American Psycho

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. — 'Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.' — Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood."

Ralph W. Emerson, Essay II Self-Reliance (1841)


We all have some ideas that seem inconsistent. (At least I hope we do.) For example, I think every able-bodied adult should work in order to support him or her -self. But I also think we should provide a safety net for people when they cannot - or do not - support themselves because that is better than people living and dying in the streets. (Remember being right vs. doing the right thing?)

This is arguably an inconsistency, but I would argue that to try to be consistent in this regard would be "foolish."

Not all consistency is bad, according to Emerson, just "foolish consistency." Here's an example of a "foolish consistency," IMO. Remember Judge Roy Moore, running for Governor in Alabama? He "accuses" his opponent of believing in evolution, insinuating that that is a wrong or bad thing. In so doing, he is exploiting the "foolish consistency" of creationism and Christianity. It is foolish to think that one who believes in evolution cannot be a Christian, yet that is what Roy Moore is suggesting. And it worked, to a degree, because his opponent is running a response ad claiming to "believe every word of the Bible."

See where "foolish consistency" gets us?

But if "foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds," then absurd, ridiculous inconsistency is the rabid vampire of decent society. It wreaks havoc wherever it is unleashed.

The absurdity that caused my mind to trot down this rocky road is the intellectual, logical, and rational disconnect that is boiling over in America right now.

The national news is dominated by two story lines right now: One, the Tea Party. Two, the Deep Horizon Oil Disaster.

The Tea Party purports to be upset about high taxes (even though they've actually gone down) and a federal government that is too big, and too much in their lives.

If you stay with the news until after the commercial break, you will hear many of these same, southern Americans complaining that the federal government is not doing enough to stop the oil from bubbling out of the mile-deep hole in the ground 50 miles in the Gulf of Mexico. Now, I want to remind you which states are located on the gulf coast: Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, and Texas. Thinks there are some Tea Baggers there? You betcha!

So which is it, Tea People? Do you want lower taxes and less government, or do you want Uncle Sam to bail you out again? The government didn't cause the accident or the spill. A private corporation did that. Can't the free market fix this for you? No? Then you, my friends, need to abandon your faux-movement-cult and get real. Stop acting like you don't need the federal government when in fact, you depend on it for your very survival. It is a "foolish inconsistency," and it is sucking the life-blood out of America.

(What does it say about me that I am linking to my own prior blogs? Narcissistic? Brilliant? Obsessed?)

Apparently, Alabamians Still Oblivious to Time Zones

Two, count 'em, two FB "friends", both of whom live in Alabama, posted the Idol results before it had run its course in the Mountain and Pacific time zones, spoiling the end for me and my sister.

Let me try to explain this so you can understand.

Despite the long held myths, the earth's rotation only makes it appear that the sun goes around the earth. The earth, not flat but a wonky sphere, actually rotates on an axis. So the angle of the sun shining on the earth changes as the earth rotates.

Because we have all agreed not to make 1.4 billion Chinese people eat lunch at midnight, we came up with the concept of TIME ZONES. So, when it's 9 pm in Mobile, Alabama, it is only 8 pm (halfway through Idol) in Utah and only 7 pm in Washington state (Idol does not even begin until 8 pm in Washington state.).

I know this mite hirt yur brane, but try showing a litel respekt for those of us in the westurn tyme zones next tyme.

Do you understand now?

Bailout? Or Bargain?

(Is it me, or does Tim Geithner look a little troll-like?)

It irritated me (too) when we had to bail out the big banks. I hated the idea and the practice of rescuing the highly educated but utterly irresponsible a$$holes who were so careless and cavalier with other people's money.

I hated that more than I would have hated bailing out someone less educated, less sophisticated, and less calculating. But there are two important lessons to take from this Big Bank Bailout that we can use to make our lives easier and, dare I say, more zen.

(Side note: I'm not sure who should be embarrassed by this issue, geographically speaking. Washington, DC for failing to regulate, and in fact repealing in the 1990s regulations that would have prevented a lot of the mess that resulted? Or NYC and the Wall Street shills? Whatever. They can share the shame.)

