I am the danger.
I am the one who knocks.
Say my name.
A New York town has prevented a veteran’s group from flying a “Don’t Tread on Me” Gadsden flag, calling it “offensive”.
As I recall, there were once some fellas in red coats who didn’t care for it much, either. Anyone remember how that worked out for them?
“That’s the fire swamp! We’ll never survive!”
“Nonsense! You’re only saying that because no one ever has.”
-The Princess Bride
The three dangers of the fire swamp are the flame spurt, the lightning sand, and the dreaded Rodents of Unusual Size. But going in may be the only way to escape the evil Prince who’s pursuing you… so why not give it a shot? If there’s any justice in the world, true love will save you. And failing that, you can hold tight to your two-foot-long R.O.U.S. plush toy to make you feel safe.
You asked for it, and we made it a reality. Actually, we had this product earlier, but we thought if we launched it too close to April Fool’s Day you wouldn’t think it was real. BUT IT IS REAL! We have a R.O.U.S. and you can, too! This plush is a ThinkGeek exclusive and is a whopping 27″ from the tip of its unusual nose to the end of its unusual tail. Now you just need to add flame spurts and lightning sand to your backyard.
Rest assured that, despite the title, the piece is completely respectful of the Iron Lady.
[Think you have a link that’s IMAO-worthy? Send it to firstname.lastname@example.org. If I use your link, you will receive High Praise! (assuming you remember to put your name in the email)]
“I feel like a kid in a candy store!” – terrified diabetic
— Mike Leffingwell (@mikeleffingwell) April 23, 2013
You can’t argue “Boston illustrates our need to help struggling immigrants more” and “immigrants are not a threat to us” simultaneously.
— jimgeraghty (@jimgeraghty) April 23, 2013
“I’m killing you because of my radical beliefs””You don’t mean that””No, really. This is part of my jihad””You were bullied,weren’t you?”
— Will Antonin (@Will_Antonin) April 23, 2013
The man who stole President Obama’s teleprompter last October was sentenced to three years in prison.
Whoever got Obama’s teleprompter back for him deserves at least double that.
It’s in our interest to help foster democracy through the diplomatic and economic resources at our disposal. But even as we provide such help, we should be clear that the institutions of democracy – free markets, a free press, a strong civil society – cannot be built overnight, and they cannot be built at the end of a barrel of a gun.
BARACK OBAMA, speech, Nov. 20, 2006
“…but I’ll do my best to tear them down that way.”
So the motivation of the bombers is what everyone pretty much guessed as soon as they heard there was a bombing: They were motivated by their religion of Islam. But it’s not nice to jump to conclusion, so we have to act all surprised.
Give me a sec…
But most Muslims are such nice people! How could this happen? Did we fail them somehow? Maybe it’s our fault for what our military has done to those countries overseas; they were so peaceful and nice before we got involved! Really, the Tsarnaev’s are the true victims here! Why did this have to happen?! Why?! Maybe if we change our ways, less people will fall victim to wanting to mercilessly blow up children.
Okay, I’m done. You have to wonder what the logic was here:
1. Blow up children proving you’re ruthless murderers who can’t be reasoned with
3. Islam dominates the world
People wonder if these two were part of some larger conspiracy. It seems too stupid and pointless to be much larger, but of course I never got exactly what sensible thing 9/11 was supposed to achieve either.
And I know the left are going to want us all to learn something from immigrants turning against us, but are Muslims going to have some deep conversations about why if you hear an explosion, you can think “Muslim!” and usually be right? Anyone working on a solution to fix that?
And are we waterboarding Dzhokhar? I mean, I know we probably got all the information we needed out of him, but maybe he can work as a practice dummy for CIA agents who need more waterboarding training.
Works like this: I feed you Moon Nukers a straight line, and you hit me with a punch line in the comments.
The most surprising item in the new Benghazi Report…
So the other day I ran into one of our commenters who had put up a big conspiracy rant, and I posted it because I found it fascinating. Here’s a guy who thinks the government is quite regularly assassinating its own citizens to political ends and the reaction is to… casually drop that into conversation at a humor blog. You want to talk about a conspiracy, something doesn’t seem to add up there.
Anyway, I was disheartened to find out the reaction of some commenters was to engage in even crazier and even more obviously stupid conspiracy theories. One commenter (who will remain nameless — NAMELESS!) started alleging that the families from Newtown are actually actors who didn’t lose children and the whole incident was done to push gun control. Now, I’m just trying to run this through my head how this conspiracy would work: The government would hire a bunch of actors to pretend to be grieving families — and all these actors would collectively be known by hundreds of people who could easily expose this conspiracy saying, “Hey, I know these guys. They’re not even married and don’t have children!” Plus, apparently they’re all really bad actors because the conspiracists are easily seeing through their lies. And I know at least one of the fathers is against more gun control… so I’m not sure how that fits in the conspiracy.
There’s no way this conspiracy would grow beyond two people without one of them saying, “This is a really stupid idea that would never work.” And I haven’t even pointed all that’s stupid with it.
