If This Doesn’t Turn You On, Nothing Will

Well, today should be Fuck it Friday when I let down my usual hatred of the non-news reporting media and give my two cents about the “biggest story of the week” which really shouldn’t be a story. (See Michael Phelps blog from last week) Well, as it turns out, I came down with the flu this week and when I’m sick as hell I don’t care much for reading. I watch movies and have fever induced fantasies that usually culminate to me being brutally hurt or murdered. And, for some reason, I still have the ability to think about sex. Imagine that. It was during this particular time I thought of a new childish sex act simply entitled “The Handkerchief”. This is when you stick your nose between a person’s buttocks and blow your nose really hard to get the cheeks flapping like a handkerchief in a cartoon.

Like This but With Ass Cheeks

Okay, so it is pretty lame, I know; but when your brain is baking at a warm 102 degrees, you don’t come up with Pulitzer prize winning material. But, this does bring up a conversation that usually incites a couple of groans and a few disgusted faces. The topic is various sex acts that no one possibly does but for some reason we have a word for them. I’m picking five that have caught my attention over the years. Hopefully, you’ll learn something.

Rusty Trombone: This is when a male stands up, trousers down while his partner kneels behind him and licks his anus while stroking his penis. In this euphemism, the anus can be seen as the mouthpiece of a trombone while the penis is the main slide but where the hell they got rusty is beyond me. Rust is clearly a shade of red while feces are clearly brown. Yes, feces could be a shade of red but then we’re talking blood and feces. That would be like saying rust could be a shade of brown if someone shat on a rusty knife… which would then explain the blood in the feces but anyways, the point is that rust is red and shit is brown. This is a stupid euphemism but then I imagine the guy receiving the rusty trombone starting to make sound effects like he’s actually a trombone and I giggle like a little school girl for hours.

Strawberry Shortcake: When a male ejaculates on his partner’s face and then punches them in the nose causing it to bleed. Quite possibly the best way to ensure one will never, ever, sleep with that person again. There are a lot of acts like this, for example a donkey punch. Frankly, it’s hard enough to get to sleep with anyone so why the fuck would you want to ruin it? Oh, and yes, inflicting senseless violence and pain on someone isn’t cool.

Feltching After a male ejaculates into someone’s anus, someone (including said ejaculated male) drinks the semen out with a straw or really strong lips. Of course, there is the whole “poo” factor that makes this pretty disgusting and the potential of drinking one’s own jizz is pretty bad but those really are not the disgusting parts. The disgusting part is that afterward, your daddy kissed you good night.

Cleveland Steamer or Pasadena Mudslide One partner straddles the other’s upper body to receive oral sex. During oral sex, the receiving partner defecates on the giving partner’s chest. Not the nicest way to say thank you and has always made me wonder, what do you say when this happens? I imagine a women sitting on my face while I eat her out and then all of a sudden I feel a warm mass on my chest. I gently lift her up a little and look what was left on my pectoral muscles. I respond, “Damn, am I really that good?”

Mung: Supposedly, there is some contention as to whether the following description is accurate. Some say it was not the original definition but somehow became part of the it. Probably because they let some 14 year old on Urban Dictionary. Anyways, to mung means an individual and a co-conspirator go out to a cemetery and dig up the corpse of a recently deceased woman. Once she is removed from her earthly tomb, one of the individuals opens the woman’s leg and puts his mouth over her vagina to cover its entirety and create a tight seal. The other individual proceeds to… you know what, this is fucking disgusting. I’m just going to stop while I’m ahead. If you are interested, Google it. Then it’s your problem.

Hope it was educational!

Honorable Mention – The Mike Tyson: Supposedly when you fuck a guy in the ass until he likes it for the sole purpose of calling him a “faggot”. I don’t know; I never understood Tyson.

What I Was Doing Whilst Typing – Listening to Manowar

Can I Bum a Cigarette?

Living in a city center, I’m accustomed to the homeless as there is rarely a day that goes by that I’m not asked at least twice for some kind of handout and the rare days that I’m not asked are the rare days I don’t leave my apartment. I was in a bit of a pissy mood today (another female-less Valentines Day and a cold being the primary reason) and when I was asked to spare a couple of dollars on my way home from work, I toyed briefly with telling the guy to fuck off. Now, I’m normally a compassionate person in that I don’t go out of my way to wish harm or hardships on anyone. I’m also a fairly laid back guy, the dude who can go with the flow no matter which direction it goes and just be chill. But my sudden rush of anger and disgust at a simple question I can politely say no to or just ignore him caught me off guard. No, I didn’t give him cash to make myself feel better but it made me think, why have I recently been annoyed at the homeless or “bums”? Maybe you, faithful reader, feel the same way? Let’s try to see where the problem is.

Smell? Well, where it is true that the homeless smell something resembling rotten cheese mixed with urine and feces, you can’t hold it against them too much, I mean, their homeless which usually implies shower-less as well. I mean they could take a bath in a fountain or river but then we would be subjected to naked homeless and I would almost rather tolerate the fleeting dumpster smell. Of course there are missions and shelters they can clean up at but those places aren’t daily affairs. I’m going to say, this would be an unfair critique.

Lying? Everyone has that story that either happened to them or their friend or their friend’s friend or their friend’s friend’s friend where the homeless guy moves from his begging territory and proceeds to jump into a Ferrari and drive off or pull out a wad of cash that makes us normal working schlubs look like the bums. I’m not sure about that Ferrari story but the wad of cash makes sense. Being homeless they lack a crucial component of having a bank account: a home address. So, if they are “successful” at begging for money, they would have all their worldly money on them. Combine this with handouts like free food and the fact they have no bills and said money accumulates after awhile. I’m not sure if it happens in America (although it wouldn’t be surprising) but in countries like India, they will actually deform children because deformed children will make more money begging. And, no, I didn’t get that from Slumdog Millionaire; I caught that golden nugget of wisdom when I was in India. Same thing with a community baby, which will be a baby shared amongst multiple “mothers” because a women with a screaming demon hanging from her shoulder will garner more money. Supposing similar stuff happens in America, it wouldn’t be too much of a stretch of the imagination where the homeless guy has the sign that says “Please help me, wife and 2 kids starving. Anything will help. God Bless” might not actually be married. It would be vindictive, though, to assume an outright lie. Unless you play 20 questions to trip them up, it would be difficult to call outright bullshit. Even when the transient is shit-faced and asking for money for food, we’ve all had the drunken craving for Taco Bell so they actually may be done drinking and want to put some real fuel in their stomach. Let’s assume they are telling the truth for arguments sake.

