Ok, I have to admit I love Stephen Colbert. He is so funny ... well, at least 50% of the time. Now, I know this is old, but I was a little behind on my DVR, so I just saw it yesterday, but I have to share this, because it is just too funny.
Background: Aaron Barr (of HB Gary) reportedly suggested to BofA (who reportedly got in contact with Barr at the suggestion of the Law Firm of Hunton & Williams, who was recommended to them [BofA] by the US Justice Department) that they should hire him (Barr) to hack WikiLeaks and plant false information to discredit them (WikiLeaks). Confused? Read it again ... it'll make sense.
So Barr tells BofA he can hack WikiLeaks and ruin them, but WikiLeaks has a self-appointed cyber guard called Anonymous, a group of independent hackers dedicated to, among other things, protecting WikiLeaks. I have to transcribe this next part directly from Stephen Colbert, because it is just too funny exactly the way Stephen and his writers created it:
_quote:
But first, he had to take out WikiLeaks Guard Dog, Anonymous. Barr threatened Anonymous by telling the Financial Times he had collected information on their core leaders, including many of their real names. Now, to put that in hacker terms, Anonymous is a hornets' nest, and Barr said, I'm going to stick my penis in that thing...
Because, faster than you could say, "Get these hornets off my penis!" Anonymous took down Barr's website, stole his emails, deleted the company's backup data, trashed his twitter account and remotely wiped his iPad.
And he had just reached the Ham 'em High level on Angry Birds. Anonymous then published all of Barr's emails, including one from his wife saying, "I will file for divorce," AND Barr's World of Warcraft name, "sevrynsten." That's right, they ruined BOTH his lives!
_end quote.
I don't really have a comment here, other than, "um...yeah...people gotta watch what they say they can do. Don't piss off the wrong people. We all need to play nice in the sandbox."
Maybe Charlie Sheen should have extrapolated this lesson to his situation ... The broadcast was from before he started really pissing people off, I think.
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Friday, March 4, 2011
Charlie Sheen
I don't get Charlie Sheen's preference for porn stars.
If he was just going for a pretty face with big chichis, I think he would end up with fewer porn stars. Let's face it, people watching porn are not looking at faces.
I wonder if he thinks he'll get more sex from a porn star than a 'regular Jane.' I would think that would not be the case. I mean, they spend all day doing that at work. I would think they would come home to a horny Chuck and be all, "Awww, come on, Charlie! I just had four guys banging me for the last 6 hours! I need a break. Maybe tomorrow, ok?"
I mean, when I was in my internship, I delivered 85 babies in two months of OB/GYN. I know that the last thing I wanted to see when I got home was another vagina. If any job could turn a man gay, it's gotta be Obstetrician. The most beautiful experience in the world my butt! It's all a bunch of screaming, gushing, oozing, and juggling of the slime covered lizard that arrives ... not only do I not want to go home and see another vagina, I never want to do anything that would cause my wife to create such a mess!
I can't imagine that he's looking for status. "Look at me ... I bagged a porn star!" Right or wrong (I think most likely WRONG), people would tend to think, "Um ... how hard is that? She's a porn star ... gotta be a nympho." And while I think most porn stars would probably not be like this, I think the ones who are hanging out with Chucky are most likely in it for the money and/or exposure.
Then again, I know zero porn stars ... for all I know, they're using "porn star" as a euphemism for "prostitute," in which case it all makes sense ... Chucky is paying to have some arm candy hanging around, and probably even offer up the sexual side of the equation on demand.
Not a great financial plan, but at least it's a well defined business agreement.
If he was just going for a pretty face with big chichis, I think he would end up with fewer porn stars. Let's face it, people watching porn are not looking at faces.
I wonder if he thinks he'll get more sex from a porn star than a 'regular Jane.' I would think that would not be the case. I mean, they spend all day doing that at work. I would think they would come home to a horny Chuck and be all, "Awww, come on, Charlie! I just had four guys banging me for the last 6 hours! I need a break. Maybe tomorrow, ok?"
I mean, when I was in my internship, I delivered 85 babies in two months of OB/GYN. I know that the last thing I wanted to see when I got home was another vagina. If any job could turn a man gay, it's gotta be Obstetrician. The most beautiful experience in the world my butt! It's all a bunch of screaming, gushing, oozing, and juggling of the slime covered lizard that arrives ... not only do I not want to go home and see another vagina, I never want to do anything that would cause my wife to create such a mess!