So what happens when I point the obvious flaws in the conspiracy? I got the stereotypical conspiracy theorists response of, “Well, I wasn’t alleging all that obviously crazy stuff; I was just asking questions.” I mean, this was a constant refrain from the 9/11 truther twits when you’d critique how idiotic their ideas are from a high level. Like I remember one going on about evidence it was a missile that hit the Pentagon, so I’d ask, “Then what happened with all the people from the plane that they said hit the Pentagon? They’re in hiding? The government just landed the plane elsewhere and assassinated them all?” And he’d never try to explain what happened to those people because he knew there was no answer that wasn’t insane; instead he’d just point out a few “inconsistencies” because he’s just asking questions. And so he’d get you trying to scrutinize some pixel on some image and ignore how completely insane the whole premise of a vast conspiracy is.
And that’s the real conspiracy: These conspiracy theorists don’t actually believe their own crap. That’s why they do everything to avoid following what they’re alleging to the logical conclusion because then they’d have to admit how completely insane it is and give up the game. So they’re really just silly people, but when you’re silly about actual tragedies where people were murdered, it’s gets offensive.
And I must do something. If I’m going to be the type of person to teach my children to punch hippies, then I cannot let useless people indulging in idiocy to continue on unmolested. Plus, IMAO is a site I have worked hard on for years, and thus I will not let it descend into a cesspool of nutty conspiracy theories! Thus there is only one solution:
From hereon, anyone engaged in nutty conspiracy theories in the comments of IMAO WILL BE BANNED FROM THIS BLOG. FOREVER. AND THEIR CHILDREN. AND THEIR CHILDREN’S CHILDREN.
As for their children’s children’s children, they will be on probation. That means any comments they make will automatically go to moderation. I don’t know how long it will take on average to get them out of moderation; I’ll probably be dead by the time this applies so it will be someone else’s problem.
…Actually, on second though, I don’t even know how to ban people. This kind of seems like a lot of work to enforce. Plus, I don’t even read comments half the time so what do I care? I mean, the site could get take over by neo-Nazi skinheads (what do racists have against hair?) and it would be like weeks before I would notice.
So, new idea: If you are found writing an insane conspiracy rant, I will add “I AM NOT A CRACKPOT!” to the end of your comment to make the whole thing look ironic and thus less offensive.
Except I don’t have time to do that. I mean, I have a full time job and I’m working on two different books; I don’t even know how I’m writing this post right now. I guess I could have Harvey do the comment editing… Can I have Harvey do thing? I don’t really understand the hierarchy at this blog. Actually, I probably should have discussed this all with Harvey first. He might get mad and not let me on the blog anymore.
Okay, new plan: You must enforce this edict on yourself. If you write some insane rant in the comments, you have to add “I AM NOT A CRACKPOT!” to the end in all caps.
I know; everyone will probably just claim their rant isn’t insane. Well, we’ll have an objective measure to determine if you wrote an insane rant. You have may have noticed before that lots of trolls and crazy people tend to write long comments; that’s because if you have a coherent thought, you can condense it. If you don’t, you just tend to blather on and on and hope to conceal in all the verbiage that you’re crazy. Plus, this is a humor blog; there really is no reason to write long comments unless you’ve gone into crazy rant town.
So, the objective measure of whether a comment is a crazy rant is whether it’s more than four sentences long. Any comment longer than that will be assumed to be some sort of RON PAUL! crazy type ramblings. Thus…
NEW IMAO COMMENT RULE:
After writing a comment for IMAO, count how many sentences it is. If it’s more than four, add “I AM NOT A CRACKPOT!” in all caps to the end of it. We at IMAO thank you for your cooperation.
BTW, anyone know what happened to Carpenter?
I AM NOT A CRACKPOT!
Anonymiss of Nuking Politics picked her favorite punchlines to “Why don’t you comment on Anonymiss’s Straight Line when you check for the winner of the IMAO Straight Line at Nuking Politics?…”
Click here to see if you made the cut.
If you did, you should probably email Keln about becoming a guest blogger there.
If you didn’t, Anonymiss has got another straight line for you to practice on.
Keep trying. No one likes a quitter.
The trailer for the new Thor movies make it look… comparable to the first one. So “meh.”
Can’t wait, though, to once again hear Thor’s catchphrase: “Hammer to the face!”
Suggested headline: “Min Baucus”
Seemed like “news” backwards would have been a really good password for the AP twitter account.
In search of something we can watch with Buttercup in the room, we’re now watching the Cosby Show on Hulu. It is really really good.
The Cosby Show also gives me this big “nostalgic for the good old days” feeling.
For my generation, the 80s are the “good old days”, the 90s the “pretty okay days”, and after that… well, smart phones are nifty.
New gun bill: Anyone who buys a gun gets a tax credit for being awesome.
Wait, they were acting like gay marriage was this inevitable, progressive thing and France hadn’t even legalized it yet?
I don’t think many conspiracists really believe their conspiracies. That’s why they do the “just asking questions” when pressed.
They know if they follow it to the logical conclusion, it’s insane, so they avoid following their ideas to the logical conclusion.
None of this is to imply that Obama isn’t a Kenyan-born Muslim.
It’s a good thing Obama wasn’t really injured in a bombing; the White House had to drop his health coverage because of Obamacare (paying the fine was cheaper).
The only conspiracies I tend to believe are ones about people in government trying to cover up their incompetence.
Buttercup’s review of The Cosby Show: “That daddy is funny!”
MSNBC’s Melissa Harris Perry said the government has “a right to impinge on individual freedoms in order to advance a common good”.
So… um… has she read ANY books published after 1776?
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.