Sadly, No!

Sure, Amber told us that she’s in love. Yet she’s still young, and who knows what will happen to that relationship. Always be prepared we always say, and thus we introduce one of this generation’s new and exciting conservative voices, one Nathan Burchfiel.

Nathan would be great for Amber because in addition to being a total stud, they share an obsession with their non-existent sex lives and “liberal propaganda.” Frankly, we think that Nathan could Mr. Right for Amber, or if that doesn’t work, at least Kyle Williams‘ special friend. Nathan isn’t preoccupied with nipples or vaginas this week, well, not directly anyway:

One great hypocrisy of the administration of the university – and of liberal organizations in general – is its ability to disapprove of some harmful behavior while condoning and even propagating other harmful behavior.

So right away you see the great potential in Nathan. You don’t know what the problem is, but don’t you know it liberals are, as in invariably the case, at fault. So what’s wrong? Not Cloned Pandas of Mass Destruction (NCPOMD.) Not Girl Scout Cookies of Lesbianism (NGSCOL.) This time, it’s Free Condoms of Mass Promiscuousness. (FCOMP.)

RAs are required to make condoms available for free to any student requesting them. This service shows blatant favoritism toward the sexually active and makes no effort to provide an equal service to the abstinent, and distribution of condoms encourages dangerous behavior.

So, as a smoker who has made the decision to remain abstinent until marriage, I’m told I can’t enjoy something that makes me happy in the comfort of my own room. My roommate, on the other hand, a non-smoking man-whore, is encouraged to have as much sex as possible under the administration’s false sense of security brought to life in a small latex penis-glove.

So while the University of Maryland gives out condoms to students who want them, it doesn’t give out DVDs of Touched by an Angel to those who believe that every sperm is sacred. Nathan doesn’t tell us what he would like to get from his university, so we don’t know if he would prefer the Ann Coulter talking doll or a pinup poster of Kathryn Jean Lopez.

It seems to us that while Nathan’s problem may have the appearance of a complex game of which came first, the chicken or the egg, it’s really not that complicated. Blaming distribution of free condoms for college students’ sexual activity is like saying Jonah Goldberg is fat as a result of his wearing size 50 pants. You may want to check your causal links on this one.

Having condoms (or access to some) will no more lead to sex than renting Johnny English will make you into a British secret service agent. We wish it were so (in both cases,) but we’ve never seen evidence for this (and there was a time when empirical work was ongoing.) Sure, that would have been nice we guess… but, Sadly, No! Perhaps things have changed in the recent past — we wouldn’t know actually because the day that we got engaged, we said goodbye to the condom forever. (Then again, with nonsense like this perhaps we’ll have to go back one day.) Where were we anyway? Ah yes, giving away free condoms violates the separation of church and state. (Is Maryland giving away Jesus condoms?:)

The state rejects the religious or otherwise intelligent decisions of students who choose to remain abstinent. By outwardly supporting the promiscuous sexual activity of students who choose to participate, the state infringes on the rights of abstinent students. [Emphasis added]

Hey Nathan, nobody’s shoving your dick anywhere (as far as we know anyway.)

Charles Krauthammer, on FoxNews earlier today:

Candidates who try to make an issue out of the deficit don’t get anywhere.

Right. 19% of the popular vote as a third party candidate in a presidential election, that’s nothing!

By the way, is Krauthammer unable to open his eyes anymore? He looked on the verge of falling asleep throughout his interview.

FoxNews (Sadly, No! loves the FoxNews) had a story earlier on an event held last month featuring Kevin Phillips, Al Franken, and Paul Krugman. (Details here and there.) According to the reporter, there are “critics” out there with one pressing question:

Critics wonder if they’re performing a public service.

They are? Who the fuck cares about that? Does anyone on the left wonder if conservative comedians/authors are performing a “public service” doing what they do? The WhiningDar is really off the scale at Fox.

We mentioned the adventures of Triumph the Insult Comic Dog in Quebec last week. The story picks up some steam today on the pages of the New York Times:

And of a third, rather plump, man the puppet asked: “Are you a separatist? Maybe you should try separating yourself from doughnuts first.”

Worst of all, perhaps, the Toronto audience laughed heartily.

In the comments to our first post, Robert McCleland had noted that the “outrage” was coming from the NDP, and that there was no real firestorm in Canada. If the New York Times article adds anything, it is that English-speaking federal politicians are those who are upset. [Yet sadly, we have no video to offer.]

This article in Montreal’s second largest paper does mention a few more of Triumph’s jokes:

‘I can guess that you’re French, I can smell your crotch from here.’ O’Brien’s team also changed some street names in Quebec with such signs as ‘Quebecqueer Street’ and ‘Pussy Street.’ [Our translation]

Until we can find a video clip, here is a picture of Triumph in Quebec city:

Thanks to Frederick for the NYT link.

Update: Robert McCleland kindly posts a link to the video. We’re having problems connecting, but from the part we’ve seen so far it’s just typical Triumph speaking (only?) to non-English speaking Quebeckers.

One of the fake street signs Triumph puts up is called “Celine Dion sucks.” That sounds about right to us.

K-Lo seems upset that the “right” gets “blamed” for the Kerry had an affair allegations going around:

YUP, RIGHT GETS BLAMED [KJL]
On Inside Politics, Judy Woodruff just talked about John Kerry’s Imus interview this morning; Woodruff said Kerry responded to rumors that were circulating on conservative websites.
Posted at 03:34 PM

Unless Matt Drudge has suddenly become a non-right news source, or unless you believe that FoxNews really is fair and balanced, isn’t Woodruff’s (for all her suckiness) description pretty accurate?

Andrew Sullivan, who threw a fit on the radio about Atrios’ anonymity, offers this mind boggling thought today:

It is impossible to verify all letters. My general view is that if they make good points, I couldn’t care less who sent them.

Why should a blog be judged differently?

Roger Ailes links to this NYT op-ed piece by Seinfeld co-creator Larry David on the National Guard (or as the Daily Show put it about Bush’s experience there, the National Guard’s National Guard: An Army of None.)

The New York Times, that great liberal propaganda machine, unleashes this gem on its readers today:

And yet, just as Hillary Rodham Clinton was more complicated than her feminazi image, surely Laura Bush has a few currents, a little tension, in her inner life.

This comes from a review of Ann Gerhart’s The Perfect Wife, a biography of Laura Bush (who did not collaborate in the project.)

Now, we don’t know who came up with the feminazi label for Hillary. Yet given the very nature of the word, is there anyone above the intelligence level of a mollusk that would not have guesses that Hillary’s image was “more complicated than that?” Clinton apparently graduated from Yale Law School and managed to do a few things on her own, so who exactly would think she wasn’t “more” than a feminazi (whatever the fuck that is.)

And hence we bring you yet another idiotic and pointless Sadly, No! Enterprises game: The It’s Way More Complicated Than That Discovery. The goal is to use a mostly (or entirely) baseless smear or insult while appearing to “defend” the target of said smear. [See also the never-ending War on Straw.] Such as:

… and in case that had failed to shock you, World O’Crap reports on the Girl Scout Cookies of Lesbianism. And you know who loves cookies? Oh yes, the one, the only… Miss Amber Pawlik! Oh my, what a tangled web we weave.

Put us down for at least one. Kyle Williams is another one with nipple on the brain:

While [MTV] may be the poster boy for the evils of entertainment, the reality is that MTV is simply one of countless media outlets marketing sex and other vulgarities to teens. [Emphasis added]

But it isn’t just about the vulgarity of heterosexual sex of course — it never is:

Viacom also owns Paramount, a company that delivers trash to our wide screens every year, and the kids network Nickelodeon, which has broadcast many programs supporting the acceptance of homosexuality.

If there’s one thing we can’t have under any circumstances, it’s the acceptance of homosexuality. Because, well, because once we accept homosexuality, Kyle just won’t have any reason not to come out anymore. So what’s a boy to do?

Unfortunately, our society is way past that. If we want to clean up television, then the best thing we can do is throw our televisions out the door.

Given how much Kyle knows about various TV channels however (the “sex-saturated, profanity-airing station BET,”) it seems like he has yet to follow his advice.