i won fair and square and i want my prize. good or bad, its mine and i want it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OK...This abuse of power to bring the attention to him...
HAS GOT TO STOP!!!

You know who you are!!!!!! abusing your powers!!!!!! fucking no-good, double dealing, sidewinding, low-down, cheater!!!!!!!!!

All you kiddies keep blasting me for being old. Read on and see if you are starting to have an urge to buy depends.

Each year the staff at Beloit College in Wisconsin put together a list to try to give the faculty a sense of the mind set of this year's incoming freshmen.

Here's this year's list:
1) The people who are starting college this fall across the nation were born in 1983.
2) They are too young to remember the space shuttle blowing up.
3) Their lifetime has always included AIDS.
4) Bottle caps have always been screw off and plastic.
5) The CD was introduced the year they were born.
6) They have always had an answering machine.
7) They have always had cable.
8) They cannot fathom not having a remote control.
9) Jay Leno has always been on the Tonight Show.
10) Popcorn has always been cooked in the microwave.
11) They never took a swim and thought about Jaws.
12) They can't imagine what hard contact lenses are.
13) They don't know who Mork was or where he was from.
14) They've never heard:
a. "Where's the Beef?",
b. "I'd walk a mile for a Camel", or
c. "de plane Boss, de plane".
15) They do not care who shot J. R. and have no idea who J. R. even is.
16) Michael Jackson has always been white.
17) McDonald's never came in Styrofoam containers.
> 18) They don't have a clue how to use a typewriter.

Metal Haikus

more useless crap on the Internet....try coming up with some of your own haikus


Hair spray, dead hair spray (5)
Falling on tresses long gone (7)
How cold it must feel (5)

Seems alot of you would never leave the house....

Pesticide blamed for sexual mutation in frogs
April 16, 2002 Posted: 10:55 AM EDT (1455 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Male frogs exposed to even very low doses of a common weed killer can develop multiple sex organs -- sometimes both male and female -- researchers in California have discovered.
"I was very much surprised," at the impact of atrazine on developing frogs, said Tyrone B. Hayes of the University of California at Berkeley.
Atrazine is the most commonly used weed killer in North America, he said, and can be found in rainwater, snow runoff and ground water.
"There is virtually no atrazine-free environment," Hayes said.
The Environmental Protection Agency permits up to 3 parts per billion of atrazine in drinking water.
But Hayes' team found it affected frogs at doses as small as 0.1 part per billion. As the amount of atrazine increased, as many as 20 percent of frogs exposed during their early development produced multiple sex organs or had both male and female organs. Many had small, feminized larynxes.
Hayes' research team concluded that the effect on the frogs results from atrazine causing cells to produce the enzyme aromatase, which is present in vertebrates and converts the male hormone testosterone to the female hormone estrogen.
The effects on frogs in Hayes' study occurred at exposure levels more than 600 times lower than the dose that has been seen to induce aromatase production in human cells.
Their research is reported in Tuesday's issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.
Asked if atrazine might also be a threat to people at low levels, Hayes said he did not know, adding that, unlike frogs, "we're not in the water all the time."
Water fleas also affected
"I'm not saying it's safe for humans. I'm not saying its unsafe for humans. All I'm saying is it that it makes hermaphrodites of frogs," he said.
Stanley I. Dodson of the University of Wisconsin at Madison called the work "the most important paper in environmental toxicology in decades.
"It shows the effect of the most commonly used herbicide on amphibians in environmentally relevant concentrations," he said.
Asked if people should be worried, he also said: "We don't know."
"It's like a canary in the mine shaft sort of thing," Dodson said, referring to the former practice of miners of bringing canaries with them as warnings of dangerous gases. The birds are very sensitive to gases and would die before the concentration of the gas was enough to harm the miners.
Dodson said that in his research he had found that low exposures of atrazine changes the ratio of males to females among water fleas.
In addition to its effects on developing frogs, the Berkeley researchers found that male frogs exposed to atrazine after reaching maturity had a decrease in testosterone to levels equivalent to that found in females.

I'm putting this here for Jimmy and Gonzo...

(and I didn't look to see if it was anywhere else before I did it)

Quote:<marquee>Court Strikes Down Child Porn Ban</marquee>

The Associated Press
Apr 16 2002 10:55AM

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court struck down a congressional ban on virtual child pornography Tuesday, ruling that the First Amendment protects pornography or other sexual images that only appear to depict real children engaged in sex.
The 6-3 ruling is a victory for both pornographers and legitimate artists such as moviemakers, who argued that a broad ban on simulated child sex could make it a crime to depict a sex scene like those in the recent movies ``Traffic'' or ``Lolita.''

The court said language in a 1996 child pornography law was unconstitutionally vague and far-reaching.

The court majority, led by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, found two provisions of the Child Pornography Prevention Act overly broad and unconstitutional.

``The First Amendment requires a more precise restriction,'' Kennedy wrote for himself and Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote separately to agree with the outcome.

The law was challenged by a trade association for pornographers.

The law barred sexually explicit material that ``appear(s) to be a minor'' or that is advertised in a way that ``conveys the impression'' that a minor was involved in its creation.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor partially agreed with the majority and partially disagreed. She was joined by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Antonin Scalia. Rehnquist and Scalia also filed their own separate dissenting opinion that went further.

``The aim of ensuring the enforceability of our nation's child pornography laws is a compelling one,'' Rehnquist wrote for the pair. ``The (law) is targeted to this aim by extending the definition of child pornography to reach computer-generated images that are virtually indistinguishable from real children engaged in sexually explicit conduct.''

The law was Congress' answer to then-emerging computer technology that allowed the computer alteration of innocent images of real children, or the creation from scratch of simulated children posed in sexual acts.

The law was an expansion of existing bans on the usual sort of child pornography. Congress justified the wider ban on grounds that while no real children were harmed in creating the material, real children could be harmed by feeding the prurient appetites of pedophiles or child molesters.

The Free Speech Coalition, the pornographers' trade group, said it opposes child pornography but that the law could snare legitimate, if unsavory, films and photos produced by its members.

The group did not challenge a section of the law that banned the use of identifiable children in computer-altered sexual images.

A federal judge upheld the law, but the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decided in December 1999 that the challenged provisions violated the Constitution's free-speech protection.

The appeals court said the government did not show a connection between computer-generated child pornography and the exploitation of actual children.

The Supreme Court upheld the appeals court, finding that the law would ban images that are not obscene as the court has previously defined that term. Neither obscenity nor child pornography involving real children is protected by the Constitution's free-speech guarantee.

The Clinton and Bush administrations defended the law in court, claiming it ``helps to stamp out the market for child pornography involving real children.''

This case is one of two dealing with children and pornography that the court considered this term. The other, which the court has not yet decided, tests the constitutionality of a separate law governing children's access to sexually explicit material on the Internet.

Tuesday's case is Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 00-795.

On the Net: For the appeals court ruling in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.uscourts.gov/links.html">http://www.uscourts.gov/links.html</a><!-- m --> and click on 9th Circuit.

04/16/02 10:53 EDT

A new day, a new version, Here's the first word:

Meat Flaps

wait til you see the chairs...
Clicky the link.....
:bouncer: :bouncer: :bouncer:



oh yeah, and I'm wearing red lace panties, it's too hot though, I should have went commando {}

Sadly there isn't enough room for the correct answer