Drunk? However, when a bum is asking for cash when they are hammered, why the fuck should one believe they are going to do anything other than drink more. In the same note of the drunken craving for Taco Bell, there is also that drunken craving for another shot of tequila. And, frankly, does anyone want to really support that? Oh, it’s funny when the guy comes up and says “Hey, why lie? I need a buck for a beer” and you’re like “Haha, well at least he’s honest… hell I know I would want a beer!” Yeah, it’s hilarious that unlike the other contributing members of society, all that SOME (don’t want to get caught generalizing here) homeless people do is spend life in a perpetual state of drunkenness doing fuck-all. In fact, it could be the alcoholism that could have got some of these people where they are today. Contributing to this eventually leads to you walking down the street going, “why the hell does it smell like piss?”. Notice the shops around? See the sign in almost every door: “No Public Restroom”. Now, to be fair and bring up the point I mentioned earlier, it isn’t fair to generalize and to say every bum was a drunkard wouldn’t be fair and to assume every bum that came up to you was a drunk would be judgmental.

Assholes? Once again, this doesn’t apply to all homeless. There are some really nice homeless people out there. But there are also some assholes. You know the ones; they don’t thank you when you give them money or a cigarette or they refuse food and just “want some money”. I was once outside on a smoke break and this guy came up to me and asked for a cigarette. I gave him one. Then he asked for $10. I said he was aiming a little high to which he replies, “You fucking office jerk-offs are all the same. Have fun driving your Corvette tonight” and took off. Suffice to say, I don’t own a Corvette; I work IT which doesn’t give you Corvette comfort… may Ford Focus comfort but definitely not Corvette comfort. I digress on this point but I get shit pretty often, especially when I politely refuse to give a handout. I guess they have nothing to lose so they might as well share their disgust but honestly, that’s no way to get repeat business. However, once again, you cannot assume every homeless person coming up to you is an asshole, so this still can’t be the point of contention.

Priorities? Actually, more often than not, you can generalize that if a bum asks you for money and you offer a substitute like food or coffee instead, you will be declined. Logically, time spent eating is time spent away from begging and it is kind of hard to feel sorry and give handouts to a person in the middle of eating a Big Mac or drinking from a Starbucks cup. But, biologically, it makes more sense to have food in your stomach than money in your pocket. But since we still can’t go absolute on this fact, as I have experienced several times a homeless person taking my offer of a hot lunch or accepting left overs, this still cannot be the point.

Conclusion? So, what is the reason? We’ve looked at the five most common stereo-types/gripes about homeless people and all of them are not absolutes. In actuality, there is no definitive reason to hate homeless. Oh, there can be a combination of the above but since none are definitive there is truly no reason to be annoyed by homeless people. Now, that isn’t to say it is “wrong” to be annoyed or that it makes a person any less compassionate. Yes, most of us have extra to give but why? Is it our societal duty to help the homeless? I guess it is what Jesus would do but he’s the son of God, you can’t expect us all to live up to that standard. I’m not being cruel but no one knows what the next day will bring. Maybe you’ll be two smokes short of your usual consumption and are now stuck at work with no option but to get crabby not having your cigarette break. Perhaps that dollar was going to be converted into quarters for laundry but now you have to go make a withdrawal from an ATM and argue with the minimal English speaking clerk at 7/11 to break said $20. Perhaps you just had a really shitty day and don’t feel out-going and charitable. Maybe underneath it all, some of us are just selfish. I honestly don’t know but I wish there was a verifiable reason to be put off by the homeless. In the absence of one, I’ll make one up:

They Have it Good Compared to other countries, especially third world countries, our homeless have a much easier time. They are better fed, better clothed, better tolerated and have a much higher life expectancy. The only problem with this theory is that it implies you should help out people in those countries. Dammit, just forget the whole thing.

Michael Phelps – Innocent Idiot

It’s Fuck It Friday. Well, that was a bit presumptuous to assume you would know what that means; allow me to explain. I’ve decided that despite my utter hatred for the vomit that is the news media in America, Friday is a day in which no one gives a shit. The work week is done and now it’s time to drink. So, if I’m not in the middle of a theme, I’ll devote Friday as Fuck It Friday and take the week’s most trashy, over played story and give my two cents on it. Why? Because it’s Friday, so fuck it.

A little background before going into the story of the week, Michael Phelps is a pot smoker who may soon get busted by cops with apparently nothing better to do than run sensationalistic investigations and be all around media whores. Michael Phelps, whom about 4 billion people in this world know, is the Lance Armstrong of swimming. Winning 8 gold medals, he makes 99.99% of the world’s population look like wet towels stuffed with rotten cheese. Of course, not all of us can make careers as athletes but this 23 year old boy showed everyone up including the French, which is A-OK in my book. A demi-god amongst men, he is an inspiration to all of us desk jockeys and couch potatoes that at least someone is out there pushing the physical limits of the mortal shell God gave us. And I bet he gets a lot of ass.

But I digress. It turns out he’s actually pretty normal, down to the occasional marijuana usage and letting his jackass friends take pictures of said usage. And now, in a bizarre turn of events, the police in bum-fuck-nowhere South Carolina are arresting people in connection with said picture and questioning them solely about Michael Phelps’ participation in the shenanigans. I’ll repeat that. The cops are ARRESTING people in connection with the Michael Phelps’ photo to QUESTION them. Since when did you have to fucking arrest someone to question them? I suppose it is because of potential possession charges but only Phelps was pictured. How much investigation went into figuring out who was at the party and who to bring in? And the charge is only $300 with up to 30 days in jail. This will end up costing tax payers more money than it will bring in and in the fucked up state our economy is in right now, that ain’t right. Anyways, the whole point of the investigation is to bring Phelps in on drug charges. That would be $300 for the possession of the actual marijuana (misdemeanor) and $500 for the paraphernalia. Wait, what the hell? It is a larger fine to have the bong than to have the actual pot? WHERE THE HELL IS THIS? Bizzarro World? Jesus, Jerry Seinfeld was right.

Now of course, there is the legality. Yes, Phelps broke the law and the police are obligated to bring his ass, no matter how trim and cut, in for justice. But hold on, this is a college town. Are you telling me that every fucking pot smoker is brought in? I mean, do these cops troll MySpace and FaceBook just looking for people posting pics and go “AHA! I see a bong in the background! Book ’em Dano.”. This is preposterous. This police department saw an opportunity for sensationalist bullshit and decided to jump on it. Frankly, I think they are arresting Phelps for the wrong crime. They should arrest him for the inevitable assault that will happen when he beat’s his “friend’s” ass to a mushy pulp for (a) taking the picture and (b) letting it fall in the hands of the press. I mean, the news media does a lot of crazy shit but they won’t break into your house, rummage through your stuff and steal something “news” worthy. So that means someone really went out of their way to give this up. Phelps must find him and destroy him. I guess this is why I’m not a legal advisor.

