questions and comments.

Vint Cerf Answering Questions From NameCritic

Q5: Since ICANN is supposed to foster competition, how does restricting the number of TLDs help do that?—by Chris McElroy

Vint Cerf: It depends on what you interpret useful competition to be.

No, it seems to be what the ICANN BoD considers useful competition to be and that is not part of ICANN’s responsibility nor is it their area of expertise.

There are costs associated with the implementation of new TLDs and these costs are manifest in various ways (ICANN cost of operation,

Which is already covered in the part of the domain name registration fees ICANN gets.

potential costs to trademark holders,

Again, not an area of ICANN’s mission statement or MOU with the DoC.

impact on the root operation, costs to the supporting organizations considering new TLDs and so on).

There shouldn’t be much cost in considering the applications since you should not be trying to determine financial capability, but only technical ability.

The idea that increasing the number of TLDs is absolutely beneficial seems to me open to some debate (see also responses to earlier questions).

Stifling competition by deciding who is allowed to compete is absolutely not beneficial to anyone and does not foster competition as ICANN is mandated to do. It is not ICANN’s job to determine if my business plan is viable or not. Increasing the number of TLDs does not threaten the stability of the Internet and does foster more competition in the domain name market. ICANN’s refusal to do so is blocking legitimate trade.

* * *

Q6: Do you consider it fair and competitive to allow current companies who monopolize most of the good, short one word domain names, to have an advantage over every other business or individual user who has to choose 3-4 word domain names to compete with?—by Chris McElroy

Vint Cerf: I assume you mean by this, second level labels within a given TLD?

Well, yes I do Vint.

Registrations in the existing TLDs have been essentially open and roughly speaking first come, first served, discounting some sunrise processes introduced with some new TLDs.

Let’s don’t discount that Vint. The sunrise periods where one TM holder gets to monopolize a specific string opf letters in every TLD is part of allowing them to monopolize namespace.

Your thesis seems to be that short domain names are somehow more competitive than longer ones, or ones that are hierarchical in structure.

Vint I understand you are an engineer. But if you do not understand how short one-word domain names are far superior to longer 4 word domain names, then you should not be part of an organization that makes decisions about domain names. I’m considered somewhat of a domain name expert, but I could be a total newby and know the value of a one-word domain name over a four-word domain name.

Given the way in which most products and services are found on the net (through search, not through domain name guessing), I am not sure I buy the competition argument I believe you are implicitly making.

I am implicitly making the assertion that one-word domain names have a huge advantage over longer multi-word domain names. If you don’t buy it again, “Internet Evangelist” is a strong title for someone who doesn’t understand this basic concept of SEO. Remembering a domain name is an integral part of maintaining a customer base Vint. You know this. Denying it only means you don’t wish to address the issue that there is an actual shortage of good domain names and that there is a need for more TLDs.

Q7: What about future generations of users and future businesses that are not even on the web yet? How long will their domain names have to be since ICANN has limited namespace to a few generic sounding TLDs, com, net, org, biz, and info and how does that foster competition?—by Chris McElroy

Vint Cerf: Please see my previous answer above. ICANN has not said it will not authorize additional TLDs but what is lacking is the basis for their authorization. That’s what the PDP process is intended to help create.

I believe the process was created to again complicate and slow down the process of creating or approving new TLDs. I saw your previous answer above that also did not address the real issue that there is a shortage of good commercially viable domain names due to ICANN restricting namespace. ICANN approved dot aero and dot museum and now dot mobi and dot tel, none of which address ther need for commercially viable TLDs. None of which can compete with a dot com. Competing TLDs have been applied for and consistantly turned down by ICANN. The introduction of these insequential TLDs is a thinly veiled attempt to give the appearance of ICANN approving more TLDs for businesses to use on the web.

* * *

Q8: Why should a trademark automatically assure one company a domain name when several businesses have the same mark? And why does ICANN not solve that problem by creating categorical TLDs that correspond to trademark categories? Then apple.computers could be as protected as apple.records—by Chris McElroy

Vint Cerf: For gTLDs one would need a universal categorization system and the trademark community does not, to my knowledge, have one. There are categories for each national trademark system but as far as I am aware, these have not been homologated. You are correct that trademarks are not unique and that has been part of the “collision” with the domain name system.

