The Other 95 Percent

Stuff

In honour of the late great Hunter S Thompson I am going to get blind stoned before writing this post entirely in the first person.

Ben Weerheym you are a bigger idiot then words can describe. Fuck off and die please. I don't want any more comments from scum like you on my website.

With those pleasantries out of the way, how are you doing homeboys and girls? This coming Thursday night (22nd Feb) I will be competing in Raw Comedy at the Hyde Park Hotel. Come along and check it out. I am the cool motherfucker who will be wearing a fonzie style leather jacket.

Get a sample of what I sound like on stage. Bear in mind that the microphone picks up my voice and nothing else so it may sound like the audience is not laughing. But they are I promise. I wouldn't mention it but for the fact that I realise I sound better with a laugh track. I am the Toni Pearen of Raw Comedy.

---

On "The Other 95" related matters, you may notice I have added another segment to this site. Another box. In fact a couple of new boxes. This box you're in now has the following quite long name...

"The Place Where The Funny Is Not As Important As The Truth"

On its own that doesnt make much sense. But let me make it clearer by telling you that the box to the right of the words you are reading right now is called....

"The Place Where The Truth Is Not As Important As The Funny"

Why is this necessary? What does this mean? Well it occured to me after I wrote an article that some misconstrued as homophobic that there are always 2 criteria by which I measure the things I write.

Is this Funny?
Is this True?

The problem with this is that the 2 are sometimes mutually exclusive. I can't make jokes about being gods gift to women and still be entirely truthful. I do, after all, know in my heart of hearts that I am not actually gods gift to women. Nor can I parody homophobes without from time to time pretending to be one. It seems clear then that to be funny I need, from time to time, to also be a liar. What is the solution to this conundrum? Do I have to choose between truth and humour in everything I write? Yes I do. But this doesn't mean that I cant write truthful articles that are also mildly humerous. Not does it mean I am unable to write funny articles that also bear some truth.

It just means that, in the interest of being lucid wordsmith, I have to prioritise my objectives at all times. There will be times (on the right of screen) when humour is the highest objective and truth is to be sacraficed apon the comedy altar. The there will be other times when the 2 are wholly compatible. There will be other times still when truth is the highest objective and comedy is to be put aside so that I can say something important about myself and/or the world I live in. The Funny and The Truth are always the objectives. It is just that I must always have it clear in my own mind, which takes precedence when the 2 clash.

---

You might also have noticed that the Sunday Times Magazine here in Perth gave this humble little website a plug. A big thank you to that delightful lady over at the STM, Retna Wooller, who is a top chick and is no less cool for the fact that she is working for Rupert Murdoch. Big ups. I like to pretend from to time that I am some sort of left-wing, anti-establishment, down-with-right-wing-jourlalism, kind of guy but clearly I am the biggest pussy around because News Limited has just now paid me the smallest smallest bit of attention and I am all ready to fellate Rupert Murdoch in gratitude. Or Retna Wooller if Rupert is too busy taking head from George Bush.

Brad and the BDSM Bunnies

Hello and welcome to my new regular segment "Homepage Roundup" where I will be having a look at all the wonderful hompages out there on the internet. And my aren't there an awful lot of wonderful and amusing websites out there. Well each week I will be reviewing two homepages. Heres this weeks two.

1)Brad Wellington's Homepage



The first homepage I'll be reviewing today is the homepage of Brad Wellington. Brad is the senior software engineer of the HBO group, and is also a member of the NLP group. His homepage has a Bio link which has lots of pertinent and worthwhile details about Brad's life.

Brad was born in Stamford CT in August 26th, 1976. He is the seventh child of ten brothers and sisters. (He says we shouldn't ask, as that would be its own website). He grew up in Danbury CT and went to the Wooster High School. After graduating he went to Brandeis University for his undergraduate degree. He majored in economics but also worked for four years at the Human Memory Lab. After graduating he went straight to work for his brother at the Opal Financial Group. Sales was definitly not for him, neither was spelling, so after spending a few months in Brazil he decided to continue with his college job and become a professional developer.



But this fascinating story doesn't end there friends. Because upon his return Brad moved to New York City where he began working for HBO and he has stayed there ever since. He says they are a great company to work for and have treated him quite well. (Only "quite well" Brad? Oh well. You get that don't you, eh readers.) While living here he met his wife Shayna, which is funny because they both went to same college, although they didn't meet. Pretty amusing huh. To end this breathtaking account of one man's thought-provoking existence, Brad recently graduated from NYU with an MS degree in computer science.



