Aug
1
1
If You Go Down To The Woods Today . . .
ABOVE: Tim Daniels
Shorter Tim Daniels, The Daily Little Tucker
Hypothetical Reasoning
- Here’s the best reason for permitting concealed carry: bear attacks.
‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™
Slocum said,
August 1, 2010 at 21:57
What a shitty tie. Is that a picture from a high school dance?
Cerberus said,
August 1, 2010 at 22:01
Gay Panic Defense? ;)
Major Kong said,
August 1, 2010 at 22:05
If you’re going to carry a concealed handgun for protection from Grizzlies, be sure to file the front sight off.
That way it won’t hurt as bad when the bear takes it from you and sticks it you-know-where.
Any handgun small enough to carry concealed is most likely just going to piss off a Grizzly.
noen said,
August 1, 2010 at 22:14
“Any handgun small enough to carry concealed is most likely just going to piss off a Grizzly.”
I got out of the boat. He mentions that:
His reply?
I’m a little unclear on his reasoning there.
Major Kong said,
August 1, 2010 at 22:18
There are people who have killed Grizzlies with handguns, but they were very large, powerful rounds like a .460 Ruger or .454 Casull.
These things make the “Dirty Harry” .44 Magnum look like popgun and are not the sort of thing you can conceal.
They’re also not something the average person can shoot comfortably without a lot of practice.
J— said,
August 1, 2010 at 22:22
Here’s the best reason for permitting concealed carry: bear attacks.
What, no pumas?
Angry Geometer said,
August 1, 2010 at 22:24
I think his reasoning is that the outcome could’ve been way worse! One of the injured campers could’ve been killed by a stray bullet instead.
vacuumslayer said,
August 1, 2010 at 22:31
If people would just STEP AWAY from the pic-a-nic baskets, we wouldn’t have this kind of trouble.
Smut Clyde said,
August 1, 2010 at 22:33
No “right to bear arms” jokes?
Xecklothxayyquou Gilchrist said,
August 1, 2010 at 22:34
I’m a little unclear on his reasoning there.
It’s just a clumsy attempt to shoehorn an unusual situation into the “if everyone were armed this wouldn’t have happened” cliché.
BMACCNM said,
August 1, 2010 at 22:36
I know this is anecdote, not data, but my kid and I spent an amazing week in a bear camp on privately owned land inside Katmai National Park- I’ve been 15 feet away from a mother Kodiak and her cubs. The weathered Alaska born and raised bear guide didn’t carry any form of weapon because, as he said, “I’m not good enough with a rifle to bring down a 1200 pound animal with one shot, and you only get one shot” Everybody in the camp carried highway flares, and I saw them used once. There’s that element of “Me human, have fire” that the bears don’t habituate to, and it allowed us to back off to a safe distance.
I’m shocked that a knee jerk pro-2nd amendment at any cost responder doesn’t know what he’s talking about
Hann1bal said,
August 1, 2010 at 22:37
Revised Shorter Tim Daniels: Anecdote is TOO the singular of data, you dumb libs!
Alex Shrub said,
August 1, 2010 at 22:48
Well hell, son, I’m all for the right to bear arms, the right to arm bears, and all points in-between but if you ever want to be taken seriously you got to do something about that haircut, that ill-fitting shirt, and that tie you bought off the clearance rack at Wal Mart.
Willy said,
August 1, 2010 at 22:51
People got killed where they were allowed to have guns. It’s all the libs’ fault those killed weren’t packing heat. Letting people have guns is not enough.
Oblio's Cap said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:00
If people would just STEP AWAY from the pic-a-nic baskets, we wouldn’t have this kind of trouble.
Yeah! What is that grizzly had been smarter than the average bear? Even Ranger Smith would have trouble dropping that honker.
Dr. Archetype said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:01
I got out of the boat, but the water was really shallow and bears had eaten all the mangoes.
Smut Clyde said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:03
the cherry-picked Chief of National Park Services
Not wanting to be led astray by the expertise of the single most knowledgeable person, I revved up the cherry-picker and went Googling.
In one study by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
According to BYU bear biologist Thomas S. Smith,
Because these are all cherry-picked experts, Daniels probably has a much longer list of studies that show the opposite.
stryx said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:11
Montana sez meh:
I wonder if there’s a bridge near the point….
Paul T. Lazaro said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:13
I think we should all be permitted to have our own highly trained “Anti Bear Bears” that would fend off attacks from wild, ungood, bears. Plus if we don’t get to have our own bears, then only criminals will have bears.
Smut Clyde said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:14
the water was really shallow and bears had eaten all the mangoes.
Let the record show that ITTDGYA was more likely to blame.
paramedicx said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:17
best way not to get attacked by a bear is to not bother Steve C. when he’s eating. BONO!
mmy said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:24
My God, people! Haven’t you been paying attention to your Colbert?! Bears are godless killing machines and MUST BE STOPPED!
Wait, you can stop them with pepper spray? Okay, never mind.
DrDick said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:32
Oh dear sweet spreadable jeebus on a matzoh. I live in western Montana, which has the largest grizzly population in the lower 48, and spend a lot of time in the back country. The smallest handgun you want to carry for protection against a grizzly is a .41 magnum and you ain’t carrying that puppy concealed. Also, by the time you draw a concealed weapon, you are already the bear’s lunch. Personally, I take bear spray when I hike in bear country since it is just as effective, weighs less and is less likely to attract other bears. Seems that grizzlies have learned to associate gunfire with hunting season and the possibility of a free meal, so are attracted to the sound of gunshots.
Captain Industry said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:33
After receiving a bullet to the face, at least we can once and forever confirm that Bear is, in fact, not driving.
DrDick said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:35
What, no pumas?
Pumas are too sneaky and come up behind you without warnig. No fair at all.
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:44
Let the record show that ITTDGYA was more likely to blame.
OMG!
I’d totally forgotten. ALL MY FAULT, peoples!
atoning.
btoning.
~
Jennifer said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:47
Photoshop improvement suggestion: remove the grizzly and add Pedobear.
And also, few people know this, but it’s rich in irony: the bear who killed and ate “Grizzly Man” is the one he had named “Jeffrey Dahmer.”
Ok, not really.
tigris said,
August 1, 2010 at 23:55
Liberals love to go down the subjunctive mood route and justify positions within theoretical conditions. But those theoretical positions always fit the progressive mold and worldview.
Wait, he asserts this tu quoque preemptively so he can make up some stupid hypothetical ignoring all the facts of the case and any data whatsoever?
And why would you need to concealed-carry? If bears are smart enough to steer clear unless you conceal, wouldn’t you WANT to display it? Of course, it was the middle of the night when the attack occurred, so his little hypothetical is even stupider.
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
August 2, 2010 at 0:06
Purrhaps he meant con-sealed carry, tigris.
Coitanly the bears would be more aggressive if convicts were attempting to transport seals across staid lions.
~
Another Kiwi said,
August 2, 2010 at 0:09
Since Glenn Beck has stolen teh crazy high ground, a lotta people gotta start way higher up the scale than they used to have to.
