Draft Thurl Ravenscroft!
I feel the need to disabuse you all of the myth that is Fred Thompson.
Fred Thompson is not the savior. Repeat. Fred Thompson is not the savior. He does not ride a white stallion. He does not wear a white hat. Thus, he can not ride to the rescue of a Republican party that has lost its way. Stop expecting him to.
I'm not convinced that Fred Thompson will enter the presidential race. Neither am I convinced that if he runs he will win the nomination. He's currently polling third. Third is not first. Third is third. And right now that means he's in the low teens. Despite the fact that a lot of otherwise reasonable people think he's a viable candidate, polling in the teens does not indicate a huge groundswell of support.
I think a lot of people are projecting their own hopes on Fred, unreasonably. Sure, none of the top candidates are perfect conservatives. Sure, George W. Bush has been a disappointment for those of us who idolize Ronald Reagan. But wishing Fred Thompson is another Ronald Reagan does not make him so. And wishing Fred Thompson is another Ronald Reagan does not make him electable.
I've accepted this fact and you should too: We will not see another Ronald Reagan in our lifetime. The best we can hope for is that our presidents try to emulate him, but they will never duplicate him. The man was that great.
Please also remember the following (those of you who know a lot about Reagan should already know this): Reagan was a great man and a great president because above all, he was a great thinker. He thought big things, and he thought about them all his life. Before he entered politics he had his own idea of how the world should work. When he entered public life he put his ideas into practice. But make no mistake, the thinking part came first.
Fred Thompson has it exactly backwards, and too many people are forgetting that. Reagan left acting to enter public service. Fred Thompson left public service to become an actor. That should tell you something about their comparative priorities.
And don't tell me people aren't attracted to Thompson in large part because he is an actor. I'm sure the theory is that his acting experience should give him the ability to connect to the average voter. Reagan was an actor and he was "the great communicator." Therefore all actors who run for office should make great communicators. It sounds silly when you say it out loud because it is silly.
"But," you say, "Fred Thompson agrees with me on all the issues." Yah well, so do I. Why don't you write my name in? Being right on the issues is not enough, and never has been. Running for president is a huge, difficult job and I don't think Fred has what it takes to win.
First, you gotta have the right contacts, and lots of them. What contacts does Fred have? Contacts get you donors, and volunteers, who in turn get you money. You need a lot of money to run for president, and this time around you need a lot more than during past elections because the big states have all moved their primaries up front. Name recognition is not enough.
You still need money because you have to pay big staffs, and consultants, and they all have to travel, and you have to buy ads and computers and cell phones and pay rent on offices in fifty states, and spend your money on countless other expenses that eat it up like crazy. At this late date, Thompson's rivals have too big a head start.
Besides that, all the most experienced consultants are spoken for. Who's going to guide Thompson's campaign? Will he have to settle for some amateur? If you think these things don't matter, you're dreaming. Bush got half his contacts from family and business connections. The other half Karl Rove brought with him.
I'll always remember something I heard Phil Jackson say to his team in a huddle during one of their losing playoff runs. "I know you guys want to win, wanting to win is not enough." I know lots of people want Thompson to win, but it's not enough. He has to have the resources, the money, the people, the contacts, the ideas and the fire in the belly. I don't see him having any of that stuff. All I see is a relatively likeable conservative, who's been flattered way too much for anyone's good.
And as for qualifications, I have as much executive experience as Fred Thompson. What has he ever run in his life? A few months ago I explained one reason why I prefer candidates with executive experience over former legislators.
Theoretically, executives must work in the real world where results are expected. Therefore, they should be more results oriented. Legislators on the other hand, work in a world of theoretical projections, possibilities and imaginary outcomes. When they fuck up, they're rarely held to account because they simply blame the other party, the executive, or both.
Even giving him the benefit of the doubt, Thompson only had eight years experience in the Senate. What are his accomplishments? If you can name any, how do they match up with Rudy's, or Romney's or Huckabee's records as executives. Even more than running for the post, being president is also a huge, difficult job. Thompson would need on-the-job training. I don't care how solid he is on the issues. I'm really not sure I want someone who's never run an organization running the executive branch of the most important organization on the planet.
"But, he's got a great speaking voice..." Okay. He does have a pleasant baritone. But if that's all it takes to get your vote, why stop at baritone? Why not draft a bass? If vocal timbre is all it takes to be president, we should have had a President Thurl Ravenscroft!
1
"The best we can hope for is that our presidents try to emulate him, but they will never duplicate him."
Sadly, you're right about that, but I'm still hoping you are wrong about Thompson.
"Reagan was a great man and a great president because above all, he was a great thinker.
Indeed. Gerard Baker recently noted:
[The President was being briefed on the invasion plans by his senior military officers just before the Grenada operation. As was often the case, Mr Reagan did not seem to be paying close attention, according to one of those present. But when the briefing was over he had one question. He wanted to hear again the number of troops the planners were going to send in. He was told a figure and shook his head. “Make it twice that,” he told a slightly puzzled general. Asked why, the President said calmly: “If Jimmy Carter had sent 16 helicopters rather than eight to Desert One to rescue the US hostages in Iran in 1980, you’d be sitting here briefing him today, not me.”]
To me, however, Reagan's biggest "sin of omission", as far as I know, was not suitably avenging the deaths of those Marines in Beirut. By "suitably", I mean that the administration's response should have been to depopulate the area within a 300 mile radius. It would provide some solace if I at least knew that KGB-styled acts of clandestine retribution were carried out by our gov't against the Hezbos.
Posted by: reagan80 at May 10, 2007 10:16 PM (iXkL1)
2
Never see another Reagan? Hmmmm, well since I lived through the Reagan years as a Reaganite, I'll tell you this. You're seeing one now. Oh, he's not the great communicator, but most of it is there, and he's younger and more vigorous.
Almost nothing happened in the second Reagan administration. Reagan is remembered for confronting the Russkys, thus winning the cold war, an issue much in doubt when he left office, and for making the hard correct decision on tightening the money supply and ending inflation. Controlling inflation unleashed the torrent of economic growth that we live on today, but few recognize this.
Dubyah will be remembered for leading us out of the darkness of 9/11, and confronting Islam. We'll need to wait twenty years to get it in perspective.
Posted by: Casca at May 11, 2007 06:51 AM (Y7t14)
3
I have to agree with Casca on his point. As far as foreign policy and taxes are concerned, Dubya is every bit a Reaganite. His fiscal spending, however, has been a disaster.
The biggest problem with candidates now is that they spend too much time talking about Reagan and not enough time just being a Reaganite. They need to stop talking about how great Reagan was and concentrate on going forward with the conservative agenda.
I don't know that we'll see a Reagan in the '08 election, but if the GOP gets stomped a couple more times like they did this passed November, someone is going to get the message and start acting like a true conservative again.
4
"Dubyah will be remembered for leading us out of the darkness of 9/11, and confronting Islam."
You're right, Casca. However, his once admirable stubbornness to cling to nation-building is bogging down our anti-proliferation efforts. As the Derb once stated...
[GWB should borrow a rhetorical figure from the Great Liberator and say: "If I could stop nukes from spreading around the Middle East without democratizing any of their countries, I would do it; and if I could stop it by democratizing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about democratization, and the Muslim Middle East, I do because I believe it helps to stop the spread of nuclear weapons technology to people who should not have it."]
Posted by: reagan80 at May 11, 2007 07:51 AM (iXkL1)
5
Aw shucks Annika, next you'll be telling me that there's no Santa Clause!
Posted by: Janette at May 11, 2007 08:58 AM (5R+zg)
6
re the Santa Clause, Tim Allen has done the most extensive research on that issue.
Posted by: annika at May 11, 2007 09:12 AM (zAOEU)
7
This is a wonderful observation about Reagan's "thinking". The reason Reagan was so great is that he brought true conservatism to the White House, for the first time ever, maybe.
Reagan was a conservative visionary at a moment when few - outside of true believers - believed conservatism would work.
The Laffer Curve was less than a decade old when Reagan embraced it as his raison d'etre for tax cuts. The took some guts.
Reagan was a visionary on the USSR. Reagan did his own thinking - as Annika points out - on a range of social and societal issues. The man was his own thinker, and his own man. Reagan was a talented communicator who could dismiss his critics with a flick of his wrist.
GWB - I should say I am a big, humongous fan of GWB. I literally thank God that GWB is our President. GWB is a visionary about Islamism. GWB has done, maybe, as much as could've been done about Islamism, given the domestic cultural and political forces GWB was dealing with.
GWB is an earnest thinker about issues. He generally makes good decisions, and he generally plays the political knife-fight game well.
But GWB is not the seasoned and independent thinker Reagan was. Reagan made his national tour of public meetings in the early 1960's, when he represented GE. These meetings were the equivalent of talk radio. Reagan matched wits with all comers. I always think this was like graduate school for Reagan's political thinking. I believe it seasoned him, and forged his beliefs, and gave him confidence in his beliefs.
A confident President - a seasoned thinker, with confidence in his own beliefs - would've never signed McCain-Feingold into law; would've never filed a friend of the court brief in favor of Affirmative Action in the Michigan case; would've never allowed U.S. controlled Al Hurra to broadcast Islamist propaganda; would've never allowed Condi to meet with Assad. A seasoned President would've already "slipped", during a pre-speech sound test, and said into a hot mike: "the bombing of Tehran begins in 5 minutes."
I say this with great respect: I love GWB to death. But he is not the visionary, seasoned, confident intellect or talent which Reagan was.
Posted by: gcotharn at May 11, 2007 11:23 AM (Ucsqp)
8
I will say this: Roberts and Alito are about ten zillion times better than Reagan's SC appointees. They are about twenty zillion times better than danged Sandra O'Connor was. If GWB had not come along and defeated Gore, our nation might now be crumpled down upon our knees, groping in the dirt. Thank God for GWB. History will look upon GWB with great favor, I think. Many decades from now, GWB might gain status as one of our nation's finest Presidents. Even if a worst case Iraq scenario occurs, and Iraq falls to an Islamist dictatorship, GWB has nevertheless introduced a vibrant democratic conversation into that region - for the first time in history. You can't keep people down on farm, once they have seen the big city. That vibrant democratic conversation will reap great and historic long term benefits - regardless of what happens in the short term. GWB rocks!
