Merciful Flippin' Minerva.
Linus taps his base, Marco loses a stick, and Paul proves that he is the greatest guitarist in the world.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Kim Jong-IL: " I Give You Nukes, You Send Tailor"
(Pyongyang, North Korea)
During a televised speech delivered from the Presidential office today, North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-Il offered what many Western journalists and academics have heralded as a shocking "olive branch": the shutdown of Pyongyang's entire nuclear weapons program in exchange for what "Dear Leader" referred to as a designer of mens clothes "who not make me look like I work at Jiffy Lube or something."
The offer from the Supreme Leader includes a complete and unconditional transfer of all of North Korea's enriched uranium and nuclear technology to the United States, and grants international inspectors unmitigated access to all military and government facilities in North Korea. The sole stipulation is that the US or another Western nation must provide a tailor or fashion designer, who will presumably take up residence in Pyongyang and design clothes exclusively for Kim Jong-Il.
The North Korean dictator cited the unflattering and uniform nature of his wardrobe as the impetus for his decision. "You think big shot like me, able to snooker hick snakeoil salesman Bill Clinton into giving me nukes, might be able to find tailor worth a damn in nation of 24 million," he continued, growing increasingly irate as he spoke. "But no. It always same, same, same! Same baggy, gray jump suit, same big ass Harry Caray glasses!"
As if to emphasize this last point, the Supreme Leader tore off his eyeglasses and sent them sailing past the camera, whereupon they were heard to smash against what was presumed to be the opposite wall. There was brief pandemonium as aides scrambled to assist the North Korean leader, who stumbled and groped about blindly until an aide produced an a pair of glasses identical to those destroyed. Scarcely skipping a beat, Kim Jong Il resumed his tirade.
"I try. I ask nice to my tailors. I plead, I beg, come up something different. Throw in a splash color. Try earthtone. Give me flashy sport coat and necktie. Mock turtleneck. Cardigan. Anything. But no. Same crap, different day. Why I feed these people 500 whole calories a day if this best they come up with?"
The Supreme Leader concluded his speech by informing Western leaders that the offer was on the table for 48 hours. The reverberations in the West were pronounced and instantaneous.
"Are we just going to let this golden opportunity go to waste? We can trust him!" screamed Eleanor Clift, who watched Kim Jong-Il's statement in the green room of the McLaughlin Group with the rest of the cast. Pat Buchanan began to mount an objection, but was silenced when Clift pounced on him and ripped his throat out with her teeth.
Others remain skeptical. "Are you kidding?" Asked an incredulous Donna Karan from her New York office. "No way. I remember going through this nonsense with Gaddafi back in the early 90s. He calls me out of the blue, 'Donna, Donna, you gotta help me, I'm sick of looking like Richard Simmons in a sailor suit.' I design the entire 'Tyrant Playboy' line, waste months of my life that I'll never get back, and in the end he goes with Versace. Do you think I ever got paid for the demos? Do you?"
Still, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the news a "pleasant surprise" and announced that her office is keeping the lines of communication open with Pyongyang to see if a deal might be struck. While optimistic, the Secretary of State cautioned that there were still hurdles to be cleared.
"I am not certain we can come to an agreement within Kim Jong-Il's time frame," said Mrs. Clinton, indicating that it might take time to find a tailor or designer who would be both willing and able to undertake the assignment.
"I had originally hoped that Isaac Mizrahi would be willing to take the job, but his only response to my office was "Eeeeewwwwwwwww!"
During a televised speech delivered from the Presidential office today, North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-Il offered what many Western journalists and academics have heralded as a shocking "olive branch": the shutdown of Pyongyang's entire nuclear weapons program in exchange for what "Dear Leader" referred to as a designer of mens clothes "who not make me look like I work at Jiffy Lube or something."
The offer from the Supreme Leader includes a complete and unconditional transfer of all of North Korea's enriched uranium and nuclear technology to the United States, and grants international inspectors unmitigated access to all military and government facilities in North Korea. The sole stipulation is that the US or another Western nation must provide a tailor or fashion designer, who will presumably take up residence in Pyongyang and design clothes exclusively for Kim Jong-Il.
The North Korean dictator cited the unflattering and uniform nature of his wardrobe as the impetus for his decision. "You think big shot like me, able to snooker hick snakeoil salesman Bill Clinton into giving me nukes, might be able to find tailor worth a damn in nation of 24 million," he continued, growing increasingly irate as he spoke. "But no. It always same, same, same! Same baggy, gray jump suit, same big ass Harry Caray glasses!"
As if to emphasize this last point, the Supreme Leader tore off his eyeglasses and sent them sailing past the camera, whereupon they were heard to smash against what was presumed to be the opposite wall. There was brief pandemonium as aides scrambled to assist the North Korean leader, who stumbled and groped about blindly until an aide produced an a pair of glasses identical to those destroyed. Scarcely skipping a beat, Kim Jong Il resumed his tirade.
