Funny numbers, new math, and running towards the edge….

February 28, 2010

Remember this video?

(HT to FB over at In Mala Fide–I believe that’s where I had seen it first.)

Now consider this post on the CBO being “married to the model” over at Vox Popoli (HT Alkibiades at Seasons of Tumult and Discord).

The commenter “Good Will” is entirely right: we are in deep trouble, and the vast majority of Americans are completely oblivious to the threat. I’ve already seen the first signs at where I work; my unit is loosing a “post” starting 7/1, which means two jobs will be lost. Management is determined to cut my unit in half; which means I’ll be on the street again–this time, literally. It’s just a question of when.


Rule 5 Sunday–Seka Aleksic

February 28, 2010

So I’m a day late–sue me:

Seka Aleksic

Seka Aleksic

Seka Aleksic

Seka Aleksic


Rule 5 Saturday–Brooklyn Decker

February 20, 2010

Brooklyn Decker

Brooklyn Decker

Brooklyn Decker

Brooklyn Decker

Brooklyn Decker


And the worm does, indeed, turn…

February 18, 2010

Duke lacrosse accuser charged with attempted murder, arson

Durham, N.C. — Durham police late Wednesday arrested the woman who four years ago falsely accused three Duke University lacrosse players of raping her.

Crystal Mangum assaulted her boyfriend, set his clothes on fire in a bathtub and threatened to stab him, investigators said.

I wonder how many of Crystal’s feminist supporters will try to blame this on the boyfriend.

(Tip o’ the hat to Kathy Shaidle for the link.)


Why I believe women who oppose Game are talking out their ass…

February 18, 2010

“Think about how amazing it would be if someone who possessed all the qualities of your ideal fantasy figure came into your life and seduced you. You would love it.”~Arden Leigh, A Weapon of Mass Seduction

All women have a fantasy object–a love/lust figure against which all men are measured. The figure might be modeled after a real-life male in that woman’s life (her father, a teacher, etc.), or be entirely cut from whole cloth (such as the male characters of any Harlequin romance novel); whatever the source, the point is that this is their ideal man–their Alpha–against which all men must compete. It is the reason why women are always ready to trade-up–women will always pursue their fantasy over reality, because reality always disappoints in some way or fashion. (Men are no different in that they have a fantasy love/lust object–but where they do differ is that they are not the gatekeepers of sex, and that limits their ability to trade-up in the same fashion as women.) This also works against women, because no fantasy figure (just as no Utopia) is a completely realizable thing: all men are changeable, and therefore flawed, and consequently are not able to measure up to an unchangeable ideal.

Game allows men to produce (or to fake) those characteristics that women look for in their fantasy figure, allowing women to indulge–however briefly–in their fantasy, and no woman is opposed to her own fantasy. What woman would, as Ms. Leigh points out, trade the excitement of a man who hit all the touchstones of her desire, when that is the very thing she is looking for? When women speak out against Game, what they are really doing is refusing to acknowledge that their fantasy is unachievable as a real-world condition–that Man is un-perfectible and flawed. But, then again, what is the alternative–constantly turning down the real for that which doesn’t–and can’t-exist? How many women have done just that, and hit the Wall–only to regret that which they have passed up? It is a classic example of the perfect being the enemy of the good.

God Lord–I think I just characterized Game as a public service.

Standard caveat: I am polishing off a few bottles of Bacardi left over from a party, and may be punching above my intellectual weight class on this.


Rule 5 Saturday–Christina Hendricks

February 13, 2010




Would someone please explain to me….

February 12, 2010

…why the Fruit-of-the-Boom terrorist is entitled to the same rights as an American citizen (including Miranda rights), while the US Government now has an official policy of whacking US citizens abroad?

In testimony before the House Intelligence Committee today, National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair told representatives that American citizens can be assassinated by the US government when they are oveseas. Blair said the comments were intended to “reassure” Americans that there was a “set of defined policy and legal procedures” in place and that such assassinations are always carried out by the book.

Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R – MI) inquired about the procedures involved, asking what the legal framework was under which Americans could be killed by the intelligence community.

Blair insisted that under no circumstances would Americans be assassinated overseas for criticizing the government, adding “we don’t target people for free speech.” Rather they are subject to assassination when the government decides they are a threat and when they “get specific permission.” Exactly who was giving that permission was unclear.

WTF?

(Obligatory tip ‘o the hat to Vox Popoli for the link.)