Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
We have the five short-list successors for Justice Souter profiled on Huffington Post…sixty percent of which are big-nosed butterface white chicks.
Then we have another butterface white chick that’s got the homosexual community all excited, or at least those who purport to be an advocate for said community. Her nose, for the record, is rather svelte.
And then there’s this year’s favorite big-nosed butterface white chick, the one who says the 9/11 hijackers came into our country through Canada, and returning veterans are a security threat.
There is something about decent-looking pretty women that liberals find extremely threatening. And I think the time may have come for the rest of us to comment on it.
What is it with liberals and ugly women? Who is it within their perceived constituency that finds old-fashioned feminine beauty so threatening? Isn’t it possible to find some hardcore lefty chick, one that has a law degree, who gets all excited whenever babies are aborted, wants to make up the law as she goes along, who thinks global warming is a threat but Islamic terrorism is not…but one that looks kind of like Elisabeth Hasselbeck? One that I want to see in Hooters’ uniform, or at least a short skirt? Aren’t they out there? They’re all over the place on Boston Legal reruns.
Seriously: What is this apparent correlation between premature aging and modern liberalism? Obviously, there is a relationship; obviously, it is a persistent, enduring one. And it’s not exclusive to the female variety either. You’ll notice there’s a couple of dudes in that line-up and they have faces-made-fer-radio too. Is it kind of like that thing the Dark Side was doing to the Emperor’s face? Pardon me, I realize this is all less than delicate…but you have to admit, if I didn’t at least get curious about it, let alone ask the questions — there’s have to be something terribly wrong with me. It’s the track record, going all the way back to Geraldine Ferraro. It’s just too consistent and too striking.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This just in:
Feminists Hate Women.
You don’t have to be Ann Coulter to notice that “fragrant, hairy-legged hippie pie-wagons” (damn, I love that woman) have been the only acceptable “females” to lefties ever since the ’70s. And actually, H.L. Mencken is reputed to have said that the “social reformer” women at the Democrat convention in 1928 “Make me want to burn every bed in town.” Nothing wrong with noticing it.
As a friend says, the trouble with things that “go without saying” is that if they go without saying long enough, people forget they’re true.
Nice collection of HuffPo Hunnies, btw.
- rob | 05/05/2009 @ 01:33What is it with liberals and ugly women?
You’re overlooking the adage that
“Politics is the Hollywood for ugly people.
Judging by the (always well photographed) “activism” popular
in the apparent continuing financial failure
that is particular to California, I suspect it’s safe to say that
“Politics is the Hollywood for ugly liberals”.
Rock Stars are the exception of course.
As the intentions of the founding fathers boldly go forward into exponentialcatastrophic
- CaptDMO | 05/05/2009 @ 11:13disintegration(ok, not really), then consider the implications in this truism as well
“The women look better at closing time”
You’re overlooking the adage that Politics is the Hollywood for ugly people.
There is a great deal of truth in that, but the matter seems to be somewhat more complicated to me. The democrat-men, for example, who are actually placed before us for our consideration as presidential candidates, look better than most Hollywood actors. John Kerry was the homeliest one throughout the previous sixteen years, and even he, with all those Botox investments, could easily have been cast as, say, an important dignitary in a rubber mask on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.
It seems to me there is some message they’re trying to get out, here, without putting it into words. It’s got something to do with the proper role of men and women. Like a role reversal of sorts: Men should be “pretty” in order to be taken seriously, but a pretty woman is fit to do nothing but stay home and bake cookies. Ugly men can soar as high as Congress (Reid, Kuci, Schum, Frank and others) but should forget about assuming any executive position such as Governor or President. This part, I infer, has to do with that thing about salesmanship upon which we’ve commented: A great product can be sold by a mediocre salesman but a crappy product requires an excellent salesman. Excellent salesmen on average are more handsome, so Bill Clinton is more visually appealing than Tom Daschle.
What’s going on with the “ladies,” I’m thinking, is just a determination to avoid offending the hidden constituency: Homely women who want the bar lowered. And there’s something unisex about that, because that gets into the question the democrat party is here to answer, without allowing it to ever be put to voice or ink anywhere: How much not-trying can someone do in our modern society, and still manage to stay afloat? Now, look at some of these “candidates.” Yech. I have never known a woman, in the carnal sense, who would deign to walk out of the house looking like that. One of them didn’t even bother to take a brush or comb to her hair! Gross!
There’s a certain abundance of cosmetic neglect that requires work. And these women all seem to have crossed it (except for the one in the homosexual-issues mag, she’s the best-looking out of the whole lot). They all look like the before-picture in an Extreme Makeover episode, and there’s something insincere about it. They’re trying. Trying to be the ugly duckling.
- mkfreeberg | 05/05/2009 @ 11:41There are older and beautiful liberal women out there, they’re just not in politics for reasons The Good Captain mentions. I’m probably biased, but The Second Mrs. Pennington qualifies and she has impeccable Liberal street cred… member of the academy, PhD candidate, drives a hybrid, eats only organic produce, yadda, yadda… all such traits acquired AFTER we split the blanket, I should add. But yeah, she still turns heads, even at 50+.
- bpenni | 05/05/2009 @ 15:01“There’s a certain abundance of cosmetic neglect that requires work.”
Morgan, dude, you made my day.
- tim | 05/05/2009 @ 16:14