Archive for the ‘Random’ Category

I think I’m going to start a semi-regular feature here at Yellow is the Color.  Every time I watch an incredibly embarrassing YouTube video that makes me laugh and ashamed to be a human being, I’ll post it here as a part of the newly established Put the Video Camera Down! feature.  Because some people should never ever put themselves in front of a camera.  Ever. 

This week’s installment is a guy who takes it upon himself to respond to the Miss Teen USA South Carolina brain-freeze which has gone viral all over the internet.  Enjoy. 

(Found courtesy of The M Zone)

Read Full Post »

While I’m as prone to lamenting Paris Hilton stories on CNN as much as the next gal, there’s something kind of hilarious in people’s pearl-clutching over the vapidity of this article in Salon. Considering that Salon’s whole shtick is sort of a cultural/political/random-ass-stuff schmorgasboard, I’m really confused by the commenters who have worked themselves into a cute little tizzy of moral indignation over the fact that Salon would bother reporting on Media’s Bistro’s “DC’s hottest media types” contest when don’t you know there are starving children in Africa? Examples:

so little substance.
No wonder our Republic is going down the toilet. What’s next? A Hottest Self-Congratulatory A-Holes Contest

So I’m spending my money to subscribe and read this kind of crap as the featured story? Wasn’t there something more important to run as the main story?

And probably the best one:

This article might have been worth a short blurb, at most. Please give us a solid article on who the best reporter in D.C. is.

Oh, yes, because that’s something totally capable of being measured, and people would totally read that article. Gag.

What’s worse, though, is all the people who just had to give their opinion of the relative hotness of Kriston Capps and Catherine Andrews, the two people who won the contest. That might be valid — might — if the whole point of the article was “Look how hot they are!” But it wasn’t. The point was about how Capps and Andrews won because they had bots on their side and that the whole thing — from the Clinton staffer’s “campaign” email to the fact that people started getting snippy when the bots started running amok — is kind of funny and silly and lame all at once. And yet dudes on the Internet (or gals, I guess, as some of the names are gender-neutral or anon) cannot resist one, even one, chance to exert their position as personal arbiters of exactly who is or isn’t allowed to be considered hot, because everyone knows that their personal feelings on this matter are of utmost importance and interest. As one Salon commenter put it:

Is it funny to see a DC hotness contest taken over by robots? YES!

Is it funny to see people get upset about who won? YES!

Is it funny to see critiques of society based on how society behaves in an all for fun hotness contest? YES!

So shut the fuck up, other commenters at Salon. Thank you.

Read Full Post »

Stern cat

What is possibly possessing so many people to search for “catbook facebook” today? Seriously, like 30 people have visited this blog today under those terms. Why?

[By the by, is this not the greatest picture you have ever seen? (thank you google images)]

Read Full Post »

So the House passed a bill yesterday countering the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., a gender/pay discrimination case involving a female employee, Lilly Ledbetter, who found out after 19 years of employment with Goodyear that she was being paid much less for her efforts than her male counterparts. She sued. The company argued that Ledbetter was paid less because she was a bad worker who had to be repeatedly disciplined, and there was some evidence to support this. The court didn’t rule against her for this reason, though. Instead, it ruled that she had filed her suit too late – that a worker’s wage discrimination claim must be filed within 180 days of the initial instance of pay discrimination.

Before this, many courts held that each individual instance of pay inequity – each pay check or pay period, essentially – counted as a new instance of discrimination, and thus restarted the statute-of-limitations time clock. But under the Supreme Court’s new ruling, those who are victims of pay discrimination must somehow realize this within about 6 months from the time the first discriminatory decision is made, which is clearly somewhat of a difficult task. People don’t generally run around asking people in their workplaces how much they get paid, so obviously this thing isn’t usually immediately brought to light.

So the House introduced the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in June, and in July Sen.Edward Kennedy introduced a companion bill (the Fair Pay Restoration Act) in the Senate, clarifying that the time limit for suing an employer for pay discrimination begins anew with the issuance of each paycheck, essentially. The House bill passed yesterday; the Senate bill is still in committee. But apparently Republicans are against the bill, which they said would expand current pay discrimination law, and the White House (which has threatened to veto) said the bill would “impede justice and undermine the important goal of having allegations of discrimination expeditiously resolved.” Blogd notes:

The White House read is that discrimination only occurs at the time the initial decision to discriminate is made. So, in principle, if I were to start refusing today to hire a black person based upon their race, and then continued to make the same decision every week for 20 years, I would only be guilty of discrimination the first time I made such a decision, and not the subsequent 1,041 times after that. Presumably, this is based upon the “I forgot I was continuously breaking the law” defense, that a business could not be expected to remain aware of an ongoing illegal activity beyond a certain time frame.

