Todd's Mischief Blog

There is a definite upward trend in both the quality and content of conservative political ads. Check this out: Hat-tip to Patti at NotaWonk .

Police have just released video of a statement made by George Zimmerman on the day following his fatal encounter with Trayvon Martin. In the statement, Zimmerman claims that Martin spotted his gun and tried to grab it. "He looked at it and he said 'You're going to die tonight mother f--ker and he reached for it," Zimmerman said. It was in that moment, Zimmerman said, that he acted in self-defense.  I don't mean to cast any doubt on Zimmerman's account, but I can't help thinking that it sounds awfully familiar:

Feminism is about giving women choices, a promise to every little girl that she can grow up to be anything she wants to be. Well, anything except one: a stay-at-home mom. This isn’t surprising in any way, but I have to give Elizabeth Wurtzel credit for being so forthright about it in her recent article in The Atlantic . She very directly refutes the idea that women can make any choice they desire and still be called feminists. "Who can possibly take feminism seriously when it allows everything, as long as women choose it?" she asks after comparing feminism—perhaps too aptly—to an "easy lay." And from there she very squarely pits feminism against wife and motherhood for the umpteenth time. Wurtzel repeats—even makes a subtitle of—the old canard that being a stay-at-home mother isn’t "a real job." She meanders through well over a thousand words loosely related to this idea before finally putting an underline to it: "something becomes a job when you are

Snippets from other conversations On obstructionist politics: The false assumption made when asking simply whether obstructionist politics really work is that any given tactic will have the same effect regardless who is using it and regardless of the conditions in which it is used. This isn't true in warfare. This isn't true in sports. Why should it be true in politics? It's not hard to see that obstructionist tactics are working for the Republican party right now . It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to question a tactic's efficacy while it is working. The real question should be why it is working and what might cause that to stop? On the purpose of laws: The law should provide certainty where it otherwise does not exist. When new uncertainties arise, new laws may be created to deal with said uncertainties. However, when the creation of law becomes itself the source of uncertainty, then there is a real problem. We have that problem now. More on obstruction

Just kidding ;-)

  Zooey Deschanel vs. Darth Vader Anybody care to explain? 

Snippets from other conversations ...on Hipsters: tryanmax said... Frankly, I think progressivism is too status quo and should not appeal to a truly self-conscious hipster. Every counter-cultural option has been tried in the last 100+ years, leaving only conservatism as the last truly non-conformist political philosophy. someone else said... I think it's just the new word for "smug faux rebel." They're deeply materialistic and just think they have better taste than everyone else. And their penchant for cynicism makes them think they're smart. tryanmax said... So, even the definition of "hipster" is ironic? Well played, hipsters. Well played. ...on Alternate Universes What if our universe is the alternate universe? ...on Gender-Based Abortion in a way I am glad that the anti-gender-based abortion legislation failed. I don't care for the illusion of fairness when it comes to abortion. Let it remain as ugly as it is. Besides, while the subject may be so