A couple of other thoughts to fully thresh this out. First, apparently in this county, anything under an ounce is a misdemeanor, otherwise it is a drug trafficking charge which means hard time. Now, let’s look at Phelps. The man has lungs that could inhale 12.3% of the available air on Earth in one breath. So, in theory, if he is arrested, it would be perfectly acceptable to arrest him for having over an ounce of pot. By my mathematically sound calculations, of which I’m so confident in I need not bother to share, Michael Phelps requires a 6 foot bong made out of PCV pipe and a giant salad bowl.

This field was grown specially for Michael Phelps’ second bong hit, ironically not pictured.

Second thought: Michael Phelps’ lawyer must be an out of touch idiot. Blame the whole damn thing on Photoshop and be done. Just drive the fact that kids with their computers can do just about anything. Don’t believe me? I never smoke pot, but guess what I was able to do in 5 minutes with minimal (correction, absolutely no) effort:

Baby's hand may or may not have been added for dramatic effect

So, am I a pot smoking hippie bent on overthrowing the world in search of munchies and a place to mellow out? Absolutely not, but if you let the picture talk, well that would be a different story.

I guess I really don’t give a shit what happens but honestly I’m disappointed that our society is still primarily living with “reefer madness” fear and thinking that a kid with a bong is the worst thing in the world. And all the meantime, we are losing focus on the 1,000+ page stimulus bill (which I’ll write about shortly as soon as I finish skimming it… I bought the cliff notes online from the Treasury department), potential political discussions with Iran that haven’t taken place in over 30 years, North Korea being dicks again, Australian wild fires (poor koalas and kangaroos) and all the other stuff that is relatively important in day to day matters that get’s pushed to the bottom and back of websites and newspapers. Why? Well, that would be a rant worthy of another blog or seven, so I’ll leave you with this: friends who take compromising photos and videos of their friends to post on the Internet or distribute in general are not friends at all. They are fucking douchebags that deserve to have their testicles (or labia) forcibly removed and fed to them. I’m not only a hater of these dipshits, I’m also a victim. Enjoy your President’s Day weekend!

What I Was Doing Whilst Typing: Drinking beer and listening to Pantera and Iron Maiden (note: not together)

How To Avoid a Public Intoxication Charge or How I Spent Last Friday Night

Well, with the controversial movie countdown out of the way, I’m going to go back to some more current affairs for about a week and then will probably tackle another subject and something other than movies.

So, last Friday I went out as I normally do with some friends and had a good time. A really good time. And then I met these people at a lounge and decided I wasn’t happy drinking until 2AM, no, I needed to go to a house party. Turns out the place was in the middle of nowhere and that’s when I decided to open my big mouth: “George Bush is such a cunt”.

Although I was in a car full of Obama supporters, they really weren’t supporters of the word cunt. Had I been more sober, I probably would have realized that they weren’t British but I had some difficulty understanding their drunken gibberish the same. Point is, I got my ass kicked out of that car quicker than I could say “Well don’t be a bunch of cunts”. Which is probably for the best because I would surely have been ran over. Second point is, don’t say cunt around women; apparently they take that shit SERIOUSLY. I just think cunts roll off the tongue really nice (pun intended).

So, being in the middle of nowhere, I trudged onwards through about 2 miles of back roads and fields until I happened across a freeway. Being 4AM in the morning, there was minimal traffic so I crossed and went to the closest exit to find a gas station and call a taxi. When I reached 50 feet away from my destination, after traveling about 3 miles, a guy in a security car rolls up in front of me, blocking the crosswalk and my way to home. I ask if there is a problem. Here is a transcript of the conversation:

Guard: “What’re you doing tonight?”
Me: “Trying to get home sir”
Guard: “Did you cross the freeway back there? We got a call concerning it.”
Me: “Yes, I was dropped off in the middle of nowhere and I crossed the freeway so I could go to that gas station across the street and get a cab.”
Guard: “Why didn’t you call a cab in the first place?”
Me: “Because they need an address to come to. I can’t just call them and say ‘Hi, I need a cab to the middle of nowhere'”.
Guard: “Hmmm, okay, well just wait a minute.”
Me: “Why?”
Guard: “Because I called the cops and I was asked to detain you while they come.”
Me: “What the fuck?”

That’s when the blue and red flashing lights pulled up. Goddammit. So, after having pretty much the same conversation with the cop, he took my ID and searched for warrants, of which I have none. Not that I’ve been a saint my whole life, I’m just really good at not getting caught. Usually. While I’m waiting for the warrants to be checked, 2 other cop cars show up (how did these guys get out here so quick?) and proceed to do their duty of standing around doing nothing but jerking off and wasting your tax dollars. So the cop comes back and talks to me about the dangers of running across a freeway (seriously, I felt like I was in 5th grade) and proceeds to say the following:

“Well, you’ve been respectful, you were trying to be responsible grabbing a cab and I can understand why you are doing what you are doing. You aren’t too drunk but since you have an out of state license, I don’t really don’t trust letting you go. I’m taking you to detox. Turn around so I can cuff you.”

Yep, I did everything right and because my goddamn ID was out of state, that was the straw that broke the donut-eating camel’s back. Warning to those visiting or living temporarily in Denver: DON’T GIVE A COP YOUR ID! Not being from their precious gem of a state is grounds to bring your ass in.

So, fortunately, I was transferred to the hospital drunk tank and not the jail version. There I was given the usual bombardment of inane questions: “Do you know what day it is?”, “Do you know where you are?”, “What color is this red apple?” and my personal favorite: “Have you been drinking tonight?”. It’s like, “No, ma’am, I just thought this place would be better than my bed at home”. I guess I could have been high or something but I think under those conditions it would have been jail. Anyways, after successfully answering all the questions I got the comment, “Well, at least you aren’t really drunk”. I’m thinking to myself, I’ve been blasted out of my mind, blacked out for hours but I can still get myself home. I still know what day it is. What constitutes “really drunk”? Then I was led to the dormitory as it was called. Oh, I said as I entered, that’s what really drunk is.

I spent the next 7 hours surrounded by mostly homeless men who if they weren’t snoring, they were pissing themselves. I made quick friends with the orderlies and started grilling them with questions. Seriously, I was the fucking Barbara Walters of drunken interrogation, asking the guy questions ranging from statistical “Is this how many people are normally here on a Friday?”, “Which is your busiest night?”, “What percentage of your clientele would you say are homeless?” to the interpretive “Why do you think they constantly abuse their bodies?”, “Does providing shelter make you feel good?”, “What’re you doing tomorrow night because I know this kick ass deal where it is all you can drink from 7PM to 9PM. Yeah! Let’s go get wasted!” (the last question may or may have not been appropriate). All in all, I wasn’t too hated. By 11AM, I was “sober” and waiting to be discharged. Then came the exit interview. OH, the exit interview.