What they are having wet dreams about is, a perfectly aimed and pinpoint accurate fusillade from concealed carry weapons bringing down the 9/11 jets.
Kootznoowoo said,
August 2, 2010 at 0:09
Go read No Room for Bears by Frank Dufresne.
Especially if you imagine that carrying some sort of gun will protect you.
Smut Clyde said,
August 2, 2010 at 0:19
Liberals love to go down the subjunctive mood route
It’s a bit longer but it doesn’t actually take any more time, and the scenery is better.
Xecklothxayyquou Gilchrist said,
August 2, 2010 at 0:23
Liberals love to go down
Wait, who’s shoving what down whose throat again?
Hysterical Woman said,
August 2, 2010 at 0:29
You know, I don’t really care much about anti-gun control people anymore (gun control being a symptom-based solution to crime anyway), but the people who say everyone should be armed annoy me. I don’t want to carry a gun! If a crazed gunman comes by I’d still be screwed, possibly even more screwed than if I just kept my head down. You can keep your polite society, my purse is full.
Bitter Scribe said,
August 2, 2010 at 0:58
It’s the right to bear arms, not the right to arm bears, dammit!
Esteev said,
August 2, 2010 at 1:15
It’s the right to bear arms, not the right to arm bears, dammit!
I think you just figured out the path to victory in Afghanistan.
77south said,
August 2, 2010 at 1:20
I cannot imagine how that scenario was supposed to turn out better if the bears were armed. The wingnut mind will forever remain opaque to me.
tigris said,
August 2, 2010 at 1:26
Where do bears even have where they can conceal a gun? Under the Smokey hat?
Jennifer said,
August 2, 2010 at 1:36
BTW, business update: our catalog was printed last week and debuted yesterday at the summer PTA leadership meeting to great acclaim. I was really nervous about some items being priced higher than most school fundraising items (we have boneless hams for $75 which includes tax & direct shipping) but one of the first people who picked up the catalog raved about how great the pricing on the hams is. Anyway, my business partner was really upset to learn about a few schools who already have contracts with other companies, and one in particular who invited 3 other companies to make a pitch in June but not us. But there’s enough out there that isn’t sewed up yet that we can still have a great year, and like I told her, up until February no one had ever HEARD of us, and up until now we’ve just been a couple of people going around telling people that we’re GOING to have this fundraising catalog. Now that we have it, we can probably shake loose even some of the schools that already made contracts with other companies – those contracts aren’t binding until they get the fundraiser started. So I’m still feeling really good about our prospects for fall.
Lesley said,
August 2, 2010 at 1:37
Everywhere I look I see bears. Bears at the mall. Bears going to church. Bears at Starbucks. Bears at the grocery store. Bears window-shopping. Bears in bars. Bears stealing parking spots. Bears at the gun store!
g said,
August 2, 2010 at 1:45
Shoot Grizzlies! What does he have against Sarah Palin, the best-known
American Mama Grizzly?
Big Bad Bald Bastard said,
August 2, 2010 at 1:48
I cannot imagine how that scenario was supposed to turn out better if the bears were armed.
Well, getting shot by a bear would be a quicker, cleaner death than a mauling.
The Bear said,
August 2, 2010 at 1:51
You don’t really come here for the hunting, now do ya.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 1:58
After receiving a bullet to the face, at least we can once and forever confirm that Bear is, in fact, not driving.
How can that be?!
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 2:00
A few months ago, a deer bounded out in front of my car and I almost hit it. I think we should have concealed carry so I could shoot out my window at the deer the next time that happens. It’ll be like Ronin or some shit, but with deers.
zombie rotten mcdonald said,
August 2, 2010 at 2:01
Jennifer rocks, and getting out of the construction industry will doubtless be a good move.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 2:03
Yeah, Jennifer is totally kicking ass!
(BTW, we do have concealed carry here. It is Missourah, after all. I just like to pretend we don’t).
justme said,
August 2, 2010 at 2:04
I don’t think that twunt ever made it to a high school dance.
There’s reasoning there?
I’m gobstopped at the idiocy and mendaciousness of the whole thing. I mean, he’s whining that the dfhs made it so these poor folks were all bear eaten because if they could have had guns they would have been fine even though the new law says you can have a gun and they were in a National Forest anyway not a National Park so they could have had guns anyway but the hippies always always just use made up hypotheticals so here’s a completely made up hypothetical and SHUT UP THAT’S WHY!
Whew. Damn.
And from the comments, his reply contains this gem,
Because clearly, there’s a 51+% tax bracket, and he’s in it.
That’s some fine logisticatin’, Lou.
M. Bouffant said,
August 2, 2010 at 2:10
We can only hope the Daily Cruller is last-legging it. I noticed last wk. that gun, hunting & fishing items were suddenly popping up there. May mean that Bow-Tie Daddy realizes he’s reached every urbanite & suburbanite he’s going to get, & has to expand his reach to the would-be Neanderthals who think animal murder makes them Randian supermen. Or at least will make their willies grow.
Big Bad Bald Bastard said,
August 2, 2010 at 2:14
May mean that Bow-Tie Daddy realizes he’s reached every urbanite & suburbanite he’s going to get, & has to expand his reach to the would-be Neanderthals who think animal murder makes them Randian supermen.
Of course, these are just the sort of individuals who’d love to smash a bow-tie wearing trust fund snotnose with a 2X4. Good luck, er, Tucker, ya fucker.
Jennifer said,
August 2, 2010 at 2:15
thanks, zrm & T&U.
At some point in the next 2 – 3 months, we’ll have our online store up and running – we’re labelling every product that goes out with the web address so people can re-order with a percentage going to the school of their choice. Then you’ll get sick of me pimping products. Though…they really ARE quite nice.
wiley said,
August 2, 2010 at 2:20
It’s not enough that they have the right to carry guns in national parks, everyone has to agree that it’s a great idea and not think that people might be more threatened by people carrying guns than by bears.
M. Bouffant said,
August 2, 2010 at 2:27
Concealed carry is for effete weaklings. What good is hiding your weapon? How can we guarantee a “polite” society if someone is willing to take a chance you aren’t packing & actually dares to keep their place in line when you want it?
Strap that hog-leg on your manly thigh, as close to the banana wrapped in aluminum foil that you stuff down your pants daily, so the ladeez will “know” you are ready, & so the less “polite” will get out of your way!
Captain Industry said,
August 2, 2010 at 2:43
Also, how can we dare impugn the grizzly when he so proudly defended the great American tradition of stuffing one’s face with processed pig anus?
The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge said,
August 2, 2010 at 2:49
What is the wingnut obsession with concealed carry all about? Do they know deep inside that they could never get the drop on someone unless they take them by surprise?
Is there some deeper psychological mechanism going on that I can’t begin to understand? Like how the Israelis refuse to acknowledge the existence of their nuclear weapons, which are supposed to be a deterrent? What kind of a deterrent do you deny the existence of?
There’s something going on in these people’s heads that I will never be able to grasp.
