Sadly, No!

My main man Jon Swift:

It’s not like we are asking only this woman to make a sacrifice for the war effort. Milbloggers like Shackleford are making sacrifices, too. Shackleford really doesn’t like attacking an alleged rape victim and trashing her before all the facts have come out. He would prefer we not return to “the not so distant past when some argued that the victim somehow brought the crime on themselves.” He thought that we had moved on from that time. “Questioning a rape victim is akin to a second rape,” Shackleford writes. “Or so I was always taught.” But if protecting America from terrorists means subjecting a woman to something akin to a second rape, then Shackleford, like Curt at Flopping Aces and Ace of Spades, is prepared, however reluctantly, to do his sad duty. Sacrifices must be made. Things are different now. 9/11 changed everything.

I didn’t think they could sink any lower than attacking the families of 12-year-old car accident victims. Clearly, the barrel has a good deal more bottom to it.

A Little Socialism is Good for You, as Long as I get What I Want

• Schools are spending entirely too much money educating retards, despite the fact that children who already have every advantage in life are crying out for help.

‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard.

And yes, my friends, Dr. Mrs. Ole Perfesser has been on a damn roll lately. I need to make her part of my daily reading list.

Holy gods. I agree with Ace about something:

What are we going to do with Dr. Helen? She’s refreshingly — bracingly, actually — pro-male but sometimes her impulses get the better of her.

Like this link — the “Instapundit link of silent approval” she learned from her husband — to a whining “Recovering Nice Guy” who mewls that all those women he befriended and never actually asked out didn’t fall in love with a gutless pussy.

As semi-recovering pussy myself, I have some sympathy for my fellow pussies who can never seem to nut up enough to actually take the bold step of clearly and plainly announcing their romantic designs on a woman (wow, what a concept), but not so much sympathy that I can condone this destructive behavior or encourage self-styled “Nice Guys” to keep up with their pussy behavior.

You’re — we’re — not “Nice Guys.” You/we want exactly what the “Not Nice Guys” want from women, which is to say Sex, Companionship, Sex, Romance, Sex and Sex in that order. You/we are just too a-scared to say so. Which isn’t Nice. It’s just cowardly.

I agree, but with a caveat.

Dude, women are cool to hang out with even if they don’t want to sleep with you. There are times in your life when you feel lonely and down and when sex isn’t all that important- sometimes you just need a pal. That pal can come in the form of a woman or in the form of a fellow dude. What matters isn’t that you find them physically attractive, but that they’re a decent person who can help you get through rough times. This, to me, is why the Craig’s List pussy wimp* is such a sad case- because he doesn’t understand that having a friend is actually more important and valuable than the “physical intimacy” (a.k.a., “ZOMG SHE H4Z 4W3$0M3 KN0Ck3RZ!!111!!”) he wants his female friends to give him. Life can be very tough and depressing at times, amigos. Don’t turn someone away just because they won’t have sex with you. Jeebus H, this should be bloody obvious.

*Sorry, kids, poor original word choice on my part.

Oh this is too precious. Here’s another link I found at Dr. Mrs. Ole Perfesser’s place. It details the tragic story of an ex-nice guy who had to put up with a bunch of nasty womens who sobbed on his shoulder and cried about their problems and didn’t even have the common decency to put out afterward. I shit you not:

I see this question posted with some regularity in the personals section, so I thought I’d take a minute to explain things to the ladies out there that haven’t figured it out.

What happened to all the nice guys?

The answer is simple: you did.

See, if you think back, really hard, you might vaguely remember a Platonic guy pal who always seemed to want to spend time with you. He’d tag along with you when you went shopping, stop by your place for a movie when you were lonely but didn’t feel like going out, or even sit there and hold you while you sobbed and told him about how horribly the (other) guy that you were fucking treated you. […]

You ignored the nice guy. You used him for emotional intimacy without reciprocating, in kind, with physical intimacy.

Interesting. I had no idea that listening to a friend in need required the friend to have sex with you afterwards. I’ll keep that in mind the next time some chick decides she wants to use Brad’s shoulder to cry on. I’ma be like, “Ex-cuuuuuuuse me, missy, but I’m tired of being ripped off in this deal and demand a sexual down payment this time. I don’t have to be such a nice guy, you know.”

You laughed at his consideration and resented his devotion. You valued the aloof boyfriend more than the attentive “just-a-” friend. Eventually, he took the hint and moved on with his life. He probably came to realize, one day, that women aren’t really attracted to guys who hold doors open; or make dinners just because; or buy you a Christmas gift that you mentioned, in passing, that you really wanted five months ago; or listen when you’re upset; or hold you when you cry.

No, women don’t like guys who are nice to them just to get in their pants. It’s a very sad and cruel world, for certain.

He came to realize that, if he wanted a woman like you, he’d have to act more like the boyfriend that you had. He probably cleaned up his look, started making some money, and generally acted like more of an asshole than he ever wanted to be.

Amazing but true: bathing regularly and not dressing like a 12-year-old boy will increase your chances of having sex. Also amazing but true: having a steady job and not being chronically unemployed will also boost your attractiveness to others. Also also amazing but true: bathing and having a job do not require being an asshole. If you do find it necessary to be an asshole in order to get a girlfriend, then brother, you were probably an asshole from the start.

I suppose the other possibility is that you STILL don’t really want a nice guy, but you feel the social pressure to at least appear to have matured beyond your infantile taste in men. In which case, you might be in luck, because the nice guy you claim to want has, in reality, shed his nice guy mantle and is out there looking to unleash his cynicism and resentment onto someone just like you.

Now this sounds like a guy any woman should want! Hellllllllllooooooooo, ladies!!!!

UPDATE: Oh. My. God:

Women: Take note! Asian men treat Asian women like furniture, and Asian women look at American men like we’re gifts from summit of Mt. Fuji.

Hope you enjoy dating that two-timing, lying piece of human waste you call a boyfirend, because when the nice guys figure out how much Asian women LOVE US, you will be a long-forgotten memory.

How do you say “virgin” in Japanese again?

Ahem. Guys. The reason that women don’t want to sleep with you isn’t because they’re greedy bitches or because the evil media is training them to hate you or because they’re crazy nutter loonies who contradict themselves and send you mixed messages. It’s because you suck. Yes, it’s that simple.

UPDATE: Oh baby, this is one that Roy missed:

The old come on:

None until marriage.

Women are smarter now. Pop music has taught them to think like dope dealers:

The first one (or at least until you are a steady customer) is free.

And:

I agree. When I was single, most women who I was intitially attracted to (and it wasn’t the uber-hotties) would usually turn me off by displaying a rank selfishness and sense of entitlement, all the while prating about equality blah blah. Men were to be a subservient ATM machine with a penis attached.

But, I knew that there were true levelheaded women out there who were fair minded, strong people and delightfully feminine. I found one and married her.

And unlike those other greedy bitches, this one came with free batteries attached!

UPDATE THE SECOND: Uh-oh, they’ve started invading Roy’s place:

Women want a guy who is intelligent and who makes them laugh. Of course, to attain this, a woman will find a man who is handsome and “ambitious”–that is, wealthy–and then convince herself that every word that proceedeth out of his mouth is profound and/or humorous.

Face it, ladies, if guys weren’t so horny, only the prime cuts of your gender would get laid. I myself would prefer fly fishing, shooting pool, or playing bocce to spending time in irrational pursuit of a gal.

And women everywhere let loose deep sighs of relief.

I linked to this classic NRO story yesterday, but I think this graf in particular deserves special recognition:

To add to the sense of values gone topsy-turvy, Mrs. Schiavo’s ordeal was climaxing over the festival of Purim. Parallels with the Purim story, the Biblical book of Esther, leap out at you. In both, a vigorously determined personality (Haman, Michael Schiavo) seeks to take the life of an innocent or innocents (the Jews, Mrs. Schiavo) with the aid of a high government official (King Ahashuerus, Judge Greer) while the people (Persia’s Jews, America’s Christians) weep, fast, and don sackcloth. Simultaneously, a protagonist (Queen Esther, Governor Bush) closely linked to the head of state contemplates intervening.

I don’t exaggerate when I say that that’s some of the most crazy-assed shit I’ve ever read. It also illustrates how bogus the National Review’s purported concerns about Mike Huckabee’s theocratic leanings are. If they want to publish insane crap that equates Terri Schiavo’s death with the Biblical suffering of the Jews, then they have zero right to complain about others’ religiosity.

[See also John Cole, who’s been having a field day with this.]

Let’s see what new silliness Glenn Reynolds is promoting today.

OBESITY AND POLITICS — but the best line is from the comments: “They are going to take potato chips from us for the common good.”

Why, it’s a link to Ann Althouse. There must be some thoughtful thinking going on over there — thinking that not at all resembles the unprocessed resentments of a solipsistic crazy person.

“If we went back to the obesity rates that existed in 1980, that would save the Medicare system a trillion dollars.”

Said Barack Obama at today’s Democratic debate. That sounds absurd to me. But let me be fair. He prefaced that assertion with the phrase “it’s estimated.” Oh, estimated. Well, then. He wants to “emphasize how important prevention and cost savings can be.” I get it. The plan is to get the government to pay for all sorts of routine health care for everyone, and we’re supposed to think it will actually save money. But the truth is that going to the doctor more is not going to solve our fatness problem. If it did, we’d be paying now for the treatment (not that we wouldn’t like the government to reimburse us). The false hope of a solution to obesity and a promise of illusory savings is being used to soften us up for massive spending on health care. I’m estimating.

Above: Althouse

---

In other words, it’s futile to subsidize preventive health care, because if it actually prevented illness or saved money, then everybody would already be paying for it, and if you italicize words archly, it’s okay not to have any facts at your disposal. Moreover, there’s a willful conspiracy afoot to make us spend massive money on health care, beginning by instilling false hope in fat people.