Posted by: gcotharn at May 11, 2007 11:38 AM (Ucsqp)
Posted by: shelly at May 12, 2007 08:15 AM (h/YdH)
10
DRAFT CASCA FOR PRESIDENT!!!
P.S. I don't think I've got 20 years to wait for GWB to be proclained a great president; I'm ready to do it now.
Posted by: shelly at May 12, 2007 08:17 AM (h/YdH)
11
Even David McCullough wouldn't be able to turn GWB into a great president, if the surge fails.
Posted by: annika at May 12, 2007 08:23 AM (WfR6S)
12
I am a radical in this area: our definition of success in Iraq is skewed. Decades from now, we may see that our venture in Iraq has already succeeded, via introducing a vibrant democratic conversation into the region, for the first time in history.
I think some rocky form of democratic government is likely to succeed long term in Iraq. I think that is a humongous historic achievement, though our Congress and media will, in the immediate, call it failure.
If the worst case happens, and democratic government is a complete failure in the immediate, I say any theocratic government will be eventually overthrown by a more moderate, open, and free government. Even in the worst case, our regional introduction of democracy will take hold, and will win out, eventually.
I'm way out on a limb with my opinion, but that is truly the way I see it.
Posted by: gcotharn at May 12, 2007 09:49 AM (Ucsqp)
13
"The reason Reagan was so great is that he brought true conservatism to the White House, for the first time ever, maybe."
Don't forget Coolidge.
"GWB has done, maybe, as much as could've been done about Islamism, given the domestic cultural and political forces GWB was dealing with."
True. Bush did everything he could to wage a good-intentioned war without having a draft. However, that is everything short of just carpet-bombing the place into submission or salting their walter supplies. While we may not have enough troops to perform a successful nation-building campaign, we do have more than enough to kill and break anything in their path. The administration should have listened to Ralph Peters sooner instead of persisting on idealistic, politically correct warfighting.
On getting more troops for the war, Neal Boortz had this idea:
[Getting more hardware is easy. Place the order and pay for it. Easy enough. But how do we get more troops? Some in Congress have called for a draft. Bad move. A Military draft is essentially forced labor. Short of an invasion of our shores by an aggressor, there is absolutely no public support for a draft in this country. Period. So we're going to have to recruit more troops.But Iraq remains a dangerous place. Not too many people are going to want to sign up, knowing that they could come home in a body bag. But there is a way to get more people to sign up, and you can do it in a second. How do you think Halliburton is getting people to fly over to Iraq and drive trucks? You might say nobody in their right mind would do that.But they're doing so because of one reason and one reason only: money. Private contractors are bringing people in to do jobs like that for six figures. If the U.S. Military announced tomorrow that the recruiting bonus was $50,000 and the annual combat pay was being increased to $100,000, we'd have all the troops we'd ever need. While they're at it, how about jacking up the death benefit to a million dollars? Whatever it takes.]
"....would've never allowed Condi to meet with Assad...."
I would also like to add to that list, "...would've never frittered away the treasury war chest, several months into the Iraq war, for a prescription entitlement program."
And, finally, I second Shelly's motion.
Posted by: reagan80 at May 12, 2007 01:42 PM (iXkL1)
14
Good Gawd, I go on the road for a couple of days, and good fellowship breaks out. I love you guys too, even when you're wrong. I'm unelectable.
Republican Primary Update
On one issue, I am not a "big tent" Republican. I don't think there should be room for pro-abortion candidates in the Republican party. But I think abortion is a great moral evil, so it follows that I don't think there should pro-abortion candidates in the Democratic party either. Nevertheless, I don't live in a perfect world. Much as I am confounded by his illogical position on the abortion issue, Rudy Giuliani is still the front-runner for my party's nomination.
But the same can't be said of Mitt Romney, who even after getting rave reviews for his debate performance last Thursday night, still remains mired in fourth place. Gallup even has him losing ground after the debate.
What's the difference between Romney and Giuliani? Both have flip-flopped on abortion. (So did I, by the way. Although I came over from the dark side much earlier than Romney, who "says" he switched in 2004). Giuliani donated to Planned Parenthood three times. Romney's wife donated $150 only once, back in 1994.
Both men supposedly have an impressive record of accomplishments. Rudy's is better known to me. He fixed an unfixable city, I watched him do it. Romney did something or other with the Olympics and as far as I know he was a successful governor of Massachussets.
One might say it's anti-Mormon prejudice. It might be, there certainly is some of that going on. But I don't think that explains all of it. I personally don't have any problem with Romney's religion, yet I don't like him at all. What's up with that?
I think one reason I don't like him is that he polls so badly, and I badly want to win. Would I like him better if he were a stronger candidate? Perhaps. I'm open to voting for Romney in the primary (which is more than I can say for Rudy or McCain), if Romney could somehow prove that he can beat Hillary, but so far he hasn't proven that.
Then there's the intangible slickness factor. Romney seems slick. I'll admit that's a silly reason not to vote for somebody, but I doubt I'm the only one who has noticed it about him. I also doubt I'm the only one who's slick-averse after eight years of Clinton. Would America vote for slick over shrew? I don't know. But I do know Romney's got a lot of work to do if he's going to get my vote.
For now, I'm leaning towards Mike Huckabee. He impressed me* during last week's debate, although he's not good on tax policy from what I understand. He has zero chance in hell of winning the nomination and Hillary would crush him like a bug anyway. But I always vote my conscience in the primary, and save my pragmatism for the general.
_______________
1
"But I always vote my conscience in the primary, and save my pragmatism for the general."
Great. I feel all warm and fuzzy now.
If all the one-issue voters do that we could end up with Huckabee or Brownback or [insert any other pro-life, "I love Jesus", uninspiring, white male]and get our asses handed to us by Hillary or Obama.
I know we've already had this debate, but I think '08 is a different sort of year. The country does not support this war, and, fair or not, they are not likely to vote for a person that closely resembles George Bush in social policy or that sounds exactly the same on the GWOT. (Don't get me wrong: I think Bush is correct on the GWOT, but he is probably the worst possible salesman for the job.)
We need a person who is socially moderate enough to attract independent voters - who we have been losing lately - but not so moderate that he loses the conservatives. Rudy fits that criteria pretty well. Yeah, he's pro-choice but so is most of America. Abortion is just not an issue that the majority sit home and worry about.
I, personally, will spend a lot more time worrying about a candidates view on the GWOT, his fiscal policy, his view on illegal immigration, and his ability to kick Hillary's fucking ass. Rudy is the only Republican - currently declared -that can beat Hillary. Nobody else has a fucking prayer.
Reps need to decide if they want to be "right" or if they want to win. Do you want 75% of what you like or 10% of what you want?
I wanna win.
Posted by: blu at May 09, 2007 06:36 PM (NntAN)
2
Greetings Annika,
I like Mitt for a number of reasons and not because he's a mormon, which I happen to also be, but for all the other reasons. I like what he did for the Olympics and that he was a governor of a state. Sadly, he has the same kind of experience that Jimmy Carter had in 1976. I think we are more savy at choosing elected officals than we were then.
I like Rudi, warts and all. No slickness about him that's for sure.
Posted by: Drake Steel at May 09, 2007 11:58 PM (CiU4y)
3
Just found your blog and you rock! Sucks that you are ending this stellar commentary in a few days, I wish I'd discovered it sooner.
Your political commentary made me stand up and cheer, and laugh out loud. Good stuff! Best of luck to you ~
Posted by: Lalah at May 10, 2007 01:41 AM (TYera)
4
I agree with Blu, and I will go even further.
The last two Republican Presidents were both selected partly because of their strong anti-abortion stands and what did it get us? Two clueless blue-bloods with nearly zero fiscal responsibility.
Maybe its time to draw a little from the other side of the big tent.
Posted by: kyle N at May 10, 2007 03:29 AM (uKJF8)
5
Of all the candidates currently in the race, I, too, like Huckabee's politics best. However, we all know he's pretty much dead in the water. I am, however, still holding a place in my heart for Fred. I think that when he finally jumps in, he is going to dramatically alter the landscape for '08. And, we get someone from our side of the tent who is definitely electable.
6
Woe unto him who ignores the wisdom of Hewitt, and that other prescient Buckeye, Casca.
A poll doesn't tell you shit, unless you have the question asked, and the crosstabs. Without those two ingredients, you know nothing.
Posted by: Casca at May 10, 2007 06:43 AM (Y7t14)
7
Yes, the slick factor likely makes a number of people leery of Romney (though one of my sheep is a Romney).
Good of you to stand up for your principles and vote your conscience; if only more people did that instead of acted just like sheep.
And I too like many of Huckabee's stances, especially his answer to this question in the last debate.
Posted by: will at May 10, 2007 07:35 AM (z62e3)
8
I didn't have time to read the entry today but I wanted to ask: how did some of you regulars find Annika's Journal (which I will really miss)? I found this blog while guest-blogging for Doug TenNapel about a year ago. I just wanted to say thanks for putting a good blog out, and you're really smart and talented.
Posted by: Joules at May 10, 2007 11:55 AM (u4CYb)
9
I am just bewildered by anyone who thinks that Rudy is "Moderate". Rudy is as democrat as you can get. I would be completely shocked if someone as gun literate as Annika would give any support to a guy who would prefer to make guns illegal. (That's what he credits for his cleaning up of NYC. Nevermind the fact that it took a large police force to get the guns off the streets. But surely it was just the guns that made the difference. *rolleyes*)
Personally, Rudy and Hillary are synonymous in my mind. If Rudy wins the primary, I'll probably vote third party and that is WAY out of my character.
I really like Mike Huckabee. I think if the hard core Republicans out there actually did some research on the candidates, Huckabee would gain a lot of ground.
I agree with the "slick-factor" on Romney. He reminds me too much of Gore. (More in personality than in politics, but some of both.)
If Fred crashes the party, I'll be voting for him.