Lesson One: There is a major difference between being right and doing the right thing. People have such a hard time with this, but it's really very simple. Yes, it would be just and proper to allow the "fraudy" banks to fail when their card houses collapsed. But who gets hurt? The banks, their shareholders, their depositors, and ultimately, the entire economy - i.e. all of us. So, while we may be right that failure was what the banks deserved, letting them fail would not have been the right thing to do.

If you are a parent, you do this every day. "Don't touch that! It will burn you!" When your kid touches it anyway and gets burned, do you stand over her and smirk and say, "See, I told you. Serves you right!"? Of course not. Because that would not be the right thing to do. The right thing to do is to comfort her and bandage the wound. (If you did now already know this last part, I pray to Ra you don't have kids.)

Banks are not children, so there is no love and affection there, but their good health is still in our best interest. So,IMO, we did the right thing when we bailed them out.

If you are not convinced, consider Lesson Two:

WORK-RELATED ANECDOTE: I took the deposition of a rather shady-lady-real-estate-investor several years ago who touted a big, fat balance sheet, drove a beautiful leased Jag, and owed money to half the state of Utah. During the deposition, I asked her the very general question, "What caused you to leave your job and begin investing in real estate?" Her answer was that she had "figured out" a great, new real estate investment business plan. I asked, "What was that?" She said, "Buy low, sell high." (I am not making that up. If you are willing to pay for the copy, I'll send you the transcript.)

Buy low, sell high.

What happened to the banks' stock prices when the crash occurred in 2008? They went down. When the TARP fund was created to bail out the banks, the government took huge chunks of shares as collateral for the loans to the banks. Essentially, the US Government became shareholders in the big banks.

What has happened to the banks' stocks since the bailout and the end of the recession? They have gone up.

Today, it was reported that the Department of the Treasury has sold 20% of its stake in Citigroup - FOR A PROFIT. And they plan to continue to sell Citi shares at a profit in the months ahead. No one talks about this. They just talk about the UTTER INJUSTICE OF REWARDING THE BANKS BLAH BLAH BLAH (see Lesson One).

"Doing the right thing" is called "doing the right thing" because of the result it brings. Being right only gives you the personal satisfaction of being right. But being right and personally satisfied in the midst of a Second Great Depression is not a good result. So, in this instance, being right would not have been the right thing to do. (Does your brain hurt yet?)

So -> Lesson One - Do The Right Thing
Lesson Two - Buy Low, Sell High.

Do we really need to know anything else to get by in this world?

Can He Be Guilty If God Told Him to Do It?

The Bible tells us that God told Abraham to kill his son as a sacrifice, then spared him at the last minute. The Bible tells us that God told Noah to build a giant ark. God told Moses to face down Pharaoh and trust in Him, though that appeared to be a suicide mission. And on and on, the Bible tells us of God speaking to relatively normal, unimportant individuals, telling them to do things their peers thought strange. We hold these people up as examples whose faith exceed the norm, because they obeyed God's instructions though they seemed illogical or even crazy.

In Thibodaux, Louisiana, a man was arrested because God told him to walk around town in the nude and he did it. Shafiq Mohamad claims he was walking around Thibodaux naked because God told him to. And who can prove otherwise?

Why is Abraham an inspiration, but Shafiq a nut? Why does Moses hearing a voice in a burning bush make him someone to revere, while Shafiq is someone to pity?

I hear all the time about how America is a Christian nation (though I don't ascribe to that description) yet we dismiss it when ordinary people claim to hear God's voice.

For all we know, Shafiq Mohamed is God's next prophet. Locking him up may not bode well with the Big Guy in the Sky.

Who's the Fools?

Some teenagers in Salt Lake City, UT (WOOT!) tried to order at McDonalds via rap, and were cited for disorderly conduct.

According to the kids, there was no one else in line, so they did not disrupt service. A judge dismissed the citation.

Why in the sweet hell would the police charge kids for this silliness. Yes, it was silliness, but when did teenagers acting silly become a crime? No one got hurt. No one could have gotten hurt (unless someone ate the McDonald's food).

There were no threats. They didn't threaten to "bust a cap in they fries" or anything. They just tried to order rap-style.

Jiminy Christmas, McDonald's, sensitive much?

Let's get back to the police: Is there not enough real crime on Salt Lake City to occupy your time? Or are you just tired of dealing with "those darn kids?"

I think there are lessons to be learned here.

