Superstition belongs to the essence of mankind and takes refuge, when one thinks one has suppressed it completely, in the strangest nooks and crannies; once it is safely ensconced there, it suddenly reappears. – Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe
This week saw a strong rebound from the Thanksgiving slump, and though we haven’t seen any worthwhile Christmas items yet there were an unusual number of astronomy-, death- and monster-related items. Radley Balko was top dog in links as usual (contributing everything down to the first video), but four others provided two each: Walter Olson (first video and the link below it), Mike Siegel (“Pat Robertson” and the link above it), Michael Whiteacre (“Kentucky” and “censored elbow”), and Brooke Magnanti (second video and the link above it). The others came from Aspasia (“demon sex”), Wikileaks (“Swedish attitude”), Franklin Harris (“cyber terror”), Jesse Walker (“sic transit”), and Jack Shafer (“snow in Hell”).
- “Never call the cops for any reason whatsoever”, dog edition.
- Another segment in the growing school-to-prison pipeline.
- Headline of the week, “not for the squeamish” edition.
- Chinese newspaper falls for Onion spoof.
Here’s a cute, funny PSA from the Melbourne Transit Authority.
- Egyptian court sentences various North Americans to death in absentia.
- Christian ex-stripper says homosexuality is caused by sex with demons.
- A Swedish writer on the attitude which enables neofeminist tyranny.
- How to convert a lovely beach town into a pile of shit.
- Could Pat Robertson be going sane?
- The “cyber terror” bogeyman.
- Sic transit gloria caelos.
- Kentucky criminalizes atheism.
- Facebook censors photo of nude female elbow.
- For their next trick, they’ll prove the existence of snow in Hell.
- Man steals school bus in order to get to Detroit to start a rap group.
- Why won’t Yoko Ono go away?
- “Brain and brain! What is brain?”
- This happened in Sweden. ‘Nuff said.
- Man builds ark in preparation for supposed Mayan doomsday.
- The exception that proves the rule; or, can we clone this dude?
- For those who claim socialized medicine doesn’t lead to prohibitionism.
- Cop forces crippled old woman off the road, destroying her truck, for the “crime” of exceeding speed limit by 2 miles per hour.
- Monster watch: Serbian village council issues warning that a legendary vampire is on the loose again, and North Korea announces proof of the existence of Asian unicorns (Qilin).
Not exactly correct. The Egyptian ruling gives cover to any Islamo-idiot who now wishes to act as the “Hand of Allah” and kill these guys in cold blood on the streets of America. What’s amazing to me – is the fact that there seems to be no objection to this from Hillary’s State Department. Indeed, Hillary personally promised the father of one of the fallen in Benghazi that the Mohammed filmaker would be tossed in jail.
That promise has been fullfilled.
And … before anyone says the “defendents” deserve this … let’s the ponder the very real fact that these same Islamo-idiots want to wipe homosexuals, lesbians, and whores off the face of the planet. This is a very high stakes game here and if anyone thinks we have reached a point where passing out chocolates and building schools in the middle east will solve this problem – they are seriously mistaken. These guys are playing for keeps – and their “grievances” aren’t what they’re stating them to be.
Their major grievance is against Western Liberal Thought … and all of the tolerable “perversions” they perceive it produces. And they firmly believe they have a God behind them that guarantees them success in exterminating those perversions globally.
But don’t take my word for that … just read Osama Bin Laden’s own words in his “Letter to Americans” where he answers the question … “What do we (Al Quaida) want from you?”
Sure … I think we have may abused these guys and exploited them for their oil. But I don’t think future generations of westerners should be sacrificed to a hoarde that will not stop until it oppresses every last one of them.
One big weakness of guys on my side of the ideological fence—liberals—is that many of us desperately want to believe that Islam isn’t so bad and it’s only a few radicals that are giving the religion a bad name. Too few have the courage to say that something is wrong with the religion itself. That doesn’t mean that the Christian right is correct in wanting the wall of separation between church and state, but that they are quick to call out the oppression done in the name of Islam means that they are necessarily wrong.
Turning a blind eye to evil does not make it go away.
I think you’re being too harsh on ol’ Osama. If I loan a guy fifty bucks and charge him fifty-five, of course I deserve to die. /sarcasm
@Krulac
There is no terrorist in the Middle East that hasn’t been created by the West, going back 200 years. The best way to fight the terrorists is not to create them in the first place.
