Shorter Thomas “Kidney” Sowell
Posted on September 6th, 2008 by
‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™
Edited for style.
‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™
Edited for style.
(comments are closed)
The other authors and Seb seem to use a different template for Shorters. The former use a bullet point rather than a blockquote, and it makes it clearer that the words are a paraphrase.
Just sayin’, if you guys all used the same format it would be clearer.
Alternate shorter:
o I just received my big fax-blast of talking points and I’m just gonn puke them out on the page for you.
gonna. I’m just gonna puke them…
Actually, Sowell appears to be saying that *nobody* has any foreign-policy experience–not McCain, not Obama, not Palin, not Biden. Of course, he overlooks the obvious truth that Senators are, well, *involved in crafting legislation that affects foreign policy,* and that Biden might know something about this given his time on the foreign policy committee.
The GOP super-scientists (at LuthorCorp, a wholly owned subsidiary of Blackwater Security) have perfected the explosion-proof adamantium skull reinforcement process, which is being administered to all GOP media operatives, as per Rove Order 666b.
They barely got to Sally Quinn in time.
Well, I look forward to the GOP’s full-page ad in the New York Times apologizing for all the mean crap they said about the qualifications of governors that last time we ran one. I seem to recall that they said being governor of Arkansas qualified Clinton for exactly jack. “My dog Millie knows more about foreign policy than those bozos,” Old Man Bush said about Clinton and Gore.
I would like it if Sowell would explain to me what makes Palin a more qualified governor than other governors. After all, Pawlenty, Romney, Ridge, and Huckabee all have more governor governance that she does. Romney even has the mavericky cred of being a Republican from Ted Kennedy’s state! And he belongs to a mavericky religion! Why do they disrespect poor Mittens so?
My prayers have been answered! Praise the spaghetti monster.
Thank you, SadlyNo.
Of course, had McCain picked Charlie Crist as his running mate, Sowell and other right-wing apologists would be pushing a completely different line.
Charlie Crist is more qualified than Palin. He was state attorney general before being governor. He has a resume.
Of course, he doesn’t have a passel of adorable though oddly named children. His, uh, proclivities are not conducive to reproduction, as it were.
Did somebody mention the Power of Crist?
I don’t know, the thing that really impresses me is just how out in the open the duplicity is these days. “Sarah Palin has foreign policy experience because Alaska is close to Russia”. I mean, saying something like that just puts on display one’s utter contempt for the intended audience. Imagine you had a really rich but stupid friend. I mean really stupid with a low IQ. What would happen to such a person that is unprotected by friends of family? Well I’ve seen what happens to such people, they get taken for everything, they get set up to take the fall for criminal activity. They get used and abused in every way imaginable. The people who use them cover their guilt by blaming their victims. “It’s your fault for letting me take advantage of you.” It’s a grifter mentality.
This is what is happening to America. I think, maybe, because we are too stupid to understand what is being done to us. The American taxpayers just bought 5 trillion in bad loans from fannie mae and freddie mac. It is just too much to ask for us to pay attention I guess. So, I don’t know, maybe we deserve it. It’s just natural selection and if the American consumer is too dumb to survive maybe they shouldn’t. Or maybe I’m wrong, I’m just thinking out loud.
Thomas Sewell: The anti-intellectual intellectual.
How do you go about getting one of them there senior fellowships at one of them there “Think Tanks”? Sounds like a cool job.
I’m feeling lazy at the moment (Smut’s brain work not coffee without), so I’ll re-cycle a comment already sent to Flying Rodent:
Having abused whatever power she has previously had for the benefit of her family and business partners, Palin is promising that if given far greater powers, she will be equally dogged about abusing them for the benefit of her fellow-citizens.
If you’re gonna do some style edits, how ’bout a terminal comma?
A terminal coma? Yeah, sounds good about now.
Shorter ITTDGY: This is your Republican party.
Next time you hit him with the bat, run down the stairs and finish him off.
But Crist is the Commander-in-Chief of the Florida National Guard, and has foreign policy experience because his state is near a hostile Cuba!
I keep imagining what the reaction would have been if Howard Dean had said that he was the Commander-in-Chief of the Vermont National Guard, and knew about foreign relations because of sharing a border with Canada.
Did somebody mention the Power of Crist?
This week, pray to God to turn out The Gay. Next week, pray to God to get the pipeline project approved.
There’s quite a laffer of a post up at Malkin’s place.
Apparently, there’s some bogus list of books banned by Palin floating around.
But Michelle totally debunks it. You see, as Michelle explains, Mayor Palin only attempted to force the Wasilla librarian to ban books under threat of dismissal. But her attempt failed due to public support for the librarian and no books were banned. In fact, Mayor Palin was so magnanimous that she didn’t even fire the librarian out of spite. So what’s the big deal?
If memory serves, George W. Bush’s foreign policy credentials were that Texas is next to Mexico and that once he recorded a radio campaign commercial by reading (poorly) from a Spanish script.
I see that Sowell is a “senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.”
I’m sure someone can come up with a better punch line than I, but it pretty much begs for one…
I get that appeals to authority aren’t the best ways to make your case, or even supplement it, but Sowell is a fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford. That’s, um, a pretty friggin’ great school, and if I had to guess, I’d that any institution affiliated with it could have its pick of people. So why is he writing such garbage?
For one thing, the second half of that essay seems to be little more than a string of non-sequiturs. And while he makes a point that both sides could agree on–that few people have made actual foreign policy experience–he seems to say that simply surrounding one person with the issues doesn’t mean he has a better chance of making the right decision. I guess that’s true, but simply having made a decision doesn’t mean that you understand the issue any better than someone who has been thinking about the issue for years. I’d much rather have a doctorate in some field that studies Middle Eastern terrorism advising or making a suggestion relating to foreign policy than most others.
Of course, the ideas are what matter most. Obama doesn’t have a background in foreign policy in either the governmental sense, like Biden, nor in the academic sense, as he is a former law lecturer. But his ideas, so they seem, are better than most. That’s what gives him the edge to so many of us.
Now, Palin does have executive experience, however minor, that others lack. But what in the world does that have to do with foreign policy? How can you make a jump like that? Why doesn’t my old country executive, a Republican, who is now a college president, have the spot instead of her? He has executive experience leading a county that, as of 2000, had more than double the number of people of the entire state of Alaska. (I’m sure it’s gotten bigger since then, of course.)
The argument that he should have made was that her ideas were better. Of course, unless he’s spoken with her, or has access to some information he’s not sharing with us, he has no way of judging that. He simply wants us to assume that because she’s led people before, and because Obama and Biden haven’t made any decisions like an executive and don’t have the right ideas, she’s a better person to get behind.
I keep imagining what the reaction would have been if Howard Dean had said that he was the Commander-in-Chief of the Vermont National Guard, and knew about foreign relations because of sharing a border with Canada.
And if Obama had picked Richardson, not only would they be able to refer to Richardson’s foreign policy experience when in the Clinton administration, they would also be able to tout his role in leading the vital effort to secure the border against illegal immigration, given the fact that the New Mexico National Guard has been used to patrol the border with Mexico and Richardson is its Commander in Chief.
This could go on and on.
Now, Palin does have executive experience, however minor, that others lack. But what in the world does that have to do with foreign policy? How can you make a jump like that?
It’s GOP Calvinball, that’s all. What’s your candidate got? Well this year, that doesn’t count. What’s our candidate got, if we go out on a limb, extend a two by four, and then hang a tire swing from that?
That’s First Executive material, that’s what that is. This year…
I joined a group on Facebook called, “I’ve had my passport longer than Sarah Palin.” The magic year is 2006. Then again, since she didn’t travel abroad she didn’t bring back anything dangerous, unlike Bill Clinton with his Muscovite Bolshevism and Obama wth his “European ideas”
PUMAs to Obama:
“Hey, Precious! Fight Your Own Damn Battles. Seal Your Own Damn Deal.
Psst, Obama is a Weakling — Pass it on.”
http://blog.pumapac.org/2008/09/05/hey-precious-fight-your-own-damn-battles-seal-your-own-damn-deal/
“We’re not going to be bullied, we’re not going to be smeared, we’re not going to be lied about,” Obama said.
Shorter Obama:
“Tave me! Tumbody tave me from the bad ol’ puddy tat!”
ROFL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fdr#Assistant_Secretary_of_the_Navy
Good thing he cleared up that whole FDR having no foreign policy experience thing for us.
“It’s GOP Calvinball, that’s all. What’s your candidate got? Well this year, that doesn’t count. What’s our candidate got, if we go out on a limb, extend a two by four, and then hang a tire swing from that?
That’s First Executive material, that’s what that is. This year…”
Ah, I get it. Shorter ifthethunderdontgetya: Heads, they win. Tails, we lose.
I’m curious how many US states Palin has ever been to.
You might want to work on your reading comprehension, Brian J.
But can she come up with demeaning nicknames for every foreign leader she will meet?
That’s the standard set by our current pResident, after all.
Perhaps it’s because I didn’t get a lot of sleep last night, but I’m confused. Where was I wrong, ifthethunderdontgetya?
Dear S.N.,
I just want to thank you for reading their B.S. so I don’t have to. It must be such a distasteful chore. Kudos.
PUMAs to Obama:
“Hey, Precious! Fight Your Own Damn Battles. Seal Your Own Damn Deal.
Psst, Obama is a Weakling — Pass it on.”
Yeah, too bad Obama’s lost all, what, 30 of the PUMA’s, people so fucking stupid that they’d vote for an anti-choice, anti-equal rights candidate just because of spite. If, of course, they actually existed in any substantial numbers and weren’t a GOP-funded bunch.
Shorter goober: I am digging up any friggin’ piece of dirt from any pitiful corner I can because my candidates – McCain/Palin – are so totally and completely indefensible. I mean, if I could trumpet the GOP positives I would, but ya know…
And tell Gomer I said “Hey”. Dickhead.
Obviously, Sarah Palin is THE most experienced public servant in the US today.
At least that’s what I heard from Ed Morrissey, who says he heard it from Greta van Sustereneren, so…it must be true!
Also, “Precious”? Goob, is that your’s or is that the PUMA’s? In other words, which one of y’all is down with using homosexuality as a slur? I mean, both are conservatives and conservatives do hate gays almost as much as they hate everyone else, so who knows?
Maybe it’s because I ate too much LSD last night, Brian J, but I’m wondering why I need to explain irony, sarcasm, and/or Calvinball to someone who excuses their dumbassitude with excuses about what they did last night.
Why are you being so hostile? I don’t know your record on this blog, but I imagine we’re on the same side.
Sometimes, I can be dense, like everyone can be. It’s only worse when I am on light sleep from the night before, as is the case right now. You made a comment that seemed to make sense to me, so I agreed with it, and since I was trying to be funny, I used the “shorter” routine. Then you said I needed to check my reading comprehension. Not seeing where the problem was, I asked you to explain. So what’s the deal?
Sowell obviously believes in separation of powers: the Executive has the power, and the Senate is separated from it. They observe foreign policy, like how it says in the Constitution apparently.
“Also, “Precious”? Goob, is that your’s or is that the PUMA’s?”
Shorter Matt T:
“I’m to lazy to click a link.”
Now boys, play nice….
Yep, too lazy to click a link from a disingenuous group of assholes provided by a class-A chickenshit. Life is just too short, ya know. But, upon further review, it appears the GOP’s ratfucking group is down with the fag-bashing. And, since you link so approvingly to it, I guess you are, too, huh, goober?
Shorter goober: “Huh huh. Obama’s a prissy fag-boy like this group of most trustworthy people say. Huh huh.”
Color me just all kinds of shocked.
Conservatives Pray for McCain’s Death
Dear Jesus…
Matt T: The “Precious” is a PUMA thing. It’s a reference to that movie with the goblin or troll or whatever it was chasing after its “precious.” I’m not real up on fantasy-type movies.
Speaking of trolls and fantasy: poor l’il goober.
Hey Matt, lookie what Ace wrote:
Obama: “We’re Not Going to be Bullied”
Oh for Christ’s sake call a waaahmbulance already, Buttercup.
How is this sissy going to stand up to someone a bit more menacing than Sarah Palin?
Don’t worry, Princess. You’ll be coming in third, Joe Biden in fourth.
He said this while attending a fundraiser hosted by long-haired ex-prettyboy Bon Jovi, incidentally. Then they went out shopping for “outfits.”
ittdgy: I didn’t do anything except sleep last night, I am intimately acquainted with the rules of Calvinball (having played more than a few games myself), plus I know what “ironic” means and how to use it correctly (i.e., I am not Alanis Morissette), and I don’t get your objection to Brian’s shorter, either.
If “Heads we win, tails you lose” is not what you meant, please explain.
goober and Ace should get along famously. They seem to have a lot in common.
Sorry — that was me who came up as “Anonymous” in the last post.
FYWP.
“Matt T: The Precious is a PUMA thing. It’s a reference to that movie with the goblin or troll or whatever it was chasing after its ‘precious.’ I’m not real up on fantasy-type movies.”
I believe you’re thinking of The Lord of the Rings trilogy.
Shorter Matt:
“Reality really harshes my mellow.”
Shorter goober: goo.
That’s Ace O’ Spades, manly heterosexual and avowed hater of bacon and Play-Doh, you’re quoting so lovingly, there, isn’t it goober? So you like kncukle-dragging sexist morons, too, huh? Man, parties are your place must be a riot.
I mean, really…Ace of Spades, right? Or is this just some random “Ace” I’m supposed to accept as…what? I really don’t see where you’re going here, goob, unless you’re trying to prove conservatives are atavistic clowns. You’re doing that pretty well, give ya that.
I believe you’re thinking of The Lord of the Rings trilogy.
Oh. Okay then.
“Reality really harshes my mellow.”
Okay, this is true. Guys like you, goob, do make me depressed. Imagine, someone as dumb as you in this, the information age. And homophobes do piss me off, this is true, and I guess you’re a misogynistic sort if you’re down with Mr. O’Spades, and that’s just pitiful. So, give ya that one, goob. Tell Gomer, “Hey”.
SOME PEOPLE… SOME PEOPLE LIKE PIE EXCLUSIVELY, WHILE MYSELF, I SAY THERE IS NAUGHT NOR OUGHT THERE BE NOTHING SO EXALTED ON THE FACE OF GOD’S GRAY EARTH AS
THAT PRINCE OF FOODS, THE MUFFIN!
I think a clearer statement would have been “Shorter ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©: ‘For the GOP, heads they win, tails we loose.'”
Or is it tales?
Um, why is saying you’re not going to be bullied a wussy thing in the first place? I don’t understand people.
Hi:
I’ve just dropping in to say that McCain is a tool and Sarah Palin is, well, I’m not sure; but to paraphrase Bar Bush’s comment about Gerry Ferraro, “It rhymes with lying, sanctimonious skank”.
Please pass this along to people who like Obama and also to the delusional fucks who think John McCain is Christ with white hair.
“I think a clearer statement would have been “Shorter ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©: ‘For the GOP, heads they win, tails we loose.’”
Or is it tales?”
I thought it was obvious that I was talking about the Republicans.
Captain A.O. “Bacon ‘n’ Playdoh” Spades, manly man.
/lookism
Maybe it’s the concussion I apparently sustained last night, or maybe it’s whatever I was doing between 1 AM and 4 AM (seriously, no clue here, and Gary R. isn’t picking up the phone), but correct me if I’m wrong in taking all the statements here at face value.
Cry havoc, and loose the ice weasels of war!
ifthethunderdon’tgetya:
Hi.
She’ll probably go with the old standby, “Fag.” Maybe “Some Foreign Fag.” She and the wingnut bloggers are truly Cheetohs out of the same bag.
Cry havoc, and loose the ice weasels of war!
Mutter in annoyance, and loose the Chihuahuas of polite disagreement!
See, I’m not entirely a pacifist.
“It rhymes with lying, sanctimonious skank”.
Now, now. Calling someone a “skank” really isn’t nice, definately not if one considers oneself a good pro-feminist, pro-woman liberal. I shouldn’t have to explain why, I trust.
“Lying” and “sanctimonious” are okay ’cause, well, that’s the reality of the situation, ain’t it?
The Hoover Institution’s affiliation with Stanford is a tricky thing, and I don’t think that the board at Stanford exercises much influence over the Hoover (honestly I don’t know how much influence they can exercise even). Over the last few decades the Hoover Institution has steadily transformed from a “right-wing intellectuals” to “right-wing anti-intellectuals”; one speculates that the Reagan Administration was something of a brain drain on the Institution, which is pretty disturbing in itself.
“I’m curious how many US states Palin has ever been to.”
Well, she went to five different colleges in three states to get her four year college degree. And she had her coming out party in Ohio, then went to the convention in Minnesota. After that she skedaddled back to Alaska, no? So I count at least five.
Mind you, one of the states she studied in was Hawaii–does that make her an elitist?
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
September 7, 2008 at 1:00
Conservatives Pray for McCain’s Death
I went there.
It’s true.
Perhaps these people should worry about an eventual Lake o’ Fire.
Oh my, no!
Don’t you know how to play this game?
A Republican can never be an elitist!
No matter how many houses he or she owns.
They also can’t lie or say “POW” too many times.
So I count at least five.
Plus whichever ones her plane refueled in.
Matt T: The “Precious” is a PUMA thing. It’s a reference to that movie with the goblin or troll or whatever it was chasing after its “precious.” I’m not real up on fantasy-type movies.
I saw that they use it, and I’m not quibbling with your sourcing of their use. But … what the fuck sense does that make? Gollum called the evil ring his “Precious.” Is Obama the ring? Who’s Gollum? What’s … who are they insulting?
I’m asking too much if I expect them to make sense, aren’t I.
Now, now. Calling someone a “skank” really isn’t nice, definately not if one considers oneself a good pro-feminist, pro-woman liberal. I shouldn’t have to explain why, I trust.
Oh, please.
Jim,
I imagine, if MzNicky’s right – and I’ve no reason to doubt her – Obama’s the ring, the “Precious”, and any Obama supporter is Gollum. Since the only reason anyone supports Obama at all is because they’re far-gone, bull-goose cult loonies who think Obama’s the Promised One, the Messiah and Elvis all wrapped into one holy package. Of course, PUMA’s are rational beings – only rational beings are eager to vote totally against what they’re prefered candidate stands for just to teach an, *ahem*, uppity new-comer a “lesson” – and thus, “Precious”.
I am simply amazed people, any people, take PUMA’s seriously. They even look at politics like wingnuts.
Of course, he overlooks the obvious truth that Senators are, well, *involved in crafting legislation that affects foreign policy,* and that Biden might know something about this given his time on the foreign policy committee.
Indeed. Mysteriously tucked away out of sight within the fog of the phrase “foreign policy” is the invisible word “policy”.
Well, it’s like this…
What, my friends, is a “skank”? A skank is a woman considered of dubious moral character. Usually, the label is applied to her by someone else, someone who’s generally not a friend of said woman. And it’s never nice, really. I mean, you don’t call someone you really like and care for a “skank” unless you’re trying, in some way or another, to piss her off. However, more often than not, it’s to put a woman who doesn’t fit certain standards “in her place”. These standards may be satorial – “She dresses like a skank” – or they may refer to hygiene, such as a “white-trash skank”. Also, “skank” is often substituted for “whore” or “slut”, that is, it refers to a sexually promiscuous woman, particularly if said woman comes from a lower economic bracket.
Now. Unless Gov. Palin is really into second-wave ska and I just missed it, refering to her as a “skank” is not only misogynist but also to a lesser degree classist. That’s just not nice at all and liberals aren’t supposed to do that. Only a total asshole would call a woman, any woman, a “skank”. As always, if you don’t give a fuck and want to be an asshole, all I ask is that you own it. Don’t whine about what wingnuts do or about humor or any of that shit. Just say, “Yeah, I’m an asshole and I’ll call that female political opponent a ‘skank’.”
Further thought: if someone can explain to me why calling someone a “skank” is a rockin’ pro-feminist and not-at-all-hatefull thing to do, I’ll be more than willing to rethink my position. I don’t see it, but I could be wrong.
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
Conservatives Pray for McCain’s Death
I can see how it’s tempting to believe in an omnipotent, omniscient deity who takes a close personal interest in the running of His universe, and who sometimes kills people in order to forward His ineffable plans — a sort of supernatural assassin — but who needs advice about which guy to hit. Advice which His sympathisers are happy to supply.
Like back-seat drivers, but in this case, back-seat assassins, contributing their suggestions on whom the Divine Cross-sights should centre. “No, God, left a bit… up, and slightly to the right… that’s the guy!”
From God’s perspective, I suppose one Sim looks kinda like another.
I thought it was obvious that I was talking about the Republicans.
I was just trying to help with I perceive as a misunderstanding between two people who I think are on the same page. I read it as directed at Republicans, but the problem is you called it “shorter ifthethunderdontgetya. Traditionally, the shorter form is used to point out tersely the internal contradictions of the author being shortered. So “shorter ifthethunderdontgetya” could be read, following the conventions of the internet genre, as criticism of ifthethunderdontgetya’s original statement and not as agreement with and summation of it.
with what I perceive
Conservatives Pray for McCain’s Death
Let the record show that I have already called tragic snowmobile accident and I intend to use it when the pool is organized.
J— said,
September 7, 2008 at 1:13
I think a clearer statement would have been “Shorter ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©: ‘For the GOP, heads they win, tails we loose.’”
Or is it tales?
Yes, that was the missing point that I found objectionable.
Here’s another example:
~
And the only thing that has been shortered is who said what. Which can get annoying.
I have already called tragic snowmobile accident and I intend to use it when the pool is organized.
I called “found having beaten himself to death with several heavy Bibles”, but I’m not sure where the comment is.
I used the word ‘skank’ to describe someone on Pandagon.net and they thought I was being a jerk.
Wikipedia sez:
“Skank is a term of abuse for a person who may be repugnant for reasons of hygiene and/or promiscuity.”
If that’s correct, then it might not only be anti-woman.
My money is on “mysterious poisoning”.
Don’t touch the figs.
Shorter PUMAs.
P.S. The comments will make you want to die.
I have noticed that a lot of people shout advice at the TV when their favourite team is playing, apparently in the belief that it would not otherwise occur to the players to carry the ball across the goal-line. So perhaps this business of advising God about whose death would best benefit His ineffable plan is not so far-fetched after all.
I’ve noticed people calling out to various deities in hopes of making one “Harry Hutton” put up another post.
It’s not clear if this person even exists, and the deities in question appear unmoved.
atheist,
Well, let’s say it’s correct but incomplete. Wikitionary, not to mention Merriam-Webster, note “skank” is most often used to refer to a female. You ever hear someone call a dude a “skank”? Besides, being promiscuous and male is considered a good thing; not so much for the distaff side of things.
I mean, this really ain’t that difficult. You understand why calling someone, male or female, a “whore” isn’t exactly pro-woman, even if you’re not refering to the fact they fuck everyone but you, right? Same sort of thing.
And perhaps you were being a jerk. Why would you call someone a “skank” unless you thought they were a trashy, slutty person of (and let’s be generous) undetermined gender, or at least as bad as such a person is considered by whatever standards apply? Again, if you’re cool with doing that, we have no problems. Just don’t play, is all.
Cleter, Cleter, Cleter: Alaska is very very very close to (gasp!) Russia! and even CLOSER to Canada- but who cares?
Let me contrast another term also historically associated with women. I’ve heard and read in recent years the terms “slut” and “slutty” applied to men, sporadically and usually very purposefully. I have not seen the same with “skank.”
In the pool I’ll take McCain at the campaign Halloween party dressed up as a caribou who’s minding his own goddamn business and you can figure out what happens next.
It appears the Repug response to anyone taking offense at Palin’s malicious insults is to broadly insinuate that, be they gay or straight, they are sniveling sissys!
In Other Words: “I know you are but what am I?”
J-,
In high school, some of the doofi on my football team used “skank” as sort of an all-purpose pejorative in sort of an exlamatory way. Like “Hey, skank!” instead of calling a fellow from an opposing school who’s too far away to actually whip your ass “Hey, bitch!” or “Hey, fag!”
It was maybe a half-dozen dudes, though, and they were all knotheads. Oh, yeah, and two of the football coaches, but they were serious knotheads.
“I was just trying to help with I perceive as a misunderstanding between two people who I think are on the same page. I read it as directed at Republicans, but the problem is you called it “shorter ifthethunderdontgetya. Traditionally, the shorter form is used to point out tersely the internal contradictions of the author being shortered. So “shorter ifthethunderdontgetya” could be read, following the conventions of the internet genre, as criticism of ifthethunderdontgetya’s original statement and not as agreement with and summation of it.”
I appreciate your effort to help. I didn’t know the rules of using “shorter,” but I’ll be more careful next time.
terms “slut” and “slutty”
I’ve heard it directed at cats who like to have their bellies rubbed, which, for me, is taking it too far.
Matt: Re: Skank…you sound like those commenters at KOS nitpicking over whether a headline should have “Breaking” in it, or a word was spelled wrong, or a link didn’t work, or…whatever. So often they sound like a disfunctional family of bickering drunks.
I like the diaries, however.
Fozzetti,
Oh…kay. Thanks for the input, I s’pose.
Right, because etymology is for mierenneukers.
I can easily imagine the dozen or so deranged PUMA’s who always accidentally fall in front of TV cameras saying something about “tough luck” to Obama in any close swing state.
It’s a little more difficult for me to imagine Hillary Clinton preferring 4 years of McPalin rule (or just Palin if the crazy prayers get their wish) and national ruination versus having her name go down in history as actually passing a real national health care plan (as opposed to utterly destroying health care reform in 1993 by attempting to give all U.S. health care to the top 5 HMO’s and insurance conglomerates).
Similarly, Hillary can probably imagine the sort of power she might have in the Senate, with a nation-wide network of supporters, under an Obama presidency, whereas no one will give the slightest sh*t about one more Democratic Senator if Senator McBush & the Apocalypse-In-Waiting are in charge.
Whereas the two or three fake nutballs per state who claim to be Democrats who will vote for McCain ’cause their heart hurts for Hillary simply cannot see anything rationally.
I’m asking too much if I expect them to make sense, aren’t I.
Jim: Yes, I’m afraid you are.
Matt T: As I said, I’m not real familiar with fantasy-based movies like “Lord of the Rings.” But I think the equation of Obama with the “Precious” is as you said, based on what little sense I’ve been able to make from my horrified scrollings through TGW. Also, as far as I can tell, the only ones who take PUMAs seriously are PUMAs themselves. Except when MSM bobbleheads need a useful idiot for their narrative.
Let the record show that I have already called tragic snowmobile accident
I believe you also mentioned something about a stairwell death. Yes, I’m keeping track.
There’s a person I’ve seen commenting on a few liberal blogs who always manages to turn whatever the subject of the thread to take a nasty stab at Obama. Always when this person shows up, a couple of comments later someone else (always the same names) shows up and does the same thing. I strongly suspect this is one person and sock puppet cruising hither and thither in an attempt to ratfuck. Never so extreme as TGW commenters, but real quick to cry sexism at any attack on Palin.
If I’m wrong and these are two different people and are truly legitimate angry Hillary supporters I duly apologize. However, I think it likely that there is a small contingent trying to sow the seeds of discontent around the liberal blogosphere. I don’t think it’s working very well. Most of the sane people, even if they really don’t like Obama, have come to realize how really fucking bad a thing it will be if Obama loses to McCain.
As to the term skank: I’ve heard it applied to men, usually men of lower social economic means and not necessarily related to perceived sexual activity. It’s rare though. I suspect those who use it in that sense are confusing it with the more common-for-men term “scuzz”,
The commenters I mention above haven’t been around Sadly,No! since the primaries, AFAIK.
OK I need some to put a guess on the record then.
A tragic overdose of Viagra, leading to fatal erection of much more than four hours.