(1) Rhyming + Fast Food = Criminal Court

(2) Teenagers + Car = Rhyming at McDonald's

(3) Ignorant Fast Food Managers + Bored, Power-tripping Cops = Waste of taxpayer $$$

Moral of the story: Either stop being teenagers, or go to Wendy's.

Finally, a rap for the aftermath of the whole debacle:

The last time I went to Macky-D's,
I got busted by a cop with a disease.

That lame-ass fogy with his talkie thing buzzin'
He called the cops so the whole place was all fuzzin'.

"Get outta here with your judgin' and curmudgeon,
We want our burgers with a heapin' side of lovin'."

He thought my rhymes were disrupting all the burgers.
I thought his job was to help prevent murders.

Why the man wanna bust me and my boys,
When we were just making friendly, happy noise?

And thank you judge, for cutting us some slack,
And telling those old guys that they are really whack!

Too Much Kool-Aid in Kentucky

I blogged about this before, but since it looks like Rand Paul is likely going to win the GOP nomination for US Senate, and then probably the election, it bears repeating:

This guy thinks we should let private businesses decide on their own whether or not to refuse service to people because of their race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, gender, planet of birth, etc.

You say "libertarian, " I say "delusional white man." Of course he doesn't care if businesses are allowed to discriminate 'cause no one is gonna discriminate against him, especially after he becomes a US Senator.

(I should add at this point that he will NOT achieve his goal of a segregationist free-for-all. Thankfully, too few think like he does to permit such an outrage.)

People say "libertarian" and "capitalism" in this country as if they are the ideal, that if we have purity on these philosophies, we will achieve our best society. That is also delusional and really, really shows an ignorance of American history.

As an example in just one small area of American life, extreme libertarianism would mean no protection for minorities, which, as observed above, really only sucks for the minorities. Remember, we had to fight a WAR to end slavery, pass 3 constitutional amendments to TRY to undo the cultural servitude that came from slavery, then we had to pass more federal legislation in the 20th century just to TRY to enforce equality on racist segregationists. We still struggle with these issues today.

What ignorant folly to suggest that we just "let people choose" who they do business with? You can choose to be racist. It's a free country. And many people do choose this route. But do we really want to go back to segregation? Because we will in many rural parts of this country if Rand has his way. Haven't we embarrassed ourselves enough?

Extreme capitalism: OK, so here's a revolutionary thought. Pure capitalism is BAD. It is BAD not because it is immoral, but because it is amoral. It gives no regard for anything but profit. Under pure capitalism, slavery was an excellent labor source, because it is the cheapest labor you can get. PROFIT! Short of that, the abject exploitation of workers (as in the Gilded Age from the late 19th to early 20th centuries) will do nicely as well. PROFIT! It took unionization to stem this tide of abuse.

When I hear people gripe about unions, I wonder if they know what kind of crap-hole this country would be without them? Read about the Gilded Age and find out. Workers killed by machinery, bodies dumped and replaced with the next fungible troglodite, pitifully low wages, dismemberment, abuse, child labor, the list goes on and on, while corporate owners made GAZILLIONS of dollars (Vanderbilt, Carnegie, etc.). But unions here did not overthrow our government. Instead, they engaged in collective negotiations to get a better deal. Supply and demand, negotiation, labor markets, etc. See how it works?

Any organization can become too powerful, but a balance is needed, and we cannot have a balance without unions, IMO. (Sorry, I sound like a scene from The Katate Kid.)

Pure capitalism means no post office, no military (only private mercenaries), no police, no fire department, and it also means that bribery of public officials is A-OK. Because pure capitalism means the only law is profit.

So before you start calling people socialists, maybe remember that YOU ARE ONE TOO.

Keep 'Em Comin', Apothecary!

Apparently there have been more than 100 cases reported of modern, American, human beings drinking this skin lotion. They claim it was accidental, but the side effects include: "numb lips, unconsciousness, hallucinations and confusion." I'm thinking - Benatini!

You Should Have Seen His Face

I'm not going to pick on a particular place today. Instead I'm going to recount a recent conversation with a friend (who reads my blog, incidentally, so he'll be seeing this).

I am listening to God Is Not Great on CD, listening to Mr. Hitchens explain many, many aspects of his point of view on religions of the world and discussing his atheism. Dude is smart. Though some of his arguments are, I think, a little strained and certainly not always "objective." But still, dude is SMART.