Susan,
Islam was offering the “convert or die” approach long before there was a coherent “West” to speak about.
And before you offer up the Crusades as a counter-argument, recognize that the First Crusade took place after 4 centuries of Islamic aggression against the Byzantine Empire and the Visigothic Kingdom in Iberia.
If you’ve been following my comments here, you know that I am unlikely to cut historic xtians a lot of slack, but let’s recognize the distinctions between the two religions historically.
The modern incarnations of political Islam begin with the founding of the Muslim Brotherhood 4 years after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire, which, you will recall, was allied with the Central Powers of Germany and Austro-Hungary – an ironic bit of history given that the Austro-Hungarian empire was the heir to the Holy Roman Empire and had spent the better part of the millenium keeping Muslim armies OUT of Europe.
Nor was it mere “historical accident” that found the Grand Mufti of Jersusalem in Berlin at the personal invitation of Adolph Hitler.
The Brotherhood’s charter was to act against what they considered the evils of European liberalism; that is, the ideas of individual autonomy and democratic government. Islam, in its political form, is totalitarian. It was for this reason that Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the modern Turkish state, gave the Constitutional charge to the military to exclude religious factions from governing the Turkish state. A precaution that has since been obviated by the current regime. And unlike Christianity, there is no “Render unto Caeser” escape clause whereby devout political muslims can evade the totalitarian trap.
The current power grab by Morsi in Egypt is the bitter harvest of the so-called Arab Spring and it was inevitable given the fundamental principles of political Islam. And the sway that the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoots hold in Egypt and other Islamic countries.
Political Islam is perfectly capable of creating their own terrorists. The reason we are seeing more of them in action today has to do with our own Chamberlinesque appeasement of them. I predict that it will work just as well with them as it did for Neville in Munich.
Islam is no different from any religion in that empires have conquered and fought under its name.
True enough. But the difference is that in modern times, the historical propensity of Christians to do that very thing are held up and vilified – rightly so – whereas the Islamic record gets a pass. And the left-hysteria about the threat of Christian Actions Against Rights is very loud while their response to far greater threats and atrocities made and enacted by Islamists is strangely muted.
Compare the left response to preaching that homosexuality is a sin from the Christian pulpit to the left response to Iran hanging homosexuals. Do you think that they are congruent to the magnitude of the offenses? Based on the volume levels involved, preaching sin is a far greater offense than hanging homosexuals.
That’s really more of the difference between domestic and foreign affairs. People pay more attention to problems that directly involve them than problems in places where they can’t do anything about them.
You don’t get it, do you?
The West is not “appeasing” the terrorists; we are actively funding the terrorists.
You’re problem is that you think that the Middle East is the equivalent of Nazi Germany. Not even close. They are nowhere near the equivalent of the West in terms of military technology and strength. And, the reason why they say “convert or die” is because their version of Islam is so unappealing they have to threaten death to get people to accept it. Including other Muslims. Furthermore, this version of Islam would not even exist in the strength and numbers it has if we were not consuming Saudi oil, which is funding a great deal of it. So, Andrew, no matter how you slice it, the West is to blame for terrorism.
Susan,
Apparently you are deficient in the “getting it” aspect as well.
The political Islamists represent the most consistent application of Quranic principles. As such, the moderates, who have half embraced the Western values of individual autonomy are morally disarmed before their more consistent brethren. Which means, so long as the moderates continue to invoke Islam as their justification for action, they will lose to the militants.
And you are right that we are financing the Saudis and that that oil money is going to support various proto-terrorist organizations including madrassahs. But exactly how did the Saudis end up with control of the oil technology that they did not produce? They nationalized the products of American and European companies – and we let them get away with it. Eisenhower backed Nasser in the confrontation over the Suez canal which French companies built.
And why do we continue to consume Saudi oil? Because, starting in the 1960’s we imposed regulatory caps on pricing from oil wells in the US so that they were no longer economically feasible to operate. We followed that up with outright bans on drilling that pushed our oil acquisitions overseas and into the oceans themselves – which also raised the cost of acquisition. This gave the OPEC nations far more economic power than they could have acquired othewise which gave them more political clout than they deserved after the twin oil shocks of the 1970’s.
