Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

False flags

So. Did I call Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey an anti-semite, as those commenting at his site continue to suggest? You be the judge. But do keep in mind that these posts were in direct response to Frey’s own posts publicly vetting Stacy McCain for what Frey decided may or may not be racist thought crimes/racist behaviors sometime in his (perhaps and potentially) racist past that Mr McCain may or may not be responsible for.

Frey defended himself against suggestions the he was holding a kind of public show trial — and potentially harming RSM’s professional reputation — by claiming he had NEVER called McCain “a racist” (with the “a” eventually becoming a huge distinction for Frey). And his conclusion, after several truly rigorous posts inquiring into the matter of Stacy McCain’s perhaps racism? We just don’t know. So, then:

Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey: purveyor of (what might look to a reasonable man like) anti-semitic statements that may or may not reveal a “sub-conscious” anti-semitism? Hard to say. World class smear artist and disingenuous hypocrite…?

Abso-fucking-lutely.*

****

PROMINENT RESPONSE ALERT! (Or, “Is Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey anti-semitic? We really can’t say. Nor does that have anything to do with this post. But we just thought we’d throw it out there,” part 3) [updated]*

[…]

Justifying Letterman’s right to make what I consider an easy (and lazy) joke for an audience he knew would be responsive is not the same as defending the joke, for reasons I shouldn’t have to explain to educated adults, much less a Los Angeles County Deputy District attorney (who may or may not be anti-semitic).*

****
Is Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey anti-semitic? Part 2

In part one of our series, “Is Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey anti-semitic,” we very pointedly refused to reach a conclusion: perhaps he is, perhaps he isn’t. Frankly, it’s hard to tell, because no one is quite sure just how many anti-semitic statements (if indeed that’s what we’re looking at) are needed in the aggregate before we can conclude that we have on our hands is a full-bore kike knocker. What we do know is that said statements are born not of intent but rather from a hatred of Jews that remains deeply buried in the subconscious of the Jew hater until it shows up in one of his statements. At which point we simultaneously know him to be a Jew hater, but can now conclude, happily, that he likely isn’t one.

– And that’s because he is to be forgiven for being an anti-semite precisely because of the deep seatedness of his anti-semitism. Sounds strange, I realize, but hey: that’s just how language works. Which is fine, so long as in the end we can convict his statements, and in so doing win the battle vs. hate. In fact, I for one wouldn’t mind it at all if those statements we convict are then banned from polite company. In perpetuity.

That’d teach them.

In this latest post in our investigative series, I will very very pointedly and demonstrably NOT BACKTRACK from my earlier non-conclusion in any way. It is too early to tell if Frey is himself an anti-semite, or even if what we are dealing with are anti-semitic statements attributable to Frey. Though he wrote them.

That’s what we’re here to find out.

And that’s why this investigation needs to press on, despite Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey’s rather transparent attempts to blame the victim of his (potentially) anti-semitic statements for airing them in the first place.

True, this doesn’t look good for DDA Frey, but we mustn’t rush to judgment: what we are doing here is bigger than just Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey. Hell, it’s bigger even than your humble investigator, whose primary goal is to make sure that the (potential) anti-semitism of Mr Frey is understood and properly contextualized.

After all, our democracy at stake. And that is hardly hyperbolic: as a movement, conservatives simply can’t have someone like Patrick Frey, who has made what looks to me like anti-semitic statements (but which may not be, I guess) backing a prominent and promising conservative candidate (maybe even the next Reagan!) in public, then find out later that Frey is, in fact, a raging anti-semite — and the worst kind, too: one who keeps his (maybe) anti-semitism quite hidden in the dark recesses of his sordid psyche, carefully signified by certain code words, ensuring that his rank bigotry gets only opaquely verbalized. Meanwhile, beneath his polished (perhaps) exterior are all those deep-seated anti-semitic thoughts that are his (but that he doesn’t intend, nor is he responsible for), itching to break free.