I can't imagine that he's looking for status. "Look at me ... I bagged a porn star!" Right or wrong (I think most likely WRONG), people would tend to think, "Um ... how hard is that? She's a porn star ... gotta be a nympho." And while I think most porn stars would probably not be like this, I think the ones who are hanging out with Chucky are most likely in it for the money and/or exposure.
Then again, I know zero porn stars ... for all I know, they're using "porn star" as a euphemism for "prostitute," in which case it all makes sense ... Chucky is paying to have some arm candy hanging around, and probably even offer up the sexual side of the equation on demand.
Not a great financial plan, but at least it's a well defined business agreement.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
The Oscars
So I wanted to say something about the Oscars, but I didn't get a chance to write yesterday.
James Franco has got to be gay. That's the only explanation I can find for his performance on Sunday night. Anne Hathaway did a great job with the material she was given (and wow! I had no idea she could sing that well!) She engaged the audience and even tried to engage James.
But he was having none of it. I mean, even if Anne had rotten teeth, a gall bladder problem and had just eaten a garlic and onion sandwich, her breath could not have been so awful that it could explain James being so intent on not looking at her. It was as if he found her mere existence disgusting and disdainful. Perhaps he skipped his Oscar after-party and hopped a plane back home so he could kiss his boyfriend and get the bad aftertaste out of his mouth.
It was also painfully obvious that he was HUI (hosting under the influence). Even in the pre-show interviews he was acting strange, and curiously enchanted by one interviewer's iPhone, as if he had never seen such a device before in his life. I would have totally understood if Anne had kept turning away from him, taking a step or two away to maintain a fresh-air zone.
One wonders if the Academy realizes they'll never recapture the great performaces of previous shows. Billy Crystal came out and showed that great performers still exist. Then they rolled a few clips from Bob Hope's (many) days as MC. They planned this look back...why don't they take their own hint? You want a good show, get a good MC, and that good MC has historically been a great stand-up comedian. Trying to go "younger and hipper" (their words, through Anne Hathaway), they'll never please anyone. They need to go with a good comedian. If you want young, may I suggest John Mulaney, Bo Burnham or Gabriel Iglesias? Bo may be a little too deadpan. I think Adam Ferrara, who is in his 40s, would be a great host and could appeal to a younger crowd. I am trying really had to think of a good female host, but Chelsea Handler has already bombed on another show, Kristen Schaal is good, but can get annoying, and I have not seen Rene Hicks, who is totally a riot, on anything in years. :-(
That aside, Thank GOD King's Speech won. I don't think I could have stomached hearing about that computer/internet related non-documentary (I refuse to even write The Social Network's title ... aww, damn it!) for another 6 months.
Now to focus on the great movies of this year!
James Franco has got to be gay. That's the only explanation I can find for his performance on Sunday night. Anne Hathaway did a great job with the material she was given (and wow! I had no idea she could sing that well!) She engaged the audience and even tried to engage James.
But he was having none of it. I mean, even if Anne had rotten teeth, a gall bladder problem and had just eaten a garlic and onion sandwich, her breath could not have been so awful that it could explain James being so intent on not looking at her. It was as if he found her mere existence disgusting and disdainful. Perhaps he skipped his Oscar after-party and hopped a plane back home so he could kiss his boyfriend and get the bad aftertaste out of his mouth.
It was also painfully obvious that he was HUI (hosting under the influence). Even in the pre-show interviews he was acting strange, and curiously enchanted by one interviewer's iPhone, as if he had never seen such a device before in his life. I would have totally understood if Anne had kept turning away from him, taking a step or two away to maintain a fresh-air zone.
One wonders if the Academy realizes they'll never recapture the great performaces of previous shows. Billy Crystal came out and showed that great performers still exist. Then they rolled a few clips from Bob Hope's (many) days as MC. They planned this look back...why don't they take their own hint? You want a good show, get a good MC, and that good MC has historically been a great stand-up comedian. Trying to go "younger and hipper" (their words, through Anne Hathaway), they'll never please anyone. They need to go with a good comedian. If you want young, may I suggest John Mulaney, Bo Burnham or Gabriel Iglesias? Bo may be a little too deadpan. I think Adam Ferrara, who is in his 40s, would be a great host and could appeal to a younger crowd. I am trying really had to think of a good female host, but Chelsea Handler has already bombed on another show, Kristen Schaal is good, but can get annoying, and I have not seen Rene Hicks, who is totally a riot, on anything in years. :-(
That aside, Thank GOD King's Speech won. I don't think I could have stomached hearing about that computer/internet related non-documentary (I refuse to even write The Social Network's title ... aww, damn it!) for another 6 months.
Now to focus on the great movies of this year!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)