So if you are arguing that our own insane regulatory policies at home have given a priceless advantage to the islamic oil states – then I agree with you. Do you therefore advocate the repeal of such policies toward the end of depriving Saudi Arabia of our income?
Unfortunately, because oil is a fungible commodity, that would, at this juncture, have no effect. The oil revenues funding terrorism would merely come from other sources.
When the iranian revolutionaries took the American Embassy in Tehran, they committed an act of war that had been recognized as such in the West for 500 years. The appropriate action would have been to utterly destroy their government in return.
Reagan withdrew from Lebanon after the Marine Barracks Bombing. Osama bin Laden cited that as one of the events that inspired him in his war on the West.
Americans were continually kidnapped in the Middle East during the 80’s. During this time period, only one Soviet was kidnapped and the USSR hunted
down the kidnappers – and killed them. They were never bothered again.
Notice how quietly Qaddafi tiptoed about after Reagan bombed his palace complex after he bombed those European discos and killed American servicemen.
This is what I mean by our appeasement being the primary cause of the resurgence in political Islam. We should never have allowed the nationalization of Western assets. In doing so, we gave 20th century technology to minds that are still locked into a 7th century, barbarous ideology.
And regarding Nazi Germany – before Hitler re-occupied the Ruhr Valley, the French troops stationed there would have been sufficient to overwhelm his armed forces. But they withdrew and appeased him and eventually his armed forces were more powerful than those of the allies opposing him. Now I doubt that the Islamist nations could launch that level of industrial endeavor. But with just a little help from their Russian friends…
Andrew, I am laughing my ass off.
Oil is an obselete form of fuel. We could easily ween ourselves off of it if we wanted to but the oil companies would be out of business. I believe Nikola Tesla created something that would have made oil and gas obselete back in the early 20th century, but his funding for it was removed rather quickly when it was discovered what he was trying to do.
Really we do not need oil from the Middle East, if we start weening ourselves off fossil fuel altogether.
So, there is no “titanic struggle between civilization and barbarism”. Just a bunch of greedy oil companies and their elected slaves in the government. Period
Susan,
I have much the same reaction to those touting conspiracy theories about great stores of energy being subverted by eeevil corporations. Paroxysms of hilarity ensue. So there wasn’t a single one of those evil capitialists who were willing to stick it to their competitors by financing Tesla’s miracle energy source? Yup, I’m buying that theory.
If oil were as obsolete as you would like to think, then alternative energy sources would not need to run through as much subsidy in 4 years as oil and gas have received over the previous 50 years.
Secondly, when it comes to transportation, there are advantages regarding energy density per unit weight that fossil fuels hold the lead in. Now such things as hydrogen might be able to displace them if holding technologies obviated that advantage, but to date, they have not. The same holds true about CNG vehicles.
Now once they get the range and cold-depletion issue of the electric vehicles solved I could see us moving toward that kind of economy. But you would still have to address the issue of where the power generation is coming from and I look forward to seeing Germany demonstrate this over the next two decades. To date, though, their solar and wind power are not sufficient to cover the nuclear power plants they plan on taking offline as well as being unbalanced in the generation cycle vs the consumption cycle.
I remain skeptical of the peak oil and other Malthusian theories of depletion, the earliest of which was first touted for coal in the 11th century, CE.
The most famous gaffe of a prediction comes from Paul Ehrlich in 1973. Bradley, commenting on the same, writes;
A quarter century after Ehrlich’s calculation, the world’s proved oil reserves stand at more than 50 percent above year-end 1973 levels despite substantial and ever-increasing consumption in the interim. The 1970s energy “mini-crisis” (seen by the Ehrlichs as “the leading edge of the age of scarcity” for America [7] ) has not been followed by a far greater reckoning as predicted. [8] In fact, the major crises have periodically been for oil producers from falling prices (such as in 1981/82, 1986, and 1998).
So if the electric car manufacturers can make their vehicle competitive, they will displace oil as the major mode of transportation energy – at least directly – but unless we are willing to embrace nuclear energy, the lion’s share of power generation will still be the province of fossil fuels.
And in regard to the clash of civilization between the Enlightenment West and Islam – that will go on as it has for centuries. And unless we change our domestic policies regarding exploitiation of our own resources, we will continue to provide the extant and Islam-generated terrorists with opportunities to ply their trade.
