Thursday, August 21, 2014

FBI director calls Islamic terror group behind journalist slaying 'savages' | Star Tribune

FBI director calls Islamic terror group behind journalist slaying 'savages' | Star Tribune: What is new is that they have done it to an American. They have been doing it to other Arabs and Muslims for decades but that was merely 'their culture' and condemning it as barbarism was, therefore, racist.


Tuesday, May 27, 2014

Nigel vs the Lunatic Mainstream :: SteynOnline

From Mark Steyn: 


Nigel vs the Lunatic Mainstream :: SteynOnline: "Occasionally, the realities of electoral politics oblige the village's denizens to dissemble to the barbarians beyond, as in David Cameron's current pledge of a referendum on EU membership sometime after his reelection, which is intended to staunch defections to UKIP by seizing the nuanced ground of pretending that he's not entirely opposed to adopting the position of conceding the prospect of admitting the possibility of potentially considering the theoretical option of exploring the hypothetical scenario of discussing in a roundabout way Britain's leaving the EU. He doesn't mean it, of course, but he has to toss a bone out there from time to time. Lord Feldman, the Tories' co-chairman and Cameron's tennis partner, rather gave the game away when he was overheard dismissing the massed ranks of his party as "mad, swivel-eyed loons." Weary of being insulted by Cameron and his Oxford chums, Conservative voters began phoning the local UKIP office for membership applications. In nothing flat, "swivel-eyed loons" became a badge of honor, and the prime minister was giving speeches to the effect that, underneath the insincere unprincipled elitist veneer, he was a swivel-eyed loon himself.

"
I like the 'swivel-eyed loons' bit. It seems to me to be a fine tradition in the politics of the English speaking world to take insults as a badge of honor. Indeed, the names of the two great parties in Great Britain are insults adopted as standards by their objects. This seems to me to be a much healthier kind of politics than the endless whining about being owed an apology that constitutes contemporary political discourse.

Nigel vs the Lunatic Mainstream :: SteynOnline

From Mark Steyn: 


Nigel vs the Lunatic Mainstream :: SteynOnline: "Occasionally, the realities of electoral politics oblige the village's denizens to dissemble to the barbarians beyond, as in David Cameron's current pledge of a referendum on EU membership sometime after his reelection, which is intended to staunch defections to UKIP by seizing the nuanced ground of pretending that he's not entirely opposed to adopting the position of conceding the prospect of admitting the possibility of potentially considering the theoretical option of exploring the hypothetical scenario of discussing in a roundabout way Britain's leaving the EU. He doesn't mean it, of course, but he has to toss a bone out there from time to time. Lord Feldman, the Tories' co-chairman and Cameron's tennis partner, rather gave the game away when he was overheard dismissing the massed ranks of his party as "mad, swivel-eyed loons." Weary of being insulted by Cameron and his Oxford chums, Conservative voters began phoning the local UKIP office for membership applications. In nothing flat, "swivel-eyed loons" became a badge of honor, and the prime minister was giving speeches to the effect that, underneath the insincere unprincipled elitist veneer, he was a swivel-eyed loon himself.

"
I like the 'swivel-eyed loons' bit. It seems to me to be a fine tradition in the politics of the English speaking world to take insults as a badge of honor. Indeed, the names of the two great parties in Great Britain are insults adopted as standards by their objects. This seems to me to be a much healthier kind of politics than the endless whining about being owed an apology that constitutes contemporary political discourse.

Wednesday, May 14, 2014

35 Ways British Men Can Address Each Other, Defined

35 Ways British Men Can Address Each Other, Defined: "28 People Who Totally Kinda Had A Little Bit Of A…"



The linked piece is a list of forms of address in contemporary Britain. The interesting thing is, the more insulting the term the closer the social relation. It is pretty funny and worth a read on its own.



It reminds me of something that has often struck me: the names for political parties and movements in the English speaking world tend to have their origins in insults from the other side of the political debate. Both 'Whig' and 'Tory', for instance, started out as terms of abuse. In effect, they answer "Yes, I am, so?" I think it is an attractive and manly--if one is still allowed to use such a term--sort of custom. The contrast with our contemporary political discourse is striking. We are continually monitoring the utterances of the other side to find a word we can pounce upon and loudly demand an apology for.



I suspect that the approach represented by the older discourse is healthier. It is certainly more fun.

Friday, February 14, 2014

Snuffles on the job

No one better try anything in this parking lot, not while snuffles is on the job.

At the Apple Store


Every time I do something at Apple I get a pleasant surprise. 
Courtney, my new hero, just told me I was still under my AppleCare warranty and they're going to place my battery for free.

Sunday, January 26, 2014

Wendy Davis, Classic Texas Four-Flusher | RealClearPolitics



Some Futile Filibusters are
Approved by the Media


Classic and Classy take down of Wendy Davis by Carl Cannon, a writer that I had not heard of before but whom I will be following from now on. I frankly didn't care much about the discrepancies in the Texas candidate for governor but after reading this you get a real sense of her ambition and unscrupulousness.



Perhaps what is most powerful in Cannon's understated account of the controversy around Ms. Davis' account of her life is the vicious self-righteousness with which she has answered the most reasonable observations about the inaccuracies in her campaign biography. Like really good writers he lets the actions of the subject speak for themselves as much as possible, limiting himself to some wry comments in passing. My favorite is this at the end.



As a chaser to such deceit, the campaign added a gaffe in the form of a Wendy Davis statement that Abbott never “walked a day in my shoes.” One doesn’t have to wonder how liberals would respond if George W. Bush had said that about a paraplegic opponent. And then, a surreptitious videotape began circulating in conservative circles purportedly showing Davis backers laughing about Abbott being in a wheelchair.
That’s not as surprising as it first seems. Wendy Davis came to prominence when she filibustered legislation that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, require abortion mills to meet the health and safety standards of hospitals, and ensure that the physicians in charge of abortion clinics have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.
The impetus for this legislation came about in the wake of the murder conviction of Kermit Gosnell, the Pennsylvania doctor who routinely performed late-term abortions, and killed babies who managed to survive the procedure. Many of his patients were grievously injured, too, and at least one died. All of them were women. 

Sunday, January 19, 2014

Who cares what religious conservatives think?


There is something that strikes me as strange in the arguments we have about gay people. On the one hand it is argued that society's disapproval of gays is the source of many of the problems that gays have, such as, for instance, their higher rates of tobacco use as is argued in this article

But on the other hand, the sort of people who are the chief source of that disapproval such as religious conservatives are themselves the object of ridicule. How can the opinions of people for whom such open contempt is a part of our culture--and I think it is fair to say that religious conservatives serve as little more than the butt of jokes in our mainstream culture--have such an impact on people? 

Moreover, the same cause seems to be maintained to have different effects in similar cases. The same contempt from religious conservatives that is supposed to be the cause of self-loathing and substance abuse among young gays is at the same time, and by many of the same people, sought after and viewed as a sign of being transgressive and meaningful in the realm of art. I think it is even fair to say that the contempt of religious conservatives is advertised and seen as a selling point in the art world. Indeed, the contempt it inspirers from religious conservatives seems in some cases to be the only thing that qualifies certain efforts as art at all, such as the notorious 'Piss Christ'. 

How can something so nourishing to the self-esteem of artists be so damaging to the self-esteem of gays?