Oh the irony.
After more than 200 entries, McIntosh, a 23-year-old engineering student at Otago University, and McCormick, a 24-year-old teacher at Musselburgh School in Dunedin, were chosen from three bromance couples to win an all-expenses paid trip to the 2015 Rugby World Cup in England.
The catch was that the buddies had to get married — a same-sex wedding — and they will do that tomorrow in front of 60 family and friends at New Zealand’s home of rugby, Eden Park, in Auckland.
A celebrant will make the union legally binding, the marriage will be streamed live on the radio station. […]
Otago University Students’ Association Queer Support co-ordinator Neill Ballantyne told the Otago Daily Times that the wedding was an “insult” as marriage equality was a “hard fought” battle for gay people.
“Something like this trivialises what we fought for,” he said.
No, dear, you “Love is all that matters and you better accept it or else” thugs already took care of that.
And who are you to judge these two men and what they will do or not do behind closed doors?
Cheers, love!
maybe they can tag-team princess kate while they’re in england
Is schadenfreudtastic a word?
– This is what happens when you live a lifestyle that makes you feel like a total freak 24/7, but get everyone to pretend you feel perfectly normal.
– In other news…..
– The WH has finally declared the conflict with ISIS as officially a “war”. Alrighty then, that only took a week and a half. Now that Bumblefuck has finally realized we’re in a war maybe he’ll actually come up with a strategy sometime before he leaves office.
– What a gaggle of total morons.
Traditional marriages matter. Ghey marriages? Fleeting.
Anyone still have a pet rock or a poodle skirt?
Wait a minute, what the hell does rugby have to do with snooching up to Jessica Biel?
I expect to see a number of same-sex couples get married who do it purely for economic reasons.
In any case, the notion that marriage is about love and not about raising a family is a relatively recent one in the history of mankind.
Yeah. Used to be if you wanted love, you poured your soul out in word and deed to some utterly unabtainable woman.
Now, if you wanted sex, you kept a mistress.
So at least in that regard, not much has changed.
BigBangHunter says September 13, 2014 at 5:41 am – This is what happens when you live a lifestyle that makes you feel like a total freak 24/7, but get everyone to pretend you feel perfectly normal. – In other news….. – The WH has finally declared the conflict with ISIS as officially a “war”. Alrighty then, that only took a week and a half. Now that Bumblefuck has finally realized we’re in a war maybe he’ll actually come up with a strategy sometime before he leaves office. – What a gaggle of total morons. – See more at: https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=55075#comments
What shit writing.
You special fuckwit, who can’t, like happyfuck, use language because you’re so fucking special, go ahead and make a couple billion with your unique fuckwitedness, then donate.
Otherwise you detract with your special, snowflake-like bitchness.
http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/06/amy_schumer_offers_you_a_look.html
Do something that matters to others, not just your ego.
In fairness, I don’t like that little prick who runs around on TV telling bar owners “kick your regulars out and get the hot bitches because hot bitches bring in men and their money.”
Damn anyone-other-than-God, perhaps I am wrong and happyfuck and BBH are driving the innovation which I am ungrateful for and hence I be (or am as you like) just a big, soiled ass.
With language being used properly the world is better; without language being continually allowed to progress as is its want we delve into “electing” some fucks who determine what what is.
Why don’t we goad, as much as a man like Jimmy O’Keefe?
Think of the Ray Rice.
“So you feel woman should be able to hit men and men should not react?”
“So your position is men cannot hit woman, but a woman hitting a man is okay?”
“The conclusion you’ve reached is men are superior to woman, hence women can’t pummel men and men can’t respond?”
“Is it okay to hit men, since they are stronger and more mature in almost every case?”
“When can men be beaten without consequence?”
WE all must look at the left as a success.
With shit, they created power.
That is something.
Evil.
Uninspiring.
Anti-Buckley and unAmerican.
So how did they do it?
We know why, but how?
Should we copy them, even with the knowledge as per the German dude that we might become evil ourselves?
THAT, not to be or not to be (which is bullshit unless you’re suicidal) is the question.
To corrupt and defile ourselves in order to save what’s left of Christianity.
The bible and Ann Barnhardt say yes: that’s plenty for me.
NotquiteunBuckley says September 14, 2014 at 7:28 am
Holy Christ you are toxic.
And in the wrong thread.
i fear I’ve been misunderstood
all I mean to say is that our intrepid newlyweds might, while in England, set aside an evening during which they might take turns having hot trashy sex with Kate Middleton, the royal whore
it would make for a memorable honeymoon at the very least, and might perhaps be a productive exercise on self-discovery for the two young gentlemen
anyway it’s just a thought
*in* self-discovery I mean
In Raising Arizona there is a scene where a guy says “sometimes I get the menstrual cramps real bad.”