You see, Susan, I consider men who think that they have a legitimate right to beat and confine and execute women for pursuing their own educational, career and personal life goals to be uncivilized and, in short, barbarous. And I don’t care if they use a late Iron Age sky-wizard’s book as a fig leaf to hide behind any more than I would accept Warren Jeff’s assertion that his position as “prophet” legitimized his rape of children.
krulac,
I’ve always thought that the best way to deal with the death fatwas that come out of muslim clerics is for the US gov’t to put a bounty on each cleric who does so. If they offer a million dollars for the death of a westerner, we offer 2 million dollars for their own death.
Ditto the blasphemy death sentences. Judges or clerics that render such sentences get treated to their very own death bounty. We’ll start small – just $50,000.00 per death declaration. So $400K for these vile dogs in Egypt!
The best way to deal with “fatwas” is to start weening ourselves off of fossil fuels. When the Middle East can no longer use oil to support themselves, they will be forced to develop their economies, and their interpretation of the Quran will have to adapt itself to that fact. There is no room for “convert or die” when you have work with the infidel on a daily basis or starve.
It’s no coincidence that the countries most resistant to extremism are those countries that have less oil, like Egypt, Syria, and Morocco. Case in point: the extremists have tried to topple Assad for going on two years now, and have failed. Some places are simply immune to extremism.
Susan,
You might find the following interesting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belling_the_cat
I’m waiting for you to specify the means whereby the industrial west can wean itself off of fossil fuels.
At least two or three times a week one of the topics of discussion on local radio talk radio shows is how something needs to be banned or regulated because it has negative health impacts and “we all pay for each others’ health care costs” (this is Canada). It’s a short trip from “we’re all in this together” to “we need to control what people do”.
Precisely. I’m sure somebody will object that the linked story merely suggests that people pay for their own care for “self-inflicted conditions”, but if that’s challenged in court as “unfair” it will either swiftly turn to prohibition or else set off a chain of exclusions which will result in the whole thing becoming an expensive subsidy for a very few individuals.
Indeed. It’s particularly perilous here because obtaining private insurance is illegal (if I understand the law correctly). When the government health system says “we won’t cover X” it’s the same as saying “no one can or will cover X”. The whole health system has become another way for people to mindlessly bleat about things they like/support or don’t like/support.
It’s turned the very personal matter of health decisions into something “we” talk about, which is just a bit horrific.
Eh, I’ll bite.
It’s only one MP making a suggestion at what amounts to a public brainstorming session.
Remember that phrase you like, the exception proves the rule. You’re not actually using that phrase right, but you get the idea.
By itself, it doesn’t mean anything.
This kind of cost cutting measures are a part of your precious free market healthcare too and the MP in question is actually a fiscal conservative trying to encourage personal responsibility
Actually, I am using it correctly; it seems you just don’t realize what I actually mean by it.
No, you are not using it correctly. Exception proves the rule would mean that all cops are bad, for no other reason than because this cop gave the homeless guy a pair of shoes.
In the sort of “Homophobia means anti-gay” you’re using it correctly.
You are incorrect. The reason this story stands out and has been circulated around the world is that it’s such weird behavior for a cop. If cops were generally good guys as badge-lickers pretend we’d see stories like this frequently, but we do not. In fact, a cop acting like a decent human being is SO weird it’s striking. This “proves the rule” that the great majority of cops are NOT decent human beings.
You have a bad habit of correcting other people on subjects about which you are either ignorant or severely misinformed.
It stands outs because it’s a nice fluff story with good camera work on a slow news days. It doesn’t “prove the rule” any more than “gangnam style” proves that every other pop song is some funeral march.
And most people don’t share your opinions on cops, it’s not a popular story because of how shocking people found. This is something that you’ve complained about in your blog.
And I have a habit of discussing things with libertarians.
Oh, yes and that would prove that most people believe the rule to be true, not that it actually is true.
If for instance, it was true that governments were better at emergency management then a story where the private sector does better than the government would be striking because it would be SO weird.