Maybe he’ll be Gaslighted instead.
When “skank” and “slut” are applied to men (and I’ve never heard it, but it wouldn’t surprise me), it’s likely meant as a viler form of “whore” and even “bitch.” All refer to female sexuality, although when applied to men I’d guess it’s meant more to degrade and humiliate, for what could possibly be worse for a man to be compared to than a woman?
Also, I heart Matt T.
In the McCain death pool, I’ll say heart attack while unleashing a rage-choked attack on Cindy for her overuse of makeup.
I’ll take things that will make the SS very unhappy for $1,000.
Gotta love the way they’ll pray for his salvation too.
Nice. Sweet. Where the fuck can I buy a gun?
Oh, my guess:
Drowned in a tub full of amniotic fluid.
[runs away]
Tragic snowmobile accident….
Staircase accident….
I dunno.
Perhaps it will be as simple as visiting Walter Reed Middle School, … wandering aimlessly looking for photo ops with wounded/maimed vets, …never to be seen or heard from again.
I’ve lost track of what this thread is even about.
Hey, did HTML get back from Denver okay?
You probably think this thread is about you, dont you…
It’s a lot closer to fucking Canada, and nobody’s bothered talking to any Canadians who might have been in a position to deal with the Palindrone.
I’ve lost track of what this thread is even about.
Look up.
Wayyy up.
And I’ll call Rusty.
You know the satirical shirt which reads ‘University of Iowa, Idaho City, Ohio’? That’s probably what the Palindrone wore during her college years. With a moose on it. And a gun.
…she went to five different colleges in three states to get her four year college degree.
My grandpa did the same. The reason there was that he was an uncontrollable drunken hellion – no way the same principle could apply to Ms. Mooseburger.
I’m wondering what’s really going on. I have two scenarios that play out in my head:
1) Herr Rove has an ongoing bet with the RNC: You pick the candidate, I’ll get ’em elected. RNC is calling him on the bet.
2) The RNC has managed to accumulate enough power that they feel a coup will succeed.
Either way, I need another drink.
Occam’s razor: The RNC is acting batshit crazy, complete with babbling nonsense, because the members of the RNC are batshit crazy and given to babbling nonsense.
May angels sing to Fr William of Occam.
“Community Organizer.”
Conservatives Pray for McCain’s Death
I’m with a commenter at Rising Hegemon on this one – fatal Segway accident.
My only question – how will they ever convince him to get on the fucking thing in the first place?
You LIE-brals hate Sarah Barracuda because she was against the bridge to nowhere when she was humping her husband’s partner. I suspect they were simply waiting for some polar bears to come by so they could shoot them when it got real cold (it’s Alaska, after all) and they needed to exchange body warmth and fluids in order to keep from getting hypothermic. It’s just typical of you DEMON-crats to go off on some tangent of accusing her of wrongdoing when there’s always gonna be a simple explanation, if you’d just listen to the Republicans explain it.
in 2000, mcmansions ran his campaign the way he wanted to, and had his ass handed to him by what turned out to be, the worst president in sixty years. so this time around, he totally is doing everything the hired guns tell him he should do to become president. do the hired guns know what they’re doing this time around? do they have enough juice in the system left to swing it? is the electorate too sick of them to play along? i say no. the repugs are bankrupt. they think the nutbags can hold the party together.
Aw, c’mon Rugged, it’s demon-craps.
Well, looks like the McMafia went up to Alaska to shut some people up.
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=11249
Nice. Continuing the Republican tradition of strongarming witnesses and obstructing justice.
Sigh.
If there was any question as to how these people intend to govern, I think it has been settled.
I call mauled by starving polar bear, within first hundred days.
This blog has tons of crazy stuff on Palin… http://liz-seattlespeak.blogspot.com
Like 50 thousand dollars spent on CARPET during renovations on the governor’s mansion
http://www.gov.state.ak.us/omb/09_omb/budget/Admin/Veto/2008proj45391.pdf
totally corrupt.
seconded! thanks for speaking up, matt t. i was thinking the same thing but i didn’t have the energy to post it. thank you.
My McCain dead pool pick:
Victim of murder/suicide by jilted Lieberman.
Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come.
To answer an earlier commentator wondering about how Sowell got a gig with a Stanford based think tank:
The Hoover Institution is a rat-hole of neocon politics. It really is. When I was doing my degree, I took a module on the return of great power politics, or potential thereof, and unfortunately, every single week our reading pretty much involved one link from the Hoover insitute, referring us to one of the Kagan clan or someone similar, where there would be endless fulminating about the autocratic governments of China, Russia and the Third World possibly coming into an alliance against NATO.
It was the most tiresome, contradictory and bullshit series of International Relations articles I had ever read, more like a bunch of propaganda pieces meant to bring in ‘liberal’ hawks and Realists to the Neocon foreign policy camp, than anything like actual discussion on, you know, the potential problems and advantages of a multipolar world.
That they would hire Sowell does not amaze me at all. I would not be surprised to see certain company or individual names funding lots of the research that the Insitute undertakes, if its anything like my own experience with think tanks. Being right, or interested in making fact based arguments with research behind them is not as important as creating a narrative – no matter how implausible – using the ideal of impartial academia as a smokescreen for vested political interests. Not all think tanks are like this, of course, but some clearly are, and you can usually tell by the type of people they hire and, more importantly, the type of people they exclude.
Grinnin’ Tom Sowell:
This is a familiar bad logic ploy that wingnuts like to try when they’re nailed for hypocrisy:
“Aha, see! By pointing out we got caught doing what we were accusing you of doing, now you’re admitting you’re just as bad.”
Logic FAIL.
I actually clicked on Goober’s link…now I feel as if I’ve jumped into a giant vat of horseshit.
