Showing posts with label mary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mary. Show all posts

Debate: Death Penalty/Capital Punishment

By Jake and Mary 

There are a few debate topics that are considered to be cliches: abortion, does God exist, is Poison Ivy 2 worth watching and, of course, the death penalty. Yet, occasionally these trite topics become relevant when Illinois passes a law outlawing them, and that is what happened with the death penalty. Starting July 1, 2011, Illinois will have a ban on the death penalty, essentially making murder legal. Yet, not everybody agrees on this issue, and we are going to stage a reenactment of such a disagreement.

Jake: Like I said in the introduction of this debate, banning the death penalty is essentially making nefarious crimes like murder, rape and living in Texas legal in Illinois. The flip-side argument has always been that innocent people are occasionally put to death. For every one innocent person receiving a lethal injection, there are thousands of super villain-types getting goofed up on death juice. And, yet, Lex Luthor is allowed to live in Metropolis and antagonize Superman, the greatest man/alien who has ever lived. This is the world Mary wants us to live in. She probably has a Lex Luthor poster over her bed with lipstick kiss marks all over his face. I have Superman bedsheets and underoos, and I support the death penalty.

Mary: According to Ron White, Texas has the death penalty in a Drive-Thru window for maximum expediency. It’s a slippery slope, so let's just keep Texas and Texans in Texas and capitol punishment on demand out of Illinois. Now that I’ve got juice on my mind, I sure wouldn't want to get in the wrong line accidentally thinking I was at a Sonic and get blasted in the face with bullets instead of slurping down a cherry limeade, which I’m not even sure you’d call juice or not - maybe that’s another debate for another time. There are plenty of good reasons for people to be punished by execution, as in cases of rape and incest, but our justice system is imperfect and, like any reasonable person, I'd prefer we err on the side of keeping convicted murderers alive and behind bars than letting innocent people die. Hopefully, a murderer or child molester in jail will just get shanked on the basketball court during recess, which is what happened in a movie I watch one time.

Jake: Yes, that movie was called “Recess: The Movie” and the producers, writers and directors are on death row in Illinois and they are very relieved about this death penalty ban. They will now be able to make another sequel that will poison the minds of our children like a cherry limeade poisons our bodies. We simply cannot allow justice to be served by other criminals during games of basketball. Not every rapist, murderer or pedophile likes b-ball, some like softball or even cricket. Imagine, if you will, a world where the death penalty is illegal. John Wayne Gacy is still alive, stuffing corpse after freshly killed and fucked corpse in his crawl space. His character Pogo the Clown has its own TV show which is fairly popular with children. Not “Bakugan” popular, but it gets okay ratings for the time of day it is on. The merchandising deals are not great, but they exist, and every once in a while you will see a child wearing a Pogo the Clown t-shirt. This is the alternate reality that Mary wants us to live in, where murderers, serial rapist and pedophiles have popular television programs and are celebrated as heroes instead of despised for being the monsters they are.

Mary: Are you serious? Cricket and the rest of recess activities aside, this is 2011 and the world I want to live in is one where the government doesn't kill me for mistaking me for Lex Luthor. I suppose Jake would prefer we go back to the days of public hangings on the weekends. The weekend was made for slamming bottomless mimosas and calling it "brunch" or going for a walk in the park. I also like to do laundry on the weekends and the best part is, while I'm folding my clothes and huffing Downy, I don't have to concern myself with the stoning happening down the street. Whether a person is hanged, stoned, lethally injected, or electrocuted, keeping the death penalty around makes it all practically the same; you're killing somebody for their perceived crime. There are so many people, how do you know if you have the right one? Let Jake watch Pogo the Clown and Recess, if it's still airing, on Saturday mornings until noon-thirty rolls around and it is time to go to the town square to watch somebody die!

Jake: Mary is against public stonings, but is for prisoners shanking each other. She is against Lex Luthor look-alikes, but is pro-huffing downy and watching cartoons. I’m no mathematician, but these things just don’t add up, especially the first one. The cases where innocent people are put to death is so low that it almost does not exist. Being afraid of being mistaken for somebody wanted of murder is outrageous, especially for white females, such as Mary and myself. Even “innocent” people being put to death is not necessarily a bad thing. It improves our odds of winning the lottery, for instance. It also lessens our population, which is getting out of hand. Mary probably won’t be happy until every American is starving to death because of over population. What a humanitarian she is!