Dear asmallnotch, the “execption proves the rule” IS a logical fallacy:
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#proves_the_rule –
“You are most likely to encounter this phrase when somebody is speaking in generalisations or stereotypes and somebody else points out an example that clearly contradicts their comments. Retorting with the platitude that this is just the “exception that proves the rule” is an easy way of handwaving away this inconsistency.”-this is another way of saying that people don’t count, small groups don’t count, etc., etc., that’s pushed by the WONDERFUL (gag) world system constantly and is part of the “gloom and doom” mentality that’s also pushed by the world system. It’s in the neighborhood of the “slippery slope” logical fallacy in that if an individual and/or small group isn’t liked/wanted to be talked about at all for whatever reason they’re written off as not counting, not really making any difference, etc. Thanks for speaking up about this. I enjoy your posts and the truth is you may have experiences with cops that you just haven’t talked about here YET. Or you may NOT. Whatever the case is you don’t deserve unfair assumptions on this subject. Take care.
Mr. Notch,
I’m not sure what you are representing as “your precious free market healthcare” since we don’t have that system in the US and haven’t had since the 1960’s – or even earlier if you count the artificial restriction of the supply of MD’s through the licensing system. Or the arbitrary granting of monopoly rights by the FDA to particular companies for generic drugs that have been on the market and out of patent protection for decades. Or tying medical coverage to employment that came out of the wage controls of the WWII era and the subsequent activities of labor unions.
And it’s not just happening as a brainstorm in England. It’s policy in Japan – although they are targeting corporations instead of workers. See here.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/19/japan
And what do you think will happen to those workers who don’t conform? Or what steps the gov’t will take next if their enforcement of these norms via corporations – an instance of fascist policy if ever there was one – does not succeed?
It’s as Kewilson says above. Not only do they prescribe certain mandatory actions, they prohibit finding other ways of dealing with your own health issues – by law. And if those laws don’t target you directly, they still make your own efforts impossible by threatening those who might have the ability to help you on their own terms.
It’s as if xtians passed laws to charge physicians with murder for performing abortions and then turned around and made the claim that they didn’t say that women couldn’t get abortions.
“Precious free market” merely references the current system of health care in America. I am aware that this system is not the system envisioned by libertarians.
But this is system that will defended by them as being as a prefect example of the free market when compared to systems of “socialized” (That’s not what socialism means) medicine.
To expand on that point, in a free health care market, people who make poor lifestyle choices will pay more for their health care than other people. This is the reasoning behind Phillip Lee’s plan. He specifically mentions that his intention was to “reward individual responsibility” Which is what’s going to happen in a free market.
Nick,
I’ve been discussing issues of health care since the mid-80’s and I’ve yet to run into a libertarian that defended the current system as a perfect example of the free market. Trenchant critiques of the problems of the current system, yes. And defending it against further gov’t encroachments, yes. But that is akin to saying that I’d rather be up to my waist in quicksand instead of up to my nostrils.
But all things being equal, I’d rather being standing on solid ground, not having the iron triangle of regulators, politicians and industry interest groups using a pole to push me back into the middle of the quagmire each time I attempt to extricate myself. And not having the FDA, HHS and the IRS stand on my head while I try to keep my nostrils above the water line.
And yes, people who do make bad lifestyle choices will pay more for their healthcare than those who don’t. To do otherwise is to invite moral hazard.
And even people who take care of themselves will be caught paying more for their healthcare due to genetic predispositions and other things outside of their control. I fall into this second category myself. And as tempting as it is to let someone else pay for my misfortune, I’m wise enough to recognize that he who pays the piper will call the tune. And the politically connected and the politically au courant diseases will get the funding and, if these programs proceed to their logical conclusion, I will be prohibited from finding other means of assistance outside of the sanctioned programs. This is the point that Kewilson was making above. Take a look at Oregon’s state health care system for an example.
The FDA is in the process of awarding “orphan drug status” to medications in the public domain that are not, in fact, “orphan drugs.” If they were, then the FDA wouldn’t have to shut down alternative providers to the company they just awarded the monopoly to; there would be no other providers. This is a political exercise to reward the politically connected; how an increase of 10 fold in the price of a generic drug can be construed otherwise is completely beyond rationalization.
And the FDA supported legislation passed in July of this year to shut down pharmacy purchases by individuals abroad to help reinforce these monopoly rights they’ve granted. None of these behaviors is something that would be countenanced in a free market even if you had a patent regime in place. Because the drugs that the FDA is doing this with have been off patent for decades.