My conversation with my friend was civil and respectful, overall, and left us both mentally tired. But those who know me know how much I love that kind of discussion.

One overarching issue for my friend seemed to be wondering was whether atheists would have any morals at all without a belief in God and a religious construct to provide moral guidance. Hitchens is actually very good on this point that he and other atheists are no more or less moral than religious people. Statistically, he is right.

One particular point had to do with Hitchens' position on how religions repress normal, natural sexual behavior. My friend wondered if being an atheist meant a person could just have sex whenever, wherever, and with whomever he or she chose. Mr. Hitchens has his own morality about such things, and I don't know what it is, but I did point out that absent a religious construct prohibiting this sex and that sex and this act and that act, there is a mostly universally accepted secular prohibition on hurting people, on taking without consent. So, even absent religious mores, there has to be consent. And he said (paraphrasing), "So two people agree to have sex and they just have sex?" My response: "Yes."

He seemed a little shocked by this response. Maybe because it was from me, or maybe because it had not occurred to him that such behavior would or could be considered "moral" under any definition. Clearly, he would not consider it moral.

But people make choices every day to do things they were taught were immoral: like living together without being married. Happens all the time now. It's actually the norm, I think. Yet we still call it "living in sin." Why? Because the Bible says so? Because it upsets Mom? If we really thought it was wrong, we wouldn't do it (unless we were sociopaths). But if someone cheats? Holy hell! We KNOW that is wrong! (Why? Because it hurts the other person.) And yet, not married, so it's not adultery. Do you see where I'm going?

We have established a secular moral construct, which we all live by, whether we are religious or not. Even our decision as a society that slavery is immoral is secular. I have not read all religious books, but the Bible certainly does not prohibit slavery, and in fact provides rules for how to treat slaves. (Kind of makes me proud to be human, that we figured this out on our own, even if it did take us centuries to do so.)

Yet we continue to pretend the rules we live by come from religion while simultaneously ignoring many of the actual moral teachings of religion.

We don't honor our father and mother, though we try to visit when we can.

We don't take care of the poor, though we sometimes donate food to the shelter at holidays and donate to Good Will at the end of the year when we want a tax deduction.

We don't love our neighbor as ourselves, though we will call the cops if we see someone breaking into their home.

We still don't want people stealing, but we don't correct the cashier when she makes a mistake.

And we oppose killing, except for wars, the death penalty, and by ignoring those in need of medical care, food, and shelter.

And we covet everything. Heard of capitalism?

I am not advocating that we actually live by the Ten Commandments and the teachings of religious books (though those who do have every right to continue doing so as long as it does not infringe on the freedom of others). I am advocating that we start being honest about what is "moral" and stop pretending this is Salem, Massachusetts, circa 1625.

If morality were defined by what we actually DO believe to be right and/or wrong, and not by a 2000 year old book written when most of the world was illiterate and only men mattered, wouldn't we all be a lot happier? I know George Reker would be.

You May Not Believe in Evolution, But Evolution Believes in You!

Sweet Home, Alabama, where skies are blue, and some yokel moron named Roy Moore is actually campaigning against a guy by "accusing" him of believing in evolution, and worse, advocated teaching it to children. THE HUMANITY!!!!.

You know what would make a lot more sense? Campaigning against a guy because he does not accept evolution as the most likely explanation for our existence.

Pointing at someone as in the final scene in Julius Caesar and shouting "I accuse you of believing in evolution" ought to cause the audience to look at the accuser like a freak. I'm guessing that's not the case here (except for me and hopefully a few of my readers).

If Roy wants to reject science (which provides us with a tested and supported theory of human evolution) and instead cling to a religious myth (meaning simply that it is unproven) to explain human existence, that's his prerogative. Just like he can choose to believe in little green men, shadow governments, immaculate conception, that President Obama was not born in the US, and that the earth is flat. He has every right to cling to those beliefs despite the factual evidence to the contrary. It's still a free country.

But here is where we diverge: his belief in religious narrative to explain human existence is NOT science. It is theology. And NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO TEACH A PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS THEOLOGY IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS. So that guy who advocated teaching evolution in schools, he's right there with modern 20th century thinking while his nutty opponent, Judge Roy Moore, would have locked Charles Darwin in prison.

Further, telling children to reject science and instead cling to de-bunked mythological explanations is a form of child abuse, IMHO. To quote a good friend of mine who is a teacher, do you want everyone to think your kids are stupid?

So, I suggest Roy (at home) tags his little Design caveat on evolution so his kids can at least be conversant about the topic. At least that allows a little bit of science to seep through. (Though let me be clear, the Design mumbo-jumbo is not science either.)

Finally, let me say this to those of you who may be shocked or offended by my pro-science, anti-religion diatribe: If there is a conflict between science and religion, science will ALWAYS win. It always has. Check your history. And it will continue to win because science is based on information, testing, observation, facts. Religion is based on none of those things. Religion is based on faith, believing things without evidence. So if you cannot conform your religious beliefs with advances in science, you are doomed to choose.

What's more, choosing to reject demonstrated scientific principles in order to cling to religious dogma is a form of delusion that gives us people like Roy Moore, the Champion of Myth and the Enemy of Science.

Don't Let the Facts Get in the Way of Your Valuable Opinion

If you watch the news, you know that the last year has been all about the Tea Baggers. They want lower taxes and lower deficits, at the same time, all the while they want the government to keep its hands off of their Medicare. But here's a little information, you know - actual fact:

The average American's income taxes for 2009 were the lowest since 1950. That means the last time income taxes were this low, that old white guy pictured above was President of the United States (That's Harry Truman, BTW.). That's 59 years ago.

Meanwhile, we were in 2 land wars, and were coming out of a HUGE recession caused by the avarice of unchecked and unregulated greed in the form of (it turns out) fraudulent schemes to disguise bad assets as "warrants" and "derivatives." So, I think you Tea Baggers need to get a clue. Here's some help.

Dear Tea Baggers:

(1) Stop getting so STEAMED and read a book. Any book. Ok, not any book. How about a history book or a book on economics? Stay away from books by authors named Limbaugh, Beck, Coulter, Bush and God. Read something enlightening and informative.

(2) You are so STEEPED in prejudice, why don't you just admit that your real problem is that the guy in the White House isn't. Come out of the closet and be true to yourself. Wear your white hood proudly. I say this because the primary stated reason behind the Tea Bagger movement is utter crap. You DO NOT want smaller government. If you did, you would give up your Social Security, Medicare, Disability, VA benefits, and you would want the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ended NOW. You really are just upset because you "want your country back." Well, it's not just your country, Bubba. It belongs to all of us, of all races, religions (and non-religions), sexual orientations, ages, ethnicities, and political philosophies. Your life will be so much more Zen when you accept this.

(3) LEAVE the TV and stop watching Fox News. You are being used and manipulated. Also, See #1.

So remember, under Obama, first African American President of the United States, and a Democrat, you paid the lowest taxes in 59 years. Can you repeat after me? "Obama lowered my taxes. Obama lowered my taxes. Obama lowered my taxes."

I knew you really couldn't but it was worth a try.

Yours patriotically,

Heather "Obama lowered your taxes" McDougald

Maybe He Should Stick to Water and Avoid Crosswalks.

In Northampton, Massachusetts, a 20-year-old woman has been cited for running down Lord Jesus Christ.

How many times does this poor guy have to martyr himself? Jesus! I mean, ....yeah.

Apparently some clever fellow in Massachusetts legally changed his name to Lord Jesus Christ. (Aren't you proud, Massachusettsans? Massachusites? Whatever?) And you better believe it's true, or you will go to Hell and burn for all eternity.

And then some not-so-clever young woman ran him down in a crosswalk.

So this time, instead of being on the cross, he's in the cross?

Are these things OK to make jokes about? *shrug*

The lesson here is very clear: watch where you are driving, and yield to pedestrians in crosswalks! If you do, the life you save could be your Messiah.

(Side note: the woman's name is Brittany. Can we all agree now that Brittany should be put in the "do not use" name-box with Judas, Cain, and Lucifer?)

Lord Jesus Christ is OK. He was knocked down, but he rose again.

This Blog Entry Brought to You with an Assist from Steven O. Wagner

(Steven not pictured. That is South Carolina Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer.)

In comment to my blog about "horsing around," my Facebook friend and high school classmate (never mind what year) attached this clip from The Daily Show. Appropriate to my blog, it references a South Carolina man who was arrested for sexually assaulting a horse twice. That's the same horse, twice. Guess it was true love.

