Sadly, No!

Yes, we get it. Honeycomb’s got a big, big bite. However, voila. (Below: Daily reach of Sadly, No! vs. the Rapid City Journal, South Dakota’s daily paper of record.)

So, should we go to some of those black-tie affairs now too?

The anecdotal evidence is overwhelming: Liberals hate conservatives a lot more than conservatives hate liberals. I repeat: A lot more. You can ask anybody – or you could save yourself the time and just rely on some stuff people told Dennis Prager:

Where I live in liberal Los Angeles, drivers of most vehicles with Bush-Cheney bumper stickers have told me (and I have often seen) that their cars (and mine) were deliberately scratched. When I have asked about the fate of cars with Kerry-Edwards stickers in equally conservative areas in, for example, Orange County or even the Bible Belt, no Democrat has reported such intentional damage to his car. This does not mean it never happens, only that it is far more rare. I would bet a lot of money — and I am not a gambler — that cars displaying conservative messages in liberal areas are far more likely to be defaced than cars with liberal messages in conservative areas.

It’s hard to argue with such a cogent argument. So hard, in fact, that I considered giving up now and getting back to work before my boss fires me. But what the hell — let’s review the data set: Drivers have not only told Prager about the damage their vehicles have suffered by mean-spirited (and very hypocritical) liberal vandals -– but Prager has actually seen the damage. As in, “with his own eyes.” In addition, Prager — who bolsters his claim, I think, by reminding readers that he is not a gambling man, unlike his friend Bill Bennett — states that he’s willing to bet money that his conclusions would turn out to be accurate if he, or someone else, were to actually research the statistics. You know what? I’ve got an extra $12 I won for finishing second in our office NCAA pool, so I’ll bite. Now, if there were only some relatively easy way to find some statistics on this, and preferably something I could do without leaving my desk…

[Zeerp] “Hello, dum-dum.”

Oh sweet, it’s the Great Gazoogle. And not a moment too soon.
Read the rest of this entry »

This is just too good. It’s their industry-type promotional video, with clips from a bunch of different songs.

Oh, and here’s something else that Jonah might appreciate as “so much more shocking than the canned rebelliousness of most ‘political’ rock music.”

Ian Stewart and the Klansmen – ‘White Power’ (2:14)

Really kinda puts Phish and Peter Gabriel to shame, como no?

Alas, if Reynolds, Hewitt, Powerline, and Jonah only knew that the Right Brothers mini-revival began here on Friday evening… Remember the band’s Myspace page with only three friends? Take a look now. It also says they’re appearing on the Hugh Hewitt show at 5:15 this afternoon (apparently as call-in guests). This is truly a sterling example of the Law of Unintended Consequences.

Welp, since we’re picking ’em, how about Freedom Folks?

Kicky!

As I noted last week, immigration reform is a very important issue that requires sober, rational thinking and dynamic, innovative ideas. Fixing our immigration system is a tricky balancing act that requires both securing our borders and maintaining our nation’s long tradition of welcoming foreigners with open arms. This uniquely difficult challenge will require the best efforts of our nation’s finest intellectuals and policy wonks, many of who have been working independently on immigration reform plans for years. I invited five of these great minds to debate this deeply serious matter today on Sadly, No!

But unfortunately, none of them got back to me, so instead I just cut’n’pasted a bunch of stupid anti-immigration columns that I found on Alan Keyes’ website. It may not be as informative as a real panel of experts- indeed, you’ll be far less knowledgeable about immigration and everything else by the end of the debate- but twelfth-rate pundits are better than no pundits, right? And since no one does twelfth-rate better than I do, I figure it’s a perfect fit.

“Our” first, immigration panelist — “is” Kaye… Grogan. Let’s read, “her”:

An open letter to the President of the United States

Kaye Grogan
April 3, 2006

Dear Honorable President Bush:

It is obvious that the illegal immigration problem is getting totally out-of-hand. The first mistake centers around the leaders sitting back while millions of foreigners crossed our borders over the years. Now evidently, no one can come up with a viable solution to this ongoing problem.

The real problem does not lie with Americans that won’t do certain jobs. We both know that Americans cannot afford to take jobs offering cheap labor wages without any benefits.

Which also means they’re jobs that Americans won’t do. I’m glad Kaye’s thinking so logically about this.
Read the rest of this entry »

We’re a little busy this morning, what with doing all the normal things lefties do (getting abortions, cleaning the resin out of our bongs, cashing welfare checks, etc.) as well as with picking up limbs out of our yard, so we thought we’d point you to people who are actually working this morning (or recently) — working on the machine of America, grinding and clanking and smoking and broken as it is from the presence of so many wingnut monkey-wrenches:

Just when Sully says something intelligent, such is his wingnut recidivism that he immediately follows it with something stupid. Roy Edroso parses Sully’s bullshit form of even-handedness.

Steve Gilliard smacks around the Macho Men of the Right. Bonus points for the Robert Conquest reference.
Read the rest of this entry »

…um, the sandbox. Now someone is supposed to say, “I two the sandbox,” and we’ll be like, “Uh, we three the sandbox.” And I’m not going to tell you how it all turns out in the end, except somebody ends up saying, “I eight the sandbox,” and someone else is like, “Ha ha! How did it taste?” and the other person is all like, “Curses, you tricked me.”

That person is actually Glenn Reynolds, because what’s up with this?

It seems kinda familiar, doesn’t it?

Glenn, we totally just sevened that particular sandbox, man. You don’t want to be getting in on the sandbox-numbering action at such a late stage in the proceedings. Like, really. And besides, did you hear? We won Hugh Hewitt’s penis.

[Update: Woop! We hit the trifecta — Powerline picked it up too.]

Congratulations to Jesus’s General, and Cobb Awards are on the way! Yay!

Aaron L. Friedberg, one of Norman Podhoretz’s hired goons, tries to defend neoconservatism from Francis Fukuyama’s apostacy. In the process, he …well, he lies:

Neoconservatives…have been inclined instead to draw sharp distinctions between democratic and non-democratic states. For them, authoritarian regimes are not merely distasteful but demonstrably unreliable and untrustworthy.

What’s the phrase I’m looking for?

“Oh, wait, wasn’t she a great big fat person?” Nah, where did that come from?

“Eat shit and die, you fuckety fucking fucktard”? Nah, but we like it. Save it for later.

Wait. How about “Sadly, No!?” Aha! That’s the ticket:
Read the rest of this entry »

Daniel “Crack” Pipes, sympathetically interviewed by an employee of Richard Mellonhead Scaife’s Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, calls the Iraq war “a success”.

And there’s more:

Q: Were you in favor of going to war in Iraq, and how do you think it’s progressing or regressing?

A: I was in favor. I continue to be in favor of the campaign to eliminate the rule of Saddam Hussein, with all the dangers to the Iraqis, to the region and to ourselves.

In favor for how long? Who knows, but if Pipes means to say “always,” well, then… Sadly, No!:

Pipes did co-author an article with Laurie Mylroie for the New Republic entitled “Back Iraq: It’s Time for a U.S. Tilt.â€? (4/27/87) I would provide the link to this article from the “complete list of articles” on Mr. Pipes’ website, but he seems to have neglected to include it. Funny, that.

Read the rest of this entry »

There’s wingnut gold in them thar hills! Seriously, Hugh Hewitt’s radio show is a freakin’ gold mine for aficionados of pure wingnuttery. Let’s go prospectin’!

Talking to Fivehead (TM Tbogg Enterprises) about immigration, Hugh makes a candid slip but swiftly recovers his disingenuousness:

HH: But you know why they [flew a Mexican flag above an upside-down American flag]? They were waiving a red flag in front of the Republicans. That’s all it was. It was designed to bring the Minutemen out of their closet with their guns going, proverbially, they don’t have guns. It was designed to send Laura and other talk show hosts into orbit, and it did. It was designed to get exactly this sort of meltdown, but I’ll tell you, I think the meltdown, in the final analysis, because it focuses on security, is going to help Republicans again.

Nice try, Hugh. You had it right the first time.
Read the rest of this entry »