I’ve been told by defenders of gov’t health care that the Canadian system, the UK system, the Japanese system, the old Soviet system, the German system, ad infinitum are not valid examples of “socialized medicine.” But I’ve yet to hear of a system promoted that does not contain the issues of moral hazard, cost allocation, rationing and loss of individual autonomy that these systems have demonstrated. What would be the distinguishing features of your ideal system?
And, asmallnotch is actually the dictionary definition of Nick, which is my first name.
Something I’ve wanted answered for years and have yet to see it answered anywhere I’ve been online (plus haven’t heard it answered offline): what about people who have health problems from past drug/alcohol abuse, etc., but they’ve QUIT these things and have been sober for years and are also doing the right things for their health overall? What about the cost of their healthcare?
Hi Laura. In a single-payer system? Their costs are covered regardless of the cause and he would pay the same taxes as someone who didn’t drink himself to disability.
In a (free) market system, insurers would simply adjust his premiums to reflect his assessed level of risk based on whatever actuarial information is available. From a financing perspective, it’s irrelevant* why he has a high-risk profile, only that he does.
*unless information on ‘why’ is predictive of future risk (e.g., he might relapse into alcoholism)
Dear Kewilson, thank you! It’s great to get an answer on this! Thank you also for appearing to NOT be part of the group I’ve seen that say smugly (with noses high in the air): “I’m NOT going to pay for the healthcare of those who are overweight, etc., etc.”. I’ve worked for health insurance companies in the past (and still work in the healthcare field) but haven’t had positions that allowed me to see how coverage prices are calculated, etc., so your information is great to see. Thanks again.
236+ comments on this article and not a single tentacle. I’m calling BS.
hee hee hee
These school drug sweeps are simply appalling and a good argument for why we should have more private schools. This is the sort of thing that happens in a police state, not a country of free people. And I can’t help but think … hell, I don’t need to think; the needle-dicks involved openly state that their real purpose is to get kids used to having their rights violated.
I don’t think that anybody but me noticed this, but the article Maggie linked to under the title “Sic transit gloria cælos” is actually called “The Stars Are Beginning To Go Out.”
I may be the only one to get this reference, but I suspect that title is an homage to a famous Arthur C. Clarke story The Nine Billion Names of God.
I got it, too, and actually considered making some reference to it in the link but decided against it because I figured it would be more obscure than a Latin phrase people could look up if they didn’t understand it. Plus, it’s a paraphrase of the title of one of my own recent posts, and I love that kind of referencing. 🙂
Not a criticism, and I remember that column of yours a few weeks ago. 🙂 I wonder if this means that the universe is now “middle aged” if that means the universe will be going through a mid-life crisis?
More likely the reference is much more recent. In the Doctor Who story, “Turn Left”, one of the characters witnesses the stars of the Orion constellation, among others, going out in rapid succession as he was looking through his telescope. He said, “The stars are going out.” The main bad guys of the series. the Daleks, were taking stars and planets out of space time to build a universe-killing machine.
I think that Clarke’s first published story, Against the Fall of Night also mentions that the stars are “going out.”
Really great series of posts. Kentucky has become the land of the Deranged, for-profit prison systems need to be dismantled, and Pat Robertson has become (between this and marijuana decriminalization) an island of sanity in the Religious Right. Mind. Blown. Or a least really headache-y. Is that a word?
Undignified ways to die:
On the private prison cops, I find it ironic that the total number of the student body is… 1776.
Vista Grande High School Principal Tim Hamilton ordered the school — with a student population of 1,776 — on “lock down,” kicking off the first “drug sweep” in the school’s four-year history. According to Hamilton, “lock down” is a state in which, “everybody is locked in the room they are in, and nobody leaves — nobody leaves the school, nobody comes into the school.”
On the Demon Sex thingie; well, I guess they had to have something to stand in for Olde Demon Rum! (I still think that would make a dynamite rum brand!)
As for hydrogen atoms emitting alpha particles – maybe two hydrogen atoms get together and make one alpha particle? Of course they’d have to be a deuterium atoms. Is that like same sex marriage in the nuclear world? If so, xtians should oppose it.
On the toad, if someone was messing with my food, I might bite their hand too.
