<< PARENTING SKILLS NOTED ~ MAIN ~ MAINTAIN VERTICALITY >>
ONLY THE TOP FIVE?
A glowing review from first-time visitor Alex:
I went and had a look at Tim Blair’s site, and I’d rank it in the top 5 most disturbing experiences of my life.
UPDATE. Lumberjack: “Woulda been top 4 if Alex’s mom would take the time to tie her bathrobe properly.”
I was about to say that he really needs to get out more often, then I noticed Paco had already said it. damn.
Posted by Harry Buttle on 2006 08 04 at 07:49 AM • permalinkComing from someone whos “gravitar” (blog picture) is a stylised palm of the hand….
Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 08 04 at 08:03 AM • permalinkI went and had a look at Tim Blair’s site, and I’d rank it in the top 5 most disturbing experiences of my life.
Well Tim, I don’t know for sure, BUT taking into consideration the other “disturbing experiences” probably had something to do with his mother, father, ‘uncle Ralph’, goats, dogs and/or siblings, if any and/or a mix thereof, I don’t know how Tim Blair could possibly be in the “top 5”....lol.
Damn! Hope my post didn’t vault you into Alex’s number one spot.
Oh, Alex, assuming you are male, I’m sure you are the type that constantly has to be reminded that your fly is open, OR walk, left, right THEN chew the gum. Should you be female, the flys…well never mind.
Alex? You didn’t by any chance have a “tacher” named Nick, did you?
Translation from Leftish:
Larvatus Prodeo is an Australian group blog which discusses politics, sociology, culture, life, religion and science from a left of centre perspective
=> from a bereft of reality perspective
this movement (unlike his own) is a broad church
=> we’ll take anyone, especially if they can contribute to the holy fund.
So, let’s welcome Pat to the fold ...
=> we’re rapidly losing believers.
Maybe this visit will steel him for a future sally outside the left-bubble.
It’s important to try to avoid the echo-chamber effect, you know.
Posted by The Sanity Inspector on 2006 08 04 at 08:24 AM • permalinkCould someone who knows a bit of Latin please tell me what that name means. I’m betting it’s quite pompous.
Posted by Daniel San on 2006 08 04 at 08:44 AM • permalinkMr Alex’s top 5 disturbing experiences (go on, Alex, you LOVE this attention, don’t you?)
1. Tiddles the cat used my mouth as a place to pee-pee - Alex aged 5.
2. Michael Moore tried to befirend me when I was 16; this was OK but them he took me to see his movie. YEECH! - Alex aged 16.
3. I tried to calculate the square root of 25 and I realised I would never get into space. - Alex aged 11.
4. I considered the last Democrat Presidency and its legacy (as left on blue dresses). - Alex aged 13
5. I was surfing the web and came across this cool Aussie facist who used all these big words I didn’t understand. - Alex aged 7 (current).
Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 08 04 at 08:44 AM • permalinkWell I’d hazard young Alex didn’t grow up in 25 Cromwell St, doesn’t have Latham as a surname, work as a flack for John Stanhope or isn’t a current mamber of management at Fairfax then.
And he doesn’t get out much- try Darlinghurst Rd at about 3AM on a Sunday morning, opposite the El Alamein fountain, or perhaps outside the Lakemba Mosque just after evening prayers, wearing a t-shirt proclaiming Skylines Suck.
This coming from someone haunting a website titled Lavatory Rodeo- I wonder if his mum is checking his IE history folder?
Excuse me people but you have missed a post of Terry Lane-esque proportions on the link to Larvatusprodeo from one MrLefty, as follows:
I loved this comment from the Blair thread:
Now kiddies, gather around for Kaboom’s science lesson of the day.
Wind turbines INCREASE global warming. All of these bloody great fans cause atmospheric resistance, which slows the earth’s rotation. Slower rotation means longer days. Longer days means more sunlight. More sunlight means it will be warmer.
Uh… where to begin? Should I point out the ridiculousness of asserting that wind turbines make a real difference to the rotation of the earth? Or should I cough and point out to our slightly deranged friend that if days were to suddenly become longer, then nights must become longer, too?
Nah, I’ll just laugh at him. Oh, Blairites, you crack me up.
PS You might be happy to be rid of Robertson on this one; but he’s on your side on everything else…
What do you reckon? Should we point out the (clearly too subtle for the Left’s radar) satire in Kaboom’s post?
Posted by Jack Lacton on 2006 08 04 at 09:10 AM • permalinkI can’t resist it. The post from Paul Norton over there is really quite revealing in describing the Left’s inability to distinguish fact from fiction.
As a card-carrying member of the Greens and the Australia Institute and an environmental studies academic, I’m far from comfortable when people of an authoritarian mindset convert to environmentalism. This is because the big environmental issues (i.e. those, like global warming, which entail an element of systemic and/or global crisis) are lush paddocks in which discourses which justify breaching the contraints of democratic process and democratic civility can graze. Two of these discourses are the Discourse of Emergency and the Discourse of Defending the Defenceless.