Well, that’s certainly one possible interpretation of things. Here’s Glenn again:

Plus, a solution: “Maybe all those fat people should start smoking again.” Hmm. Smoking goes down, obesity goes up. I wonder if this is another unintended consequence of government action . . . .
posted at 07:02 AM by Glenn Reynolds

Whoah, blowback. Then again, as Glenn showed us yesterday, “it is simply a myth to believe that only interventionism yields unintended consequence, since doing nothing at all may produce the same unexpected results. If American foreign health policy had followed a course of strict non-interventionism, America would certainly be different from what it is today; but there is no obvious reason to think that it would have been better.”

…There are times at which it almost seems as though Reynolds is a slippery and arrogant character driven by crankish enthusiasms.

Come, ye blind squirrel, and show me what bounty ye bring:

Why does Mike Huckabee come in for this bizarre and weirdly strident treatment, not just from NR, but from so many establishment organs and figures within the Republican coalition? Mitt Romney plays pro-lifers and cultural conservatives for suckers, and gets a pass. Rudy Giuliani runs to the left of Hillary Clinton on cultural issues, and gets a pass. Mike Huckabee doesn’t kowtow to the keepers of fiscal orthodoxy within the movement — and we’re told that he’ll cripple America at home and abroad, that his partisans are “idiots,” and that he may destroy the Republican coalition.

All basically true, although Treviño concedes that it would be better if Huck did kowtow to the GOP’s supply-side royalists.

More:

They’re the churchgoers, parents, local activists, and cultural conservatives who have kept the Republican party nationally competitive for the past thirty years. They’re us and ours. They’re the base. In the end, the ones tearing apart the Republican coalition aren’t them — but the elites who deride them for daring to vote their values.

And that’s just the problem.

The GOP has, generally speaking, done close to nothing for its Values Voters, much like the Democrats have done little for union voters in recent years. The reason that unions and the Christian Right keep voting for Democrats and Republicans, respectively, isn’t because those parties support their political interests. Rather, it has to do with voting against the other party, which they see as actively hostile to their interests. Despite being more liberal socially, the cash-rules-everything-around-me, C.R.E.A.M., get-tha’-money dolla-dolla-bill-y’all wing of the GOP has been willing to tolerate the social cons’ views on abortion, gay marriage and Hollywood as long as they don’t interfere with the tax cuts, which are more important than anything else. And besides, it’s not as if the GOP leadership ever planned to enact any of the social cons’ agenda in the first place.

Read the rest of this entry »

OMGOMGOMGOMG:

YEEEAAAH, BOY-EEE!!!! TAKE THAT, BLACK HELICOPTERS!!! THE SKIES OVER BOSTON ARE NOW FREED FROM THE CLUTCHES OF THE UN!!!

(Thanks to Jen for the tip.)

UPDATE: In all seriousness, that blimp really does kick insane amounts of ass. The first Democrat to pilot their own blimp will get my official endorsement.

Gavin adds:

If you thought that Don Surber, the Pepys of Poca, West Virginia, just had a blog, then you have surely missed the unalloyed joy of reading his column in the Charleston Daily Mail. In his current column, our Keats of the Kanawha offers up some standard anti-Gore fare: “Al Gore is a big fat hypocrite whose farts cause more global warming than the exhaust from a million SUVs”:

It is difficult to take his sermons on the coming doom seriously when his mansion in Tennessee consumes 10 times the electricity of an ordinary home. … Rather than lead by example, Gore and other millionaire celebrities engage in carbon offsets.

Once again Don is that late-to-the-party kind of guy, showing up when the liquor is gone and the guests have already left. He hangs around, nonetheless, boring the hosts until they finally kick him out at 1:00 a.m. I say this because on the same day as Surber’s column, the wires were flooded with stories about Gore’s recent renovations to his home:

Al Gore, who was criticized for high electric bills at his Tennessee mansion, has completed a host of improvements to make the home more energy efficient, and a building-industry group has praised the house as one of the nation’s most environmentally friendly.

The former vice president has installed solar panels, a rainwater-collection system and geothermal heating. He also replaced all incandescent lights with compact fluorescent or light-emitting diode bulbs — even on his Christmas tree.

“Short of tearing it down and staring anew, I don’t know how it could have been rated any higher,” said Kim Shinn of the U.S. Green Building Council, which gave the house its second-highest rating for sustainable design.

[…]

In February, a conservative think tank criticized Gore for using an average of 16,000 kilowatt hours a month for an average monthly bill of $1,206 in 2006. The typical Nashville home uses about 1,300 kilowatt hours a month.

Gore has said the criticism was unfair because the 10,000-square-foot mansion was undergoing extensive remodeling. He said this week that “global warming denier” groups were trying to discredit him because they don’t like the attention he has given to climate change.

(Italics ours.)

There was some discussion among the Daily Mail‘s editorial board about issuing a correction to Surber’s column but they couldn’t agree on how to spell “correction.”