For those who would like to keep in touch with the enigma that is Brad, he also keeps a blog which he updates very frequently indeed. This is also conveniently linked to from his homepage. On this blog he "talks about software, politics and culture with lots of class (most of it low)". Ha ha! Most of it "low", eh, brad? Oh, you really are a card! Brad has other links to pages where he talks about scuba, music, his family and his friends.

His discussion of his musical abilities is particularly enlightening. He has been playing bass for nine years, on and off with different bands since back at Brandeis. He orignailly began by playing jazz with a group called Jam Apple Zig Zag, but decided that playing covers wasn't for him. Wow! respect. This guy is all about the rock. Brad I salute you, keep the rock real brother.



Brad also has wonderfully enthralling links to discussions of his software. These include: PlugProxy (A port forwarder), BESS (An NLP SPAM filter),P2 (An app I worked on at HBO) and BIM (Brad's IM client).

In conclusion, this reviewer would like to say that he found Brad's site very accessible, in that is was nicely laid out in a very straightforward and logical manner, allowing easy browsing. It was rather amusing and in places I found myself laughing out loud. Also it was very generously illustrated with lovely pictures. All in all a cracking good homepage that this reviewer enjoyed for hours on end. I give it 2 out of 10 points.

2) FoxWolfie Galen's Plushie Page

The second hompage I wanted to review this week is by a chap called FoxWolfie Galen who enjoys fucking stuffed toy animals. I enjoyed masturbating over this site, esp. the shackled bunny pics, and I give it 9.5 out of 10.



So until the next edition of Homepage Roundup, this is Simmachine signing off. Adios, readers!!!

Blogger Politics

"The other day I asked Bob Carr if he'd noticed the net changing Australian politics and his emphatic response was, "no, not at all". Despite the strident blogs, the exuberant conspiracy theorists and the new tribalisms of the web, it's hard to see solid evidence of significant impact. Yet."

Phillip Adams No doubt Bob Carr is right. The internet doesn't seem to impact so strongly on Australian politics. Yet. Which is where Phillip Adams is right. The question of the internet and its affect on politics is all balanced on another question: When will the political parties recognise the internet as an important constituency.

Link Dump

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/PopeJohnPaul2.htm

John Paul II vs Dan Brown

Well the Pope seems to be on the way out. Which is ok you know. He is 84 after all. It is not like he has had a short innings. He has been around for a long time, done a lot of neat stuff and now it is his time to go into the fertiliser industry.

Browsing the internet for funny things to say about the Pope I discovered that the Pope is actually a very prolific author. How about that! Dan Brown eat your heart out! It looks like there is going to be some substance to this post after all! Up till now I had planned on just repeatedly refering to the Pope as the Poop. But not now. Now I have something to run with. The Pope was the literary genius behind such classics as:

1. Redemptor hominis. All about the dignity of man. Somehow manages to gloss over the fact that men who like to wear chicken suits are not very dignified. This book was widely read after a Priest in Sao Paulo insisted that his entire congregation read it. It made it to number 1263 on the Amazon best sellers list.
   
   
2. Dives in misericordia All about the mercy of God. Why a loving God would need to display a capacity for mercy in the first place is never quite explained. Nobody can say if I am a particularly merciful person or not because I try not to do cuntish things to people in the first place. Sells over a dozen copies after numerous people confuse "John Paul II" with a Beatles biography of a similar name.
   
   
3. Sollicitudo Rei Socialis Latin for "On Social Concerns". This is the one where the pope criticises economic and political ideologies of both western capitalism and eastern communism. Whether or not the Pope has an degree in economics giving him the authority to pass judgement on such matters is never discussed with his publishers. The Pope waits anxiously for a Nobel Prize in economics but it is not forthcoming.
   
   
4. Veritatis Splendor This is latin for "the Splendour of Truth". Despite the title this book has very little to do with truth and alot to do with the same old staid churchy themes. One of the janitors at the Vatican rated this his favorite Pope publication.
   
   
5. Evangelium Vitae This is latin for "the Gospel of Life". This is the Pope at his creative best. This imaginative tome of fiction is all about how wanking, condoms and the contraceptive pill are tools of the devil and are inherently evil. JP2 (John Paul the second) also spends a few chapters pontificating on the evils of euthanasia. The Pontiff shows himself here to be in possession of a brilliant imagination and at the top of his literary talents. Despite being critically acclaimed, it sells poorly and the Pope is photographed leaving a book store with a dozen copies under his arm.
   
   
6. Ecclesia de Eucharistia This one is completely unreadable. I have no idea what the pope is talking about in this book. I have read it from cover to cover and I cant make heads or tails of it. This is around the time that the Parkinson's really started to kick in. Like the rest of the books authored by the Pope, Dan Brown does not decide to read this book.
   
   

Of course that old nemesis of the Pope, Dan Brown has also written a few books in his time. He has written...

1. Digital Fortress All about the National Security Agency and code breaking. A facinating look at cyber terrorism and a well written novel. Sells like a million copies.
   
   
2. Angels & Demons Join protagonist Robert Langdon as he has adventures around Vatican City. I haven't read this book but I am pretty sure there is a chapter where Langdon plays twister with the Pope. The Pope retires early because his arthritis and progressing Parkinson's prevent him from putting his left foot on the green circle. Angels and Demons sells a trillion copies. Or something like that.
   
   
3. Deception Point Ummm. Much like Digital Fortress only this time about NASA instead of NSA. The Pope read this book as he does all Dan Brown books.
   
   
4. The Da Vinci Code The most widely read book of all time. Even the Bible gets left in its dust. This book is about how the Holy Grail is not actually a chalice but rather a woman. Mary Magdalene to be precise. Dan Brown never actually says it openly but it is pretty obvious to all concerned what this implies: that to find imortality one must find the skeletal cunt of Mary Magdalene and drink from it. Harrison Ford is rumoured to be grateful that this book was released long after he played the part of Grail enthusiast Indiana Jones.

Oh wait. Shit. I am sorry, I should have given a warning. The preceeding passage contains plot spoilers. So if you intend on reading The Da Vinci Code I suggest you do not read the preceeding paragraph because it will spoil the plot.

---

Just by the way and quite incidental to everything else I have written here, does it really matter if we have a frail and senile old Pope? All the commentary in the news seems to be around whether or not the Pope should retire to allow a fit and more able Pope to take his place. The needle on the care-factor dial is struggling to rise above zero. I mean what important stuff does the Pope really do on a day to day basis that requires mental acuity or indeed the ability to stand, walk or speak? Ok so he travels a fair bit and that requires reasonable good health. But surely the Catholics of the world will get over it won't they? The Pope is too old to come and vist you. Deal with it.

Look. I am not saying that it wouldn't be better if we had a fit able-bodied Pope instead of this old frail one. I am just saying that when your job description involves waving from a Vatican window and muttering some unintelligible Latin into a microphone you probably don't need too many sick days and you can probably do a bang up job of it untill the day you die. Ok so maybe the Pope won't be authoring very many more books before he dies. But nobody reads them anyway. I'm just saying is all.

---

There is also quite a bit of debate about who will be the next Pope. Look.... the Pope before the current one was John Paul the First. This one we have now is John Paul the Second. I am going to have a wild stab in the dark and say that the next Pope will be John Paul the Third. It's not rocket science people.

Reader Mail

Lisa writes:

You are a fool!! First of all, just because someone is gay does not mean that they are interested in every man that walks on the face of the earth. What makes you think the guy in the office next to yours would even think about wanting to have sex with you. You are replusive and you probably get rejected by every woman you hit on. Chances are if women find you repuslive, and i do, then gay men do as well.

Grow up and get a real argument!

Hi Lisa,

Ordinarily I respond to all my reader mail in the order in which it lands in my inbox. There are several hundred emails in the que before yours but I am going to make an exception since you seem to be a particularly annoying breed of idiot.

Just for those following along at home this is what the stupid fat slapper is talking about. I made a serious investigation into the nature of homophobia and this hairy dyke has mistaken the subject for the researcher. I don't have to glowing green to be a nuclear scientist you dumb bitch.