Mary: Sure, there are way too many people on this planet. I guess in Jake’s reality, we would all just be arbitrarily electrocuted by state police to take care of that problem. Furthermore, I just don’t know if the government has jurisdiction over prison recess shankings, and if it did, is there anything the government can really do to further prevent it from occurring? The death penalty, on the other hand, gives the government the ability to kill people even though scientists have proven that capital punishment does not serve at a deterrent. Scientists are right about climate change, so why should I think they’re all liars about this one? Why else would we allow innocent people to die in order to kill other guilty people other than to deter it from happening in the first place? We should be more concerned that the wealthy murderers with really expensive lawyers are now back to blowing coke at the country club until their next victim arrives than we are about whether a prisoner will die tomorrow by lethal injection or decades later by natural causes. Either way, they’re spending the rest of their life in jail and the only thing I need to be afraid of murdering me are rich men like OJ Simpson. That being said, I hope Jake will win the lottery between now and July 11th and invite me over to his mansion for a pool party with Beyonce.

Debate: Peanut Butter or Jelly?

By Jake and Mary 

People are always deeming things “greater than sliced bread,” but can we really call bread greater than what we spread on or put in between it? If those things cease to exist, does sliced bread remain great? This debate will not answer those question, because, frankly, they are too philosophical for a comedy debate. Instead, we will be deconstructing the American dietary staple, peanut butter and jelly, and try to find out which of the two sandwich ingredients is the best.

Jake: Peanut butter and jelly are a harmonious pair; they are a legendary team like Abbot and Costello or the Bad News Bears. Separate they can be seen as weak, but together they are stronger than Hulk Hogan circa WrestleMania III. Yet, to choose between the two is one of the easiest decisions I have ever made: jelly is superior.

Peanut butter may be more versatile, but jelly is so darn sweet. I can spread jelly on a piece of toast and call it a day, but I cannot do the same with peanut butter. It is simply too dry. According to Chris Rock, in prison people put jelly in their assholes for others to eat out and that is called a “tossed salad.” The only sexual act that peanut butter is widely used for is bestiality. Bestiality is rape and I do not support condiments that rapists use over ones they do not use.

Mary: There is a reason PB comes before J and it has nothing to do with bestiality or Chris Rock. Jelly is sticky and when I think of jelly, I think of children with little jammy-hands and jelly-stained faces getting everything they touch sticky. I don't know about you, but I prefer not to be reminded that these smaller, boisterous versions of adults exist at all, let alone be bothered by this fact while I'm trying to eat. Stickiness aside, peanut butter offers more nutritional benefits, like protein, but even more remarkable is what it doesn't contain: ground-up cattle hoofs. Peanut butter is simply mashed up peanuts, sometimes a little salt, sometimes honey. That’s it. Everyone knows peanut butter was mastered by George Washington Carver. Who invented jelly? Nobody knows this because nobody cares.

Jake: First of all, the Aztecs invented peanut butter. Everybody knows that. Jelly was supposedly invented in the Middle East, which is the real reason Americans do not care. Since I am not a complete racist like Mary, I do care-- even if I was born in the USA. I love jelly, jams and preserves. They are sweet and make otherwise awful bread products edible. I could eat jelly off of a playing card and I often do. My favorite is the ace of hearts. I don’t know why, but it just tastes better than the other cards. There are no cattle hooves in jelly, jam or preserves, they use pectin! Pectin is nature’s ground up cow bones. Peanut butter has protein in it-- too much if you ask me. Plus, any peanut butter that isn’t “natural” contains high fructose corn syrup. HFCS is essentially rat poison.

Mary: I’ll admit I’m not well-versed in the distinction between gelatin and pectin, but I stated that George Washington Carver mastered peanut butter, not invented it, which means he took the ground up peanuts and made it into the even more palatable spread we find in the jar today. Non-natural peanut butter has partially hydrogenated oil, not HFCS, which is why you can find natural pb’s on the shelf at just about every grocery store. Jelly, on the other hand, is almost always found chock full of rat poison. I can’t believe this is even up for discussion and actually pity Jake for having to pretend that jelly is better than peanut butter. In fact, we don’t really need jelly at all; have you ever tried a peanut butter and honey sandwich? In 3rd grade, I read in a Weekly Reader that President Bill Clinton’s favorite sandwich was peanut butter and banana - also jelly-free - and when I ate it as my after-school snack, I decided I was no longer a Republican. How can jelly be better than peanut butter when jelly is obsolete? How can jelly be better than peanut butter when jelly ruins a perfectly fine jar of peanut butter by invading it to become the vile concoction ‘Goober’?

