HOGS GONE WILD: the less successful branch of Joe Francis’ creepy media empire

so after all that “website problem drama” and “ANGRY WIZARD drama,” i figured it would be reassuring to our audience (all three of you) to get back to the usual: dashing off “updates” in the forum of linking to random, weeks-old internet news articles and making some jokes about them. actually, it’s possible that one of these is accidentally current (or fairly current, at least), but i’m not sure of that; in either case, let’s just consider that an unfortunate accident that we’ll try not to repeat and get right into the “internet comedy!”

Amanda Clayton
although i would like to thank this welfare cheat for being white so that we can avoid the outburst of internet racism that always accompanies stories about welfare cheats

Michigan woman wins $1-million lottery, still collects welfare

now, i know it’s not really kosher to declare that the victim of a crime has done anything to bring that crime upon themselves… but at the same time, i have a feeling that if something criminal was to happen to this woman at the hands of Michigan taxpayer, we’d probably all be sitting here thinking, “well, i imagine she should have predicted SOMETHING along those lines occurring.” and why is that? well…

“A Michigan woman who won a $1-million lottery jackpot last fall admits she’s continued to collect $200 a month in public assistance. That’s not all: The 24-year-old also says she deserves the financial aid because she’s now saddled with expenses related to two houses.”

yes, this is really one of those situations where people need to stop speaking in their own defense, because the last argument you should follow “i still need my welfare after winning a $1 million lottery” is “i DESERVE the financial aid because i have so many houses!” actually, i guess the LAST argument you want to make is “i DESERVE the financial aid because i spent all my lottery winnings on heroin and child pornography sold to me by Communists,” but the one she’s making here still seems to be incredibly unsound. of course, someone smart enough to shut up in this situation is probably also smart enough to not immediately waste all their lottery winnings, so…

she also added in a quote in another article on this story that:

“[Clayton] will keep using her Bridge card until the state cuts her off and said she deserves it. ‘It’s just hard, you know. I’m struggling,’ she said.”

…which, if nothing else, does lead me to believe that she’s not actually smart enough to know what the word “struggling” means.

“The situation came to light this week after the Detroit-area Local 4 station received a hot tip: “Please do a story on lottery winners on welfare.” Local 4 did just that. First, it tracked Amanda Clayton using her public assistance card at a local snack market. Then, it tracked Clayton out to her home, where she was packing up a U-Haul for a move to her new place — a home she had bought with cash from her lottery earnings, along with a new car.”

i think the best part about this is the small scale, almost insulting use of the public assistance: you’ve just bought a house AND a car, both presumably with the sudden windfall of lottery cash… but damn if i am going to shop at my local snack market with said lottery cash! i mean, at least buy something more than some candy and beer with your morally-outrageous purchase!

“Clayton, stopped in her driveway, barely flinched when the camera and microphone were thrust in her face. Nor did the single mother of two backpedal; she said she deserves the extra income just like any other taxpayer on public assistance.”

…and the whole thing is made even better by this woman being a (presumably-unmarried) mother of two. no time to plan for my children’s future; i need to spend this money ASAP! and yes, i know that buying a new house could in many respects be a form of planning for her children’s future, but i’m going for comedic outrage here, so there’s no need to be so technical. but okay, she says she needs the extra income “just like any other taxpayer on public assistance.” so… can we elaborate on that?

“I thought that they would cut me off, but since they didn’t, I thought maybe it was OK because I’m not working,” Clayton told the reporter. “I feel that it’s OK because, I mean, I have no income, and I have bills to pay. I have two houses.”

…wow.

now, i DO like the subtle shift from “i thought maybe it was OK” to “i feel that it’s OK.” i’m wondering how long she pondering this question for, but i imagine it can’t have been longer than 13 or so minutes. then again, we’re obviously not dealing with a deep intellect here, considering that she seems to see no connection between “i have bills to pay” and “i just bought myself a second house with my lottery money.” i suppose at the very least, though, she’s not saying “i have bills to pay, and i’ve spent all my massive lottery winnings on rolling around in a giant pile of money, thereby tearing all the bills and rendering them unusable in legal commerce.” that WOULD be more ridiculous.

“[Clayton] also quibbles with the reporter who wonders how she can justify taking public aid after winning $1 million on the state’s “Make Me Rich!” television show. After taking the lottery payment in a lump sum and paying taxes upfront, she walked away with much less.”

see, my rule of thumb goes like this: if someone makes more per year in salary than the amount of lottery money you’ve theoretically wasted, they can manage to understand. if i make $30000 a year and i hear you won and spent $10000? well, hey, i get it: cars need repairs and past-due bills need to be paid. i might not like that you’re a shamelessly-spending unwed mother of two, but i can wrap my mind around it. but if i make $30000 a year and i hear you won and spent $500000? well… i might just suspect you of being a terrible person, to say the least.

