I promised myself I’d work on my resume all day today.
Instead I made this.
I hate myself.
While looking through a few athlete Twitter feeds for something I was working on recently, I stumbled across this unfortunate tweet from Cardinals defensive end Darnell Dockett. He doesn’t provide any additional details in other tweets, so it’s fair to say I’m singling out this one out of context.
That being said, it’s hard to imagine he saw two separate pit bull dog fights outside the context of an actual dog fight. Although it’s equally hard to imagine he’d be very popular at a dog fight if he was legitimately acting to break up the animals.
Either way, the tweet is unsettling. Dockett is one of my favorite athlete follows on Twitter—probably because he enjoys nothing more than ruffling feathers, which is undeniably entertaining. But now I just can’t get the imagine of him being enthralled by the sight of two animals brutally attacking each other out of my head.
Hopefully it’s not as bad as it seems.
This was posted a couple of hours ago to Twitter, just hours before Ha Ha Clinton-Dix is expected to be drafted in the first round.
Considering the unfortunate timing, expect the ridiculous cover stories to start coming any minute now.
In the interest of truth in “journalism” (it’s in quotes because I recognize that my blog doesn’t actually qualify as such), apparently that’s just a rolled up tissue. I wish I could call bullshit, but it does look like he’s in a public dining room.
Sorry, Ha Ha.
As a Pittsburgh girl, born and bred, a fondness for Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban is basically in my genes. Seriously! Good luck finding someone from Pittsburgh that doesn’t love the guy.
So when Shark Tank’s “notorious bad boy billionaire” started following me on Twitter in February 2013, needless to say I was pretty enthused—even though the story of how he came to know me wasn’t particularly pleasing.
If memory serves, I had posted an embarrassing drunken photo of him with some random girl at a bar and said something needlessly sarcastic and probably a little mean. Via Twitter DM Cuban explained to me that the photo was a billion years old and that my context for it was dead wrong.
Naturally, responded like a groveling little worm, profusely apologizing and gushing about his greatness. (I know…)
Thus began a beautiful one-sided Twitter relationship in which I told people Mark Cuban follows me and he completely ignored me. It lasted a glorious 15 months before abruptly coming to an end sometime in the last week, when my FindUnfollow iPhone app informed me of his defection.
I’m not going to lie—initially my feelings were hurt and my self-esteem suffered.
But as it turns out, that thing about time healing all wounds is actually true. Now that I’ve had a few days to acclimate to the fact that Cuban unfollowed me, the sting is gone. If anything, I’m kind of impressed that I was personally annoying enough to him on Twitter to prompt such an action.
So I guess he joins John Cusack on the list of celebrities that have found me personally objectionable enough to take action.
So I was perusing the clearance section of Target.com, one of my favorite poor person past times, and I came across this epically terrible t-shirt. It’s actually so bad and so cheap that for a second I actually considered buying it.
Ya know…as a conversation piece.
Then I decided it would just be wrong.
Wrong for me. Wrong for Snoop Dogg. Wrong for dogs. Wrong for gold chains and hoodies. Wrong for nerdy white dudes who look like narcs. Wrong for fashion.
Way to go, Target! I don’t remember the last time I saw a piece of clothing that was so amazingly objectionable.
Well, this and heart disease…
Which is why I’m not in the business of tearing down other sites or writers—unless it’s absolutely necessary.
In the case of the Huffington Post recently tackling the big “Kim Kardashian Takes The Plunge In A Simple Black Tee” story, it’s absolutely necessary.
Not only am I equal parts outraged and confounded that this woman wearing a plain black t-shirt in public is somehow a newsworthy item, I’m flat out stunned it was basically re-blogged from another post from the Daily Mail.
They ripped it off, ripped out all the salaciously sexy nouns and verbs, and gave us this:
Kim Kardashian leaves the house wearing a fucking t-shirt. Great job!
At least you can always count on the Daily Mail to deliver their sleaze straight up. It’s like tequila, watering it down only makes it worse.
Craigslist remains one of the greatest sources of accidental comedy on the interwebs. Recently I was perusing the “for sale” section, hoping to find a great deal on an underrated gem and provide it a loving new home.
As is almost always the case, I found mostly outdated Ikea garbage that I wouldn’t want if it was brand new, let alone used by strangers. But there was one gem—the cow hair ottoman chair seat.
Not a gem that I would ever pay $200 for or actually put in my house—in fact, I wouldn’t put this thing in my house if the seller paid me $200—but a gem nonetheless. Everything about the listing is perfection.
