Robert had Lasik done awhile ago, so long ago now that he has to wear glasses again, which is apparently a thing that happens. He would occasionally wear glasses anyway, for their intimidating effect, which was powerful enough to work on me even though I knew they were props. He told us about the process, which he found beyond odd: the laser man talked to him the whole time his cornea was off, complimenting him on the brilliant color of his iris, now unencumbered by its protective scale.
He told me that story when I first met him, too long ago to even remember when that was exactly, and I’ve probably thought about it one or twice a week ever since: a man who is always in some way unsatisfied with the human eyes he sees, who knows that there is some undiscovered color beneath those shells, a shell he knows is easy, so easy, to pull away.
There’s a 30 minute television horror episode in this one, somewhere. Assuming that they still do those. On cable, maybe? Yeah, probably on cable.
Pejman Yousefzadeh, stating something that’s obvious in retrospect:
If Bismarck, Metternich, Castlereagh and/or Palmerston were alive and on the Internet, I imagine that they would tell us to only get into those flame wars that advance our strategic interests.
If you want context, click on through, and then click the David All link. Warning: don’t have any liquids in your mouth before you do. You won’t spray the liquid out; instead, you’ll just pour it out over your keyboard as your jaw goes slack. Don’t panic when that happens, by the way. That’s just your brain trying to desperately enter hibernation mode before you lose any more IQ points from the sudden mental toxicity.
PS: If you don’t know who David All is, good on you and don’t worry about it. Also, don’t click through past Pejman’s post.
Brendan O’Neill, writing for the UK Telegraph:
Whenever a bomb goes off in America or Britain, some liberals’ first reaction is to wonder whether stupid white people will go crazy and attack Muslims.
It’s not quite right, though.
Whenever a bomb goes off in America or Britain, some liberals’ first reaction is to [hope that] stupid white people will go crazy and attack Muslims.
There. Fixed it for him.
PS: No, offensive is constantly being subjected to a mass hysterical – and quite baseless – accusation by people who I am morbidly are at least half-projecting. The above was merely me being impolitic. We all know darn well that there are Left-pundits out there who are downright eager to see a pogrom.
From the Free Beacon comes this time-delayed, epic slam:
A GOP Senate aide told the Free Beacon [Democratic Senator Kay] Hagan’s decision to jump out early in support of Manchin-Toomey was “a testament to her skills” as a politician.
I assume that we all understand why, yes? – Because I have to go pick up my kid, now.
What you are about to read is not understatement. It is what understatement will become after the Singularity.
Marsha McCartney, president of the Texas Chapters of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, conceded that Texas was “a few election cycles away from passing laws like they did in Colorado.”
…You have to wonder if the New York Times writer lost it when s/he* heard that for the first time. I mean, some tests of one’s professionalism and ability to keep a straight face are going to be harder to surmount than others…
*It’s not yet 8 AM and I haven’t had my coffee. I neither know, nor really care, whether ‘Reeve’ is a guy’s or a girl’s name.
I know what Edward Luce was trying to say, here…
No one would accuse President Barack Obama of being Nixonian.
…but the truth of it is that my immediate response would be: Sure. Richard Nixon did things. He regularized relations with the PRC, got us out of Vietnam, set up the Environmental Protection Agency, and put a man on the Moon*. Hell, Nixon was a better Democrat than Barack Obama could ever hope to be. Cruel of me to point this out, I know.
Continue reading QotD, Unintentionally Favorable Nixon/Obama Comparison edition.
Glenn Reynolds, while noting just how bad it’s getting out there under Bloomberg for New York City residents who don’t happen to be mega-rich, offers this invitation:
You’re welcome to move [to Tennessee], so long as you don’t start agitating for the same policies that drove you out.
I’m wondering if any state legislatures might decide to try to back up that sentiment with appropriate legislation. Probably not; it’d be hideously inappropriate and probably unconstitutional. But remember, Blue state transplants: your new Red state neighbors were smart enough to create the safe place that you’re currently fleeing to. Learn some humility, Sparky.
Michael Crichton, by way of Ed Driscoll:
Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.
Byron York, on Ted Cruz [Link fixed: thanks to jbird in comments]:
Cruz has gotten a huge amount of coverage for his strong performances at hearings involving Chuck Hagel, guns and immigration. For whatever reason, some in the press have been amazed that a Princeton- and Harvard-educated lawyer, former solicitor general of Texas and winner of multiple cases before the U.S. Supreme Court would be good in a hearing room. He is.
You’d think that both Byron and I would have gotten used to the incredibly provincial mindset that dominates journalism in the Imperial Capital; and I think that normally we have. But every so often they still unfavorably surprise us.
…of the distinguished gentleman from Georgia:
I support killing bad guys with drones overseas. Hell, I’m okay with killing bad guys in the United States with drones if they are about to cause imminent harm. But the administration’s standard was far too nebulous. It is opposed by a majority of Americans. Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Marco Rubio, and others who are okay with drone attacks on bad guys supported Rand Paul because Paul found the sliver of ground on which they could all be opposed to an Obama Administration policy.
– My colleague Erick Erickson, over at RedState. As most of you know, I self-identify as ‘neoconservative:’ and my major problem with Barack Obama’s foreign policy is that he’s trying to do what he thinks George W Bush would do under the same circumstances, only he’s not very competent even at that. But I loved watching that filibuster. It was utterly guilt-free; I’m aware of Rand Paul’s likely defense stances, but he managed to keep the debate framed in terms that I could accept without quibbling. And then he made the administration give way on a point.
That last point is important: because the last time I checked neither, say, John McCain and/or Lindsey Graham (who I don’t actually particularly dislike) have done as well lately.
PS: I think that the time has come for Senator McCain to announce that this will be his last term in office.