Wherein I read things, laugh [or not], and pass them on to you…
• A Good Day To Die Hard Adds Cole Hauser In Supporting, Villainous Role: Now Deadline is reporting another tiny bit of casting that suggests some forward motion– Cole Hauser, the character actor with roles in everything from 2 Fast 2 Furious to Good WIll Hunting to Dazed and Confused, has signed on in the supporting role of Collins, a villain who presumably will work in cahoots with the the previously cast bad guys. Hauser has been in two other Willis films, Tears of the Sun and Hart’s War, though it’s unclear just how much face-to-face time they’ll have. A Good Day To Die Hard is shooting in Russia [cinemablend/deadline/08 May 2012]
• Hillary Clinton wore glasses, didn’t wear makeup. The world did not end.
• Roe V World: Why Not Require a 72-Hour Waiting Period for Every Major Life Decision?: At least one Salt Lake City writer agrees — but he thinks the law doesn’t go far enough. His Jonathan Swiftian suggestion? Three day waiting periods on every major life decision….For example, he thinks that since getting drunk can lead to poor decisions (“Let’s eat some Taco Bell!”) and getting high can lead to its own special brand of stupidity (“Let’s roll three Taco Bell tacos into one super tacoburrito!” or, “Let’s invent Pizza Scissors!”), people should be legally required to sign a letter of intent and then wait for three days. The 72-hour rule should also apply to church attendance, which Kirby says can cause imposition of belief and intrusion on the lives of others. And finally, couples trying to get pregnant on purpose should state their objectives in writing and keep their pants on for 72 hours of quiet reflection before procreative sex takes place. [jezebel/Erin Gloria Ryan/08 May 2012/Salt Lake City Tribune]
• Kansas Bill Permits Doctors to Refuse to Administer Chemotherapy to Pregnant Cancer Patients: The Kansas Senate has approved a bill that literally prioritizes a doctor’s personal beliefs over women—currently alive, breathing women—by permitting doctors and other healthcare providers to refuse medical care to a pregnant woman if such care might end her pregnancy. And here’s the kicker: the healthcare provider would not be under any obligation to refer the patient elsewhere. So, if a woman develops breast cancer while pregnant, or if a woman with breast cancer becomes pregnant, her doctor could refuse to provide chemotherapy treatment to her, and the doctor would not have to tell her why she was being refused treatment and would not have to refer the patient to another doctor who would provide chemo. We’re familiar with abortion laws that prioritize the lives of the unborn over the lives of women. This bill now prioritizes a doctor’s personal beliefs over the life of a human. THIS IS MADNESS. [balloon-juice.com/ABL 2.0/08 May 2012]