The Discourse of Emergency holds that there is some clear and present existential danger which is so urgent that it justifies governments removing or restricting long-established citizen rights and freedoms, and releasing executive government and state agencies from the constraints of democratic accountability and the rule of law. We see this discourse at work in relation to the War on Terror, but it is not difficult to imagine its application to perceived environmental emergencies. Indeed, it appears in a significant strand of authoritarian ecopolitical literature from the late 60s and early 70s, and has cropped up in some on-line discussions I have taken part in on Peak Oil.
The Discourse of Defending the Defenceless holds that democratic processes in which adult human citizens participate tend to disregard the interests of purportedly morally considerable entities which cannot participate in such processes. This leads the self-appointed Defenders of the Defenceless to regard as illegitimate the outcomes of democratic processes when those outcomes are perceived to adversely affect some or other category of the Defenceless. Feminists will recognise the D3 in many statements by the right-to-lifers, e.g. Richard Egan from WA Right to Life proclaiming that elected parliaments do not have the right to pass laws which allow the “killing of unborn babies”. The D3 is also at work in some family values conservatives’ complaints about “children not having a voice” in debates about gender and work-family balance.
Now there are two very large categories of “the Defenceless” whose purported Defence could be a driver of eco-authoritarian and eco-fascist discourses. These are non-human species, and future generations of humans. There is already evidence of the D3 at work on the wilder fringes of the environmental movement in the methods of some “animal liberation” activists.
Apparently, Paul is comfortable in his lush paddock discussing things in breach of not only the democratic process (didn’t a lot of our forefathers fight for that?) but civility, as well. I think he might have been smoking some of the grass from that paddock…
Posted by Jack Lacton on 2006 08 04 at 09:18 AM • permalinkImagine if that animal-rights bikini girl had still been up.
Posted by Rittenhouse on 2006 08 04 at 09:20 AM • permalinkD3 bwaahahahahah what a tool.
(grabs crothch and thrusts pelvis) “I got your D3 riiight here cohchita”Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 08 04 at 09:26 AM • permalinkYou can’t really fuck up the environment with a D3, they’re the hobbit version of a killdozer; what you want is an IDF Armoured Hippie Pizza Maker- it crushes havens of malcontent Muslim missile flingers, puree’s idiot middle class mongs with loudhailers and sends myriads of species too stupid to get out of the road of 20 tons of diesel-chomping Caterpillar into well deserved extinction.
D3? Pah!
“loony right” doesn’t really have a snappy ring to it, does it?
#1 That’s because it’s “loony left” and “rabid right.” Alex can’t even get his stereotypes right.
Posted by Bruce Rheinstein on 2006 08 04 at 09:41 AM • permalinkThere is already evidence of the D3 at work on the wilder fringes of the environmental movement in the methods of some “animal liberation” activists
What utter crap! It’s mainstream. How, then, does Paul define the situation where farmers in Queensland are fined for cutting down trees on their own friggin’ land!?
#23 - Jack, I couldn’t resist young Paul’s effort for another reason. This is my post on Labium Proboscis -
Paul Norton is “far from comfortable when people of an authoritarian mindset convert to environmentalism”. “Convert to environmentalism”!! Phew, and some people think environmentalism as currently espoused is not a religion. Paul, give me a break, you’re a theist, not an academic.
And your first sentence in its entirety is a gem. Rule of thumb - anyone who is pompous enough to describe himself as an academic, isn’t.
Posted by Whale Spinor on 2006 08 04 at 10:11 AM • permalinkYeah, I noticed what that congenital idiot Jeremy Sears wrote, and provided my second science lesson of the day right here.
Some people just don’t get it, do they?
My sympathies, Tim.
But if you try really, really hard, I’m sure you can raise your rating to 2nd or 3rd most “disturbing” experience. ;-p
Posted by Barbara Skolaut on 2006 08 04 at 10:22 AM • permalink30 “loony right” doesn’t really have a snappy ring to it, does it?
No imagination at all. I can think of lots of things they could use if they really wanted to add some sizzle: Neanderthal right, knuckle-dragging right, prognathous right, reich-wing, etc. Not that these are accurate descriptions of any but a tiny minority, in truth, but as polemical categorizations, they have more zing than “looney” right.
As a card-carrying member of the Greens and the Australia Institute and an environmental studies academic
Has anyone here ever described themselves as a card carrying member of anything? It seems to be an expression reserved for the Left. The poor, misguided Paul seems to use it as a badge of pride.
Let’s see…<looks in wallet>...I’m a card carrying member of…American Express…Tabcorp (!)...and Medibank. Does that make me special?