Here is a sample from the conversation:
Woman: “When you drink, do you feel better?”
Me: “That’s a loaded question.”
Woman: “Why?”
Me: “Well, obviously alcohol is going to give you a feeling of euphoria, so I would say yes. However, the way the question is presented, it is saying that unless I drink, I can’t feel ‘better’ which labels me an alcoholic, which I’m not.”
Woman: “That’s doesn’t answer the question.”
Me: “Fine, yes, when I drink I feel better but I don’t need to.”
Woman: “Then why do you?”
Me: “Because it makes me feel better.”

A moment of awkward silence.

Woman: “Okay, that was the last question. I hope you learned your lesson.”
Me: “Oh yeah, definitely. Never get into a car with people you don’t know and if you do, watch your mouth.”
Woman: “The lesson is to not drink so much.”
Me: “Oh.”
Woman stares at me for 10 seconds: “So, did you learn your lesson?”
Me: “I guess not.”
Woman: “I hope I don’t see you again.”
Me: “Don’t worry, next time I’m running from the police.”

And in the end, I was charged $300 for the spacious accommodations of a soiled mattress. It was like staying at a Best Western. Okay, that was a cheap joke but you know what isn’t cheap? Getting picked up for public intoxication, even when the cop agrees you aren’t too bad. For such a small infraction, the punishment doesn’t seem fair; especially when I was 50 feet from spending $40 to get home. But, if there is one thing I’ve learned, life isn’t fair so fuck it.

What I Was Doing Whilst Typing: Listening to Iron Maiden.

Controversial Movies: Art or Trash (Pt 5)

If you want to see the evolution of awesome, check out:
Part 1: Caligula
Part 2: Cannibal Holocaust
Part 3: Ichi the Killer
Part 4: The Last Temptation of Christ

And now the exciting conclusion!

It has been a long journey of shit and silver but its almost over. No, I’m going to continue blogging but at least the controversial movie retrospective is almost complete. Looking back at the other films, they are based on history or books or a little of both. Today’s movie is based on another book, one so perverse that the movie, as much as it tries, is like a Disney film compared to the source material. Of course, that’s fine considering the “novel” outlined the pleasures of raping 3 year old girls. Oh, don’t wuss out now, we’re at the best part!

**Actual Warning** The content of today’s film is pretty bad and I go into some explicit detail. I normally wouldn’t give a shit given the First Amendment and what not, but this shit is seriously fucked. You’ve been warned.

Salo (or the 120 Days of Sodom)

For a summary of the film (which isn’t all that great… Wikipedia let me down on this one) click here.

Okay, some background before we look at this movie. As mentioned briefly above, the movie is based on a book called The 120 Days of Sodom written by a French guy while in jail. It is the jolly tale of four kings who bring a group of male and female virgins and some prostitutes to a secluded castle. What transpires over the next 120 days is an increasingly disgusting mantra of sexual acts based on the experiences of the prostitutes. What starts out as simple pleasures (yea, that’s what their called in the book) like ejaculating on young girl’s faces and eating excrement turns for the worse with rape, torture, child prostitution, dismemberment and eventually outright murder for sexual gratification. You know, the normal shit you think of in jail.

You don’t even want to know what the fuck this guy is thinking

So, with that source material, the movie shouldn’t have ever been made? Well, in a stroke of brilliance, they decided to back off a little bit from a literal translation. Oh, there is still plenty of indiscriminate rape, torture, excrement consumption and murder but all with relatively legal age people involved. So what’s controversial?

Well, we could go scene by scene but that would wear out your faith in humanity. Let’s take some choice scenes and item. First off, about 15 minutes in the film, we’re treated to a random raping of a woman serving people dinner while a group of 30 watch and laugh. Then a guy comes over and asks to be fucked in the ass by the raper. He is obliged.

Then there is the dialogue. The prostitutes sprout some pretty nasty shit out of their mouth but in a poetry style that for some reason sounds elegant in Italian. I never heard the phrase “he beat me to a bloody pulp” sound so erotic and enticing.

There is another scene where the virgin slaves (7 boys and 7 women I believe) are being fed like dogs on all fours and when one girl refuses, she is beaten until she caves in. Not before one guy sticks a nail in the clump of bread and gives to her. The scream and blood is enough to infuse this scene into your memory for an eternity.

Then, for about 15 minutes, people eat shit (no, not bad Italian food, actual fecal matter).

Then, after more abuse, all the young people are killed while the old men jerk off young boys.

The End.

Not really but that’s all about I can summarize. There is plenty of other travesties that occur during the film but I grow weak trying to recap. They are all things you have to see with your own eyes to believe that anyone could even come up with this stuff. And with that, we now look at the merits of the film to see if they could possibly make up for all these depraved acts.

First, their is the setting which is late World War 2 Italy in the fascist state of Salo (that’s where the name comes from!). Now, why this is interesting is because when people aren’t being absolutely demeaned, the men causing all this raucous are discussing about their love of fascist ideals and how said ideals apply to life. The theories and dialogue during these scenes are haunting considering the time period and although none of the dialogue can be proven to be something anyone actually said during those times, it isn’t too much of a stretch of the imagination to envision someone thinking like that. Also, the fascist nature of the men could be seen as a protest against this form of government and there is an underlying message that fascism would bring about the death of any beauty and love associated with sex. Imagine the propaganda during World War 2 if people came out and said “Hitler will destroy sex!”… I don’t think he would have had so many followers.

Another interesting point is whether this actually happened. Obviously not the exact events but similar events; especially the gratuitous murders for the sheer pleasure of watching. In a fascist state, especially one like Italy at the time, it wouldn’t have been the least surprising. There is no documented proof but if you watch the movie you would understand that there wouldn’t necessarily be a scribe taking notes the entire time.

Scribe: Hey, was that a scream or a howl? Did anyone catch that? Shit… nevermind… okay, now a large male has just slit the victim’s throat open while the presidente is masturbating vigorously using the blood as lubricant. Time is 8:31PM.”

Also, the way the music, scenery and camera work compliments the mayhem is pretty decent. The music is the atypical 1940s cheery music complete with authentic 1940s radio quality giving a certain level of immersion. The scenery is a country like but mostly takes place inside an antiquated mansion with vibrant contrasting colors between the rooms that give their particular scenes their own context and feeling (as well as foreboding). Finally, the camera work is interesting with it’s wide angle takes and stunningly fast close ups which keep you constantly on your toes. MANGIA!

