A friend of mine has been nominated as a panelist for the Suxorz 2009 panel at SXSW. (Yes, that’s a real thing). Please help her win by clicking the link and voting for Shannon McKarney. It took me three seconds (couldn’t find her name at first) and I didn’t have to register or sign up or give them any info. Please pass this on!
The archerfish (or archer fish) are a family (Toxotidae) of fish known for their habit of preying on insects and other small animals by shooting them down with water droplets from their specialized mouths. A large lower jaw helps these fish to hunt…Archerfish are remarkably accurate in their shooting; adult fish almost always hit the target on the first shot. They can bring down an insect six feet above the water’s surface. – wikipedia
It’s odd how much slang we never second think. I wonder if this also explains the more obscure “How’s Tricks?” The Urban Dictionary claims both uses of Trick were derived from prostitutes, and I guess I can’t blame them for backfilling some folk history.
Given that they had mind control juice, why did the evil guys in Temple Of Doom feel a need to use child slave labour? Maybe in some sort of Industrial Temple their little hands would be useful in the machinery, but weren’t they supposed to be old school mining?
Also, how do people in the heart devouring sector get into mineral extraction?
I had a friend back in highschool who often used the following logic: Late is a binary state, you’re either late or you aren’t. If you’re already late than what’s the point of being concerned about your time of arrival?
I had sort of a similar thought when I started watching this video; your spine can only really be shattered once, so what’s the point of being concerned:
This whole piece is poop, but by assaulting the money shot I think I can easily point out the stupidity:
“It won’t. But it will surely send a message to those who believe in marriage, that they will be viciously attacked for expressing, or merely believing, that marriage is defined as between one man and one woman. Ms. Kolbert provides just the latest example of how the forces of “tolerance” and “diversity” quickly abandon their principles of “live and let live” when somebody disagrees with them.”
Not only does Mr Lorence admit that his side (apparently Christianity) isn’t one for “tolerance” or “diversity”, but the bulk of his argument is “Hey, you guys said you would accept everybody!” which seems like an odd turn about for mudslinging. This kind of “Aw, c’mon guys!” argument sounds doubly hollow from the whistling throat of a member of the church.
I’m sure in the name of Judge Not\the LORD therefore be judge\etc, Mr. Lorence’s church has found a passionately gay man to say some words before the next few Sunday sermons. Actually, that’s not the best example despite it being a nice bit of turnabout, more appropriate might be inviting a militant atheist to speak. The logic of why this wouldn’t please everyone is obvious to any adult.
There are apparently people trying to soften the reasoning for Warren not being wanted at the inauguration, giving idiots like Lorence room to hide, so let’s be clear: He’s unwanted because Obama ran, and won, on a progressive platform, one of the major tenants of which Warren vehemently opposes. While articles like Lorence’s may serve to whip up the angrys who still have time to be upset about gay marriage and not just that they can no longer pay their mortgage, its infantile whininess simply underscores the dumb beast that is that portion of the right that’s still obsessed with other people’s dinkies and hoohahs.