Concern trolls of the world, unite!
PUMAS my ass. More like chickenshit right-wing morons terrified of a black President pretending to be Hillary supporters.
Sheesh. Some right-wing maniacs should lay of the crystal meth and blinding racial hatred that fuels their anti-Obama insanity. It can only lead to some very, very bad things happening. Remember Timothy McVeigh? Imagine the thousands of right-wing, racist wackos who will lose their fucking minds when Obama wins.
Death pool entry #2: McCain’s buccal boil grows, takes over from his original head, starts making statements that are contrary to the original McCain’s principles.
McCain’ll snuff his lid with the Mother Of All Brainfarts. However, he will remain in office until the Politburo can finagle the propaganda machine to accept Mooselini without plunging the Dow down to 500.
hey guys, did you hear Jay Leno the other night:
‘Sarah palin sold the State Governor’s jet on E-Bay! Yep, that’s true! And you know what is interesting? John and Cindy McCain are the ones who bought it!” Zing!
Bwahahaha! That Leno! Sucha jokester!
It was a Palin contributor who bought the plane. $600K off the price.
I agree: the R’s have decided to become the wingnut party.
That’s okay by me. They are in the last room from Masque of the Red Death. Unmask! Unmask!
I think we could make the case that he already is.
McCain may already be dead and stuffed, Brezhnev-style.
McCain may already be dead and stuffed, Brezhnev-style.
Weekend at Bernie’s Part IV.
Part III was the charade the Roman Catholic Church played with Pope J-P II’s corpse; he’d been dead for ten years before he actually “died.”
Bernie’s corpse was more fun than McCain and may well have had more coherent policy positions.
for what could possibly be worse for a man to be compared to than a woman?
A woman being compared to a man?
Skank= abject, unkempt, substance-abusing, prostitutionally promiscuous, and interpersonally vicious.
To the extent that you’re saying it’s sexist to apply the term INAPPROPRIATELY to Sarah Palin, you might have an argument. (As far as I know she is merely interpersonally vicious.)
To the extent you want to remove a descriptive word from the liberal lexicon, you don’t.
Skank= abject, unkempt, substance-abusing, prostitutionally promiscuous, and interpersonally vicious.
Also pretty much used on women.
To the extent that you’re saying it’s sexist to apply the term INAPPROPRIATELY to Sarah Palin, you might have an argument. (As far as I know she is merely interpersonally vicious.)
As far as I can see that was the extent of the argument when you took issue.
To the extent you want to remove a descriptive word from the liberal lexicon, you don’t.
Yes, “lower class slut” should remain part of the liberal lexicon.
>As far as I can see that was the extent of the argument when you took issue.
Fine. I can see that. Just as it is sexist to apply the term “bitch” to women whose behaviors would be considered unremarkable in a man.
But I was concened that the reproach was more comprehensive. To remove the word “bitch” from the approved vocabulary, even when it APPLIES, is excessive word policing, just as much as removing the word “prick” when it applies.
I’m sorry, but there ARE bitches and pricks in this world and I think we should be able to call them what they are. There are also, sad to say, skanks.
There are also, sad to say, skanks.
If you’re setting yourself up as the Judge of Appropriate Sexual Relations, sure. Some of those judges think the skanks are girls who’ll fuck anybody, or girls who fuck too many people, or girls who fuck someone other than their husbands, or girls who fuck at all, or girls who won’t fuck them. I don’t know that the liberal lexicon has settled on an agreed standard.
I don’t see where anyone said anything about removing the word “bitch,” or anything else for that matter, from “the approved vocabulary,” whatever that may be.
I posed the question: “What could possibly be worse for a man to be compared to than a woman?” The question of whether the particular word “skank” is misogynist is a separate issue.
Your point that there are indeed “bitches” and “pricks” in the world is not in dispute. I agree with others here, however, that “skank” refers to female sexuality in a pejorative sense — a category that includes a multitude of colorful descriptions for women but, as far as I know, none for men.
Julia,
If you want to call women you disapprove of “skanks”, I’ve got no problem with that. Just own it, is all’s I’m asking. You use “skank” to condemn a woman you don’t approve of, thus implying she’s of dubious character because she’s a stinky ho, then I personally feel fine with considering you part of the overall problem and not really helping things. In other words, you’re an asshole. If you’re cool with being thus, I’m cool with it, too. And no one talked about “removing” words or “word policing”, whatever the fuck that means. Don’t try to cloud up the issue with that weak-ass “mmph, mmph you’re too PC” horseshit.
I’m enough of an asshole to refer to Palin as a skank, a skeeze, a scuzz, a sleasebag & a slut. Given that her hubby’s ex-business-partner just “conveniently” sealed his divorce papers, that last one may not be too far afield after all.
LOL, booger posted a pumapac link!
Dude, shouldn’t you be weaving baskets or making picnic tables or something?
If you actually take a proven – & laughably transparent – ratfuck like PUMA at face value, I’ve got a SWEET deal on the Holland Tunnel you might want to look into. You’ll make the $20 million back on tolls in just a few years, honest!
Interested? Click the link to find out how!
(*looks up & down thread for SowellFan, makes sad face, puts down sledgehammer*)
If you guys are declining to use disapproving words about anyone’s sexual behavior, that’s your privilege. Just quit implying that “liberals” are under some obligation to eschew certain words.
And of course I accept that you disapprove of my behavior enough to call me an asshole. Although I’d much prefer to be called a bitch, just on aesthetic grounds.
How does being an “asshat” grab you, Julia?
I often find it an amusing enough term, simply for the image it conjures up.
P.S.
I posed the question: “What could possibly be worse for a man to be compared to than a woman?”
Turn it around, as I suggested above. It’s just as “bad” to compare women to men, is it not? Calling them trannies, etc. Mocking them for having insufficiently “feminine” attributes?
As people were doing on this blog last week.
You’re all a bunch of jerks for assuming that “skank” has to be some kind of condemnation.
Just quit implying that “liberals” are under some obligation to eschew certain words.
The particular usage is the issue. I used “skank” at Roy’s new digs.
IMO the non-ironic use of the word always says more about the user than about the target.
As people were doing on this blog last week.
How times change: now YOU’RE the jerk! What a crazy world.
It’s just as “bad” to compare women to men, is it not? … Mocking them for having insufficiently “feminine” attributes?
And what planet did you say you hail from?
P.S. You’re STILL not reading my original question correctly. Hint: It was rhetorical.
>How times change: now YOU’RE the jerk! What a crazy world.
What? I’m not sure I understand you (although I’ll cop to being a jerk/asshole/bitch last week when I was laughing along. Who’s with me?).
I wasn’t condemning that. I kind of enjoyed it, even with its frisson of liberal guilt. It WAS jerky, but that bitch deserved to be kicked around a little. I just remarked that if it’s evidence of the sexism of our society to refer to men as pussies, it’s also sexist to refer to Ann Couter as Mann Coulter and suchlike, and if knuckles are going to be rapped for using ugly, sexist words/tropes, everyone who laughed last week deserves a whack.
>And what planet did you say you hail from?
You don’t think it’s HIGHLY insulting for a woman to be mocked as a “trannie”? As in, not being a “real woman” because her appearance or behavior is “too masculine”? Terms like “bulldyke” when aimed at women are pretty much equivalent to “pussy” aimed at men, aren’t they?
I understand that your question was meant rhetorically. I chose to look at it literally because it revealed an interesting irony.
This is a humor site. As such it has -or should have- more license than a site/tv show/column that expects to be taken seriously as meaningful political discourse. That’s why I objected to what I saw as an attempt to “police” our language here.
That’s why I objected to what I saw as an attempt to “police” our language here.
Especially since it was all in your head. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: if you wanna use dehumanizing language to bash people, go for it. Just own that shit, goddamnit, and quit trying to get a free pass. You’re an asshole, might as well indulge. I have no power over anyone, and thus, can’t police jack shit, okay? Calm down, I wear tennis shoes, not jackboots.
And to use your complaint about the tranny business, yes, that’s just as bad and folks who use “transexual” as an insult against women they don’t like are just as big assholes as people who use “skank” as a way of keeping uppity bitches with overused and filthy vaginas in their place. And “Hey, it’s just a joke” is a pathetic defense. Here’s a hint: to use humor as a shield, one must actually be funny. Being on a humor site – and I really can’t stress this enough – doesn’t give one carte blanche to just toss around dehumanizing, hateful language and then brush it off as just yuks. Seriously, if you’re gonna be an asshole – and you seem intent on being just that – go for it. Just don’t pretend you have the right to determine who can and cannot be considered “the right kind of folk”. Makes you look like a real asshole.
>if you wanna use dehumanizing language to bash people, go for it. Just own that shit, goddamnit, and quit trying to get a free pass.
I did not ask for one, and I object strenuously to you saying that I did. I explained my thinking on the use of the word. I did not demand that you let me go on it. In fact, I acknowedged your “asshole” epithet as arguably appropriate.
>Just don’t pretend you have the right to determine who can and cannot be considered “the right kind of folk”. Makes you look like a real asshole.
Sheeze. Look who’s talking.
I simply objected to your implied characterization of me (or essentially anyone who uses The Word) as “not a real liberal.” That was irritating. So I rolled my eyes.
I didn’t say you weren’t allowed to call me a bitch, a skank, an asshole, whatever, or to judge me as “not your kind of people.” You can say what you like, pass what judgments you feel justified. That’s everyone’s privilege.
But I am also allowed to object to what you say about me. Speak up for myself, and perhaps for others who were similarly irritated by your “determination of who was or wasn’t” a proper liberal.
I will own to “asshole,” because I AM a rude and and judgmental bitch. That’s just a fact. But I will not let someone publicly call me “not a liberal” because I make use of a word THEY think isn’t properly used by liberals. That’s when I feel a need NOT to “own” your judgment. Sorry. You can still judge me to be a non-liberal or a “bad” liberal or whatever the hell you were trying to say, you just can’t expect that I will quietly accept that judgment or Mend My Ways.
Ms. Nicky’s interesting question was a side issue, but I thank her for the stimulus to my thinking on the matter.
Thanks to you, too, for the excellent discussion, but I’m burnt out now. I think I’ll let you have the last word about the horror that is me. Cheers!
Julia: Sister, let’s have a discussion about feminist theory, terminology, and sexism another day. I think we’ve all had a really really long and politically surreal week to deal with. We’re pretty much on the same wavelength, but as free thinkers of course we’re going to clash on the details.
So, c’mon kids! This is a humor blog, and we’ve got a good fight to fight!
Letttt’s goooo! [image of Belushi in Animal House psyching the gang up to go do some really fun and anarchic action, I’m too lazy at this point to YouTube a link]
Julia,
Well, as long as you admit you’re comfortable with using that kind of dehumanizing language, as I’ve said over and over, I’m cool with it. I have neither the power nor the inclination to drum you or anyone who does out of the Liberal Treehouse (mainly because I don’t have much use for it m’self). What *I* object to is folks who use that sort of language and don’t want to be called out on it. Liberal or not, you are an asshole, but since you’re comfortable with that, all’s good in the world. Just don’t complain when it comes around, is all.
“That’s, um, a pretty friggin’ great school, and if I had to guess, I’d that any institution affiliated with it could have its pick of people. So why is he writing such garbage?”
Tenure.