He’s a ticking time bomb of (potential) hate. HE JUST CAN’T HELP HAVING THOSE (PERHAPS) ANTI-SEMITIC THOUGHTS!

I don’t know about you. But that kind of thing makes me feel uneasy. I mean, it’s hard not to look at his constant use of “money grubbing” with respect to a Jew and not find it “cringe worthy.” I propose we search around and see how often, and in what other contexts, Frey used “money-grubbing” as an adjective. We want to keep this exploration of his possible (though I’m pointedly not calling him an anti-semite) anti-semitism as scientifically sound as we can, to impress upon the world our utter fairness in trying to locate the birthplace of Mr Frey’s anti-semitic statements, which we can’t yet conclude are anti-semitic.

And this investigation should be public. VERY public. So as to avoid any semblance of impropriety.

We owe it to our cause to get to the bottom of these statements of Frey’s, which on the surface a reasonable man might easily conclude are anti-semitic.

We’d actually be doing LA County DDA Patrick Frey a favor, exploring his possible anti-semitism in this way. Because if he’s exonerated, he’ll be ever so thankful! And then we’ll finally be able to answer the question, “Is Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey anti-semitic” with a resounding we still don’t have a fucking clue.

****
update: meta-commentary, from Tommy the Cat.*

****

Is Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey anti-semitic?

As many of you know, on at least two occasions, Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey has made statements that more than a few people have suggested are redolent with the stink of anti-semitism.

Generally, when I interpret such statements, I appeal to the writer’s intent: was the statement signified in such a way that the anti-semitism belongs to its author, or am I merely imagining anti-semitism in the author’s marks, and then signifying those marks myself — in essence, creating a text in which anti-semitism exists, then attributing that text to the original author?

But those are all very “academic” questions, and as we now know, “most blog readers” are too fucking stupid to understand them. So rather than work through questions and concerns on issues that require words be used with some precision, I think you’ll all agree that the best maneuver going forward is to do away with specialized questions, and only use terms in a way that the common man might, were he, say, attending a rib cook-off or a Tea Party, or merely whispering sweet nothings into the ear of one of his cousins during a fireworks display commemorating James Earl Ray’s birthday.

“Intent” is one of those words that needs it some retiring, given that it is, as a concept, incredibly difficult to define. And as intent is no longer a requirement — what we are looking for is some deep-seated anti-Jew hatred that the author didn’t even know he had, some vile internal grubbiness that exists at the very core of the author’s soul, but for which he cannot possibly held accountable given that, in polite company (and aware of the stigma of uttering anti-semitic remarks while not holding a progressive political worldview) he would never intend such buried hatreds to escape — we can conclude that Frey would never intentionally let those inveterate bigotries be aired publicly.

And so we are left only to deal with the statements themselves, which exist outside the purview of the author’s intent (though we will stipulate that they are animated by something very much like intent that nevertheless gives the agency whose deep-seated anti-semitism gave birth to such ugly statements a psychic mulligan).

To begin: I wish to state up front that I am not calling Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey an anti-semite. I don’t know whether he is or whether he isn’t. But I do know that his statements might reasonably be reviewed by a casual reader, whom we’ll assume is a “reasonable man,” as potentially anti-semitic, and frankly, I’m not sure I can imagine a context in which those statements — not the person who made them, mind you, who should bear no real responsibility for them, given how deeply-seated they were in his black little soul, and given how very very very much he wished they’d never escaped his mind to go goose stepping across the blogosphere — could be anything but anti-semitic; and so it is my duty to examine the potential anti-semitism of LA County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey as if he were, say, a Louis Farrakhan, or some British Leftist.

If we are going to scrutinize the hatreds of others and hold them up to the disinfecting light of public opprobrium, how can we in good conscience excuse analogous behaviors just because they are coming from someone on “our side”?

To reiterate, before we begin our 15-part series exploring the anti-semitic suggestiveness of Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey’s multiple statements, on the way to determining if Frey himself is anti-semitic: on the one hand, I am most pointedly NOT calling Patrick Frey anti-semitic. However, it’s quite possible he’s made anti-semitic statements, animated by anti-semitic thoughts that are deeply seated in his “subconscious.” Where they don’t count as his thoughts (but nevertheless, he’s the dude who thunk ‘em, so, like, what can we do?)

On the other hand, I do find myself concerned that he reintroduced the idea of “money-grubbing” for a second time, without any provocation, seven months after his first stab at tethering the adjective to a Jew with whom he was having a heated disagreement. (Not that any perceived provocation should matter, anyway: if a black dude blocks my jumper, I wouldn’t be any more entitled to call him a thieving coon than I might had he just given me the Heimlich and cost me a nice chunk of already softened steak.)

I say that this was unprovoked because from where I’m sitting, when I hear “language can only be language when it is tied to intent,” I don’t immediately jump to describing the person offering that argument as a “money grubber.” But then, I might not have the same deeply seated thoughts animating me as Patrick Frey does, so I will resist passing judgment on him.

Does that make him anti-semitic? Is Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey an anti-semite? Or is he guilty of making (potentially) anti-semitic statements, for which he should be forgiven, insofar as the benighted thoughts that animated such statements are, like, really really really deep in his subconscious, where they aren’t really his, or rather, they are, but it’s not like he wants you to see them.

Naturally, I’d give him a chance to deny his anti-semitism, if indeed that’s what it is, and I’m POINTEDLY saying that I don’t know if it is or not. But I’m beginning to think that the only way to protect conservatism down the line is to publicly vet its mouthpieces.

One of my readers, who like me is torn about having to launch such an investigation, but who, again like me, is duty bound as a spokesman for the conservative cause to do so, has suggested that we begin examining the question of to what do we attribute the anti-semitism of the statement, if not to the anti-semitism of its utterer, with a series of hypotheticals:

If a boy names his dog “Moneygrubber” and a Jewish person is walking by when the boy calls to his dog, is it anti-semitic if

1) he lowers his voice so the Jewish person doesn’t hear something that might offend?
2) he thoughtlessly (although perhaps not sub-thoughtlessly) just yells for the dog?
3) he doesn’t give a shit if he accidently offends anyone, it’s a fucking accident, and only a stupid Jew would seize on such a thing and make a big deal out of it?
4) he was anti-semitic when he named his dog, but that was just one time years ago, and now he’s just calling his dog’s name?

Reader input is greatly appreciated. And so we’re clear: we will NOT use the findings of our reader poll to prove Frey’s anti-semitism. That would be unscientific and unethical.

Instead, we’ll use the findings merely as a springboard for other posts on just how anti-semitic Frey may or may not be.

Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey has to realize he is not bigger than the cause. The cause must be served. It must be protected. And with the ability people have to run around finding unintended anti-semitic thoughts emanating from people who don’t themselves consciously realize how anti-semitic they actually may or may not be, we really must be careful these days.

I’m really worried about the left, and how they might use what may or may not be Frey’s anti-semitism against the cause somewhere down the line. Patrick Frey’s anti-semitism, if it exists, matters only inasmuch as it can be used against the cause by unscrupulous people on the Left.

We murder to dissect .*

Me, I read these posts and see something downright Swiftian about them, viewed in context.

Which I’d be willing to bet is why they are now being unmoored from their original context and bracketed from their original intent — if they are even considered at all — and the consensus “truth” about them, that I called Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey an antisemite, is being carefully crafted, even though it is clear that I took precautions to most POINTEDLY NOT call him such.

Truth is, I don’t know either way. I was just trying to do a service to conservatism by making sure we investigate its truly important questions (for instance, is Stacy McCain racist? Did we ever find out the answer? I forget) — and that we do so very publicly. To prove we aren’t afraid to look hard at ourselves and not just at those on the left who wish to turn this country into a Marxist-controlled soft socialist nanny state, supported by voter “clients” who rely on the government for subsistence and administered in perpetuity by unelected bureaucrats who put themselves in charge of policing the very regulations they pass of their own volition.

You’re welcome.

48 Replies to “False flags”

  1. Drumwaster says:

    I’m buying more popcorn, that’s all I know…

  2. McGehee says:

    I think if Frey weren’t anti-semitic he would simply have shrugged it off. But, when you throw a rock into a pack of dogs the only one that yelps is the one that got hit. And why are you throwing rocks at dogs anyway, that’s animal cruelty.

    And don’t let me hear you call that dog “boy” where someone of both age and color might overhear, because then I’ll give you a really, really severe scolding to make sure that person of both age and color doesn’t think I’m as racist as you might be (although I could never really know for sure).

  3. J0hn says:

    He didn’t get it the first time, so what makes you think he’ll get it this time?

  4. Jeff G. says:

    He didn’t get it the first time, so what makes you think he’ll get it this time?

    Who said it was for him?

  5. Wm T Sherman says:

    Heavy sarcasm = saying the opposite of what you mean.

    If employed, it can always be intentionally cherry-picked or unintentionally misinterpreted to incorrectly signify its actual meaning to be its face value.

    —————–

    Odd little anecdote — I lived in Edmonton, Alberta for a few months (ca. 1998). When I first started reading the local daily newspaper, it took awhile for me to understand that on many days, a majority of letters to the editor were actually sarcastic, and should be taken to mean that the author was actually angered by what they appeared to be espousing, and meant the opposite of what they had written. Sometimes there would be sarcasm clues, phrases such as “I suppose” or “It must be that,” but mostly not. Given how alien it was to me, I’d say it must have been a cultural thing – whether it’s pan-Canadian or just Albertan, I don’t know. I assume locals understood this convention, or the letter-writers would not have made their points in this way.

    —————-

    The works of Swift are understood to be Swiftian because (i) a critical mass of people have been informed so, and (ii) the works are mostly accessed only by the pool of people who “get it.”

  6. Jeff G. says:

    The works of Swift are understood to be Swiftian because (i) a critical mass of people have been informed so, and (ii) the works are mostly accessed only by the pool of people who “get it.”

    I live with a sex-crazed armadillo, hold conversations with my pants, encourage the petty taunts of oatmeal, and have been known to engage in covert ops with heroin-addicted sugar beets.

    Those are what some might call intertextual clues to be on guard for the potential of irony.

  7. Wm T Sherman says:

    But see, I didn’t know that stuff until just now.

  8. Wm T Sherman says:

    Has a student ever cited “A Modest Proposal” as an unironic example of man’s inhumanity to man? Can’t rule it out.

  9. Jeff G. says:

    But see, I didn’t know that stuff until just now.

    Ah. Well, no worries. That’s what the post is for — to set things straight.

    I considered developing an irony tag to put on my posts. But then I realized I’d just use it ironically. So this is probably best.

  10. geoffb says:

    Reader poll, reader poll, reader poll.

    Obviously blatant discrimination in favor of the small minority of college graduates who are literate. This blog bias, prejudice, against the unreading only continues because it is remains unread.

  11. Spiny Norman says:

    I live with a sex-crazed armadillo, hold conversations with my pants, encourage the petty taunts of oatmeal, and have been known to engage in covert ops with heroin-addicted sugar beets.

    Exactly. One must intentionally misinterpret them not to read them as ironic or sarcastic… which is what Pat’s readers must be doing, because they can’t be that dense, can they?

  12. Sears Poncho says:

    You be the judge

    Don’t know that I’m smart enough to be a judge. Maybe a DA, though. Let me give it a try

    In “DA” voice, think Sam Waterston

    “Obama’s a good man”

    Nah, nobody’s that stupid………

  13. Slartibartfast says:

    I live with a sex-crazed armadillo, hold conversations with my pants, encourage the petty taunts of oatmeal, and have been known to engage in covert ops with heroin-addicted sugar beets.

    …and I take Geritol every day.

    Seriously: LOL funny. If I’d been eating some heroin-addicted oatmeal, it’d be spewed all over my monitor.

  14. Slartibartfast says:

    I’m sorry. Still cackling.

  15. Slartibartfast says:

    Really, you could give Mitch Hedberg a run in written comedy.

  16. Wm T Sherman says:

    Well, what do you think of this list of sets:

    1. A thinker who often employs irony.

    2. The people who know of (and are capable of acknowledging) the thinker’s reputation for irony.

    3. A DDA who chose of his own free will to engage in a philsophical discussion, who cherry picks, splits hairs, impeaches witnesses, and declares certain data inadmissable, as if it were not a discussion, but a federal case he deperately needs to win for some reason; and thus makes his business not to be overly aware of certain things such as the aforementioned reputation for irony.

    4. The DDA’s following, who tend to be directed to the set of facts that the DDA wishes to consider, and not look much further because, hey, they really like his other work, and data an resoning that he chooses to give them in connection with the discussion appears satisfying and self-consistent.

    5. Other.

    Obviously this scheme may need some work.

  17. zino3 says:

    Jeff,

    You are awesome to me, but please don’t climb down into the PC sewer with the idiots that make their home there.

    I don’t know about the rest of PW’ers, but I, or one, don’t happen to agree with even giving the PC’ers room to breathe. They are assholes, and they are sucking us all into an ephemeral fight.

    They don’t give a fuck what they say – be it about Joooos or any other group. Hate is the norm for people who are so clueless that they think you and I (and the PW crew)are the stupid ones. ny knowledge of history is beyond their “ken”.

    I happen to like almost all the Jooooos I know, and the ones that I don’t like?

    It has nothing to do with their stereotype or religion – even though the Jooooos use the blood of arabs to make matzoh balls. It has to do with ETHOS or do I meanm Pathos?)group. There are always major assholes, and the Arabs stand tall in this respect. Shame not only doesn’t exist (as a guide), but shame means you must kill your own children. Noe THAT is fucking AWESOME!

    And I can’t deny that I am one of those assholes.

    And the rest of you are NOT!

    This is screwy. Every time I try to edit, this stupid ting erases wha

    FUCK THIS! I can’t even edit without this stupid thing erasing the next two letters? I hope that all get the gist….

    And Jeff, what is going on here?

    To everybody else, I can’t edit this without losing the two letters in front of my edit. Read appropriately…

  18. McGehee says:

    4. The DDA’s following, who tend to be directed to the set of facts that the DDA wishes to consider, and not look much further because, hey, they really like his other work…

    …and because he incites fear in them that the out-of-control, violent, harassing guy with the competing point of view might become out-of-control and harass them if the visit his site — and maybe even get violent.

  19. The Monster says:

    Before we had to put her down, I’d speak to our half-Schnauzer in German much of the time. Is speaking German in the presence of a Jew inherently anti-semitic, or do I have to be saying something like “Arbeit macht frei”?

    If I say “Arbeit macht frei” where LA County Assistant District Attorney Patrick Frey can hear me, does he think I’m calling him anti-semitic due to his surname’s identical pronunciation to “frei”? Or would he think I’m instructing the dog to deliberately bite, and then mock, him?

  20. Jeff G. says:

    zino —

    I can assure you I only climb down in the PC sewer to retrieve shiny things. Then I come right back out, wash off the filth, and try to enrich the rest of us who are standing topside.

  21. cranky-d says:

    Until now, I didn’t know that when you visit someone’s site, your name, address, and phone number are immediately visible. My meager site doesn’t have that feature. I guess you have to pay extra, or know the right people.

    The best I’ve been able to do is to figure out who the service provider is.

  22. Wm T Sherman says:

    “Spiny Norman posted on 3/20 @ 3:02 pm

    Exactly. One must intentionally misinterpret them not to read them as ironic or sarcastic… which is what Pat’s readers must be doing, because they can’t be that dense, can they?”

    You’re being ironic — aren’t you?

    Some men are born dense, others achieve it, and still others have it thrust upon them.

    I think the latter two categories actually exist.

    The ability of people to not get it is a stubborn fact of life.

    -Is everyboy who didn’t get it a lost cause who should be written off?
    -How much of a problem are they going to be?

  23. McGehee says:

    I spent all of my teen years trying desperately to get it, and failing. Then somebody informed me I should have been trying to get some.

    That worked out much better.

  24. Jeff G. says:

    OT: But I just remembered FEDEX will be dropping off a 100lb Atlas stone tomorrow. I’m wondering how I’m going to get it into the backyard before having ever trained with it.

    I guess I’ll just have to learn fast how to lift and carry the thing. Or suffer the indignity of rolling it back there.

  25. Wm T Sherman says:

    McGehee posted on 3/20 @ 3:57 pm

    “…and because he incites fear in them that the out-of-control, violent, harassing guy with the competing point of view might become out-of-control and harass them if the visit his site — and maybe even get violent.”

    Yes.

    There is a rogue with a following, who misrepresents so to his followers. How much of the problem is the rogue himself? How much of the problem is that the rogue has a following at all?

    Note: In case it’s not clear, I don’t do Socratic questions. A question mark genrally means I simply don’t know the answer.

  26. Wm T Sherman says:

    24. I think I get it.

  27. McGehee says:

    How much of the problem is the rogue himself? How much of the problem is that the rogue has a following at all?

    Since the whole campaign is aimed at keeping Jeff from expanding his following, I think you do get it.   ;-)

  28. McGehee says:

    If the Freylitburo weren’t following Frey, they’d be following somebody else who makes them comfortable.

  29. SteveG says:

    I bought an electric jackhammer at Amazon… the FEDEX delivery guys that specialize in heavy objects were not amused when I watched them getting everything just so in the truck and I got impatient and just grabbed the damn thing and carried it into the garage.. evidently the customer is assumed to be unable to lift the things they buy.

    I have a few sledges around for when we need to quarry stone. So I tried to do the finger crawl you described… the hardest part for me was walking it down because my forearm was exhausted. I do dumbbell presses with as heavy as I can go with a spotter, and I do push ups with my feet (alternating left and right) on a balance ball and hands on the round side of a half ball… which really hits the wrists. (My wrist was broken and is sort of bent) But that sledge thing kicked my butt. I have a very strong friend who is about 6-6 275 and he walked the sledge up like it was easy but said the same thing… the down is where it hurts.

    All this is assuming the atlas ball is a real workout tool… I know that when we quarry stone, there are times when we are leveraging around some real big stuff and it is fun to get momentum going and then push push push to keep it going and to fight to guide it to the right location.
    But my sense of fun is kind of abstract.
    It’s gonna leave a track in your lawn… I suggest doing it in the HOA parkway just to stir the pot

  30. Pablo says:

    Some men are born dense, others achieve it, and still others have it thrust upon them.

    Others track it down, tackle it and make hot monkey love to it.

  31. SteveG says:

    There is a young guy who does well at powerlifting that lives near where I keep my excavator… he saw that my 3′ bucket was by the trail and sized it up to try to figure out how to grab it to lift it.
    He gave it a go, but it is too awkward. If I have to move it without the machine, I spin it to have the teeth toward the tailgate and roll the teeth onto the bed, then I build blocks of wood under it bit by bit and then shove the dang thing over onto its side and then slide it in.
    It is exhausting

  32. Pablo says:

    I guess I’ll just have to learn fast how to lift and carry the thing. Or suffer the indignity of rolling it back there.

    Just watch the FedEx guy.

  33. Molon Labe says:

    He didn’t get it the first time, so what makes you think he’ll get it this time?

    Of course he gets it. His only concern is whether the text admits an alternative interpretation – however tenuous – which he can exploit.

    It’s text vs. intent all over again.

  34. Jeff G. says:

    Just watch the FedEx guy.

    Heh. I expect he’ll use a handtruck. If he doesn’t — and I can’t lift it myself — I’m going to let him keep it.

  35. SteveG says:

    Yeah

    Let him muscle it off the truck and to your door and then refuse to sign for it because the packaging has a couple of nicks.

  36. SteveG says:

    I’ve had jobs (when I was young) where the boss wanted two 90# sacks of cement carried to the mixer at a time, not one.
    Of course I weighed about 140# then. Asshole.
    But in a weird way, I respect having learned technique, setting up the lift and carry.
    Another “but”, I just got three cortisone shots on my spine, so if I ever see that old son of a bitch I am pissing in his oatmeal and telling him it’s the new butter

  37. SGT Ted says:

    Jeff, just have the Fedex guy deliver it into your backyard. #winning!

  38. Jeff G. says:

    I do sandbag carries, as well. But I’ve never lifted large stones. I just saw one used on eBay and thought, meh, why not?

  39. David Block says:

    Spammer macht Frey is still going back to the windmills of a year or more ago?

    Those who didn’t learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.

    Unfortunately, that entails drawing you and McCain back over the SOS. [same old shit] That sucks.

  40. Darleen says:

    When #1 daughter was a newbie EMT, the dispatcher was wont to initiate the females by pairing them together and sending them to do patient transport on the most obese patient on the list.

    #1 and her partner were both each about 5’6″ and 135 lbs … sent to a condo complex to transport a guy who weighed over 400 lbs to the hospital for dialysis. He was totally unable to help get on the gurney.

    The girls knew if they called for any help they’d never hear the end of it. #1 told me the hardest part wasn’t getting him from bed to gurney but when they got the gurney outside and were trying to figure out how to get it into the back of the ambulance. They had one bad moment as they released the sides trying to lift it up a couple of clicks so it could be pushed into the back (legs made to collapse under while being pushed in). They could only manage one click up and that almost killed ’em. They finally pushed it back on the sidewalk, backed up the ambulance and used those few extra inches to get the gurney into it.

    They made sure they not around the hospital when the patient needed transport home.

    #1 is now an ICU RN and her upper body strength is still pretty awesome for someone her size who doesn’t work out except for hefting human beings …

  41. davisbr says:

    I considered developing an irony tag to put on my posts. But then I realized I’d just use it ironically. So this is probably best.

    …just might be my favorite comment of the month.

  42. Jeff G. says:

    Do you all realize I’ve watched 54 episodes of “Man v. Food” in about a week?

    What the hell is wrong with me? Or you for that matter, Netflix.

  43. Pellegri says:

    @43:

    I think this can’t be as bad as me reading through to the 235th page of regretsy in one sitting over ten hours.

  44. Kevin says:

    *clap clap* I’m calling this post a win :)

  45. Squid says:

    Do you all realize I’ve watched 54 episodes of “Man v. Food” in about a week?

    The episode at Gasthof zur Gemutlichkeit doesn’t do the place credit. We took my great-aunt there for her 90th birthday, and it was a damn good time. At least, the parts of it that I remember were great. Like when she held up a bratwurst and mused on how much she missed my long-dead great uncle.

    Incidentally, the drunk guy in that episode shouting “Adam! Adam! He’s our man!” is an old cow-orker of mine. We still give him shit for that.

  46. […] of Stacy McCain’s (potential) racism works, and the dangers inherent to it — clearly spoofing Frey’s own posts and using the opportunity to point out the linguistic problems with such […]

  47. […] through inference while pretending to keep your own hands clean — that I wrote a couple clearly satirical posts that mirrored nearly precisely the arguments and rhetorical methods used by this examiner of racism […]

Comments are closed.