Just because you are an idiot does not entitle you to fabulous cash prizes (617 hits)
Category: NewsRating: 1 on 15 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by Johnny Mac <wjmcintyre.at.gmail.com> (View user info) at 2006-10-20 16:52:15 EDT
This was a Article I wrote for www.dojoproductions.com - I think you wonderful people should enjoy it =P
Today, in America, the greatest country in the world, if you are a big enough douche bag you are almost entitled to fabulous cash prizes. If you think I am kidding, feel free to surf the news pages on the net, 40% of them are dedicated to reporting on frivolous lawsuits and the like. Today I am officially making a new holiday, Dumbass with sense of self entitlement and no concept of responsibility day. I don't want to write that again, so I am now officially changing it to "Fucking moron day".
In observation of my new favorite holiday, which is dedicated to trying to get paid by hurting yourself and blaming someone else, we will talk about 5 frivolous ass lawsuits currently undergoing litigation in America today. All of the plaintiff's in these cases should be tortured and then killed in the most horrible fashion imaginable. Why do the people living today not have any sense of responsibility? If I ran you down with my pickup truck, would you sue Ford for making the truck, or me for running you over? These examples would choose Ford. I understand in other countries it is a crime to file such suits, and if you do, and the court throws it out, you have to pay the legal costs of the defendant. I like that Idea. I know, as Americans we don't adopt that policy, because it can intimidate people from "seeking justice" But this is not the USA that we wrote a constitution for in 1776 ( Or it would say SOMETHING about keeping Illegal immigrants the hell out ) and we cannot play by those rules forever.
Fat Butter Monsters vs. McDonalds
Yesterday Judge Robert Sweet gave the go-ahead to two Bloated teenage girls who have decided that their fat, jelly filled asses are worth their weight in gold, or McNuggets, if they settle out of court. Apparently these two girls feel they were tricked by McDonald's advertising into stuffing their already over inflated mouths with greasy fast food. The funny part about all this is, this is not the first time these walking coronaries waddled into a courtroom, greased the doorways to get in, and tried to Argue that McDonald's force fed them fatty foods for months at a time until they swelled up to the size of Volkswagens Busses. In the first court case, the judge threw their case out, for obvious reasons, I will quote the Judge regarding that case:
"Where should the line be drawn between an individual's own responsibility to take care of herself and society's responsibility to ensure others shield her?" he asked. "The complaint fails to allege the McDonald's products consumed by the plaintiffs were dangerous in any way other than that which was open and obvious to a reasonable consumer."
That's the nice way of putting it. Had I judged that case the answer would have been similar to:
" Har har har! You fat ugly pimply butter beasts. McDonald's didn't trick you. Your fat asses are hereby sentenced to stay fat for the rest of your life because you are not smart enough to include things like portion size, exercise and healthy living in your diet. Not to mention the half a brain that would be needed to figure out that deep fried fast food ISN'T DIET FOOD. You stupid cunts, if my the price of nuggets goes up for this I swear to got I am going to give you a hysterectomy with a turkey baster."
Well, just like any good horror show, there is a sequel. The fatties waddled back into the courtroom later in the year with 15 examples of supposed "Deceptive advertising", and the court granted them a trial. I don't know how dumb these girls are, but check it: It isn't deceptive, did the commercial say " McDonald's" on it? Yes? THEN YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN IT WAS CRAP. A McFlurry IS low calorie, IF YOU DRINK A SMALL ONE WITH A SENSABLE MEAL DUMB-SHIT. A McSalad would be good, IF YOU PICKED OFF THE DEEP FRIED FATTY CHICKEN THEY LAY ON TOP OF IT, AND DON'T COVER IT IN BLUE CHEESE DRESSING. What's next, you girls going to sue Diet Coke for not Magically making you thin after a can of it? You could eat tofu and rice the rest of your life, if you don't move around, your will get FAT. I know how to settle this. Being both of the girls' mother's to court. If the mom is fat, throw out the case. The daughter was on the way there anyway. Or so my father's advise to me as a teenager about " how to pick em'" Leads me to believe.
McDonald's is not liable for you over-using their products. Of course they put a good spin on their food, it's Advertising, however, the information is out there, every Subway commercial tells you how McDonald's has X amount of fat, as opposed to Subway. The Movie Super size Me was, in it's entirety, about how McDonald's will make you fat. Damn bitches, it's called "Junk Food" for a reason. In order for these girls to gain so much weight, and blame McDonalds exclusively, they would have to go there a lot, and engorge themselves on FRIED FOOD. I cannot express in words how fucking retarded this case is, however, it almost makes me embarrasses to be an American. Do you know what happens when people sue companies without any basis to do so? They realize they are spending more money on defense than they make on French fries, and stop offering the fries, and / or jack up prices. Thank you Dumb butter beasts.