As I mentioned above, the decision was originally played as being essentially a typo, and that the Supreme Court regrettably had to point out that typo though nobody really wanted it that way–but the White House stance is now that they agree with the typo, they believe the typo was the best thing all along, and that the typo should be followed, because it wasn’t really a typo, it was actually a feature. It even goes so far as to claim that the Ledbetter Fair-Pay Act would be a “major change” when actually it would simply reverse the Bush Supreme Court re-interpretation, and bring the law back to where it has been for decades.

Really what the White House is saying is, “we like the fact that Roberts and our other stooges made it possible to discriminate based on sex and color and whatever else we like, and we want it to stay that way, otherwise it could cause all sorts of nasty legal problems for our bigoted corporate pals.”

Read Full Post »

Count Gottfried von Bismarck, who was found dead on Monday aged 44, was a louche German aristocrat with a multi-faceted history as a pleasure-seeking heroin addict, hell-raising alcoholic, flamboyant waster and a reckless and extravagant host of homosexual orgies.

(Via Matt Zeitlin)

Read Full Post »

A (rather large) break from blogging about the 21st Century …

I’m researching first ladies this week at work. If I were going to, you know, travel back in time somehow and be friends with any of them, Dolley Madison is totally my first pick. She was the Lindsay Lohan of the early 1800s. She was known for her wild social life, and nothing – not even a little thing like the British burning down the White House – could stop her – she just moved her weekly parties to a temporary location while the place was rebuilt. Dolley also really liked orphans, but not really because she really liked orphans; mostly because orphans were a hottt cause, and promoting orphanages allowed her see and be seen.

Lucy Hayes, on the other hand? NO FUN at all. She and ol’ Rutherford banned alcohol from ALL White House events, and the only time they broke this rule was for the Grand Dukes of Russia. Apparently people still liked her quite a bit, though. She was nice. She’s kind of like that friend that you really like, but you just never hang out with because, you know, you can’t go to a bar, and what are you going to do together on a Friday night? Get coffee?

People thought Marcia Washington was stuck-up. Frances Cleveland was jailbait – she was just 21 when she married Grover Cleveland AND he was already president at the time (talk about a golddiger…). Florence Kling Harding refused to wear a wedding ring and insisted she be addressed by her maiden and married names. And Lady Bird Johnson, who was all about flowers and beautification, seems kinda like a dip (“Ugliness is so grim,” she said. “A little beauty … can help create harmony”).

Read Full Post »

Wow, this is creepy: Tiny Pocket People makes mini-dolls with your loved one’s (or stalkee’s, I suppose) face. Tiny Pocket People? Couldn’t they at least have come up with a less totally-frightening name?

Read Full Post »

I know it’s really tedious to tell people about funny terms that people searched to get to your blog and all that, but I found this one particularly funny. Maybe only ’cause it’s 8 in the morning and I just woke up, but: “pirates in the bible.”

I am really excited to know that somehow searching for “pirates in the bible” leads you to this page.

Read Full Post »

links for 2007-01-31

Read Full Post »

links for 2007-01-20

Read Full Post »

In doing some lexis-nexis research on a completely unrelated topic, I came across this November op-ed from Bill Mayer in the Boston Globe, “A re-look-see at the Constitution.” Maybe I just like any mention of pirates, but I found it pretty damn funny:

There’s no out-of-the-box thinking in this country. If we were really looking for a new direction, we’d not just change Congress, we’d have another Constitutional Convention, as Jefferson suggested we do. Jefferson said: “Let us provide in our Constitution for its revision… every 19 or 20 years… so that it may be handed on, with periodical repairs, from generation to generation.” He himself was saying, “I’m a bright guy, but even I can’t foresee the iPod.” Or the assault rifle.

And I know traditionalists are saying, “But Bill, it’s a sacred document!” Please, it’s full of crap about pirates, for God’s sake. And I don’t mean the kind that copies Justin Timberlake CDs. I mean peglegs and parrots. “The
founders were so brilliant.” Yes, they were: the proof being, the government they designed keeps functioning even with cement-head doofuses like you in it.

Listen to Jefferson – he was saying, “We’re smart guys, we’re not Nostradamus.” We deal with things today no founding father could have imagined – the Internet, global warming. Toilet paper, instead of bark. If Ben Franklin got beamed in to visit us today, the first thing he’d say is, “For 17 dollars, I get porn on my TV all day? How can the hotel afford that?” And then he’d say, “You’re still using the old Constitution that we told you to revise? That’s so nuts hemp must still be legal.”

Read Full Post »

links for 2007-01-04

Read Full Post »