Lamborghini making an SUV.
No, that is not an SUV, it is a FWIT (F***ing What Is That?).
This is like surgically altering a cat to be an alligator that is vegan. It fails on every single level measurable to mankind.
****
William Kristol is not perfect but (a) I like him, and (b) I respect his opinion. It’s no secret that Romney isn’t the guy I’d pick to be president but in a choice between him and Obama I’ll take Romney and dance in the streets (while still hoping for that giant asteroid strike, but still happier than I would otherwise be).
I do believe his take on what it will take to beat Obama. Act like a president… like a LEADER. He’s quite correct that to get down in the mud and poo-flinging trenches with the dems is a losing battle since they are much better at petty sh*t.
But if he allows the race to degenerate into name-calling and gotcha gimmicks, he could lose. Democrats are better than Republicans at the small and nasty stuff. – William Kristol
I agree. I have run into this firsthand with several liberals. When you try to have an intellectual debate and they find themselves confronted with a well reasoned argument that they don’t like they storm away angrily and offended at your gall for your un-compassionate misanthropic world-view. This happened one day at work as I discussed Global Warming with a liberal co-worker. Every statement he uttered was a textbook bullet-point. When he claimed that only 3% of scientists held views counter to AGW, I looked at him with utter disbelief and flat out told him that he needs to stop reading the propaganda and actually research rather than parrot off things that are completely false. He then stormed away muttering “Well, maybe YOU don’t care about destroying your children’s world but I won’t do that to MY children.”
Hey, if he truly believes that, I can commend him on his principles and devotion to his children. But I can also call him out for making arguments that are outlandish and supposedly are self-evident and self-supporting, needing no defense or foundation.
Update: Climate Alarmist Calls for Burning Down Skeptic’s Homes
See the thought process there? “Well, why not? If they won’t listen to me, I have every right to burn down their homes.” Lot of ego wrapped up in that broken toy.
So Romney needs to ignore every damn thing Obama says. He needs to talk about what he will do and not once attack Obama. He needs to be of the mindset that he can say something that cuts his opponent deeply and gives them pause about pulling such crap while staying classy and move right along to the important things.
He doesn’t have the luxury for getting bogged down in the childish antics of the buffoon that currently holds the office that I admire. I once got to see Clinton speak and it was an honor to see the President, it was repulsive to see Clinton. The two can co-exist. I don’t know if I could pull it off so easily if Obama had been in that place at that time. At least Clinton has brains. He actually did know how to lead. I disagreed with damn near everything he stood for but I’d take him over what we have now.
****
There are some things that are just so weird that when you try to dress it up and claim that the condition needs “acceptance” I don’t even consider the notion, such as with liberalism. Also, phantom genitalia fall under that rainbow-colored umbrella of bizzarro-ness. Thank you, FARK.
’I sometimes wake up thinking I have a penis…’
I refuse to read Kristol since the end of the Bush admin when he and Fred Barnes pretty much called me a racist over illegal immigration. Fudge him.
I lost all respect for him, and I had a lot before that. But I will never forgive him, that was beyond the pale.
They called you out personally for being an anti-immigration racist? That’s cheeky. The bastards.
I can’t think of anyone that I’ve ever heard in punditry circles who hasn’t said something that didn’t kind of steam my clams at some point. He steams them less than most.
Thomas Sowell hasn’t offended me yet. Dave Barry, no, I don’t think so. Alan Keyes, no… but then again I might not even understand it if he did diss me.
But this is a free blog. I support your right to sneer at Kristol. Hell, if I ain’t upset at your sneering and boycotting of me I’m not going to get all lathered up about that.
I kind of like the idea… LK’s Folly is a now a “Mandatory Sneer Zone”, like the exact total opposite of a Sanctuary City.
Yes, veesh, I’m flicking you sh*t because you posted that ******* spider post. I hate spiders.
“Lamborghini making an SUV”……………………They will just have to exist beside all the other lifted asphalt 4×4′s that inhabit city strteets and parking lots existing to bolster their owenrs egos because they will not be much use for any offroad travel.
Lots of people annoy me. I don’t agree with anybody 100% on anything, even myself. Sometimes I really tick myself off.
But they didn’t give me the benefit of the doubt, I was against illegal immigration because I hated brown people.
Once you attack me instead of my position I lose all respect for you and that’s what all the Bushies did in 2008.
That ticked me off more than I can say on this blog. Think “eddiebear on a roll”.
I spent 8 years defending him over BS attacks on his character and then he and his peeps start doing to me what I defended them from?
