i think i have, in the past, complained about trying to do these little intro paragraphs, especially when the topic of the update is a) yet another pair or trio of news articles that i am making fun of that b) aren’t really brought together by any strong theme. sometimes i can go with “more stuff about bears” or “the excellence of bears” or “bears: doin’ thangs” and have it work … but today i cannot, and so there’s a little bit of rambling going on here. okay, on with the articles:
ah, well, when i see the feet in the shoes, i see how damned important it was to scam money from the British government to have those feet chopped up for fashion purposes
this concept (“girl lies to get medical procedure in order to wear designer shoes”) is absolutely a story that, if i didn’t know specific information like “Â£5000” and “National Health Service,” i would assume feature some goddamn brain-dead American girl who just HAD to be wearing the latest fashion, whatever the latest fashion is. (is it Jimmy Choos? i have no idea) but it turns out that women who are terrible, terrible people are the same all across the world, at least fundamentally. if they’re from a poorer country, they might not be able to scam the government out of fashion-oriented surgery. prepare to get annoyed further!
“A teenager lied to doctors to qualify for a Â£5,000 operation on the NHS so she could squeeze her feet into designer shoes, she admitted yesterday.”
i don’t want to be redundant with my outrage, so i’ll just say that sometimes, late in the evenings, i feel completely disgusted with the human race. usually when this happens, i’ve read about a story like this during the day.
“Hannah Bailey was referred for foot re-shaping surgery at 19 after telling her GP she was in excruciating pain. In reality, she was simply frustrated that her ‘wide and ugly’ feet prevented her from wearing the latest fashions.”
let’s just get this out of the way: this is absolutely perfect fodder for conservatives that do not like anything approaching socialized medicine. i don’t know how you get around it, since “excruciating pain” can be so subjective, and i personally have witnessed rich old white women citing “excruciating pain” in order to take advantage of our non-socialized medical system, so it’s not like this is only a problem for socialized medicine. still… there has to be SOME way to detect this kind of nonsense, right? right?
“Surgeons broke her foot in four places, cut her tendons and ligaments and stapled two-inch screws to her bones â€“ all so she could be comfortable in designer heels. Miss Bailey, now 23, said: ‘I knew the only way to get something done was to say my feet were really bad. I had to exaggerate the pain I was in.'”
wait… “exaggerate the pain she was in?” there was no exaggeration: her feet were fine! so i like how even in a news article wherein she essentially gloats over scamming a public health system out of money SOLELY for the purpose of her wearing fashionable shoes (which she’s surely spending all HER money on), she STILL can’t be honest about the circumstances of this surgery. for the record, the correct phrase would be “i had to lie about being in pain.”
“Since the taxpayer-funded surgery, she has spent around Â£9,000 on designer shoes, including her favourite Jimmy Choo heels.”
so at this point i’m not understanding why she couldn’t just get the surgery if she had Â£9000 to burn on nonsense. no… wait… it’s probably because she couldn’t lie and scam the taxpayers out of shoe money. URGE TO KILL RISING
“Miss Bailey said she had been unhappy with the ‘disgusting’ shape of her feet since she was 13, and had been to see her doctor about it more than 20 times. She said: ‘Because my feet were so wide, wearing heels gave me excruciating pain. When I wore trainers it was fine, but as soon as I put any pressure on the balls of my feet, the pain was too much.'”
so, a couple of things:
01. not to be flip, ladies, but isn’t the whole deal with heels that they’re slightly uncomfortable, but that you wear them because they look so good with formal apparel? and that, when you’re NOT dressed to the nines, you DON’T wear heels? not trying to be sexist here, just trying to understand.
02. i have absolutely GOT to find out what these 20+ visits were like. “doctor, i’m having pain in my feet. well, not right now, since i am wearing normal shoes.” the doctor has to be holding his head saying “for god’s sakes, stop wearing fucking heels!” … and she’s probably staring blankly back at him. “i don’t understand, doctor. my feet still occasionally hurt when i wear uncomfortable shoes!”
“She discovered foot re-shaping surgery was available on the NHS for patients in serious pain. She went to see her GP and was asked to rate the amount of pain she was suffering on a scale of one to ten. ‘I wasn’t in any pain because I was wearing trainers but I said a seven or eight,’ she said.”
right, see, again, this is not an exaggeration. saying 7 or 8 when you’re feeling 1 or 2 is an exaggeration. saying 7 or 8 when you feel NO pain (or, to put it another way, o) is called “an outright lie.”
“Miss Bailey, who works in marketing-“
of course she does.
“-said her foot was unbearably painful after the surgery and remained swollen for two years, but added that she wanted to have a similar operation on her left foot in the next few years. She said: ‘I don’t feel guilty about getting my feet done on the NHS-“
again, to translate: “i don’t feel guilty about lying to steal taxpayer money to spend on a cosmetic procedure that i could have paid for myself.”
