"The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing."


Glenn Reynolds:

Barack Obama:
"Impossible to transcend."

Albert A. Gore, Jr.:
"An incontinent brute."

Rev. Jeremiah Wright:
"God damn the Gentleman Farmer."

Friends of GF's Sons:
"Is that really your dad?"

Kickball Girl:
"Keeping 'em alive until 7:45."

Hired Hand:
"I think . . . we forgot the pheasant."

I'm an
Alcoholic Yeti
in the
TTLB Ecosystem

Monday, March 26, 2012

Facial hair . . . is there anything it can't do?

Saturday, March 24, 2012

And I looked, and behold a pale cow . . .

. . . and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him.


Tuesday, March 20, 2012

What happens when a 35-year-old man retakes the SAT?

From Deadspin:
There are many shitty things about being a grownup. You have to make money. You have to do taxes. You have to show up for your bail hearings. It's all really fucking annoying. But one of the few upsides of being an adult is that you NEVER have to take the SAT again. You never have to worry about it. You don't have to give a shit what'll happen if have to pee during the test. You don't have to look at another analogy ever again. It's not a bad tradeoff for all the other piddling crap you have to deal with. I know I was happy with the arrangement.


Monday, March 19, 2012





Saturday, March 17, 2012

It's not what it looks like. I can explain . . .


You don't suppose . . . .

Washington Post headline: "George Clooney arrested in Washington at Sudan protest."

So, while George is being arrested, does anyone else wonder where Matt Damon and Brad Pitt are, and what they're stealing?


Les chats ninjas


The Feast of St. Patrick, Bishop


Thursday, March 15, 2012

Tea Party: Another Fat White Racist Guy Running for Congress in Utah

. . . oh, wait.

Labels: ,

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

Abstinence: not just a laugh-line anymore

We promise we're not making any of this up.  It's on the interwebs, so it must be true.

There's a Facebook Group called "Liberal Ladies Who Lunch."  Now if you think that any such group must necessarily exhibit a very high degree of hysteria . . . well, then, you're a sexist tool of the oppressor class destined for reeducation camp.  Not that you'd be wrong, but still.  It's all so tediously predictable.  "Choice" means "I choose, you pay."  Standing up for "LBGT Rights" means "and you also have to pay for my genital mutilation surgery."  If you wonder aloud why you ought to be required to pay for birth control pills for an upper-middle-class law student, then you're part of the "War on Women."

Currently, the forces of reaction and oppression have become so alarming to the Liberal Ladies who Lunch that they've determined that they're not going to taking it laying down.  No, sir.  They've determined to stand up for their rights and, fiercely clenching an aspirin betwixt their knees, have announced what they're calling the "Access Denied Sex Strike," to run from April 28 through May 5:
Younger men and women may not remember the "good old days" when the only reproductive choice we had was to deny men access to sex. In truth, if we lose our hard won rights to medical care, birth control and pregnancy choice, it won't only affect women. Men will have to go back to the days when they waited for or paid for sex. This issue impacts all of us. This strike is designed to make that point. IT IS NOT A PUNISHMENT OR A WEAPON TO BE USED AGAINST ANYONE! It's a week in which you are conscious of the attack on women's rights, nothing more.

Ask your man to stand with you in solidarity and speak up for your rights, because when we lose our reproductive choices, so do they.
I know, I know. You thought "abstinence" was a laugh-line to be used when discussing sex education; so silly a notion that it can't be taken seriously. But, then, while these folks are liberals, they're also ladies. And if there's one thing a gentleman knows about a lady, it's that her inconsistency and irrationality are just part of her charm.

So don't worry, girls: we still think you're cute as a button.



Who thought THIS was a good idea?

We seem to have our theme for today, wot?

From The Evening Sun (Hanover, PA):
Bobblehead dolls of Abraham Lincoln's killer have been removed from the bookstore at the Gettysburg Museum & Visitor Center.

The bobbleheads of John Wilkes Booth drew criticism last week from some visitors and a distinguished historian who said they felt Lincoln's death should not be trivialized, nor his killer celebrated with such a souvenir.


Flag of Our Fathers

Let us begin today's lesson by observing that, inasmuch as this is the United States, you're pretty much free (or ought to be) to do anything you damn well please, so long as you're not actually injuring someone else (like killing them or stealing their car, for example). This is, or ought to be, particularly true if the thing you damn well please to do is anywhere in the neighborhood of expressing an opinion. And it's most true of all if the opinion you're expressing has anything to do with politics.

It follows that if the Democrats of Lake County, Florida, want to take the flag, replace the field of stars in the canton with a picture of Barack Obama, and fly it outside of their headquarters in Tavares, they'll get no push-back from me. Even if they then fly it from the same staff as the Flag of the United States, in violation of generally understood flag etiquette, it makes no never-mind to me.

But it does raise an interesting question: what lame-brain thought that this was a good idea?

More HERE.


Monday, March 12, 2012

Speaking Truth to Power

Reporter asks Michelle Obama: "How do you respond to critics who say the government should not be telling people how to eat or to stay active?"

Reporter is 11 years old.


"I got walked out on on a date . . . because I said I didn't like french fries."

A Treasury of the World's Worst Online Dating Stories.


"Female sexuality... the timeless mystery."

Responding to the headline, "Grey ties are flying off the shelves as wives take inspiration from X-rated bondage novel to dress up their men," Ann Althouse wonders: "So... is this new-found, book-driven desire a desire to get tied up or to get their men to wear ties? Female sexuality... the timeless mystery."

Labels: ,

Catholic Church Schedules Referendum on Seventh Commandment

That would be so open and modern and progressive, don't you think?

But at least one CNN news-reader seems to take as a given that the Church might want to consider public opinion respecting matters of faith and morals. There's a referendum this November on the ballot in Maine respecting "gay" "marriage." [Personally, we look forward to the time when we can vote in a referendum which would grant to all citizens the right to be elected Holy Roman Emperor, but we digress.]

CNN's Kyra Phillips interviewed the Bishop of Portland, Richard Malone:

Labels: ,

Intentional Walk: Fail


Saturday, March 10, 2012

This will not end well


Friday, March 09, 2012

The Ghost of Oscar Wilde

This just in:
Rush Limbaugh has drawn the ire of celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred, who sent a letter to the Palm Beach County state attorney requesting an investigation into whether the popular radio host should be prosecuted for calling a law student a “slut” and “prostitute” last week.


In a letter dated March 8, Allred, writing on behalf of the Women’s Equal Rights Legal Defense and Education Fund, requested that Palm Beach County State Attorney Michael McAuliffe probe whether the conservative radio personality had violated Section 836.04 of the Florida Statutes by calling Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke the two derogatory words.

The statute stipulates that anyone who “speaks of and concerning any woman, married or unmarried, falsely and maliciously imputing to her a want of chastity” is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree.
The statute, dating from 1883, reads in full as follows:
836.04 Defamation.—Whoever speaks of and concerning any woman, married or unmarried, falsely and maliciously imputing to her a want of chastity, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
It seems to us that there is presented no question of fact as to whether the derogatory statement "imputed to her a want of chastity." Thus, the question to be presented to a jury would be whether that derogatory statement was made "falsely."

We can't help but wonder if Ms. Allred has thought this through.


Thursday, March 08, 2012

Rabbi Disagrees with Catholic Doctrine

Water is wet.  Film at 11:00.

Labels: ,

Wednesday, March 07, 2012

Coppin' some 'tude? That's a cuffin'

A Colorado television station reports:
ADAMS COUNTY - Children who cop an attitude at school might want to think twice. Eleven-year-old Yajira Quezada, a sixth-grader at Shaw Heights Middle School, was handcuffed and taken to a holding facility for disobeying the orders of an assistant principal during lunch and being "argumentative and extremely rude," 9Wants to Know has learned.

An Adams County Sheriff's Office incident report says the assistant principal found Yajira walking in the hallway during lunch because the girl claimed she was cold and needed to get a sweater from her locker.

The report says the assistant principal was in mid-sentence when Yajira, "turned and walked away saying, 'I don't have time for this.'"

When intervention efforts with a counselor failed, Yajira was handcuffed and put in the school resource officer's patrol car and taken to a juvenile holding facility called "The Link."

"She told me that I need to quit giving her my attitude. Why would they handcuff me? I'm not the type of girl to get arrested," Yajira said.
Sheesh. Things sure have changed since I was in sixth grade. Back then, if every kid with attitude had been cuffed, the Sheriff would have had to bring the big jail transport bus to the school.  So I guess after all the studies and seminars and mountains of Ed.D. degrees handed out in the last 50 years, they've done away with detention, suspension, or calling dad to come pick up his mouthy kid.

Labels: ,

Chevy Volt: "I'm sorry, do you smell something?"

Chevy Volt - Building a Better Tomorrow from Ben Howe on Vimeo.


Pop Quiz!

Question 1. Here's a picture. Who do you think this is?

All righty then.

Question 2. Here's a second picture, taken within a few hours of the first. Who's this?

Question 2 is easy, because there are only two possible answers. Your answer is either "Lindsay Lohan," or "I'm a serious, mentally stable person, and so I have no idea that that's Lindsay Lohan."

And, despite the fact that the papparazzi apparently thought that the person in the first photograph was also Lindsay Lohan, it's not. That's Debbie Harry.

Lindsay Lohan was born in 1986, and will be 26 in July.

Debbie Harry was born in 1945, and will be 67, also in July.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, March 06, 2012

The stuff of nightmares

In answer to your question: it's you, my friend. It's chasing you.

What do you get when you cross this terrifying construct with the autonomous quadracopters being developed by the very smart people at Penn? You get a pack of independent, implacable, tireless robotic Dire Wolves, coming soon to a dark street near you.


I am SO Confused

The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States says:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury . . . , nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law . . . .
The Sixth Amendment adds:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed . . . .
Eric Holder says:
Any decision to use lethal force against a United States citizen — even one intent on murdering Americans and who has become an operational leader of al-Qaeda in a foreign land — is among the gravest that government leaders can face . . . .
Well, sure it is. Because they have to make a presentment or bring their evidence to a Grand Jury, and then arrange for a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury. Right? That must be what he means, right?


Monday, March 05, 2012

It's time we fixed the Bill of Rights

And Frank Fleming is leading the way:
. . . when I dug out a copy of the revered Bill of Rights to show someone how it guarantees everyone a right to contraception, I found no mention of that right!

In fact, the Bill of Rights doesn’t guarantee anything people need — not food, shelter or even broadband internet. The only things it mentions are a few nebulous rights of absolutely no market value. It's rather pointless, really.

Why was the Bill of Rights thought out so poorly? It turns out it was written by these “Founding Fathers” long, long ago, in a much more primitive time. I'm pretty sure their first meeting to draft it was broken up by a woolly mammoth attack.

So it’s no wonder the Bill of Rights looks like it was written by a crazed, right-wing militia member living in an isolated compound. It’s all “Government can't tell me to do this” and “Government can't make me do that” and “I want to have guns.”

Obviously, we’re much more sophisticated now. We aren't like the Founding Fathers, with their primitive fear of government and thunder. We need to update this silly, archaic Bill of Rights, which puts all this emphasis on “freedom” with no mention of the much more important “free stuff.” If we don’t act, other countries will make fun of us for it — and who wants to be tittered at by Belgium?

We want a strong government that guarantees us all the things we need, and we should have a new Bill of Rights that reflects that.

I propose that we have a meeting of all the great minds (college professors, A-list Hollywood actors, people who watch “Downton Abbey”) to list everything people need — basics like food, transportation, and smart phones.


And the brain trust will make it clear that if the “freedom” section ever conflicts with the “free stuff” part, then “free stuff” wins out.


Thursday, March 01, 2012

Andrew Breitbart (1969 - 2012)

Anima eius et animae omnium fidelium defunctorum per Dei misericordiam requiescant in pace.


Babies are Stupid

From Deadspin:
This is the baby's idea of a game: He keeps trying to throw himself off the couch, headfirst. It's completely intentional. I sit him upright, and he looks me in the eye, holds my gaze, grins—and then pitches over sideways. I grab him, reel him back in, and straighten him up, and he grins again and takes another dive.


I had forgotten how incredibly stupid babies are, over the four years since we'd last had one. The previous baby had become a child, a wholly recognizable human being, someone you could have a conversation with. ("I gotta pee," he says. "So go pee," I say. And he goes to the bathroom and pees.) This ability to communicate seemed, when we didn't think very hard about it, to have been there all along. We had always understood each other, child and parents. We'd gotten more fluent about it over time, was all. His infancy, in retrospect, was a puzzle we had all solved, working together.


But then this baby arrived, and he was much, much stupider than that. His brother was born weeks early, tiny and puny, and so it had made sense that it took him a while to be able to do anything. But this one was a full-term baby, a sturdy eight-pounder, and he was unbelievably ignorant and helpless. He knew nothing, understood nothing. He was soft and warm, he had that going for him. His eyes were big and bright; his head was a handsome shape. And yet behind those eyes, or inside that head—a roaring void. For weeks, his mind consisted of one thought: "NIPPLE...? NIPPLE...? NIPPLE...?" I would hold him and he would nuzzle at me, blindly, trying to drink from my collarbone. He would bang his face against my chest over and over, with as much affection as a moth has for a windowpane.
Read the whole thing.


Welcome to the 100th Annual Buggy-Whip Manufacturers Convention & Trade Show