WIPO is the organization responsible for international compliance with trademarks. I’m sure someone there could give you a list of classes. Then they could easily be added to the DNS as TLDs. Then TM holders would ONLY be entitled to a domain name if the domain name matched their mark AND the TLD matched the class the trademark was registered for. This would reduce TM conflicts by 99%. Ahhh, but then the corporations that have influence would not be able to control namespace the way ICANN currently helps them do.

* * *

Q9: Where in ICANN’s bylaws does it say that ICANN has the right to review my business plan before deciding to let me run a TLD? What if my business plan is a secret? Why does it take $50,000 to review an application? And why haven’t the application fees ever been refunded to applicants who were turned down?—by Chris McElroy

Vint Cerf: Part of ICANN’s responsibility is to attempt to assure the stability of the domain name system

Technically assure the stability of the Internet, yes.

and that has been interpreted as trying to assure that operators of TLDs are equipped to run their TLDs in a sustainable way.

Is there a place in ICANN’s MOU or even Mission Statement that shows that ICANN is responsible for the financial stability of every company that manages a TLD? No? I thought not.

That’s out of interest for the registrants.

Again, buyer beware. It is not ICANN’s job to guarantee registrants of domain names that the registrar is financially stable.

The process of evaluation allows for confidentiality of submitted materials.

And I’m sure none of those business plans were ever discussed outside of the Boardroom with anyone. Kind of a “Trust Me” policy hunh?

Also, since ICANN is reviewing and in a very few cases accepting and approving a particular business plan in regards to running a TLD that would make ICANN liable if me registrar goes out of business.

By putting ICANN in the position of reviewing business plans and finances it increases it’s own liability in this litigious society. “Also Named” is a good term for lawsuits. ICANN need to stick to technical issues and stay out of political, social, and financial policy making.

ICANN contracts for outside reviews of TLD proposals so there are out of pocket costs. In the last sTLD cycle, ICANN undertook to analyze costs and to rebate unused fees, if memory serves. I would note that there are out of pocket costs even if bids are not accepted so refunds in that case are problematic.

It’s taken 6 years to review this? But thank you Vint for addressing the questions anyway. What I should have asked is if ICANN is ever going to reactivate the General Assembly and hold elections for Board Memebers as promised. So many questions so little time

The Rest of the Questions, Answers and Comments.

More things that just piss me off
Start Your Own Blog Free!
Affiliate Website Design


Politicians Use Teens to get Votes

Politicians were and are never worried about child abuse, child sexual exploitation, and Internet safety, until it comes to getting votes. How many times have you heard a politician running for office that says, "I promise to find more missing children"? or "I pledge to reduce the number of children who are abused by 90%"?

You don't here those as campaign slogans. You know why? Because voters don't care about those issues as much as the economy, the war in Iraq, unemployment, or illegal immigration. Thats right. Thats exactly what I said. American voters care more about many other issues over the welfare of children.

I have never seen any survey that asked voters what their top issues are for an election that including missing and abducted children, child abuse, or online sexual predators.

But now with the popularity of and with inflated figures from the NCMEC, that they cannot prove or verify, that one out of five children is approached online by a sexual predator, it has now become a political issue and politicians are rushing to capitalize on it.

Of course there are teenagers who are solicited for sex online. It does happen and needs to be dealt with. The police have and are dealing with it. One in Five cannot be proven even though the NCMEC insists on using that figure.

Basically a long time back someone did a survey with a question like "Has anyone talked to you in a sexual manner online?" and one in five said yes. However, they were not asked if it was other teenagers talking to them that way or adults.

They left that out on purpose because funding comes from places who want numbers that show there is a problem. Having the actual details might not get them as much money.

Now, . . .
MySpace and other social-networking sites like and Facebook are the potential targets for a proposed federal law that would effectively require most schools and libraries to render those Web sites inaccessible to minors, an age group that includes some of the category's most ardent users.
Fitzpatrick and fellow Republicans, including House Speaker Dennis Hastert, on Wednesday endorsed new legislation (click here for PDF) that would cordon off access to commercial Web sites that let users create public "Web pages or profiles" and also offer a discussion board, chat room, or e-mail service.

That's a broad category that covers far more than social-networking sites such as Friendster and Google's It would also sweep in a wide range of interactive Web sites and services, including, AOL and Yahoo's instant-messaging features, and Microsoft's Xbox 360, which permits in-game chat.