Anonymous said,
August 2, 2010 at 3:01
In modern English, the subjunctive mood still exists but is regarded in many contexts as optional. Use of the subjunctive tends to convey a more formal tone, but there are few people who would regard its absence as actually wrong. Today, it survives mostly in fixed expressions, as in : be that as it may;: far be it from me;: as it were ;: lest we forget ;: God help you;: perish the thought; and : come what may.
I prefer the indicative mood myself, be that as it may.
justme said,
August 2, 2010 at 3:03
One might wonder what the relevant statistics were, re: shooting deaths vs. bears eating peoples faces, in the Yellowstone area.
Or anywhere, really.
No, wait. Let me guess.
justme said,
August 2, 2010 at 3:05
flxxorr3d
tigris said,
August 2, 2010 at 3:19
One might wonder what the relevant statistics were, re: shooting deaths vs. bears eating peoples faces, in the Yellowstone area.
Oh you liberals and your hypothetical subjunctivity. The bear didn’t just eat faces, she also gnawed a leg and an arm.
One article I read said about the lady who got her arm chewed on “[t]he bear spray she had with her at all times was out of reach in her tent.” I guess people sleep with their guns closer, though, so wingnut hypothetical = saved!
Andrew Blartblart said,
August 2, 2010 at 3:20
Video proof of ACORN and New Black Panthers voter intimidation tactics. Very interesting. What say you now libtards.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1omB8WKPmus
Smut Clyde said,
August 2, 2010 at 3:39
the subjunctive mood still exists but is regarded in many contexts as optional.
Were I a pedant I would argue with that.
owlbear1 said,
August 2, 2010 at 3:49
That’s right, Timmy! Concealed guns completely terrify bears.
So do pork chops and applesauce…
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
August 2, 2010 at 3:52
Captain Industry said,
August 2, 2010 at 2:43
Also, how can we dare impugn the grizzly when he so proudly defended the great American tradition of stuffing one’s face with processed pig anus?
That video made me proud to be a human bean, I can tell you that much.
~
Forest Ranger Bob said,
August 2, 2010 at 3:53
Oops, looks like we’re going to need a new Timmy.
Esteev said,
August 2, 2010 at 4:00
You know, the Daily Caller has some really biting commentary.
Anonymous said,
August 2, 2010 at 4:01
Maybe the bear was really Sarah Palin?
wiley said,
August 2, 2010 at 4:03
“Is there some deeper psychological mechanism going on that I can’t begin to understand”, Reverend? If you have a concealed weapon, you are busy protecting your family from bears, homicidal maniacs, and what-not. The actual odds of being attacked by bears, homicidal maniacs, and what-nots matters not. Whether you are actually being vigilant and taking other precautions matters not either. What matters is that you have a gun. By that logic alone, it is YOU- 1 and BEARS-0. You win. You have a gun. The bear doesn’t.
Guest said,
August 2, 2010 at 4:11
His reasoning is BS. The correct argument goes:
“Concealed carry permits should be legal everywhere in the US because guns.”
Esteev said,
August 2, 2010 at 4:18
What say you now libtards.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lCBPaNE12w
blowback said,
August 2, 2010 at 4:22
Some mates going for a hiking trip in Yellowstone NP.
stryx said,
August 2, 2010 at 4:27
One might wonder what the relevant statistics were, re: shooting deaths vs. bears eating peoples faces, in the Yellowstone area.
Bears stealing your face right off of your head:
2010
29009
justme said,
August 2, 2010 at 4:27
I’m just wondering how you carry a bear in the first place, much less conceal one.
M. Bouffant said,
August 2, 2010 at 4:31
Oh, shit, didn’t know that doofus was “Left Coast
RebelDefender of The Status Quo & Quisling To The Establishment.” Barf.M. Bouffant said,
August 2, 2010 at 4:37
stryx’s first link has a lovely euphemism: “Management Removal.”
noen said,
August 2, 2010 at 4:39
“Concealed carry permits should be legal everywhere in the US because
gunsI am an emasculated asshole and a gun is all that’s left of my shriveled manhood.”fxe’d
noen said,
August 2, 2010 at 4:48
The reason that you’d want to take a gun with you when you go into the woods is because you never know, you might walk through a circle of trees and end up in the Red Room. Save the last bullet for yourself.
Smut Clyde said,
August 2, 2010 at 5:05
Some mates going for a hiking trip in Yellowstone NP.
Your mates seem to have carjacked a Getty Images truck.
Smut Clyde said,
August 2, 2010 at 5:22
Also, how can we dare impugn the grizzly when he so proudly defended the great American tradition of
driving off in Japanese cars and crapping in the back seat.
M. Bouffant said,
August 2, 2010 at 5:36
Your mates seem to have carjacked a Getty Images
trucktechnical.W/ an orb composed of orbs (!) attached.
Candy said,
August 2, 2010 at 6:07
I keep imagining the bear in the above picture leaning over and snarling in Timmeh’s ear: “See these teeth? These teeth could bite your head clean off. Now, ask yourself this question: Do you feel lucky, punk?”
Dirty Harry Bear.
N__B said,
August 2, 2010 at 6:20
we have boneless hams
You have my sympathies and/or lustful fantasies.
Also, congrats on the catalog. Also.
Jennifer said,
August 2, 2010 at 6:22
Candy – I’d still rather see him being menaced from behind by Pedobear.
Also too, thank you N__B.
Doctorb said,
August 2, 2010 at 6:41
As you know, the Premier loves surprises.
Enraged Bull Limpet said,
August 2, 2010 at 7:07
Wow, what a coincidence: I just descended a few hours ago from a two-day backpacking trip in bear country, and taking a few basic, sensible precautions meant that I felt no more need to be mortally armed than I would in any American city on a night out.
President Merkin Muffley said,
August 2, 2010 at 7:27
Ah… Well, let me finish, Dmitri… Let me finish, Dmitri… Well listen, how do you think I feel about it?… Can you *imagine* how I feel about it, Dmitri?… Why do you think I’m calling you? Just to say hello?… *Of course* I like to speak to you!… *Of course* I like to say hello!… Not now, but anytime, Dmitri. I’m just calling up to tell you something terrible has happened… It’s a *friendly* call. Of course it’s a friendly call… Listen, if it wasn’t friendly… you probably wouldn’t have even got it…
gocart mozart said,
August 2, 2010 at 7:38
Todays bears are smarter than average so us humans must take this into account.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hiJ2dbpRY0
Spengler Dampniche said,
August 2, 2010 at 8:07
I’m back from my tour of the Himalayas. Anybody miss me?
Want to weigh in here for no reason: I went to the only place I buy ammunition, Wal-Mart — also the only thing I buy there, because if you’re going to be douchebag enough to own guns, you should have to buy ammo somewhere horrible — and they didn’t have any .380 rounds. Why not? Because every asshole now has a .380 stashed under his driver’s seat, in the glove box, bedside table, toolbox, attic, basement, kitchen drawer, and the back of his pants. If these shitheads start claiming they need to carry guns everywhere because of bears, I think we’re fairly close to them deciding they need to shoot people because they’re similar to bears.