10
Yeah, Trint, it is a sad state of affairs that we are left with such shitty choices. If we're lucky, Rudy will go the "states' rights" route on gun control issues. BTW, remember that Bush originally pledged in 2000 to renew the "assault weapons" ban.
Anyway, I wish I would've been the first to say this to the Lefty shitheads. Thank you, Ed Kline.
[Oh, and let's be clear, my feelings about Bush in general are very similar to Lee’s, but I hate it when liberals chime in with their “I told you so” bullshit. It's like all of the sudden I am supposed to agree they were right all along. However, I don't remember liberals warning me in 2000 that Bush wasn't sufficiently conservative enough for me.I don't like Bush now because half the reasons liberals hated him aren't even true.(not that they ever give him credit for being a big government guy like themselves) And most importantly I don't remember the Democratic party giving me a viable alternative to Bush. As much as Bush’s second term has been a bitter pill for me to swallow, I would still prefer him over Gore or Kerry.]
[Well that's just it, Bob, I didn't do that. I addressed the whole ‘Bush was always incompetent’ thing. Bush turned 800,000 dollars into 15,000,000, in less than 10 years, so when you use his turn as a baseball owner as an indication of his ‘always being an incompetent’, I am going to call you on it. I also addressed the whole Sosa thing because you used that as well.The problem Bob is you did NOT tell me so. You (and when I say you I mean liberals, the Gore-Kerry advocate press and Bush’s Democratic opponents) told me many things. You told me that Bush would appoint Supreme Court justices who would rival Taliban members in how backward they are. Guys like horror of horrors Sam Alito, (which was fine with me). You did not tell me he would betray me by trying to nominate Harriet Myers. You told me that compassionate conservatism was nonsense, and Bush would gut government progams designed to help the poor(again fine by me), not expand entitlement programs like prescription drugs for the elderly. It's like I said before, you certainly didn't tell me that Bush’s conservatism was to be questioned. The case you made against Bush was that he was way too damn conservative. You were afraid he was another Reagan.(oh if only it were so) So you most certainly did NOT tell me so.]
Posted by: reagan80 at May 10, 2007 07:19 PM (iXkL1)
11
Thank you Lalah and Joules.
Good find Reagan80.
Posted by: annika at May 10, 2007 08:58 PM (WfR6S)
Posted by: Che' is my muse at May 11, 2007 12:07 AM (mXI7A)
13
"Rudy is as democrat as you can get."
"Rudy and Hillary are synonymous in my mind."
With all due respect, those are inane comments. Because a former mayor of America's largest city supports various forms of gun control doesn't make him a "Democrat." Neither does being pro-choice. Those are two policy positions that are supported by the majority of American citizens both Rep and Dem. Rudy's stated positions, however, on issues that matter more: GWOT, fiscal responsibility, illegal immigration, and judges are all solidly conservative - and distinctly different from Hillary and Obama's positions.
BTW, having several close friends that are cops, I can tell you that most police officers support various forms of gun control. Does that make them all "democrat as you can get"? I don't think so: Most are very conservative and vote accordingly. (I don't happen to agree with their position, but I'm not silly enough to think because their opinion on a single issue differs from mine makes them liberals.)
But, whatever, go vote third party and enjoy Hillary's 8 years. What kind of judges do you think she's going to select?
Citizens For A Better America
The aptly named group Citizens for a Better America is doing work that I support wholeheartedly. Check them out here. They speak, I believe, for the vast majority of Americans.
1
There is a way to make her and all of the other inconsequential celebrity ilk disappear from your world: get rid of your cable TV subscriptions.
As long as I have access to the 'Net and my collection of DVD's, I don't miss it.
Posted by: reagan80 at May 09, 2007 08:08 PM (iXkL1)
Annika's Journal Farewell Tour: Part VIII, Poll Results That I Never Got Around To Revealing
For those who followed the various sidebar polls, and others who are merely curious, here are some results that I never got around to mentioning, due to a lack of interest on my part.
The current poll asks, "Annika trivia: If you busted into Annika's house, what would she most likely shoot you with?" The correct answer is Heckler & Koch USP in .45 ACP, not the Sig Sauer 9 mil that 50% of you guessed.
Do you think the Travelocity Gnome is funny? I do not, and thus I agree with 67% of you. Strangely, ten respondents did not know whether the Travelocity Gnome is funny, which is a "no" vote as far as I'm concerned.
Eighty-seven percent of you think Ohio State should officially change their name from the Buckeyes to Florida's Bitches.
On the burning question, "Egg salad sandwich, tuna salad sandwich, or chicken salad sandwich?" the response was evenly divided: 31%, 33% and 33%. So basically, they're all good.
Which Jessica is best? Thirty-four percent picked Jessica Alba, but I was happy to see that there were at least 23 Frank Herbert fans out there who voted for Lady Jessica Atreides.
Now that Sam Jaya has been kicked off American Idol, if he takes your advice he should go on one of those Bravo reality shows where everyone's gay. I think he'd be perfect for Shear Genius... as a client!
Eighty-five percent of you have health insurance. Fifteen percent of you don't. Amazingly, this result is almost exactly congruent with the latest national census figures. So anyone who thinks my blog visitors are not a representative cross-section of America is nuts.
Regarding the question: "What was the top story of 2006? The one everyone's talking about?" you were given a number of choices, and the majority of you picked, "Jackie Passey." That's crazy. What's even crazier is that "Evil donuts from the future invade Wall Street, reprogram the stock market" got only 14%, and that's only because I kept voting for it about two dozen times. The mere discovery that sentient donuts exist is enough to make it the top story in all of history, let alone the top story of last year. Add to that the fact that they're evil, they traveled through time, they invaded Wall Street, and they somehow managed to reprogram the stock market?!?! I just don't see how you people didn't think that was a major story! I suspect it's because many of you are doing well in the stock market and don't want to rock the boat.
¿Qual es la favorita pictura del hombre de sombrero? Esta Alfonso Bedoya.
And finally, the winner of the Battle Of The Movie Assassins was Nikita from the original La Femme Nikita, starring Anne Parillaud. She got 58% of the vote, compared to Jason Bourne's 42%. I totally disagree with that result but what are you gonna do? View the tournament bracket here.
1
Gnome Rules: The gnome has to be experienced on t.v. (he's really irritating on radio) and he's only funny once. Totally unrelated subject: I just saw a music video that's the first one to grab my interest in a while: Dan Le Sac vs Scroobius Pip, Thou Shalt Always Kill. It's very British. Thou Shalt Always Kill doesn't mean murder or killing. I think they said it's slang for ending a song or performance. I'd have to listen to the interview again. Look them up on YouTube!
Posted by: Joules at May 08, 2007 08:42 PM (u4CYb)
2
EFF U, just as soon as Cal makes it to a BCS game.
As for the lovely Miss Passey, I stuffed the ballot box for her, because I KNEW you were stuffing it too. She didn't just win, she OBLITERATED the field, as she should, since she's perfect. I may have to become her bitch soon.
Posted by: Casca at May 08, 2007 10:17 PM (2gORp)
3
Skippy said it best about "Jacqueline Mackie Cougar Mellencamp Paisley Herbert Walker al-Zawahiri Passey":
[She's the kind of woman who would bite your testicles if she suspected that you were masturbating and not moaning her name, as she so obviously does.]
BTW, the fivehead often makes her look like Rudy G. in drag.
Random YouTube of the Day: "Brokeback Commie"
Posted by: reagan80 at May 09, 2007 07:03 AM (iXkL1)
4
Damn that explains a lot. Sounds just like my ex-wife.
Weather Underground
Forget the Yahoo weather site, which is really just the Weather Channel's site, which sucks. The most comprehensive internet source for all your weather related needs is Weather Underground, which I have just bookmarked under my "references" tab. It has complete and searchable almanac information too, for you global warming junkies.
No, I'm not a total geek. But I am the daughter of a former Navy Aerographer's Mate.
On a slightly related note, I want you all to know my electrical usage has decreased compared to last year's kWh for two months in a row! And I haven't even been trying. Of course that might be because last year I tended to forget to turn off the air when leaving the house. Now, I have a Puerto Rican butler who will do that for me.
1
There is nothing that brings out apathy in me more than the subject of Global Warming. I'd rather worry about Nuclear Winter, instead.
Anyway, congratulations on snagging the "butler", Annie. You guys look like such a nice couple.
Posted by: reagan80 at May 05, 2007 12:31 PM (gyiuI)
2
I wonder if there's some way we could harness the power of hamsters in their wheels. I think it's on page 85 in Algore's book. My dad is a retired Navy chaplain and I thought I'd heard every Navy job title there was but I don't remember hearing that one! Must have to have a good mind for detail.
Posted by: Joules at May 05, 2007 02:13 PM (u4CYb)
3
I'm glad that pops turned back to women after he was done being an Aerographer's Mate. I guess mom is too. I'm also gratified to see that you've found a man who knows his homefire duties, i.e. turning off everything left unattended/in use, and keeping the hooch from burning to the ground.
Posted by: Casca at May 05, 2007 02:24 PM (2gORp)
4
Been a fan of weatherunderground for many years now. See pics from my deck at http://www.weatherunderground.com/wximage/imagesearch.html?citybox=on&city=Paeonian_Springs&statebox=on&state=VA&submit=go
Good to hear you are doing your part on the conservation front (setback thermostats are very common now, btw).
Posted by: will at May 07, 2007 10:02 AM (z62e3)
5
I always wondered where the Wizard of Oz landed!
Posted by: annika at May 07, 2007 12:34 PM (zAOEU)
6"No, I'm not a total geek..."
True, but when you're in the high 90's, you just accept, ya know.
C'mon... embrace the geekdom!
"Now, I have a Puerto Rican butler..."
... and for a brief moment, I had a quick visualization of Agador Spartacus. Luckily, I clicked the link.
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at May 07, 2007 01:30 PM (CCvex)
7
I hear ya Reagan! Now that it's warm I'll be wearing my "Fuck Recycling - Just Make More" shirt all the time. I love it! It just dares the moonbats to say something - then die!
I'll make up a few more, of different colors, for the other days of the week.
Over/under on when the journaljizzmers finally reveal the I-Slamic names of the Jersey terrorists? Were they caught with international terrorist surveillance? No wonder Straw and his fellow travelers hate it so much.
Posted by: Radical Redneck at May 08, 2007 07:13 AM (WKULG)
Posted by: Radical Redneck at May 08, 2007 07:47 AM (WKULG)
9
I just can't look at that tornado link. I could not believe the reporter on NPR asking the governor if there was any human error involved in the enormous damage. Yes, as soon as they heard the sirens, the residents jumped into their bulldozers and leveled about a third of their town before the tornado hit, assuming it was going to be destroyed anyway.
Posted by: Joules at May 08, 2007 12:34 PM (u4CYb)
Milblog Conference Live Video Feed
You can watch the Milblog Conference video feed here. I think they're on lunch now, but the schedule says they start up again at 1:00 eastern time.
1
Crap. I want to see the President's remarks. I hope they post the video later.
Posted by: reagan80 at May 05, 2007 11:54 AM (gyiuI)
2
Annie,
I was a sponsor of Milblogs convention and knew in advance of the secret surprise of the POTUS address, what was amazing is that when Andi introduced President Bush, there was a palpable gasp and lots of folks turned expecting him to walk in. He actually was on a taped feed.
Having served as a military officer or cadet under five President's, I still greatly respect the office of the President and regardless of their politics or leanings, will always respect the office holder.
Otto
Posted by: Otto at May 05, 2007 08:42 PM (czVLs)
3
I was one of the dufuses who gasped and looked at the door. I knew it was too good to be true! But the taped speech was amazing, and I was so star-struck through the thing that now I couldn't tell you one word he said. I'd love to see the video again too.
1
I must confess. I have never thought about it, and most likely never will again.
Posted by: Casca at May 04, 2007 09:03 PM (2gORp)
2
A stingray is a "distant relative" of the turtle? Yikes, but yer stretchin' there.
More spookier though: On April 26, 2007 you posted about "weather futures". The next day it rained like a bitch. Dammit, Annika! You and your @#$% blog!
I'm really gonna miss you. **sniffle**
Posted by: Tuning Spork at May 04, 2007 10:15 PM (d7H4x)
3
You know, Annika, with Screech it got a WHOLE lot worse than anything having to do with Slater. How could you forget the release of "Saved by the Smell" on November 16? That's officially a two-fer for poor Dustin. You've got SPOOKY powers!
Gonna miss your blog, Annika! If you do last one "Wednesday Is Poetry Day," here's one you might enjoy:
Here I sit, broken-hearted;
Tried to fart, but only parted
My new pants from all the strain.
The moral is: All strain, no gain.
Do I gots the skillz to pay the billz, or what?
Posted by: Cameron at May 05, 2007 03:43 AM (3DWOF)
4
With posts like Cameron's, maybe you do need a break...
Posted by: shelly at May 05, 2007 04:09 AM (A5s0y)
5
Dammit Shelly, you're in between me and the target. Get down before I Dick Cheney your ass.
Cameron, survey says......NO!
Posted by: Casca at May 05, 2007 08:40 AM (2gORp)
6
So, I'm thinking, how much would you charge us to write about Strawman, Annika?
I think we can get up a pretty good kitty here.
Posted by: shelly at May 05, 2007 09:51 AM (h/YdH)
12
One of my friends, who teaches high school English, recently e-mailed, "Reaching 40 and realizing that you still find body humor hilarious is one of life's great surprises." I'm in that camp.
Posted by: Joules at May 06, 2007 06:13 PM (u4CYb)
13
Annika,
You can't be serious about giving up your post!! But based on your writing history, can you dedicate your last days by writing a LOT about the democrats running for POTUS.
Posted by: Ed at May 07, 2007 07:50 AM (s5qzW)
14
Okay, Anni, what the hell's with you missing your last target? You did Orbach in, you did Albert in, and Irwin... well, we all knew it was gonna come at the hands... er, barbed tails... of some animal, though that doesn't change the influence your karma-cursing post had. But Screech?? You freakin' missed Screech??!! Of all people??
Keep posting, goddammit! If one doesn't do 'im in, keep shooting!
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at May 07, 2007 01:14 PM (CCvex)
15"Get down before I Dick Cheney your ass..."
Jesus, Cas! You could've said "Vice President your ass", but noooooo... you gotta choose the verbiage that causes spit takes and rereads. Now I gotta wipe this orange juice off my monitor...
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at May 07, 2007 01:20 PM (CCvex)
Annika's Journal Farewell Tour: Part VI, The Agitprop
These are the sidebar agitprops I created during the course of this blog's run.
Number one was my first attempt, using a picture of Kerry doing the "raise the roof" gesture. Pretty self-explanatory.
Number two was a little more sophisticated, and the first time I did the whole top and bottom bar thingie. I like the long face distortion, which is useful anytime one wants to depict the french-looking candidate.
Number three was created soon after Byrd gave his freakish meandering oration against the Authorization for the Use of Force. I'm particularly fond of the vampirish pallor of his skin, which was created by manipulating the hue and brightness settings in photoshop. Great pose too. The caption is a subtle hint at his Klan history. Grand Wizard becomes Grand Poobah.
Number four is Nancy Pelosi at her most strident. For effect I manipulated the size of her eyes and mouth. Not enough to look photoshopped, but just enough to be weird.
Number five is connected to my infamous EJ for Sec Gen post, which got such wide exposure thanks to a mention by Jeff Jarvis on the Ron Reagan show. I totally lucked out when I found that picture of EJ with the blue hair wig. It was perfect.
And number six utilizes the gif animation function, which has given me hours of fun since I discovered how to do it back in January of '05. For those who don't know the references, this was based on the promotional photograph of Kiki Couric, which had been photoshopped by CBS to make her look younger and thinner. Tiffany is a reference to CBS's old nickname, "the tiffany network." I can't deny that I was also inspired by Violet from the old Willie Wonka movie.
So much for the agitprop. Someday, when the time is right, I'm planning to make a "Hillary: the female Nixon" sticker and plaster it all over California. Watch for it.
1
Ooo, that excites the mind. Haggard & Huffy? Bitchy & Bloated?
Posted by: Casca at May 04, 2007 09:08 PM (2gORp)
2
A joke loses it's momentum/timing when you have to explain it, but for those of you not alive in 1968, one of the Nixon primary campaign slogans was "Rested & Ready".
On the Byrd piece, I always thought that it would have been better if you'd have made it "Grand Kleigle of the Senate".
Rosie Unfazed By Emeryville Freeway Collapse
Rosie O'Donnell is a perfect example of the psychological defense mechanism known as "cognitive dissonance." Here's what she's written in the last few days in response to questions posed at her "Ask Ro" site.
Teresa writes:
Hey Ro!
I live in No CA and guess what? The freeway near the Bay Bridge is going to be open sooner than expectedÂ…Why? Because the steel didnÂ’t melt!!
HmmmmÂ…Â…Â… Love ya!
[Rosie:]
hmmm
and the concrete didnt pulverize
. . .
Jami writes:
Hey RosieÂ… you should send those who doubt the 9/11 stuff to watch the videos on Youtube about WTC7 fallingÂ… maybe that will make them believe what you are saying!!!! Rock on girlfriend!!!!
[Rosie:]
yup
. . .
Kim writes:
Hey…just watched Loose Change. I didn’t know that 9 of the “hijackers” were found to be alive. Why haven’t I seen this until now? Did the media ever cover that? Loving you from Toronto!
[Rosie:]
the media did not
. . .
amy writes:
rosie- i am horrified. i just googled wtc7 & i am just sick. i have always thought there was more to the story than what the media was saying- but to see actual evidence is frightening. IMPEACH!!
[Rosie:]
go amy
. . .
Dan writes:
U said the last tower on 9/11 couldnÂ’t have fallen by melting steelÂ…it has never happened. Did the recent incident in California where freeway girders melted from a tanker truck change ur mind?
[Rosie:]
no
wtc7
google it
. . .
Jan writes:
Can you explain how fire from an overturned oil tanker in San Francisco melted steel beams and bolts leading to the collapse of part of an interchange on Hwy I-80? But not on 9/11 you said.
[Rosie:]
watch wtc 7 fall
and tell me
it was not a controlled demolition
45 stories
come on
. . .
CYNTHIA writes:
is it plausable that terrorists placed bombs in the WTCÂ’s? y, but the real question is which terrorists,foreign or domestic? if u were a man the news would praise u 4 your views. they r full of shit!
[Rosie:]
loving cynthia
There is no convincing one who has abandoned all reason and logic in exchange for fear and superstition. It's ironic that she has the nerve to criticize religion.
1
The problem with the "reality-based community" is that much of it can't handle reality. That's the basic premise of Paul Berman's Terror and Liberalism, in which Berman essentially says that many liberals, grounded as they are (or at fancy themselves to be) in Western rationalism, simply can't accept the notion that millions of people could subscribe to an utterly irrational ideology. He cites the French Socialists prior to WWII as another example of this phenomenon:
The anti-war socialists gazed across the Rhine and simply refused to believe that millions of upstanding Germans had enlisted in a political movement whose animating principles were paranoid conspiracy theories, blood-curdling hatreds, medieval superstitions and the lure of murder. At Auschwitz the SS said "Here there is no why." The anti-war socialists in France believed no such thing. In their eyes, there was always a why.
(Berman is a leftist, by the way.) A large portion of the left needs a "why." No one would fly loaded airliners into skyscrapers without a really good reason; thus the self-immolation of the hate-America crowd.
I think Berman's onto something there, and I think the conspiracy theories may be the flip side of the same coin. If you're not willing to accept the possibility of an irrational, murderous, evil ideology with sufficient backing to organize a 9/11, and if you also don't accept the proposition that America did something so horrible as to justify 9/11 on rational grounds, then you have to find some other way to explain those three thousand dead people. I think conspiracy theories are another way to do that.
Of course the people who buy into conspiracy theories are themselves falling prey to an irrational ideology -- and they're implicitly accepting the very proposition about people in American government (for example) that they're unwilling to accept about certain foreign Muslims. So much for their commitment to Western rationalism. But that just proves that the human capacity for self-deception is almost unlimited.