And so it is for me.
ohnoes i hate that for you
Naturally along came the hamster to demonstrate how toxic he can be.
oh huh
What the fuck are you talking about?
Seriously, I want to know. What German dude? Ann Barnhard and the BIBLE say to corrupt and defile ourselves to save ourselves??? Where? and from what exactly?
The tone is intemperate, but the question is sincere.
I’m in a mood.
the german dude is nietzsche
Ann Barnhardt is a nutjob
the Bible says lots of stuff and it’s all very open to interpretation
pot pies are super tasty, but they contain a plethora of carbs
one of the best ways for to get income when you have no money is to get a job
it might rain soon here in California, but only in yon mountains
fall brings rain sometimes, and lots of new tv shows
>the Bible says lots of stuff and it’s all very open to interpretation
pot pies are super tasty, but they contain a plethora of carbs<
apples to happystuff
Is your name NotquiteunBuckley rodent?
Didn’t think so.
‘feets, you aren’t good enough to groom Ann Barnhardt’s toenails. Nor could you grovel enough for her to allow you to strip and clean her AR-15 (which is, dear boy, pleasantly pink).
she’s a nutjob Mr. serr8d
we’re moving away from that sort of thing
‘feets, you say that about all strong women.
Because, I think, pleasantly pink.
A steady diet of brown-eye will do that to you. Or so I’m told.
>it might rain soon here in California, <
steely dan my old school
>she’s a nutjob Mr. serr8d<
all hail nancy pelosi and other ca creatures
nancy pelosi is also a nutjob with really big tits
i honestly think her tits have gotten bigger lately
they’re really really big
That sounds a bit like sin eating to me. Which is distinctly pagan.
If we’re going the Nietzschean route (which isn’t exactly clear from the original comment, btw) then you’re proposing a second transvaluation of values. This isn’t something you’re doing if the Bible means much to you.
Nah, the Bible proposes righteous wrath as the farthest available method, not corruption and defiling.
Unless it was just a pop reference to the abyss staring back and then that’s just a bit of lazy regurgitation rather than argument.
Fuckin’ A, Bubba.
(Because that’s about as coherent as I can mangage tonight)
Not to put too fine a point on it but I can only think of one entity in the Christian world recommending that we corrupt and defile ourselves for a cause.
He’s generally considered to be something of a “bad influence”.
Rasputin?
For the record, I’m pretty sure that this is the first time I’ve ever mentioned another’s Satanic influences in a comment here before.
Damn it. If I had a chance to read your comment beforehand, Ernst, I could have changed my later comment to “Rasputanic influences”.
my money’s still on nietzsche
Yeah. The risk is you wind up sounding like the guy who advocates becoming an alcoholic just so you can experience the joy of recovery.
On the other hand, I’ve always found Gene Hackman’s argument that the gutter is the place to fight something that’s crawled out of the sewer to be a persuasive one.
But then again, fighting in the gutter isn’t the same thing as crawling down into the sewer now, is it?
Gotta consider Kant there but, yeah, probably Nietzsche.
I have a strong feeling that Ernst’s thrust with that comment (which German? where in the Bible? in which investor blog post?) was to ask for the citations because they’d be so very, very silly upon discussion.
time to short sell Nietzsche then
well don’t be mean to him
he called me innovative!
That’s right. There’s nothing but filth and muck in the trenches after awhile but that isn’t moral justification for raping and pillaging there.
That, and the whole idea of doing a little evil in order to avert or avoid a greater evil has always been an interesting discusser.
Hmmm…Nietzsche, Ann, but no mention of a Russian girlfriend ?
he called me innovative!
his brain was rotted with syphilis!
This idea has come up before, usually under the metaphor of Tolkien’s One Ring (TM). At least that’s the metaphor I default to, maybe the rest of yuse guys use a different metaphor.
It was a sincere question. But like I said, I’m not in the most sociable of moods tonight.
Maybe you didn’t notice.
*hugs*
Re: Nietzsche
Friedrich is something of a bugbear for me in that I’ll only read him in excerpt or second-hand. And that’s because I’m afraid I’ll end up agreeing with him.
But that’s because I lack G. K. Chesterton’s strength of character.
I can’t laugh at Nietzsche’s faux-seriousness.
I’d like to take a look at the sincere question, Ernst. For my benefit, to make sure I’m not missing your meaning here, could you pose it again for me?
*guts the hugger like a fish*
Proposed: That in order to save what’s left of Christianity, we need must corrupt and defile ourselves like the Left has corrupted and defiled itself in it’s pursuit of power for power’s sake.
In that debate, I’ll argue the negative.
Mostly though I was asking NotquiteunBuckley to “revise and extend” his 0802 in a dude, what the fuck are you talking about? sort of way.
Of course, that’s not the best way to try to start a dialog.
For what it’s worth I go through this with Spinoza myself (as an analog to agreeing with “the German” after reading him). Sdferr recently started changing my mind here by email, btw.
It’s a very similar thing.
My probably is that I’m so earnestly serious that I forget to take unserious things unseriously.
I really admire Chesterton’s ability to deflate the pompous.
Of course, being pompous myself, I’m attracted to pomposity.
You know, like Nietzsche.
Okay, I gotcha, Ernst.
To get into that question with any seriousness we do need people to make that argument and then stick around.
It could be posed in two parts to my mind. First, what do you actually mean by [internally] defiling and corrupting? Second, as a utilitarian matter, what’s the competitive advantage that this would offer?
probably=problem.
Fast bourbon fingers, y’know?
Honestly, I’m not interested in the utilitarian matter. I’m more interested in the moral dimension.
That whole retard eternally tormented to keep this fully operational paradise funtioning thing.
That’s my perspective of course. I get the whole it’s easier to shoot ’em in the dark after you’ve nuked ’em till they glow thing.
Maybe in fairness you should read that as rubble don’t make trouble.
The reason I pose the second part — while we both consider it a moral issue instead — is how the people doing the things in question do so from a [faux?] utilitarian stance all while not comprehending how the hacking off of limbs in central Africa or the blood vengeance elsewhere brings them nothing tomorrow or the day after.
They have no air conditioning. They have no capital accretion. They have no social trust.
It doesn’t work but I think that in their minds they do think it works. “If I teach this other person a lesson their family won’t mess with mine for at least a couple generations.” So while it isn’t properly a matter of utilitarian action they think it is and they should understand how it is not if they’re to stop with such.
I’m not sure but I think there’s a chance that we’re not on the same page here.
Maybe we’re talking about different things with our terms.
it’s like in Ender’s Game where Mr. Ender gets all vicious to where he kills these kids for so they stop picking on him
cause of that is the path to peace
after that he commits genocide and flies away in a space ship to have adventures
*spaceship * i mean
Gotcha.
And agreed. My problem with Michael Walsh/David Kahane’s book (besides the oxymoron in the title) was the idea that the way to beat the left was to be better at lying/cheating/stealing than the left was.
How was that supposed to work when they’d just lie about your lies?
Ender’s Game?
If that’s the best you have to offer, please do us the courtesy of staying the hell out of the conversation.
bh, I think we’re on the same page as far as utilitarian/competetive advantage goes vis-a-vis the debate question.
Real life gets messier, of course, when you’re playing for blood..
I’m not personally a big fan of Ender’s Game the book but the movie almost worked I think
Haven’t read the book or seen the movie.
I do have to wonder how much of a hit Harrison Ford took in the market, though, given some to the movie choices he’s made since ’08.
Anyway, if you could try to be less you, I’d appreciate it.
At least on this thread.
But… as a utilitarian issue, it’s also a problem with how our (always circumspect) ruthlessness could ever possibly match their’s given their thoughtless and collectivized killing of hundreds of millions of people.
Communists are good at this. Nazis are good at this. These Islamists might be getting better and better at this.
We’d do better to find internal agreement about the proper killing of 10 or 2o thousand here or there to re-establish the Pax A.
that’s ok I have other stuff i can do
As a matter of foreign policy, I’ll reluctantly agree with you, or even go one step further and say we’d do better to kill 150 to 200 thousand now if that meant we’d never have to kill another one of them again than to kill 10 or 20 thousand at regular intervals in order to keep the problem “manageable.”
But if you pull a Dick Morris on me, and start arguing that we need to run Condoleeza Rice because identity politics, I swear to God, I’ll clear cut northern Wisconsin.
Acknowledged and Appreciated ‘feets.
To be silly for a second I sometimes imagine us as the late imperial Romans getting into a time machine and facing the 13th century steppe hordes.
Okay, maybe that’s not silly. That is how it seems to me. We’re soft and decadent with internal enemies and they’re not to be trifled with.
Okay, we’re entirely on the same page. Yes.
As to utilitarian ruthlessness, that’s why I want to know what the hell NotquiteunBuckley meant by Bible/Barnhardt approved corruption and defilement.
If destroying the village in order to save the village wins you the fight, then that means you get to rebuild the village. Arguably, that’s better than the alternative.
It’s harder to make that case when destroying the village means you get to squat upon the ashes therof, win or lose.
Personally, I think Attila the Hun would have kept Genghis Khan for a pet.
Maybe I’m wrong.
Heh.
Actually, yeah, I think I’d disagree. Who else could put such cavalry onto the field? Only the great and mighty Khan.
[The point is well made though. I didn’t need to reach for the later iteration when Attila was right there on the timeline.]
Yeah, but I don’t remember the Mongols so putting the fear of God into their victims that the king one of their victim’s (Ermanarich) made himself into a human sacrifice.
And the Huns penetrated further into Europe than did the Mongols.
This might become one of the stranger running jokes of this blog because I really do disagree. The Mongols achieved far more in the East and I suspect that they didn’t find enough to plunder in the West. Had they found more than poorly made woolen goods in our area then they might have wintered and pressed on.
You’re a dirty Hunnite. I’m a dirty Mongol sympathizer.
It has begun.
Alas, it’s too late to continue.
I’ll concede the territirial extent of the Mongol dominions, though.
territirial
see what I mean?
G’nite
Heh, nah, we should argue this well into the future for shits and giggles. We should maliciously link the others’ random comments about current events to the others’ sad love of the Huns or Mongols.
‘night, buddy.
here is a picture of a place called Okinotorishima
it means “distant bird island” in an exotic foreign tongue
it’s kinda natural and kinda made by people
for a little while, it was part of the United States, but just for a little while
“At high tide, one area of the reefs is roughly the size of a twin bed and pokes just 7.4 centimeters (2.9 inches) out of the ocean. The other is the size of a small bedroom and rises about twice as high.”
here is another picture
in Okinotorishima, there you can be free
That was exactly my impression.
Ernst wrote: Proposed: That in order to save what’s left of Christianity, we need must corrupt and defile ourselves like the Left has corrupted and defiled itself in it’s pursuit of power for power’s sake.
This is why we hire/employ men like Ethan Edwards, who, once the job is done, watch as the reunited family walks into the Home, turns, and walks away into the lonely plains.
[James Bowman wrote of this a few years ago; I’ll see if I can find a link.]
i heart ann barnhardt!
**** 2. […]
But, um, we need to let that whole thing go. She’s not serious, and in fact, the whole family is now degenerating into full-blown snowbilly farce.
Drunken fights … as a family?
I can understand maybe one of the older kids going out and getting drunk and acting stupid, but when your family evening activity is going out and picking fights AS A FAMILY UNIT, um, no.
You’re done. Thanks. ****
shortyfingers = kthxbile
Sean Connery has a great speech in The Presidio along the same theme.
I think he was rippin’ off Orwell though.
Anyways, my favorite movie and one of my favorite literary themes.
I still haven’t heard anything like details about the Palin incident that would imply the entire family was involved.
Not that I’ve been paying attention. It’s just that history indicates these kinds of things prove to be about as genuine as Tina Fey saying, “I can see Russia from my house.”
I’m in the same boat McGehee, but I would add I’ve long thought many of the people the Palins have to deal with would be best served by a good right hook.
Actually, I’d expand that sentiment across the land. This used to be a much more polite society when punching someone in the nose was acceptable behavior when publicly insulted.
II think it was unbuckled Bill Buckley who once said, “I’d rater have Baked Alaskans running the country than Hasty Puddings.”
Whomever, “Ditto.”
From the James Bowman essay I assayed:
http://jamesbowman.net/diaryDetail.asp?hpID=159
” He’s an outcast because he has been doing civilization’s dirty work for it. Once it has been done and civilization is safe, the civilized don’t want to know how it was done. And they don’t need him anymore either.”
That’s the theme.
Perhaps this is way Pauline Maier separated The Founders into two groups: The Founding Fathers and The Old Revolutionaries.
I’m currently reading the book of the same name as the latter term and she [RIP, for Mrs. Maier was truly one our best historians] states that people like Samuel Adams and Richard Henry Lee – the great agitators – were not wanted around by those who wrote The Constitution and got the new Republic off the ground and running. I still haven’t made-up my mind on this yet [I’ve taken a diversion off the book to read a novel: The Last Ship].
That’s the theme.
I think any person we vet for consideration for political leadership as we seek a Restoration of The Republic must be an outcast [dare I say it: an Outlaw].
Welcome to Dirty Jobs: American 2014 A.D.
What if it happens that any possible simulacrum of restoration cannot possibly — by definition — arise in a political leader, but must come not in an individual but from the sovereign of the land, i.e., the people in their masses?
What if, the means of restoration doesn’t look political at all?
Founding Fathers and Old Revolutionaries
Ransom Stoddard and Tom Doniphan in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
Speaking of The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance…
http://jamesbowman.net/articleDetail.asp?pubID=1926
ok so maybe ann isn’t a complete nutjob
So are Stoddard and Doniphan representing some earlier others — like Moses and Joshua, say, or others similarly situated?
Too, we can easily jump to think of the stories of founding crimes: Romulus and Remus, Cain and Abel.
More like they represent different stages of civilization. Hard Men like Tom Doniphan make it safe for the Ransom Stoddards to get the girl.
Here’s somebody who’s actually bothered to get the details — unlike our resident hater.
Don’t get on the bad side of his thumb, left or right one.
The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
He was the bravest of them all.
Who was that asperger syndrome chick who used to hang around? notquiteunBuckley sounds a bit like her off her meds.