Day By Day

Comments

  • EC

    Yay! Elbows!!!

  • DASTARDLY DAN

    PUDDING WRESTLING!!!

  • JavaMan

    Make her pay to replace it. Every time she gives it away. She’ll figure it out. Maybe. It is Skye after all.

    • JSStryker

      I like your idea.

    • rickn8or

      Unless Skye winds up selling them for more than they cost her; maybe then the concept of capitalism will dawn on her.

      • Bingo. That’d be how many com/soc/fascist countries have learned how capitalism works. What’s in it for me, or do I lose a bit of my human nature?

  • WayneM

    I can’t imagine Sam cannot handle Skye’s rhetoric without Zed’s intervention.

    Mmmmm… mud wrestling…. dirty girls….

    • Grunt GI

      Word.

  • Grunt GI

    So, my question is, EXACTLY what does Sam expect Zed to do?

    🙂

    • John Greer

      Fetch another top.

      • Grunt GI

        I rather hope not.

  • Spin Drift

    Headlights on! Skye is an idiot, she could have gotten $100 for the top and probably $200 for her knickers. Now that’s capitalism.

    Spin

    • rickn8or

      Just like with drug dealers; “The first one is free.”

    • Grunt GI

      Would that require a pole in the middle of the DDQ?

      • B Woodman

        Ummm. . . I think not.
        Let’s try to keep the DDQ a LITTLE bit classy, even if it’s not the kind of place you’d want to take your sainted New England mother to dinner.

        • Grunt GI

          You’re right…we should stay classy.

          I vote for Pamela’s Jello Wrestling idea instead.

          🙂

        • MasterDiver

          My sainted New England mother was raised at a variety of Army posts in the 30s and 40s. She knew ALL the verses to songs like “The Girl I Left Behind Me” and “She Wore a Yellow Ribbon,” ESPECIALY the dirty ones! Naked pudding wrestling wouldn’t rate an eyebrow twitch.

      • PaulS

        Plenty of poles being erected in the DDQ, methinks.

        • JTC

          Ha!

          • JTC

            But let’s keep ’em under the tent, boys…

          • Grunt GI

            HAHAHA, especially if they’re just a pup tent…

            Damn, that was supposed to be my inside voice.

  • Pamela

    Jello Wrestling.
    At least it’s edible

    • Bill G

      So is Crisco oil.

  • JTC

    Skye ain’t wrong. Neither is Red. Capitalists are all whores in one manner or another.

    And she’s even inadvertently on to something. Word gets out those tops come off at the end of a nice dinner and drinks they’ll be cranking out a hell of a lot more dinners and drinks. That ain’t giving it away, that’s advertising!

    • JTC

      Dang it, forgot to say after acknowledging we’re all whores…

      “Deplorables R Us.” I read that somewhere. 🙂

    • eon

      Well, yes, whores are capitalists. Heinlein said it best;

      A whore should be judged by the same criteria as other, professionals offering services for pay–such as dentists, lawyers, hairdressers, physicians, plumbers, etc. Is she professionally competent? Does she give good measure? Is she honest with her clients? It is possible that the percentage of honest and competent whores is higher than that of plumbers and much higher than that of lawyers. And enormously higher than that of professors.

      -RAH, “The Notebooks of Lazarus Long” in Time Enough For Love

      Legalize it. License it. Make sure the practitioners get regular health checks.

      Removes the pimps and mob types from the equation, as much as is possible in any field of business.

      Also makes it easier to protect the workers from serial killers.

      Problem solved.

      (And having a LEO background, I don’t say this lightly.)

      clear ether

      eon

      • JTC

        Don’t know that RAH ever said it explicitly but he would agree that as I said above, all whores are capitalists and all capitalists are whores. And as an avowed capitalist, I don’t say THAT lightly, but it’s just a matter of intent and context.

        In fact much of what is abhorred (heh) as criminal behavior is nothing of the kind.

        Use Heinlein’s rational logic above as a template applied to drug use for one glaring example, and every one of his lines and all of his reasoning applies.

