Shorter John ”Daaa Crusha” Yoo:
Obama’s unwillingness to crush the testicles of young children represents a return to pre-9/11 effeteness, and will lead to more terrorist attacks in the future.
Yoo’s pedosadistic fantasies make him feel big and strong:
Thomas Jefferson was on to something:
A little patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells dissolve, and the people, recovering their true sight, restore their government to it’s true principles. It is true that in the mean time we are suffering deeply in spirit, and incurring the horrors of a war & long oppressions of enormous public debt…If the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have patience till luck turns, & then we shall have an opportunity of winning back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are the stake.
The long awaited passing has begun, but someone needs to unpry* Yoo’s fingers.
*This is now officially a word with the meaning that I intended for it which is clear from the context. Even if the prefix and noun combination would give it the opposite meaning. You’ll just have to take my word on this.
January 29, 2009 at 1:16 pm
No question 9/11 induced mass hysteria. I just hope the economic meltdown doesn’t re-inflate the hysteria bubble.
January 29, 2009 at 2:00 pm
Obama hasn’t said he won’t crush young children’s testicles, I’ve always just assumed he has.
January 29, 2009 at 6:45 pm
You know, now that you mention it, Obama kind of reminds me of Bugs. Right down to the penchant for cross-dressing and coy wordplay.
January 29, 2009 at 8:27 pm
That’s a nice Jefferson quote. I just wish it wasn’t part of one of his nasty little smears on Alexander Hamilton.
January 29, 2009 at 9:02 pm
Is “unpry” a word?
January 29, 2009 at 9:04 pm
someone needs to unpry Yoo’s fingers
Someone needs to crush Yoo’s testicles.
As long as it can be done lawfully, that is. But, hey, according to Yoo that should be no problem.
January 29, 2009 at 9:11 pm
Is “unpry” a word?
Clearly it should be.
January 30, 2009 at 2:14 am
I’ll bet Jefferson didn’t put that apostrophe into “it’s”.
January 30, 2009 at 6:10 am
It sounds like Yoo’s “true principles” boil down to
Where Jefferson comes in is anyone’s guess.
January 30, 2009 at 7:01 am
“Unpry” is a perfectly cromulent word.
(That never gets old. Right? Right?)
January 30, 2009 at 10:17 am
“The Crusha” AKA “BongLord”?
Just what message are you trying to send the children, curv3ball?
January 30, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Just what message are you trying to send the children, curv3ball?
That they cannot trust Republicans not to crush their testicles.
January 30, 2009 at 11:31 pm
Grand Old Unpry.
January 30, 2009 at 11:33 pm
Erm, that’s Grand Ol’ Unpry.
January 31, 2009 at 5:41 am
Fuck Yoo.
But ignoring for the moment the fact that John Yoo is clearly a terrible person who would be run out of any decent society on a rail, this part really struck me:
What such a review would have made clear is that the civilian law-enforcement system cannot prevent terrorist attacks. What is needed are the tools to gain vital intelligence, which is why, under President George W. Bush, the CIA could hold and interrogate high-value al Qaeda leaders
This got me thinking, I’ve always considered the CIA to be part of the civilian law enforcement apparatus, like the FBI. Wikipedia calls them “a civilian intelligence agency” I’m pretty sure they aren’t a branch of the military, which is the only thing I can think of as an alternative to “civilian”.
And of course, Yoo insists that the rules of war are also too lenient for the terrorists. I like that he doesn’t explain the logic behind that at all; we can’t treat them like civilian criminals because they’re all bent on our total destruction, but we also can’t treat them like the many significantly more dangerous groups that have been bent on our destruction. The Nazis were not a friendly people.
So we can’t treat them by the rule of law or the rules of war. We have to invent a third category, a category of people who have no rights whatsoever.
This man is a law professor writing for one of the nation’s most prestigious newspapers, and he’s arguing a morally abominable position with all the sophistication of a Weekly Reader article.
Our country is sick.
January 31, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Look, I don’t want to hear any more lip!
Its like inflammable, ok? Its not that complicated, you know.
January 31, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Steelers 27 Arizona 20
Arizona has a lot of players who are from Western PA or played at Pitt, (Breaston, Fitzgerald, etc.) They will play hard. I respect, Antrel Rolle, Dominique Rogers-Cromartie, and Adrian Wilson, but not so much Rod Hood, nor their depth. The Steelers Santonio Holmes was a beast at Ohio State, and I think he is going to have a big game. Washington, Heath Miller, and Hines provide the Steelers with plenty of targets. Willie Parker is a WMD, but he’s not a good receiver.
