Let's Just Merge These Stories

Pictured: Britney's baby daddy.

K-Fed will be appearing at an emergency hearing seeking custody of his two babies, now that Ms. Spears has left rehab after one day for the second time in a week.

I think he should claim to be the father of Anna Nicole's baby, and move to have her body released, not for further DNA testing or even for burial, but rather to have her head shaved to match Britney's.

Meanwhile, this judge in the Anna Nicole circus is the worst grandstander I've seen in years. Note: Woody Allen should play him in the soon-to-be-filmed Lifetime movie (c'mon, you know the pitch is already being made), as the voice is a dead ringer.

Some guys from New Zealand caught a colossal squid...I'm still figuring out how to work that in to the story.

Seriously, this shit is getting so ridiculous that I actually was excited to see coverage of a high speed chase in Broward County, FL on Headline News (the channel always on our company's cafeteria TVs--unless there's a fresh batch of company propaganda to pipe in) yesterday at lunch.

PS - Tried to read Ann Coulter's latest column, but couldn't get beyond the opening words, "Rumored ex-Marine John Murtha..." Ann, you f*cking slut bitch. Now, "rumored ex-Air National Guardsman George W. Bush" would make sense to me. But, you know that already, you flappy-c*nted whore. I try to keep up on what the queen of the right-wing Tampax saturators is spewing (a 'know thy enemy' type of tactic). But, damn, what a thankless process that can be!

PPS - To Saxdrop: Sorry, I just noticed you'd left a comment on my "William F. Blowhard, Jr." post (my blogging has been somewhat erratic lately). Hey, I'm certainly not in support of an attempt at heightening the burden of proof to the point that more of the truly guilty criminals are found not guilty, just to approach the point of zero wrongful convictions. In fact, that's exactly why I believe that Buck-nuts has engaged in a logical fallacy, by implying that the proposal to repeal the death penalty, as justified by past wrongful convictions, somehow indicates support for such. He says, basically, that people shouldn't use wrongful convictions as an argument against the death penalty, because to prevent all wrongful convictions would be impossible, or at least a net detriment to justice. I say, "Bullshit!" I say that I agree that wrongful convictions are inevitable, and precisely because they are inevitable, the death penalty sucks. I think the tables should be turned on Bill Buckley: If he were to be able to prove that wrongful convictions could be prevented without letting guilty people free in droves, then he would have set up a legitimate argument in favor of the death penalty. For him to say, in effect, that's too hard to do, so you don't get to use that against me is bullshit. This isn't one-on-one basketball, Haahnster vs. Shaq, where I would certainly want to forbid all sorts of things (like allowing Shaq inside the 3-point line at any time). In debate, I don't believe you should just say, "well, that argument is too effective, so you can't use it."