Jake: Skippy peanut butter does contain HFCS, and probably many other brands. I live in the mid-west where almost everything is made out of HFCS because it is merely a way to sell corn, much like ethanol. Your points about honey and bananas are exactly why peanut butter isn’t great. You need a sweetener to be able to choke it down. Sure, rat poison might be sweet, and it gives cocaine an extra oomph that is sometimes pretty nice, but I do not prefer it usually. Jelly is made out of fruit and pectin. We do not need to run in circles over that fact. How can you say jelly is obsolete when there are more flavors of it than ever and it takes up much more space on the supermarket shelf than peanut butter. Peanut butter and jelly are the yin and yang of a somewhat unhealthy lunch menu, but they compliment each other, like I compliment Mary when she gets her hair cut. Frankly, I am not raging against the peanut butter like Mary is doing to jelly. I like both, but just feel that jelly is easier to eat alone on a piece of bread than peanut butter. After all, it does stick to the roof of your mouth.

Mary: I have yet to verify the validity of your statement on occupying grocery store shelves, but let's just assume that is the case and proceed. I think it's safe to say the only reason jelly takes up more room than peanut butter in a grocery store is because there are so many kinds of fruit in this world. Peanut butter only has unnatural/natural versions of chunky and creamy (and sometimes honey roasted) but I don't see this as a limiting factor; I think it's liberating. With jelly, I'd have to decide among thousands of types of fruit - let alone whether it's naturally or artificially flavored - and there's no way I can determine which one jar I'm in the mood for and what I may or may not be in the mood for later. This is a lot like making plans or being in a committed relationship, this does not rank high on my list of things I'm going to do instead of doing the things I currently do. I'd never be satisfied with so many options and while Jake is standing in the aisle, sensibly considering which will pair best with the Ace of Hearts card, I've become paralyzed by the overwhelming paradox of choice in a world of scarcity. When you share a fridge with 4 other people, you only have so much room for jars of jelly. On the contrary, having fewer available options of peanut butter allows me to pick up my standard jar and be on my way to go and live my simple life of organized chaos in between peanut butter and banana sandwich feedings. Furthermore, I'd much rather un-stick the stuck-on peanut butter from the roof of my mouth than walk around with a sticky jelly-face.

I enjoy these debates in part because I learn so much, like how jelly is made or that cocaine may contain rat poison - such a thing you just don’t learn on the streets of Bed-Stuy, Brooklyn - but one thing is for sure that we will not learn today is that jelly is better than peanut butter and that more is less.

On The New Facebook

By Mary 

The new Facebook profile spread faster than HPV and, as we’re all well-aware, last week this option became obtrusively mandatory. News feeds were inundated with Facebook friends’ profile updates: current cities, interests, and my personal favorite: “Who inspires you?”

Sure, there are many reasons for an aversion to the new profile – familiarity with the previous format and not knowing any foreign languages to proudly display along with the rest of the vital stats – but regardless of our motivations, the implementation of last week’s mandate defeated the resistance to change we old-profilers maintained and communism broke the glimpse of what seemed like choice in the market of Facebook profiles.

We’ve experienced both positive and negative modifications to Facebook throughout the course of its existence. Forget the invasion of privacy and targeted advertisements, the new profile ranks up there with “Moms on Facebook” on the list of all-time worst Facebook changes. While we were in college, the old-fashioned Facebook was not only a fun tool of procrastination and display of party photos; Facebook was intentionally purposeful, as it allowed us to connect with people taking the same courses. It then took on a madness of its own and in the same way that we were connected by the network of our alma mater, Facebook has expanded to connect us by the music we like, activities we enjoy, languages we speak.

We all remember the arrival of the News Feed and feeling hyper-exposed. Then, we realized how much more easily we could find out which people we went to high school with are now preggers and, much like during fornication, we became comfortable with the nakedness almost instantaneously. The improvement was like upgrading to DSL from dial-up and with the profound ease of Facebook-stalking, the news feed became our preferred form of pornography and we wouldn’t think twice about reverting back to the old ways.