        And yes most involved with LE would find that too difficult to accept. That is because the very name of their job is Law Enforcement; the laws exist and they are sworn to uphold them. It’s not the enforcers but the laws themselves that are illogical and wrong. Change the laws and eliminate the difficulty officers have in acknowledging that logic.

        Another problem solved.

        • eon

          Legalize all the drugs you like, but you’ll never get rid of the illegal drug trade.

          As fast as you legalize “substances”, the dealers will find some new “substance” to flog to keep getting their 10,000% markup. (See; meth, bath salts, etc.)

          And there will always be a clientele’ for it. The rich, hip, trendy types. As soon as pot was legalized in The Only Places That Matter, The Only People Who Matter lost interest in it.

          Because they can’t maintain their carefully constructed self-image of being Dangerous, Romantic Rebels Struggling Valiantly Against A Corrupt, Oppressive Society (which they largely run, actually) if they’re getting high on a legal drug.

          They need the rush of doing something illegal, to flaunt their avant-garde hatred of society’s mores. Never mind that “society” is divided into the elite’, most of whom think like that, and everyone else, who mainly wish the “enlightened ones” would STFU and tend to their own knitting instead of trying to make everybody else Shut Up And Sing from their hymnal.

          Add in the number of people who will be engaged in crime simply because they get off on it and have no interest in anything resembling honest employment, and no matter what you “legalize” or “decriminalize”, they will always find another law to break. To thumb their noses at Society as a whole, if nothing else.

          You can change the laws all you like. Changing human nature is a lot tougher, and I’d daresay pretty much a non-starter.

          clear ether

          eon

          • Old Codger

            Eon,
            Kindly show me where Article 1, Section empowers Congress to legislate what substances an adult may or may not introduce into their tender bodies by whatever means they see fit. To paraphrase Jefferson, whatever substance(s) my neighbor uses/abuses neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. If while impaired they perform some act which DOES result in fiscal or monetary harm, THAT action is what should be proscribed, not using/abusing one or more substances. Use alcohol as your model. We don’t proscribe consumption of alcohol (tried that once and it failed spectacularly) but we do proscribe certain activities while under the influence of alcohol. Look at the result of proscribing use of alcohol. The compliance rate was terrible and a criminal element arose to supply a commodity in great demand. I submit that proscribing the use of so many substances has yielded essentially the same result. I am convinced that ending the proscription on drugs will yield a result similar to repealing prohibition.

            If government gets out of the nanny business all together and stops trying to control how we live that alone will reduce its size. As for people getting out of crime because something is legalized, you’re right, crooks will be crooks. But reducing the number of proscribed acts to those which manifestly, demonstrably and QUANTIFIABLY result in fiscal or physical harm to another person than the actor, would greatly reduce the number of statutes on the books and simplify the task of Law Enforcement.

            I challenge you to study the history of Prohibition and show me why you believe that legalizing drug use for adults would not lead to substantially similar results.

          • Swansonic

            Well said, Eon.

          • JTC

            OC has it down on this one. Essentially all of the arguments eon made against are effectively refuted, and if one ascribes to the logic of RH on the one, it is disingenuous and irrational to deny it on the other.

            I do know where he is coming from though; I would submit that no one has seen the cause/effect continuum more closeup than me, even career leo’s. We can have the in-depth on that another time, but suffice for now to say that I disagree with every single one of the points of logical disconnect that eon presents in this instance, as some are transparently emotional and others are speculative projection. Those are components of the argument for denial of many rights and activities of free men; although certainly with different motivations, the logic and effect are the same.

          • Pamela

            I work under the premise of do not trust or work with anyone that willingly takes a substance that alters their state of mind in order to transcend to euphoria, lethe or discovering the secrets of the universe. It turns out badly in the end with to high a price for the person and devastation for those surrounding them.

          • JTC

            Right there with you Mz. Pam:

            “It turns out badly in the end with too high a price for the person and devastation for those surrounding them.”

            Truth. That applies equally to illegal and legal substances and has a lot to do with my choice not to do the booze thing much at all as it is one of the most lethal and damaging of all.

