Ammo For Sale

« « Crazy kids | Home | Car emergency kit » »

The Airing of Grievances: Shit I thought of since the last episode of The Airing of Grievances

Pocket Queens: Screw them. I’m going all in pre-flop with them from now on. When the flop comes, they’re generally as useless as a cock-flavored lollipop.

Dramatic movies with retards: Rain Man, I am Sam, those types. I’m done with them. Some of them star people who are actual retards in real life. As much as you try to tug at my heartstrings, I can’t get over the fact that what is considered acting is also considered bad taste when I do it at a party. Plus, any movie with a retard in it is automatically overrated by every critic. Let’s stick to the cameo appearance in comedies please.

Bruce: who will remind me that I use the phrase useless as a cock-flavored lollipop too much.

Iraq: Sorry but I’m doing some serious introspection on that one. As an initial supporter of the war, I’m torn between 1) the US needs to either go balls out or, err, 2) balls in. That is, get our asses in there and take control of the motherfucker. Or bring everyone home and take our ass-whippin’ and loss of respect in the worldwide community like a man. The latter is clearly the worst option. So, it’s either time for a vulgar display of power or a powerful display of vulgarity. They’re both ugly and no one wants to do either but it’s time to cowboy the fuck up and do something right, whether it’s winning or saying oops, sorry about your infrastructure. And the first person who says I’m advocating cutting and running needs to have their pee-pee whacked.

Me: The fact that by stating the above, I actually agree with John McCain about something. That sucks.

Sensitivity: I’m not an overly sensitive person but I find it to be in poor taste the fact that people care more about congressional control than the fact some dude just had his head split open and the organ that determines the fiber of his being operated on following a stroke. At least have the decency to offer sympathy first before becoming a partisan hack. Anyone checked DU to see for conspiracy theories? I mean, I’m kind of a dick but I’d at least offer condolences to the family before saying OMG, we’re doomed!

My hands: They’re faster than my brain. Been re-reading a bunch of old posts and realize they are riddled with typos.

Google: I’ve had it happen a lot lately where I am Googling up a bit of research and the source is, err, me. Well, quoting me doesn’t do much for backing up assertions made by me.

The people of DC: Look, I hear what you’re saying. Taxation without representation is bad ju ju and people have started wars over that kind of stuff. And having no say in the constitution sucks too. But you’d get a lot more sympathy if your local .gov wasn’t trying to piss on the constitution by banning gun ownership.

26 Responses to “The Airing of Grievances: Shit I thought of since the last episode of The Airing of Grievances”

  1. Diamondback Says:

    I’d have thought that googling yourself up as a source would make you happy? Means your popular, no? (will googling yourself to much make you go blind?)
    Taxation without representation should never happen in a country that was founded by people revolting against this very thing. I hear what your saying tho…
    Sorry about any typos; I’m just not that anal about spell checking stuff that isn’t work related. I find it’s more important to carry a coherent thought. Something; several newspapers could learn from you.

  2. ben Says:

    My hands: They’re faster than my brain. Been re-reading a bunch of old posts and realize they are riddled with typos.

    Yeah, you suck. My sister fixes all my typos for me.

    The people of DC: Look, I hear what you’re saying. Taxation without representation is bad ju ju and people have started wars over that kind of stuff. And having no say in the constitution sucks too. But you’d get a lot more sympathy if your local .gov wasn’t trying to piss on the constitution by banning gun ownership.

    However, they could always move anywhere they like in the USA. They are citizens of this country, no? The colonists, back in the tea party days, what were their options?

  3. ben Says:

    Also, google “egg nog pancake”. That kicks ass.

  4. countertop Says:

    pocket queen???? Color me clueless.

    DC – no representation, not now not ever. You think pork is out of control now??? Imagine how bad it would be if the person who represented Washington – home of the lobbyists – actually got a vote on appropriations bills (wait, never mind, thats already happening – see Frank Wolf (R-McLean, VA) and his appropriations exploits.

  5. SayUncle Says:

    Counter, not a poker player, eh? Pocket queens means your hole cards in hold ’em are a pair of queens.

