New Jersey governor Chris Christie recently decided to undergo weight loss surgery after years of enduring the media’s hefty jokes. But it wasn’t late night television’s search for laughs that convinced him to finally go under the knife.

Christie said he had a wake-up call after his 50th birthday, and realized he needed to make several lifestyle changes if he wanted to be around to see his children grow.

Family was the most important reason for the procedure, but there was an elephant in the room that Christie refused to acknowledge in Tuesday’s presser: the 2016 presidential race.

“Whatever size I happen to be when I have to make decisions about what to do next with my career I doubt that will play any role or effect in what I decide to do,” said Christie. “It’s not a career issue for me. It is a long-term health issue for me.”

The governor is currently one of more than 78 million American adults who are considered obese, and one of more than 500,000 people who have undergone lap band surgery worldwide.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN’s chief medical correspondent, explained why the procedure might have appealed to Christie.

In the case of gastric bypass surgery, “you are actually operating on the stomach itself, using a stapler of sorts to small pouches within the stomach, and it’s just more of an invasive operation,” he said. “The risk is higher up front.”

My own process began on Feb. 2 with a procedure known as a “nipple delay,” which rules out disease in the breast ducts behind the nipple and draws extra blood flow to the area. This causes some pain and a lot of bruising, but it increases the chance of saving the nipple.

Two weeks later I had the major surgery, where the breast tissue is removed and temporary fillers are put in place. The operation can take eight hours. You wake up with drain tubes and expanders in your breasts. It does feel like a scene out of a science-fiction film. But days after surgery you can be back to a normal life.

Nine weeks later, the final surgery is completed with the reconstruction of the breasts with an implant. There have been many advances in this procedure in the last few years, and the results can be beautiful.

I wanted to write this to tell other women that the decision to have a mastectomy was not easy. But it is one I am very happy that I made. My chances of developing breast cancer have dropped from 87 percent to under 5 percent. I can tell my children that they don’t need to fear they will lose me to breast cancer.

It is reassuring that they see nothing that makes them uncomfortable. They can see my small scars and that’s it. Everything else is just Mommy, the same as she always was. And they know that I love them and will do anything to be with them as long as I can. On a personal note, I do not feel any less of a woman. I feel empowered that I made a strong choice that in no way diminishes my femininity.

I am fortunate to have a partner, Brad Pitt, who is so loving and supportive. So to anyone who has a wife or girlfriend going through this, know that you are a very important part of the transition. Brad was at the Pink Lotus Breast Center, where I was treated, for every minute of the surgeries. We managed to find moments to laugh together. We knew this was the right thing to do for our family and that it would bring us closer. And it has.

For any woman reading this, I hope it helps you to know you have options. I want to encourage every woman, especially if you have a family history of breast or ovarian cancer, to seek out the information and medical experts who can help you through this aspect of your life, and to make your own informed choices.

Powerful stuff. I seem to like her more and more the more I learn about her.

Okay, now enough with the silly stuff and lets get serious here for a moment as I invite you to press play below and take a walk down Mammary Lane…

BONUS: Click here for a movie-cap of them out and uncensored. I’m not going to Mr Skin you the movie title and time stamp because that would cheapen this otherwise very tasteful (click here for a closeup of them) and heartfelt (here’s a full frontal one with good lighting thats like BAM) tribute…to Miss Angelina Jolie’s tits…

Sleep well, my loves. May you be at peace at last.

You guys figure that out on your own – I’m just here for the logic stuff. And boy, is this one terrible. It’s a screenshot of a facebook response to a pro-life image making the animal-vs-human life point that fails miserably, yet is being lauded by abortion-rights advocates because it hits all the right emotional appeals (meanies against Obama, bible thumpers, etc). I’ll admit that if someone wants to kill the baby growing inside them, I can’t say I really care, but being against Nazi ideology like what this dude is advocating isn’t “bible thumping” and people would do themselves a service to not perpetuate Hitlarian doctrine based on false claims. Here’s the image in question:

Everything about that guys comment is wrong. Which would probably make it not-the-best-idea-ever to endorse it as a good reply.