It scares me. I’m switching to a higher caliber.
M. Bouffant said,
August 2, 2010 at 8:25
Cub update from the Scrawler.
gocart mozart said,
August 2, 2010 at 8:30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4bc-KmgsBg
gocart mozart said,
August 2, 2010 at 8:52
Time for a Youtube war biitches!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up3NNf4_MVg
Doctorb said,
August 2, 2010 at 9:29
I like the idea of “bear country”, like it’s a country, and when you get there a bear gives you a mean look and stamps your passport. This is scary but still vastly preferable to bat country.
justme said,
August 2, 2010 at 9:42
Careful what you ask for.
Spaghetti Lee said,
August 2, 2010 at 9:51
There’s no way in hell I’m getting off the boat for something called “Tea Party Music Video”, but I will guess that it contains any combination of A) The Obama Joker pic, maybe with some scary CGI flames licking at it, B) an eagle flying in slow motion, and C) A clip of Glenn Beck/Sarah Palin/Paul Ryan speaking, set to a triumphal soundtrack.
Smut Clyde said,
August 2, 2010 at 10:06
like it’s a country, and when you get there a bear gives you a mean look and stamps your passport.
– The nudist beaches? What beaches? We’re in a desert.
– I was misinformed.
St. Trotsky, Pope-in-Avignon said,
August 2, 2010 at 10:07
This is Stephen Colbert’s fault, I’m sure of it. We’ve already identified that the wingnuts don’t seem to realize Colbert’s fucking with them, so his panic attacks about bears are clearly being treated as real-life fears of the wingnuttria. And thus it leads to situations like this, wingnut commentary on “oh yeah, what about bears, libs?! Who’ll protect you from bears?!”
Ted the Slacker said,
August 2, 2010 at 11:09
This is Stephen Colbert’s fault
Yep, he should shred his rejected scripts so aren’t stolen by Tucker’s dumpster-divers.
Hatchepsut said,
August 2, 2010 at 12:31
Now, wait…maybe it’s because I’ve been a mummy/goddess for a very long time, but it does strike me as very strange that even grammar is now a political statement. Does this mean that these “Tea Festivals” won’t allow you entrance if you use the subjonctive tense? Do they refund your ticket if you are caught saying (for example), “Long live pharoah!” Are you at least allowed to keep the souvenir tea cup?
Modern people are very strange indeed…
N__B said,
August 2, 2010 at 12:35
like it’s a country, and when you get there a bear gives you a mean look and stamps your passport.
– The nudist beaches? What beaches? We’re in a desert.
– I was misinformed.
Is there anything to say other than “Rule 34″?
unemployed said,
August 2, 2010 at 14:16
An excellent book comes to mind – “Bear Attacks, Their Causes and Avoidance” by Stephen Herrero – the wife and I used to tiptoe (in a liberal fashion) through the woods in the hopes of seeing wildlife. Not after reading this book. Jingly things on the pack, and bear spray.
As I recall, Herrero observes that hunting bears isn’t like hunting other animals so much as it is entering a war zone, since as soon as the bears are aware that you are after them they will be hunting you.
Also, this: “Bear kills militants in Kashmir” – you’d think the wingers would be rooting for the bears.
guitarist manqué said,
August 2, 2010 at 14:16
I was camping at Hetch Hetchy once when a patient from nearby Camarillo State wandered into the campground with a shotgun and let off a few rounds outside of the tent of a stranger. In the ensuing hubbub it turned out that I was the only camper there without a gun. I don’t know what this tool is worrying about, Amerika is very well armed already.
Doesn’t possession of a gun make the likelihood of being shot multiply by 7 or 8?
N__B said,
August 2, 2010 at 14:21
Doesn’t possession of a gun make the likelihood of being shot multiply by 7 or 8?
Based on the principles of homeopathy, owning an empty water pistol makes you the meanest mother-fucker around.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 14:32
Doesn’t possession of a gun make the likelihood of being shot multiply by 7 or 8?
Only if your family members hate you.
Lurking Canadian said,
August 2, 2010 at 14:45
There is only one interesting element in this post and that is the discussion of the subjunctive tense. My only formal training in grammar was in French, and in French you do not use the subjunctive for hypotheticals. You use the conditional tense (past or present, as required) for hypotheticals: If (past continuous or present) then (past conditional or future conditional).
The subjunctive has other uses.
Is this guy right that the verb tense used in English for hypotheticals is the subjunctive, or is it just one more thing he got wrong?
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 14:50
What is the subjunctive used for, again? Commands? There’s something else, too…I didn’t take French, but I took years of Spanish and have forgotten most of it.
Lurking Canadian said,
August 2, 2010 at 14:54
It always shows up following the verb “faloir”, which is only conjugated in third person singular “Il faut que [whatever goes here is subjunctive]” (basically “You must”, where “you” is the generic you); and I think any similar sentence that has “que” (that) will follow it with subjunctive. But this all from memory and Grade Seven was a LONG time ago, for me, too.
For commands, they have the imperative, which is like the present tense, but lacks an explicit subject.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 14:54
And, yeah, he’s right.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 14:58
Okay, yeah, I remember now. Of course, hence “imperative.”
I wasn’t smart enough (or didn’t care enough) ever to get imperfect vs. preterite down 100%, so I should probably just STFU.
N__B said,
August 2, 2010 at 14:59
What is the subjunctive used for, again?
Getting
drugsthe imperative directly into the bloodstream.actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:20
Always. Trust. The. Shorter.™
Hang on…is this unprintably idiotic jackass ACTUALLY suggesting concelead handguns be permitted into Yellowstone because of bear attacks?
A handgun? REALLY??????
creature said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:22
The photo brings to mind- ‘Bears vs Twinks- Who Will Win???’ Perhaps the Twink, if he’s got a big enough gun.
Spengler, carry a .45 auto- doesn’t take much more space and works much better at its intended purpose. The .380 is not that good of a cartridge for stopping power unless you stick the piece in the assailant’s eye and cut loose. Just speaking from personal experience, just trying to help a brutha out and all that..
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:24
A handgun? REALLY??????
You mean my Ladysmith won’t stop a bar?
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:28
If bears are smart enough to steer clear unless you conceal, wouldn’t you WANT to display it?
Is that a gun in your pocket or are you just happy to feed me?
N__B said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:28
You mean my Ladysmith won’t stop a bar?
There’s a hygiene joke in there somewhere.
A Bear said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:28
You mean my Ladysmith won’t stop a bar?
She pulled out a pair of 44s. I wasn’t scared.
They she pulled out a gun. I was scared!
A Bear said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:33
Is this guy right that the verb tense used in English for hypotheticals is the subjunctive, or is it just one more thing he got wrong?
It’s used more for hopes and wishes and commands than conditional clauses.
Da Wiki:
Notice there’s no if/then involved. The requirement to return to the end of the line was precedent to the action. “The cop demanded I produce my license, which I did.”