            The key to the discussion here is the role -if any- of .gov in making those choices for the individual. The attempt to illegalize booze backfired mightily, creating crime where there was none just as it has a hundredfold for other substances now. You’d think history would have taught that lesson to intelligent people, but apparently not so much.

            The assets and expenditures of LE and Corrections are roughly HALF wasted on this proven failure of gov control and has become a self-fulfilling prophecy of ancillary crime and societal effects, and therefore something of a job-security issue for many in the field. But even that is irrelevant to the basic issue of gov control and/or usurpation of personal rights and choice, and that is a very slippery slope indeed in a time when our other Constitutional rights are under attack in the guise of what is “good for the people”.

            And that does also call into question eon’s debate tactic of the red herring of the trendy elite, he knows virtually all here despise those scum and attaching them to drug use might gain some support. Some of what he says about them is true, I saw it happen to powder cocaine in the seventies when it went from high-brow to low-tone in its appeal. But again that is irrelevant to government control and is a bit of a disconnect when he cites their effect on the progression of drugs of choice; I have not seen “meth or bath salts” adopted by the cool kids, they are the refuge of the poor when control and law enforcement makes more traditional highs more expensive and more risky. Prescriptions for pharmacy grade substances are available for the price of a pill doctor appointment for folks with the dough, and they play a very minor role in street level narcotics and enforcement…how many of them are robbing c-stores and getting locked up at county?

            He is right about one thing, there will always be criminals and there will always be those who seek escape from the reality of their lives; a reality that has been affected for the worse by the same helpful gov that seeks to eliminate illicit drugs. But it is not about “changing laws” it is about eliminating them. And it is not about “changing human nature” it is about eliminating gov’s role in trying to control what is not controllable, for better or for worse.

            A lot of discussion here recently about various legal intoxicants, and many would separate that from the type under discussion here. But they are wrong. There is no difference other than gov having learned its lesson about alcohol, but not yet about the rest.

      • RegT

        Heinlein had it right. And having been an LEO myself, I couldn’t agree more. Most of the crime came from pimps and from getting the gals hooked on drugs. Tried to talk a free-lance sixteen year old out of it, several times, but she said she was having too much fun between the money/tips/”being treated as an adult”. I left San Diego before hearing – thank goodness – that she ever experienced the many negative possibilities that could have befallen her.

    • interventor

      In DC, the lobbyists are located on K St. In the evening, the ladies of the evening take over. It’s said the evening shift has more ethics.

    • Whore is the second oldest profession after all. Hunter was first.

      • JIMV

        No, prey was first

        • Norm

          Hardly a profession.

          • JTC

            “Hardly a profession.”

            Tell that to the sheeple on the dole.

    • Swansonic

      A friend once had a typo and called himself a ‘Conslutant.’

      I recently typo’d myself from a Manager to a Mnagger.

      I think they both fit….

  • formwiz

    Either way, it’s a win-win.

  • Bill G

    Nothing deplorable in that scene, aside from Skye’s mindset.
    As an aside, this article has some comments from the Instapundit on this idiot Seidman who is saying we should just ignore the Constitution. Other tidbits of interest are included.

  • Kafiroon

    Only problem is: Those in power ignore the rule of any law they want. Corollary is: Those in power enforce any rule of law on us.

    • Bill G

      From the article I cited above:
      REYNOLDS: Oh, well, then I’m free to do whatever I want! And actually, that is a damning admission, because what that really says is: If you believe Seidman’s argument; if you believe that we already ignore the Constitution anyway, then in fact, the government rules by sheer naked force, and nothing else. And if that’s what you believe, then all of this talk of revolution suddenly doesn’t seem so crazy, it seems almost mandatory.

  • KenH

    Throw her fu…frabbing ass out in the snow

    • eon

      Texas. Not a lot of snow until around November.

      cheers

      eon

      • Pamela

        Are there fire ants this time of year?

        • Andy

          Fire ants are out ALL year in the South of Texas.

  • B Woodman

    Yes, I think Skye is inadvertently on to something, even if she doesn’t realize it. All capitalists are “whores”, they sell their products for as much as the market will bear. But “bear” (hehehe) in mind, that most of those products are legal, and beneficial to society as a whole.