“It’s not clear that Clayton is actually doing anything wrong, mind you. She does not have a job, and as a result, does not technically have any income.”

you know, i’m going to make a call on this: she’s doing something wrong. maybe she’s not doing something ILLEGAL, but she’s definitely doing something WRONG.

“But the idea of a lottery winner on welfare does not sit well with Michigan state Rep. Dale Zorn. The Republican lawmaker has introduced legislation, now pending, that would trigger a state notification whenever a resident wins more than $1,000 in the lottery. He authored that legislation after it was discovered that another Michigan resident, Leroy Fick, continued drawing public assistance after winning a $2-million lottery jackpot in 2010.”

you know, i think the really sad part here is that this has apparently happened before AND involving a large sum of money, and thus there HAS to have been outrage over this issue… and yet not one person managed to take political advantage of that to get something passed.

“The problem, Zorn told The Times on Wednesday, is that many lottery winners opt to take their earnings in a lump sum and pay their taxes upfront. That helps them to largely fly under the radar. Under Zorn’s pending legislation, lottery officials would be required to alert the state’s Department of Human Services, which oversees public assistance, whenever a state resident wins more than $1,000. The winner’s name would then be checked against the state’s roster of financial aid recipients. Winners would be required to undergo a reassessment to see if they still deserve aid after their financial windfall, he said. “Public assistance is for those people who can no longer purchase food for their families, or pay their heating bills,” Zorn told The Times. “It’s not here to help those who win millions of dollars.””

Dale Zorn also added, “i would, however, like to thank Miss Clayton for giving me a surefire political example regarding welfare abuse that no Democrat in their right mind can dare take issue with in public.”

“For her part, Clayton is no longer talking to the media. But her mother is. “Until the bill’s passed, apparently it’s legal, and people need to leave her alone,” Euline Clayton told the Detroit News, referring to Zorn’s bill. “I’m not saying it’s the right thing to do. But it’s nobody’s business if she’s not breaking the law.””

again, i agree, she’s probably not breaking the law (although not knowing the specifics of Michigan’s welfare laws, i don’t know if there’s some regulation she’s violating or not), and i agree, people should leave her alone in the sense of not going to her house and committing crimes against her. but frankly, if you’re going to out yourself for being an evil thieving cunt on the news, then i think it’s only right we be allowed to point out that you’re an evil thieving cunt based on what you have ADMITTED YOU HAVE DONE here on the internet. fair enough?

Kevin Brann
behind these disgruntled eyes is the soul of a man who simply wants to be left to his alcoholism and sexual anus plugs

DUI driver with sex toy in tush rear-ends other driver

well, there’s distracted driving and then there’s DISTRACTED driving. also, i like how in a fairly graphic scenario such as this one, we’ve decided to run with the word “tush” in the title. it certainly makes the incident seem much more light and whimsical.

“A driver with a “sexual anus plug in his rectum” was jailed after investigators say he rear-ended another driver and had more than five times the legal limit of alcohol in his blood, according to a recently released arrest affidavit.”

so this raises three questions:

01. when we say “sexual anus plug” … is there really any other kind of anus plug? now, i’m not trying to be flip here. i just cannot think of a non-sexual scenario where a man (or woman, i suppose) requires a plastic plug to be jammed into his anus, although i suppose there COULD be a medically-necessary scenario. or maybe this is just the official legal term as used by the officer in question?
02. was it REALLY necessary to use the word “rear-ended” there? i mean, that HAS to be intentional;
03. what’s the more distracting part: the “five times the legal limit of alcohol” or the “sexual anus plug in his rectum?”

“[About] 11:20 a.m. Feb. 24 as Martin County Sheriff’s investigators went to a two-vehicle crash at U.S. 1 and Seabranch Boulevard in Hobe Sound. A deputy determined Kevin Brann, 41, had rear-ended another vehicle. Officials also determined Brann smelled strongly of alcohol.”

AGAIN WITH THE “REAR-ENDED”

“Brann’s speech was slurred and mumbled, his eyes bloodshot and glassy. A deputy gave Brann, who’d urinated in his pants-“

well, it’s good to see that this Kevin Brann character keeps it extra classy.

“-field sobriety exercises before arresting him on a DUI with property damage charge. Brann “soiled himself” en route to the slammer. “The defendant had a sexual anus plug in his rectum, which he removed, or it fell out in the rear of my patrol car,” an affidavit states.”

now i would think you’d handcuff someone who you’ve arrested for a tragically-intoxicated DUI, and if you did, how exactly is he REMOVING this “sexual anus plug?” on the other hand, i could totally see some drunk Floridian saying to himself, “watch me teach this officer a lesson for arresting me!” … although this still assumes he has the ability to remove the plug. unless all along we’ve been talking about some violent anal expulsion of the device, which i now REALLY regret thinking about.

“The length, girth and color of the “sexual anus plug in his rectum” was not listed in the affidavit. Also not specified was the make and model of the plug and an explanation of how it ended up in his bottom.”

…and it was at this point when i began to wonder, “why does the author of this article really need information regarding the length, girth and color of this sexual anus plug? even if you assume the size part is relevant to wondering how all this happened… the color? really? and this same disbelief extends to needing to know the make and model of the plug.

as far as the explanation, you ARE talking about a urine-covered man with a blood alcohol content of roughly 0.409-0.412, so it’s entirely possible he doesn’t even remember putting the plug in there.

wild boar, apparently 'going wild in Islamabad'
it turns out that Pakistani wild boars are completely unfazed by the prospect of facing down “pitchforks” and “rocks”

hogs going wild in Islamabad

so from the jump, there’s two things i like about the tone of this piece:

01. the INCREDIBLY DRAMATIC tone of the hog uprising, as the synopsis immediately tells us “with a police officer wounded and the presidential palace breached, the Pakistani capital has launched a fresh offensive against a uniquely feared enemy.” it turns out this is simply wild boar, but oh my, all this DRAMA!
02. the way it sounds like these hogs have risen up in righteous anger at a populace that has insulted and marginalized them.

“Each night, packs of the hairy beasts emerge from Islamabad’s river beds, parks and scrubland to rifle through the overflowing rubbish bins of its mostly wealthy residents and growing number of restaurants. … The animals can weigh up to 180 to 220 pounds (80 kilograms to 100 kilograms) and have razor sharp teeth. Adult males come armed with upward curving tusks. While they scurry off at the site of humans, they charge when cornered, alarmed or wounded and are a major cause of traffic accidents in the city.”

so while i grant you that any animal with the ability to injure you CAN be dangerous when cornered, i find it more difficult to freak out about any animal that can be described as “scurrying off at the sight of humans.” not even running off at the sight of humans, SCURRYING off. this is the way you describe mice and other 100% non-threatening animals!

“The latest chapter of man versus hog played out in a city center police station last week. “Someone shouted ‘watch your back’ but before I could look round the animal had hit me,” said Sajjad Hussain, who was on duty when the animal slipped in past the high, razor wire-topped blast walls after guards opened the gates to let in a car. Hussain had a gash in his stomach that required eight stitches and is on medical leave.”

so i suppose it’s less than reassuring that the razor-wire-topped blast walls of a Pakistani police station can be defeated by one sneaky pig … a fact made even more depressing when you consider that this particular hog was clever enough to get subsequently trapped in a large pit and shot by police there. hopefully, though, the police responded to this in a measured, reasonable fashion?

“The pig was like a terrorist. We shot him down,” said station chief Fayaz Tanooli. “I have told the guards if another pig gets in then they will be dismissed.”

…ah, well, so much for that. although, in fairness, aren’t “rogue pigs” and “terrorists bend on destabilizing the nation and equipped with heavy arms” roughly the same thing?

“The hogs have also encroached upon the lavish, not to mention tightly guarded, houses of the president and prime minister. A team has been dispatched to lay poison mixed with molasses or maize, said Malik Aulya Khan, the city’s environmental chief. “We are making special efforts. We have killed many with poison,” he said. “Somehow they enter under the fences.””

SOMEHOW? either the fences don’t go all the way to the ground, or the hogs burrow in. we’re not talking about rocket science here; these are random wild boar!

“Wild boars are found all over Pakistan, and are one of its major agricultural pests, gobbling their way though millions of dollars of wheat and sugarcane crops. In Punjab province in the 1980s, the government initiated a bounty system whereby villagers were paid for each tail they delivered, but it was discontinued for lack of funds.”

something tells me that the funding from the fences and molasses could PERHAPS be routed to a fund to pay these villagers, especially considering that the fences and molasses are apparently not even working… but then maybe i’m simply more versed in the ways of “crafty animals” than the entire police and political establishments of Pakistan.

“The animal’s abundance has made the country a prime spot for boar hunting, said Qaiser Khan, who leads hunting parties to Pakistan, including teams of foreigners who like to shoot hogs. He said that teams must sign a contract stipulating they will not cook the meat or ask staff to so. He said hunting in Islamabad was unlikely to get many takers because it was not “worth the hassle” of coordinating with police and city authorities. Moreover, shooting hogs with a shotgun was dangerous because the hunter had to be up close, and the weapon risked wounding, but not killing, the animal, he said.”

see, again we find the Pakistanis making this incredibly ridiculous for themselves. they KNOW they have a wild boar problem… but the police and city authorities can’t make it easy to coordinate with foreign hunters who want to shoot said wild boars? even if foreign hunters could theoretically be brought in in small, controlled groups for the express purpose of shooting boars? FRUSTRATION RISING. eh, well, keep leaving out random molasses, as i am sure THAT will convince boars to stay out of the city.

…and that will do it for us. stay tuned for next time when we’ll probably have a 100% decrease in stories about wild boars!

Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *