Please do not set the players on fire

You wouldn’t think anyone could make Oakland Raiders fans look genteel, but at the San Siro, the stadium shared by Milan and Inter Milan, with Milan leading 3-0 in the aggregate, an idiot Interista threw something and apparently hit Dida, the Milan goalie, in the face. I wasn’t sure if it was a spark from the nearby flare that hit the ground just before he collapsed or another object too small to see, but either way, he was down and out.

I’m not sure what was going on, as the crowd was already going crazy after Inter had a goal disallowed.

After that, the referee wisely decided to call the game early. It looks as if the game will be awarded to Milan and the rossoneri will rightly advance, but UEFA really has to figure out a way to crack down on this sort of thing. This penchant for throwing things already reached the point of absurdity several years ago, but this is over-the-top insane.

Taliban… Taliban… Taliban, I wanna rock you….

Orac doesn’t know so very much:

I thought the Taliban only existed in Afghanistan, but I was wrong. We apparently have our very own aspiring Taliban wannabes right here in the U.S., even in a state as liberal as Minnesota.

Don’t believe me?

Read this disgusting tidbit from a “conservative” blogger calling himself Vox Popoli. Some of the comments are even scarier.

But don’t read it unless you have a strong stomach.

Let’s see. Christian |= Muslim. Libertarian |= Totalitarian. Anti-death penalty |= pro-death penalty. True, I think women’s suffrage was a tragic mistake for the nation, but then, I don’t recall the Taliban permitting men to vote either. I only hope the poor dear didn’t faint when she encountered the “disgusting tidbit”.

But don’t let a wildly inaccurate analogy slow you down, Cecilia. Keep saying “Taliban” enough and perhaps you’ll be able convince someone that you know something about the world outside your small intestine.

Oh, and it should probably be noted that the Taliban actually began in the madrassas of Pakistan, many of which are still in operation. But let’s not get pedantic….

Mailvox: the other side

MW is moved to defend the homemakers:

I’ve never done this before, but VR’s comments caught my attention. You see, I’ve cleaned many toilets in my time and have “popped” ten babies so far. I have many aspirations, but they center around the vision my husband and I have for our family. We are trying to build a foundation that will stand for generations. This is a task that requires a mother who is focused and dedicated to that vision. This requires that a woman even has the foresight to appreciate the impact her mothering can have on future generations when she is dead and gone. Women today are short-sighted. They will do this for a corporation, but they won’t do it for their own family. The working world pays a woman for these things. A mother at home does it for love. Daycare can’t compare with real time mother love. Women are trading their birthright for a mess of pottage.

It saddens me that Christian women have joined the ranks looking to impact the world by means of a paycheck. Thriving families are a thing of the past because feminists have convinced today’s women that a mom at home is worthless, useless, senseless, and ignorant. I reject that drivel! I revel in the results of my decision every day as I see the happy faces around our dinner table and as I lie next to the man I love each night. Jesus said the greatest among us would be servants and that in losing our life we would find it. That is what real womanhood is all about…

She really sounds like a useless, worthless ignorant doormat, doesn’t she….

A truly wicked woman

Captain D tells a horror story:

My first wife planned her leaving for years, and like an idiot I continued to believe that things would work out if I just stayed for the sake of the children. Then she secretly attended a seminar “How to Leave your Man” at the local women and children’s shelter.

This is how I was almost set up.

One day I arrived home from work to find that the children had been sent to a friend’s place for the night. Nancy (the plotter) greated me with a kiss and a hug and said that she had arranged for us to have the evening alone “like old times”. She was cooking my favorite meal and presented me with a glass of wine and a gift of a new Tom Clancy paperback (Red Storm Rising as I recall).

Like a lamb going to slaughter, I sat happily in the living room – reading the novel and enjoying the wine while my sweetie cooked a “special dinner.” Absorbed in the book, I hardly noticed her walk to the front window of the house and look out as if expecting something.

At just the exact moment, she said, “Oh Honey” – and I looked up to see that she had a brick in her hand. She took the brick and smashed the glass in the grandfather clock and then started screaming and advancing towards me with the obvious intent of hitting me.

The front door burst open and there stood her girlfriend with a video camera… but the timing was off.

I was supposed to be caught in some staged physical confrontation – to facilitate spousal abuse charges. The girls were a little too quick, so all the video would have shown was me sitting in the chair, looking up from my novel in a confused and surprised manner.

