I love it.

Good Gawd woman! Now you're reduced to reposting Rodger's week old work? Not that it isn't worth watching. It definitely is. Sayet was on Dennis Miller's radio show today. BTW, this was the first week of Miller's show, and he's GREAT! His guests are as esoteric as his wit.

This is the way the blog ends,
This is the way the blog ends,
This is the way the blog ends,
Not with a bang, but a whimper.

There were some good times here. Snapping Victor with wet towels; bitchslapping LF and Procain Amy; taunting senescent USC fans; but life must go on; For all things change, the darkness changes,
The wandering spirits change their ranges,
The corn is gathered to the granges.

The corn is sown again, it grows;
The stars burn out, the darkness goes;
The rhythms change, they do not close.

They change, and we, who pass like foam,
Like dust blown through the streets of Rome,
Change ever, too; we have no home,

Only a beauty, only a power,
Sad in the fruit, bright in the flower,
Endlessly erring for its hour,

But gathering, as we stray, a sense
Of Life, so lovely and intense,
It lingers when we wander hence,

That those who follow feel behind
Their backs, when all before is blind,
Our joy, a rampart to the mind.

nice, Casca. Can't follow it with equal eloquence. A few years ago, I would've been devastated that this blog was ending. Since, I've come to be more religious, to trust God's plan more. It's God's plan that all things come to an end. I'm okay with it now. Been some nice times hanging out here, with all you guys. Truly.

I actually took notes during Evan Sayet's video. His premise: Liberals are not okay with the continued existence of war, poverty, crime, and injustice, reminds of the way I wasn't okay, a few years ago, with the reality of everyone dying dying, and of everything coming to an end. Liberals, like me a few years ago, have a complaint with the Creator. They just don't know it.

What is funny, about Liberals choosing not to employ discriminate thought about competing options, is that everything is a choice, including the choice not to choose amongst competing options. Liberals are discriminating as to whether to use discriminate thought about option, or whether not to do so. Humans cannot avoid employing discriminate thought. The entire Liberal premise - as described by Evan Sayet - is slashed to pieces by this reality.

I enjoyed the video.

More and more people are cottoning on to the imminent death of Annika's Journal.

I shall have to write a Korean-style death poem for it. Or draw something particularly filthy to commemorate its passing.

"Passing..." Yes, that gives me an idea...

Kevin

"Passing..." Yes, that gives me an idea...

Kidney stones?

Think bowels reagan80, like this...

...and gcotharn, considering your comment on "everyone dying dying", consider these other lines from "casca's" poem:

Fasten to lover or to friend,
Until the heart break at the end:
The break of death that cannot mend;

Then to lie useless, helpless, still,
Down in the earth, in dark, to fill
The roots of grass or daffodil.

Down in the earth, in dark, alone,
A mockery of the ghost in bone,
The strangeness, passing the unknown.

...That death will change because it must;

ITS a good video, well deserving of a repost, better watch than any of that michael moore tripe, but still, the daily show is funnier...

oops, here's the link for ya reagan80

Thanks, Scof. You surprised me.

I was worried that it would be a "tub girl" or "goatse" link. No one deserves to have their eyes raped by those.

Annika,

I don't know what theis guy was drinking the night out that he had his epiphany but it wasn't logic juice.

He is completely guility of the logical flaw that the R always makes. If you don't agree with my plan to attack my enemy than you must perfer my enemy to me"

If one thinks the aftermath of the Iraq invasion is a tragedy, then, Saddam was a good guy who should have been left in place.

If you thought 911 beat up America but you don't agree that beating up Iraq, who had nothing to do with 911, is the oppropriate response, then, you must have enjoyed the 911 attack and thought America deserved it.

If you think a woman's right to choose is more important than the concept of ending the progress of the life in her womb, then you must be part of the culture that promotes unprotected sex and promiscuity.

If you think that America still has problems with institutional racism then you are a hater of our country because S. Africa, Poland, Germany, and Borneo have greater problems with racism.

If you think that universal health care is a good idea then you are a communist and Russia lover because they though it was a good idea too and looked what Stalin did.

And if you think descrimination is often used to marginalize segments of the population than you are a proponante of indiscriminate thinking.

The man is an idiot. The basis for the ideas he espouses are so riddled with generalization and
sophistry that I wonder why he doesn't get laughed of the stage. And why, you, a reasonable woman would find this simplistic reasoning the answer to lifes big question-Why Liberals hate America.

He infact said nothing about the why's. He said nothing about the complex reality of the world will live in. Just dumb equations-if you don't want to kill an evil man, you too are evil. This is the kind of crap GB lives and breathes

If you want to gauge the validity of Sayet's theory, just look at ">one of Strawman's classic rants.

WTF happened to my link in the last post?!

http://tinyurl.com/2ofuwt

If you have friends and family who still believe in this whole global warming thing, pass this link on to them.

http://www.gorelied.notlong.com

It goes to that video

as the peasant in Holy Grail said:

"I'm not dead yet!"

Since this blog won't be around for the second anniversary, I would like to take this time to formally congratulate Annika's Journal for remaining the #1 search on Google for "bullet shaped titties".

For those that were disappointed with the absence of the desired visuals when their search brought them here, I will finally offer a meek token of consolation. Enjoy!

yah you laugh now, but when my graphic novel gets made into a feature film, you'll all say you knew me way back when.

And what are you doing searching for bullet shaped titties, Reagan?

Skippystalin made me do it! I swear!

Okay, okay, I admit not being very forthcoming there. I apologize. I was kidding about Skippy. He had nothing to do with it.