Fitzpatrick's bill, called the Deleting Online Predators Act, or DOPA
More like Dopey. Censorship is not the answer. Education is. I mean educating parents not just the teens. Be a real parent. Quit using the computer to babysit your children. Parents these days are "too busy" to be parents. They first used television as a babysitter and now it's computers and they want laws passed that make it a better babysitter.
Hey let's take away their cellphones too. And we can put a lock on the house phone, lock them in their rooms, slide food under the door, and they will be safe and we won't have to spend too much time making sure they are safe.

Schools are no better than the parents. Of all the money they get, they spend very little out of every dollar on actual students where they could be hiring people that can educate students about Internet safety.

Any real parent has already learned that forbidding teenagers to do anything is making certain that they WILL do it. Censoring these websites won't work anymore than prohibition worked on adults. These teens know far more about the Internet than their parents and certainly more than teachers whose last days in school was when the TRS80 was the hot new computer.

They will get around whatever system that is put in place and do it more because you are trying to forbid them than any other reason. The idiot republicans behind this law are desperate to retain voters that are tired of the bush-neo-con-almightier-than-thou-crowd and they think that banning teenagers from myspace will do it for them.

More things that just piss me off
What Pisses You Off? Start Your Own Blog Free!

The actual proposed law that would block social networking websites.

borrowed quotes from;


Webmaster Advice

Okay, this really pisses me off. You go to a webmaster forum and you see someone puts their website up to be reviewed by other webmasters. Then 2 or 3 webmasters start criticizing the website and talking about all the flaws.

Then you look in the webmasters sigline for their own websites and find out they have a couple of adsense monetized webpages with 0 page rank and no traffic.

What makes some of these guys think that buying an adsense website on Ebay qualifies them to criticize anyone else's website?

More things that just piss me off


Google Sued Over Child Porn

"Google has made child pornography an "obscenely profitable and integral part" of its business and must be stopped, a new lawsuit claims.

Child Porn Lawsuit
Jeffrey Toback and Child Porn Lawsuit

Jeffrey Toback, a Democratic representative in New York's Nassau County Legislature, charged in a complaint filed Thursday that Google has been taking in billions of dollars by allowing child pornography and "other obscene content" operators to advertise their sites through sponsored links, which are tailored to a user's search terms and automatically accompany search results. The suit was filed in the New York Supreme Court."
Legislator Toback has also proposed a law to raise the legal age to purchase tobacco products in Nassau County from 18 to 19. Called TOBACCO 19, the law would make it more difficult for younger teenagers to “pass” for the legal age, adding a substantial obstacle to their purchasing tobacco products. Yes, let's punish legal adults because some minors look older than they should.

Among other allegations, the complaint evoked the politically volatile topic of the search engine's dealings in China.

"Defendant is willing to accede to the demands of the Chinese autocrats to block the search term 'democracy,'" the complaint states, "but when it comes to the protection and well-being of our nation's innocent children, Defendant refuses to spend a dime's worth of resources to block child pornography from reaching children."
And exactly what does Google's china business have to do with child porn. I think Legislator Toback has a hard time staying focused.
Google Child Porn Case
A Google representative said Friday that the company prohibits child pornography in its products and removes all such content whenever the company finds or is made aware of it. "We also report it to the appropriate law enforcement officials and fully cooperate with the law enforcement community to combat child pornography," spokesman Steve Langdon said in an e-mail.

Langdon pointed to the content policy for Google's AdWords sponsored links service, which broadly prohibits "promotion of child pornography or other non-consensual material." Langdon also noted that Google offers a filtering tool called SafeSearch that aims to block offensive content in search results.
Which is what they should do. All companies that provide search and other access to online material should make some attempt to make sure they are not facilitating any illegal activity including child pornography.
The suit was filed by the White Plains, N.Y.-based firm of Meiselman, Denlea, Packman, Carton & Eberz. Other recent lawsuits filed by the firm have sought at least $10 million for alleged sex discrimination against Atlantic City, N.J., casino cocktail waitresses and $600 million from the maker of an ephedra-based dietary supplement claimed to cause the death of a Baltimore Orioles pitcher.