Conclusion: The reason I saved this movie for last is because it really tears you between what is acceptable in movies. From an artistic perspective, it tells a torrid tale of despicable humanity and the sheer depths of depravity it can reach. It is a tale of fascism extreme that takes the viewer through all 9 level’s of Dante’s hell with no apologies. Salo is also so extreme that it shuns the average person to the point that most cannot watch it and surely a movie that keeps people from watching it must be doing something wrong. Do we need to know about these perversions? Will viewing this movie give you any extra perspective on the world and mankind? For an optimist, it is ridiculous, violent porn. For a pessimist, it is a proof of concept. I cannot say this film is art but I would never say this film is trash. Salo will make you question what kind of person you are if you can tolerate the whole film and while it may never give you a greater knowledge of that which exists on this planet, it will certainly let you know more about yourself. Especially if you got aroused.

Honorable Mentions:
Jacob’s Ladder – Although not much controversy surrounded this film, it delves deeply into the soldier psychology of Vietnam veterans and comes across pretty unforgiving. Certainly not the best film about the Vietnam war, it’s perspective is interesting and warrants a look. Just watch out for the demon sex scene, that part will really catch you off guard.

Romper Stomper – A neo-nazi piece that really gets the blood boiling. Up there with American History X. Bonus: a neo-nazi Russel Crowe.

Requiem for a Dream – Watch the NC-17 version to really get the full content of the movie. A story about 3 young adults and a mother and their personal struggles with drugs. A little over the top at times with the drama, it is still a great movie.

Meet the Spartans – the only movie I ever watched that made me want to commit suicide. And I was only 15 minutes into it.

What I Was Doing Whilst Typing – Cooking and eating dinner and listening to Tool.

Controversial Movies: Art or Trash (Pt. 4)

You can read previous parts like the great introduction known as part 1 here, the exciting sequel part 2 here and the lack luster trilogy add on part 3 here. Now, welcome to the superfluous part 4.

Today’s controversial movie may surprise you. It’s controversial for different reasons than the other films we’ve look at in the previous posts. The other movies upset people due to their sex and violence and much like “The Exploited” song by the same name, the themes were repeated into oblivion in each movie. But today’s movie hits hard with a crowd that is already difficult to make happy. The Christians.

The Last Temptation of Christ

Once again, if you are not familiar with the movie, here is a summary.

First off, I just want to get this out of the way: I was raised a Southern Baptist and Luthern (don’t ask) and I still have some faith, but not in Christ as God but Christ as a man who put forth some easy to follow rules of life that would make for a great time on this Earth. But, as history has shown, those who preach peace are the first to get killed. Damn pacifist hippies. Anyways, the point is that I’m tolerant and respectful to people’s religious beliefs, especially Christians. However, I am weary as hell in regards to uppity religious groups that brain wash their congregation to all think alike. And that is what caused a lot of controversy with this movie was people blindly following pastors and preachers against this movie and then once some of them sat down to watch it, they realized it wasn’t nearly as bad as it was meant out to be. So, take that with a grain of salt because when this movie came out it was a big deal but the test of time has shown it to receive more acceptance because, much like the Bible, you can’t take everything as literal in this film. I’m probably going to hell for this review.

So, then, what is the problem with this movie? Well, if you watched the first 2 hours of the film you’d be scratching your head. It is the story of New Testament and a damn better version than “The Passion of the Christ” (which I guess was controversial because of it’s anti-Jewish theme but if you read the New Testament the Jews did ask for the blood of Jesus; for once Mel Gibson didn’t make that shit up).

Please go back to good movies Mel

I suppose there are a couple of scenes that show Jesus as not fully accepting his duties as the soon to be martyred son of God which probably did upset the faith of some people. I say faith because the period this takes place is before the adult Jesus in the New Testament makes his appearance. Think of it as filling in the blanks of character development. Honestly, if you were told you were going to have humongous nails pounded through your hands after being brutally beaten and then hoisted up for all to see while you slowly bleed to death, the first thing that pops to your mind isn’t, “Whatever you say boss!”. In fact, Scorsese does a great job of building Jesus’ relationship with God through various dialogues, which depending on your religious affiliation could either be extremely boring scenes or an interesting take on the man that has had the most influence on Western civilization until Hitler (ah, another conversation for another day… 5 Greatest Dictators? Ehhh, probably not a good idea). By midway through the movie, you see Jesus starting to fulfill his role. We aren’t given an all awesome Jesus but a common man that has learned of his destiny and is struggling to come to full terms with it. Even without the religious overtones, that is just good writing.

Actually, the controversy comes from the movie’s ending. Okay, here is the obligatory “WATCH OUT! **SPOILER ALERT**”, so if you want to watch this movie, then abort the article now. In the end, an angel comes to take Christ off the cross explaining that he has been tested and is not the son of God and can go on to live a full mortal man’s life for all the trouble he’s endured. Jesus is given a full life where he weds Mary Magdelene and has a kid which is a short lived happiness because God comes in a blinding white light and kills Mary. I suppose this is because God is a bit pissed Jesus wussed out? I don’t know. Anyways, Jesus remarries, has some more kids and lives to be an old man. When he runs into a man preaching about Jesus Christ, he starts reflecting on the choice he made to deny God. That’s when we find out the angel wasn’t an angel but Satan!!! Jesus denies the temptation and returns to consciousness on the cross realizing he faced his last trial. Then he dies. WHOA, didn’t see that coming!

I don’t like to do summaries in exploratory pieces like this but I wanted to replay that last 20-30 minutes in case it wasn’t fresh in your mind. Those who have read the Bible already know that Satan was a douche and tried multiple times to tempt Jesus, so why is it so bad that he tries one last time when he is vulnerable? Is it because they showed Jesus having sex with Mary? Well, I suppose that would be bad if they said it actually happened but it is a dream! Seriously, it would be more sacrilegious for me to suggest Jesus took a shit on a corpse because that was more likely to happen than him having sex with Mary (you have to remember, corpse handling was less of a science back then). Could it be that Jesus had a fulfilling mortal life instead of accepting to be the son of God? That would be pretty bad except that he eventually chooses to reject his own irresponsible action which he was tricked into in the first place! So that makes him fallible? Okay, that probably get’s to the root of the problem right there. Jesus is God and God is infallible, not prone to make mistakes. So then, Jesus never stubbed his toe? Never misspoke someone’s name? Never once thought of something other than wanting to die to give all people realistic passage to Heaven? It is hard to swallow, honestly, even trying my best to put myself into a religiously conservative mindset.

As a side note, I guess it would be worthwhile mentioning that Jews are not shown in the best light in this movie. No, it isn’t like in “Passion of the Christ” where they are shown as well dressed Jesus haters. In this movie they are shown as, to quote Lewis Black “10 hairs away from being baboons”. Seriously, they are out of fucking control with all kind of pagan acts, which since paganism is how Christianity sort of started out, you really can’t blame Scorsese too much for showing this but I imagine people weren’t too happy showing Jesus getting howling crazy in the mud with John the Baptist. And Harvey Keitel plays Judas. Not really controversial but I just wanted to mention he plays a good back stabbing Jew.

Conclusion: Given all that is said, let’s look at one fact: Scorsese got a nomination for best director (certainly not his first and definitely not his last). Know why? Because the movie was beautifully made and if you can take into context what Scorsese was trying to do, you actually have one of the best movies about Jesus’ life and the New Testament. To argue this movie was made for the sole purpose of pissing off people would be completely insane. This is the perfect example of a movie that had great direction, superb acting, beautiful cinematography and a chilling soundtrack. Sure, it dragged a little and the story isn’t original (I mean, there is the copying the whole New Testament but it was also a book previously which was pretty much hated on for the same reasons) but no movie is perfect. It is a shame that so many people hated this film because it is a treat to watch from both a religious and filmography perspective. If you haven’t seen this movie, for whatever reason, do yourself a favor and at least rent it. You won’t be disappointed… unless you wanted to see Harvey Keitel’s penis. You’re thinking of “The Piano”.

Final thought: At least all the Christians did was protest the movie. I would really hate to see what would happen if a movie about Muhammad’s life came out. Just saying, that’s all.

What I Was Doing Whilst Typing: Listening to Rage Against the Machine and Eating Dinner.

Controversial Movies: Art or Trash (Pt. 3)

This is part 3 in a 5 part series. Follow this link for part 1 and this link for part 2.

Hola hombres. It’s been a long weekend which started with a trip to “detox” which is like the drunk tank but you don’t get charged with public intoxication. When I get done with these controversial movies, I’ll give me two cents on the experience but until then, I want to keep the focus on cinema. For today’s movie, we are going to travel East instead of West to the land of Japan.

The Japanese are well known for having some pretty fucked up movies, especially for anyone who has watched anime beyond what is played on Adult Swim. But, as stated earlier in part 1, I’m going to leave anime out of this. Looking at other Japanese films, we have a couple genres which we see a lot of. First, we have the generic violence tweaked in a manner to mess with our heads. In this category, we have movies like Battle Royal in which around 30 teenagers are put on an island and have to kill each other until one is left. In 72 hours. Or they all die. No one said high school was going to be fair. I think a fat kid gets his first. On a side note, we Westerners invented that originally. It was called Lord of the Flies. And we killed the fat kid too because dead fat kids are make-you-shit-yourself hilarious. But I digress.

The other well known genre for Japanese cinema is gore flicks like Suicide Club which is made just to shock the hell out of you. How? Well, imagine 50 high school girls holding hands, singing a song in unison and being generally cute. Now, imagine that same group of girls jumping in front of a moving subway and spraying a blood wave 20 feet in the air. Shocked? Probably not, so here’s the clip!

If you drop your homework on the subway tracks, just let it go; cuz man, it's gone

Now that we have proven that Japanese movie makers are certifiably psychotic, you are wondering why I’m bringing up these movies. Well, it is to better understand the controversial movie I’m about to go over. It is a mix of that goofy over the top violent action combined with shit that just makes you wish you never got out of bed when you were 10 years old so the horrors of the world would have never entered your precious head.

Ichi the Killer

Woof, that creepy guy in the poster sort of scares me, but if you haven’t seen the movie, get a summary here.

I don’t know what is more shocking about this movie; the strong sexual overtones or the violence. To be honest, the violence in this movie is pretty campy. I mean, it’s gory and violent and people get hacked up worse than Kill Bill but honestly, it is so over the top and at times so poorly done, it is hard to be “traumatized” or at least turned off by the movie. One scene in particular when he cuts a prostitute(?) in half symmetrically, it looks like she’s glowing pink inside. The effect is terrible. I’ll bring up Cannibal Holocaust again because in that film, the cannibals chop a dude into pieces with stone axes and it looks sickeningly realistic and it was done with an 8mm camera and ~20 years prior to this film. For all the awesome CG work the Japanese do, it just boggles the mind why they would be so damn lazy on this effect. If you are going to chop a guy (and especially a woman) in half, then at least try to make it look good. It is the psychotic’s mantra: “you only go to hell once, so make it count.” (Editor’s Note: there is no psychotic’s mantra, only “Mike’s daily speech to himself in the mirror”.) Okay, so what else makes this movie “controversial” then?

Well, remember when I said “turned off by the movie” above? If not, then re-read it and start paying attention because there is one guy who is definitely getting turned on by this movie. Ichi, our main character, it seems has a little sexual problem. He can’t get off unless he’s murdering people. Imagine, gentlemen reading this, that you are 19 years old and unable to ejaculate unless you disembowel a room full of 30 year old men. Yeah, you’d be a world of hurt. And how do we know he has this odd sexual blockage? Ichi talks about it but the kicker is when blood sprays on the wall and it is shortly followed by a stream of ejaculate. Yep, he comes on the walls. Skeet, skeet, skeet! (Actually, that was supposed to be a caption for a image of the main title which is made out of Ichi’s semen but while looking for an image I ran into some disgusting shit that would probably get me arrested in most countries so I aborted).

Ichi’s odd fetish notwithstanding, there is also a good amount of rape in this film. A re-occurring theme of the movie is that Ichi was brought into his career of killing evil men because when he was younger he watched a girl he liked get raped and didn’t do anything to stop it (I won’t bring this up anymore to avoid plot spoilers). So, since that was his first “sexual experience” it is used to explain his violent ejaculation and I’m not talking about Scary Movie. Their handling of rape is pretty terrible because they always present the victim of the act as someone other than the actual victim of the rape. I could spend another couple of paragraphs going into what is wrong with this but it should speak for itself.

Probably the “funniest” scene is when Ichi is talking to a prostitute and she pretends to be this girl he saw get raped and did nothing to help and that she was turned on by the act and that she desires him and want to feel pain (for some Japanese reason). He gets overly excited about this and chops off half of her leg. She hops around on her non-stumpy leg, screaming and spraying blood until he finishes her off in the middle of a hallway. Is it actually funny? No but try to imagine the ridiculousness of the scene and you may chuckle. For those who have actually seen the movie, then maybe you laughed. I can’t be the only person.

Conclusion: This movie is pretty messed up. The violence isn’t realistic but the context in which it takes place most of the time is pretty random, relatively meaningless and over the top to the point where when they shipped the film to the censorship board, they must have included a picture of the director giving the bird. Combined with the sexual oddities of Ichi and the rampant prostitution and rape and you have a full fledged WTF movie. Fine, but is it art?

