British scientist and rock music promoter Kirk Thurston has written a diet-book entitled Get Served: 3/30. The controversial diet allows practitioners to eat whatever they wish, and as much of it as they choose. The only catch, according to Dr. Thurston, is, “Subjects must consume their foodstuffs within a 30 second time-limit, and may do so only three times a day.” So whether you fancy beans and bangers or cups and cakes, the diet allows you large doses of either. Thurston answered questions about those able to consume thousands of calories in the allotted 30 second window by saying, “Most subjects who really pack it in for 30 seconds… like an entire kidney pie or several milkshakes, will upchuck immediately after, which is also a great way to stay trim.”
As one might expect, the diet has raised vociferous objection amongst members of the health and fitness community. Dr. King Ruby of the Center for Gastroenterology claims, “This diet is moronic and Mr. Thurston is a rock and roll producer, not a health expert.” Rock Strongo, famed fitness trainer and muscle-head, says, “Whatever, I’ll still get paid.”
However, there are those who see the new dietary trend as a godsend. Richard Shea, co-founder of the International Federation of Competitive Eating, says gleefully, “The more gurgitators there are, the better the competition, and the better the competition, the better for the Federation.”
Thurston is no stranger to controversy. He was the first scientist to use the synthetic DNA of deceased rock stars to create an entirely synthetic pop sensation he dubbed David Lee Rock Star. His new diet book, Get Served: 3/30, has already topped the best-seller list.
|Dr. Thurston Bugs Out
Dr. Kirk Thurston, famed bass-player, rock music promoter, dietician, and geneticist has successfully bred the Northern Chinese Snakehead with the cicada. The purpose of said creation is convoluted, diabolical, and just crazy enough to work. According to Dr. Thurston, "The cicada provide free backing vocals with a doo-wop vibe. So you take a Puffy rap track, do the hippity hop thing with the beat, and then mix in those insect backing vocals, and you have a hit with no demographic constraints."
Asked why he found it necessary to cross-pollinate two widely reviled creatures, Thurston said, "The cicadas come round once every 17 years. I need more gold records than that will allow. Recreating their sound synthetically is impossible, and saving digital samples of their song is inelegant. Finally, Snakeheads can live anywhere and breed like bunnies, thus ensuring an endless supply of talent. Plus, LOOK at my creation! It is beautiful!"
Martha Stewart – Crucified by the Feds
By Jefferson Locke
March 18, 2004, 10:55PM
Martha Stewart was just convicted of obstruction of justice and lying to the federal government. She faces 16 months to 20 years in federal prison. Stewart was accused of conspiring with her stock broker, Peter Bacanovic, to cover up an insider trade, lying to investigators about it (obstruction of justice), and deceiving investors by proclaiming her innocence (securities fraud). These charges are all based on insider trading, something with which Stewart has never been charged.
In simpler terms, the government claims Stewart sold ImClone stock based on inside information she received from her broker. The “inside information” was that a new ImClone drug would not be approved by the FDA. The drug has since been approved. Her broker originally got that information from the CEO of ImClone. When the investigation began, Stewart claimed she had done nothing wrong, which is why she was charged with lying to investigators (obstruction of justice).
In my admittedly limited research and understanding of these charges, I have discovered that the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) has never gone after the customer of a broker who offered advice on a trade based on what another customer had done. Previously, they have only prosecuted the broker who leaked the inside information.
Stewart was at least two steps removed from the corporate insider in this case (her stockbroker). According to the stockbroker’s assistant (the main witness against Stewart), Stewart neither sought information about the stock nor told anyone to lie about the trade. What the government is charging is that the assistant to Stewart’s broker, an admitted liar who cut a deal to nail Stewart in order to save his own skin, called Stewart and told her to sell her shares of ImClone stock. That’s it. That’s what this witch-hunt is about. Stewart received a call she did not ask for, sold her stock (which soon after went higher in value) and then proclaimed her innocence. Stewart could have faced even more prison time, but the judge threw out the most serious charge (securities fraud) that alleged she duped investors in her own company (Martha Stewart Living) when she publicly declared her innocence. The judge referred to this charge as "novel."
The government claims this was not a targeted investigation. They claim it is business as usual. Sure. It just happens that a billionaire woman who refused to play ball with the feds on this investigation was the first person ever brought before a kangaroo court on such meaningless charges. Even if Stewart did sell her stock based on what the broker’s assistant told her, it is insane to think she did anything wrong. Stewart’s real mistake was to become rich and famous. Her mistake was to become “too perfect” in the eyes of others. Stewart’s real crime was not acting sufficiently guilty about the wealth she earned. Her mistake was not acknowledging the fact that her wealth and success make her, by definition, a criminal.
Death of Free Speech
By Jefferson Locke
January 21, 2004, 11:32AM
Free speech is dead in America. No gray area. No slippery slope. It is the law. "McCain - Feingold" has passed through Congress (with great bipartisan support), been signed into law by the President, and most recently endorsed by the Supreme Court when the constitutionality of the law was challenged. McCain - Feingold is blatant government censorship of speech. The new law criminalizes certain political statements during certain times of the year. If the NRA, Sierra Club, or ACLU wants to say something good or bad about a candidate, they now need to consult their calendar first.
Sixty days before an election all opinions from groups and individuals are off limits. The idea that the government can tell Greenpeace when they can and cannot run ads supporting their position is obscene. It is no surprise that they have outlawed these ads in the 60 days before an election. They might as well call this new law the "Incumbent Protection Act." Want to take out an ad criticizing the war in Iraq right before people vote? Nope. Not anymore. That would be breaking the law. We can argue whether the first amendment protects segregation, porn, or spam. but there is no doubt that it was intended to protect political speech. The government has just severely regulated how much we can say, and when we can say it. So before you place an add in your community newspaper or post a political position on your website you better check with your government first.