Not really an “article”, more along the lines of droll sarcasm. The New Yorker refuses to offer any concessions or assistance to the humor-impaired, which can frequently be confusing to dullards like yourself.
Oh, and welcome to the Boards. Remember, we are here to help.
By way of our good friends at Crooks and Liars, a fart blast from the past, Tom Tancredo. (Who? Oh, right, him!)
Colorado Republican Proposes Welfare Solution: Give Everyone Guns
Nope. Totally not making this up.
Forgotten, but not gone.
Yes, but for satire to work, it has to have some basis in reality.
Swing and a miss for Borowitz.
Nice try, dipshit.
This is wishful thinking on your part.
It’s like this thread puts up a bat signal of stupid where Republicans have to come in and say “You think THAT’S dumb? Wait till you get a load of ME.”
The Batshit Signal!
I was on the fence until this post but now I’m totally won over. Do you have a newsletter to which I could subscribe?
You’re welcome.
A fan of Mallard Fillmore, perhaps?
Right. The joke is that Scalia consistently offers the worst calls of any judge, to an almost laughable degree, and does so with the intellect and maturity of a three-year-old, to the point you’d have to wonder if he wouldn’t be better off somewhere other than the highest court in the land. I mean, everyone else would be too, so it’s not that much of a stretch…
I think the phrase you’re looking for is “Jiggery-pokery! Pure applesauce!”
Do you really not see the parallels? Or are you just not very good at this?
'… Scalia said that there were people who would contend that “it does not benefit African-Americans to – to get them into the University of Texas where they do not do well, as opposed to having them go to a less-advanced school, a less – a slower-track school where they do well.” ’
'… Justice Antonin Scalia would fare better if he served as a judge at a court that was “less advanced” than the United States Supreme Court.
According to the study, Scalia’s struggles to perform his duties in a competent fashion stem from his being inappropriately placed on a court that is “too demanding” for a person of his limited abilities.’
The Joke?
I thought it was the reality.
Welcome to t he SDMB, by the way, BigBlue. The others were probably being too polite to mention it, but if you’re going to start your career in this thread, the expectation is that you begin at the beginning. So, without further ado:
Please give us your thoughts on the stupidity of proposing that the First Lady should be regulated by Congress.
Aaannnd, GO!
Not fair to say that Scalia is not smart, he clearly is. Otherwise, he could not perform the sorts of intellectual gymnastics his opinions require. He can leap from the springboard of his premise and perform multiple sets of twists and flips in midair, and land on his preferred conclusion as adroitly as a bowling ball thrown overhand. His peers gasp in amazement, also, shock, horror and dismay.
An unintelligent man cannot do that, it requires mental acuity and agility. He not only is a fair target for mockery, its almost a duty. Johnathan Swift is dead, but his spirit lives on. And we a blessed by it.
That is not to condone such remarks as noting that he would lose a beauty contest with a bullfrog. I certainly will not say such a thing, but I’ll laugh if someone else does.
Reminds me of a joke from an old Stan Freberg show.
I think anyone that starts reading this thread at post 1, and reads every single post in this thread, should have plenty of beer on hand.
Of course, it could be like the marching Chinese thing, by the time you reach the end, another 500 posts have been born.
Well, I did, but concurrently, while serving other sentences. And I have plenty of beer on hand, but its mostly for the dog, gets cranky when he sobers up.
Yes, but the reason why the joke doesn’t work is that Scalia doesn’t struggle to perform his duties in a competent fashion. Therefore there is no parallel.