Tag: Regrettable Acts

And Here’s Why

Drunken Fools, Gypsies Tramps & Thieves, Travels

Earlier this week I talked about how Yurpeen tourist places were rethinking their welcome wagon policies.

Well, here’s one place that’s doing that and I think, based on the evidence, we can all see their point:

In a desperate attempt to crack down on alcohol-fueled debauchery, enraged [Albufeira] City Hall officials on Friday approved huge new penalties of up to £3,375 for holidaymakers flouting a strict new good behavior code — with fines for everything from urinating in the street to getting naked.

The rules will kick in within weeks, in time for the summer season, aiming to curb anti-social behavior.

And locals hope they will turn the tide, with nakedness, vomiting in the street or having sex in public all now coming at a price.

Here’s what really sucks about this.  I know Albufeira — I’ve been there before, and I thought it might be the prettiest little village on the whole of the Algarve coast — but that was eons ago.  Clearly, things have changed, and not for the better.

And the problem is that regardless of how badly the tourists (mainly Brits, duh) might behave, the pubs and restaurants are obviously making a killing so they’re not going to do anything to stop the Louts & Sluts Brigade from trashing their town.

Sadly, it’s always the local folks who end up with a town where the streets flow with vomit, blood and semen while the publicans shrug and pocket the cash.

And then everyone will be shocked — shocked! — when the locals start posting signs that read “Muerte A Los Turistas”, “Ingleses Regressam A Casa” or “A Bas Les Rozbiffs”  (depending on whether it’s Spain, Portugal or France, for instance).

What’s really needed in Albufeira is for the Porro rozzers to go all Chicago P.D. circa 1968 with these drunken assholes (men and women):

…and let them know that what might be fine in Merseyside, Manchester or Millwall is non grata when visiting Albufeira.

The problem is that the Euros in general have gone to great lengths to pussify their various police forces, so that very logical avenue will denied them — but it is, at the end of the day, the only language that these oafs understand.  Until that time, then, nothing will change, and fines aren’t going to do diddly.

Boondoggle Over

Business, Gummint, Subsidies

I see it suggested that Elon Musk’s apparent disapproval of Trump’s budget (the Big Beautiful Bill — ugh, FFS) may stem from the fact that included in the suggested budget cuts are federal subsidies for EV purchases.

If this is the case, then Musk’s ire may be understandable… but not excusable.

Sorry, dude:  the whole climate-change-is-gonna-kill-us-therefore-we-must-all-buy-EVs bullshit is one of the more egregious examples of governmental waste and budgetary irresponsibility.  You’ve ridden the gravy train because if Gummint is going to throw money your way then why not take it — say your shareholders — but that time is over, so suck it up and spend more time on other pursuits, those which don’t rely on government subsidies to survive or turn a profit.

Like I said, I don’t know if this is the reason for Elon’s peevishness, but if it is, then it’s just silly.  The gravy train was bound to end sooner or later, and from a taxpayer’s perspective, sooner is better, although said taxpayers who were going to buy a Tesla may not see it the same way, of course.

Too bad.

Speed Bump #3,248

Grammar Nazism

At Insty’s place, I saw this:

…and I was irritated by the non-clarity of the post.

There’s always an issue when using numerical values when writing.  You can write “Ninety-nine out of a hundred people think that George Soros is an evil cunt” — which is acceptable — or “99 out of 100 people think that George Soros is an evil cunt” which is equally so.  One can argue that the latter usage is more effective in that the scale is better described, and that is generally true when using large numbers, e.g.

“The chances of that cunt George Soros being hit by a meteorite while crossing Sunset Boulevard on any given Thursday are 1 in 174 trillion” works better than “one in one hundred and seventy-four trillion” (too many words, albeit expressing the same distressingly-small likelihood).

However, in the above Twatter post, the writer should not have used the numeral in his sign-off sentence, because there’s another “1” preceding it — referring to the other cunt, Nancy Pelosi — and the sentence as written causes a mental speed bump because in actual fact it is Pelosi (#1) who has changed her position / sold out on the tariff issue.  (Trump (#4) has never changed his position on tariffs:  he’s been arguing in their favor since about the 1990s, long before he  became a politician.)

“Only one hasn’t sold out” would have been the proper way to write it.

Disappointed!

Train Smash Women

Well, I have to say that so far this year’s Grand National (or “Tanned National” someone called it, because of all the Trumpian fake tannery) at Liverpool’s Aintree track has been pretty much a bust for us Train Smash Women-watchers.  I mean, it just looks like they’re not really trying very hard:

Of course, there have been some close calls:

…and one or two near-misses [sic]

…but let’s hope that things improve as the event progresses, so to speak.

Travel Insanity

Psychos, Travels

I know that flying on commercial airlines can drive one crazy, but this is outstanding:

Naked woman stabbed people with pencil after screaming ‘I speak all languages’ in airport

A completely naked woman allegedly stabbed two people, ran through a busy airport screaming, “I speak all languages”, broke monitors and threw beverages all over the place in a bizarre rampage. A disturbing two-minute clip of the deranged woman disrupting Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport on March 14 was shared widely on social media.

The police were called for a welfare check on a woman who had suffered a “manic episode” that led to her allegedly stabbing two people with a pencil and biting a restaurant manager trying to subdue her. The traveller reportedly stabbed the restaurant manager in the face and head with his own pencil and also bit his right forearm.

The woman was covered in blood, according to an eye-witness, which was later confirmed to not be her own by medics. When the police managed to restrain her, a police report says she “wanted to be with the flowers” and was “in a forest”.

Gotta say, if you want all that then DFW is definitely not the place for you.

I’m going to bet that her little episode came from trying to make some kind of change to her Qantas ticket — that would make even me do all that.

Or else she’s just a Spirit Airlines Platinum-level customer.

Woke Bollocks

Seen On Campus

Back when I were a callow young student of some fifty-seven summers, I was approached by a professor who wanted to chat with me about the paper I’d just submitted.

He/She* told me that I would have got an A+ for the paper, except that I’d committed the unpardonable offense of using B.C. and A.D. therein instead of (the stupid and unnecessary) B.C.E. and C.E.  All I had to do was re-submit the paper with the terms changed, and I’d get my A+.

“What if I refuse to do that?”  I asked.
“Then you’ll get a C,”  was the response.
“Then give me the C,” was my response.  “And then I’m going to appeal the grade, loudly, especially after you’ve just told me that my work is of A+ standard.”
“You’re refusing to change it?”
“Yes.  And I’m expecting to see an A+ for it, too.”
“Why don’t you just change the terms?”

So I launched into an explanation that was more or less the same as the one that David Marcus published here., stressing, though even an atheist myself, I had to acknowledge the role of the Judeo-Christian influence on our history and culture.  At the end of it, the professor seemed somewhat stunned by what I’d just said.  And I happened to know that this professor, unusually, was actually quite conservative, just by observing the general tenor and terminology used in the lectures.

I ended up getting an A+ for the (unchanged) paper, and for all the rest of the papers** and exams in that professor’s course.

A small victory, perhaps, but for me an important one.

*used not because of their “chosen pronouns”, but because I prefer to keep their identity anonymous.

**For one paper, I got a 100% grade, because my argument was not only irrefutable, but the professor admitted later that it had caused them to rethink their whole position on the topic.  Under those circumstances, clearly, the “BC/BCE” silliness was irrelevant.