Cognitive dissonance indeed.
Of course in Rosie's case the problem may just boil down to the fact that she's a fat, stupid sow.
Posted by: Matt at May 04, 2007 08:47 AM (10G2T)
2
Hey, I am a "lurker" by your own definition. I drop in from time to time, yet rarely comment. I like your spot and mourn its passing in advance. I like your take, and your response most ususally, and when I don't you at least open up a new avenue for me to pursue. Keep up the good work, keep the faith. Jay
3
Annika,
"There is no convincing one who has abandoned all reason and logic in exchange for fear and superstition."
I donÂ’t know Annie, it seems to me that the foundations and "facts" that stimulate the paranoid delusions that plague Rosie are 1000 times more concrete than the foundation for a belief in a supreme being, his children, his ghost, his intentions, his interest in us as individuals, a virgin birth, reincarnation, heaven, hell and all the other silliness that is stuffed in to the bag(s) of religion. No? She may be drawing wrong conclusions and seeing conspiracies that are not supported by facts but she is at least still in touch with reality
Posted by: Strawman at May 04, 2007 01:05 PM (et8nf)
4
Strawman, how did you determine that the multiplication factor is exactly 1,000? Please cite your source or sources for that figure.
Posted by: annika at May 04, 2007 04:43 PM (WfR6S)
6
Annika,
Are you familiar with Lorenz's Butterfly effect, Von Neumann architecture and Godel's incompleteness theorms? It can also be gotten at from Gell-man's work in QCD.
Let me know and I'll show you the how this factor was derived. It is a complex and very long winded proof but it is very rewarding more rewarding even than painting your nails, donning gingam wedgies and strutting your stuff around the pool! Well,on second thought, maybe not.
Posted by: Strawman at May 04, 2007 05:23 PM (et8nf)
7
"more rewarding even than painting your nails, donning gingam wedgies and strutting your stuff around the pool!"
Straw, is there something you're not telling us? .......Or maybe not telling yourself?
Posted by: blu at May 04, 2007 05:29 PM (NntAN)
8
Have you ever read "Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis? Also, "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel is good for those with massive doubts--not to say that we believers don't have our doubts--that's why I have these books lying around the house. They're good friends on the journey. So, Rosie...hmmm...I think she lost it somewhere along the way. She used to be a lot of fun. My guess is hormonal changes and brain chemistry have something to do with it.
Posted by: Joules at May 04, 2007 06:57 PM (u4CYb)
9
Yes Joules, that, and not coming to terms with her unnatural hatred of men. Early success (money) in life, before forty, tends to arrest emotional and intellectual development, and one risks becoming something bizarre.
Posted by: Casca at May 04, 2007 09:16 PM (2gORp)
10
Perhaps a better question is why you would bother polluting your blog with this MORON'S statements. She's totally beneath anyone with any critical thinking ability.
11
Rosie O'Donnell's utterly stupid statements are "concrete" but Catholicism is "silliness."
Straw, when Annika closes shop (what a quitter, by the way), promise us you will learn how to THINK.
12
Y'know, posting Rosie's blog is a kind of public service for people who aren't surrounded by irrational people every day. It allows us to practice responding to Rosie-heads in the comfort of our own homes!
Posted by: Joules at May 05, 2007 08:01 AM (u4CYb)
13
CONcrete:
Of or relating to a material thing or group of things as opposed to an abstraction.
Gee Mark, did I miss something?
Joules, I notice you don't have Bertram Russels "Why I am not a Christian" laying around to help you on your journey.
http://englishatheist.org/whynot.shtml
Or:
http://members.aol.com/chasklu/religion/private/whynot.htm
Posted by: Strawman at May 05, 2007 08:08 AM (et8nf)
Posted by: Strawman at May 05, 2007 05:19 PM (et8nf)
15
"Are you familiar with Lorenz's Butterfly effect, Von Neumann architecture and Godel's incompleteness theorms? It can also be gotten at from Gell-man's work in QCD."
Strawman, that was amazingly condescending even for you. I am a long-time lurker, and I have before now let you be, but unless you are a mathematical physicist you know a hell of a lot less about those things than I do (I'm a Ph.D. physical chemist).
If you are technically trained then I have no use for that kind of attitude coming from those of us in the technical community when dealing with laymen. But given the shotgun approach I betting you're bluffing. Explain to me what exactly you meant, because I'm at a loss how any of those disciplines gives a probabilistic estimation for the likelihood of the existence of a god. I am most familiar with Quantum Chromo Dynamics, but I have more than a passing interest in Chaos Theory, and while I know little to nothing about CS, I'm still at a loss to how a data / instruction design in a human made computer system sheds any light on this question. Enlighten me. I doubt there's any math that you can throw at me I won't understand.
And apologize to our hostess.
16
John administered what is technically known as a bitch slap.
You feeling OK, Straw? Cuz that had to hurt a lil'.
Posted by: blu at May 05, 2007 10:15 PM (NntAN)
17
Well, duh! (I'd love to see presidential candidates yelling "Duh!" at each other during a debate.) It's primarily a journey of FAITH--the assurance of things hoped for; the conviction of things not seen. I'll look at these links when I have a chance. About all the physics: I have this funny feeling that all the disciplines are easier to understand than I think they are--but try telling that to the rest of my brain. I have a book lying nearby called, "Physics for the Rest of Us"--which is supposed to make Physics easier to understand--but I bogged down in chapter 2 and never finished it.
Posted by: Joules at May 06, 2007 07:22 AM (u4CYb)
Posted by: annika at May 06, 2007 07:33 AM (WfR6S)
19
Dear John and Annie and Joules,
A thousands lardons.
I thought Annie's retort was tongue in cheek (IÂ’m sure it was) and I thought my response was as well. I thought my references were clearly frivolous (to the argument only) and not on any point since belief in a supreme being is the domain of religious belief; not science. I did not intend to be condescending nor do I purport to have more than a passing knowledge of these areas of study, and if anybody, your self included was offended, I apologize. I would never use my extensive knowledge of wood for instance to make someone feel inadequate. When I wish to offend, which is, I hope some may notice, becoming less frequent as my affection my associates and hostess grows, I usually do it with irony not condescension, unless of course its directed at Kasha varnishkas who insists on remaining unlikeable and a truly condescending ass.
I thought the references were clearly humorous because I am, as most around here know, like our lord Jesus Christ, a simple worker in wood laboring not in the rarefied air of quantum chromo dynamics, but rather in a miasma of a thick suspension of sawdust, carcinogenic volatile hydrocarbons, and other unhealthy elements too numerous to list. I am enjoy reading these subjects on the level of the “Dancing Wu Li Masters”, or listening to the wonderful Richard Feynman lectures from Cal Tech and other such lay fare.
Annie, you got it as a joke, right?
"I wish I knew half as much about anything today as I thought I knew about everything
when I was twenty." Bill Ayers
Posted by: Strawman, PHDuh! at May 06, 2007 09:21 AM (et8nf)
20
i always love reading the trash posted on sites such as this. it is amazing that people so utterly unable to comprehend the point of views of others can only deal with this deficit in their own abilities by calling the others names. rosie may be annoying, vocal, and not always politically correct. however, she at least makes judgements for herself. you all, however, find it easier to right her off as a "fat, stupid sow", a "moron" undergoing "hormonal changes", jealously refer to her early successes as responsible for "arrested emotional and intellectual development" and reveal a telling fear of lesbians which does not, in fact, surprise me at all. calling someone names in no way challenges the arguments that they make. you need to look at the facts for yourself and make your own judgements - but i fear that most of you would be too scared by what you might find out. a pity.
Posted by: whatthe? at May 07, 2007 09:39 AM (go1IV)
21
Whatthe,
Comprehending an inane argument (held by Rosie and other "truther" morons) does not require agreement. I and other regulars at this site comprehend their idiocy well.
I've got an idea self-righteous, smug guy: Why don't you go ahead and provide an intellectual defense of Rosie's stupidity. We'll all be waiting with baited breath. Nothing like reading the rantings of deluded conspiracy theorists - for a good laugh anyway.
Now get back to your bong and your latest version of Loose Change.
Posted by: blu at May 07, 2007 10:37 AM (j8oa6)
22
Hey Blu,
So what is your problem with smoking dope? You deride people as bong users and I wnat to be clear if it is the use of a bong that you don't like or just smoking reefer in general.
Whatthe,
You noticed, eh?
Posted by: Strawman at May 07, 2007 11:11 AM (et8nf)
23
Straw,
Was it bong resin that diminished your brain capacity and led to your bizarre and amoral political philosophy?
Regarding your question, I tend to be a libertarian when it comes to drug use. I am not a user myself, however. While I may not agree with current government policy on the matter, I am not, like many who share my policy belief, just looking for an excuse to get high.
Posted by: blu at May 07, 2007 01:29 PM (j8oa6)
24
Bong resin coupled with the plastizer in the PVC tubing. Sometimes we would smoke with nothing in the bowl and never notice a difference.
Posted by: Strawman at May 08, 2007 06:23 AM (et8nf)
25
To Whatthe,
Some of us have looked at the facts for ourselves and made our own judgements. You want to challenge the ad hom on Rosie, fair enough. But if you want to imply that there's something behind what she says, then you're the one who needs to look at facts for yourself and make your own judgement.
Besides, what's this defense that she "makes judgements for herself"? Like hell. She's repeating verbatim the 9/11 Conspiracy Fantasy, right down to the terminology and the mistakes. That's not "thinking for herself", that's being a blind savant, echoing only what she's been fed. It's one thing to "look at the facts for ourselves", it's another thing to mistake fantasy for reality, and it's a whole other level of mental laziness beyond that to not even analyze what you read and just parrot it forth. So go ahead and criticize folks saying mean things about her person; that's warranted. But don't make the mistake of defending her intellectual honesty. Regarding 9/11 and the World Trade Center, she has none.