    Good point on the pork.

  6. Ron W Says:

    Re: the airing of grievances, tomorrow December 15th, is Bill of Rights Day. It should be the biggest Federal Holiday after July 4th or maybe the true Patriot’s Day, April 19th when the American Revolution was initiated by government troops, when they came to disarm citizens.

    But most Republicans and Democrats are too busy dismantling the Bill of Rights to ever acknowledge or even think about making that day a National Observance. I’m not even looking for a day off…just acknowledge that “we the people” have rights that are OFF LIMITS to our public SERVANTS!!

  7. Jay G Says:

    Ah. Thanks CT, I thought I was the only one who was REALLY concerned about SayUncle and his “pocket queen”…

  8. tgirsch Says:

    countertop:

    Yeah, because if you think pork is bad with 435 votes, just wait until that 436th vote comes along. It’s going to cause orders of magnatude more pork, and there’s nothing the other 435 could do to stop it!

    As to representation, if you deny it, then you at least ought to exempt all permanent residents of Washington, D.C. from all federal taxation.

  9. tgirsch Says:

    (And after all, preventing DC from having federal representation has done such a good job of preventing the concentration of power into Washington, that I can see why you’d be so interested in preserving it…)

  10. SayUncle Says:

    then you at least ought to exempt all permanent residents of Washington, D.C. from all federal taxation.

    Yes. And then cut off all funding of the city government, roads, infrastructure, and jobs to the district that my fed dollars pay for. Sounds fair.

  11. tgirsch Says:

    And then cut off all funding of the city government, roads, infrastructure, and jobs to the district that my fed dollars pay for.

    Why? They didn’t have any say in it. You can’t have your cake and eat it, too. Apparently you don’t give a shit about taxation without representation when it’s someone else (especially those dirty DC liberals) being so taxed…

  12. SayUncle Says:

    Tom, I don’t buy the don’t pay taxes argument on the basis of benefit. I was being smarmy with cut off funding bit. It is a federal district and should be funded by the feds. I need smarmy tags in html.

    Tom: Apparently you don’t give a shit about taxation without representation when it’s someone else

    SayUncle many minutes before: Taxation without representation is bad ju ju and people have started wars over that kind of stuff.

    Like I said, it sucks. And that is the stand-alone reason why they should have representation.

  13. pepe Says:

    My hands: They’re faster than my brain. Been re-reading a bunch of old posts and realize they are riddled with typos.

    Firefox has an automatic as-you-go spellchecker that highlights misspelled words as you go. And lots of other things that make it work using.

  14. Nomen Nescio Says:

    loss of respect in the international community?

    what respect? y’all lost that when you went into Iraq. if you had any left after that, you’ve since lost it by failing to maintain control of the blasted place and failing to produce clear and convincing evidence the whole mess was really necessary in the first place.

    really, if it hadn’t been for this misadventure in mess o’ potamia, i might’ve naturalized as a U.S. citizen by now already. as it is, i’d be way too embarrassed and ashamed to carry this country’s passport. maybe in another few years, once we know whether the coming congress will be any more competent…

  15. Sebastian Says:

    I’m all for getting our army out of Iraq….. and into Iran.

  16. JustinB Says:

    I’m all for getting our army out of Iraq….. and into Iran.

    I wanna see you cowboy up and enlist then big boy.

  17. Ninth Stage Says:

    Another grievance for you. Insty just mentioned you by pseudo-name and he still didn’t link to you.

  18. t3rrible Says:

    I am with you on the whole Iraq thing. This Scott Adams post really sums up my feelings on it.

    http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2006/11/complicated_dec.html

    I think I favor Uncle’s first option, the “balls out” scenario. But since we all know that will NEVER happen, I say Frack it, let’s get our guys out and let them deal with their own. We have plenty of problems on the horizon, China and Tiawan for example. The list goes on and on. Soon enough the Saudi’s will realize they need to clean the whole area up. They have the western trained military to do it and none of the restraints. Let them “cowboy up”. I am tired of losing my fellow countrymen for the six out of ten who don’t want us there and the other four who don’t care either way.

    We should just respond to direct threats with overwhelming force and then come home until another threat is found.

  19. countertop Says:

    Yeah, because if you think pork is bad with 435 votes, just wait until that 436th vote comes along. It’s going to cause orders of magnatude more pork, and there’s nothing the other 435 could do to stop it!

    2 thoughts – where that vote ends up decides how much pork is going to occur (if we do it, do we give Elanore Norton Holmes seniority for all the past years?? Does she manage to land herself a spot on Appropriates, say chair of the DC Appropriations Committee????)

    Also, are we simply talking about 1 seat in the house, or are you aware that DC also has a shadow senator (he’s much less of a media hog) and that the folks in DC are also insisting on 2 senate seats (all of a sudden thats a whole lot more power).

    As to representation, if you deny it, then you at least ought to exempt all permanent residents of Washington, D.C. from all federal taxation.

    Yep. THe funny thing is though, there’s been lots of proposals to do that. Democrats generally shoot them all down. Might not be aware of it, but there’s been an ongoing, major battle in DC ever since Anthony Williams won election over “gentrification” or what I call the “we hate whitey (and any successful black who doesn’t fully tithe at the alter of the civil rights advocates) campaign” If you made DC a tax free haven, property values would soar. A couple of blacks would do ok, but since most of the real estate isn’t owned by blacks (there one jewish and about 5 greek families that own the vast majority of DC real estate – that stuff outside of downtown and outside the single familyhomes in the NW) they would stand to make a killing. All of a sudden the blacks have to move out – their not going to Virginia, so they end up in Maryland. 2 problems – increasing property values has already started this process and close in Prince Georges, MD areas have seen significant increases in crime as the folks in Anacostia just cross the border. The other thing is DC is America’s black city (or so it likes to be called). Those political leaders who gather lots of power playing the race card here, lose that power if they have to compete in a real state like Maryland. As a result, folks in Maryland don’t want it to be a tax free haven and neither do the folks in DC. Other thing, is the virginia connection. DC goes tax free – and the super expensive real estate in Northern Virginia loses value as the money quickly goes across the river – so what do you see?? Tom Davis (R Fence Sitter – NOVA) and (soon to be former) chair of the Govt Affairs Committee with jurisidiction over DC opposses this at all costs)

    So, in short. I support your snarky comment but its really (in my experience) not something any politician in this area would really allow to happen.

  20. Sebastian Says:

    I wanna see you cowboy up and enlist then big boy.

    Seriously, the chickenhawk crap is getting tiring. We have civilian control over the military and we live in a republic. That means I get to have opinions about how that military gets used. Deal with it.

  21. Lean Left » Blog Archive » The Airing of Grievances Says:

    […] Iraq War Supporters: Admit you were wrong, already. Admit that you got punked. Side note to SayUncle: it’s awfully big of you to finally acknowledge that we need to “cowboy the fuck up” or get out, but it seems a wee bit late for that. You could have done this, you know, two or three years ago, when there was a chance it could have helped. Side note to Joe: Nice straw man you’ve got there; did you build it all by yourself? Seriously, you show me one prominent commentator from anywhere on the political spectrum who argues that “success” in Iraq is measured primarily, or even largely, by our ability to bring our troops home, and maybe you’ll get my attention. […]

  22. tgirsch Says:

    Uncle:
    I was being smarmy with cut off funding bit.

    Which is what I was being when I suggested exempting them from taxation, and in pretty much everything that followed. 🙂

    Getting serious for a minute, I think there are ways of giving them true representation without making them a full-blown state. You could give them a voting seat in the house, but none in the Senate, or you could even give them a single senate seat, which would still make them less powerful than even Wyoming.

    pepe:
    And lots of other things that make it work using.

    But apparently nothing to alert you to typos which themselves are also words. Like, for example, when you type “work” where you meant “worth.” 🙂

    Sebastian:
    Seriously, the chickenhawk crap is getting tiring.

    I agree. The correct response would have been to tell you that your “let’s invade Iran” remark, if even remotely close to serious, is fucking insane, and is so irrespective of whether or not you’d be willing to go there yourself and help fight it.

