Sadly, No!

Above: Steven F. Hayward

Shorter Steven F. Hayward, America’s Shittiest Website™:
The Future of NPR: A Prediction

Shorter Steven F. Hayward, America’s Shittiest Website™:
Media Kudos and Brickbats

‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™

The wingnut message is basically that we should simultaneously expand our use of nuclear energy while shrinking government’s ability to regulate it.

That about right?

I’ll see your ‘Friday‘ and raise you ‘My Jeans’:

Charmin Neal Boortz. Best for bear bottoms

Shorter Neal Boooortz, Clown Hall
To America’s hot-to-protest college students

‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™

ABOVE: Bill Flax

---

Earlier this morning, while perusing the recent output of the brain trust over at the American Thinker website, I saw a post by someone named Bill Flax titled “It’s Time for Gays to Get Married.” Surely, it’s a mistake, I thought, or the site has been hacked, or I’ve misread the title or something.

Gays have every bit as much right to get married as you or I. And in fact, they should.

What next? Is K-Lo going to announce that she’s started screwing black men and has had five abortions? Is Jonah Goldberg going to start bathing regularly and wearing unstained ironed shirts? Is Peggy Noonan going to reveal that at last she’s started attending AA meetings?

A homosexual man has an identical right to take a woman in holy matrimony as may any other man. Likewise, the rest of us have just as little right to take some guy and pronounce him a bride. This isn’t a question of differing rights. Our rights remain in perfect symmetry. Homosexuals are now and always have been permitted to marry.

And anti-miscegenation statutes didn’t discriminate either. Blacks had the same right to marry someone of their own race as whites did.

Of course, this is the American Thinker we’re talking about. Surely Flax isn’t simply going to repeat this tired old pseudo-gotcha and leave it at that. Certainly he’s going to put an extra-wingnutty spin on it, isn’t he?

Marriage is and must always remain one man and one woman. … Rather than seek to undermine such a foundational institution necessary for healthy society, homosexuals ought to get married. Marriage would temper their urges and channel their desires into something beneficial for both them and society at large.

Because that worked out so well for Rock Hudson.

ABOVE: Mark W. Hendrickson

Shorter Mark W. Hendrickson, Clown Hall:
A Tale of Two Union Disputes: NFL vs. Wisconsin Teachers

‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™

The New York Times published a pretty devastating article Tuesday pointing out the disconnect between Rep. Peter King’s jihad against American Muslims and the Republican congressman’s own well-documented ties to the IRA — ties that he refuses to sever even when pressed. Hypocritical, much? Well, yes, but for Jammie Wearing Fool, it’s not King who should be sweating in the face of the dreaded hypocrisy charge … but the Times:

So now to the New York Times the IRA is unequivocally a terrorist group. Not freedom fighters, not militants, the name typically reserved for Islamic terror groups. Their agenda is all too transparent: Peter King supports terrorists, therefore his holding hearing on radical Islamists in America makes him a hypocrite.

Well, yes, that’s pretty obvious … right? Not so, kvetchs the Fool:

Memo to the Times: The New York City and Boston areas are filled with Irish immigrants and the sons and grandsons of Irish immigrants, with a countless number who either had ties or sympathies with the IRA.

That such urban centers are now home to many Muslim immigrants does not occur to the Fool, who soldiers on with small regard for logic:

Yes, New York Times, a lot of people looked upon the IRA not as a terrorist group, but as those fighting for independence from Britain. Their actions and collaboration with radical leftists and terror groups — again, groups the Times openly has sympathized with over the years — left a bad impression upon many of us who later wanted nothing to do with them, family ties or not. The events of 9/11 also provided a stark realization for many: If we’re going to unequivocally denounce terrorism, you better be consistent. But for the Times, they prefer hypocrisy over consistency. [emphasis mine]

It’s a neat trick. The Fool readily admits that the IRA’s associations and the post-9/11 gestalt have combined to make sensible people reject the organization as a terrorist group if only just to be consistent. Furthermore, consistency — here defined by the Fool as the opposite of hypocrisy — demands that you do the opposite of what Peter King is doing if you want to ‘unequivocally denounce terrorism’. But calling out King for refusing to reject the IRA even as he holds his own hearing designed to force a non-Irish minority to ‘unequivocally denounce terrorism’ means that you are the hypocrite.

Here’s a news flash for the Jammie Wearing Fool — the New York Times is not the one conducting a witch hunt in the halls of Congress.

ABOVE: Newt Gingrich and his wife du jour

Shorter Newt Gingrich, The Brody File:
Newt Gingrich Tells Brody File He “felt compelled to seek God’s forgiveness”

‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™

Miss Mrs. Anne Elk Applebaum, March 8th, 2011:

Why the Arab anxiety about American and Western help? Why the reluctance among our allies? The answer can be summed up in a single word: Iraq. Far from setting “an example for the entire region,” as Krauthammer put it, Iraq serves as a dire warning: Beware, for this could be the fate of your country.

Anne Applebaum, August 30, 2010:

I supported the invasion of Iraq, I think the surge was a success and I believe that an Iraqi democracy could be a revolutionary force for good in the Middle East. Yet even if violence abates, even if all American troops go home, we have still paid a very high price for our victory — much higher than we usually admit.

Anne Applebaum, July 17, 2007:

More troops? I hardly need to elaborate on what’s wrong with that plan, since so many in Congress do so every day. But for the record, I’ll repeat the obvious: More troops means more American casualties, maybe many more casualties. Worse, the very presence of American soldiers creates strife in some parts of Iraq — angering Iraqis, motivating al-Qaeda, sparking violence. Besides, we’ve tried the surge, and the surge hasn’t brought the results we wanted.

To recap for those scoring at home: Iraq is pretty much a mess (“this could happen to your country”), a mess that resulted from the US “victory” there. The surge, a success, was a really bad idea (obviously). The invasion of Iraq, a good idea supported by Anne, started this chain of events.

It follows then, logically, “All wood burns,” states Sir Bedevere. “Therefore,” he concludes, “all that burns is wood.” This is, of course, pure bullshit. that:

Good idea –> Invasion –> Victory –> Mess –> Victory