I’ll not go on for much longer, but in the end I traded the house and my pension for my children – and Nancy ended up going from man to man looking for a yacht owner. She finally found a sucker in Mexico, and I raised my three children alone. But if their timing had of been a little better, I might have been doing some jail time.

All thanks to an evil woman, and a seminar provided by an institution supported with public tax dollars. If I were 25 years old again, I don’t think I’d ever get married.

I’m just amazed that Nancy darling didn’t end up having someone go AT&T on her. If not on behalf of Captain D, then on behalf of someone else further down the victim chain.


Der Ursprunglich Kunstlichzunder presents a few predictions:

EUROPE: While it’s tempting to look upon Europe as the land of quiche-eating metrosexuals, if you do that you’re forgetting that the continent that gave us vichy water, brie, and Vidkun Quisling also gave us vikings, nazis, and Attila the Hun. Right now Europe is about 20 years overdue for the sort of convulsive mass slaughter that we generally refer to as “history,” and while the Balkan adventures of the 1990s vented the pressure somewhat, we’re still but a few more Theo van Gogh’s away from Götterdämmerung Time. If the E.U. succeeds in uniting it may be able to stall or suppress ethnic and religious tensions for a few decades, in much the same way (and by using much the same methods) as the Soviet Union kept the lid on things from 1945 to 1990, but this will only make the anti-immigrant eruption that much worse when it finally breaks out. The eventual breakup of the E.U. will kill millions.

DOMESTIC TRAVEL: A few days ago the U.S. government announced that American citizens returning from Canada, Mexico, or the Caribbean will henceforth be required to show their passports before reentering the country. Many frequent flyers are already in the habit of carrying their passports whenever they take domestic flights, just because it makes it so much easier to get through airport security. Further, with all the concern over illegal immigration, there is now loud and persistent talk in government circles of creating and mandating the carrying of a national I.D. card.

In the end I don’t know whether it will be in the name of homeland security, immigration control, or energy and transportation policy, but I figure we have at least 10 and at most 15 years left before it will no longer be possible for American citizens to move freely around their own country without government permission. “Show us your papers, comrade!” But more on this in a future column.

Hint: Your own car will be the snitch that rats you out.

My only thought is that empires usually begin to die when they reach too far. With that in mind, the event that might bring about the violent implosion of the EU would be an attempt to swallow an unwilling Switzerland.

The contemptible media

The New York Times’ Nicholas Kristof doesn’t like what he sees:

Since 1973, the National Opinion Research Center has measured public confidence in 13 institutions, including the press. All of the other institutions have generally retained a good measure of public respect, but confidence in the press has fallen sharply since 1990.

Those of us in the press tend to get defensive about our dwindling credibility. We protest that we’ve been made scapegoats by partisan demagogues, particularly on the right, and I think that’s true. But distrust for the news media, even if it’s unfair, is the new reality – and we will have to work much, much harder to win back our credibility with the public.

In any case, it’s not just right-wingers who distrust the media these days. The Pew Research Center found that while only 14 percent of Republicans believe all or most of what they read in The New York Times, even among Democrats the figure is only 31 percent. Other major news organizations face the same challenge. The Fox News Channel is considered credible by fewer than one-third of the Republicans – and an even smaller number of Democrats. Indeed, it’s a rare news organization that is trusted by more than one-third of the people in either party: the one thing Democrats and Republicans agree on is that the news media are not trustworthy.

The main reason is that they’re not. The news media is largely a bunch of undereducated pseudointellectuals who regularly confuse having heard of something with expertise in it. Being educated in journalism instead of an actual discipline, they tend to have a very small smattering of general knowledge and no depth of knowledge in anything.

Internet technology is the curse of the legacy media in more ways than one, because the men and women behind the curtain are now so easily revealed as the intellectual frauds they have usually been.

For example, when concealed carry laws were first passed, the newspapers in Florida and later Texas predicted bloodbaths soon to follow. But the significant fact was not that these newspapers were completely wrong, (although they were), but that newspapers in Minnesota and other states REPEATED EXACTLY THE SAME INACCURATE PREDICTIONS when similar carry laws were being debated ten years later. The same thing applies for the inability to recognize the farce of static revenue models when reporting on the expected impact of changes in tax rates.

It used to take a good memory and a newspaper addiction to notice this sort of thing. Now, even a casual news junkie may well read ten or twelve different papers online by the time he finishes his morning coffee, and should he notice something suspicious, he can check it out in seconds.

The blog phenomenon has merely magnified this new ability of the public to fact-check newspapers and other media, and since many journalists know very little about anything specific, it’s no surprise that their fraudulent credibility has finally been exploded.