Blogger Sucks?

I had a great "The Adventures of Rich and Vince" comic prepared today, but it seems Blogger has decided to stop accepting my image uploads today. I'll revisit this again tomorrow. If it is presistent, I may have to look elsewhere. Stay tuned.

The Mathematics of Strippers

After Robert A. McCormick charged up $241,000 on his corporate American Express card in a nudie bar, I decided I'd like to take the Strip Club Challenge. Of course, my company wouldn't foot the bill so this is all theoretical.

It's been a while since I've been to a peel bar and I've never been to a "high class" establishment like Scores, so I'll adjust my memory of pricing to suit this experiment.

• 1 12 oz beer (domestic) = $10 (includes tip)
  
• 1 8oz mixed drink or 4oz shot = $20 (includes tip)
  
• 1 Table Dance = $25 + $25 (tip) = $50 (5 minutes / 1 girl)
  
• 1 Private Dance = $50 + $50 (tip) = $100 (5 minutes / 1 girl)
  
• Tips on "Pervert's Row" = $1 (that's right – we're in the money, but we remember our roots)
  

Given this "menu", let's assume Sir Richard, T-Nutz, Mark and I head off to see the ladies dance. What would a quarter of a million dollars get us (besides my mortgage paid in full)?

We start off with a limo from work ($500) on a Friday night right at quitting time (5:00PM). We do this because:

1. We don't want to drive in Boston traffic
   
2. We don't want to drive home drunk afterwards
   
3. We need to start spending! We have $241,000 for chrissake.
   

We arrive at 6:00PM (Boston traffic) and immediately start. We only have until 2:00AM before close, so that's only 8 hours of nude women and drunken debauchery – what is a boy to do?

Assume 1 beer and 1 mixed drink every 15 minutes all night long. We are all professionals; please don’t try this at home. Also assume that we're generous and each one of us buys a stripper 1 beer and 1 mixed drink every 15 minutes all night long.

((($10/beer x 4 boys) + ($20/mixed drink x 4 intoxicated lads)) +
(($10/beer x 4 peelers) + ($20/mixed drink x 4 strippers))) x
32 [15 minute intervals / 8 hours] = $7,680

We mix our table and private dances alternating 1 each every 5 minutes all night long. Also, only three of us get dances at any given time allowing one of us to bequeath $1 tips along "Pervert's Row". Now we’re rolling in dough tonight, so we decide a single lady per dance is for losers and we have 5 girls for each table and/or private dance per fellow. Note that we don't consider timeouts for bathroom breaks to answer nature's call or to puke. Just assume that if any one of us goes to the bathroom for any reason, the 5 strippers accompany that guy to – you know – help out.

((($50 table dance/girl x 5 strippers) x 3 randy fellows) x
48 [5 minute intervals / 4 hours, i.e.: half the time]) +
((($100 private dance/girl x 5 exotic dancers) x 3 horny guys) x
48 [5 minute intervals / 4 hours, i.e.: the other half the time]) = $108,000

So far, that’s a $500 limo ride + $7,680 in refreshing beverages + $108,000 in personal entertainment for a running total of $116,180.

We have to buy a few rounds for all the less fortunate patrons. Actually, we don’t, but we do anyway. We the buy the 200 other guys shots every 30 minutes.

($20 shots x 200 drunken hooligans) x 16 [20 minute intervals / 8 hours] = $64,000

That leaves the 1 guy tipping singles a total of $60,820 over the 8 hours. Assuming three girls on the main stage at all times, that’s about $1 per girl every 1.5 seconds.

Granted, we could have stopped for a nice dinner along the way. We could have drank a little less. We could have been more liberal with the tipping. We could have bought highly overpriced champagne instead of beers. This is only one possible Strip Club Challenge expense sheet. We plan to try it again next weekend.

The Adventures of Rich and Vince

Characters courtesy of Planearium

Drunken Legislation

As Massachusetts lawmakers gut the stiffer penalties from a potential drunk driving law called Melanie's Bill, a Dedham teen named Lisa O'Connell runs down two Bridgewater State College students and their friend – killing one – while driving with a blood alcohol content level three times the legal limit. Should we feel bad for the victims? Should we feel bad for Lisa; who has been on Prozac since the death of her mother two years ago? Should we be disgusted with our lawmakers for not taking drunk driving seriously? Given the latest news, we should rethink our views on drunk driving and the penalties that should be imposed upon those who recklessly drive while under the influence.

There is no excuse for driving drunk. I myself have gotten blitzed on many occasion and made it home safely. This of course was when I was living in Boston and I would walk to the clubs and either stumble, T or taxi home. Now that I live outside the city, anytime I plan on drinking, I consider the fact that I'll be driving to and fro and therefore, limit my beverage intake to a minor amount that I can handle while still being aware.

Notice in my confession, I use the word "I" quit a bit. "I'll be driving" and "I take responsibility". I don't expect a bartender to stop serving me. I don't count on my friends to take the keys. I don't rely on anyone but myself to control my alcohol intake and carry out my responsibility of getting me home safely.