On Yoko Ono, are you sure this isn’t an onion piece? I know, I know, but it just seems tailor made for them…
On the universe as brain – I thought that Men In Black established that we were all just marbles in some grand alien marble game. Well, it’s at least as credible at their theory.
And here all this time, I thought Hamlet was a DANE. And Male!
Kudos to the New York Cop. Nice to see one of them doing something like this. And double the props for using his own money. Good job, man.
Well, so much for the palate cleanser. Jackass cop should have to repay the department out of his garnished wages while the department should buy a new truck for the victim of police violence.
On the Serbian vampire – well, I guess we’re just lucky that we get public health warnings for such dire things as 4 LOKO and Irish Coffee.
Maggie,
yYou may be the only person who quoted the best line in anything anywhere anywhen:
“Brain and brain! What is brain?”
I nearly fell over. I’m glad someone remembers.
Frankly, the frog video is the best.
I’m glad at least one reader caught it. 😉
One of the funniest things I ever heard was around 1990, when ads for drug rehab centers were common on the radio. There was one which featured a man calling, “Help me, I’m drowning,” followed by an announcer intoning portentously, “The pull of drug and alcohol addiction is relentless!” But the “drowner” was very deadpan; he didn’t sound excited or even very upset. In fact, he sounded almost EXACTLY like a certain Star Trek line that the DJ obviously caught; one time, after I had heard this commercial on dozens of occasions, the commercial faded out on the usual bland “Help me, I’m drowning,” and the DJ quietly replied, “A Vulcan would not cry out so” before starting the next commercial.
Brain and brain! What is brain?
At some point, liberal people will start to notice the massive disconnect between their championing of Islamic underdog status (and general collateral damage, like the visceral hatred of Israel and the general left-wing hatred of Jews that has such a long pedigree on the Left), and the contempt and horror Islamicists generally show to liberal values.
This marriage of left-wing politics (Hilary as a case in point) and Islamofascism will die a painful death, as the liberal delusions are utterly shattered by their allies’ continued scared-cow (and people) killing.
At some point, liberals are going to jump ship and then they’ll say, Hey! We left-wing types never supported these guys!
They did this with Stalin and Mao, too. Suddenly, nobody ever suported Stalin. This came from the same people who lionized him a decade before.
As usual, left-wing errors will be erased from history.
Well, the “Duranty Prize in Journalism” will hopefully keep such behavior in the public eye. And the NY Times still boasts about the journalism awards that piece of human debris achieved while papering over the the mass state sponsored starvation that Stalin inflicted on the Ukraine.
Of course, the left is not alone in this. They’re just better at it. I particularly like the religious conservatives that try to tell us that the Inquisition wasn’t so bad and really represented the cutting edge in jurisprudence at the time. Well, they’re right about the cutting edge part anyway.
There are a hell of a lot of liberals who have never been down with Islam.
Robertson also suggested that we should decriminalize marijuana. The man has intermittent moments of sanity. I’m surprised he hasn’t been stoned to death by his own followers.
As pointed out, the Moon also has water, and this is going to come in real handy.
As my mamma never said (because really, did she need to?): “NEVER piss off a frog!”
I see women wearing stuff just as dumb as this stuff Ono puts out. Maybe that’s her point. I don’t know.
The universe is like a brain, and its lights are dimming, but it has occasional bright flashes… JUST LIKE PAT ROBERTSON!!1!!
That story from Sweden did not give me a boner.
The thing in Britain isn’t a case of anything leading to prohibition. An MP got in the papers by suggesting that people who eat a lot of sweets should have to pay for their own insulin and other medicines. IOW, he’s suggesting that certain diseases be exempt from socialized medicine, not that sweets be banned. His suggestion is unlikely to go into effect, and even if it did, it isn’t a prohibition of anything. Has any country with either single-payer healthcare (like Canada or Medicare) or socialized medicine (like Britain or the Veteran’s Administration) even banned smoking?
The best vampire movie I’ve seen in years was from Czechoslovakia. I need to see if there are any Serbian vampire movies.
I’ve tried to stay out of any of the conversations here. I’d as soon butt into a conversation between Michael Moore and Bill O’Reilly as some of the exchanges.
“Sic transit gloria caelos”?
To paraphrase Blazing Saddles : golly gee Miss Maggie, you use yer tung purdier than a twenny dollar … oh… wait 😁😉❤