« DimWittery Alert: Hoist, Meet Petard Edition | Main | Israelis Arrest Hamas Ministers »
June 29, 2006
The Daily DimWit: Awkward Moments Abound
File under Great Moments in American Jurisprudence...
Awkward Moments Abound in Penis Pump Trial:
Over the past few days, the jurors have watched a defense attorney and a prosecutor pantomime masturbation. A doctor has lectured on the lengths the defendant was willing to go to enhance his sexual performance.The white-handled sexual device sits before the jury box for hours at a time. Occasionally an attorney picks it up and squeezes the handle, demonstrating the "sh-sh" sound of air rushing through the contraption's plastic tubing.
Who knew?
Art Imitates Life (Back To The Future Edition):
Sept. 10, 2006: The Times runs a story about a CIA agent named Mohammed al-Ghouri, 1234 Oceanside Boulevard, Evanston, Ill., who is attempting to penetrate a radical sleeper cell suspected of having 19 liters of homemade mustard gas. The series concludes with the agent's obituary, and a moving quote from a CIA historian noting that "al-Ghouri was one of that rare, brave breed whose names and deeds are rarely known. Except in this case, of course."Criticized for blowing the agent's cover, a Times spokesman tartly notes that "this man is — sorry, was — a government employee, and if he's using taxpayer money to take terrorists out to lunch, we think the people ought to know, if only so they judge the menu items chosen on behalf of the government. Was veal consumed? Because a lot of people are sensitive to the veal issue."
Feb. 14, 2007: Times Editor Keller approves publication of the Pentagon's plans for a Feb. 15 strike on Iran, asserting that "there has been far too little debate about whether the sustained assault by cruise missiles and stealth bombers will provide a cover for the infiltration of several SpecOps teams from the Iraqi and Afghan bases, or whether these groups, code-named `Red Six' and `Blue Fourteen' respectively, might suffer friendly fire. One error in timing, such as the barrage scheduled for 3 a.m. on the night of the 24th, could expose our troops to great harm. If this leads to a debate about whether the Tomahawk missile can be sent slightly off course by a concentrated microwave burst, as classified documents seem to suggest, it's a debate we need to have."
Ohio gets tough in the war on drugs...
Thus this extremely powerful protein knife, XO, floats throughout the body in the blood and lymph systems. When the XO breaks free from its fat envelope, it attacks the inner wall of whatever vessel it is in. This creates a wound. The wound triggers the arrival of patching plaster to seal off that wound. The patching plaster is cholesterol.
The anti-war Left champions freedom of expression in its usual vigorous fashion:
It's about those d*mn Support Our Troops magnets and the like. Please take them off your car.I am the wife of an army reservist. My husband has not been called to active duty, but could be at any time. Every day there is a possibility that my life as I know it could be drastically changed. I know other military families who are in the same situation, and I know military families whose lives have already been drastically affected. It is the sword of Damocles hanging over our heads.
All that being said, what in the world does slapping a magnet on your vehicle have anything to do with supporting our troops? Everytime I see one, particularly when it mixed in with the "W" sticker and the screaming American eagle decal, I am insulted. Many times, the yahoo whose got the sticker on his car is of military service age, but would rather talk tough than put their *ss on the line." -- TigerMom
Whatever you do, don't you dare support her husband, because that really pisses her off.
Apparently, Hooters is insensitive to the needs of men. Don't say we ladies didn't warn you.
Posted by Cassandra at June 29, 2006 06:48 AM
Comments
Everytime I see one, particularly when it mixed in with the "W" sticker and the screaming American eagle decal, I am insulted.
No sh*t? Man, that's just about cold. I love seeing the magnets when I'm running down the road. I've met some wonderful people, all kinds, shapes, and colors, due to those ribbon magnets. I'm even inclined to help out on the side of the road if I see one. A Corps sticker is a guarantee though! ;-)
Sounds like TigerMom needs to get laid! I bet all those mean, nasty magnets would be really cool if they were next to an AlGore sticker eh? ;-)
Posted by: JarheadDad at June 29, 2006 08:57 AM
Sounds like TigerMom needs to get laid!
The panacea for all ills... :)
Posted by: Cassandra at June 29, 2006 09:40 AM
Works for me! :-o
Posted by: JarheadDad at June 29, 2006 10:01 AM
[shaking head]
The Oink Cadre strikes again....