While it's tragic that a young girl made a terrible mistake, it's not "unfortunate" that someone died as a result. It is criminal - more specifically - homocide. Regardless of her past record or prior experiences, there is no excuse for recklessness in light of the fact that drunk driving is a mainstream issue. It's not like she didn't know that driving drunk was bad – no one can claim that defense. She probably did think, "it won't happen to me". Well she was wrong and now someone is dead.

I'm not naive thinking that drunk driving can be ended with stiffer penalties. I do however believe in taking responsibility and paying for your mistakes. Mandatory stiff penalties for first time offenders will certainly decrease the amount of "casual mishaps" while giving prosecutors more ammunition to address chronic drunkards. The Massachusetts law put forth those provisions and was quite robust (given current lack of legislation). The real issue with Melanie’s Bill was that a group of drunk driving defense lawyers were allowed to rework the bill and finish it hours before the final vote. It's unfortunate that legislating under the influence of lobbyists is not a crime.

Accidental Traffic

I’ve written a rant on traffic describing the most efficient way to drive through Boston during the Big Dig. Having to commute into and out of Boston everyday, I’ve become quite the expert. However, I still don’t understand why traffic stops when there is an accident on the OTHER side of the road. I’ve concluded it is due more to human nature than to actual traffic flow mechanics.

There seems to be some primal urge to see blood on the highway reminiscent of the driver’s education films we saw at sixteen. I find it quite pitiful that we take pleasure in stopping to observe other peoples’ misfortune when we are obviously destined for an alternate location. We weren’t planning on seeing a traffic accident, but when we do, we slow down to examine all details so we can later explain it to our friends and complain about how backed up traffic was. Hypocrites! Don’t stop to look and there would be no traffic back up to speak of!

Case and point, I was stuck in a three mile backup of bumper to bumper traffic while my north bound comrades rubbernecked a south bound car fire. It’s not that I get paid by the hour or that I love work so much, but I’d rather be at work than sitting immobile in my automobile while feeble-minded morons watch a car burn.

Given that, one would think that reality shows about police chases would be the highest rated programs on television. Instead, they’re surpassed for reality shows that involve people’s egos hurting other people’s feelings. Frankly, I couldn’t care less about either genre but I think the reason the former doesn’t fare well is because people can get their fill with live action on the real highways.

The Adventures of Rich and Vince

Characters courtesy of Planearium

No Amnesty for Minor Criminals

Amnesty International is crying out against life sentences for juveniles in United States prisons. What the hell does Amnesty INTERNATIONAL have to do with domestic United States laws? From the latest Supreme Court decisions, apparently quite a lot.

First off, I’m all for the death penalty. Please don’t shovel the crap that it takes more money to kill someone than it does to keep them in prison for life. Also, the whole, “what if we kill an innocent person” argument holds no weight when looking at cases like Dahmer and BTK. If the prison system is meant to rehabilitate our criminal element for return to society, then life sentences are contrary to the prison mission.

The bleeding heart would like to place blame on anyone but the criminal. All the more so if the criminal is a minor. Perhaps it was television, perhaps it was bad parenting, perhaps it was video games. Nevertheless, the criminal has committed a crime. They are responsible and must atone for their actions. Setting the hard example is not easy, but it surely deters further infringements.

We need to stop worrying what other people think about the United States and start worrying about whether we want to be a civilized society. The alternative is murder and mayhem in the streets at the hands of minors who are exempt from lawful punishment. There is a world of compromise between anarchy and cleric rule like the Middle East. I’m not proposing we chop off shoplifters’ hands; however, phallus removal for sexual predators may not be a bad idea. As for minors, they must be taught that all actions have consequences and if the parents don’t impress that upon their children, then the laws of civilized society must.

Local White Water Action

We spent the weekend in West Virginia for rafting on the Gauley River but it seems we could have stayed home and rafted the Mill River during the unexpected dam release at the Whittenton Pond dam.

The Adventures of Rich and Vince

Characters courtesy of Planearium

Uber-Sexual versus MANTOWN-Sexual

The number and qualifications for categories developed by trendy magazines and opinion makers to classify men has now officially become ridiculous. As if heterosexual and homosexual weren’t enough – the metrosexual man is the man that embodies the classic traits of masculinity while exuding an outwardly – for lack of a better word – GAY appearance and displaying a penchant for traditionally female luxuries like pedicures and facials. And now, the penultimate – uber-sexual – the man who maintains the “better” points of the masculine persona augmented with desire and deep rooted passions.

I’ve noticed the lack of trendy categories to pigeon-hole women. Of course there are the standard girly-girl, tomboy and dike labels, but they lack the panache to entice women to aspire to their demanding credentials. Therefore, borrowing liberally from the Hillman Morning Show on WAAF, I’ve come up with the newest trendy label for today’s power woman to aim for – the MANTOWN-sexual.