In other words, in this case it’s more a statement of fact/outcome than a hypothetical.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:34
*sigh*
nymfailure…
Moon Dragon said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:35
Sheesh.
Grizzly bears have incredible tenacity of life. Unless you carry something big enough to send them base over apex (as the late L. Sprague DeCamp would put it), they are likely to live long enough to kill you any way, unless you’re lucky enough to shoot through the eye socket into the brain and disable the autonomic controls.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:39
You know what are scary and probably can be killed with a handgun? Possums.
I say “probably” because I’m quite sure there are mutant possums out there that are indestructible. At least, I’m pretty sure that’s what happens when your diet consists solely of kittens and processed food scraps…
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:42
Grizzly bears have incredible tenacity of life.
Why do you think they eat all those omega 3s?
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:44
You know what are scary and probably can be killed with a handgun? Possums.
Yes, but then you get zombie possums, which are worse than bears and may actually be your best protection against bears.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:47
Yes, but then you get zombie possums, which are worse than bears and may actually be your best protection against bears.
I’ve never been able to train zombie possums adequately. Better to run them over with your car, I think.
Once, when I was a child, a possum got into our house. We had to lock it in the bathroom until animal control could come the next morning.
*cue Deliverance music*
mark f said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:48
I read Monster of God* a few years ago. It convincingly argued that an alpha-predator-less world is coming and the implications of this on human psychology will not be good. In short, we will have defeated Leviathon and will be one step closer to defeating God or nature or the creator of your choice.
Frankly, I don’t see how advocating the destruction of bears is all that different from arguing that Terri Schiavo should be kept “alive” as long as medically possible. We humans have an awfully solipsistic obsession with pursuing our own immortality. I don’t exclude myself from that, but I also don’t think it’s necessarily a beneficial thing.
*I haven’t read the linked review; it’s just for reference on the book.
mark f said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:51
Hrm, did I have a comment fail? Test?
stryx said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:51
concelead handguns be permitted into Yellowstone because of bear attacks?
It’s even better than that. His example took place in “Greater Yellowstone” i.e. Gallatin National Forest- no handgun restrictions.
Chris said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:51
Any handgun small enough to carry concealed is most likely just going to piss off a Grizzly.
Well, that’s the point. When the handguns prove to be ineffective, they can move on to concealed hand grenades and escalate from there.
Eventually, we’ll end up at concealed suicide bombs, which will prove their point about hajji terrorism coming to America, and it will still all be the liberals’ fault.
mark f said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:52
Motherfuck. I did. Welp, you all can just imagine I said something fantastically brilliant, congratulate me for it, and move on.
N__B said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:52
Once, when I was a child, a possum got into our house. We had to lock it in the bathroom until animal control could come the next morning.
Did it use the toilet and soil the towels?
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:54
We had to lock it in the bathroom until animal control could come the next morning
I take it you had indoor plumbing.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:54
Did it use the toilet and soil the towels?
I don’t remember. You know, I could be recalling incorrectly, but I think my mother had to call my grandfather to help her with wranglin’ it because my dad was too scared.
mark f said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:55
I think my mother had to call my grandfather to help her with wranglin’ it because my dad was too scared.
I’m not sure whether I’d be more embarrassed if my wife called my father or hers.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:55
I take it you had indoor plumbing.
YES. I may have had to step over a dead rat to go to the bathroom one morning, but at least the bathroom was inside. Or not.
N__B said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:56
I think my mother had to call my grandfather to help her with wranglin’ it
Getting the saddle cinched tight is the hard part.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:56
Getting the saddle cinched tight is the hard part.
That’s where the picadors come in
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:57
I’m not sure whether I’d be more embarrassed if my wife called my father or hers.
She called my dad’s dad, who is kind of a badass. I’m pretty sure my dad was ashamed.
stryx said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:57
Somehow the internet got me to read this Financial Times story about The crisis of middle-class America and at the end of the article there’s this closing comment
Which led me to the video of Carlin setting up that line.
Unfuckingbelieveable.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:58
Ironically, Stryx, I used that same video at my blog this morning, for a slightly different reason.
S. cerevisiae said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:58
“He was a hairy bear, he was a scary bear…”
N__B said,
August 2, 2010 at 15:59
That’s where the picadors come in
You can pick your friends and you can pick your nose, but you can’t picaDoors’ nose because Jim Morrison is still alive, man, but he’s in hiding.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:00
You can pick your friends and you can pick your nose, but you can’t picaDoors’ nose because Jim Morrison is still alive, man, but he’s in hiding.
He’s hiding in Toreadors.
stryx said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:02
And from that story in the Billings Gazette:
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:03
You can pick your friends and you can pick your nose, but you can’t picaDoors’ nose because Jim Morrison is still alive, man, but he’s in hiding.
This is hilariously stupid and/or stupidly hilarious.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:03
That’s when they came across another victim, a young man, who’d been bitten in the calf and managed to scare the animal off by punching it in the head.
In fairness to gun owners, that bear had a glass jaw and lowered his left to throw his right cross.
mark f said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:03
That’s when they came across another victim, a young man, who’d been bitten in the calf and managed to scare the animal off by punching it in the head.
I have heard that the way to fend off a shark attack is to punch a shark in the face. I wonder how good a shot I’m going to get in if I’m being thrashed around underwater.
N__B said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:06
This is hilariously stupid and/or stupidly hilarious.
Gotta have the strength of your convictions.
N__B said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:06
In fairness to gun owners, that bear had a glass jaw and lowered his left to throw his right cross.
We all have our bears to cross.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:07
I have heard that the way to fend off a shark attack is to punch a shark in the face.
It’s possible but the punch should be to the gills, which makes sense: it’s about the only part of the shark’s head that has more soft tissue than bone and cartilage.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:07
I have heard that the way to fend off a shark attack is to punch a shark in the face.
Glad I don’t have to worry about that. I wonder if that would work on cottonmouths, though…
S. cerevisiae said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:08
I had always heard that you are supposed to fight a black bear if it attacks but to play dead for a grizzly.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:08
We all have our bears to cross.
I crossed one with a zombie possum.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:08
I wonder if that would work on cottonmouths, though…
Only if I’ve had too much gin the night before.
mark f said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:09
It’s possible but the punch should be to the gills,
That’s good information, particularly if I make it to the Cape this summer, but it doesn’t assuage my concerns. If anything, it’ll be more difficult to punch the face than the gills, as the face will be the part that’s attached to me.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:10
We all have our bears to cross.
I crossed one with a zombie possum.
What fiendish depths will you not sink to, Dr. Moreau???!
mark f said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:11
I had always heard that you are supposed to fight a black bear if it attacks but to play dead for a grizzly.
You play dead for a possum. You and the animal just lie there. Whoever plays dead longest wins. You need to call your grandfather over to judge the contest.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:12
What fiendish depths will you not sink to, Dr. Moreau???!
Goats. Can’t abide the critters. In fact, I was hoping to create a chupacabra.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:14
Or maybe I was trying to create the Salmon of Wisdom. Not sure I remember. I had too much gin the night before and woke up all cottonmouth
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:15
Goats. Can’t abide the critters. In fact, I was hoping to create a chupacabra.
