There's no way they actually televised this, right?

For fuck's sake, I enjoy lowbrow humor and moronic puns more than the next guy, but come on. You didn't think this sounded silly before you put it on television? Then you're a fucking idiot and, quite frankly, I won't feel bad if you get shitcanned and your family can't make ends meet. Sometimes that's just what needs to happen.

The Corleone Institute is accepting nominations.

Through years and years of intensive study, the researchers at the institute have tried to determine who exactly is the most attractive woman on earth. Our researchers are far more lazy and prone to distraction than most, so there's no telling where this study will lead. It seems like some sort of ranking should be in the works, sooner or later.

In addition to their general laziness with respect to matters of research, the folks at the institute can sometimes become obsessed with a single topic and overlook the virtues of other topics. This week's 'topic' of choice seems to be Kate Beckinsale. On a scale of 1-100, her physical beauty is about a 150. And, from the little bit that I've seen the researchers have seen of her, she seems pretty cool. Plus a prim and proper London accent, just for good measure? Oy, she's gonna be tough to beat.

I don't know if any sort of ranking is actually forthcoming. I don't even know if anyone reads this blog anymore. When you work as a tech support guy for a major computer/cell phone company, and therefore spend all day telling elderly people how to set up their ID's for app purchases, blog topics don't come readily to mind. You typically just feel inclined to get as far away from your computer as possible. Maybe my blog has already entered the death spiral from which there is no exit. I don't know.

Assuming that anyone is reading though, the Corleone Institute welcomes all input. Is Kate Beckinsale the most desirable woman on earth? If not, we're accepting nominations. google-site-verification: googlea5e42937fcf52959.html

I was bored this morning. Then I saw an internet discussion about a certain movie.

And the rest, as they say, is history. Enjoy.

This one is not funny, and I don't enjoy writing it.

It has to be said though. Jon Hurdle at the New York Times is a sick, twisted man. Let me state, for the record, that I'm not arguing the merits of the Gosnell case here. I'm pretty sure he has another judgment coming. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's a whole other discussion. My point is one of basic English.

Hurdle reported on the story of...

"Dr. Gosnell, who according to prosecutors killed fetuses that were alive after they were aborted."

Kick it around in your brain for a minute, take it from a few different angles, and... shit, I don't know. Whatever. Fetuses that were alive after they were aborted.

Hurdle is referring to babies who were born - alive. Being born alive means, by definition, that they weren't aborted. Where I come from, those babies are called babies, or newborns, or humans, or any of a number of other nouns. I left out the gratuitous descriptions of what happened because I'm not trying to have an emotional discussion here. You have probably heard a few details about the case, despite the efforts of some media to ignore it. The gruesome actions of the doctor speak for themselves. But if you're a reporter, if your job is to report the story, is this really an acceptable twist on the English language? I submit to you that it's not. Otherwise, every run-of-the-mill birth in this country yields nothing more than a fetus that was never aborted.

There are thousands of posts on this blog. You can read them. I typically word things in a way that supports my viewpoint, or sounds amusing to me, or emphasizes whatever aspect of a story I intend to emphasize. This is how the real world works when it comes to writing, and I'm no innocent bystander on that score. I get it. But shit, man. Some of this really has gone too far. This is not a matter of 'pro choice' or 'pro life' being used to put a happy spin on one's chosen viewpoint. This is something else. And it makes me sad to think that we have "news" stories written in this manner.