Last Thursday, Facebook upgraded me to the new profile against my will. Like many of my fellow comrades in la resistencia, I updated my status to reflect my denunciation and accordingly made modifications to my profile to fit the new format.

LANGUAGES: Aside from ordering a burrito, my Spanish-speaking skills are non-existent, which almost makes me wish I didn’t drink so much red wine in Spain or tequila on Spring Break. ‘English’… On second thought, maybe I’ll just leave that one blank, rather than announce that I never bothered to learn a language in addition to my native tongue.

FAMILY: Not sure if I need to make that facebook-official. Christmas dinner is enough of a reminder. BLANK again.

PEOPLE WHO INSPIRE YOU:

Being the serious type, I decided to announce to the entire Facebook realm who actually inspires me, once I figured it out for myself. As I stared at the Facebook (NEW) profile update page, I asked myself: “Where am I? What am I doing here? And whose fault is it?” I entered the first influential individual’s name and Facebook did not recognize it. I tried it again: nope. I entered another name, then another. Unlike political beliefs and religion, Facebook wouldn’t let me save the unrecognizable changes and, in a panic, I threw my laptop out the window.

Facebook has crossed the line with the new profile. In its attempt to connect us all through these interests, our alma mater, our occupation and employers, it restricts us to this assumed level of commonality. I tried to play along, but now realize we simply don’t need to share something with somebody else for each and every aspect of our profile. I am admittingly a Facebook-junkie, and this is where Facebook has gone wrong.

Debate: Wrapping Paper

By Mary & Jake 

Wrapping gifts in a festively colored paper has become as controversial as denying the Holocaust. Wikipedia estimates that Americans create four million tons of wrapping paper and present bag waste during the holiday season. Many Americans cite the fact that there was never an episode of Captain Planet urging us to not wrap our gifts as a reason to continue with this tradition; other Americans reason that it is simply pretty, so why bother stopping. This debate will definitively put an end to this nonsense.

Mary: I can't imagine a Christmas without perfectly wrapped gifts under the decorated evergreen; this is because it wouldn't be Christmas, but instead the fascistically-orchestrated ticking timebomb of its death and the death of humanity. If you're not going to wrap your presents with wrapping paper, you might as well throw the glad tidings out the window and not even decorate the tree, but instead just buy one with pre-attached ornaments. Nevermind that you can get wrapping paper in all kinds of colors and patterns and add ribbons and bows to make it your own. Putting Christmas presents - or any present, really - in bags, instead of concealing it with wrapping paper, is what's wrong with the direction of our country. More and more, people mistakenly opt for the ease and convenience of the Gift Bag, depriving the rest of us from the joy of ripping the paper to shreds to find out what's inside. It takes time, but the wrapping paper is a part of the present, an added touch that shows that you actually care about the person you're giving a gift to, or at least acknowledging their existence. Gift bags are not only the worst thing to happen to Christmas since the aluminum tree, but indicative of the mass culture that has made us increasingly dependent on instant gratification, fast food, and 24-hour news, all the while resulting in wage slavery of our fellow humankind and death by 5 hour energy overdoses.

Jake: It is bad enough to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ, but to do so by giving presents to each other and not to the "man of the hour" is straight up despicable. Then, as if that weren't enough, you must wrap these presents in festive paper called "wrapping paper" or place it in some sort of bag. I don't know about you, but I kind of like this planet. I appreciate its resources like a pretentious middle class woman or Frasier appreciates a bottle of wine. The Earth is where I sleep. You do not use your blankets to wrap gifts in honor of some made up savior, so I do not see why we should do it with processed trees. Trees are the Earth's blankets. We should not have any packaging in the first place. To wrap something that is already over-packaged is overkill. I know a thing or two about overkill, since I recently wrote a research paper on Gary Ridgway for fun. I say, instead of wrapping presents in paper, we should just hold them behind our backs and then quickly hand it to our loved ones.

