Monthly Archives: August 2013

Worst song ever? I know worse (2005)

So apparently people really, really hate “We Built This City”, to the point where it wins a lot of “Worst Song Ever” votes.

As someone who finds it the fun, cheesy kind of bad, I find this offensive. I can name a lot worse. So I’m going to go through my own memory box and Billboard’s Top 100 lists (thank you Mr. In The Shadows), and find five songs from each year that are worse for every year from 1986 to 2010, for a nice round 25 years of godawful music that you can use to remind yourself that no, cheesy 80s sellout songs are not as bad as it can get.

Today, I’m going to go with 2005, which was not a good year for music. Let’s put it this way: I can think of exactly one song on the Billboard Top 100 that I would willingly listen to. Hollaback Girl is at #2. HOLLABACK. GIRL.

Yeah. This may not be much fun.

Continue reading


Leave a comment

Filed under Worse than WBTC

Why I don’t like the American right

This is building up to a “Why I Don’t Like The Australian Right” in a day or two. Be warned.

A fair bit of this comes from one twitter, which, as part of my non-idiot-shaming philosophy, will not be linked.


#10: “Government is untrustworthy, except when it comes to military force”

Government is untrustworthy. But you know what? The most untrustworthy bit is the military, because that is what totalitarian states use to maintain control.

And yet somehow American right-wingers are hugely in favour of the military. Which is kind of hilarious given their opposition to food stamp welfare, which feeds no less than 5000 soldiers on active service.


#9: “Poor people are just lazy.”

In a country with full employment and sufficient minimum wage, yes, lacking a job would be a sign that you don’t want one.

Your country has neither of those things. You do not have full employment. Your minimum wage is one third what it needs to be to produce a living wage. The politicians you are voting for are fighting against fixing those things. Try some empathy.


#8: “America is a Christian nation.”

“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion…” – the Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11.

Usually the people who spout this somehow miss that “sell all you have, and give it to the poor” is in theory a Christian teaching. See #9 and #7. (I say “in theory” because large Christian organizations never seem interested in actually practicing it to that degree, and large right-wing Christian organizations are more along the lines of “sell all you have and give it to ME”.)


#7: “Government aid creates a dependent class, unlike private charities.”

How? Faezress radiation? Why does one create that effect and not the other? People who need food are getting fed either way. Does the government’s involvement have some magical effect that turns otherwise decent human beings into leeches?

If I was starving, my response to being given food by the government would not be “sweet, I can now develop into a dependent class”. It would be “hell yes, now I don’t need to starve.”

Usually the people who say this are operating on a resentment that their taxes are being used to pay for this, which is why I don’t view it as honest – you’ve expressed a desire to pay less, you tend to assume everyone else will also pay less, exactly which programs do you expect private charities to cut to pay for the starving people you’ve dropped on them? Since you want to keep your money, why would you give it to charity rather than government when the sole difference is a thing that you made up?

(This one, incidentally, is complete bullshit. The vast majority of American welfare recipients are on welfare for less than two years. Hooray for zombie lies and inadequate fact checking I guess.)


#6: “Guns don’t kill people, people do.”

With guns.

Which are tools that make killing easier.

Especially when it comes to killing multiple people, which is very easy with an assault rifle and very hard with a butter knife.

Hey, here’s an idea. How about legalising the possession and sale of nuclear weapons? After all, nukes don’t kill people – people do.


#5: “We need guns to protect ourselves from the government.”

The government that has more guns and bombs than you do.

And which you in fact vote against when they propose reducing the number of guns and bombs they possess.

Consistency isn’t your strong suit, is it?


#4: “Firing a soldier who commits racist harassment of his co-workers threatens free speech.”

No it doesn’t. He is perfectly free to continue being racist in the unemployment line.

Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences. Nor does it entitle you to harass your co-workers, which is grounds for sacking in literally any other career in existence. Why should the military have to keep on douchenozzles when any other industry is entitled to give them the boot?


#3: “There are able-bodied people on food stamps!”

You do realise that 100% employment does not exist, right? So occasionally people who are not disabled will not be able to find employment? Would you seriously prefer them to turn to crime rather than seek out welfare? Because for reasons we’ve already discussed, it’s pretty clear that under your strategy they won’t be able to get help from the now overworked and under-financed private charities. You don’t like the tiny tax expenditure they cause you? How much will you like your increased insurance premiums when someone steals your TV to buy food?

Jokes aside, this is a symptom of a larger problem I see infecting right-wing politics today: “it is better for ten innocents to suffer than one guilty person go unpunished.” You see it in Abbott’s and Rudd’s boat people plans, in which dealing with people smugglers at the cost of their passengers is A-OK. (That their plans are worthless for this purpose is a thing I will get to later this week.) You see it in the idea that one welfare abuser automatically invalidates the whole system. I would rather have my tax occasionally go to help people who don’t deserve it than that it never go to people who do.

(Well, okay, I don’t pay tax at the moment because I can’t find a job that pays enough to get taxed, but you get the idea.)

This is not justice. It’s the exact opposite of justice. People complain when a few jerks ruin it for the rest of them because that should not happen; it’s so much worse when what’s at stake is starvation.


#2: Opposition to gay marriage.

I absolutely despise the idea that my gay sibling should not be permitted to marry whoever they like because of some idiot with his head up his backside. Case closed.


#1: “Champions of small government”

Did you perhaps nap through the entire Bush administration? You know, the guy who overrode as many checks and balances as possible? Nice going dudes. I’ve never been so glad to not live in your country as I was between 2001 and 2008.


Yeah, the next few weeks are probably not going to be fun for you guys, because:

a) With the election coming up, I’m thinking about politics more;

b) Thinking about politics usually makes me angry, because of how atrocious it gets sometimes;

c) When I’m angry, I usually vent it, and my parents are deeply bored of me venting to them.

On a brighter note, I would like to remind you that echidnas are the most adorable creatures ever. That waddling gait of theirs is surprisingly cute.

– OSM out

Leave a comment

Filed under Guide to Life

Can’t post. Dungeon Robber.

It can be found here.

That’s all.

– OSM out

Leave a comment

Filed under Randomness

The importance of checking URLs

So it turns out I neglected to check the link I provided yesterday and the initiative in question is hosted by Objective Ministries, one of the most successful Creationist satire sites on the Intertubes. I’m not the first to be taken in, I almost certainly won’t be the last, but I should have checked a little more intently.

I would like to apologise to all seven of my readers for not doing that.

– OSM out

Leave a comment

Filed under Surviving the Internet


I can’t tell whether this is a brilliant piece of satire or the dumbest thing I’ve seen in my life. Thank you, Nathan Poe.

For the linkshy, it is an expedition to find live pterosaurs to “prove” evolution is wrong.

Everything about this strategy is dumb.

Point #1: You Are Idiots.

The extinction of pterosaurs is not actually a fundamental plank of evolutionism. Finding live pterosaurs will not prove that evolution is wrong; it will prove that some ancient creatures survived, which is not really news given the coelocanth (although if you do find live pterosaurs, which you won’t because you would have severe trouble finding your arse with both hands and an atlas, that would be awesome). Providing a conclusive rebuttal to evolution would require one of the following.

  • Conclusively prove the Earth to be only ten thousand years old, by which I do not mean providing crappy pseudoscientific explanations for how physical laws change at random in order to explain away contradictory evidence.
  • Conclusively demonstrate that species cannot change, by which I do not mean applying folksy down-home ignorance masquerading as common sense.

Point #2: You Are Idiots.

People who accept evolution as the most reasonable interpretation of the evidence are not engaged in a propaganda campaign. You only think that because you are dumb. A major problem of the more fundamentalist brand of idiot is that they tend to assume that everyone knows, in their heart, that the belief system of the idiot in question is correct, and thus that anyone who disagrees with them is either directly or indirectly in the employ of Satan.

That is moronic.

If you cannot accept that other people do not find your religion as convincing as you do, shut the hell up. Atheists and agnostics don’t want to listen to you and other religious people are fed up with you being a jerk.

Point #3: You Are Idiots.

Just…for crying out loud. Go look at the page and tell me these people have come within 500 miles of a clue. I’ll wait.

“Velociraptors: Today terrorize the goat herders of Puerto Rico and are rumored to guard the remains of the Ark on Mt. Ararat. They have become vicious since the Fall as the result of the effects of genetic entropy, making them too dangerous for the sort of interactive public experience we have in mind.”

…you guys do know Puerto Rico is a real place, right? People really live there?

“Funding is being provided by Fellowship University, the Fairlight Institute, and donations from wealthy Christian businessmen who wish to remain anonymous at this time.”

Yeah, there’s probably a reason for that. It involves stylish canvas blazers with long sleeves that do up at the back.

– OSM out

Leave a comment

Filed under My Disbeliefs

CSU’s message system is not very good

Charles Sturt University has a somewhat poor message system.

Basically, instead of emailing you important messages, it sends you an email saying that you have an important message. So you end up logging into two sites only to discover that a student survey is considered an important message in CSULand.

This has been another useless ramble.

– OSM out

Leave a comment

Filed under Randomness

So. New Doctor.

It has been confirmed that Peter Capaldi will be the new Doctor Who.

I have no opinions about this whatsoever.

I have seen virtually none of his work. I don’t even remember him in the one episode of Who he was already in. I assume the BBC think he’ll do a good job, otherwise they wouldn’t have cast him, but I have no real points of comparison on which to judge him.

This is why I find the people who are panicking over him being appointed to be a bit frustrating. Guys: wait until we actually see him PLAYING THE DOCTOR before you panic. Then, if he’s not very good in the role, I will stand by you as you scream to the heavens about it. But please wait until you actually see how it pans out before you do so, you’re giving me a headache.

– OSM out


Filed under Randomness