Look, let me break it down into terms you can understand. Homophobia is an irrational fear. Of course it is and I would never, nor I might add have I ever, claimed otherwise. Being afraid of a homosexual is about as rational as being afraid of a guy who, unbeknownst to others, has a birthmark on his right bum cheek. But that still doesn't explain why a large percentage of straight men are, to variable degrees, afraid of gay-men. Do you ever stop to ask yourself questions like that Lisa? To stop, just for a moment, being such a dumb bitch and actually give thought to difficult questions despite the fact that they make you a little bit uncomfortable? Isn't it possibe that the only reason straight men fear gay men, if I can generalise like that, is because gay men are such an unknown quantity? If you had paid attention I made the suggestion that straight men find flamboyantly gay man to be LESS threatening then more ordinary mainstream gay men, which supports my theory that it is not homosexuality that people fear but rather the uncertainty. Ironically, if what I am saying makes any sense, and it does because you are a stupid dumb slut and I am right, then it means that gay men would be persecuted LESS rather then more if rather then keeping it in the closet so to speak, they were 100% honest with the world about their homosexuality. And one thing that gay men certainly are not, is honest about their sexuality.

But fuck it. I could lay it down for you in the simplest english imaginable. I could use small words and type them phonetically. It wouldn't matter. Because you are a stupid slapper and you will NEVER get it. So I should just go back to insulting you and not trouble myself with a lucid well reasoned explanation of my earlier post.

Incidentally you repulsive bitch, mispelling "repulsive" once looks like a typo, mispelling it twice makes you look like your not sure how to spell R-E-P-U-L-S-I-V-E.

Yours Truly,
?? Wangst McPants

PPS. Yes gay men do want to root me. Trust me. You dont understand how this works. I am straight so it goes without saying that gay men would love to stick the old pork sword into my virgin ass. Men are men are men. Whether they are straight, gay or Michael Jackson. So let me tell you something about men: they want what they can't have. Straight men want a Lesbian threesome, gay men want straight men and Michael Jackson wants Bart Simson. None of us can have what we want but it doesn't stop us from searching for it. What do you want Lisa? Call me some time.

Posted by ExistAngst at 02:16 AM | Comments (1)

Because Monkey's are worth it.

I actually moved out of home recently. It is quite a big step to take. For the first 22 years of my life my mother did everything for me and then suddenly when I am living on my own I have to do everything for myself. Moving out of home is one of the most independent things I have ever done in my life. Except for the times I have sex. Those are pretty independent also.

One of the things I struggle with the most is going grocery shopping. It is very confusing. I get particularly confused each time I walk down the toiletries aisle. It seems to me that the purpose of shampoo these days is to put food in your hair. That seems to be what it is all about. Here are some of things you find in shampoo these days...

• strawberries
• coconut
• almonds
• honey
• chamomile

These are all things you are supposed to eat! You're not supposed to put these things in your hair. Who is the bright spark at the Ponds Institute that decided it was a good idea to put food into shampoo? When I want to put some food into my hair I will buy a kilo of beef mince and really have some fun with it.

Stranger: "Excuse me Sir but is that a kilo of beef mince you have in your hair? It seems to be getting quite smelly."

Me: "I am strengthening my hair from the roots to the tips. What is the world coming to when a man can't wear beef mince in his hair while at a fancy restraunt?"

The other day I was in the shampoo aisle at Coles and I noticed that on some of the shampoo bottles was written in big bold letters:

NOT TESTED ON ANIMALS
I thought to myself, I'm not particularly impressed. That just means they haven't been comprehensive in their testing procedure. I am waiting to find a label on a shampoo bottle that reads:

"Yes we tested this shampoo on Monkeys. We know that if this shampoo can bring out the 7 kinds of softness in baboon hair it will do wonders for your's."

or...

"9 out of 10 Chimpanzees recommend Pantene 2 in 1. Takes out the dirt and fecal matter and leaves your fur feeling silky smooth."

It is the same with cosmetics. If I was a really really really ugly woman. I mean if I was so ugly that I looked a little bit like a chimpanzee, I would be going up to the make-up counter at Myers and asking for the stuff they test out on Monkeys. Who cares if they tested the lattest eye-liner on Salma Hayek? You could smear a large turd across her face and still find her desirable. But chimpanzees on the other hand? Thats the real test!

Gods Gift to Women

I am actually gods gift to women.

No really it is true. I can never understand why people are so suprised I tell them this. I mean it seems obvious to me that if God were going to buy a gift for the women of the world he would choose me. There is no way in hell he would pick someone like Johnny Depp or Brad Pitt. Because God is a man and men suck at buying gifts for women. So God would choose me as a gift to the women of the world.