    My bigger beef with war supporters isn’t that so many of them are unwilling to enlist themselves, it’s that they’re unwilling to help pay for it. Taxes may well be eeeeevil, but you’ve got to pay for your $90-billion-per-year (roughly, so far) war somehow. And you’re not going to do it with current levels of taxation (never mind more tax cuts), especially when you’re running a third of a trillion dollar deficit not counting the cost of the war.

  23. Sebastian Says:

    tgirsch:

    You and I certainly have the basis for a reasonable discussion.

    And for the record I’d be willing to pay higher taxes to support a prolonged and sustained effort in the middle east. If Congress came along and said “We need to pay for a larger military to deal with Iran, so you can’t keep your tax cut”, i’d be fine with that. But I expect to see some real scrimping in other areas, and not have it be like the Republicans, who will try to fight a war while going bat shity crazy on the pork spending, adding major new domestic programs, and cutting taxes. I recognize that for the bullshit that it is. The problem is the Democrats haven’t convinced me they are any better.

  24. Standard Mischief Says:

    tgirsch Says:

    Getting serious for a minute, I think there are ways of giving them true representation without making them a full-blown state. You could give them a voting seat in the house, but none in the Senate, or you could even give them a single senate seat, which would still make them less powerful than even Wyoming.

    Too bad DC statehood people won’t ever accept any compromises like that. There has been proposals to let the two Senators from Maryland represent DC’s interests and have a the district be treated as part of Maryland to determine how many congress-critters we get in the House. No dice. The DC statehood people want to become a state, with all the rights and privileges allotted, AND they still want to get that big chunk of cash from the federal government every year AND retain home rule.

    Oh, and they want to do the entire thingy by legislation, not by amending the Constitution, because passing laws is easier and I guess they think that they can just ignore how the Constitution gives all legislative control to congress, because that part is now considered obsolete.

  25. tgirsch Says:

    Sebastian:

    I think our primary disagreement on the middle east in general and Iran in particular is that I don’t think we’re anywhere near the point of discussing prolonged military action. Military action is the path of last resort, not the first option. Diplomacy may not be entirely pleasant, but it’s an option that needs to be exhausted before we even talk about military action.

    As for taxes/funding/etc., I’m frankly not willing to flush our own country down the toilet just to pay for our actions overseas. Now if we’re talking about the types of cost-cutting that don’t involve serious benefit cutbacks (e.g., allowing medicare to negotiate for low prices), we may have some room for discussion. But we’re already too military-industrial as it is. If we cut back everywhere else to redirect even more of our budget/economy into the military, that’s going exactly the wrong direction.

    SM:

    I can see why they’d reject the Maryland idea. It seems like it would at best only be marginally better than what they have now. Besides, would you want to be annexed by Maryland? Didn’t think so. 🙂

    I agree on the amend the constitution thing, but I frankly don’t see why it would be such a big deal to grant statehood to DC. They’d still only be 1/51 of the Senate, and 1/436 of the house. That’s really not all that much influence. The lobbyists are where the influence really is, and in case you haven’t been paying attention, they already control the federal government. Statehood for DC wouldn’t noticeably alter that calculus.

  26. Standard Mischief Says:

    tgirsch:

    Screw what DC thinks, do you think we in Maryland want any of DC’s problems?

    Given that we’ve established what needs to be done (Constitution Amendment, otherwise congress has total power over the laws of the District) The problem is to draft an Amendment and talk the rest of the country into ceding a small bit of power. From Wikipedia:

    Under the first method, Congress can propose an amendment by a two-thirds vote (of a quorum, not necessarily of the entire body) of the Senate and of the House of Representatives. Under the second method, two-thirds (2/3) of the state legislatures may convene and “apply” to Congress to hold a national convention, whereupon Congress must call such a convention for the purpose of considering amendments. As of mid-2006, only the first method (proposal by Congress) has been used.

    Good luck.

    Unfortunately, it would be a lot easier to admit Puerto Rico as a state rather than actually ever create the state of New Columbia.

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges


bisonAd

Categories

Archives