Mary: Even worse than a gift bag is just holding a present behind your back. My older brother once did that to me instead of wrapping the present because he hates me. Growing up, I loved to sit by the tree every December and shake the presents marked with my name and guess what's inside. Like Jake, I also like the Earth and make eco-conscious sacrifices, like showering only every other day, but to not wrap the gift is a statement against the person you're giving the gift to. Why would anyone go through the trouble to drive - or in my case ride my bike - across town in the cold weather during the darkest days of the year to a mall crowded with frenzied shoppers, stand in line, spend money on a gift, and risk your life as SUV's quarrel over parking spots and not put in the meager amount of effort to wrap the present? This is insanity and while many people suffer from it, any reasonable person knows better than to not wrap their Christmas gifts. If I wanted to maximize my environmental sustainability impact on the Earth, I would have to kill myself. I like the Earth just fine and I also like some of the people who live on it, which is why I give them presents wrapped in paper for the holidays. Gift wrapping shows you care about your neighbor, and we all know it takes a village.

Jake: The present is the "meat" of the deal and the wrapping paper is like the parchment paper in which deli meat is often wrapped. I don't eat meat, but my point still stands. If the deli did not give you the parchment paper would the meat taste any less delicious? I am no food scientist, but I would still have to lean toward 'no.' If a person goes to a mall to get you a gift, then that person clearly loves you. Malls are the butthole of the consumerist anatomy, and wholesale warehouses are the vagina. Wrapping paper is nothing but dental dam and it should not figure into the equation. If you really trusted the person then you would not worry about the protection. Wrapping paper and dental dams should be relegated to clubs and public restrooms, where most anonymous sex and gift giving happen. Let us give unwrapped presents and have unprotected oral sex like God intended.

Mary: I've never seen nor heard of wrapping paper use in a public restroom or club, but if I ate meat and went to the deli and the butcher held the meat behind his or her back and then quickly handed it over, it'd be somewhat off-putting. On the other hand, I might convert to omnivorism if meat was wrapped in colored paper with ribbons and bows to decorate it. What would shaved roasted turkey be if it came on a plate instead of parchment paper? Something worse than turkey that comes wrapped in parchment paper. That is why gift-wrapping is so great. If you're too busy to wrap your presents, you can donate to Glenn's favorite charity - The Salvation Army - and have them wrap all the presents for you at their local annual present-wrapping event, but the fact of the matter is that gift wrapping is the only thing we have left to resist the over commercialization of Christmas. It is a sentimental gesture that says the true meaning of "Christmas" as much as the star on the top of the tree.

Jake: When I read that you said wrapping paper is the only thing keeping Christmas from being over commercialized, I imagined you stepping into a bear trap. And when you screamed for help, I just stood over you laughing hysterically. Wrapping paper might conveniently hide brand names on occasion, but once you tear it apart like a velociraptor tearing into a succulent calf, the innards are displayed for all to see and covet. I don't even really care about the over commercialization of Christmas. I don't give a shit about Jesus and we live in a capitalist society. I do like presents. I like receiving them more than giving them, but I still like giving them. Wrapping paper is just a waste of our nation's greatest resource: trees. Christmas trees are also a waste of trees, but that is not the point to this debate, unfortunately. Let us have a treeless Christmas this year and copious amounts of unprotected oral sex.

Debate: Prince William and Kate Middleton's Royal Wedding

By Glenn and Mary 



Prince William's engagement has unfairly been credited newsworthy all over the media. While engagements, much like sports, aren’t actually news no matter how large of a proportion of your hometown paper is devoted to these two topics, we at OYIT get down to the real issue: is Kate Middleton a hero? The Prince William and Kate Middleton of this website attempt to answer this question in the following paragraphs.

Mary:
What we have is the controversy of what makes a modern-day princess heroic. Kate Middleton is not a hero; she's merely a princess-to-be. In the past, a young lady waited for her prince to rescue her from chores, choir concerts, and oppressive parent-figures to live happily ever after together in a castle. The princess was never the hero because this would contradict the fairy-tale's attempt to socialize young girls to an active/passive dichotomy by which one would submit themselves to be rescued, rather than rescuing oneself from the oppression by any means necessary. The modern-day princess doesn't even know she's a princess and escapes her toils on her own, overcoming opposition and adventures through the woods to the nearby city where she learns she's the princess, who was stolen from the royal family at a young age. She is a hero. Kate Middleton, on the other hand, is unworthily praised for wearing hats and waiting around a decade for her Prince to come. Princess: yes; hero: no. I’d rather go back to watching BP propagandize its eco-consciousness or how Congress will extend Bush-era tax cuts than see repeated footage of Prince William and his Princess-to-be.