1. Strange capitalization and a lack of punctuation really sets the tone. The tone being crazy.
2. The only thing more stunning than the seller’s asking price for the hair chair is the fact that he paid (or claims to have paid) $500 for it to begin with.
3. The “really beautiful” hair chair is “priced to sell”—CASH ONLY, deadbeats.
4. The person who owns a $500 hair chair doesn’t like dealing with “flakey ppl.”
5. “Stunning back cow hair” is definitely the most accurate part of this whole thing—I am definitely stunned.
6. I love that he captured the cube from several different angles, despite it being a cube and looking the exact same from all of them.
Of course, the seller saved the best for last.
Describing the cube cow hair chair as a “conversation piece” is really attracted my interest, after the initial sticker shock wore off. It made me wonder about the seller and the weirdo life he or she (I’m thinking it’s a he) lives.
My thought is that he probably doesn’t have a whole lot of friends and most of his conversations at home go something like this:
Guest: What’s the deal with this hairy cube?
Seller: It’s a cow hair ottoman.
Best conversation ever. I think I’m going to email this warlock and see if I can find out a little bit about the man behind the hair chair.
I didn’t want to end up an accent lampshade that goes perfectly with a cow hair ottoman, so I decided not to menace the socially awkward weirdo. But the furniture gods brought us back together this weekend when I was perusing Craigslist for bargain furniture that I knew I’d never find.
As it turns out, the cow hair “conversation piece” ottoman is still for sale. When I wrote about it in April it had been for sale for more than 30 days, which means it’s now been for sale for at least 90 days. That’s a pretty long time to be posting the same classified ad without dropping the price so much as a nickel.
Not only is he still trying to sell that overpriced horror show, he’s so passionately committed to finding it a new home that he reposts the ad pretty much every day. At this point, I’m considering offering this guy $200 just to throw it in the trash.
Listen. I think we can all agree that getting “MURDER” tattooed across your entire neck sounds like an amazing idea—one with little to no chance of regret down the line.
Seriously! What could go wrong? As long as you don’t actually get charged with murder and have to face a jury of your stuffy peers, who you know won’t appreciate the irony, that tattoo guarantees nothing but a lifetime of happiness and success.
In the case of Kansas man Jeffrey Chapman, unfortunately things went terribly awry. You can bet he’s now a firm believer in Murphy’s Law—the notion that anything that can go wrong, will go wrong—because that’s exactly what happened to him.
Chapman smartly decided to get his giant “MURDER” neck tattoo (actually, it’s a “REDRUM” tattoo, because apparently the only person he was trying to please with that thing was himself) and then, wouldn’t you know it, dude got charged with murder.
Suddenly it’s looking like a slightly less inspired idea.
The defense attorney for Chapman, who has been charged with murdering a man and leaving his body on the side of the road where it was found by hunters, recently filed a motion requesting that his client’s, otherwise tasteful and appropriate, tattoo be neither seen nor mentioned in the upcoming trial.
Chapman’s attorney notes that it is unduly prejudicial and cannot be easily hidden with clothing. Which means they’re asking for the prosecutor be barred from mentioning the ink and requesting a licensed tattoo artist (who has already been secured by the defense) be permitted to go to the jail and cover it up with something less…prejudicial.
Because the State wouldn’t be bringing the case to trial if Chapman’s ridiculous neck tattoo was a major piece of “evidence,” the prosecutor “does not oppose the defendant from covering his tattoo using clothing, bandage or other means compliant with jail policy.”
As it turns out, licensed tattoo artists are forbidden from conducting their business in Kansas jails. Who knew? The county sheriff opposes allowing a tattoo artist into the jail to work some magic—he also opposes the request allowing Chapman to be transported to a tattoo facility.
If that wasn’t enough, earlier this month Chapman’s attorney filed a motion requesting a change of venue for the trial, insisting the pre-trial publicity would preclude the possibility of his client receiving a fair trial. And it just gets better—opinions posted on websites and Facebook were entered as evidence.
And you thought nobody was reading your inflammatory nonsense in the comment sections of local websites!
Despite being a dangerous lowlife, Chapman has obviously got himself a decent lawyer. As hilarious as this whole thing is, there is absolutely no way I’d find this dude not guilty of murder, given what I’ve read about him—read about him online…and on his own damn neck.
Maybe if the judge doesn’t allow him to have the tattoo removed, he or she will let him get it covered up with “LIFE IN PRISON, NO PAROLE.”
h/t to the NY Daily News for always having the best stories—the best, Jerry! The best!
Here are few tattoos that would be LESS prejudicial in a murder trial: