Panel The First: If you are not listening to Keith Olbermann--if you are not listening to Keith Olbermann--you are missing out on the most eloquently rational voice in the U.S. national media. Catch him on "Countdown", on MSNBC (yeah, it's still around) or over at YouTube.
Panel The Second: In the immediate wake of Federal seizure of the dead drug dealer's assets (someone might point out that I'm supposed to say "alleged": okay, I just did), the senate ethics commission--a.k.a "Three Ass-Lickers and Two Idiots"--voted 3-2 to defeat a motion to investigate Hector "Drug Dealer? Drug Dealer?! That Guy Has No Job and Owns Four Houses? Drug Dealer?!?" Martínez.
Guess who voted "No"?
Let Me help the lameculos who voted "No," a word equal in letters to their collective IQ:
---Your statehood colleague INVITED this soon-to-be-dead drug peddler to official senate events several times. Not once, not twice: several times. Your own legislative headless body has ample evidence of these ethics breaches ranging from photos taken on-site by a myriad of witnesses to the drug dealer's SIGNATURE on official documents.
---The Feds just seized several properties once-owned by the dead drug dealer and have stated that ties to local political figures are being investigated. Your very own colleague was a childhood friend and neighbor of the dead dope pusher and actually signed an official receipt to pick up a gun issued in the dead creep's name a few years ago.
Your alleged (See? I said it again.) vote seems to gurgle "Ethics? Ethics?! We don't need no stinkin' ethics!", which I can appreciate must be hard to enunciate when your tongues are dragging lickety-split over derriere. If any of you asswipes can read and think, you'd see a connection in this case worthy of at least a token investigation by your ethics-voided chamber of horrors. That you voted "No" shows you either cannot read, cannot think, have taken bribes or are implicated in the current investigation. Your pick.
Panel The Third: Took some flack for my "Labs" post. Seems a couple of teachers objected to My indirect description of their profession. Okay, here's what I should have said: Most teachers are teachers because they are too lazy or too stupid to be anything else. There are exceptions, but the majority fit My description to a proverbial T.
And One: Courtesy of Google and some folks who almost certainly wound up where they didn't expect: "is not for fools" quotes; "sell your gil" (almost didn't make it...); "taino gil"; "i hate banco popular"; "what is a nebbish"; "what happened at the grito de lares"; "the simplest way to sell your ideas"; "conflict is necessary for growth"; and remarkably, "global economy, education's role" and "schools destroy creativity".
Okay, ten. At least it contains a one...
The Jenius Has Spoken.