Define "Insane"

The wheels of justice turn slowly, and often, senselessly.

Nearly eight months after the attack which killed 12 and wounded 58 at a Colorado theater, the defense for James Holmes is still heel-dragging on what plea to enter.  They do not want to use not-guilty by reason of insanity, because it simply does not benefit their client.  You see, if you want to go that route, you have to turn over all documents and information pertaining to your client's past, including those records previously protected by doctor-patient confidentiality.  And in the case of Holmes, it's a particular notebook given to a psychiatrist prior to the attack.  So how to you get around the evidence that would clearly implicate your client and his premeditated actions?  Challenge the constitutionality of the state insanity law!

Trying to make a whole separate issue challenging the law you're looking to take shelter under is a stroke of pure genius scumbaggery.  Only a defense lawyer could complain that a law is not serving enough of their plans and try to have it changed to suit them better.  I assume they'd prefer they could just plead insanity as a defense without having to present or prove anything.  My legal scholar hat got lost many years ago when I opted out of going to law school, but my bullshit detector has been working just fine.  You can't cry self-incrimination if you're claiming insanity, because 1) you have to establish the insanity, and 2) you're not challenging the act - just whether or not they were sane when committing it.

Sorry guys, either he did it and you want to say he was crazy, or he didn't do it.  Pick one, and then promptly lose.  And as usual, a giant big fuck you to any and every media outlet, reporter and source who continues to refer to Holmes as the "alleged" shoooter or "suspect" in the case.  When you are arrested on site with weapons immediately following the attack and you deliberately booby trapped your apartment in case of your arrest, you get no luxury of speculation.  He is the defendant, period.

Ministry Of Sexy Walks

Researchers at the barely known University of the West of Scotland have just released a study on the relationship between a woman's gait and the history of her vaginal orgasms. I'm no scientist, but unless she walks with her legs crossed, that's the only indicator I can measure if she's orgasmed or not.

The study was published in both The Journal of Sexual Medicine of the International Society of Sexual Medicine and the Society for Study of Women's Sexual Health, both which probably have the circulation of the informational brochures of the University of the West of Scotland.  Sixteen college aged female subjects from Belgium were videotaped from a distance while walking, and later asked to complete a questionnaire. Then, the videotapes were "assessed" by two professors of sexology and two research assistants with training in "functional-sexological approach to sexology".  As we all suspected, the sexologists chosen to assess the video tapes had no prior knowledge of the orgasmic history of these women, but miraculously, they were able to discern their history of orgasms with 80% accuracy.  That's a pretty good return for guessing.

The big finding was that the sum of stride length and vertebral rotation of a woman in motion was higher for "vaginally orgasmic women". One cause could be a woman's anatomical features may predispose her to experience vaginal organism.  Also, vaginally orgasmic women might feel more confident about their sexuality, which would be reflected in their stride.  I am skeptical about these results on so many levels, I don't know where to begin.  Sexology professors?  Obscure schools and publications?  Female orgasm?

While I am all for studying vagina, I'm not sure a woman's walk tells us more than how well she can move in whatever shoes she picked to wear.  If anything, we should be studying women on their backs, not their feet if we want to get further information about their vaginas. 

Wait, They Were Still Together All These Years?

Sad news for the six people who gave a shit about Chumbawamba - the "anarchist art-punk" band announced they are disbanding.  Here's the overly self-indulgent statement:

That’s it then, it’s the end. with neither a whimper, a bang or a reunion. Thirty years of ideas and melodies, endless meetings and European tours, press releases, singalong choruses and Dada sound poetry, finally at an end. It’s hard to sum up why without sitting you down one at a time and having a proper conversation, but that’d take too long. So, in as few words as possible, here goes. 

We felt we’d got to a point where what we did as a band – and specifically the writing, recording, touring cycle – wasn’t doing justice to what Chumbawamba set out to do in the first place. We were always as much about ideas as music, and that meant doing more than writing, recording and touring songs. It meant trying to be relevant and active and up-to-date, while trying to avoid the dreaded rut of routine or repetition. being up-to-date meant giving plenty of time and energy to the band, constantly, for those thirty years; a constancy we plainly couldn’t keep up with in the end. 

Chumbawamba was our vehicle for pointing at the naked Emperors, for telling our version of the truth; it gave us more than the joy and love of playing live, writing songs and singing together – it gave us a chance to be part of a broad coalition of activists and hectors, optimists and questioners. But eventually the rest of our lives got in the way and we couldn’t commit the time and enthusiasm that the band demanded. Couldn’t keep up with whatever responsibilities came with a band like this. 

If there were ever a Chumbawamba manifesto, it would read in the inconsistent, contradictory language of the Dadaists – part strident belligerence and part foolishness. This ending is no different; it comes almost as much of a surprise to us as it may do to you. Always more clown than politician, the band trips over its outsize feet and performs its final tumble. 

There have been squabbles and arguments along the way. A deal of griping, frustration, moaning, exasperation – but always alongside a huge amount of goodwill and generosity, good humour and love. What a riot it’s been, frankly. And now it’s time to clear up the mess and move on. That’s the simple version, anyway.