The root of what he (and by extension – you, when you repost it favorably) is that people only exist for benefit of something-unnamed. Could be other people or could be Mother Earth – dude doesn’t say which, but the point is that human beings are just stock items and since, according to this guy, we have enough or too much in stock already – numbers need to be cut by killing off at least a percentage of the incoming crop.

This guys comment is not only a terrible insult to anyone who has been adopted, since he literally says that not being alive is preferable to not being raised by your blood parents. Pretty sick philosophy which alone should disqualify anyone who isn’t completely stupid from endorsing this. Take this as a free tip: In arguing why a woman should have the right to kill her unborn babies – use facts, logic and reality instead of a totally illogical and factually baseless claim that killing a baby to avoid it being adopted and raised by someone who wants it. OR – Please tell me, everyone-who-reposted-this-image: What exactly is your argument that people like Steve Jobs should have been aborted? He was adopted. How many people reposted this on their Apple tablets, phones or computers, I wonder?

He’s also wrong about the factual claims, too.

Bald eagles havent been on the endangered species list since 2007 and since he references Obama, this comment was made at least after 2009 (the year Obama took office for which .

America’s cup is not “overflowing”, as he claims and we indeed do not have a population problem that needs controlling.

It’s a logically terrible and morally sick proposition to deal with problems of poverty and childcare with the notion that you can just kill it away. Reality doesn’t work like that, kids. and you shouldn’t be reposting images that claim it does.

If you haven’t seen the interview with him after the rescue happened, don’t bother only cuz the song version is so much better and this EXTENDED remix version is even better:

PS: I’m proud of everyone who got the connection here last night:

I never heard of this movie, the Catechism Cataclysm, and it sounds notveryfun but for the above reasons, this interview is. To me. It might be a little too inside-baseball for the average viewer though and if you aren’t familiar with any of Little’s work AND you don’t care about observing quality interviewing skills – you’ll want to skip this one.

(Interview from 10/20/2011)

Here’s a highlight reel of Stevie from the first season of Eastbound & Down:

Here’s some sweet Duke of Nuts father/son action:

Nah, but seriously though: the crazy intense contrast-makeup on that creepy flat-haired head pinned onto that blown-up fat sack wrapped up literally from head to toe, including arms and hands and fingers, in potpourri flower mosaic…Jesus Christ… put it down!

I’m still not convinced that it isn’t a pro-capitalism comic, since there isn’t any direct tip-off as to which direction it’s going except that the hard working entrepreneur is a old guy in a suit and top hat – which is imagery that hippies like to illustrate us working-types. Okay, okay – there’s also the fact that the guy is dismayed and angered at the construction – is positively intrigued  by the result – angry that he has to pay someone for their labor – and then dismayed at their purchase choice, feeling resentment to the person who now has their money they exchanged for their service or product.

Textbook stupid-Leftist hypocritical-hippie dictatorial greed: They think they are entitled to the spoils of someone else’s work, but they complain and attempt to prevent that work from taking place in the first place and then they’re unhappy that someone else is profiting from that work that other people or even they themselves chose to buy.

The comic sums up Capitalism accurately: A Consumer is observed to be enjoying something, so a businessman thinks of a way to do it better. He takes a risk and works hard, hoping to earn money from the idea, planning, work and gamble in the presentation of his product. The Consumer finds his product useful and chooses to trade some of the money they earned themselves for the Businessmans product. Everybody wins. That’s the beauty of the system. It gives people an opportunity to earn a living by serving his fellow man while also giving people more choices to pursue happiness in accordance to their personal tastes. Mind you, that word “opportunity”. Not “guarantee”.

The inherit evil of Communism is that it guarantee’s the profits of MY labor to someone else. The inherit morality of Capitalism is that it guarantee’s me a profit ONLY if I provide something to someone else that they want and choose.