John's Judgment - Since these two girls become hypnotized into eating beyond their control at the sight of a McRib sandwich, I sentence them to being banned from all fast food restaurants for life. Just to see the Fatties cry.
Kids' Ass vs. Products not meant to be used in shallow water.
This time it is the Parents of the "victim" that I plan to slam the shit out of. In this case, a pair of "Anally retentive" parents are suing Wal-Mart over a Dive stick being shoved up their son's ass. Wait, let me explain. Remember those little sticks you used to play with as a kid in the pool? You would throw them in the deep end, dive in and retrieve them? They were weighted at the bottom, so they would stand straight up on the bottom of the pool. This is why they were called "Dive Sticks", you dived to get them. It was a fun game, when I was 8.
Well, It appears a pair of fucking idiots bred and produced a child. Upon production of said child, they bought the kid a baby pool, for some summer fun, a little water slide, so the kid could experience the joys of being thrown down a slope at a high velocity, and some dive sticks for the kid to play with.. Fast forward 3 years from then, Little Marcus Zunner (The Child) and Kimberly Zunner ( Mom ) are having a day of family fun at the inflatable pool, when mom gets the wonderful Idea to throw in some dive sticks, into about 6 inches of water, remember what a dive stick is, mind you, it stood straight up in the air, vertically, and breeched the water's surface. Now, remember the water slide? Well, Little Marcus slides down the slide, and lands on the dive stick, forcefully implanting it into his rectum, causing him to have to undergo "Medical treatment for the rest of his life." It's also worth mentioning, that due to other dumb-shit parent's who are only concerned with their child's well being AFTER they do something stupid and get them hurt, the dive sticks were RECALLED a year before the incident.
So, let me get this straight, the PARENT neglected to read the instructions regarding the item being used in 3-7 feet of water, the PARENT was not aware of the recall on the product, the PARENT set a BLUNT IMPALEMENT UTENSIL under her kid's waterslide, and advised the child it would be ok to uncontrollably hurl themselves toward it, ass first. Somehow, there is logic enough to base a lawsuit on it that this was Wal-Mart's Fault. Look, if Mr. Walton came to your house and shoved this stick up the kid's ass, you have a damn good basis for a lawsuit on your hands, but as it stand's now, this is all on the fault of the parent.
How is this Wal-Mart's responsibility? Wal Mart did not make the product, they sold it with clear instructions regarding the depth of the water they are to be used in. This is just like the McDonald's case, now that YOU have fucked up and done something bad, you want to place the blame on someone else. The kid's attorney says he is doing "as well as can be expected" Which I imagine would be pretty fucking bad with a money grubbing whore of a mother, and a permenantly leaky rectum.
Why is the mother still walking free anyway? If a kid skips school, we ticket the parent, if a kid is under-fed, we jail the parents, if a child even LOOKS at a gun, we take the parents to court. Why is this mother not facing federal indictment for the anal destruction she caused her own son? The sad part is, I would feel REALLY bad, as this is a horrible injury and it involves a child, which sickens me, because children are pretty cool little animals. It's the fact that this woman thinks she is entitled to fabulous cash prizes for permanently injuring her son, since she can rationalize the blame in some way, to Wal-Mart. She is going to get her money too, since it will probably take more money to defend the company, after court and lawyer fees and whatnot, than it will be just to pay the screaming bitch off.
John's Judgment: Shove a dive stick up HER ass at 56 MPH. No More, no less.
The Bitch vs. The Author
Does the Name Jennifer Wilbanks ring a bell? It should, She was the infamous "Runaway Bride" In 2005 Ms. Wilbanks was engaged to a gentleman named John Mason. 4 days before the wedding she went missing, hundreds of police, family and friends scrambled for days to find her. On the 4th day Mr. Mason received a call from her claiming to be abducted and being held, tortured and sexually abused. A day after that, she called and sobbingly confessed that she fled because of "Unspecified personal issues."
It turns out that people wanted to know more about the situation concerning the infamous "Runaway Bride", and much like DoJo Productions, Mr. Mason gave the people what they wanted, he wrote a book. Now this bitch is suing him for 500,000 dollars because of it. Firstly, this cunt left a man standing at the altar, secondly, she LIED telling people she was in danger, when she was gambling in Vegas, her own mother thought she was dead. Then, when all was said and done, she thinks she should be able to just call and say "Oops, I was just upset, sorry!" and everything be forgiven? That's fucked. I hate little princess whores like this woman. She feels ENTITLED to his earnings off a book based on a lying, cheating, arrogant whore....Well, since she IS the whore in this case, I suppose that there is SOME legal footing she can fall back on.