“-My foot still hurts every now and then, I get shooting pains and sometimes swelling, but it’s been worth it. Now, I’m happy with my feet and I only wear designer shoes.'”
which also means that this ultimate irony has happened: her feet never hurt in normal shoes, and so she had a medical procedure that makes her foot hurt ALL the time. plus, if she can wear the designer shoes right now with some discomfort … what’s the point of having the second procedure? fuck it, i know, the real question is “what’s the point of having any procedure done?” actually, it’s probably sometime more like “why couldn’t this girl’s parents have used the NHS to have her aborted?”
although i WOULD like to point out that the Daily Mail labeled her photo as “liar,” so that made me laugh.
one thing i love about alligators: they always have this awesome, turbo-satisfied expression on their faces
so some time back, there was a story about the ultimate marijuana farm security system being bears, and given that it was a news story featuring “some ridiculous circumstance that we could make jokes about” and “bears,” you know i had to cover it in an update. assuming anyone other than myself read it and gave a damn, it was a smashing success. anyway, you should probably have figured it would only be a matter of time before someone tried to top those bears:
“Department of Justice agents raided an East Hemet house Monday night and seized almost 2,300 marijuana plants valued at least $1.5 million — and a four-foot alligator being used to help guard the stash.”
ah, yes, an alligator. actually, though… i don’t know that i would find an alligator more fearsome than a bear: bears are huge and seem like they want conflict sometimes, whereas i once watched video of hippos eating debris off crocodiles without reaction, which has kind of made me assume that crocodilians of all sorts cannot be relied upon to violently defend someone’s narcotics stash. but, on the flip side, there’s the hilarious image of some guy actively trying to one-up those bear-packing dealers with his OWN animal.
“Agents with Arcnet, the Allied Riverside Cities Narcotics Enforcement Team, raided the house and found what they described as a “watchgator” named Wally in a back room, where it was living in a black cement-mixing tub full of water. One man was arrested, and the gator was taken to a sanctuary in San Bernardino County’s High Desert.”
alright… how did they figure out that the alligator was named Wally? they asked the guy while they were arresting him? they found a massive dog bowl with the name “WALLY” emblazoned on it? and does it really mean anything to name a gator anyway? i’m not sure they’re the kind of animal that can truly appreciate the fact that some dumbass guy has given them a ridiculously inappropriate name. an alligator should really have a cooler name than “Wally.”
“The suburban house on Sunset Lane, in an unincorporated area outside Hemet, was a front for an unlicensed, home-operated medicinal marijuana dispensary, ARCNET Commander Brian Link said. The task force, made up of DOJ agents and local authorities, seized 2,285 marijuana plants of various sizes, processed marijuana and hashish, Link said.”
now i’m fine with medical marijuana and generally support the decriminalization of all sorts of drugs… but isn’t an “unlicensed, home-operated medicinal marijuana dispensary” just a some drug dealers selling marijuana? is there a legitimate distinction that i am missing?
“The gator was being kept as a pet, but also was used in the growing area to protect the pot, Link said.”
MAKE UP YOUR MIND, OFFICER
“The gator, which weighed about 55 pounds, was reported to the California Department of Fish and Game, which then contacted the Phelan-based Forever Wild Exotic Animal Sanctuary. “He was extremely healthy — a little too well taken care of,” said Joel Almquist, who runs the sanctuary.”
honestly, i don’t know what this contradiction in terms means. usually an overfed animal isn’t “extremely healthy,” so i can only assume that what Almquist meant to say was “oh, this alligator was cared for wonderfully and was well-fed, but we’re pretty sure they were getting this thing high all the time. no, i don’t know why someone would get an alligator high. no, i don’t think it would be hilarious or even ‘bitching’ to do so.”
“It’s still an alligator; some are pretty mellow, but if you get bit by a three-footer, you’re going to remember it for a long time. It’s kind of like being bit by a vise with teeth. It’s not a pleasant experience.”
some alligators are pretty mellow? see, this is exactly what i was saying earlier about how i’m not sure this is a legitimate upgrade over a bear (or a TEAM of bears).
“Wally is an American alligator, the same species as those in the Florida Everglades. Almquist received a similar report of an alligator in Hemet several weeks ago, but it was never found. He said he doesn’t know if this is the same one.”
so you all probably know this by now, but i LOVE when mysterious-but-mundane crimes get mentioned in articles like this. why is there some reporter even asking this question? “we heard there was a random alligator sighting weeks ago! is this the same alligator? can you get fingerprints from this alligator to prove it!” especially when, later in the article, they talk about how common gator calls are.
“One of their draws is because they are illegal. That gives them spice to have them,” Almquist said. “They’re cheap and they’re fairly easy to get.”
note to self: start using the phrase “that gives them spice” immediately.
“Brennan said having alligators released into the wild is a major concern. “It’s got very big jaws, a lot of teeth, and their brains are very small,” he said. “It can be really docile or aggressive, but there’s no predicting their mood or behavior. We don’t want them around people or kids or pets.””
meanwhile, Wally’s probably sitting in some water in a black plastic tub nearby thinking, “my brain is very small? i’m going to bite the shit out of this asshole.”
finally, in closing, America lost Nate Dogg this week, and given that this site sometimes goes into tangents where i go on and on about rap music, you know i care. now, okay, a lot of people will tell you that “Regulate” is his best song (and it is a classic) or that “Deez Nuuuts” is what really got him his start (and that might be true) … but this was always my favorite:
yes, okay, this is more a game trailer than an actual video for “‘Til I Collapse,” so you may have to do a little work on your own to check that song out. still … RIP, Nate Dogg. you were too beautiful to live. well, not YOU, but your cool voice.