Heh.
Posted by: Cassandra at June 29, 2006 10:11 AM
As a spouse whose Spousal Unit was There From The Beginning until Long Past Bush's Landing On The Flight Deck, I have two words for her: "P*ss off."
Posted by: Cricket at June 29, 2006 11:07 AM
I'll admit it. It works for me, too.
Posted by: April at June 29, 2006 02:08 PM
Can womyn be a member of the Oink Cadre, April?
Hmmmm, that cute curly pink tail thingie...........! :-o
ruh-roh!
Now now Ms Cricket! heh!
Posted by: JarheadDad at June 29, 2006 03:31 PM
Well, in my Mom and Dad's case, it means that they've got two kids Navy, all of my mom's brothers, three-fifths of her brother in laws, both grandfathers and all of their brothers and brother in laws were in the Army or the Navy.
If that raving *bleep* talked to someone who is actually in the active service, they might tell her they don't WANT most "men of service age" to be in-- there are enough folks not emotionally suited to the work as it is!
Posted by: Sailorette at June 30, 2006 02:08 AM
JHD,
It really gripes me no end to see this sort of passive/agressive garbage. We can all recite horror stories of women who either wear their husband's rank or totally disassociate themselves to the point of this type of drivel. There are more than a few who manage a happy balance of supporting the troops and still being themselves.
But she isn't one of them. She doesn't want to be reminded, she doesn't need to go outside of her house. She ought to be glad that there are people out there who are willing to support the troops and want them to come home and well, that just happens to include her husband.
She is being foolish and I refuse to take my yellow ribbon magnet off the back of my SUV in order to avoid offending her.
pfthbpfthbpfthbpfthb!
Posted by: Cricket at June 30, 2006 08:52 AM
I've never understood how the "support our troops" crowd somehow believes that by supporting the *war* in Iraq you are "supporting the troops" and by opposing the war in Iraq you are NOT "supporting the troops."
To truly "support our troops" you should speak up when a president is irresponsibly and unnecessarily putting "out troops" in harm's way, to fight a battle that does more harm than good for all involved. How is it not "supporting our troops" to stand up and say "Mr. President, you are doing an extremely poor job of utilizing our brave armed forces."
An obvious example would be if the President decided to test nuclear weapons by dropping them on "our troops" to see how many could be killed with one bomb. Obviously, you could "support our troops" while opposing the president's decision. Or maybe I'm wrong -- I suspect some hardcore pro-war conservatives might just cheer the president's action, and applaud the concrete, tangible results achieved, and attack any critics as giving aid to our enemies.
True, the war in Iraq isn't as reckless as the above example, but it's on a path to being so. The president is trying to test a new weapon in the "war on terror" namely, the "flypaper strategy." His grand experiment is to make muslims really mad -- but do it somewhere else, other than America. The goal is to have the enraged muslims all fight it out against our armed forces in another country, rather than simply defending ourselves from whatever extremist muslims manage to come HERE.
In so doing, the president has possibly reduced the number of attacks on U.S. soil. At the same time he has massively increasing terrorism elsewhere in the world, and is sending our soldiers to fight it. This, in my opinion, is just about as mad as testing atomic weapons on our soldiers. You may disagree -- but don't say I'm not "supporting the troops" when I voice my concerns.
Posted by: Phil at June 30, 2006 03:12 PM
No one here has said that you can't support the troops but not support the war. There are many fine groups who do good work for our soldiers and they care not one whit whether you think Iraq is a good idea or not.
One is at the top right of the main page of this blog. The Injured Marine Semper Fi Fund.
Another is Valour-IT which provides voice activated laptops to soldiers who have lost their hands so they can still write e-mails to friends and family.
Neither one care if you support the war or not.
But just as you can't say those who don't support the war don't support the troops (although helping the troops usually, even if indirectly, helps the goals of the war: Improved morale means improved fighting)
you can't say that those that do support the war don't support the troops.
Case in point, I don't like war (neither does anyone else here). But I believe that a relatively low cost war now will prevent a high cost war later. Thus, by your reasoning, saying you'd rather fight a high cost war later is "Bombing our own troops" you unpatriotic liberal you. :-)
Posted by: Masked Menace© at June 30, 2006 05:16 PM