Toback, the politician backing the action, describes himself in his biography on Nassau County's Web site as a "quality of life guy" who has focused on legislation promoting open space and recreational areas. He has also co-sponsored a law designed to protect teenagers from tanning beds and has planned this year to pursue a ban of toy guns in the area.
Legislator Toback also co-sponsored a law to protect Nassau teens from the harmful effects of indoor tanning devices that requires anyone under the age of 18 who wishes to use a tanning facility to have signed, written consent from his or her parent.

More things that just piss me off


RIAA after Colleges now

Well at least they are going after people who are doing file sharing that are older than 13 now.

As part of the entertainment industry’s efforts to address the ongoing theft of music and movies online by college students, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) today announced a systematic program to identify and curtail campus Local Area Network (“LAN”) piracy at universities across the country. As part of this new program, the RIAA and MPAA today sent letters to 40 university presidents in 25 states alerting them of LAN piracy problems on their campuses and encouraging immediate action to stop and prevent theft by such means.
Yes, we must all spend money to add software to networks, just because the RIAA says so.

We cannot ignore the growing misuse of campus LAN systems or the toll this means of theft is taking on our industry. As we prioritize our focus on campus LAN piracy in the coming year, we hope administrators will take this opportunity to fully evaluate their systems and take action to stop theft by all means.”
Achtung! Ve must protect our product. Ve Vill begin torture of anyone who shares files Vith Von another!


In letters sent today, the RIAA and MPAA notified 40 university presidents of information indicating campus LAN piracy problems on their campuses. The universities receiving these letters are located in the following 25 states: California, Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and Washington, DC.
Ve vill no longer tolerate this. These states must now stop this activitiy or ve vill be forced to invade your states!

Lawsuits and filtering clearly aren't enough to stop college students from swapping music files. As if coercive university Napster taxes aren't bad enough, it is likely that RIAA tactics will continue to become more invasive as they search for new ways to force fans to pay up. It's not out of the quesiton that RIAA may try to get Congress to mandate use of filtering technologies at universities. Given the current climate in Washington, it's not far-fetched to imagine our elected representatives threatening to cut federal funding for universities that refuse to install filters.
Ve vill cut your . . . vunding off. Ve have vays of making you cooperate.

The Article

More things that just piss me off


Why ICANN gets captured by Special Interests

Now, this is a great example of how the whole ICANN process has been captured by poeple who have only their own interests in mind.

Michael Mann owns, but ALSO owns buy domains. He is in the domain name speculation business. He registers some dot org domains then sells them at a profit to charities that need them. Granted, he also gives the use of some of them away on his hosting to organizations. However, his business is buying and selling domain names.

Now The Public Interest Registry (PIR) the registry service provider for .org domains, today announced the appointment of seven new Worldwide Advisory Council members and a new representative from the ICANN Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) to fill expiring term open seats.

Michal Mann is filling one of those seats. Funny how they announce that. "Michael Mann of", not "Michael Mann of"

The Rest of The Story

BuyDomains Holdings, Inc.
7831 Woodmont Ave Ste 347
Bethesda, MD 20814-3007


Registrant Name Michael Mann
Registrant Street1 7831 Woodmont Ave Ste 338
Registrant City Bethesda
Registrant State/Province MD
Registrant Postal Code 20814-3007
Registrant Country US
Registrant Phone +1.2404657100
Registrant FAX +1.2404657100
Registrant Email

It's not illegal to buy and sell domain names. But for the PIR to make it look like they put him on there because he is so charitable and has only pure motives is a joke. Again, if they had said Michael Mann of it might have been a tad more honest and upfront. But that isn't something the PIR or ICANN does often anyway. Transparency isn't their strong suit.

More things that just piss me off


FDA Working for the Pharmaceutical Companies to ban Ephedra

You know, it really pisses me off when our government agencies that are supposed to protect consumers begin to represent the industry they are supposed to police.

The FCC does it. They favor big media conglomerates to monopolize the news by allowing them to buy out other news organizations. The rules were in place so that "free press" would actually mean something. Instead allowing these buyouts means there will be a much smaller number of people controlling the news you hear. But thats another topic for another day.

The SEC does it. They allow corporations and wallstreet to cheat investors, consumers, and taxpayers out of money, then change the law so that what the corporations did wasn't illegal after all. But thats another topic for another day.

Food and Drug Administration

The FDA is supposed to protect us from the Pharmaceutical Industry. According to their mission statement;

The FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, medical devices, our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation. The FDA is also responsible for advancing the public health by helping to speed innovations that make medicines and foods more effective, safer, and more affordable; and helping the public get the accurate, science-based information they need to use medicines and foods to improve their health.
Prescription drug prices
Yet, the FDA has allowed prescription drug prices to soar in this country. So much for that affordable part. They have backed the pharmaceutical companies efforts to bar consumers from getting their prescription drugs from other countries where it can be purchased cheaper. So much for protecting the consumer from higher prices.

prescription drug tv advertising

They have allowed the pharmaceutical companies to advertise drugs on TV using misleading information to consumers. So much for the protecting the public health part. What happens is this. The rules the FDA uses to police those TV ads states the pharmaceutical company has 30 days AFTER the FDA notifies them to pull down the ad. That means the pharmaceutical companies can run any ad they want, say whatever they want, as long as they only plan to run the ad for 30 days. There is absolutely no penalty given to the pharmaceutical companies for placing the misleading ad in the first place. As I said, so much for protecting the public health.

ephedra is a natural herb

Now in regards to Ephedra. It is a natural supplement not produced by the labs of the major pharmaceutical companies that run the FDA. Under recent amendments to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the agency has to act product-by-product and the legal burden is now on the FDA to show that a marketed product is unsafe, rather than on the company to gain FDA approval by showing that the product is safe before it is marketed.


That law applies to natural products such as ephedra or ma huang or herbal tea, st. johns wart, etc. The FDA must show that the drug is unsafe before banning it. The importers of these natural remedies do not have to prove they are safe. The burden of proof is on the FDA. Now in that mission statement above it says, "helping the public get the accurate, science-based information."

Yet, the FDA has not proven that ephedra is unsafe in the recommended dosages listed on the products that were sold over the counter. What has been proven is that ephedra was very effective at promoting weight loss and giving users more energy without any adverse side effects.

This means a lot of it was being sold, cutting into the profits of the pharmaceutical companies. The FDA can't allow those pharmaceutical comapnies to lose money to natural remedies.

steve belcher
The case they used was that of Steve Belcher, the baseball player

He was well known so his death made a great rallyiung point for banning ephedra. A medical examiner said probably Bechler's use of a supplement containing ephedrine, contributed to the cause of death. A bottle of that supplement was found in Bechler's locker.

But when they used his case to get rid of the evil ephedra that was cutting into the major pharmaceutical comapnies bottom line, they forgot to mention that these other factors contributed to Steve belcher's death.

* a history of borderline high blood pressure

* liver abnormalities detected two years ago but not diagnosed

* warm, humid weather during the workout

* he was on a diet and hadn't eaten much food the previous two days

* apparent use of Xenadrine RFA-1 an over-the-counter drug that contains ephedrine

* an apparent overdose of Xenadrine, using 150% of the recommended dosage

* reporting to spring training at 249 pounds, 10 pounds above his listed weight

* reporting to spring training out of shape, was pulled from conditioning drills

* did not participate regularly in team workouts, during the offseason

It was all these factors combined, apparently that contributed to Steve's death, not just the use of an over the counter, dietary supplement. Cytodyne Technologies, which makes Xenadrine, said in a statement "Physicians warn that many adverse events related to ephedra are due to people taking more than the recommended dosages.

Xenadrine has been the subject of numerous clinical trials on people, which have conclusively demonstrated that the product is safe and effective when used as directed."

Then it became political and the actual facts didn't matter much. Recntly a federal judge in Utah ruled that the FDA had not proven that ephedra at the recommended dosage was unsafe and ordered them to no longer confiscate shipments of the supplement.

The FDA is appealing, but did not ask the judge to stay the ruling until the appeal could be heard, which is the normal legal practice. Instead the FDA has chosen to simply ignore the judges ruling altogether and have continued to illegally confiscate the shipments. They have even done so in that same judge's jurisdiction.

It seems the FDA feels that any ruling against them by even a federal judge means nothing. Their loyalty to big pharmaceutical companies is all that matters. They have lost one lawsuit over ephedra and now are headed back to court being sued by yet another company.

When they lost the first lawsuit that said they couldn't confiscate ephedra shipments, they interpreted it as they couldn't stop that one company from shipping ephedra but were still free to do so to all other companies.

Their legal team has decided that each comapny must sue them individually. What a moronic idea. Ever hear of precedent? Ever hear of don't piss off a federal judge in HER own jurisdiction? Can't wait for the judge to hear this latest lawsuit.

