down with the establishment!

greg gutfeld explains how to rebel:

How do you come out of the closet, as a rightie, without ruining your life?

The animus directed at one who leaves the fold explains the value of the journey out. Its struggle dictates the meaning. The slings and arrows one experiences means, quite simply, that you are onto something. For the anger toward your move is a sweaty reaction to courage that others (like the attackers) lack.

There is nothing more rebellious, truly, than turning right. There is nothing more daring than standing alone, facing the onslaught of a smirking media, and saying, "Here I am, I am not you." There is nothing edgier than saying to the edgy, "You lie. You are as edgy as a frisbee."

The colonial rebels were resisting the same thing. They didn't want to be overtaxed, controlled from afar, or have all aspects of their lives regulated. They were TRUE rebels, not fake Sean Penn champagne rebels. That's what the country was founded on, and that's what we're in danger of losing.

recursing

obamacare is train wrecks all the way down

update: imao has better metaphors

• It’s the Hindenburg crashing into the Titanic.
• It’s a nuclear bomb that only wipes out hospitals and your savings.
• It’s a train crashing head on into another train and they’re on a bridge and all the train cars rain down onto an orphanage below.
• It’ll be like you’re trapped in a burning building, but instead of “Break Glass in Case of Fire” to get to the extinguisher it’s “Open Clamshell Packaging in Case of Fire.”
• It’s Gilbert Gottfried loudly narrating your life wherever you go.
• It’s New Coke, except it’s mandatory to drink and trying to obtain Classic Coke will get you arrested.
• It’s Miley Cyrus.

war is peace

ignorance is knowledge

based on an actual blog post

an adaptation of someone else's hopefully-fictitious story:

"When I was growing up, I kept getting into fights.

In third grade I fought a boy named Jerry, and he knocked out three of my teeth and broke my wrist.

In fifth grade Tim picked a fight with me. He threw me against some concrete steps and knocked me out; I woke up in the hospital four days later.

In eight grade I picked a fight with Ricky, and ended up with a couple of broken ribs.

In tenth grade I pushed Sam down a flight of stairs. He got up, pulled a knife, and chased me down. I needed eighteen stitches on my forearm and six down my right side.

After that, I decided that I'd rather be a lover than a fighter.

..

..

..

And that hasn't worked out too well either."

isms, in my opinion...

lileks slams the idiocy of modernism:

"(youth culture is) yammering infantile babblings that shoved all the marginalia into the center of our field of vision and demanded that we pretend it mattered just as much as the serious concerns of previous eras.

But modernism was youth culture. It had the same old predictable motivation: down with Daddy.

Every era rebels against the precepts of the previous iteration, but after the Romantics it was no longer a matter of stylistic variations. Heart over head. The inauthenticity of artifice, as if artifice isn’t an essential quality of creation. Movements like this begin well, handled by the capable hands of people who have skill and understand form, but the torch is always grabbed by those who are attracted to destruction more than creation. The French and Russian revolutions began with the convening of popular assemblies, but there are always those guys in the back, chewing their nails, one leg jackhammering up and down, waiting for the moment to use the tools of reason to level the old bad world and build utopia. They are consumed with the notion of sin, but it’s sundered from the old conceptions. No longer a matter of the individual and God. There is no true individual, only masses, There is no God; there is the state. The slate must be cleared. The fresh slates must be reserved for those who write what is helpful. The chalkmakers must be purged lest anyone outside the circle write something contrary.

The primary urge of the revolutionary and the modernist and the adolescent: impatience."

this one's a must-read-it-all piece.

not rhetorical

if progressives were really progressive, shouldn't they want to progress past their failed century-old dogma?

just like aaron alexis

take your own advice, president hussein:



"I
think
all
of
us
have
to
do
some
soul
searching
to
figure
out
how
does
something
like
this
happen."

voyager has left the solar system again

dustbury went on one tangent from that statement, and i went on another in the comments - where i used the term "google-fu" for the first, and hopefully only, time ever.

hussein's on first

truly you have a dizzying intellect!

gore's on second...

(extra credit: list every pop culture reference in this post and both linked posts.)

screen caps twofer

out of sheer boredom curiosity i surfed around a few sites that i don't frequently frequent, and found a couple of funny juxtapositions:


fron drudge:


from usa today:

the syria stimulus package

it's funny because it's true-ish!

nothing shocking

update & bump 2: a picture in celebration of tonight's weinerspitzer defeat... (aftermath via imao).

update & bump 1: the looking spoon wants to make tv even trashier.

frank j at pjm:

We especially shouldn’t be surprised by behavior like Filner’s and Weiner’s from Democrats; when you have creepy old guys so excited to make sure young women have cheap access to contraception and abortion, you kinda get the impression they have other intentions for these women than just “respecting” them.

read it all.

for science! (tm)

i don't think this is what adam savage has in mind...

A: less than zero

Q: what has obama done right?

update & bump: there is no win possible in syria:

I think only a tiny number of Americans have actually thoughtfully considered the chain of events unleashed when engaging in a tactical attack on civilian infrastructure in foreign countries . . . .^[1]

To put this in perspective, consider this great pretend Obama quote devised by The New Yorker's Andy Borowitz:

Let me be clear. Our goal will not be to effect régime change, or alter the balance of power in Syria, or bring the civil war there to an end. We will simply do something random there for one or two days and then leave.

H/t: James Taranto. The responsibility to protect "doctrine" of very, very recent vintage, let it be said, did not extend to our own people in Benghazi but it now applies to strangers caught up, innocently or otherwise, in a civil war between parties who despise us with equal passion. Apparently, the United States haven't learned their lesson about involving themselves in the Muslim world whose politics and religious savagery defy comprehension. Even when the national budget is succinctly defined by the word "hemorrhage," the insane desire for mindless foreign military involvement is as ever-present in the White House as Reggie Love.

The supposed responsibility to protect raises the question, "Protect against whom?" "President Assad!" is the immediate Obama/Kerry answer with the U.S. intelligence community said to be four-square behind them. However, apart from the facts that:

• chemical weapons are indiscriminate weapons that depend on favorable (and accurately perceived) meteorological conditions,
• there was no tactical or strategic advantage to Assad to have used them given that he appears far from defeated, and
• it's probably unwise, on balance, to taunt even an unstable, inexperienced American president (even if protected by a lap-dog national press establishment),

there are reports that the chemical agents were supplied by the the Saudi intelligence chief and/or some "Saudi militant" and mishandled by the "rebels" and that it was the "rebels" who initially denied United Nations inspectors access to the supposed attack site (H/t: New Zeal Blog) not Assad.

....and read these two follow-ups.