Well, this one is difficult. Yes, when it came to Caligula, I was pretty forward with my hatred for the lack of effort in making the violence realistic and contextually meaningful. With Ichi the Killer, it is pulling from the influence of anime and the original comic where this kind of crap is tolerated and in mimicking the source material, it does well. And even though it’s treatment of rape slightly pisses me off, I can’t fault Ichi the Killer with at least trying to do something different and within the grand scheme of things, it gives the movie an unique angle in which to view the protagonist. And also, like most Japanese films, there are some interesting themes and views on honor, society and modern life. That said, none of it really applies to a normal person and when you finish the film, those scenes seem generic within the realm of Japanese films and appear to be present for the sole purposes of giving transition between the action scenes. Even the scenes that try to be artistic come off as superficial and any true originality is kind of lost because of this. It definitely isn’t the worse movie you could watch on a Saturday afternoon but to reach a conclusion, I’m going to go with trash.

Part 4 will be coming soon (2/9 or 2/10) and prepare thyself for part 5 no later than 2/11. Although I said I wasn’t doing this in any order, I am saving my favorite controversial film for last.

What I Was Doing Whilst Typing: Listening to Man Of War. Remember kids, other bands play… Man Of War Kills!

Controversial Movies: Art or Trash (Pt. 2)

If you didn’t read part 1, here it is.

Moving on from the potentially promising but ultimately disappointing Caligula, we go to a movie that really doesn’t need too much of an introduction for horror fans but is still a movie that most wouldn’t know because of the censorship involved. I’m speaking, of course, of:

Cannibal Holocaust

For a summary, click here

Well, the controversy behind this movie was the gore. Now, when I was talking about Caligula, I used the word “violent” but for Cannibal Holocaust, I’m going to use the word gory. Why? Because the human mind can take in violence and go “meh” but true gore raises fear and disgust in a person to the point where they can’t even look at the screen. And that pretty much summarizes Cannibal Holocaust. Need some proof? Check out this awesome pic of a women impaled on a large wooden spike:

Whoa, How’d a pic of The Man From Nantucket Sodomy Porn get in here?

But that doesn’t even begin to describe the savage nature of this film. What people do to other people is basically unspeakable because you would never believe the words. Then you watch the movie and you are like “HOLY FUCK! My faith in humanity is forever shattered”. The people visiting do terrible shit and the cannibals do terrible shit. It culminates to a wonderful little scene of women having their babies taken from them. Wait, did I say baby? Oh, I’m sorry, I meant unborn baby. As in fetus. As in still inside the womb. As in… okay, I’m running this into the ground but you get the point. It is fucked up. And wait, did I say culminate? I’m sorry, I meant, we’re only about 2/3 through the movie. And it gets worse. But you won’t believe it until you see it. Hell, you probably don’t even believe the scene about the fetuses. It’s probably best if you don’t.

Anyways, I could talk for hours about the atrocities depicted in this film, but this isn’t a summary or review. What I’m trying to do is look at these films and question, seriously, if their creation has given birth to anything other than bitching and complaining. As it stands, I’m kind of behind Cannibal Holocaust as art more than it is trash. While it is definitely a shock film meant to make people disgusted and feel dirty for watching it, there are some redeeming qualities about it.

Oh and I guess some animals get killed too and pretty brutally. Go ahead and cry. Just make sure to put down your Big Mac first. Wouldn’t want the buns to get soggy. Anyways, the redeeming qualities, yes.

First off, I really like their take on the story line. The way they combine a present and past time line to present the overall picture of the film is not only interesting but I almost want to say it was the first movie to use the whole “uncovered documentary video found from a lost exploratory team” plot line which is now so fucking over used. The camera work, because of this, creates an immersible first person experience without cheapening the experience by shaking the camera too much or adding some shitty CG (I hate you Cloverfield). Secondly, they had some goddamn balls to show the tribal people of South America as they did. I mean, fuck trying to be politically correct, they went all balls out and were like, “hey, guess what, these people eat other people. What a bunch of assholes. Weird assholes. Disgusting assholes. They’re even eating assholes.”. But not only that, they showed the “Amazing White Heros” could be equally brutal and insane, which is interesting from the perspective of khaki pants don’t make you civilized. Seriously, they spend a good portion of the movie showing these tribals acting nuts and then flip the scenario on it’s head with the white people being equally as nuts. Genius. Finally, the acting isn’t too atrocious, which is usually a plague of horror films, which means they were actually taking this seriously and the quality shows.

Conclusion: Well, I definitely wouldn’t suggest this movie for everyone but if you feel like you can handle anything and aren’t planning to eat for a while, check this film out because it really is decent. At it’s best, there are definite “artistic” qualities to it. At it’s worse, it is still a worthwhile watch, especially for horror fans. I would recommend this above most other horror films but it isn’t easy to get a hold of. I wouldn’t come directly out and say it but maybe you should itB orrentT it.

What I Was Doing Whilst Typing: Listening to SoundGarden and drinking Miller High Life, The Champagne of Beers.

Controversial Movies: Art or Trash (pt 1)

Okay, since humor is really not my strong point, I’m going to tackle something very dear to me: movies. Besides having my forehead ripped open when I was 3 1/2, my first strong memory is the Transformers movie when I was 4. Since then, I’ve been hooked on movies and over the years my tastes have matured. When you really get into something, you will eventually start reaching the outer nether regions where the really weird shit lies. My next five posts will be about said weird shit. These movies are not necessarily the “most” controversial movies and this isn’t a top 5 list or whatever. These are just 5 very odd movies that are in a gray area of what constistutes art or mind pornography (and in some cases, like today’s movie, pretty much pornography). I won’t be covering animated films because they have an unfair advantage in really getting out there (especially anime tentacle porn which I could do a 100 different WTF posts on). So without further adieu, let’s look at the first film and if you decide to comment, please share what movies you have come across that made you go “um, who gave them money to make this?”.

Caligula

If you aren’t familiar with this movie, go ahead and read a summary here.

The first film on here is widely known for being sexually explicit but it also had a fair amount of shockingly violent scenes. Now, it isn’t that there were close up “creampie” shots and bukkake sessions that could fill a Roman bath (God I need help), but you have to place your self in circa 1979 and seeing a guy get a blow job was a big deal. Porn theaters were at their top of perverted popularity due to VCRs being a couple years away from being generally purchasable to the normal porn watching public so if you wanted to watch people engage in sex and not go down the peeping tom route, this was your only option. And it sucked. I’ve never been to a porn theater but I would imagine lots of lonely men jerking off and the one actual couple in the theater fooling around while your shoes stick to the floor with every step. Boy howdy, that get’s me horny! But I digress.