Anything I say about goats here will be misinterpreted Mickey Kaus-style, so I’m just going to make fun of you for using the word “critters” instead.
Chris said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:20
“It’s called the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.”
A Brit once mentioned “Americans tell us about the American dream and ask us if there’s a European dream and what is the European dream. We don’t need a European dream! We’re awake!”
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:33
Well done!
Martini?
Rusty Shackleford said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:35
Can a shark really be said to have a “face”?
N__B said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:37
Can a shark really be said to have a “face”?
Sharks, like bears, have whatever they want to have.
tigris said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:38
I had always heard that you are supposed to fight a black bear if it attacks but to play dead for a grizzly
That’s what the lady who got her arm bitten did.
N__B said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:43
I had always heard that you are supposed to fight a black bear if it attacks but to play dead for a grizzly
If a grizzly attacks, very little “playing” is required for the “dead” part.
stryx said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:45
Speaking of unhinged animals out for blood:
…at an event to promote minority support for the teabagging.
S. cerevisiae said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:46
Obviously the bears don’t read the same books I do.
Rusty Shackleford said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:48
Are the cahoots open or closed?
zombie rotten mcdonald said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:49
Hey, it’s the beginning of Shark Week.
I can’t believe Discovery Channel is even spamming Sadly, No! with advertising…. you bunch of shameless shills.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:52
Are the cahoots open or closed?
It depends on the state. For instance, in NY, they’re only allowed to be open from noon Sunday until 2AM Saturday night. In New Jersey, they’re alwys closed on Sunday in some counties but not across the state. In Connecticut, they’re called package stores.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:53
I can’t believe Discovery Channel is even spamming Sadly, No! with advertising…. you bunch of shameless shills.
They promised me a date with Kari Byron.
Rusty Shackleford said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:53
Actor, do you call Coke “pop” too?
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:56
Actor, do you call Coke “pop” too?
I call it “Peruvian marching powder” or “breakfast” depending on if I’m holding or buying.
Ted the Slacker said,
August 2, 2010 at 16:56
Lessons in wingnut history:
“Twenty years ago today, on August 2, 1990, Saddam Hussein ordered his forces into Iraq.”
Oddly, the Gulf of Tonkin incident also took place on this date. I guess we can all have a good fap over the relative significance of these events.
People Laugh At The Goddamn Batman's Shark Repellant Bat Spray*, But Damnit, That Shit Fucking Works, Man! said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:02
Yeah, pepper spray doesn’t require special permits or training, is immensely likely to work better in moments of pants-shitting terror where pinpoint accuracy is not always feasible, and doesn’t permanently injure the bear while providing some adverse conditioning regarding the hairless apes and their pic-a-nic baskets. But Jeff Gannon Jr. wants you to “indulge” him in his fantasy about going Dirty Harry on Smokey.
*Trufax.
Chris said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:07
I had always heard that you are supposed to fight a black bear if it attacks but to play dead for a grizzly
I heard you were supposed to climb a tree in either case. If the bear follows you up the tree, it’s a black bear. If it knocks down the tree, it’s a grizzly.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:10
If the bear follows you up the tree, it’s a black bear. If it knocks down the tree, it’s a grizzly.
And if it goes looking for another cub to indulge, you’re probably on the Castro.
tsam said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:21
Well I got an anecdote!
I was grouse hunting with a loaded shotgun once. I was hiking up a foothill and walked into a sheltered grove of trees where I encountered a black bear (much less dangerous than a grizzly). It felt like the bear was in my face, but in reality it was about 10 feet away from me. It looked up, saw me, we stared at each other for an hour (actually a second or two), and it bolted down the hill.
After assessing the situation and realizing that I needed to start bringing clean underwear with me when hunting, I realized that I never shouldered the shotgun or removed the safety. It had never occured to me to do so. I stood there, stunned, waiting for the bear to make its move. If it had decided to attack me, I would have taken the attack without firing a shot.
Concealed carry of pistols for bears is not a defense. Additionally, most bear attacks are rooted in cause to something incredibly stupid done by the victim of the attack.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:22
I heard you were supposed to climb a tree in either case. If the bear follows you up the tree, it’s a black bear. If it knocks down the tree, it’s a grizzly.
False. Black bear.
Fact: bears eat beets. Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica.
tsam said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:24
Saddam Hussein ordered his forces into Iraq.
What kind of an asshole would invade Iraq?
Big Bad Bald Bastard said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:26
…at an event to promote minority support for the teabagging.
What, Michael Steele’s potato salad wasn’t enough of a draw?
tsam said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:28
“I didn’t realize that any movement everywhere had a minimum daily requirement of black people to be legitimate,” he said.
This made me laugh while being sad and angry. (From Stryx’s link).
Call me crazy, but I would think that not being insane would be a minimum daily requirement for a “movement” to be legitimate. This sort of movement can be assisted with bran and laxatives.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:29
What, Michael Steele’s potato salad wasn’t enough of a draw?
Hell, if he’d mentioned watermelon, too, I would totes be there!
tsam said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:32
I have heard that the way to fend off a shark attack is to punch a shark in the face.
I usually keep a couple hundred on me to bribe the shark. That’s much more effective than primitive violence.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:38
Krugman is cheery, as usual.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:42
But really, gang, at what point are Americans going to wake up and realize they’re being played? I’m not just talking about conservatives, I’m talking about EVERYONE. Except rich people, of course.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:45
But really, gang, at what point are Americans going to wake up and realize they’re being played?
It’s going to take an act of such sheer cowardice on the part of the plutocracy that it cannot be ignored. What that might be, I can’t figure out. They’ve got us lulled to sleep with this temptation and that carrot dangling from a stick. I would have thought the Bush years…think about it, TWO major market meltdowns in less than eight years…would have done it, but uit hasn’t.
N__B said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:45
But really, gang, at what point are Americans going to wake up and realize they’re being played?
I dislike the “wake up” metaphor because it implies that a quick change of state is possible. We’re a nation of either morons or people who are willfully and completely ignorant. Either way, changing us to a nation capable of rational decision-making individuals is near impossible.
vacuumslayer said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:46
Real men fight bears in the Octagon, mano a paw.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:49
They’ve got us lulled to sleep with this temptation and that carrot dangling from a stick.
I suppose that facing the fact that the “American Dream” isn’t possible and that we’ve been complicit in our own downfall is too much for most people to bear, as well. And a lot of us are exhausted and numb and just trying to get by…there’s not much time to reflect on why things are that way, or energy to try and change them.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:53
And a lot of us are exhausted and numb and just trying to get by
That’s Carlin’s point, the one that Stryx and I linked to independent of each other.
We’re kept just intelligent enough to do the work that’s needed. We’re kept just rich enough that we don’t file bankruptcy and we can keep spending. We’re kept just healthy enough that we’re not a burden to anyone but our families. And we’re kept just happy enough that we don’t question what’s going on around us.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:53
I dislike the “wake up” metaphor because it implies that a quick change of state is possible. We’re a nation of either morons or people who are willfully and completely ignorant. Either way, changing us to a nation capable of rational decision-making individuals is near impossible.
I know what you mean, and I agree, actually. I was just talking about people realizing, “Oh, hey, I’m getting fucked over left and right by the people who are supposed to be representing me!” I’m not saying we’ll make rational decisions based on that (in fact, people rarely do), but it’d be nice if people would at least understand it.
And we’re not just talking about morons. I see people who are smart and well-informed about politics who seem not to be able to come to terms with the fact that we are well and truly fucked under the current system. I think it’s more emotional than anything else, really.
77south said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:54
Real men fight bears in the Octagon, mano a paw.
By this standard, I fail. It was in the ring with Marquis of Queensbury rules.
g said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:55
I was told that the best way to avoid being attacked by a bear was to be able to outrun the people you’re with.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:56
I think it’s more emotional than anything else, really.
There’s a lot of denial, it’s true.
The point I raised at my blog is that there’s just too much opposing us right now that even those who are awake and are alert can do anything to stop it, and by the time the rest of the country wakes up and realizes the game of blaming the blacks/ACORN/Teabaggers/whathaveyou has been successfully played and the real wealth of the nation has been extracted and carted safely away, it will be far too late to do much about it.
We’ll be Rome under the Visigoths.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:57
We’re kept just rich enough that we don’t file bankruptcy and we can keep spending.
Up until recently, it was more like, “We’re given access to enough easy credit and cheaply-made goods that we’re able to feel like we’re rich enough, even when we aren’t.”
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 17:58
“We’re given access to enough easy credit and cheaply-made goods that we’re able to feel like we’re rich enough, even when we aren’t.”
We’re rich enough to make minimum payments. Same diff.
Chris said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:00
It’s going to take an act of such sheer cowardice on the part of the plutocracy that it cannot be ignored. What that might be, I can’t figure out.
People appear to have an extremely high tolerance for bullshit, or at least conservative bullshit. Great Depression begets New Deal, but it’s kind of shocking that it really took that long for the New Deal to happen, given the conditions people were living in.
The only difference is that during the Gilded Age, you had a progressive movement that built up slowly but surely over the years starting with Bryan in 1896. I don’t see that kind of movement forming today – heck, the strongest “populist” movement around is still the teabaggers.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:00
The point I raised at my blog is that there’s just too much opposing us right now that even those who are awake and are alert can do anything to stop it
Yes, which is why I get pissy with people who supposedly on my “side” who just don’t fucking get it. *I’m* not the magical pony-wisher here, assholes, *you* are.
Chris said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:01
Also, this (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/30/opinion/30krugman.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss) was another good Krugman post from a few days ago. Pretty well sums up the anger of the Democratic base towards Obama.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:02
the strongest “populist” movement around is still the teabaggers
Which may or may not morph into a progressive populist movement. It could, but I doubt it will. It’s already too deeply embedded into the corporatocracy.
It may splinter, which might be how we get a truly populist movement.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:05
Which may or may not morph into a progressive populist movement. It could, but I doubt it will. It’s already too deeply embedded into the corporatocracy.
.
I strongly doubt it…in fact, I see them as a baby fascist movement more than anything. An ineffective one, but definitely thoroughly rightwing.
I think anything that does happen will come from the Left and from classic libertarians, believe it or not.
zombie rotten mcdonald said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:08
We’re kept just intelligent enough to do the work that’s needed. We’re kept just rich enough that we don’t file bankruptcy and we can keep spending. We’re kept just healthy enough that we’re not a burden to anyone but our families. And we’re kept just happy enough that we don’t question what’s going on around us.
and for anyone who exceeds any of these minimums, there’s the internets.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:08
If you read the original Teabagger philosophy, there’s a lot there it shares with radical leftist doctrine.
I don’t think the two sides are as far apart as we think.
Chris said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:09
Which may or may not morph into a progressive populist movement. It could, but I doubt it will. It’s already too deeply embedded into the corporatocracy.
I’m almost certain it won’t. First, because it’s completely created by the pundits and the big money behind them (unless you actually believe that after thirty years of “deficits don’t matter” they suddenly woke up and had a change of heart).
Second, because it’s “populism” in the fascist vein rather than the socialist one. “Things suck, I blame the
Jewsblack people, immigrants and dune coons” is very different from “Things suck, so let’s change the system.”Big Bad Bald Bastard said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:14
Hey, has anybody got a link to the “shithouse troll” animation?
AFAF
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:16
If you read the original Teabagger philosophy, there’s a lot there it shares with radical leftist doctrine.
I don’t think the two sides are as far apart as we think.
I agree, but I think it’s too late now…the Tea Party was actually a grassroots movement, though, with some potential. I know my cousin (who is actually a liberal, whether he wants to fucking admit it or not) was PISSED at what he believed to be the rightwing hijacking of his movement.
This is also why I’m always amused/annoyed at Democrats who accuse Jane Hamsher and Glen Greenwald of being “closet libertarians.” So what? Libertarians didn’t vote to authorize the war in Iraq; libertarians didn’t stand by as (or actively support) the Constitution was ripped to shreds…I have a hell of a lot of problems with their economic viewpoints, but at least they’re not superstitious godbags and warmongers.
Chris said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:17
If you read the original Teabagger philosophy, there’s a lot there it shares with radical leftist doctrine.
Yes, just like the NSDAP originally had a lot in common with socialism (including a stinging critique of capitalism and the Depression). But the core holding it together was identity politics, not demands for justice, which made it very unlike the socialists and very like the teabaggers.
Hitler jettisoned his populist base (the SA) after only a year in office, mostly ignored economic reform, and gave the German people a system in which the capitalists were even more in control of the economy than ever. Still most of his supporters cheered him on to the very end, because ultimately, it was never about economics for them.
Big Bad Bald Bastard said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:18
Well, there and libertarians and there are “Libertarians”. Unfortunately, the “Paul” style ones are just authoritarians who hate government. Anti-choice? Not a “small-l” libertarian.
Dick Armey said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:20
If you read the original Teabagger philosophy, there’s a lot there it shares with radical leftist doctrine.
WTF? Link?
the Tea Party was actually a grassroots movement
Listen to her liberals. Totally grass roots and not astroturfed at all.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:21
Second, because it’s “populism” in the fascist vein rather than the socialist one. “Things suck, I blame the Jews black people, immigrants and dune coons” is very different from “Things suck, so let’s change the system.”
I actually was posting something like that and then lost it…
I suppose we could be optimistic and say that maybe people who are on the edge of rightwing populism could be convinced that “getting things back to the way they were” would include shedding blame of anyone who was equally/less powerless (weird construction, but wev) and the adoption of leftwing ideas, but I don’t know.
Major Kong said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:22
I think a lot of so-called libertarians don’t go much beyond “Don’t tax me!!!!!”
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:24
Listen to her liberals. Totally grass roots and not astroturfed at all.
The original movement? Totally was. It was co-opted by corporate interests, just like everything else in this country.