"I try. I ask nice to my tailors. I plead, I beg, come up something different. Throw in a splash color. Try earthtone. Give me flashy sport coat and necktie. Mock turtleneck. Cardigan. Anything. But no. Same crap, different day. Why I feed these people 500 whole calories a day if this best they come up with?"
The Supreme Leader concluded his speech by informing Western leaders that the offer was on the table for 48 hours. The reverberations in the West were pronounced and instantaneous.
"Are we just going to let this golden opportunity go to waste? We can trust him!" screamed Eleanor Clift, who watched Kim Jong-Il's statement in the green room of the McLaughlin Group with the rest of the cast. Pat Buchanan began to mount an objection, but was silenced when Clift pounced on him and ripped his throat out with her teeth.
Others remain skeptical. "Are you kidding?" Asked an incredulous Donna Karan from her New York office. "No way. I remember going through this nonsense with Gaddafi back in the early 90s. He calls me out of the blue, 'Donna, Donna, you gotta help me, I'm sick of looking like Richard Simmons in a sailor suit.' I design the entire 'Tyrant Playboy' line, waste months of my life that I'll never get back, and in the end he goes with Versace. Do you think I ever got paid for the demos? Do you?"
Still, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the news a "pleasant surprise" and announced that her office is keeping the lines of communication open with Pyongyang to see if a deal might be struck. While optimistic, the Secretary of State cautioned that there were still hurdles to be cleared.
"I am not certain we can come to an agreement within Kim Jong-Il's time frame," said Mrs. Clinton, indicating that it might take time to find a tailor or designer who would be both willing and able to undertake the assignment.
"I had originally hoped that Isaac Mizrahi would be willing to take the job, but his only response to my office was "Eeeeewwwwwwwww!"
Monday, February 15, 2010
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Is Imbecile Just a Euphemism for Olbermann?
Via Hotair.
How long are left wing crazies like Olbermann going to be allowed to continue to rehash the canard that the civil rights legislation of the LBJ years prompted a "white supremacist flight" to the welcoming arms of the southern (ie, racist) GOP?
In 1964, the Civil Rights Act passed by a significant majority in both chambers of Congress. To hear Olby tell the tale, this must have been due to the valiant, tireless efforts of those stalwart defenders of liberty, namely, the Democrats to defeat those vicious, craven, racist Republicans--who, don't you know, actually wore their white sheets to Capital Hill in those days.
Sounds reasonable enough. I mean, something made all those Dixie hicks switch parties.
But the trouble for Olbermann's premise is that someone forgot to burn the vote tallies after the law was enacted. From Wikipedia:
Vote totals
Totals are in "Yea-Nay" format:
The original House version: 290-130 (69%-31%)
Cloture in the Senate: 71-29 (71%-29%)
The Senate version: 73-27 (73%-27%)
The Senate version, as voted on by the House: 289-126 (70%-30%)
By party
The original House version:
Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
Cloture in the Senate:
Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%-34%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version:
Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:
Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)
By party and region
Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.
The original House version:
Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)
Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)
Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)
The Senate version:
Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5%-95%) (only Senator Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%) (this was Senator John Tower of Texas)
Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%) (only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the measure)
Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%) (Senators Barry Goldwater of Arizona, Bourke Hickenlooper of Iowa, Edwin L. Mechem of New Mexico, Milward L. Simpson of Wyoming, and Norris H. Cotton of New Hampshire opposed the measure
Now, these numbers don't show that all Republicans supported the bill, nor that all Democrats opposed it. In fact, what they show is that northerners tended to support it, and southerners opposed it. Much of that southern opposition, across party lines, was owing to racism (in the case of Bobby Byrd this was undoubtedly the case; however, there were a few oddballs like Goldwater--generally a civil rights champion, and who later regretted casting "nay"--who opposed it on ideological reasons other than racism).
But what is undeniable is that this bill was supported by the vast majority of Republicans. In any vote taken in either chamber, GOP support was never lower than 80% of the total party vote. In fact, if the Republicans were the racist caricatures that Olbermann portrays, they could have killed the bill in the House from the outset. Now, Southern Republicans to a man voted nay. But might the fact that the GOP was a virtual non-entity in the south at that point somewhat elucidate which party in total more embodied the views and interests of the South in 1964? And since the vast majority of Republicans supported this legislation, might that not tell us something about how popular or "mainstream" southern racist Republicans were within their own party?
It just doesn't follow that hordes of southern voters, furious over the outcome of these proceedings, would eschew the party that in large measure voted exactly the way that the voters wanted them to; nor does it make sense that the disenchanted would then hie their little hate-filled fannies into the party that, a) supported the bill by a greater internal percentage than the Democrats, and b) would likely continue to support, at least at the national level, candidates who would embrace the equal rights platform. Maybe I'm completely wrong, and a total of eight Southern Democrats (in both chambers combined) voting in favor of the bill was enough to drive southern voters temporarily insane.