Hippies love “pay only what you can afford” type deals – except with the Government. And that’s what Capitalism is: A bowl of choices. Pay only what you want by using only the amount of money YOU choose to spend on whatever goods or services you choose – and offer products and labor to people but you will ONLY get paid if people want and need what you are offering and freely choose to patronize it.

Back to the comic: What could possibly be the complaint about this? That the greedy businessman is creating something that the consumer doesn’t want or need because it already existed? Nope. Can’t be, since the guy in the comic DOES clearly want or need the shade. The attempted point could be that the shade was already provided and so the man ended up having to pay for what he was getting for free earlier – but that’s even represented more 0ppositely in the comic. Who the hell is going to argue that that hut is the same or worse than a freakin tree? No one. The consumer gained a new and better way to do something and chose to pay for that opportunity. Tree’s are cool and all, but since you’re viewing this writing on an electronic device, don’t even try and act like there is no value in something as basic as walls and a roof. If the businessman did the Consumer a disservice in this picture then why did the Consumer choose to purchase the outcome? It has to be assumed that this is a tree on land where it’s public and legal to cut, since Capitalism doesn’t steal from private land – so we’re not in this guys back yard or anything; We’re out in the arena of ideas where everyone has the same tools and recourses available to them and whomever has an idea that fits within the rules can try it out. This person had an idea, created something and someone else wanted and used it. Why in the everloving fruitcake should he not profit from that?

In reality, this comic is an unintentional praise to Mr Capitalism – the Entrepreneur. Not only did he think of a way to help someone, work at making that idea into a reality and then have that reality be desired and used – but he also thought of  that something by re-thinking how something can be done better than it currently is.

Thinking of a product people didn’t know they wanted and thinking of a way to do something better before others even considered doing it any differently is the most wonderful gift of creation. It’s literally what makes us human and why Leftism strips a person of their humanity more with each notch on the scale to Communism.

Before the phones were introduced, there wasn’t exactly a huge clamoring for centuries for a method of talking to something at a different location than you in real time. And after the phone was commonplace, there wasn’t any century of people demanding that their phones be mobile, have cameras, access the internet and be built with large touch screens for ease of use, customization and convenience. Yet both were huge leaps that spawned from Capitalists with ideas they wanted to try and changed the world because people needed and wanted something desperately that they only learned they needed and wanted due to Capitalism.

The last thing I can think of with the comic is that maybe it’s trying to be an Aesop for Environmentalism, claiming that Capitalism profits off of destroying nature. Well, there is no profit in destroying anything vast numbers of people want, so that makes no sense in theory and no macro-example in practice. The Lorax lied to you. Western Civilization’s brand of ethical Capitalism, especially, relies on a cycle. No big business can afford to be Oncelers (the bag guy businessman from The Lorax) and just use every Truffula tree till the entire area is decimated because unlike children for whom that Dr Seuss book was written for: adults int he business world already know that that is a poor profit model ahead of time. So while it’s cute in kids books and cartoons – the truth is that if you want more Truffula trees – you should patronize products in Seussland that uses Truffula, since what you’re doing is garuanteeing, though the profit motive of Capitalism, that more Truffula’s be planted and raised. I don’t know why this surprises hippies, but: Businesses want to stay in business.

So what else is there to this dopey comic? What could I possibly be missing in where it shows how bad Capitalism actually is?

Getting rich under Capitalism is noble because you can’t get rich under Capitalism unless you serve your fellow man (ie: provide a good or service that someone wants or needs). Like life, it is’t perfect, but its the most logical and moral system that exists.

From a 2003 episode of Friends… heh

Nash joked that she thinks she was saved by the DVD of “Angels In The Outfield” she was carrying in her bag. Which is funny, except she really friggin had the DVD. Wtf? When I first read the quote, I joined what I suspect is “everyone” who also read it and thought it was a cute nod to relevant nostalgia, but nope. This chick actually had Disney’s Angels in the friggin Outfield with her on DVD at a baseball game where an errant ball came close, but was clearly misdirected by an Angel, to konking her. Dude.