More things that just piss me off
Who Let The Blog Out?

Home Owners Hire Half of Illegal Immigrants

Everyone keeps saying, "Illegal Immigrants do the jobs Americans won't do." Thats the catch phrase of all those who think we should grant citizenship to all illegal immigrants. Some of them even believe that.

illegal immigration and social security

The facts are different. First of all, if you granted them all citizenship, it is unfair to all those from all other countries who came here, filled out all the forms, stood in the lines, paid out the money, went to classes, and waited for legal US Citizen status.

You would instead be rewarding illegal behavior. Never been a good idea that started with granting favors to people who break the law.

Illegal Immigration

Secondly, the only big winners in the whole illegal immigrant issue are the big corporation and the rich who want cheap labor and refuse to pay a living wage, pay into social security which needs the money, and pay employment taxes as well as health care.

The illegals get treated like garbage by these employers. No health care or workman's compensation. They pay them less money than they would pay anyone else. They work them longer hours with no overtime. They work them in unsafe conditions. They can do all of this because illegals can't complain about not being treated fairly by employers.

Allowing illegal immigrants to come here and work is not doing them any favors. If they went through the process to become citizens then they would have the rights that all American citizens have. Minimum wage would apply. Workman's compensation would be mandatory. Employment taxes would be paid and that eases the burden on legitimate employers. Social Security would be paid into for each of these workers, which is not only good for them, it's good for social security that bush claims is going broke.

And now, statistics show that The number one employers of day laborers, many of whom are illegal immigrants, are homeowners -- not construction contractors, not professional landscapers, not those jobs that no American will do.

Forty-nine percent of day labor employers are homeowners, according to 2,660 laborers interviewed for the study. Contractors were second, at 43 percent. The study also found that three quarters of day laborers were illegal immigrants and most were from Latin America.

Homeowners like the men who call themselves "jornaleros" because they make up a flexible labor pool with no red tape and no overhead. And they'll do backbreaking jobs much cheaper than regular contractors.
Dodging red tape like taxes and social security and health care and safety rules.

Don't believe the hype. Click Here for the Rest of The Story

More things that just piss me off
Find Real Estate and More! Visit
Visit the Blog!


Domain Name Registration and Parking for Profit

google adsense

Google Inc., which runs the largest ad network on the Internet, is making millions of dollars a year by filling otherwise unused Web sites with ads. In many instances, these ad-filled pages appear when users mistype an Internet address, such as ""
But according to the google terms of service, you can't use typo domain names in the google adsense program.
This new form of advertising is turning into a booming business that some say is cluttering the Internet and could be violating trademark rules. It also has sparked a speculative frenzy of investment in domain names, pushing the value of some beyond the $1 million mark.
Psst . . . Wanna Buy Some Domains?
domain name registration
Google specifically bars Web addresses that infringe on trademarks from using its ad network, but a review of placeholder Web sites that result from misspelled domain names of well-known companies found that many of the ads on those pages come directly from Google.
Hmmm. You can't do that! Bad doggie! We'll do it though.
Google is defending its business practices, saying that it removes participating sites from its ad network if a trademark owner complains that those sites are confusingly similar -- even though close misspellings don't necessarily prove that a legal infringement has occurred. "Unless it is confusing to somebody, trademark law doesn't apply," said Rose Hagan, Google's chief trademark lawyer.
Ahhhh, so making a business out of violating trademark law is okay as long as you pull it down when someone sends a cease and desist order?
The Silicon Valley search giant is the largest but not the only ad network showing ads on placeholder Web pages. Yahoo and Australian firm Dark Blue Sea run similar services.

This form of online advertising relies on "type-in traffic": users who type the information they're looking for directly into the Web browser's address bar instead of using a search engine to scour the Web. Industry analysts estimate that 15 percent of all Web traffic originates this way.

That has created a demand for a practice known as domain parking, which involves owners of a domain name "parking" that name with a firm that creates placeholder pages and then inviting Google or other Internet ad networks to fill them with ads. When Web surfers arrive at those sites and click on those ads, Google and Yahoo get paid by advertisers for that click and share their revenue with the owners of the domain names.
Type-in traffic is nothing new. This is more like depending on TYPO-IN Traffic.
Opinion is divided on these type of ad pages. Some say they are nothing more than frustrating junk pages. Others, including those who speculate on potential traffic of a specific domain name, say they help people find information related to what they're looking for.

