Nine large sharks were spotted off the coast of New South Wales, Australia. And not once in the story did they use the term I created for a group of sharks: law firm.

C'mon, people. We have to work together to get this accepted. Email news.com.au and let them know what to call this grouping of animals! Tell all your friends!

In related news, San Jose-based law firm of Hoge, Fenton, Jones & Appel, Inc., has a six foot fiberglass shark hanging in their office. Good for them!

There's a murder of crows, a mob of kangaroos, a shrewdness of apes, and a dishonesty of politicians. After reading this story about a group of sharks, I looked for what a group of sharks was called. No luck. So I decided to come up with a name myself.

A law firm of sharks!

I need everyone to start using the term immediately. Christians: pretend this is "Book of Daniel," and start writing letters. Liberals: Pretend this is Bush and go out and protest. O'Reilly fans: Pretend Bill just told you it was true!

Let's get moving on this people!

Update: I did find what a group of sharks is called. It's a shiver of sharks. Too dull. The crusade continues!

Texas has become the fourth state to have minorities outnumber the majority. According to a Chicago Sun-Times story, minorities in Texas are 50.2% of the population. While Texas wasn't the first to reach this notable milestone (California, New Mexico and Hawaii beat us to it), at least we are ahead of Maryland, Mississippi, Georgia, New York and Arizona.

It's nice to see texas at the top of one of these lists. We've been at the bottom of the education list forever.

But, I guess I need to make a few changes to the blog. So in the words of Kent Brockman: "I, para uno, dan la bienvenida a nuestros overlords nuevos [ de la minoría ]. Quisiera recordarlos como una personalidad confiada en de la TV [ o blogger ], yo puedo ser provechoso en el redondeo encima de otros a trabajar en sus cuevas subterráneas del azúcar."

Translation by BabelFish.

For those of you too lazy to cut and paste and let Alta Vista do the work for you, here's the translation:

"I, for one, welcome our new [minority] overlords. I'd like to remind them as a trusted TV personality [or blogger], I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves." -- Kent Brockman and me

BWAH! HA! HA! HA! HA!

Revenge is so sweet!

I once got into an argument with a NORML geek once about the effects of smoking. His position was that marijuana smoking was not harmful and therefore should be legalized; but tobacco smoking was harmful and should be banned. He didn't want to suffer through second hand smoke. My position was that if smoking one dried leaf was harmful then smoking another dried leaf was harmful as well. I pointed out that cigarette smoke, according to the Surgeon General's warning said "Cigarette smoke contains carbon monoxide." I suggested that marijuana smoke contained carbon monoxide, since carbon monoxide is a by product of combustion. His response, "There are no studies that show that marijuana smoking is harmful!"

BWAH! HA! HA! HA!

Here's why I'm laughing. A study has concluded that moderate pot smokers have reduced lung capacity, and have fewer cancer preventing antioxidant levels.

Now all those pot smoking anti-tobacco zealots have to quit smoking pot! BWAH! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

No. I am not bitter and I don't hold a grudge.

But seriously, I will be happy to support your goal to legalize marijuana, if you will stop being so hypocritical and support smokers' rights.

I don't beleive that so-called Hate Crimes should be considered more heinous then regular crimes. I think that these laws push us closer and closer to a kind of thought police described by George Orwell, bringing his world of 1984 much closer to reality.

Consider this scenario: A straight white male is walking down the street, when a straight white male jumps out from the bushes and hits him upside the head with a baseball bat. Plain old assault, right?

Change the first person to a person of color, and instantly, it becomes a Hate Crime. Change the person to a gay person of color and you've got a true, double-barreled hate crime. And since it's a hate crime, the penalties are harsher than for beating up a straight white man. The law punishes the criminal because of what he was thinking, in addition to what he did.

Now, if it is much worse to hit someone because the law has determined the criminal hates, what happens when someone murders someone "based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or gender identity of another individual or group of individuals?" Does the death penalty automatically kick in? Nope. (Well, except for the great State of Texas, where speeding can get you the death penalty.) Killing a straight white man and killing a homosexual person of color (either gender) get the same penalty.

Can a straight white man who hates his straight white neighbor because he plays his music loud all night long be accused of a hate crime if he kills him? I hate Michael Bolton. What if I killed him? Hate crime? Again, nope.

To commit a crime like those above indicates that you hate, or at the very least have an active disinterest in, that person. Making a person's private thoughts the basis for harsher punishments puts us on a slippery slope where disagreeing with the sitting President can be considered Treason. A thought crime is a thought crime, after all.