Wow, that's really making something out of nothing.  They had one hit one pop song in 30 years and that's supposed to be impressive? Especially when it overshadowed any of their "message".  Rage Against The Machine made more of 45 minutes of music on their debut album than this crappy band did in decades.  Goodbye, Chumabawamba, now disappear into history.

Perhaps Not Perfect, But Still Alright

According to a formula created by used by the British company Lorraine Cosmetics contest, this is the perfect face.  Well, the most perfect out of 8,000 applicants.

The "perfect" face has a distance between the pupils of just under half (46%) the width of the whole face from ear to ear. Florence here's ratio is 44%  Also, the relative distance between eyes and mouth should be just over a third of the measurement from hairline to chin, and Florence is a 32.8%. But when mathematics fail, there also her large eyes, high cheekbones and full lips - y'know, the intangibles that every contest has to have.

Knowing the hard road that is English dentistry, I imagine Flo's got a nice set of choppers, but that will remain a mystery - at least for the sake of the contest.  They sell make up, not retainers, so we can not add a smile into the equation.  But really, even if it's not completely on the level, isn't that a better picture to show up at the top of the page than Noctomom?

Undervalued Happiness

I have a long-standing hate of the Yahoo! source site Live Science, due to their ill-written, conceived, and executed articles...and even if they become Live Finance, I'll hate them too.

Using the old conceit "money can't buy happiness", they argue that perhaps it might! According to a new poll, an annual household income of $50,000 is enough to "increase the likelihood of people feeling an overall sense of happiness and satisfaction in life".  That must be the cheapest happiness available.  To arrive at that number, the researchers at Marist Institute for Public Opinion at Marist College (no, I don't think that's a real place either), asked people to rate their level of satisfaction in the following areas of their lives: family, neighborhood safety, housing situation, spiritual life, health, friends, work or how days are spent, free time, finances and community involvement. Afterwards, they asked them to identify their annual household income, and households with annual incomes of less than $50,000 were not as happy as those with more than $50,000. 

The survey also found that in the past year:

•57% cut back on spending

•26% considered delaying retirement

•17% had trouble paying for medical care

•14% had trouble paying their mortgage

•12% had trouble paying for prescription drugs

Yeah, if your household - that's you plus everybody who lives there, make less than $50,000, you not only have trouble paying for your medicine and shelter, but you're probably on the cusp of not being able to survive.  There's no delaying retirement - you're gonna die an 87 year old greeter at Wal-Mart.  Or next week, when you can't afford to pay your utilities and the main line backs up and you get a horrible infection from the filthy conditions.

Their study was based on the responses of over 1200 people in a telephone survey, and that pretty much tells you the most important yet hidden detail of the research - any idiot who would take a phone survey is unlikely to ever comprise a household that will make more than $50,000.

Coming To The Cleveland Hall Of Rock Whatever

As we say time and again, awards and ceremonies are often popularity contests and don't reflect true achievement and merit, so the 2012 Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inductees are no surprise.

Headlining the group is Guns N' Roses, followed by the Red Hot Chili Peppers. The reset of the class is comprised of singer/songwriter Laura Nyro, Donovan, the Beastie Boys, and The Small Faces/The Faces (which included Rod Stewart and Rolling Stones guitarist Ronnie Wood). Donna Summer, Joan Jett and the Blackhearts, Heart, Rufus with Chaka Khan, Eric B. & Rakim, War, the Cure and the Spinners were on the ballot too but did not make the cut.

Admission is determined by more than 500 votes by a secret and select group of of music critics, historians and recording artists. Acts are eligible 25 years after the release of their first recording.

Given the selection, I can see why Joan Jett would get passed over, but even if Guns N' Roses and the Red Hot Chili Peppers are deserving, how can you put them in before Rush or KISS? Both have been eligible for more than a decade, and while not as hot a commodity, it does the "Hall of Fame" no service in credibility. Eric Clapton's three separate entries are excessive compared to who's been omitted...

There's still no Jethro Tull, Hall & Oates, The Doobie Brothers, Chicago, The Cars, The Moody Blues, King Crimson or Yes...and there are many, many more.  And given the 36 members coming and going between the two bands, who the hell do you have play at that "all-star" jam?

Medical Inefficacy

Hospital officials at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center are insisting that Norman Smith stop using marijuana for at least six months, undergo random drug testing, and participate in weekly substance-abuse counseling before they will consider putting him back on a liver donor list...surely there's no good reason for him to be smoking weed.

Smith was diagnosed with inoperable liver cancer in 2009, and his oncologist approved medicinal marijuana to cope with the effects of chemotherapy. Though he became eligible for a liver transplant last year, he was removed from the list in February after a positive drug test. Nevermind that it's legal under California law and HIS DOCTOR FROM THEIR HOSPITAL PRESCRIBED IT.

Thankfully, Americans for Safe Access (a medical marijuana advocacy group) is bringing this hypocrisy to light. "Denying necessary transplants to medical marijuana patients is the worst kind of discrimination...Cedars-Sinai would not be breaking any laws, federal or otherwise, by granting Norman Smith a liver transplant, and it’s certainly the ethical thing to do."