NRO's The Corner 2: Ghost Protocol

love the "yeah but hes always full of shit" defense b/c it is pretty strong :/

Good grief.

the benefit of the dim: a jay nordlinger reader

omg omg you guys dubya's on the hoover institution presents uncommon knowledge with peter robinson. "eight years was awesome! y'know, i was famous and powerful... but i have found that life after the presidency is awesome."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_gst-Ryh3g

this is from the comments on a pretty desperate-sounding Michael Medved editorial on the Daily Beast but I feel it merits representation on this thread. the screenname is especially great.

SendClunkerBackToChicagoNoRebate
28 Minutes Ago
Barack Hussein Obama is about to be "Arpaio Boated". Today at 5:30 PM EST Worldnet daily will be live streaming the SECOND Sheriff Joe Arpaio press conference. He will add more criminal evidence to what they have already discovered. The April 27th, 2011 computer generated birth record that Obama has been flaunting on Coffee mugs and T-Shirts is definitely a forgery. These investigators are also saying that Obama fraudulently registered with the Selective Service and their evidence shows that Obama's postal stamp is the only stamp with a two digit number for a date. It was a very poor fraudulent registration. As the criminal investigation continues they will enlighten the American citizens that this usurper has been using a fraudulent SS#, one the the Social Security Administration said they never issued to Barack Hussein Obama. He may have some splanin to do on that one. It has been FLAGGED on several occasions, so much so the SS Admin, stopped people from reporting it (042-68-4425). It is the number he has been using for a very long time. Don't ya love these early "October surprises?" As in Watergate it takes a long time to blow the covers off scandals, it is more difficult to do at this time since the media has become a "state run media" who have a love affair with this Man/Chld but it will eventually cause the man to crash and burn in embarrassment to all his grand brilliant supporters.

That's been the problem for three years: the proliferation of Obama coffee mugs.

Any time I see someone using "Barack Hussein Obama" I immediately tune out.

I immediately sing "mmm mmm mmm"

some of the horoscopes discussion on ilx a few weeks ago made me decide to believe in horoscopes because ... now i get to believe in horoscopes, which is more fun than not. & think how exciting it would be to really believe in a birther conspiracy, feeding off the rabbithole of telling erroneously dated mail-stamps & enhanced jpgs of photoshop watermarking.

also clunker ^^ coulda squeezed in a paragraph break to let the light relief of He may have some splanin to do on that one really breathe. poor form clunks.

Nords on fire lately:

Anyway, our reader recalls that Bill Clinton, in the ’92 debates, insisted on referring to his opponent as “Mr. Bush,” rather than “Mr. President.” I recall that when Bob Dole debated Clinton four years later, he said (something like), “I’m going to call you ‘Mr. President,’ a courtesy you did not extend to President Bush.” So, asks our reader, will Romney go “Mr. President” or “Mr. Obama”?

The former, surely. No chance he can get away with what Clinton got away with in ’92. Indeed, who among us can get away with what Clinton got away with?

I wonder who Nordlinger ships Mitt with

I can see it now: Romney turns to Obama in debate and says, “We need businessmen, Mr. President. If we didn’t have them — whom would you lawyers sue?”

i wish i could see mitt saying "whom" at a debate

I can see it now: Romney turns to Obama in debate and says, “We need businessmen, Mr. President. If we didn’t have them — who's zoomin' who?”

how is Rich LOLwry editor of anything:

"All of us rely on others to make us what we are — our families, our communities, etc. At another level, it is profoundly disturbing: It denies pride of place to individual achievement and creativity. Pace Obama, roads and bridges aren’t the key ingredients to business success. All of us drive on the roads; very few of us have the vision and determination to become successful entrepreneurs."

Isn't the natural conclusion to the clause "All of us drive on the roads" "very few of us have the vision and determination to build one"? Maybe he meant to write "All of us drive on the roads; very few of us have the determination to run over dumbfucks like me who get starbursts of joy when I imagine Sarah Palin winking at me."

maybe he changed it because he realized the federal government is responsible for a whole lot of road and bridge funding

do lawyers even sue people

i thought businessmen sued people and then hired lawyers

linked to from the corner:

http://www.openmarket.org/2012/07/13/the-other-scandal-in-unhappy-valley/

...perhaps it’s time that we revisit the Michael Mann affair, particularly given how much we’ve also learned about his and others’ hockey-stick deceptions since. Mann could be said to be the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except that instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data in the service of politicized science that could have dire economic consequences for the nation and planet.

classy

linked and approved by mark steyn, of course

I can see it now: Romney turns to Obama in debate and says, “We need businessmen, Mr. President. If we didn’t have them — GROCERY BAG”

okay winner

no this is the winnner:

To my homies’ posts below — here and here — I’d like to add something. It would seem far-fetched that George W. Bush could ever be a Nobel peace laureate. After all, the committee hated his guts. You could argue that they gave five awards against Bush 43 — or in reaction to him, or with him in mind. In 2001, Kofi Annan and the U.N. In 2002, Jimmy Carter. In 2005, Mohamed ElBaradei and the IAEA. In 2007, Al Gore and the IPCC. And in 2009, Barack Obama.

When Carter won, the committee chairman did us the favor of stating, bluntly, that they were rapping Bush, as well as honoring Carter.

But consider: The committee hated Reagan’s guts too — in the 1980s, I mean, when the Gipper was president. There were some anti-Reagan Nobels. The committee told Costa Rica’s Oscar Arias in 1987 that they were giving him the prize in order to arm him with a weapon against Reagan. Arias later remarked to Robert Kagan, “Reagan was responsible for my prize.”

Okay, flash forward — in 2009, the chairman is giving the “presentation speech” for Obama. And he cites Reagan. Favorably. Hails him as a president who recognized that “America’s ideals were the world’s ideals”! A stunning turn of events.

I say in my book, “In future Nobel ceremonies, will chairmen be praising and quoting George W. Bush?” Stranger things have happened (though maybe not many). Time can be a healer and clarifier.

that almost made me punch my computer screen

he had me at "homies"

homies rapping Bush

man, knowing even a few things about central america in the 70s and 80s is enough to make that shit about Arias turn your stomach

Nordlinger grimly tallying rainbows

In Saugatuck, there are many rainbow flags, outside shops and homes. There are even more in neighboring Douglas — more than in Greenwich Village, I think. Years ago, the chant was, “We’re here, we’re queer, get used to it.” Oh, I think we’re plenty used to it by now. Are the signs and flags all that necessary?

His coy "oh"s and short sentences bespeak a kind of retardation.

Oh, I think we’re plenty used to it by now.

Then why does the Corner continue to whine constantly about gay people?

It is comforting to know that I was correct in my assessment that Romney is not Bane. Yet that has not stopped Democrats from continuing their Internet campaign to connect the two characters, as evidenced below.

http://c6.nrostatic.com/dest/2012/07/19/pic_corner_071912_NB_B_2_2eb18ca02e7af875160824f7405cc02d.jpg

tbh when i first saw that i thought . . . boba fett?

what if he doesn't win? He's worth a lot to me

whatta maroon

The Polish View of the 2012 Campaign
by George Weigel

no offense but seriously who gives a shit

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/310400/why-did-chicken-cross-gays-mark-steyn

[Approved commenter] Teflon93
07/24/12 08:56

We shouldn't be surprised by The Muppets' turn---they spend their lives with a man's fist wedged up their backsides.

otm

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/311448/rap-radio-resentment-and-romney-kevin-d-williamson

go to it, guys

oh absolutely not

there is something about the peculiar sensation of being trapped in an epic traffic jam (the slow crescendo of building rage, the sense that one is witnessing an immense institutional failure of a particularly urban variety) that makes rap music sound to my ear like the appropriate soundtrack.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKlDBi0cyIA

If I were Romney, I’d track down the first Republican rapper I could find (Eazy-E, where are you in our hour of need?)

Does . . . does he really not know?

i think he knows. about that one thing, anyway.

i think his central point - that americans are pretty money-obsessed wealth-worshipping consumerists - is fairly otm

the real question is whether you can pitch a successful campaign to our petty demons + win. probably yes.

americans Cornerists are pretty money-obsessed wealth-worshipping consumerists

it is amazing that he managed to write (Eazy-E, where are you in our hour of need?) and then GOT WORSE

it's true that all squares are rectangles xp

What in the

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/312225/interesting-piece-kathryn-jean-lopez

"interesting-piece-kathryn-jean-lopez"

this is the most sinister URL

[Approved commenter] MikeB
07/25/12 09:07

The reactions to K-Lo posting this are gonna be a helluva lot more interesting.

K-Lo, where are you in our hour of need?

Rocket_J_Squirrel 07/25/12 10:25
Ko-Lo,

Excellent link.

As for other posters that can't quite figure this out, please follow a quick crumb trail here. If this is outlandish then all of Christianity is outlandish. So too was it then outlandish when Congress corrected Thomas Jefferson and insisted that he add the words "...endowed by our Creator..." to the Declaration of Independence thus making it clear that our rights are unalienable because they come from God Himself and are not bestowed on us by any men.
For you debonair agnostics out there who say "well I believe in God, but I don't believe in Satan and Moses and Jesus and the Saints or basically anything in the Bible...." well okay, but just look at what you are doing. You are believing not in any revealed truth extending through the experience of billions of men and women for thousands of years but rather in some God you put together in your basement. And you're calling Christians nuts?