Actually, beLIEve it or not, I saw that YTMND site first and it reminded me of that old post for some reason...

Hey, if I can remember Strawman's old posts, then surely I can remember your classics, such as that entry you made about the classmate sitting away from you due to problems with rigor mortis in his pants or something.

If you thought 911 beat up America but you don't agree that beating up Iraq, who had nothing to do with 911 . . .

Sweet Jesus, help me.

Read this s l o w l y, straw:

WE DID NOT ATTACK IRAQ AS A RESPONSE TO 9/11.

WE ATTACKED IRAQ FOR ACTIVE SPONSORSHIP OF TERROR, WHICH HAS BEEN HEAVILY DOCUMENTED, AND LED TO 9/11.

I listened to this in its entirety last week. His thesis is impressive and does make a ton of sense. Examine liberalism from top to bottom and a lack of standards is what tends to dominate.

A great article by Sayet:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1408339/posts

It has been a few days now since I saw this, and I have been thinking about his thesis. I believe I can even pinpoint when this type of thinking was first codified. H. G Wells wrote a book back in 1923 called Men Like Gods. He put forth this idea that if mankind could just jettison religion, philosophies, nations, and ethnicities, then we would be malleable and could be shaped by an elite vangaurd into realizing our full potential. We could be like gods.

Now, it is a simplistic, and utterly naive belief. But it is true, many many otherwise educated people have bought into some version of this banality.

Like a lot of ideas, that sounds pretty good, until one realizes that many men are devils.

Annika, thanks for the video. I just bought The Closing of the American Mind and look forward to reading it.

Mark,

One word. Lies. Oh, another couple: the indiscriminate thinkers who believe them.

History is beginning to write the epitaph to the whole debacle. Bush, the worst ever, ignorant, naive, insulated, fervent believer of bullshit surrounded by the uncritical, bungling manager of corrupt bunglers (people who truly hate America and will steal her resources, capital and compromise the safety of her people for their own agrandizement ad profit), mismanager of domestic resources, believer in faith not science, supporter of creation "science", could not read Hamlet if his life depended on it, caused the complete turnaround of Republican influence in America (a good thing), no less a murderer than Karadzic and too much else to list.

Keep smiling Mark, its only going to get worse, and NO i don't hate America any more than I hate my son after a bad day on the playground where he might have struck a playmate without provocation. I'm angry, I wish he had acted better and I look for new ways to teach him how to behave but I don't hate him. It appears this complexity has eluded the great thinker Evan Sayet.
SInce when is indiscriminate the opposite of descrimination? Maybe to the indiscriminate.

Did straw reply to anything I posted, or did he just change the subject 180 degrees and resort to insults and smears?

Mark,

You said well documented and I say lies.

You said ton of sense theory of Liberalism and and i said it is not well reasoned.

Where is the shift?

I'd love to meet this spamming twat and show him why I was called Vlad the Impaler in the washroom at Angola State Pen. He will soon go from "true patriot" to "Ben Dover".

Slight twist on the same old damage-control rant.

WE ATTACKED IRAQ FOR ACTIVE SPONSORSHIP OF TERROR, WHICH HAS BEEN HEAVILY DOCUMENTED, AND LED TO 9/11.

The evidence is so miniscule and irrelevant that even the Duchy of Grand Fenwick would have declined to send their army.

straw,

The "shift" is that "lies" is not a response, (it's more of an knee-jerk accusation). Kindly explain why those statements were "lies."

Again, "not well reasoned" isn't a response. Anything you disagree with could be "not well reasoned." Why is it "not well reasoned?" I'm not suggesting that his presentation was 100% flawless. Of course not. But what exactly did he say that was incorrect in your view, and what are your reasons for thinking that those statements were incorrect? If you rather not give me a point by point rebuttal, that's fine, but don't call statements "lies" when they are not, and don't claim that an argument is "not well reasoned" unless you can (attempt to) prove it.

__________

will,

It was hardly "miniscule" and hardly "irrelevant." Saddam had huge connections to global terror: he housed the bastards, he fed them, he gave them places to train, he met with them, he supported them and their families financially, etc. Apart from mailing you a signed and notarized letter, I'm not sure what else the man could have done.

Mark, I'll take you up on your offer;
- Which terrorist organizations, specifically?
- Of those, which did he house (and for how long)?
- Met = support, even if he blew them off? Please provide substantive rationale.

We'll dissect the evidence to see how well it stands up to scrutiny.

MArk,

If you read my first post you will see my arguments. The method he uses to support his conclusions is a tried and true tool of the propogandist. He finds and common thread to join to elements than switches to a non common element then claims that the second and most outrageous idea is also shared when it is not.

If a person wishes the US to leave Iraq he must hate America, love the terrorists and bask in delight that America is losing a war. He must also be a supporter of Saddam and rape rooms and torture chambers.

To Sayets way of arguing all these things follow from a dissagreement about the reasons we went to war with Iraq and how we might resolve the problems that have resulted from that decision.

Is that how you feel Mark? I love Saddam, I think his reign should be continued, that I enjoy soldiers dying and that the misson of the Islamist radicals is something I wish success?

This make sense to you and must be the nature of my beliefs because I think the reasons for going to war were trumped up and that there were altnative actions that could have been taken.

What a coincidence! Doug TenNapel sent us this just the other day, trying to influence my husband away from his Democratic leanings. I thought the same thing--brilliant--and I've been comparing every liberal I hear to this theory ever since. Pretty freaky! I love his phrase "9/13 Republican."