Folding, spindeling, and mutilating lauguage for fun since Aug, 2004
Monday, 23 February 2009

My friend Eric sent me the link for this video.  It is pretty good.  Leave it to a guy with a degree in economics to find something like this.




Monday, 23 February 2009 11:38:43 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] | #
Saturday, 21 February 2009


(Hat Tip: Pharyngula)

Saturday, 21 February 2009 12:17:01 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] | #
Friday, 20 February 2009

Ann Coulter on Larry King last night.

1)      The economic crisis only began last fall?  Then what have the economists been predicting for the last several years?  How come the situation we are in is the exact situation that was predicted to be the result of Bush’s policies and common business practices all along?  Seriously?  Does she really expect that people have forgotten all of the news stories and commentary that the right dismissed as “liberal whining”?

2)      “I’m very popular” (hair toss):  gag.  I have never personally met anyone who says “I like Ann Coulter.”  Even the conservatives that share her politics back out the door when her name is mentioned “uh…well…you have to remember that she’s an entertainer, not a real political voice”.  Uh huh.  They love her, and I suspect that most of them secretly agree with her…they just want to keep it a secret.

3)      “I like real men…ie conservatives…I don’t want them checking with the UN before making a move”  She should date good old Vox Dei then.  He doesn’t believe that date rape is real rape, so not only would he have no qualms about making a move without consulting the UN, but he might just feel free to drop a Mickey in her drink before making a move. 

4)      "Conservative women have more orgasms" Leave it to a conservative to simultaneously make sex into a sort of sports competition, AND claim to take it more seriously.

5)      Like I’m going to be chastised by a woman who claims to take sex more seriously and treat it more sparingly, but would never get invited onto television except that she is positively twitchy with physical signals of sexual availability.*

6)      Question:  Who was the last politician who was wildly successful with a campaign that

(among other things) called for a focus on traditional family values, and in particular detailed in  equal parts calls for increased public morality and a move away from “Bourgeois prudery” **; specifically highlighting the benefit of the increased pleasure of socially approved traditional marriage? (Hint:  He took Europe by storm!)***

7)      “I think we need a little NASDAQ  ticker that tells what words we can use and with whom…”  Uh…most of us do, Ann.  It is called “socialization”.  It is a collection of situational rules that people (and I am referring to people here, so I know this is strange for you) learn as they grow and interact with people (there’s that word again) in different situations and talk with them about different subjects, and learn through experience what is appropriate.  Yes, it is hard.  Yes, there are some people who are incapable of learning those rules.  However, the inability to learn them and apply them is not a virtue.  I realize that you think it is, and that it makes you smarter, but the rest of us just find it sad.

8)      “”…class up the category, like calling the GI Bill a form of welfare…”  The only people I have heard of referring to the GI Bill as “welfare” have been conservatives.

9)      About her comment that 80% of the prison population came from single moms…well, the statistics that I have heard is much higher than that for prisoners that were raised in Christian homes, and claim to be Christian.  I imagine that at least that many went to public schools…so maybe it is Christianity or public schools that cause criminality?  Or I imagine that more than 80% of the prison population wore blue jeans growing up…could that have something to do with it?  Yawn. 




*Not that there’s anything wrong with that…some men are turned on by the trampy-vampy Unattainable Ice Queen/Slut Just For You tease act, and some think it is sort of transparent and uninteresting.  Whatever floats your boat, I guess.  I just think that taking a common and pedestrian fetish and turning it into a national model for ideal relationships is a strange and bad idea.

** In other words, his argument went that if women were just a little less inhibited with their husbands, their husbands wouldn’t go to prostitutes, and we wouldn’t need to have public health initiatives, which are a liberal Marxist abomination.  Seriously, if you have not read Mein Kampf, you should; the parallels would stagger you.  Of course, he also recognized that this would necessitate training the young women to want to please their husbands in every way, and also pushing the idea of marriage and “moral purity” from a young age.  You might also be surprised at how much he agrees with Ann on the subjects of multiculturalism, the liberal press, war protestors, the importance of world opinion, family values, abortion, and the short-comings of liberal democratic leadership.  It seems a little telling that Ann herself heard “Mein Kampf” when Barbara Walters was reading her book.

***For the language impaired:  I am NOT saying that people who believe that sex within a serious, monogamous relationship is more fulfilling are like Hitler:  I’m saying that those who try to turn that belief into the exclusive political brand of a single party and then go on to use it as a form of mob-based social engineering and a tool for political eliminationism and manipulation are like Hitler. ‘Cause that’s what he did, and it worked for him really well.  You’d think people would be smarter than that the second time around, is all.

Friday, 20 February 2009 14:45:25 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] | #
Thursday, 19 February 2009

Oh God, the laughing. It hurts.



Thursday, 19 February 2009 19:22:13 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Tuesday, 17 February 2009

I can just play this for my kids in the morning...


Tuesday, 17 February 2009 08:56:28 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] | #
Sunday, 15 February 2009 putting rich people on the Endagered Species list?


(Hat Tip: DumpBachmann)

LOL!  We're running out of rich people in this country?  That's not the statistics.  The statistics say that the Republican status quo has shrunk the middle class and left the working poor farther behind.  In otherwords, redistribution of wealth is just fine if it directs the weath upward.

I keep wondering why it is such a crime to have the top 1% pay 60% of the taxes, or whatever statistic the right is throwing around nowdays when they are accumulating 90% of the created wealth.  Seems as though they are still winning.  Personally, I think that these commonly repeated facts are not terribly accurate... the CIA factbook about the US says this:

 Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households.

In other words, if you are in the top 20%, you are benefitting from the economy, and should probably be somewhat motivated to pay for it's maintenance and repair.  To not do so would be a very bad investment.

Another thing I don't get is that the right seems to think Obama invented the concept of the progressive tax.

Actually, I believe it was that little splinter group from the Whig party that originally pushed it.  A bunch of wild-eyed liberal upstarts called the Republican party began the discussion about such things.

They say Obama is arrogant, but they're the ones trying to give him credit for hundreds of years of good ideas and sound policy.

Also, I would like to point out that it is the Republican areas that tend to have the lowest income brackets, and yet get way more federal money.  Bachmann is so full of crap here about money being sucked away from Republican areas and sent to Democratic areas.

Here's the deal Red States, we don't mind that we pay in way more federal dollars than we get back, and the money goes to you instead.  It is a small price to pay for not having to share the country with the great whirlpools of suck that you would turn your states into if we didn't.

In return, could you please invite the numbskulls that keep voting for Michele Bachmann to come and sleep on your couch so that we won't have to live with them anymore?  That'd be great.  Thanks.

[Update:  More on the Republican hypocracy of complaining about Federal Taxes while they take more than they contribute:

another thing I've noticed is that there is a lot of talk in Red States about creating wealth, but it seems that it is the Blue States that actually DO it.]

Sunday, 15 February 2009 21:15:20 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Thursday, 12 February 2009

It is a threat to Christianity to pass a law that makes it a crime to hunt and kill gay people ...

THAT'S censorship.

But it ISN'T censorship to demand that a pastor's public prayer be stricken from the record of the Oklahoma Legislator ... because he is gay.

Christians are horribly persecuted, and the gays are a threat to our civil society.

Got it.

Orwell would be so proud.

(Hat Tip: Erudite Redneck)

Thursday, 12 February 2009 22:05:24 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] | #
Thursday, 12 February 2009 15:54:51 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Tuesday, 10 February 2009

Dear Food Distributors,


I just wanted to write and tell you that you are not fooling anybody.  We can tell that you are making the packages smaller at the same time that you are inching up the prices on said packages.

We understand that you are in business to make as much money as you possibly can, and we also understand that some of your costs have gone up.  We know that you have to charge somewhat more than you did before for your products, and we understand as well that you simply cannot resist pushing that a little farther than necessary.

That is moderately grumpy-making, but we can handle it.

What I’m calling you out on is your insult to our intelligence.  Yes, we notice that the packages are getting smaller, and we notice that the prices are going up.  We also notice that for businessmen, things like having to re-size all of the products, their packaging, etc. is not too expensive, but keeping them melamine, salmonella and e. coli- free is.

We understand that our economic and physical health are unimportant compared to your profit margin being high enough to give the executives their spiffy bonuses.  We are neither surprised nor are we capable of being particularly grumpy about it anymore.

However,  if it is not too much trouble, do you think you could possibly see your way clear to not act like we are a bunch of pre-operational toddlers who cannot properly process differences in relative size and volume?

That would be great…thanks!


Teresa Lhotka

Tuesday, 10 February 2009 09:41:53 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [20] | #
Friday, 06 February 2009
Friday, 06 February 2009 09:29:55 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [5] | #

Today, Marcus (the 12-year-old formerly known as Grasshopper) and I were discussing a local Charter School.  He would like to attend it, because he wants to learn Greek and Latin, and it is a Classics school.  I have to check into it to see if they offer Latin and Greek.

Anyway, I said that he could try to get into it, but pointed out that they have a uniform requirement, and that the school is very ridgidly administered.  He would have to learn to fit a very narrow mold.

He thought he could do that.  Then, I pointed out that the more free-wheeling style of the mainstream public schools in the district forces kids to take more personal responsibility, and that there is something to be said for learning to cope with chaos.  Tim (the 15-year-old) has become remarkably organized, and adept at dealing with problems on his own, and pursueing solutions to his difficulties on his own, for instance.

Marcus replied "Mom, I think that academics are more important right now.  I'm sure that I will encounter chaos when I am older, and I can learn to deal with it then."

My jaw dropped.  It just seemed like a funny thing for a 12-year-old to say.

Friday, 06 February 2009 07:43:08 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  | #
Wednesday, 04 February 2009

Sure, it seems pretty bad.  We got a Governor of Illinois whose corruption and fecklessness defy gravity, and he's a Democrat.

Obama can't seem to find a Democrat that has a clean tax history.

And there are items in the stimulus package that not even FDR would consider to be legitamate stimulus items...

...yeah...little bit of ice-water to bring down the swelling on the hope-change bubble...

But it could be worse.

These people could still be running the joint.

(Hat Tip: Erudite Redneck)

Wednesday, 04 February 2009 19:32:05 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  | #
Tuesday, 03 February 2009

Not long ago, I got a mailing from the Republican party, begging me for money to help Norm Coleman in his noble and brave attempt to deny Minnesota half of their representation in the U.S. Senate during the time when Obama would benefit from having as many Democrats as possible.

I declined to contribute, and boy am I glad I did!  Assuming thats where the money would really go, you couldn't ask for a bunch of lawyers less worth the money.

Apparently, the Coleman team can't make unaltered copies that they are going to introduce into evidence, and have trouble vetting voters who didn't committ some sort of transgression that amounts to voter fraud.

So THAT'S the nefarious plot of Democrats to "steal the election"!  Trick Coleman into putting properly rejected voters on the stand, and introducing inaccurate evidence!

They're sooo sneaky!

Tuesday, 03 February 2009 10:27:08 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  | #
Admin Login
Sign In
Pick a theme: