Archive for the 'Uncategorized' Category


What can we do to get a little mojo back. Ugh. UGH


It is clearly the red line that must not be passed as no action is more heinous. Totally unacceptable.

What is?

Using chemical weapons.

You mean like white phosphorous?

No that is okay.


Napalm is okay.

Agent Orange?

SARIN, I MEAN SARIN!!! LIKE IN SYRIA!!! Totally inhumane, cruel, only the most monstrous of the monsters would ever use it.

Yeah, killing people is bad.

No, I mean killing them with sarin gas is totally horrible!

Bullets are pretty horrible.

Everyone uses bullets. Those are okay.

But they kill people too.

Doesn’t matter, that kind of killing is allowed.

Because they are less dead?

Well, no. But it is worse to kill with sarin.

Because they are more dead?

Right. Wait, no. They are not more dead with sarin. It’s just worse okay? Killing with chemicals is bad. BAD!

Unless you are Texas.



Ahem, Pinko


Apologies to all Ahemmers who are not on the blogroll; but look, we all KNOW 3Bulls is completely .5 assed, right? It wouldn’t be 3 Boolz otherwise.

Now if only the blogroll feed would at least UPDATE more often than every other third Wednesday in a month when the date is a prime number. At least that SEEMS to be the algorithm.

Of course, Von’s and Zombie’s inability to comment is a travesty and they both deserve much praise for bearing up as stoically as they do. Send them money and beer.

A minor conflagration

in the condiment wars: assertions that pepper spray is a food product will doubtless be mocked by wiser bloggers than your humble (and occasionally posting) Ombuds, but we may as well set the bar low.

Between Ms. Kelly’s cluelessness and the recent decision defining tomato paste as a vegetable, we can only conclude a conspiracy to discredit Herman Cain and his known association with DorD-worthy pizza companies, as if he needed the help.

That, or viral marketing for an upcoming episode of Chopped.

Other business:

1. We welcome back our esteemed avian colleague plover, and eagerly await the inevitable returning salvos from Fishy McBiaspants.

2. Having not personally seen the new secret header (and being too lazy to refresh the page ad nauseam), we can only assume the presence of giant stone heads, and preemptively approve.

3. We make no apologies for our absence, accountability was specifically omitted from our contract. We have very good attorneys.

4. And they have suggested that this statement be redacted.

Any other business?


The Central Ombudsman’s Board of Accession (COBA), announced that after having received a rasher of complaints from the community on matters pertaining to Ombudsmen at Three Bulls Blog, it would establish a full committee of inquiry into the matter. This committee will meat and discuss the issues involved and return a report to COBA’s network of executive committees for further action on the matter.

“Today, we take another step in making Ombudsman review processes more fair, transparent, and responsive to the needs of community steakholders,” said O. Glomboly, spokesbudsman for COBA. “No holds barred. This is, once again, the fire starter of a new day for Ombudsmanry. We’ll be looking at some of the issues that the community has been having with Three Bulls Blog and its ‘network’.”

COBA has been smoked with complaints pertaining to Ombudsman matters at Three Bulls Blog. This new committee will be comprised of balanced and neutral representation. Already, some members have been appointed and are arriving for planning meetings.

The first and principal matter that the community will look into is the issue of a Three Bulls Blog Ombudsman, “Mendacious D, Ombirdspersonpantsmoose”, and his recent reference to the collection of people who sometimes frequent its comments section as the “Exalted Commentariat.” Many community steakholders objected to the commentariat being referred to as “Exalted”, particularly by an Ombudsman whose purpose and mission is to be neutral as per the COBA statutes. The committee will grill some of the commenters to see if they are in fact exalted, and whether this exalted status, factual or not, is really within the ambit of an Ombudsman to decide.

Said one of the newly appointed steakholder representatives, “It’s really pretty presumtuous for him to have said that, especially since this commentariat has shown extreme bias against certain classes of organisms and repeated lies and slander about them. Now, if you’ll excuse me, but my hand is a little red and sticky and I need to clean it before I pick up my steak again.” The community steakholder squirted a little lemon juice on the steak and wandered off.

Spokesman Glomboly declined to answer questions about future mandates for this committee, saying that other complaints pertaining to currently living community groups would be reviewed in due course.


Here at the Central Ombudsman’s Board of Accession (COBA), we like to celebrate the achievements of our beloved ombudsmen the world over. So a hearty congratulations to Elisabeth Beikirch, the newly anointed “Ombudsfrau” of the German Underwear Ministry for Sneezes. We were present at the, ahem, later ceremony, ritual, and sacrifice, and we can report that the omens were appropriately neutral.

While at COBA, we normally refer to all our members and provisional members as Ombudsmen regardless of sex, the unique institution of the Ombudsfrau has special significance in German culture, in particular the production of the Ombudsbrau, the neutrality inducing drink used since ancient times in Teutonic cultures to ensure even-handedness in judgement.

So congratulations, Ms. Beikirch! May all your ministerial sneezes be unbiased.

Old Skool

I love how I heard this the other day and though “that was from BACK in the DAY” and somehow that is 1989. Nooooooo, it should be from the mists of time, like 1986 or something.


The song that most inspires your internal Statler and Waldorf that you have heard starting on your commute or couch lounging starting from today through the end of the weekend that you have heard on your internet or your radio or your internet radio.

You have to have heard it. Post the You Tube if possible in comments and we will determine the winner Monday.


Let us open the self-referential meta-bidding with these unworthy contributions:

Zombie Rotten McGriddle
Republic of Smoke Dog (and by corollary, Pug Timer)
Blue Skittles in a Technicolour Dream State

Any takers?

We have been lax

as usual, regarding our sacred duties to the Exalted Commentariat. The reasons for this are manifold, mostly to do with multiple bouts of intoxication in at least three countries that we can remember. Luxembourg may have been involved, but that evening is particularly hazy in our memory. Let us begin:

1) Regarding the above, ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© addresses the perennial complaint on this blog. To wit:

If only there were some sort of entity that could address the concerns of this weblog’s readers…

An investigation into the hiring practices of in-house contractor 3Bulls! Ambassadorial Services, Incorporated is currently under way. We expect full exoneration.

(Readers will note that this is a sure-fire way to get the Ombuds to post. Be merciful)

We should also add that the above-linked thread is reaching Atriotic levels of insanity. We are currently pondering some kind of prize or award for the thousandth (or other arbitrary) comment, but fear that arguments over such a contest and its attending prizes would easily outnumber the existing entries.

2) UC is in particularly fine form in the latest Pitchfork Listomania installment. A representative sample:

Putting the song through my mass spectrometer, I can see that compositionally it is only barely different than The Microphones pt. 4.1341. I call shenanigans. David Bevan thinks this song is so clever for avoiding a hook. I say that if you are baking a chocolate dessert and forget cocoa, one deserves only admonishment and not some praise for making an alternate kind of dessert.

UC: spooning the carob of malice into your music-blogging rumballs since 2005.

3) plover, in the continuing landmark case Fish v. Shorebird, includes in opening arguments:

The sheepish look on a particular shorebird at, with this post, disturbing the tranquillity of those who thought this particular brouhaha had subsided a month ago caused one of our editors to suggest filing it under “fish vs ovine”, but said editor was, to easily imaginable effect, threatened with being locked in the room with the ombudscrew.

This is, obviously, blatant anti-ombuds bias. The most we would ever inflict is a generous measure of bourbon, and perhaps some brochettes. On behalf of our colleagues, particularly the ombudsovine, we demand an immediate retraction.

Any other business?