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at May 08, 2007 06:42 AM (WuviG)
26
Strawman, you are totally cool with me. I always have to remind myself that this type of communication means you miss vocal inflection, facial expression, etc. So, what's the best product to use to clean wood that's been varnished, like furniture?
Whatthe, a good, thorough analysis of a person or situation involves looking at it through different lenses, from different perspectives. For example, I'm sure a psychologist would have a field day with Rosie and probably everyone here. We could even analyze Rosie from the perspective of a musician (if Rosie's voice were an instrument, she'd be the sandpaper blocks!) or a microbiologist or a Tupperware Lady, for that matter.
We might learn something about Rosie and ourselves by analyzing her in different ways. Like the rest of us, you don't know Rosie personally so you're as little qualified to comment intelligently as we are. That doesn't keep any of us from doing it, though, which I think may be the most fun part about posting on the internet.
Rosie's ideas remind me of my conspiracy theorist carpet cleaner, who could show you a dollar bill folded so that it makes the twin towers. He thinks the Illuminati (which includes most government heads of state worldwide, according to him) planned the disaster ahead of time so they just printed it on our money...for some reason...which is really dumb and I'm going to go get some ice cream.
Posted by: Joules at May 08, 2007 01:06 PM (u4CYb)
27
I may need the Fabric of the Cosmos to make myself a new pair of jeans. I spent the weekend in Oklahoma City with an old college friend and we ate every meal at a restaurant!
Posted by: Joules at May 08, 2007 02:03 PM (u4CYb)
1
His knuckleball grip right? Damn you're a pervy little thing, thus very popular. lmao
Posted by: Casca at May 03, 2007 09:07 PM (2gORp)
2
what? you don't think it was risky for him to start talking about his bowling technique?
Posted by: annika at May 04, 2007 06:20 AM (UV9H+)
3
Annika,
How often do the words risque and bowling find themselves in the same sentence?
Romney looks more like RR calling his favorite sheep to the barn for a nooner.
Posted by: Strawman at May 04, 2007 08:02 AM (et8nf)
5
-Romney looks more like RR calling his favorite sheep to the barn for a nooner.
I have it on good authority Strawman would know about diddling livestock. I heard he was banned from a petting zoo in Jersey several years ago. He walked into the place wearing nothing but galoshes. He grabbed the nearest goat and inserted its hind legs into his boots so it could not run away. He proceeded to give the animal a time it would never forget along with a case of herpes.
Posted by: Spanky at May 04, 2007 10:40 AM (gyiuI)
6
You're such a pervert. That's what I love about you.
7
Spanky,
Sounds like you are competing with RR for the title of site farm boy?
Posted by: Strawman at May 04, 2007 01:11 PM (et8nf)
8
Amazingly, that's my technique, too! You'd be surprised how well it works,really you would. I've gotten thirty-two marriage proposals that way alone.
And I won't even get started with what I can do with my tongue. Who says that Catholic school didn't have some benefits?
Posted by: skippystalin at May 04, 2007 02:11 PM (ZSmqU)
9
Whoa. That's so gratuitously perverted that it almost offends even me.
Posted by: Matt at May 04, 2007 02:15 PM (10G2T)
10
Scof, I really liked the "Have a crappy weekend" sound bite.
Posted by: reagan80 at May 04, 2007 02:33 PM (gyiuI)
11
Yes, I know Matt. Its incredibly tasteless and there was no justification for it. This is probably the type of thing that explains why I was never asked to join Pajamas Media and Hugh Hewitt took me off his blogroll.
Posted by: annika at May 04, 2007 04:35 PM (WfR6S)
12"Hugh Hewitt took me off his blogroll"
I hope none of the comments were a factor in his decision. I know that I've posted some pretty toxic, politically incorrect shit on multiple occasions that people would want to publicly distance themselves from.
With that said, I'm not a big fan of Hugh's sycophantic tendencies.
Posted by: reagan80 at May 04, 2007 05:43 PM (gyiuI)
13
I missed the debate, I've heard from various sources that Romney did well along with a couple of others. Apparently, McCain looked old and tired - not a good TV candidate. Michael Medved suggests that Duncan Hunter was the debate winner (with Romney a close second.)
Opinions anyone?
Posted by: blu at May 04, 2007 05:59 PM (NntAN)
14
Hmmmm, Hunter did himself some good, but Romney was Mr. Kewl. Hunter has a big plus for being VP. Aside from McCain who is too old, and too strident. Who else but Hunter is a vet? On top of his service, he's been the go to guy on defense in the Congress for a long time. Add to that, he's an articulate conservative with major street cred, and any presidential candidate with suspect credentials with his base will want to shore up his bonafides. Plus, he has Buckeye roots.
Posted by: Casca at May 04, 2007 09:27 PM (2gORp)
15
The winner was ..... Fred Thompson.
With no real winner emerging, Fred begins to gain traction.
Looking for RWR reincarnate? Look no further.
And, Fred would not hesitate to name Newt Secretary of State or Defense. I see a Thompson-Giuliani ticket coming.
Beats the Hell out of Clinton-Richardson, doesn't it?
Remember, you read it here on Annie's blog.
Posted by: shelly at May 05, 2007 04:20 AM (A5s0y)
16
I don't know Shelly. I hadn't had a decent look at Romney until Thursday. He's a business lawyer from the East Coast, who sounds pretty damned conservative. Add to that, leading-man looks, and incredible mental quickness. He probably is the one. This is the most superficial part of politics, but Fred looks too old, and Newt too fat and toadish. Romney will make Hillary look like the hag she is in comparison, and Obama would come off like the ersatz looney left nutjob version of Romney.
Posted by: Casca at May 05, 2007 08:53 AM (2gORp)
17
Since Straw is considered the same species as the diversity of 4 legged vermin he penetrates with his Minuscule Man Meat™, it's not beastiality.
Notice he named himself after the material on which he give the old goats a reacharound?
Posted by: Radical Redneck at May 05, 2007 11:55 AM (cOyko)
18
Annie you'll be shocked to hear that I saw that picture elsewhere earlier, and thought the exact same thing! :-O
Posted by: Radical Redneck at May 05, 2007 12:02 PM (cOyko)
19
So we're supposed to vote for people now because they don't have the guts to jump in the fray? I don't know. That doesn't sit well with me. Thompson needs to get off his ass if he's going to run. Because he has no money, no staff, and I suspect no ideas either. All he's doing is sucking up oxygen from guys who have been working hard for months.
Posted by: annika at May 06, 2007 07:39 AM (WfR6S)
20
And don't forget he's got a really good side job.
Posted by: Strawman at May 06, 2007 03:34 PM (et8nf)
1
That's not a good polling question. The question should be, "Do you have an appropriate amount of healthcare coverage for this point in your life?"
Single under thirty? You probably don't need anything. Raising a family, or over forty, of course you need coverage.
Posted by: Casca at May 03, 2007 05:22 PM (2gORp)
2
Excellent point, Casca. The "uninsured" issue is such a load of crap when one considers that the vast majority of those in this group are young, single people who choose not to purchase insurance. Of course, the Lefties mischaracterize the data to try and make us all believe that socialized medicine is the answer.
Posted by: blu at May 03, 2007 05:55 PM (NntAN)
3
Blu,
Relax, and let your head out of your sphincter. The myth is that the younger cohorts don't need it. True they need it less but your characterization about the lefties and the manufactured need pointing to socialized medicine is uninformed.
Have you ever had a hospital stay? Do you have insurance? Do you pay out of pocket or are you infantilized by your employer or had a union bargain for you?
Posted by: Strawman at May 04, 2007 07:18 AM (et8nf)
4
I always find it interesting that some people will spend thousands on a vacation, shell out $300-$400 per month on a their vehicle, or spend $1200 on a television yet balk when asked to pay for their own healthcare and/or health insurance.
Posted by: TinyElvis at May 04, 2007 09:45 AM (6J+P7)
5
-Relax, and let your head out of your sphincter.
I can't believe it. Strawman has inspired me. He has given me an idea for a new creation. I will call it the "strawcolputin". It is like a turducken except the ingredients are different. Creating it requires Strawman, Gary Coleman, and Grigory Rasputin. The instructions for making it are as follows:
-You must first take Rasputin out of the jar ( http://tinyurl.com/2gedkr )
-Stick Rasputin up Gary Coleman's ass
-Continue to stick Gary Coleman up Strawman's ass
-Place the "strawcolputin" in pre-heated oven
-Bake until crispy
Posted by: Spanky at May 04, 2007 11:22 AM (gyiuI)
7
"The myth is that the younger cohorts don't need it."
"Need" is not even the point, Straw. Don't change the subject. The FACT, however, is that the data on the subject show that the vast majority choose not to purchase health insurance. The Left's Big Lie is that people just can't afford it or that it's unaccessible. Of course, as usual, the Left is purposely deceiving the public in order to try and pull off another power grab.
And, Straw, I'd never have a fucking thug union bargain for me. There are few things I despise more than unions. The damage they have done and continue to do to our economy is an outrage.
Posted by: blu at May 04, 2007 05:40 PM (NntAN)
8are you infantilized by your employer
Man, Kevlar Irony Proof™ The same freak who wet dreams about the gubmint infantalizing every single person's entire life through a heavy handed nanny state has the gall to call accepting partial insurance premiums (in liu of more pay) from an employer in exchange for productive work.
Posted by: Radical Redneck at May 05, 2007 12:09 PM (cOyko)
9
Straw, infantilized means more than the diaper you wear to The Vault on free night.
Posted by: Radical Redneck at May 05, 2007 12:11 PM (cOyko)
10
RR,
Actually its the left that bothers me about health insurance. There is this belief that it is the obligation of an employer to provide it, and to not makes a company derelict.
I do believe you are correct, that there is no harm and much good if it has been negotiated between employer and employee or collectively between a union and an employer.
So, Red, since you see it as additional remuneration should the value of the employers contribution be taxed? And if not is that fair to stiffs like me who pay entirely out of after tax income?
Posted by: Strawman at May 05, 2007 05:16 PM (et8nf)
11So, Red, since you see it as additional remuneration should the value of the employers contribution be taxed?