    Prostitutes, on the other hand (which hand? left? or right?) are a specific sub-species of whore, selling their bodies, which in most places (excepting a few locales in Nevada) is illegal.

    SO how do we get the concept of one, “whore”, which is crude but accurate as applies to the DDQ, and “prostitute”, which is more polite but inaccurate, across to both these fine looking ladies?

    • epilitimus

      So you’re saying prostitutes in those certain parts of Nevada are actually whores?

      • eon

        I prefer RAH’s term “hetaerae”, actually;

        he·tae·ra
        həˈtirə/
        noun
        plural noun: hetaerae

        a courtesan or mistress, especially one in ancient Greece akin to the modern geisha.

        cheers

        eon

        • JTC

          High-class whores then. 😉

  • epilitimus

    I think it is all a dasterdly plot by Skye. She figures if she gets Sam mad enough the last little bit of whatever it is that is holding up Sam’s shorts will give way, at which point the last thing Sam will be worried about is Skye’s top.

    Ok, I know what you are all going to say…Skye’s not that smart. Regardless I can dream can’t I?

  • Pamela

    All I can say is Newtonian Theory is being challenged in the first panel.
    I’d have to be wearing a corset serving drinks.

    • JTC

      They do seem to defy the laws of Nature, don’t they?

      That’s okay, so do I when I imagine an all-nighter with the two of ’em. 🙁

    • Vince

      I’d pay for that!

    • Noelegy

      They’ve had kids. They never wear bras. But their boobs don’t obey the laws of gravity.

      • PaulS

        Not “But”, “and”. 🙂

      • Chris Muir

        And Zed still has all his hair.Fantasy…

        • Pamela

          A good Fantasy can get you through the day.
          All depends on whose hands are in whose hair. Or not.

        • Grunt GI

          Or paradise…where things never sag and hair never falls out…

  • Spin Drift

    Those orbs of delight are non-Newtonian and filled with anti-matter. One touch and Zed makes you disappear. Look all you want but don’t touch.

    Spin

  • TJ

    Methink’s Sam hast grown in recent days…

  • Rodbo

    How can one learn as you have about the female anatomy? Do you take apprentices? 🙂

  • How about something like “Skye, derp, that’s part of your uniform”?

  • L. B. Carlson

    Chris, that headline — PRICELESS! Good Lord, you’re good.

  • Lucius Severus Pertinax

    Vive les Deplorable!!!

  • DASTARDLY DAN

    Whores, yes, the lot of us.
    But I perfer, and often refer to myself, as mercenary.
    I go wherever, and od whatever, someone is willing to pay me sufficiently to do.
    My rate is determined by location, task, and, to some extent, the character of the client.
    If that’s deplorable, then get me one of those T-shirts mentioned earlier.

  • Randy

    So Chris…When does the DDQ install a Mechanical Bull? 😉

  • NotYetInACamp

    deplorable me

    • Pamela

      But not Despicable or a minion

      • NotYetInACamp

        Thank you.

        Irredeemable in their eyes. That’s OK.

        And all of my hair. (Unlike some who must only have it in fantasy.)

    • Kafiroon

      Certain libtard claims I’m Despicable.
      I take it as a ‘merit’ badge of honor.

    • WayneM

      Good one, OC…

      Question for uninformed northern neighbour… what happens if the Hildebeast seizures out while coughing up a lung? Does Bernie get the nomination by default?

      • JTC

        WayneM, covered ad nauseum (heh) a few days back. Right, wrong, who the fuck knows, can’t really anticipate the behaviors of the special ones among us, but fun to speculate.

  • PaulS

    A basket of dewhoreables. (autocorrect suggested “requires less”) Hmmm

  • eclark1849

    Better a whore than a slut. A whore sells it. A slut gives it away.

  • 'TreHammer

    My ED has been cured. It’s a miracle!

  • NotYetInACamp

    But those girls love the cute guys. It’s a burden.

Trackbacks and Pingbacks