I have no trouble at all imagining God walking through K-Mart in Heaven Forum or whatever shopping center it is God goes to and seeing me on the shelf. He would say "It says here that this man likes porn, football, Silvester Stallone movies and beer. Yep this will do nicely. This will be my gift to womenkind."

Cause God has no idea how to buy gifts for women! And why should he? God is a man. Men were made in his image. So it stands to reason that God is just as fucking clueless as any other man. And ALL men suck at buying gifts for their women. Ladies, I am God's gift to women and you can think of me as being a little bit like the carton of beer you are going to get for Valentines Day.

Men are much better at buying gifts for other men. They dont mind buying gifts for one another. In fact they quite enjoy it because it's easy. The average man could receive a carton of beer every single birthday of his life and still be suprised and overjoyed each time.

Man 1: "Bazza! I bought you a carton of beer for your birthday!"
Man 2: "Macca! I bought you a carton of beer too. For being a good mate."
Man 1: "Shall we sit down and drink some of them?"
Man 2: "Yes lets."

But buying gifts for women is more difficult. It involves spending time in shopping centers. And men hate spending time in shopping centers. Shopping centers are emasculating. Men feel stifled in the confines of a Shopping Center. Men evolved to be hunters not shoppers so there is something that doesn't seem quite natural about men, the warriors of the species, being reduced to bundling potatoes into a plastic bag and then meekly waiting in line at the "8 items or less" express checkout at Coles.

A Yobbo's View

Sam Ward is the best kind of conservative there is. The sort that cares plenty about the poor and disadvanted of the world, but doesn't believe it is the place of government to act as the collective conscience of the people. The sort that put their faith in common sense and simple pragmatism instead of ideology. He doesn't write with the intention of changing minds from left to right. He understands as well as anyone that such political conversions are impossible. Rather, to the lefties who read him regularly, he is a reminder of what the right of politics is all about. He is the most cogent and lucid exponent of the center-right in Australia that I personally have ever read. To those among his readership that identify with his classically liberal conservatism he is, by virtue of his humour, charisma and wit, a pin up boy. All this despite the fact that he has a head, shown proudly at the top of his website, that should never ever be shown in public. It just shows how much handicapped people can achieve these days!

8/10

A Yobbo's View: From the Arse End of the Anglosphere.

Want me to review your site? Email me: existangst at gmail dot com.

"Smoking is good for you!" Says Science Apologetically.

It seems to me that scientists are not completely sure what is good for you and what is bad for you.

I mean once apon a time scientists said that time spent in the sun was good for you because it keeps the scurvy away. Then we discovered that there was an ozone layer and that it had a hole in it so then the sun wasn't actually very good for you at all. Once apon a time we were told that alcohol is bad for you, killing brain cells. Then science comes out and says that a glass of red wine actually helps you keep leprosy away or something. We were told that marijuana is bad for you but then science comes out and says oh wait it turns out that marijuana might be used for many different medicinal purposes. We were told that beef was full of iron, which was good, but then that it turns you into a mad cow, which was bad. Sex was bad for you in the 19th century, good for you in the 60's, bad for you again in 80's, good for you again in the new century. I mean does science really have ANY IDEA AT ALL what is truly good for you and what is truly bad for you?

I have a theory that some day scientists will announce at a big press conference that it turns out that cigarettes are actually good for you. I am enthusiastically waiting for that happy day. The day when scientists have to say,

"We are sorry. We have been unsure about many things. We have never been certain about the origin of the universe, how the big bang happened, whether there is more then 1 universe, how is it that this exact system of physics came to exist such that it was possible for our species to evolve, and why if we evolved from monkeys is there still great big chunks of archaeological evidence missing. Clearly there are only few things we have ever been certain about. Well one thing. That cigarettes are bad for you. The one thing in the entire universe that we said we were absolutely certain about. That cigarettes are absolutely bad for your health. Yeah well it turns out that this isn't true anymore. It turns out that smoking cigarettes in moderation actually helps cure you from the following conditions, diseases, illnesses and short-comings...."

And I spose in a way it is already true. Cigarettes are certainly the cure for being a wanker that stands around complaining "do you know that those cancer sticks are going to kill you? COUGH COUGH Your getting smoke in my lungs!! I'm asthmatic!!!". You never hear a cigarette smoker suffering from that annoying social condition.

Put your hands in the air, if you're a smoker? Keep your hands in the air if you have ever been minding your own business, having a quiet cigarette, when some terminally ill cancer patient has walked up to you and asked "hey man?… could I have a drag of your voice box?" If I was standing around having a quiet cigarette and someone came up to me asking "heeey man! Can I bum a lung off ya?" I'm pretty sure I would reply "FUCK. OFF. I NEED BOTH THESE LUNGS TO FILTER ALL THE TOXIC TOBACCO SMOKE I AM INHALING!" Then I would feel really bad for yelling at a cancer patient. And I would say...

"Look?… I'm sorry for swearing at you. But my lungs are totally fucked. They are half full of tar! You don?’t want my lungs. Why don?’t you go and ask some non-smoker, who has nice tarless lungs, if they will give you a lung?"

Loopy Lefty or Righteous Rightwing?

I am actually a Neo-Conservative. That means I am a big fan of John Howard, George Bush and the Matrix. Being a Neo-Conservative is a very controversial thing to be these days. Not everybody likes the Matrix movies as much as I do.

To give you an example, I hate left-wing documentaries made by guys like Michael Moore and Morgan Spurlock. I am very much looking forward to the day when Michael Moore is making so many documentaries he has to start a corporation. Communist Documentaries PTY LTD or something like that.

I don't much like Morgan Spurlock's film "Super-size Me" either. If you eat McDonalds for a whole month you will get fat. Big suprise. Who would ever have guessed that if you eat fat all the time you will get fat. Here we are with a generation of overweight school children and the media and the public at large rush to blame it on McDonalds. As if human beings dont have free will. Hey here is a tip kids: next time Ronald McDonald asks you if you want a super-sized happy meal just tell him to fuck off. But there is no need to make a movie about it Morgan. I mean if I eat nothing but spinach for 30 days I will get sick, but nobody is going to start hating on Popeye.

McDonalds should put out a documentary of their own. I can hear the narrators voice right now...

Narrator: Morgan Spurlock ate nothing but McDonalds for a whole month. What a soft-cock.

*Enter Larry, the 200kg couch bum that McDonalds has hired as their new mascot. He is wearing a skin tight super hero outfit complete with cape and underpants on the outside. He is too busy with his food to acknowledge the narrator. He is eating a double-quarter pounder. Presumably a half-pounder.*

Narrator: This here is Super-Size Man. A hero for a new generation of kids who are fat and proud of it. Morgan Spurlock can eat nothing but McDonalds for a whole month. Super-Size Man has been eating nothing but McDonalds since the day he was born. For how long can YOU eat nothing but McDonalds? Do you dare to take the McDonalds challenge???

And why shouldn't they release such a documentary? It is the free world and we all have the freedom say whatever we want.

Hungry Jack's (aka Burger King) must be pretty pissed off but. Hungry Jacks must be saying to themselves "Where the fuck is our documentary? Each year thousands of kids get fat from eating Whoppers. And we treat our empolyees MUCH worse then McDonalds do. How about putting us in a movie?" And they be ringing up Morgan Spurlock telling him about how many grams of fat are in a Whopper. Cause they know what I know. Any publicity is good publicity.

The problem is that McDonalds LIKE it when movies like Super-Size Me are made. They feed off negativity. Corporations want to be hated?… the most successful corporations are the ones that are the most hated. Think of Nike, McDonalds, ExxonMobil, The American Government, James Hardie, Microsoft and Al Qaeda. See what I mean? All these corporations were hated before they were successful. I reckon these corporations are successful BECAUSE they are hated rather then hated because they are successful. People started hating on McDonalds and THEN they took over the world. People started hating George Bush and THEN he choose to take over the world. Prove to me that i'm wrong! Go on! Go to google and do some research! What's that? Your still here reading? You have decided to stay here and simply take my word for it. Your not going to critically evaluate whether or not what I saying is actually a plausible explanation for how the business world works? Of course your not!

You just know the McDonalds CEO gets up at the McDonalds AGM and says...

"At current estimates, over 5 million people regard McDonalds as being the corporate incarnation of Satan. This represents a 7% increase over the past fiscal year. This positive result is believed to be due to projects undertaken such as the deforrestation of the Amazon, and making millions and millions of children very very fat. Oh and just by the way, profits increased by a million percent."

So if I were a small corporation id be thinking to myself "Right?…. All I have to do is get Michael Moore or Morgan Spurlock to make a documentary about how bad I am, then BAM! I'm gunna hit the big time".