|
June
18, 2001
Being
an entertainer brings about certain obligations that I can't stand.
For example, all entertainers must pronounce the word "vase"
like this: vaz. I will never get used to calling a vase a vaz, but
it's something that I have to do. Also, since I am an entertainer,
I must use the word "derriere" in excess. This is also
something that I find extremely unsettling, considering the fact
that I really enjoy using derriere's many alternatives, like butt,
ass, rear, and behind. Expect at least one instance of "Derriere"
in this rant.
And now, the
actual rant...
[Editor's
Note: Frog uses the word "media" very loosely in
this rant. He wants to let people know that when he says "media",
he usually means "wacky liberals who force-feed me information
that I don't care about, have already heard 67 times, or is false,
or altered to make the 71% of people in this country who are a)
stupid or b) gullible, believe them." The word "media"
does not relate to the FOX News Network (because they just report
the news, they don't integrate their silly opinions into it; that's
MY job!), Simpsons news guy Kent Brockman (because he's hilarious,
yet at the same time a jackass), or Carol Koenig (because she offends
easily and is a member of the media, and would have her hired goons
beat me up, strip me of all clothing, and throw me in a ditch full
of dirty water and biohazard material if she thought I was including
her as part of the dreaded "media". Hey Carol, ####!)]
Each time I
write a rant, I take to a hearty session of media bashing. By now,
you readers probably expect it in each new rant. This time will
be... *pause for significance*... no different, aside from the fact
that one of this rant's primary subjects is media bashing. There
are multiple reasons why I dislike the media, most of which already
being covered in the estemmed Editor's Note above (they are true.
I'm telling you). Sure, we wouldn't know what the hell was going
on without these esteemed... *searches for synonym*... criers (hot
damn. That's a good one), but there is no denying the fact that
the media destroys lives; not only mine by subjecting me to their
brainwashing over the last 17 years (I almost started believing
Kenneth Starr was the bad guy in that whole debacle. Didn't the
esteemed media give you that impression?), but those whom they report
on. Usually when they do report something, it's news so old and
drilled into our subconcious that even those galactic space emperors
on the other side of the galaxy know about it. Here's an example...
Dateline (an
NBC program. NBC televises NBA basketball. NBC won't get my respect
for that reason alone) recently aired a story about athletes fouling
up under pressure. Their first victim? Rick Ankiel, a guy who has
had more publicity than the Super Bowl champion Baltimore Ravens
and every golfer other than Tiger Woods... combined. For the love
of God, just leave the poor guy to his problems! I find it quite
vile to see the media still reporting on Ankiel, a guy who has tried
his damndest to work out the kinks in his game, NINE months after
his initial signs of breakdown. I don't know if the media can be
blamed for all his struggles, but I'll be the first to tell you
that they have definitely contributed to them.
Picture yourself
as a twenty-one year old phenom. Picture yourself suddenly struggling
to do what you do best. Now picture two dozen cameras following
you everywhere from the pitcher's mound to the toilet. Picture a
dozen talking heads informing the 135 million sports fans in this
country of how much you're sucking every five days. Yeah, I'd be
a little shaken up, too. These blithering morons won't put to rest
a story that probably should have been buried back in February down
in Jupiter, Florida. Hell, I feel a little guilty myself for using
it as fuel here. The media is always reminding us that they're pulling
for Rick. Well, I'm pulling for Rick, too, but that doesn't mean
I have to show video of him pitching wild every five seconds, never
fail to mention his encarcerated father every five minutes, etc.
This proves my point that the media has no respect for anyone (aside
from President Clinton and his lackeys), and has a willingness to
destroy reputations and futures that would make the CIA blush.
Clinton commits
fucking treason (dammit, it's true, and you can't convince me otherwise!
I'm past my days of dubious liberal-bashing, but I just don't like
the guy, or his husband) and the media kisses his ass with glee
and praises him to no end. Bush drinks a beer too many, does drugs
and stumbles over words like "cat" and the media is all
over it like vultures. I guess those are good reasons, as long as
they do it to everyone.
|
Oil
drilling in Alaska?! Dun-dun-dun! |
Here's
another issue that the media has some involvement in, which I'll
discuss in a moment. As you know, gas is quite costly these days.
In an attempt to relieve some of the pressure on every Tom, Dick,
and Harry that owns a vehicle, the Prez has proposed an expansion
of oil drilling in Alaska. Now, I'm against this drilling, but I'll
tell you why momentarily. Anyway, drilling in Alaska, right? Wait!