Posted by Jack Lacton on 2006 08 04 at 10:31 AM • permalink#37 - Perhaps we should ask Alex (under the guise of our continuous improvement policy) what we can do to refine the experience in order to ensure that he and his ilk can receive the complete, mind-shattering horror of a visit resulting in an ongoing need to spend even more time in lush mental paddocks?
Posted by Jack Lacton on 2006 08 04 at 10:36 AM • permalinkI’m going to predict that once young Alex gets over his red-faced shame and impotent pique, being bitch-slapped by the International Fascistry of TimBlair.net will become an orgasmic memory for the lad which he will seek to repeat. A troll is born.
Posted by crittenden on 2006 08 04 at 10:37 AM • permalinkHas anyone here ever described themselves as a card carrying member of anything?
I think some people have stated they are members of the National Rifle Association. We do get membership cards, and some people even carry them. Does that count, Jack?
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 08 04 at 10:58 AM • permalink...woulda been top 4 if Alex’s mom would take the time to tie her bathrobe properly.
Posted by lumberjack on 2006 08 04 at 11:18 AM • permalinkI think some people have stated they are members of the National Rifle Association. We do get membership cards, and some people even carry them.
Indeed, I have often called myself a card-carrying member of the NRA. I like the reaction I get.
Though I must say, their magazine’s “WWII American Firearm of the Month” is getting a bit tedious. I hope it stops before they get to the Reising.
Looking around the site, which as lefty blogs go isn’t horrible, I was lead to this interesting link from old Iowahawk nemisis feminsiting.
I’ve posted this before, but it can’t hurt to remind:
From Descartes’ Juvenalia—larvatus prodeo:
“I move forward under a mask”
in frogspeak:
“j’avance masqué”
in left-speak:
“my gimp-mask is too tight”
Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 08 04 at 04:14 PM • permalinkIndeed, I have often called myself a card-carrying member of the NRA. I like the reaction I get.
Indeed. I’ve done it too, and for just that reason. I also work at a school and derive considerable amusement by copies of National Review lying around in plain sight. Once they get inured to that, I’m upping the ante with Ann Coulter books.
We should ask ourselves, “why does Alex hate us?”
Posted by Vanguard of the Commentariat on 2006 08 04 at 07:00 PM • permalink#23 Paul should reflect on the origin of the word accurately describing so many environmentalists: Watermelons.
I’d like to think that we oafish and infantile commenters have helped Tim to produce the disturbing effects that he does on young Master Alex and other visitors of the moonbattish persuasion. If we work together we can make the experience of visiting Tim’s site even more horrifying for them.
Posted by Michael Lonie on 2006 08 04 at 10:46 PM • permalinkThe card carrying member of the NRA is sort of an anti example, though, isnt’ it?
It’s not as though anyone would use it to claim they had special authority with other gun nuts. It might come up in conversation but wouldn’t you feel like a doofus if you (any of you) prefaced a comment about guns or gun use with… “I’m a card carrying member of the NRA so you should listen to me.”
Saying you’re a member of the National Rifle Association or a lifetime member in the examples given seems more a tail twisting for reaction than any sort of appeal to authority.
It might be near the same words but it’s entirely different.
#23 “As a card-carrying member of the Greens and the Australia Institute and an environmental studies academic”
Blew his cover for inanity right there.
You just have to pity the poor tertiary students of today.We used to have a term for it - logorhoea -running uncontrollably at the mouth end.
Postmodernist academics manage to have this affliction but also, somehow, constipation too.Remarks like Alex’s make you wonder what goes on behind closed doors. Yesterday Romenesko linked to a story about a woman who was glued to a toilet seat at a mall and was freed by firemen using nail polish remover, causing burns.
She told the reporter it was one of the most embarrassing moments of her life.
The story ended there.
Posted by Harry Eagar on 2006 08 04 at 11:50 PM • permalink#56 MentalFloss,
Your explanation seems the most plausible, thanks to everyone who replied.Posted by Daniel San on 2006 08 05 at 01:09 AM • permalink#38, paco
No imagination at all. I can think of lots of things they could use if they really wanted to add some sizzle: Neanderthal right, knuckle-dragging right, prognathous right, reich-wing, etc. Not that these are accurate descriptions of any but a tiny minority, in truth, but as polemical categorizations, they have more zing than “looney” right.
Oh, Cyrano! Give ‘em hell.
Saying you’re a member of the National Rifle Association or a lifetime member in the examples given seems more a tail twisting for reaction than any sort of appeal to authority.
Oh, tail-twisting definitely. It also tends to send the message of “so don’t even start with your Brady* Bunch crap because I know better and will cheerfully fisk you bloody.”
*James Brady and his wife, Sarah are a pair of rabid American anti-gun nuts.
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
“loony right”
doesn’t really have a snappy ring to it, does it?