Here's the breakdown of her suit, and my personal opinion of all of it:
$250,000.00 - share of a home Mason purchased through the partnership with proceeds from $500,000 received for selling their story to an agent.
Johnny Mac Justice: First of all, since you never married the guy, you didn't have a "Partnership" I understand that in certain states an engagement is considered a legally binding contract, but that won't hold very much water, due to the fact she split town and fabricated a story about her being raped, negating said contract in full. Also, it is completely legal to write a book about factual events and not pay every person involved in the story, otherwise we would be paying Fidel Castro a dollar every time we did a lesson on the Cuban Missile Crisis in an American history class. As long as the book did not technically "Defame" her, and being that she is now a public figure, that would be VERY hard to prove he did, as it is more difficult to prove slander or libel on a public entity, she has little to no recourse for claims of damages, actual or punitive.
$250,000.00 - Punitive Damages for allegedly abusing the power of attorney she granted for him to handle their financial affairs. Wilbanks also seeks the return of personal property she claims he has kept.
Johnny Mac Justice - What Punitive Damages? There was no Union, the bride negated that when she did not show up at the altar, with no prior notice. To address the power of attorney situation, appealing a POA is very rarely successful. You have to prove that the man maliciously and with the intent to harm you, spent the money in a way no reasonable person would. She signed POA to her fiancée, then, for all intents and purposes, faked her own disappearance and death, she's lucky she got any of that money BACK. As for her possessions, fuck her. She abandoned them when she ran off and claimed she had been abducted.
John's Judgment - This woman should be abducted and sexually abused in a remote location, since she is so fond of the idea.
Cradle Robbing Hoe-bag vs. Sixteen Year Old Deadbeat.
I wanted to throw one in where the plaintiff gets some real Justice.
Kimberly A baker of Williamsburg has a small problem, in the form of a three year old child. Kimberly is a healthy 22 year old, and like any woman who's man abandoned her with a kid, she filed for child support. This is not frivolous yet.....just wait....
The Father of the child, is now 16 years old, still lives with mom, and probably brags to his friends about nailing that hoe, every chance he gets, because he is a kid, and that is what kids do.
The issue comes in, when you stop and take notice that the kid is three years old. Meaning the Father was 13, and she was 19, when they had sex. Noticed that huh? So did the court, when they slapped that dumb ass cunt with a second degree rape charge...Not to mention denied child support for her kid. She could be facing up to 7 years in Prison.
Even the family court officials said that had she not filed for the support, and pressed the issue to hearing, they never would have known. I guess we found the dumbass line. The line that you can actually cross, where the court says " No, you fucking simpleton, you don't win a prize, you go to jail." Now, the kid who, in all truth SHOULD be paying her something out of his bi-weekly McCheck, is considered a victim in the case. She could not pay her 20,000 bond ( Meaning all she would have to come up with is really 2000 with a bondsman ) and now sits in county jail awaiting trial.
I'm not sure how she can plead not guilty on this one, considering she signed his age to the documentation herself. CONSEQUENCE! Thank you, finally a judge is making someone suffer the consequences of their actions. I feel bad for the poor kid, who one day will be old enough to realize he is the product of hate and lies. Also, the kid will know WHY his mom is in jail, plus, she will be on the national sex offender list.
Do I consider the kid a "victim". No. Her sleeping with him was the single coolest thing ever to happen to the kid. He probably has not been laid since. He was not victimized one bit, but I do like to see stupidity rewarded with Jail sentences, as opposed to cash.
John's Judgment - Case closed. The Real Judge beat me to it. I would however, for Irony, allow her conical visits with the 16 year old, once he is legal.
Man of Principal, who doesn't mind wasting money Vs. Cheap Seafood Restaurant
I am not sure if this guy is my hero, or I want to repeatedly beat the crap out of him. It appears Mr. Ralph Paul and a lady friend were enjoying some find dining at a local seafood restaurant. Mr. Ralph Paul ordered a seafood plate with Pasta, scallops and shrimp. Upon receiving the dish, he ate the shrimp and scallops, and a bite or two of pasta, but was not satisfied with the little seafood the restaurant provided him. Accordingly, He talked to the manager, who told him he got the same amount of seafood everyone else gets on that dish, and since he had eaten all of it, he cannot give a refund. I should mention that I get the impression that Mr. Paul is a rather reasonable man, since he offered to pay for the portion he ate, roughly half of the bill. The restaurant still refused, and demanded Mr. Paul pay his 46 dollar tab.
Mr. Paul refused, and the police were called, they issued him a fine, and he went about his business, that is, until he called a $500.00 an hour lawyer to take the restaurant to court over the mess. He was not about to pay a fine.
Mr. Paul won the case, as will happen when you pay like 5 grand to defend a 46 dollar debt. The news media likes to keep bringing up he is retired Air Force, and so does he, saying it instilled values of honor, blah blah blah. Rationalize all you want asshole, you just spent a few grand on some non-existent scallops and shrimp.
This one is pretty bad to me, now that I think about it, but not as offensive as the others, because he didn't go to court to SUE, he just was wasting the court's time over a 46 dollar tab. Hell, I would have come and defended his ass for $100.00 an hour, plus expenses. I would have come in and given the Judge a copy of my bill and said "Look your honor, he's rich as hell, this isn't about money." In fact, the Jury even says in the article that the only reason he won, was because he offered to pay for half of the meal, the half he already ate. That's pretty straight up of him. Really it is what keeps me from wanting to put his nuts in a vice. Just shut the fuck up about how you were in the military, nobody cares, thanks for your service anyway though, I appreciate it, but you don't have to prelude every sentence you speak publicly with "When I was in the service..." You're really lucky I wasn't on the Jury, because pretentious military people are the only thing I hate worse than pretentious executives, and I would have fined your ass.
John's Judgment - Nothing, He was right, and since he spent 5 grand on a 46 dollar meal, I think he has learned his lesson.
User Reviews
Submitted by CaptainThorns (user info) at 2006-10-23 08:49:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
The Dive Stick article make me chortle like a fertile school girl in the football team's locker room.
Submitted by kaos-king (user info) at 2006-10-22 19:38:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Fair Enough.
Submitted by STIXS (user info) at 2006-10-21 21:35:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Right on
Submitted by MANICMOTHER (user info) at 2006-10-21 21:21:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
despite the minor errors, I really liked this
Submitted by QueenAshlee (user info) at 2006-10-20 18:56:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
No Comment
Submitted by JohnnyMac (user info) at 2006-10-20 18:33:18 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Maltese (user info) at 2006-10-20 18:12:53 (#)
Ranking: 0
+2 for bringing up a good point.
-2 because the Constitution was NOT written in 1776.
__________________________________________________________________
Fair Enough. The inaccuracy (I wrote it to make a point, though did not scrutinise the exact year the document was written, the point was rules from 200 some odd years ago seldom apply today)Aside, I am glad you enjoyed the article.
I'll be more careful on details such as those in the future.
Submitted by Maltese (user info) at 2006-10-20 18:12:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
+2 for bringing up a good point.
-2 because the Constitution was NOT written in 1776.
Submitted by JohnnyMac (user info) at 2006-10-20 17:58:06 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I feel you Jimmy, I don't care how you spell it =P
I was referencing those kids today who spell everything l1k3 th15
Submitted by St_Jimmy (user info) at 2006-10-20 17:51:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by JohnnyMac (user info) at 2006-10-20 17:13:28 (#)
Ranking: 0
Sorry guys, I am a Noob to ubersite,or, for you L33t Hax0rs like the guy who posted first, a N00b...God I hate it when people spell shit like that, anyway, I didn't know about the one post per day thing, my apologies =P
____________________________________
It's ok Johnny, I forgive you. I'm just happy I finally got to call someone a nOOb! By the way, for future reference, how would you prefer nOOb spelled?
Submitted by JohnnyMac (user info) at 2006-10-20 17:13:28 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Sorry guys, I am a Noob to ubersite,or, for you L33t Hax0rs like the guy who posted first, a N00b...God I hate it when people spell shit like that, anyway, I didn't know about the one post per day thing, my apologies =P
Submitted by HotWillie (user info) at 2006-10-20 17:06:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
No Comment
Submitted by DrSeussman (user info) at 2006-10-20 16:58:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I am going to give you a hysterectomy with a turkey baster.
BUAHAHAHAHAHHA, ok now I am going back to finish the article!!
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2006-10-20 16:55:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
One post per day, sonny jim.
Submitted by AsshOly (user info) at 2006-10-20 16:54:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I read the part about McDonald's.
Submitted by St_Jimmy (user info) at 2006-10-20 16:53:43 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
One post per day. Fuckin' nOOb!!!