Glenn:
I will make an outrageous statement to start off my debate point: Mary is jealous of Kate Middleton. Even though I was not born a woman and have no plans to become one, I know how they think. Sometimes I feel like I am more in touch with second and fourth wave feminism than the women around me. This is why I can see inside Mary’s soul and know that while she is a good person, she has committed the sin of envy and will be killed by Kevin Spacey. If I was a woman or had feminine qualities, I would jump at the chance to marry a prince. A real prince! The good kind too, not one of those motherfuckers from Saudi Arabia. No Western woman would ever want to get involved with the Arab kingdoms and shame on Mary for implicitly suggesting Kate Middleton would be better off in a full burkha in Manama.

Mary:
Glenn just ad hominemed the shit out of this debate, probably because he knows he has no case and a losing track record on OYIT debates. While the masses watch British celebrity gossip and mistake Kate Middleton for a hero, they also confuse Sarah Palin for a feminist, so I must admit that Glenn is more in touch with second and fourth wave feminism because he actually knows what second and fourth wave feminism means. But unless Kate Middleton is infiltrating the royal family to overthrow the monarchy and give students free tuition without fees, I’m not jealous in the least. Instead, Kate Middleton is giving away her right to vote just to marry a prince, which places one hundred years and any and all future waves of feminism between her and heroism. Glenn obviously hasn’t seen Tangled and if he had, he wouldn’t have gone to the way better 3-D version, and therefore he has no authority on what makes a princess a hero. Furthermore, when I think of a hero, I think of America; Kate Middleton can’t even get that right.

Glenn:
It's a bit hypocritical to accuse of ad hominem attack and then blatantly appeal to the nationalist/fascist elements of our readership by saying only heroes can be American. I can think of plenty of non-American heroes: Simon Cowell, Abu Musab al-Zarqai, Neil Young, et cetera. I even have a few more that aren’t related to music! The point is that Kate Middleton’s nationality has nothing to do with her heroism. She’s a hero because she represents the feminine ideal while at the same time putting up with the bullshit all women have to endure. Her in-laws are awful, she is constantly judged for what she wears and has terrible cramps every month during her period. She’s someone we can all relate to. I bet your precious Tangled 3D - which no, I won’t see because it’s for children - mentions nothing about menstrual cycles.

Mary:
At least in America, we don't have to bow down to a Monarch. Talk about blind nationalism! I would hate to have to bow down every time I saw a member of the "royal" family, especially with my bad back because here in America, young girls get to grow up playing sports with the kids in the neighborhood instead of practicing to become a princess. While girls in England are hosting high tea time with their stuffed animals, over in America, we're already making regular trips to the chiropractor. But it's not sports that condition American girls for success and heroism, it's that we are free from the archaic fantasy of marrying a prince. Becoming a real princess isn't even in the realm of possibilities of a young American girl, thus allowing for the full opportunity - dare I say freedom? - to become a hero in our own right. To Glenn, Kate's submission to a prince 'til her death is a perfectly suitable prison for a woman and he hopes by glorifying her as a hero, more women will follow Kate's example and be kept barefoot and pregnant. Although Tangled is meant for children, so is Harry Potter and I will now expose to the world my knowledge that Glenn, in full HP attire, once stood outside during a North Dakota blizzard in a line with tens of other adults to see Happy Potter X. It's not that Glenn won't see Tangled because it's meant for children; he won't see Tangled because Glenn hates women, which is why he mistakes Kate Middleton for a hero.

Glenn:
If I had a crown for every time a woman accused me of hating woman, I would be the one marrying Kate Middleton. Here's a question: how can I hate women if I'm also afraid of them? I hate John Boehner but I'm not afraid of him. I am afraid of snakes but I do not hate them. I am neither afraid of or have hate for Harry Potter, which is why I let some of the neighborhood kids talk me into dressing up as Gandolf from the Harry Potter series. Based on Mary's statements she seems to have chronic back problems, which is a serious issue for any woman but especially Kate Middleton. Ms. Middleton's back hurts from carrying the weight of the British monarchy on her back as a princess-in-waiting. But she did it because it was the best thing for herself and the best thing for her rotting, failed empire. My prediction is that she will become Queen of England, Mary's back problems will kill her at age 30 and Tangled 3D will win the Oscar for Longest Hair in a Motion Picture (Drama).