Top 11 reasons the VP shot Harry Whittington

From the Nihilist in Golf Pants:

11. Whittington bears a remarkable resemblance to a quail

10. Just to watch him die

9. Whittington had just filled his SUV and Cheney wanted the oil

8. Cheney tired of Jesse Ventura’s taunts about him for never having hunted man

7. Cheney thought Wittington was a major league a-hole, big time

6. Iraq war bloodlust no longer satisfies the Vice President

Oh yes, there’s more….

The White Buffalo found this amusing

Atlas Dined, by Huck:

Could I please have a glass of ice water?

The server hurried off, somehow seeming annoyed that he had ordered ice water. Jack Caldwell didn’t know why he had, why it summoned inside of him a strange emotion, not quite envy, but a nagging– well, who had time to think of emotion? He had been longing for ice water all day; not out of need, but respect, for its clarity, its precision, and yet, he felt a certain contempt for it. Perhaps it was because its perfection was wasted on craven fools who wiped tables and carried food for people.

Marla Packwood sat across from him, trying not to let him see the shock in her face, which was cut as if by a sculptor, its lines tracing out the form of archaic nobility. She knew his request for ice water was a challenge to her, that he knew she cared what beverage he ordered. As long as they’d known each other, she had endured long hours of pain, in order to show indifference toward his food and drink, but tonight she had slipped, and she wondered why. She hated herself for it, but only for an instant, after which she regained her cold, stiff, emotionless, yet dangerously feminine demeanor.

It was the height of the dinner rush, and throughout the restaurant, elegantly dressed diners chattered away, consuming California wine and whispering about Harold Molt, who was in the restaurant with some friends.

Harold Molt had created a stir in the country when he published a book of philosophy. In it, he stated that America was corrupt, and he recommended that all industrialists be shot dead at once, as a lesson for the children. His philosophy was already gaining wide acceptance among college professors, newspaper editorialists, and the wives of industrialists. It was surprising to see him at this restaurant, but in this horrendous age, nothing was surprising anymore.

“Jack, do you see that scoundrel is here tonight?”, Marla asked, managing to put emphasis in her question without showing any emotion, a trick she had mastered when only three years old, the year she graduated from high school.

“Yes,” he answered, with a look of blankness which she knew meant that he felt the same way, that they didn’t agree with Molt’s ideas, that they both recognized Molt as an assault on everything that was good in the world, what good there was left.

When their dinner arrived, neither dared look at one another. They had both ordered rib eye steak with asparagus and baked potato. He had requested his own basket of rolls, and she knew he had done it to mock her. He could eat more rolls than she, and she hated herself for letting him, for caring, for not being able to hide her shame, in the pleasure it gave her to submit, to eat only one roll while he ate four….

Blogfodder: it seems she forgot to duck

Tatiana could probably use a few more punches to the head to knock some sense into her:

This may sound crazy but I don’t think anybody should be hitting anyone no matter their sex. But that’s just my crazy pacifist side coming out. I think what this Vox person is advocating is disgusting. Absolutely disgusting. Especially considering so many women and girls are abused daily that someone to even suggest it’s okay to do that makes me stomach turn.

Betty Friedan advocated for non-violence but also condemed the feminist who felt you needed to be a man-hater. She stood for men and women working together to support second wave feminism.

This Vox individual just strikes me as angry and scared. He’s angry that women refuse to be “trained female slaves” and he’s scared that one day a woman might one day call him on it. He’s so brave hiding behind his computer but I dare him to go public with his views on women. He also seems incredibly misinformed about the life and the work of Betty Friedan. I would also venture a guess that this guy has never been hit by anyone ever. I have, I was hit by a guy, I didn’t deserve it. I did not offer sufficent provocation. I was smacked, I was given a black eye. It was not in the name of equality. It was in the name of violence.

Yes, she’s right! *sob* I’m terrified… and obviously those direct quotes from Ms Friedan’s work were the product of my terror. And unlike Tatiana, I am aware that women initiate violence as often as men. So, please don’t hit me, I beg you, please, please don’t hit me!

Now, I don’t unleash physical violence on people simply for being stupid, but I have to confess that it would amuse me to give this sniveling crybaby a matching set of black eyes. Women like this don’t understand the first thing about courage or honor, and they will never understand that it is their contemptible cravenness that causes men and women who do to regard them as an inferior species of Man.

“Oooh… I was hit once… I got a black eye… in the name of violence.” Boo freaking hoo! An NFL running back suffers worse in every single game of the 16-game season. Every boxer and martial artist in the world has been jacked in the head, most of them several hundred times. It is their scars that they wear with pride, not their victimhood.

The greatest respect is earned by the man or woman who is willing to get up after being knocked down. That’s why two boxers will so often embrace like long-lost brothers at the final bell after spending 15 rounds half-killing each other; a man respects no one more than the man who takes his best shot and still refuses to quit fighting.

Being a coward herself, Tatiana assumes that everyone is likewise craven. But she already lost her dare almost three years ago.

It is true that the Christian has an obligation to turn the other cheek. What Tatiana and her kind will never understand is that this is not a shield for cowards to rationalize their behavior, but rather, an extremely difficult exercise in mastering one’s pride in order to follow Jesus Christ’s example.

Stick with sugar

From the New York Times:

WHEN Dr. Morando Soffritti, a cancer researcher in Bologna, Italy, saw the results of his team’s seven-year study on aspartame, he knew he was about to be injected into a bitter controversy over this sweetener, one of the most contentiously debated substances ever added to foods and beverages…..

He theorized that the tumors in his study were related to the methanol, or wood alcohol, that is produced as the body metabolizes aspartame. When the body breaks down methanol, the result is formaldehyde, a known carcinogen. “I know that when I treat animals with methanol, you end up with lymphomas and leukemias,” he said.

Spacebunny and I have avoided aspartame for years, as my father – who was on the low-carb thing back when low-fat was all the rage – looked into it years ago to explain why he was getting headaches after switching to diet Coke. After he explained how aspartame can be converted into formaldehyde, we figured it simply wasn’t something you want to put in your body.

I have little doubt that this will prove to be yet another lesson in the idiocy of putting your trust in government agencies to keep you safe and healthy.

Of copyright and communism

Z.King misses the heart of the matter:

Vox is not actually a commy, but the idea of anyone feeling entitled to the fruits of someone else’s labor is a commy/socialist idea.

But the entire point of my argument is that copyright is not property. In fact, I can use existing copyright law to demonstrate this concept, because if copyright were genuine property, it would not have a statute of limitations on it. Putting the abomination of the Kelo decision aside for the moment, must your children give up your house to the public after a fixed number of years? Your car? How about your savings?

This clear distinction between the intellectual property of copyright and real property is sufficient to prove that copyright is not property.

Now, sticking with an example that has already been discussed here, there is far more to a book than the copyrighted element. There is the physical material, the layout, the typeface, the cover art and the expense of printing… in fact, the text is usually one of the least expensive elements unless the author JK Rowlings or Stephen King. So, if copyright is not property and the other labor elements outweigh that of the copyright holder’s labor in the end product, how can anyone possibly claim that skepticism about the benefits of copyright for innovation derives from one strain of Marxianism or another in any way?

As others have asked, why is it that only some ideas – often the least important ones – that can be protected in this manner? Should we not have granted copyright to the inventor of the Internet? Is not Z. therefore robbing him by not paying him a royalty for the benefit of reading this blog post? If so, she can surely send him a penny each time she logs on in order to assuage her guilty conscience, lest we accuse her of being a thief, or worse, a Communist.

Press freedom and the slippery slope

Andrew Stuttaford of National Review Online underlines the point of today’s column with these studies in legal ignorance:

“That’s right: they don’t particularly like the idea of the film, but they think that it should be made. That’s called freedom, or, as a number of EU governments prefer to call it, “provocation”.” – Andrew Stuttaford

“Dutch politician Ayaan Hirsi Ali rallies to Denmark’s defense, while faulting her own government: ‘I do not seek to offend religious sentiment, but I will not submit to tyranny. Demanding that people who do not accept Muhammad’s teachings should refrain from drawing him is not a request for respect but a demand for submission.’ In response, the Dutch prime minister has said that he does “not have much use” for Hirsi Ali’s views. Shame on him.” – Stuttaford again

“According to Dagens Nyheter, the Swedish security services (Säpo), in collusion with Foreign Minister Leila Freivalds, have forced the website SD-Kuriren offline for publishing the Jyllands-Posten cartoons (SD-Kuriren is the house organ of the hard-right Swedish Democrats).” – Stuttaford, quoting the Stockholm Spectator

“The EU’s foreign policy boss is setting out on a trip of the Middle East to discuss the cartoon saga. These comments, in an interview with Al Arabiya, suggest that free speech will take second place to a “respect” that “does not stop at countries’ borders and it includes all religions and specifically what concerns us here, our respect for the Islamic religion.” Meanwhile, a preacher in Mecca is rejecting apologies and demanding a trial. With “stiff penalties” to follow, of course.” – Once more, the irrepressible Mr. Stuttaford

The great irony here is that Andrew Stuttaford is British, and thus hails from a country which does not recognize American-style press freedom. As I demonstrated using Swiss law, most European countries ban public insults to officially-recognized religions – you can, for example, freely insult Scientologists in Germany since it is considered a cult, not a religion – and thus the Muslim call for trials and prosecutions of the offending media organizations is entirely reasonable in many, if not most of those countries.

It is a pity that these individuals so interested in protecting a non-existent press freedom in Europe are not equally exercised about the recent loss of genuine American press freedoms due to the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill and the new violence against women act.