Of course not. As a conservative I'm never in favor of new taxes. Plus, to use one of the leftists' favorite arguments, it is good public policy to encourage (not coerce) employers to use their purchasing power to offer low cost health insurance to their serfs. You know, as well as I, that most people wouldn't bother with
it unless they had a castastrophe staring them in their face. This way we cut back on the deadbeats running up huge hospital bills that end up on the taxpayer's back (like the illegals).
And if not is that fair to stiffs like me who pay entirely out of after tax income?
Nice try. Life aint fair. Again I know you know that medical payments and premiums are deductible for contractors if they exceed a very attainable percentage of one's income. Anyone middle or upper middle class should have no problem meeting this floor.
Are you suggesting additional tax relief should go to...The Rich™?
Bushbot!
Posted by: Radical Redneck at May 08, 2007 11:44 PM (Ch0M0)
12
Strawman is often really funny and kind of genteel and you guys are often...uh, not.
Posted by: Joules at May 15, 2007 04:07 PM (u4CYb)
Battle Royal
Memo to Republican candidates: here's one way to get Hillary's goat. Be polite. That was what Rick Lazio got wrong, when he did his famous "space invading" gesture during the 2000 NY senate race.
For more than two hours, France's presidential front-runner needled his challenger during a debate Wednesday, wrapping it in a veneer of chivalry and always addressing her as "Madame."
Finally, Segolene Royal snapped. The woman seeking to become France's first female president erupted in anger toward the end of the prime-time duel with conservative Nicolas Sarkozy.
It was surprising -- and potentially damaging -- that Royal, not Sarkozy, proved quick to anger. During their bitter election campaign, the Socialist has sought to portray her conservative rival as too unstable, too brutal, to lead the nuclear-armed nation.
In front of millions of television viewers, Sarkozy turned the tables. Royal got furious when he started talking about disabled children, saying he was "playing" with the issue. "I am very angry," she said.
"You become unhinged very easily, Madame," Sarkozy said. "To be president of the republic, one must be calm. . . . I don't know why Mrs. Royal, who's usually calm, has lost her calm."
Hey does anybody speak French? I think this is the video.
By the way, I know nothing about French politics, except that Royal is a hottie, and she's a socialist. Sarkozy, I remember, got in trouble during the recent "youth" riots for stating the obvious: that the rioters were thugs.
1
Sarkozy will likely win, Royal is just slinging mud (with the help of the media and celebrities of france). Sarkozy would be an interesting change of pace for French politics (not being a socialist), but uh, depends on how sneaky the democra...i mean socialists will be in trying to stop his agenda after the election.
2
The riots really brought out the worst in the French. (But did anybody expect anything less than the worst from these effete snobs?) As usual, the country's Left (and even some of the Right) refused to acknowledge that the thugs were thugs and that most were Muslim thugs. Funny thing is the Lefties are the same everywhere: it's never the thug's fault.
Posted by: blu at May 03, 2007 03:22 PM (NntAN)
3
[Royal got furious when he started talking about disabled children, saying he was "playing" with the issue.]
Ah, that reminds me of the 2000 presidential debates where Gore was saying that Bush was lying about wanting to spend all of the money on entitlements and shit. Kanye West is wrong: Bush really cares about black people.
Posted by: reagan80 at May 03, 2007 07:08 PM (gyiuI)
4
"Royal is a hottie, and she's a socialist"
Everything epitomized right there. Socialist bitch, keep yo' mouth shut! You/it's mouth, and you, have one purpose; and if you is spewing noise you ain't using it right!
Know your place!
Posted by: Radical Redneck at May 04, 2007 12:35 AM (hRcQE)
5
If you want me to make a transcript & translation of what's said on the video, A, I'll be happy to do so.
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Kim at May 04, 2007 04:49 AM (1PcL3)
6
Now that I've watched the vid, I can say that this isn't the moment where Royal has her meltdown. The announcer mentions, toward the end of the clip, that Sarko comes off as more precise in his suggested remedies and solutions than Royal does in hers.
At one point in this clip, Royal says, "You're joking!", but this isn't flying off the handle. I'm guessing, from the article you quoted, that her grand moment occurred further on.
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Kim at May 04, 2007 05:05 AM (1PcL3)
7
thanks for checking that Kevin. Most of the youtube clips seemed to show that one moment for some reason.
Posted by: annika at May 04, 2007 07:02 AM (WfR6S)
8
I'm pretty sure that clip is from a Swiss news channel, firstly because the guy doing the voiceover has a Swiss accent (he speaks in the slow, dopey way that French people mock), and secondly because, early on, he makes reference to the fact that "if 20 million French people watched it [the debate], a goodly proportion of 'romands' won't have missed it, either."
The French term "romands" is shorthand for "suisse-romands," i.e., French-speaking Swiss.
I checked around re: Royal's blowup... it doesn't appear to have been much more than a rash of finger-pointing, followed by Sarkozy's accusing Royal of having lost her temper, to which she replied that there are some things worth losing one's temper about, and that she would likely find reasons to be angry while in office, too (obviously, I'm not quoting this directly).
Final note: you called Royal "hot," but I think I'd call her "handsome" in the 1800s sense.
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Kim at May 04, 2007 07:19 AM (1PcL3)
9
She is way more than handsome. She's incredibly elegant, with a friendly face, beautiful hair, open and feminine eyes, and an extremely youthful appearance for a woman her age.
Any man with blood in his veins would find her attractive and want to get to know her better.
Possibly The Last Fash-ism Post Ever
So I better make it good, huh?
I predicted the return of the peep-toe, I celebrated the year of the wedge heel, and I got completely blindsided by this season's gingham revival.
Combine all three fabulous trends and this is what you get.
For the girls, here's my recommendation for that upcoming Memorial Day barbecue or pool party, where you know you'll need to make an impression because he might be there.
Combine these wedges with some tailored shorts and sleeveless point collared blouse? I think so! To avoid the inevitable Mary-Ann comparisons, stay with solid colors. Re fabrics, linen adds class and you'll feel as cool as you look holding that fruity drink. Let your outfit do the flirting for you. I know you'll thank me when it's over.
9
There are aspects of a woman's appearance that impress men: a good body, nice hair, stylish and matching clothes that show off her figure, nice skin, cute earrings, tasteful jewlery, tasteful makeup, lip gloss, sunglasses, etc. But shoes aren't one of them. Even those shoes, which are immediately pretty cool, would hardly get noticed. There is a market failure here; get nice shoes, but don't do it because *he* will be there. He won't notice, unless he's gay.
10
Roach,
All the attributes you mention are important although not all of them to all men. But to say an appreciation of womenÂ’s shoes and their feet is only the domain of gay men is untrue.
I think you are missing out on something. I guess you never placed your loverÂ’s feet arch to arch and had you way with them. HavenÂ’t you ever had a set of cute red nailed toes in you mouth?
Posted by: Strawman at May 04, 2007 02:14 PM (et8nf)
11
'Nam Warts, when you aren't sticking your own feet in there the only thing that has ever been in your mouth is man meat.
Roach is wrong though. Any sexual orientation can have a foot fetish. I know because I have seen it here before.
http://annika.mu.nu/archives/069532.html
Posted by: Spanky at May 04, 2007 03:27 PM (gyiuI)
12
Roach is wrong. I'm not gay--and, for that matter, I don't have a foot fetish. But a really cute shoe is still a really cute shoe.
Besides, a woman likes it when a guy notices the things that matter to her.
Posted by: zombyboy at May 05, 2007 08:30 PM (fJr0Z)
13
The best thing about espadrilles is you get all of the sexy with none of the slutty. And the gingham pattern immediately makes one think of either Mary Ann or a farmer's daughter. Great find, annika!
Posted by: Victor at May 08, 2007 07:19 AM (1oGDT)
14
thank you Victor! i ordered them, hopefully they'll arrive in time for graduation parties!
Posted by: annika at May 08, 2007 09:26 AM (CkZDt)
1
That reminds me of another story about an unemployed, angry white man.
Posted by: reagan80 at May 02, 2007 08:51 PM (gyiuI)
2
i love how that guy walked from Downtown LA to Santa Monica Pier in two hours. That would take like 3 days in real life. He must have been running on 24 time.
Posted by: annika at May 02, 2007 09:10 PM (WfR6S)
3
Indeed. What really made me toss out my suspension of disbelief was the part where he fired the L.A.W. rocket. The trajectory was unreal. It should have detonated 10 feet in front of him.
Posted by: reagan80 at May 02, 2007 10:18 PM (gyiuI)
4
Raygun Annie,
Yup, that was my big complaint with the movie as well. It's those Hollywood lefties who just can't get it through their commie heads that ordinance needs respect too!
Actually my favorite is when Mel the anti-Semite, and donÂ’t get me wrong, I think he can be a brilliant actor, takes a bunch of blankets into a bathtub next to Danny Glover, who is sitting on a rigged toilet seat, to create a blast matt. He then yanks Danny off the can, really fast, into the tub, before the c-4 blast (30K feet per second) can catch up to them. Could happen! That suspends way more belief than a too quick a trip to the Pier. But, whenever we refuse to allow a director his/her conceits it is we who have lost our way.
Posted by: Strawman at May 03, 2007 07:30 AM (et8nf)
5
Straw,
I think it must be slow fuses. If the bad guys ever figure that out, all the heroes will die horrible deaths as they try to hit the ground before the mines they are standing on can explode.
Don't tell anyone.
Actually my biggest complaint is these giant gasoline fire explosions.
Posted by: MarkD at May 03, 2007 01:51 PM (5vbH6)
6
"ordinance"
Commies don't respect gubmint decrees?! You are even further removed from reality than Annie thought!
Posted by: Radical Redneck at May 04, 2007 12:39 AM (hRcQE)
7
Red,
WTF are you trying to say? You are more garbled than usual.
Why don't you just continue to grunt and point at pictures, you are very good at that. Now this time try peeling the banana
Posted by: Strawman at May 04, 2007 07:32 AM (et8nf)
Romney's Book
Does Romney want to be president or not? Because naming Battlefield Earth as his favorite novel was probably not the best choice he could have made. It's not enough that he has that "Mormon problem," now he's got to add a "Scientology problem" to it.