The MANTOWN-sexual female displays an outwardly, over-feminine physique, while maintaining the finer personality characteristics of a man. To further define the physicality: MANTOWN-sexual women can be either petite or tall; however, they never have a hint of body fat. MANTOWN-sexual women don’t necessarily have breast enhancements; however, it is not frowned upon. MANTOWN-sexual women aren’t always strippers, but they could easily be mistaken for one. MANTOWN-sexual women generally dress in tight fitting clothes that expose strategic areas of skin; for example, the belly, upper thighs and cleavage (both breast and/or buttocks).

The personality of the MANTOWN-sexual woman can best be compared to the classic tomboy. She is athletic and enjoys sports even though she may not be able to tell the difference between a baseball and a football. She possesses a keen knack for culinary creations and is always ready to provide alcoholic beverages at a moments notice. She is eager to please and may act quite lady-like. While, belching during a beer chugging with the boys is not out of the realm of possibilities, the MANTOWN-sexual woman makes it seem rather classy.

Perhaps most importantly, MANTOWN-sexual women relish sex. In fact, sex with relish and other condiments – including whipped cream and chocolate sauce – is highly encouraged. MANTOWN-sexual women are no strangers to first, second or third input and are always dehydrated after sex sessions demanding a “big gulp” to quench their thirst. In fact, the adage “a virgin in the parlor and a whore in the bedroom” may best describe the duality of the MANTOWN-sexual woman.

It may seem difficult to delicately balance the demands of lady-like behavior with male exuberance coupled with an unbridled sex lust, but to the MANTOWN-sexual woman, there is no other way to be.

Follow the Leader

Eliminate the classic definition of a follower – a lemming easily lead by a convincing leader – and the individual remaining would emerge quite the principal. This paradox is realized by the very quality that distinguishes a follower – indecisiveness.

The momentary hesitation of an individual to react to influencing circumstances can be a downfall in times of utmost urgency. However, temporary vacillation allows the seeming experts to weigh in with their knee-jerk opinions. Given the plethora of pundits available to expound upon any given topic, giving pause allows an open mind to review data from several sources and create a well-informed, educated decision based upon facts and the best course of action for the long term investment.

Of course, there needs to be “leaders” – those willing to speak out based upon personal convictions and prior precedent without fully evaluating all sides of the impending argument. Unfortunately, the majority of people today promote these doomsayers to expert status instead of reviewing and appraising their judgment. The ability to think for ourselves gives the follower an advantage in most situations calling for discernment and scrutiny.

There will be no replacement of instinctual reaction or prescience; however, a role reversal of big-mouthed leaders and those who implement their pronouncements may create a more stable and sustaining atmosphere. Leave the knee-jerk reactions to the loud-mouthed aggressors and let the unbiased purposeful sage render actionable decrees.

The Adventures of Rich and Vince

=


Characters courtesy of Planearium

No Sex for Sex Offenders

CNN published a news story today with the link, "State won't pay for sex offenders' Viagra". I though it was just a statement, but no, it was actually a story about how the Govern-ator of California - Arnold Schwarzenegger - signed a sex crimes bill that amended a law that had allowed state funded health insurance to pay for erectile dysfunction medication. I would have thought this was impossible but the article went on to say federal funding for such medication was ended after a New York audit found sex offenders benefiting from the free program.

This may not be a result of big versus small government or cutting versus funding social programs – this may just be plain stupidity. With this logic, we should ensure that all arsonists have a continuous supply of matches and all bulimics have a continuous supply of food to throw up and all cocaine addicts get free blow without minor issues such as cocaine being an illegal narcotic or other silly such fuss.

When I rule the world, this kind of stuff won’t happen.

The Adventures of Rich and Vince

Characters courtesy of Planearium

Agnostic Justices

With the recent Supreme Court vacancies, we were all awaiting a political Armageddon manifested in the form of nominations and confirmations for new justices. The Roberts confirmation was rather uneventful compared to the spectacle we were promised by pundits. Perhaps the Miers confirmation will be more confrontational for the Senate committee. However, if all justices abided by the strict constructionist viewpoint that I was taught in civics, none of this should really matter.

In a simple elementary school definition, the judicial branch of government interprets the laws; the legislative branch makes them. Therefore, legislating from the bench should not be a concern if our justices were trusted to interpret laws based on precedent rather than creating laws based on personal convictions.

While evaluating some cases, there will be no precedents against which to measure. It is these cases where the personal philosophies of the justices are of the utmost concern. The desire to create precedent based on personal principles is tempting; however, our justices must not succumb to its temptation. Instead, more obscure, loosely related precedents must be reviewed for guidance while keeping in mind the strict guidelines set forth in the United States Constitution. Looking to foreign law and international sentiment is not acceptable for a sovereign nation’s self governance.

The Supreme Court’s rulings are rendered by nine justices by a majority rule. This helps to diffuse the partisan nature of personal politics by diluting the individual’s power. I tend to think close 5-4 decisions would not occur down party lines if the justices strictly adhered to case law rather than self-created law. I wonder how many decisions would be correct – in terms of keeping with precedent and the Constitution – as opposed to siding with the opinions based on feelings of conservative or liberalism. We may not “morally” agree with a decision, but we have less to argue when it is based on established foundations of our republic.