Warner will have 3 seconds or less to make his reads, because I know Arizon’s Center can’t handle Casey Hampton/Keisel/Hoke. I know Gandy and Zonas other younger tackle can’t handle the Woodley/Harrison/Farrier/Foote crazy LeBeau Blitz situation, all the blokers occupied and Troy Polamalu running wild.
It comes down to depth, the match-ups at the positions people don’t look at like center, guard, and consider the depth Pittsburgh has at corner. Ike, William Gay, (who we know is short but big time), Townsend, forgetaboutit. Larry Fitzerald will get his catches, and score a few, but I also could see Kurt Warner being taking off on a stretcher and/or throwing five picks. I’ve never seen a 3-4 defense put up sack totals like this Steelers team. 26-30 from the edge alone?!
Last comment. Skippy the kicker is fine, but Arizona’s kicker, (Neil Rackers) is a beast. He could rock it from 50+ no problem. The intangible is Edge James/Hightower/and whom ever is filling in for JJ Arrington(who sux.) I also fear Steve Breaston and of course Anquan Boldin. The Steelers will have to be very physical with these guys, and it will be tough to jam them, because they are so big and strong. If Boldin/Breaston/Fitz slip that jam, it’s goodnight. So ‘Zona will score, but so will Pittsburgh. The Arizona line started as a 3-4, but the didn’t have the personel, so now Gerald Hayes plays like the elephant position, like a stand up NT. Too bad willie can’t catch, because there should be plenty of chances against okeafor/berry/hayes who’s job is to occupy blockers and let Karlos Dansby and Adrian Wilson clean-up. This reminds me of the SF/Chargers match-up or the Cowboys-Bills.
Taking Steelers (-6 1/2 )and take the over 46 1/2 (Only because Arizona will throw seventy times.) 27-20 Blitzburgh.
January 31, 2009 at 7:00 pm
First wingnut manifesto of the year:
http://nicedoggie.net/2009/index.php/archives/385
February 1, 2009 at 12:17 am
Dang. PJM went down the tubes. Wish we could have a retro Open Source Poor Man day here, but The Editors prolly lost all those files, too.
If I remember correctly, every headline was just ‘Heh’.
February 1, 2009 at 12:18 am
oops. I forgot that some of the headlines were “Indeed”.
February 1, 2009 at 7:07 am
“I drop my children off at The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler School for White Justice and Pre-Baccarat-International every morning on my way to work. Emma is 6 and Bruce Smith James is 11. I’m starting to query my choice. I’m starting to think this is some sort of Crusades themed LARP and perhaps even an ongoing race war anime video made by Tecmo but distributed by KOIE only to linger on shop shelves as unconcerned Nankao shoppers float by like butterflies pollinating a wildflower field.”
Was written on the back of my Celestial Seasons “Sleepy Time Tea”. Isn’t that weird?
February 1, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Good day gents! I hear that there is a sports contest upon us this day.
February 1, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Interesting,
http://accuscore.com/nfl/articles/the-87%25-super-bowl-trend/
“In 34 of 39 (87%) previous Super Bowls, all you had to do to win your bet was pick the team that would win the game. Forget the spread. It was irrelevant. Now there’s a trend worth writing about.
I know there have been 42 Super Bowl games (not 39), but three ended up in pushes and are irrelevant to this discussion.
In 33 of the remaining Super Bowls, the favorites covered 24 times. In ten games, the underdogs not only covered but won straight up, needing no help from the spread. (Remember last year?) That’s what you call a pattern!
In fact, the dog has covered and not won the game only five times. That too is a pattern.
So now you know you don’t have to spend half a New York minute handicapping the spread. Odds are the spread will have nothing to do with whether you win or lose your bet.”
February 1, 2009 at 1:25 pm
O’Sham,
Are the Patriots amongst the contestants? No?! But how could that be?!?!
Alas, there is no joy in Poorville; mighty Brady sits one out.
Also: Go Stillers!
February 1, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Six. Just sayin’.
February 1, 2009 at 11:00 pm
I don’t follow “sports’ But even I watched the Super Bowl. They bowl very well, indeed. That aside, it was an amazing conflict. Both teams did well.
February 2, 2009 at 9:37 am
Puppy Bowl VI…
February 12, 2009 at 7:11 am
You know, you might be on to something here. Maybe the problem with Yoo and other wingnuts is that they need to have their testicles uncrushed. That’d explain a lot.