"We want those pages to function as alternatives to search engines," said Matthew Bentley, chief strategy officer for Sedo, a large parking service that manages more than 1 million unused addresses placed with the Google ad network.

The parked ad pages are mostly unattractive, but Sedo, Google and Yahoo have all said that they are working to improve them by adding more information. The parking service usually handles the creation of the ad sites.
Okay, now that is just bs. They don't plan to add more information as long as people are clicking the ads. They will continue to condone the behavior if it makes them money.

Advertisers are the ones who lose here initially because the quality of the traffic they are getting is going to be terrible. Then all of those with legitimate websites that utilize adsense and yahoo publisher will suffer next because of all the trash pages driving advertisers away from the program altogether.

Adsense and yahoo publisher were good ideas until greed took over. Calling sedo a legitimate business is just a joke.

More things that just piss me off

Former Owners Buy

Leading Domain Name Registrar eNom, Inc. Purchased by Group Led by Former Chairman Richard Rosenblatt; Paul Stahura Named President and COO of Demand Media, Inc.

BELLEVUE, Wash.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 1, 2006-- eNom, Inc. (, one of the world's largest Internet domain name registrars, announced that it has been acquired by Demand Media, Inc., a new company headed by former chairman, and former CEO of Intermix Media, Richard Rosenblatt. Los Angeles-based Demand Media will broaden eNom's offerings by developing proprietary content tools and technologies, as well as new online advertising opportunities for eNom's clients.
Hmmm. What kind of new advertising opportunities?

With the acquisition, Paul Stahura, eNom founder and CEO, becomes president and chief operating officer of Demand Media. Terms of the private sale were not disclosed.
That's good for Paul. What about us Resellers?

"For eNom's valued network of resellers and retail customers, the acquisition represents no changes to existing relationships," assured Stahura. "We will continue to offer domain name and related services under the eNom brand, which is one of the strongest in the domain-name business. eNom's resellers can be confident that the company will continue to build and enhance its infrastructure, enabling eNom to offer an even more robust suite of services."
Okay. We'll see soon enough I guess. Gonna give us prices that can compete with GoDaddy?

"Media companies and advertising networks are now recognizing the central role a domain name plays in bringing users to Internet properties," added Stahura. "The added capital from Demand Media will accelerate our commitment to grow our business as an ICANN-accredited domain name registrar and provider of high-quality value added services."
I sure hope this is a good thing.

Demand Media, Inc's Chairman and CEO Richard Rosenblatt, described by the Wall Street Journal as a "serial Internet entrepreneur," ran's parent company, Intermix Media Inc., and negotiated its sale to News Corp. for more than $650 million last year. Richard was also the founding investor and vice-chairman of Great Domains, as well as Chairman and CEO of iMALL, Inc. In addition to eNom, Inc., Demand Media, Inc. also purchased San Francisco-based eHow Inc., which provides niche content for websites.
Hmmm. The fact that he helped start worries me a lot.

That is the website where you paid $75 for a domain name appraisal and no matter how bad your domain name was, they appraised it for thousands of dollars so you would go out and register more domain names and come back to have them appraised for thousands of dollars too.

They once displayed a domain name they appraised on their front page. in which wanteds isn't even a word and said it was worth $75,000.

About eNom

eNom is an ICANN accredited company offering world-class Internet domain name services at competitive prices. In business since 1997, eNom specializes in domain name registration and related services, and is the #1 reseller registrar, according to Name Intelligence(R), with the largest and most active distribution network in the domain industry. eNom currently ranks as the third largest domain name registrar worldwide.
I've been loyal to enom for a long time. Now I will have to wait to see how many changes these guys are going to make. I'll wait and see before I fill out that form at GoDaddy though.

More things that just piss me off


Why AT&T will be able to control downloads

Right now congress is working on passing a law to allow the big telecoms like AT&T to charge companies more money to offer downloads. They want to create a two-tiered Internet.

They will be allowed to do so and the law will be passed because AT&T and the others have been cooperating and doing favors for the bush administration.

SAN FRANCISCO, April 28 — The government asked a federal judge here Friday to dismiss a civil liberties lawsuit against the AT&T Corporation because of a possibility that military and state secrets would otherwise be disclosed.