But the real story in the video (you have to watch it) is Lieutenant Governor Andre Bauer of South Carolina equating free lunches for school children to feeding stray animals. He goes on to say that we should NOT do this because, as we all know, feeding stray animals only encourages them to "breed."

So, if you are from South Carolina, do your best to get above your raisin', because that's just scary.

IMO the school lunch programs is one of the best and most successful programs in the country. It ensures that every kid in America gets at least one hot meal per day.

If this bothers you simply because the government is behind it, try to think of it like this: When you are deciding whether or not to support a charity, you ask about the cause the charity is working for. Instead of focusing on WHO is helping the children or sick people or poor people or disabled people, why not focus on (1) whether the goal is laudable and(2) whether the goal is being met.

To me, this is the real debate since the government already is so involved. Did you know that prior to health care reform even passing, more Americans received health care through a government program (Medicare, Medicaid, VA, SSI, SSDI, Tribal health care, etc.) than through the private health care system? I bet you didn't know that.

So, if we actually have a debate about REALITY instead of the delusional fantasy that somehow our government is going to extract itself from our economy, I think we can actually get more done.

In the mean time, can we agree to stop voting for people who compare children to unwanted animals?

Thanks, Steven.

WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! I'M GOING ON A TANGENT:

This cockroach is anti-choice. Does anyone else find it ironic and infuriating that this redneck calls abortion "murder" yet has no qualms calling poor children in his state "stray animals?" Well, Lt. Gov. Bauer, what do you do in South Carolina with stray animals? Go ahead. You know the answer. Say it.

I'm not saying he needs to change his position on abortion. I'm suggesting he needs to care as much about an actual child after it is born as he purports to care about a tiny lump of cells in some woman's uterus. Until then, he needs a giant metaphorical bandage to cover his hypocriture.

Is This What Jesus Would Do?

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

This Blog Entry Not for Children - or Foals

I Googled "redneck news" and found a LOT of news, but this one jumped out at me. How could it not?

Last year in Columbia, Tennessee, 58-year-old James Michael Tait was arrested and charged with animal cruelty for having sex with a horse.

When I first read the headline I thought, "What?" Then I started running puns through my head, like, "Some men like to do it with horse (instead of whores)" and "Gives a whole new meaning to jockey shorts."

But then I kept reading. (It is like a train wreck. How could I not?) Tait got into trouble in Washington state in 2005 for filming another man, Kenneth Pinyon, having sex with a horse. (Tait is a determined dude.) Then I read the next sentence: "Pinyon later died of internal injuries from the incident."

What. The. Horse? I admit I made an assumption. When the writer said the men were "having sex with" the horses, I assumed, how can I say this delicately (or are we past that?)...the men were using ladder or platform or whatever and were "on top." I was wrong.

I guess these guys were looking for someone "hung like a horse," and they found it. They found it all over the US, and they filmed it. Mr. Pinyon did not survive, but his achievement is forever memorialized on film.

I wonder how long before Tait is back in the saddle again.

When he's done, does Tait get hosed off and brushed?

Beam Me Up, Crazy!

I realize my topics have diverted from "redneck" to "crazy," but at least I'm staying in the "embarrassing" lane.

You may be confused with this one, wondering who should be embarrassed. I'm going with Vegas, Baby!

Matthew Kleindorfer of Vegas, Baby stormed the cockpit of a SkyWest flight from Helena, MT to Salt Lake City, UT, claiming he was A SPACE ALIEN AND WANTED TO FLY THE PLANE. The flight was therefore diverted the Idaho Falls, which makes perfect sense, I guess.

I think Mr. Kleindorfer was sent over the edge by strange Rocky Mountain weather in the spring which requires shoveling snow in the morning and mowing the lawn in the late afternoon. This is just WRONG. Being from Vegas, Baby, he simply couldn't cope, since Vegas, Baby has neither snow nor lawns

I am left with a few questions:

(1) Can we agree that what "loses his grip on reality in Vegas, stays in Vegas" from now on?

(2) Shouldn't airport security have known this guy was crazy when he went through security? I mean, look at him!

(3) Did anyone ask Mr. Kleindorfer if we really are supposed to "always double down on eleven?"