Or maybe, just some of them, just a handful, switched because they were disgusted with the hatred and meanness of Southern Democrats like Bull Connor, Bobby Byrd, and yes, Strom Thurmond, and had had enough.
Who knows. All I can say for certain is that Olbermann's premise makes utterly no sense. Man, who knew THAT could happen?
UPDATE:
I suppose it would have been asking too much to expect Stewart to avoid at least one shameless dig at a conservative (namely the Maha-Rushie), but it's worth it to watch Stewart utterly destroy Olby:
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-january-21-2010/special-comment---keith-olbermann-s-name-calling'>Special Comment - Keith Olbermann's Name-Calling | ||||
| ||||
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Monday, January 11, 2010
The Lesson Learned Here...
Is never trust a liberal again. [Content warning on the right sidebar] Of course the western world has had plenty of previous opportunities to learn this lesson, but has instead chosen on countless occasions to repeat history.
How long do you suppose it will take before the self same lib environmentalists behind AGW attempt to take the helm of the Good Ship Global Cooling? I give it less than six months. When the press is referring to those in the global cooling camp as "some of the world’s most eminent climate scientists," the jig is pretty much up.
To say nothing of these little bits of trivia, which are apparently no longer on the media's "suppress list":
--Gee, might that explain why libs were flipping out about global cooling a few decades back?
Uh oh. The Daily Mail is treating one of these kooky deniers as a legitimate scientist and allowing him to challenge the conventional wisdom. Better knock that off or the boys at the CRU may cancel their subscriptions.
And the doozy, not because it's anything new but because it's actually in print:
This article is a prime example of the way that AGW is going to die the death of a thousand cuts. No one is going to run a story attacking the CRU or Darwin scientists outright; rather the press is just going to stop ignoring the climatologists and other scientists who haven't drunk the kool-aid. Global Warming will take its rightful place on the shelf along with previous muchadoaboutnothings like Y2K and the Bird Flu pandemic, and will be quickly forgotten.
Then, in 20 years or so, when nobody remembers any of this crap and the next MDO prompts a warming trend, we'll get to experience the fun and games all over again. Be prepared to talk your kids and grandkids down off the ledge.
How long do you suppose it will take before the self same lib environmentalists behind AGW attempt to take the helm of the Good Ship Global Cooling? I give it less than six months. When the press is referring to those in the global cooling camp as "some of the world’s most eminent climate scientists," the jig is pretty much up.
To say nothing of these little bits of trivia, which are apparently no longer on the media's "suppress list":
winters like this one will become much more likely. Summers will also probably be cooler, and all this may well last two decades or longer.
Prof Anastasios Tsonis, head of the University of Wisconsin Atmospheric Sciences Group, has recently shown that these [Multi-Decadal Oscillations in weather patterns] move together in a synchronised way across the globe, abruptly flipping the world’s climate from a ‘warm mode’ to a ‘cold mode’ and back again in 20 to 30-year cycles
--Gee, might that explain why libs were flipping out about global cooling a few decades back?
‘I do not believe in catastrophe theories [said Professor Tsongis]. Man-made warming is balanced by the natural cycles, and I do not trust the computer models which state that if CO2 reaches a particular level then temperatures and sea levels will rise by a given amount.
'These models cannot be trusted to predict the weather for a week, yet they are running them to give readings for 100 years.’
Uh oh. The Daily Mail is treating one of these kooky deniers as a legitimate scientist and allowing him to challenge the conventional wisdom. Better knock that off or the boys at the CRU may cancel their subscriptions.
And the doozy, not because it's anything new but because it's actually in print:
According to the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado, Arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26 per cent, since 2007 – and even the most committed global warming activists do not dispute this.
This article is a prime example of the way that AGW is going to die the death of a thousand cuts. No one is going to run a story attacking the CRU or Darwin scientists outright; rather the press is just going to stop ignoring the climatologists and other scientists who haven't drunk the kool-aid. Global Warming will take its rightful place on the shelf along with previous muchadoaboutnothings like Y2K and the Bird Flu pandemic, and will be quickly forgotten.
Then, in 20 years or so, when nobody remembers any of this crap and the next MDO prompts a warming trend, we'll get to experience the fun and games all over again. Be prepared to talk your kids and grandkids down off the ledge.
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Stuff you can't make up.
Oh, you know I didn't mean it, you clean, articulate guy, you.L-M-Patootie-O
Wasn't this this the guy who was just accusing Republicans of being akin to slavery apologists and segregationists for opposing Obamacare?
Oh, how sweet it is.
Of course, the democrats can't allow this to derail any aspect of their agenda, be it Obamacare, cap'n tax or anything else. Which is why the hypocrisy of the Congressional Black Caucus will be on full display through their "odd" silence on this one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