The lawsuit, accusing the company of illegally collaborating with the National Security Agency in a vast surveillance program, was filed in February by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties group.

The class-action suit, which seeks an end to the collaboration it alleges, is based in part on the testimony of Mark Klein, a retired technician for the company who says Internet data passing through an AT&T switching center in San Francisco is being diverted to a secret room. There, Mr. Klein says, the security agency has installed powerful computers to eavesdrop without warrants on the digital data and forward the information to an undisclosed place.
The bush administration will pay them back now by giving them the two-tiered Internet system and will protect them from any lawsuits brought up by the favors they are doing.

The Rest of The Story

In a related story, see how the government is also requiring ISPs to retain your information.

More things that just piss me off

Lies Sex and Videotape

Well, okay, without bill clinton in office, maybe not sex, but lies and videotape are still here.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The FBI secretly sought information last year on 3,501 U.S. citizens and legal residents from their banks and credit card, telephone and Internet companies without a court's approval, the Justice Department said Friday.

Wait a minute.
Bush when asked about renewal of the patriot act said ""Key provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire next year," Bush said. "The terrorist threat will not expire on that schedule. Our law enforcement needs this vital legislation to protect our citizens--you need to renew the Patriot Act."
Protect us by spying on us without the need for a warrant?

Many portions of the Patriot Act have no expiration date. One part makes it much easier for police to learn the identities of a target's e-mail correspondents and Web pages visited; another permits police to learn information about an Internet subscriber, such as credit card or bank account numbers and temporarily assigned network addresses, without seeking a judge's approval first. The section that permits "sneak and peek" warrants, which authorize surreptitious searches of homes and businesses, also does not expire.
Where is that "This is only temporary" bit that bush used to get the patriot act passed in the first place?

When President Bush signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act, he included an addendum saying that he did not feel obliged to obey requirements that he inform Congress about how the FBI was using the act's expanded police powers.
Now we see why he didn't feel the need to obey the requirements and disclose how it is being used. And on yet another website bush says . . .
"Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."
Hmmm, let's scroll back up to today's news again . . .
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The FBI secretly sought information last year on 3,501 U.S. citizens and legal residents from their banks and credit card, telephone and Internet companies without a court's approval, the Justice Department said Friday.
So . . . Nothing has changed? It still requires a warrant?

because "we care about the constitution"?

Today's news doesn't seem to agree with that.
The Rest of The Story

More things that just piss me off

Whois or not to whois - That is the question

ICANN will soon be deciding whether or not you have to enter your information into the whois database when you own a domain name.

Privacy advocates say that people should not have to enter their contact information because of spammers and other privacy issues.

Other's like law enforcement say they need the whois information to find out who owns a website that is committing fraud as in the fraudulent red cross donation websites that cropped up after hurricane katrina.

Personally, I believe that we have some expectation of privacy as citizens of the US, however, I do not believe it is a good idea to not require information in the whois for a domain name. I use that information all the time before I decide to buy something from someone. I want to know who I am dealing with.

I believe that consumer protection outweighs privacy in this instance.

More things that just piss me off

Falwell, Fallwell

Legal Briefs (Gay)
Supreme Court won’t hear Falwell’s appeal against gay man
Friday, April 28, 2006

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on April 17 declined to accept Rev. Jerry Falwell’s appeal of a case that sought to shut down a website with a similar name but opposite views. Falwell claimed that a gay New York man improperly draws people to a site by using a common misspelling of the minister’s name as the site’s domain name. A federal judge sided with Falwell, who runs a Virginia-based ministries, on grounds that Christopher Lamparello’s domain name was nearly identical to the trademark bearing Falwell’s name and could confuse web surfers. Last year, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed and said Lamparello was free to operate his "gripe site" about Falwell’s views on gays at Lamparello "clearly created his website intending only to provide a forum to criticize ideas, not to steal customers," the court said. The Jerry Falwell Ministries site is
You are allowed to create parodies and opposing view websites on similar domain names. Freedom of speech allows for that.
Lamparello says Falwell is wrong for preaching that gay people are sinners who can change their sexual orientation. Three years ago, an Illinois man surrendered the domain names and after Falwell threatened to sue for trademark infringement.
Romans: 1:26 and 27 "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

So about the part where he says Falwell is wrong, well only if you think the bible is wrong.

More things that just piss me off

Powered by Blogger