Here comes the media-backed EPA (and other small organizations)
saying that the dreaded, villainous "Big Oil" will destroy
the caribou population (as well as polar bears, seals, what have
you), showing us video clips of some caribou standing around an
oil refinery... grazing peacefully... not seeming to be suffering
at all. "Big Oil" is destroying the wildlife. Uh-huh.
Not only was there plenty of edible growth in this footage (proving
that wildlife will live!), but the wildlife seemed to care
less about that hulking refinery in the background (the same way
that wildlife around here cares less when something is built). Let
me put it this way: The wildlife reserve upon which these refineries
are being built consists of 19.6 million acres of land. Let's say
that oil stuff takes up a good 100,000 acres of land. That leaves
the wildlife with... *gasp*... 19.5 MILLION ACRES! Dear God, everything
is going to DIE!
Side notes:
That is what the media feeds you to make you not want oil-drilling
in Alaska. I'll tell you the real reason why there shouldn't be
oil-drilling in Alaska: We won't get it. Most of it will be going
to Asia, which won't decrease prices over here, anyway. The truth
is, there is nothing we, the United States, can do about crude oil
prices. All of the major oil companies work together to regulate
prices. This means when prices get too low, production is simply
cut, which drives prices back up. Simple supply and demand. Also,
I'll let you know that I don't like environmental groups, usually
because they are nuts and think that no animal should ever die.
I wonder what they'll be saying when such dangerous creatures as
cougars, bears, and, dare I say... moose, kill the rest of the wildlife,
as well as cows and stuff that provide the majority of us with food
(Hey, you jackasses that live in the city, listen up! You idiots
think that your food magically appears in the trucks that stock
your local market?! Just how stupid are you?), and, eventually,
take over the world under the influence of a super-intelligent
mutant bear or something. I would talk about gun control, too, but
that's for another rant, I believe...
I have one more
example of media jackassedness to relate before I move on the more
disturbing matters, this one involving the tax cut and the rebates
associated with it. The primary reason why the media-backed democrats
were against the tax cut was because people who did not pay taxes
would not be receiving a refund. So, basically, they didn't like
it because it wasn't giving poor people free money. Wha? Tim Russert
of Meet the Press was interviewing Oklahoma senator Nichols (a republican),
asking why the people who didn't pay taxes wouldn't be receiving
a tax rebate. Nichols responded by saying that if a citizen didn't
pay taxes, they would not receive a tax rebate. Makes sense, right?
Well, Russert didn't seem to understand, and stresses the fact that
1/3 of Oklahoma's population is too poor to pay taxes, and they
really could use that rebate [Frog: Rebate? Are you an idiot, Russert?
They didn't pay anything to get a rebate!]. Nichols further emphasizes
the fact that non-taxpayers will not be receiving a tax rebate.
I would like for someone to please explain to me why a non-taxpayer
would receive a tax rebate. As far as I'm concerned, that's not
a rebate, that's welfare, and poor people are already getting that.
Some already abuse that system. How stupid can a person be to expect
non-taxpayers to get a damn tax rebate? This type of ignorance (or
manipulation, depending on how you look at it) is, indeed, saddening.
I don't care how poor these people are. If you don't pay taxes,
you get no tax rebate. It's a simple concept. If I have
a coupon that says "30 cents off a bag of Fritos", I can't
redeem that coupon without first buying the Fritos. Same concept.
I'd like to see someone try to argue this.
|
I
assume you know where this comic is leading... |
[Note:
That comic was not meant to offend jocks and popular kids. It was
meant to offend losers who shoot jocks and popular kids, parents
of the victims, and lawyers.]
Oh, if only
I had a sack of oranges right now, I would personally head out to
Denver and batter the idiot lawyers who came up with this kind of
crap. We all know about Columbine: Insane kids forget that video
games only happen on TV screens, so they shoot up their school because
they were treated improperly by those who considered them outcasts.
In order to not sound like a jackass, I'd like to remind you people
to not make fun of others that don't deserve it (if they do deserve
it, have at it. I'll be happy to join ya). Not only does it piss
me off, but it may cause unnecessary death.
Anywho, the
parents of the victims of Columbine were obviously brainwashed by
their attorneys for filing a lawsuit like this: Twenty-five (yes,
twenty-FIVE) entertainment companies are being sued for
an estimated five (yes, FIVE) billion (no, not million,
but BILLION) dollars for, get this, inspiring the psycho
kids to attack their classmates. Among the companies being included
in the suit are ID Software, Nintendo, Sony, AOL Time Warner, New
Line Cinema, etc.
Yes, I do sympathize
the parents, but come ON! This is the most blatant scapegoatation
that I've ever seen.