The point that a full feature film containing so much gratuitous sex really shook people; they honestly didn’t see this sort of thing coming (no pun intended). But in reality, the sex is pretty short lived. It sort of comes out of nowhere and just when you think you are starting to get aroused, it is over. And even during the huge orgy scene they keep cutting to old men talking so it really just takes away from the whole “explicit sex” aspect. In fact, the movie is by far more violent than it is sexual but as Americans, we don’t really give a shit about that. To be absolutely honest, I think what pissed more people off was the fact that the movie was just bad. Really bad. Like no one put any effort in to trying to make it good. The actors are lazy, the camera work is lazy, the art direction is alright but nothing that makes you engrossed in the film like Lord of the Rings or something and the score is sloppy as shit trying to get this epic “Roman” sound but really not hitting the mark. It was almost like the people making the film just banked on selling tickets because there was some sex in the film. I really wouldn’t be surprised if that was the angle.

Okay, now on to the violence since I’ve been mentioning several times without giving it a fair shot. It’s… well, to be honest, anyone my age would be pretty numb to it by now. By 1979 standards I could see how it would be out of hand but by 2009 standards it is far from tame but not all that bad. It has partly to do with the fact that up until the 80s, they really didn’t know how to do blood all that well. It also has to do with the fairly unrealistic dead bodies. I mean they look dead but the skin tone is all wrong and they kind of look plastic-like; at least to me. The thing I think which put most people over the edge was the randomness and brutality surrounding the violence. Caligula was kind of a dick. Since at the time most violent acts in cinema were fairly tame gun fights and odd angles to hide the wounds, Caligula came out as in your face, angry drunk looking to mind rape you. And to that degree, it did.

But let’s look at this from an artistic point of view because, regardless of the poor effort, they may have had good intentions initially. The idea isn’t original, they are just telling a story that has some historic relevance and they just “dramatized” aspects to give it screen appeal. The approach wasn’t unique, anyone who had seen Ben Hur or the 10 Commandments had a pretty good idea of what an epic should be and although they did the job adequately, it certainly wasn’t ground breaking. The decision to bring in heavy violence and sexy scenes could be reflected on and approached as a warning for the excesses of the 70s (a historical warning of the present) or to attempt to show the Romans as maniacs but it doesn’t do well with either approach and from what I’ve read on the matter that really wasn’t the point anyways.

ConclusionWell, it certainly isn’t art, it is a movie at best but barely. Frankly, this was a huge flop that destroyed careers and stays alive today the same way “Plan 9 from Outer Space” does: it sucks so bad, you gotta watch it. Oh, and 15 year olds who don’t mind jerking off to orgies with old Roman senators walking through the middle of the screen. Forgive them lord, they know not what they do.

What I Was Doing Whilst Typing: Listening to Fear Factory and eating pretzels, mmmmm.

Oregon: California’s Canada or Washington’s Mexico?

I never make it a secret that I’m from Oregon. I love my state. It is full of beauty no matter what your inner beholder commands you to think is beautiful. You like oceans? We have amazingly large beaches combined with sea cliffs that will take your breath away. A woodsy person? Check out our awesome evergreen forests. High desert fan? 70% of the state is high desert. Or are you a skiing fan? Go on to Mt. Hood which is 70 miles away from Portland (a great city for drinkers, flower fans or bridge aficionados) where skiing is a way of life. Did I mention Portland? It makes Seattle look like a run down whorehouse (yes, the Space Needle is a phallic symbol to entice truckers on their way to/from Canada). Oh and we have a lush valley delivering grass seed all around the nation for animal consumption and they grow wine there. When you leave, be sure to pick up a 6 pack of the best tasting beer you’ve ever drank. Which one? Any is better than what they make in your state.

But who truly knows about Oregon? There are only approximately 3.7 million of us or around 1.3% of the US population tucked away in a state no one seems to give a shit about. So rather the question shouldn’t be who truly knows about Oregon but why should you trust us? The short answer is you shouldn’t. The long answer? Well, grab a beer or whiskey and allow me to explain why the next time you fall asleep, Oregon will be sitting on your chest with a knife to your eye waiting for you to pop up awake.

Oregon is a state of frontiers people and at one point we conquered the entire North West. Check out this picture of the Oregon territory before it was broke it up:

Yeah, pretty impressive huh? Well, all good things must come to an end but we never lost that “don’t give a shit” attitude. You know what you can get in Oregon? Medicinal marijuana. You know what else you can do? Physician assisted suicide. You know what else you can do? Have a stripper grind you in the highest number of strip clubs per-capita city of the US, Portland. That’s right, you can get high and then get a lap dance and then when you’ve decided your life can’t possibly get anymore awesome then you can end it with a mega dose of pain killers, legally prescribed. Name me another state where all of this is tolerated?

But, it gets even better. Ever been to Eugene Oregon? Probably not but you owe it to yourself. 25% hippie town, 25% college town, 25% bum town and 25% redneck town, Eugene is fucking nuts. And you know what? So are the people and rightfully so. One moment you are macking on a college hottie and then you turn around and a bum is masturbating into your cup of coffee (I don’t know if that has happened but it sounds plausible). In disgust you pull out your pistol to scare the man off and then some hippie comes and tells you “Bare feet, not arms!”. All in 30 seconds. Yikes. Also, Eugene lies practically next door to Thurston. Name ring a bell? No? How about Kip Kinkel? Still nothing? Alright, well read this. Yes, the guy who started the modern day surge of school shootings. Oregon raised. Oh yeah, we still have the death penalty but can’t assign it to minors. I guess Texas has one thing on us.

BUT WAIT! It get’s better! You know meth? We popularized that shit and made you all addicted, lol. Some argue that San Diego is the meth capital of the USA but I’m not talking about distribution. I’m talking about consumption. Ever been to Kalamath Falls? Probably not. Don’t. Fucking terrible. Same goes with Sweet Home. And you know what tweakers like to do? Steal your shit and maybe stab you and maybe make whoopie with your corpse. I don’t know, that’s what my government pamphlet told me but I have a sneaking suspicion they wouldn’t steal anything. Everyone thinks this is a negative but I disagree, if it wasn’t for our failing timber industry and meth’s cheap, addictive qualities we’d still be worrying about crack in Black neighborhoods and that is SO 80s.

And guess what? We got other shit going down in our state as well, namely hydro-electric dams, wind power and wave power (yes, wave power but to be honest for a moment, it is still being researched). We’re trying to make the world a better place. You know what the rest of you weekend environmentalist are using? Coal. Congratulations, you have the environmental plan of a third world country. Cao Ni Ma!

I could keep going on but this picture is painted pretty well. You had no idea there was so much weird shit going on in Oregon did you? So, can we be trusted? I’ll ask it this way, would you give us your baby? There’s your answer. Don’t let the state border smack you on the ass on your way out.

What Was I Doing Whilst Typing: Listening to old school Red Hot Chili Peppers and working with my Indian team (amazingly, the sound of keystrokes is indiscernible as to whether they are work related or not).