That was unforgivable.
They could put a new Selma pic a day up and I wouldn’t read their crap.
Yeah, the “you’s a racist because you think X” mindset truly pisses me off at times. It’s pretty nearly always the result of a gross oversimplification of the realities.
Here’s an example that I’ve used before… years ago I had a discussion with my psychotic maternal predecessor, Joansey. I maintained that the Civil War was precipitated by but not primarily over slavery because to say that it was solely about slavery is to simplify it too much. It was a lot more complicated than school history books paint it. Here’s where it got ugly – yes, the end result was a cessation of slavery and that was a damn good thing, but when boil down the analyses the Civil War was fundamentally about state’s sovereignty. And, one could argue that the negative consequence of Lincoln’s course of action was to set precedent for the federal government to take a far stronger role relative to the individual state’s rights to self-govern. Of course that is what he meant to do but I question whether it was the best outcome. Witness the imbalance in the power structure today. THERE is some complicated sh*t for you…
Now, you would have thought that I had just traveled back in time, fought on the Confederate side, jumped forward in time, and was now driving around in a pick-up truck festooned with their flag and wearing white sheets and a dozen slaves in chains in the back. She was frothing at the mouth and convinced that by looking at it in any different light other than the simplest “correct” one meant that a retroactive abortion was the only option available to her. Presumably she thought this because I was an abomination that was ready and willing to re-institute slavery.
So yeah, I do get what you are saying. When two ideas are only related by association as defined by someone else, disagreeing with one idea does NOT define your motives towards the other idea, i.e. anti-immigration cannot automatically imply racism. It’s a non-sequitur.
Back to that argument over the Civil War, I often wish that there had been a way to stamp out the repugnant practice of slavery without having set a precedent for the federal government ruling the way it did. In other words, the outcome was good in that slavery was ended (although people continued to treat blacks like sh*t, just in different ways for way too long) but a Union that is not totally consensual is at heart a weakened one. It’s no longer a team in the purest sense but becoming more of an organization. Sometimes it is a mob in more ways than one (corrupt).
Ok, bouncing back to the comment again (I ate too many jelly beans and drank a tonic water – it’s the sugar levels in my brain, sorry). Paragraph four of your comment could be interpreted a few ways. First interpretation – I thought that perhaps you were stating that EvB was an evil bastard, but then I started using my brain and realized that there was a second interpretation. Even if you were saying that EvB was an evil bastard you still must’ve meant the Bush crowd in this instance. (yes EvB, I’m poking fun, no need to f-bomb me into the stone age)
Your wrath sure been something if a Salma pic a day couldn’t patch things up. Not even a Carrie Ann Moss or Christina Hendricks series? Whoa.
The thing is, slavery was not about states’ rights, that required a Constitutional amendment, it was other stuff that was a power grab by the feds.
Disagreeing with me makes you either a racist or a commie. I’m sure of it.
I don’t know that what we’re saying is mutually exclusive. The central issue is the feds making the assumption that they had the final say over what a state could and could not do. Disallowing secession ought not be possible without it being a specifically granted power.
I need some more sugar… hair of the dog that bit me…
I wasn’t disagreeing with you (although I typed with a sneer), I was talking about various idjits who say that states’ rights is a code word for “slavery”.
I spend much of my time pointing out the various examples of one of Heinlein’s truisms: If “everybody knows” such-and-such, then it ain’t so, by at least ten thousand to one
Oh, well. Sorry. I take back what I said. You are NOT a commie.
I like Heinlein. Except for his “Number of the Beast” book. It was weird.
Number of the Beast and Friday are when I stopped reading new Heinlein books, I got sick of everybody having IQs of 200+, running around nekkid and screwing everything that stood still long enough.
I wasn’t saying anything bad about eddibear, I was saying to imagine eddie on a roll and that’s who I felt about the Bush crowd in 2008.
The last time I corresponded with a politician was President Nixon, but I sent a bunch of emails to various pols about that, and all of them were along the lines of, “I’ve defended you for 8 years and now you’re calling me a racist for wanting you to enforce our laws? You’re never getting another penny from me”
Yeah, I sort of figured that out. I knew you weren’t ranking EvB after I sat and reflected a bit.
With the Heinlein and 200+ IQ thing, yes, that gets tiring. If I’m going to read a story about someone with a 200+ IQ it better be about me for once, dammit.
Oh, so you just read fiction?
You are confusing “biography” with “fiction” again. There are remedial classes where they can help you with that issue.