As a real life
player of video games, I would like to share my experiences with
you. Video games do not influence people to kill in real life. If
they do, then said people are either a) mentally challenged, b)
insane, or c) pathetic morons. It's true. When I play Smash TV and
kill about 100,000 men and robots (takes about 10 minutes) before
I run out of lives, I feel better. It doesn't make me want
to go kill real people (now, killing real robots, on the other hand,
I see no problem with). Video games are stress relievers,
and if you are convinced that they turn young children into violent
killing machines, you've been falsely informed by either the media,
or an attorney, of whom about 90% don't know shit about video games
(anytime I see a news report on video games, they just butcher them
because they know so little; same thing with pro wrestling).
The main target
of the lawyers is the game Doom. Doom was released way back in 1992
or 1993, and featured a marine or some sort of military man who
found himself battling his way through Hell (blowing up lots of
crazy demons, floating heads and such). Oh, and if you have no problems
with going to Hell, you better hope there aren't any horseflies
there. Horseflies are the worst, I'll tell ya, especially when like
five of them are attacking at once. AND they fly 90 mph, so you
can't even outrun the little bastards.
Sorry.
Anyway, they
say it's all Doom's fault because the kids mention Doom in their
pre-psychotic outburst journals, and they also made some kind of
video saying that they came up with the idea from Doom. If this
is what the lawyers are basing everything on, then that means that,
theoretically, the game Double Dragon could be sued because I once
hit my brother in the head with a wooden stick while he was playing
Double Dragon. I didn't hit him on purpose, but a lawyer could still
find a way to sue Tradewest (distributors of Double Dragon for the
NES), Technos Japan Corporation (makers of Double Dragon), Nintendo
(for porting Double Dragon on their system), the actual video game
cartridge, the wooden stick, my dad (since he probably made the
stick), and me. Doesn't that sound a little extreme? Probably. Well,
if that's extreme, then 25 entertainment companies is extreme, too.
And, we forget the real victims: video game characters.
  Poor
Billy Lee. His girlfriend got kidnapped by his brother Jimmy's band
of thugs, and he wants her back. So, how does Billy solve his problems?
He lifts weights all night, and proceeds to beat the hemoglobins
out of every goon in his path. Sure, he gets his girlfriend back,
but he's theoretically being blamed for real life murders now. For
shame.
 And
what about Abobo? A loyal member of Jimmy Lee's gang, Abobo is supposed
to beat up Billy Lee when necessary. Sometimes he succeeds, and
Jimmy is pleased. But he, too, has theoretically taken part in the
murder of real people. Shame on you, Abobo! Shame on you.
To the right
is a comic I made. It depicts the dialogue between characters in
video games that the players can't see, and is supposed to prove
just how ludicrous lawsuits like this one are. If you break this
suit down, about 23 of the companies are being sued simply because
they exist. You can't sue a company for entertaining millions when,
out of those millions, two go nuts. This lawsuit will fail.
If it doesn't, then the judge probably won't last long before he's
offed by the ninjas that are on call for AOL Time Warner, a company
that had absolutely nothing to do with the murders. Please
keep in mind that, according to a survey of 100 non-idiots, out
of the 25 companies, 25 had nothing to do with the murders. I'm
really getting sick of people who murder others not even getting
blamed for the actual murders. Instead, entertainment companies,
video games, and gun companies are blamed. Or, murderers exploit
the ever-popular Temporary Insanity Made Me Do It™ plea to
relieve some of the blame put on them. Bull-shit. Anyone who considers
temporary insanity to be a legitimate plea is... a fool. People
aren't temporarily insane! If a guy kills another guy, he's just
plain nutty... AND a murderer! There's no temporary about it, there's
something wrong with that fella. Just like there was something wrong
with the two kids at Columbine who murdered. Video games didn't
make them do it. They did it because they were bonafide psychotics.
Period.
These lawsuits
are simply getting out of hand. People are making millions of dollars
out of their sheer ignorance. As far as I'm concerned, any white-trash
who hires a lawyer and sues General Electric because they were stupid
enough to iron the clothing on their bodies should be immediately
air-lifted to a remote, yet tropical, island. Repeat ad nauseam
to every moron who files these ridiculous lawsuits, and let them
duke it out in the first annual "Bumble in the Jungle Tournament
of Champions." The winner gets to return to his or her normal
life. All of the tournament losers are then sued by the non-idiots
of the world for "inspiring idiocy."
Whew... now
THAT was fun! Whoops, I almost forgot: Derriere!
|