Dick Armey said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:25
What original movement?
Chris said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:25
I actually was posting something like that and then lost it…
FYWP?
Yeah, I think we’re posting more or less the same train of thought…
Mysticdog said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:26
A few months ago, a deer bounded out in front of my car and I almost hit it. I think we should have concealed carry so I could shoot out my window at the deer the next time that happens. It’ll be like Ronin or some shit, but with deers.
Holy shit! You’ve just justified the need for concealed tactical missiles on vehicles! Like the founders intended!
Chris said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:28
The original movement? Totally was. It was co-opted by corporate interests, just like everything else in this country.
Is it really?
TEA = Taxed Enough Already? Doesn’t seem much different from standard rhetoric against “tax and spend liberals.”
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:28
I think a lot of so-called libertarians don’t go much beyond “Don’t tax me!!!!!”
Oh, I totally agree. But I can’t completely scorn the ones who want to legalize pot and hate torture and wars…at least they’re trying to be consistent. Then again, I think I’m a bit more radical than most liberals
Big Bad Bald Bastard said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:31
I suppose we could be optimistic and say that maybe people who are on the edge of rightwing populism could be convinced that “getting things back to the way they were” would include shedding blame of anyone who was equally/less powerless (weird construction, but wev) and the adoption of leftwing ideas, but I don’t know.
All it would take for the movement to dissolve would be a drop in the unemployment rate. A demonstration of the validity of progressive policies (were it to happen *sigh*) would get them to shut up and hopefully stay home on election day, but wouldn’t get them on board- they’d still cling to their bigotry and “macho” culture.
TruculentandUnreliable said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:37
TEA = Taxed Enough Already? Doesn’t seem much different from standard rhetoric against “tax and spend liberals.”
Oh, I’m not saying they’re not jerkoffs, either…it’s just more complicated than we think.
Chris said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:38
Oh, I’m not saying they’re not jerkoffs, either…it’s just more complicated than we think.
True, I suppose. Probably partly because they themselves aren’t entirely sure what they stand for.
stryx said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:42
As you’ll remember from your liberal mindwashing lessons:
Still time for things to happen.
Sirius Lunacy said,
August 2, 2010 at 18:50
Please don’t shoot the Bears!
Whale Chowder said,
August 2, 2010 at 19:07
So I’m sure the thread’s long dead, what with new meat upstairs, but something that several of you sorta danced around without stating it explicitly (or enough so for me, who doesn’t do subtle, really) is that the Teatards are in fact vaguely aware that something’s wrong in these here Yew-Nited States. They can’t put their finger on it, their “analysis” is all wrong, and they’re much too willing to let their corporate masters whisper “It’s the n*gger’s fault!” in their ears. Still, they know something isn’t quite right.
I don’t know if they’re trainable or if they could be turned; it’s the tendency of these sorts of people to, when what they’re doing isn’t working, double down and do it more and harder. What I think it shows, though, is that we’re not the only ones who see a problem.
I suspect, as others have pointed out, that things will have to get much worse before the torches and pitchforks come out.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 19:23
TEA = Taxed Enough Already? Doesn’t seem much different from standard rhetoric against “tax and spend liberals.”
I’m thinking more along the lines of opposition to the bank bailouts. I didn’t say they were completely coherent, but if you recall, the first big Tea event was the Boston rally against “porkulus”. But by then it was already too late, since Rish Limbaugh had co-opted the movement and gave it energy.
There’s a real shill for the corporatocracy. If only he’d used that megaphone to really channel American anger where it belongs.
Dick Armey said,
August 2, 2010 at 19:33
Porkulus was our nickname for the stimulus bill. It had nothing to do with the bank bailouts. Pundits like Greenwald and Hamsher like to pretend that you liberals and the tea party patriots have a lot of goals in common but even I don’t understand why. And Limbaugh didn’t co-opt our movement. He just became a prominent mouthpiece for it.
Sirius Lunacy said,
August 2, 2010 at 19:45
Everything you need to know about bear attacks.
Whale Chowder said,
August 2, 2010 at 20:42
This monster will not be stopped by pepper spray or gunshots. Be warned!
unemployed said,
August 2, 2010 at 20:56
A particularly illustrative story from the “Bear Attacks” book concerned an experienced hunting guide who had his face ripped off because his gun jammed when he tried to chamber a round into an already loaded gun.
Smut Clyde said,
August 2, 2010 at 21:53
But really, gang, at what point are Americans going to wake up and realize they’re being played?
I imagine that when the kleptocrats collectively change citizenship and move en masse to habitable enclaves that they have purchased elsewhere in the world, leaving the rest of you with a dying ecology and a collapsing infrastructure, then there will be a mixed reaction, with some people waking up and others looking for scapegoats (probably the waking-up people).
Whale Chowder said,
August 2, 2010 at 22:50
…leaving the rest of you with a dying ecology…
Excuse me, “the rest of you?”
We’re taking you with us, bucko. This isn’t like nuclear winter where you might have an antipodean’s chance in hell of surviving.
actor212 said,
August 2, 2010 at 22:58
We’re taking you with us, bucko.
He’s right, Clyde. If there’s one thing Americans excell at, it’s exporting our problems.
tigris said,
August 2, 2010 at 23:25
Hell, it’s the practically only export we have left.
Smut Clyde said,
August 2, 2010 at 23:36
I can’t see Clan Bush-Cheney and the rest of the plutocrats leaving you with functioning warheads when they evacuate America. They’ll have shipped them out in advance.
What we’ll have to worry about is the influx of boat-people refugees on Plas-Tiki rafts
Whale Chowder said,
August 3, 2010 at 0:05
…well, that and the billions of metric tons of CO2 we’ve been pumping into the atmosphere for decades.
It’s worth noting that the Ross Ice Shelf, down in your neighborhood, was one of the most dramatic (alleged, heh) results of AGW to come along.
Nukes? They’re sooo last century.
Another kiwi said,
August 3, 2010 at 1:07
Oh yeah, the first Plas-Tiki of bears coming down here looking for pic a nic baskets will get met by the full fury of a strongly disapproving letter from our Prime Minister. Unless they bring cash, in which case,”Here’s the keys, no need to clean up when you go”
Lesley said,
August 3, 2010 at 1:15
I just realized who Tim Daniels reminds me of.
Round-headed buffoon Carl Pilkington, made famous by Ricky Gervais.
Another kiwi said,
August 3, 2010 at 1:18
Lesley, you are right, twins separated at birth!!
Smut Clyde said,
August 3, 2010 at 6:13
How does the subjunctive mood work in LOLcat?
actor212 said,
August 3, 2010 at 15:11
How does the subjunctive mood work in LOLcat?
“I can haz cheezburger”
Doctorb said,
August 3, 2010 at 22:25
I could haz cheezburger.
vacuumslayer said,
August 4, 2010 at 0:10
BAKULA!
www.Kulinarnepomysly.pl said,
May 7, 2013 at 10:34
Developing an effective software.is the work associated with the expert.
When you submit your site functions and login, you may go on it as a response to each history.