1
He never had a chance to begin with. The only person on the planet who seriously thinks he can win is Professor Hewitt - the same guy who thought Harriet Miers was an excellent choice for a Supreme Court justice. (Don't get me wrong, I like Hugh but sometimes he's "just wrong.")
Posted by: blu at May 02, 2007 10:32 PM (NntAN)
2
Annika,
The article you linked had this quote:
“Mormonism sounds like a science fiction fantasy to some Americans,” Prothero said. “It seems one of the burdens of his campaign is to present an image of Mormonism that sounds more reasonable and less fantastic. This seems to be undercutting that effort.”
I'd love to see any article by Reuters, AP, or any other news service or paper that was willing to take a shot at Islam as easily as they will Christiantiy or its derivatives. (And, I gotta tell you, I think Mormonism is a cult, so it's not like I've got a lotta love for it.)
Don't hold your breath: CAIR has got everybody too damned scared.
1
Armada Republica Argentina
It was just recently ANZAC day too!
Posted by: Col Steve at May 02, 2007 08:50 AM (WffUy)
2
Hey, Annie, speaking of this sort of thing, did you receive that F4 reminiscence that I sent?
Posted by: Matt at May 02, 2007 10:13 AM (10G2T)
3
Annie,
great post, you still amaze me with your military knowledge! Most people don't realize the Falklands/Malvinas fight could have gone either way, I am amazed watching video of those Daggers and Scooters zipping around the Fleet inside the sound.
But the best ever story of the battle (which most have never heard of) is the one where an Argentinian AF C-130 flew out and they rolled a bomb out the back of the Herc and hit a Brit ship! The bomb didn't fuse but what balls is that!??
Cheers
Posted by: Otto at May 02, 2007 01:16 PM (czVLs)
4
Col Steve is correct as usual.
I did recieve that, Matt. Which was the inpiration for that recent F-4 post I did.
Thanks Otto. I never heard that story either.
Posted by: annika at May 02, 2007 06:04 PM (WfR6S)
5
Ah, sorry. I missed that one until just now.
I bet you're a Dogfights geek, aren't you? Best.Series.Ever.On.The.History.Channel.
Posted by: Matt at May 03, 2007 08:50 AM (10G2T)
6
Good article, but a couple of comments if I may:
a. Just as you later say, the Belgrano did not have Exocets. The escorting destroyers did.
b. The Belgrano was not hit at the stern - the first weapon hit midships and the second removed her bow
c. Final death toll was subsequently reduced from 368 to 323
Posted by: Narendra at May 04, 2007 11:50 AM (nVX8n)
Coolest Thing On The Internets Of The Day: The Met's Zoom Function
Here's something I hadn't seen before. It's a very cool zoom function at the Metropolitan Museum of Art's website. I linked to Poussin's The Abduction of the Sabine Women, because there's a lot going on in there. But you can find and zoom in on pretty much everything they have at the Met. It's my favorite museum.
Also, while we're on the subject of art, click on the extended entry if you're interested in a tour of the National Gallery's Jasper Johns exhibition. I thought it was interesting.
more...
1
Perhaps it's my parent's blue-collar DNA, but I just don't "get" modern art. I watched the John's video and just couldn't get over how fucking ugly it all is. And can somebody please explain to me how taking a bite out of a picture is art. I am sure that I'm missing something fundamental, but I can't imagine placing something on my wall that looks like it was created by a bunch of 1st graders throwing random paint colors on a canvass and then haphazardly smearing it.
Oh well, count me as one of those middle-class Philistines who prefers his art to be attractive.
Posted by: blu at May 01, 2007 11:16 PM (NntAN)
2
You are not alone Blu. I think its the most horrible crap, and really it is indicative of a certain type of mental and moral degradation. I suggest you read
Tom Wolfe's "The painted Word". it is a great dissection of modern art.
BTW, I never really understood how mass rape was always considered "heroic" when the ancient Romans did it.
Posted by: kyle N at May 02, 2007 01:47 AM (we5pa)
3
well it is an acquired taste.
others have done the "what is art" subject before, so i haven't done a full post on it. but basically i think one of the essential elements that make something art is difficulty. either in creation or in conception, it must be something that is difficult to do, or that most people would have a tough time duplicating. while this is not true of all art, i do think it is a good rule of thumb, because it draws a line between johns and serrano for instance.
look at johns or rauschenberg, and even though it looks simple, ask yourself if you could duplicate it.
Posted by: annika at May 02, 2007 07:57 AM (WfR6S)
1
IMHO, the Democratic Party isn't co-opted by the Communists. They are EXTREMELY capitalist. Just ask the Clintons. And Al Gore. And John Edwards. I don't think that THEY will lead the masses in burning down the mansions.
2
Sure they will OE, just not their mansions. You're incorrect on them being capitalists too. They're socialists... national socialists. They'll work with capitalists, but only to make a "better" world. You only have to worry if you're not their right kind of people.
Posted by: Casca at May 01, 2007 10:55 AM (Y7t14)
3
Just got around to finishing it. Fabulous, your best work ever!
Posted by: Casca at May 01, 2007 01:22 PM (Y7t14)
4
What a bunch of 12th. grade idiot horseshit. No wonder you love it Kasha. Ku coo ka chu you dolt. Suffice it to say that the small minds that see the dialectic of capitalism, National Socialism, and socialism, unionism through the same lens that 6MB see it ought to be taken out behind the stock exchange, where their true god resides and shot in their pea brains with constitutionally issued firearms. The only thing he forgot to mention was the oversleeping drunk checker player, on his knees asking god how this could have happened to him, two bunks down named George Bush.
I will dance around my maypole this evening and take stock of the enriched lives lived by 10's of millions of Americans due to the power of labor unions, and laugh at the drowsy assholes like Kasha and 6meatloaf who wouldn't know a better life if it was tickling their prostate.
Posted by: Strawman at May 01, 2007 03:31 PM (et8nf)
5
How long will it take Strawman to figure out who he really just insulted? Place your bets, folks!
He shall soon contract foot-in-mouth disease.
Posted by: reagan80 at May 01, 2007 03:45 PM (gyiuI)
6
I think "penis-in-ass" disease is far more likely, Ray.
Posted by: Spanky at May 01, 2007 03:47 PM (gyiuI)
Posted by: annika at May 01, 2007 05:41 PM (WfR6S)
8
And, don't forget I always say them with love in my heart.
Posted by: Strawman, MD at May 01, 2007 06:08 PM (et8nf)
9
LMAO, maybe it's the day, or following on the heals of Anni's hilarious piece at 6MB, but I allowed myself to indulge in the witless diatribe that is Strawman. Surely the jig is up? This is a characature of the left. Who's writing this? RR? El Mondo?
Unions, gotta love 'em. My brother is a member in good standing of the UAW. He's a funny fellow. One of the things he loves to say is, "We could make a Lexus. We choose not to." Of course the funny part is the truth in that statement. The old auto industry is dead. We're watching the death spasms now. The unions and bad management have killed them. The same thing is going on in our cities, where the city managers buy off the public employee unions with grotesquely funded pension plans, where a senior public servant actually loses money if he keeps working. How does a city like San Diego, or a business like the auto industry go bankrupt? Just so. Workers of the world unite!
BTW, my brother submitted his buyout papers last month, along with the President of his local. Guess who's staying on the job? LMAO, I'm glad I like those German cars.
Posted by: Casca at May 01, 2007 06:44 PM (2gORp)
10
Geez, Straw, stop being such a loquacious bore.
Posted by: blu at May 01, 2007 08:24 PM (NntAN)
11
I must confess: Twarn't me. Alas, I am but a 4 Meat Buffet, yet to ascend to the 5 Meatdom status.
But, I do wish I wrote it. Seems pretty dead-on to me.
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at May 02, 2007 06:44 AM (xHyDY)
12
Oh... if any f****r substitutes "inch" for "meat" in my previous comment: I will find a way to deliver an ass-kicking via FedEx, UPS, or local mafia, whoever gets there bestest for the cheapest.
My alter ego shalt not be mocked... and he ascended past 5 "meat"dom status many, many years ago (no prosthetic jokes, dammit!).
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at May 02, 2007 06:49 AM (xHyDY)
13
Not the 6MB thing you idiot. The obvious put-up job that is "Strawman".
Bought that pump eh?
Posted by: annika at May 02, 2007 07:34 AM (WfR6S)
15
Oh. Ooooohhhh. All of a sudden it makes sense now.
Naw... I don't think that's a put on. I've heard so much of that same stuff working for a universtiy, and those folks meant it. Should've seen the "lecture" I got once back when I was working electric/light techie for the campus opera house. Got a shot at a rock concert gig, 'cept I'd have to give up around a quarter of the pay for the union fees.
I wasn't in the damn union. We were students working for the university. My question prompting the lecture was "why do I have to pay the dues?".
20 minute lecture. My ending question was "Okay. So... why do I have to pay the goddamn dues? It's not the local giving me the job, it's the travelling show's management." (Actually, I found out later that it would've been the venue, not the band's management, but I didn't know that at the time).
Never got another invite to work a travelling show again.
Took a while to get over that. But anyway, since stagework wasn't my career choice, no long term harm was done. Still, though... I was steamed. I was supposed to pay dues to a Union I didn't belong to? WTF??
So, Unions... I readily concede their contributions to improving worker conditions and redefining worker/management relations, but let's not pretend everything's all shiny, happy, and unequivacably good about them. There're downsides to the upsides.
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at May 02, 2007 09:50 PM (J+r3D)
16
Anyway, Cas: Pump? What, weights on a string aren't good enough for some folks?
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at May 02, 2007 09:52 PM (J+r3D)
17
Mondo.
I agree, not all shinny and unequivicably good. But, IMHO, far more good has come as a result of unions than bad.
Posted by: Strawman at May 03, 2007 12:14 PM (et8nf)
fred thompson
C'mon... embrace the geekdom!
"Now, I have a Puerto Rican butler..."
... and for a brief moment, I had a quick visualization of Agador Spartacus. Luckily, I clicked the link.
