The actor Tom Sizemore, who died this week at 61, was great in four movies I really liked: Saving Private Ryan, True Romance, Blackhawk Down and Heat.
Usually it’s a mistake to learn too much about actors’ or musicians’ lives, because they too often turn out to be dimwits, jerks or leftists. (Not to get Que Mala too excited, but if you make a Venn diagram of those three groups, you’ll get a lot of overlap.)
There are exceptions, of course. Denzel Washington seems like as good of a person as he is an actor, and I admire what I know of the life and work of Nick Searcy and Neal McDonough.
I don’t know much about Sizemore as a person, but I understand that he had some addictions that likely hastened his death. But even so, the unfairness of the world always weighs on me at times like these. Tom Petty is dead, as is John Prine, Vince Flynn, Rush, and Andrew Breitbart.
Yet some of the worst people are in their late hundreds – Noam Chomsky, Paul Ehrlich, Bernie Sanders, Imhotep Pelosi, Joe Biden (sort of) – and are all still alive and kicking. Or at least falling up airplane mobile staircases, in Brandon’s case.
Doesn’t seem right. RIP, Tom Sizemore
I heard two of the lamest rationalizations of bad behavior this week. The first involves the lunatic male teacher who has been going to work in a blonde wig and enormous fake breasts for the last year or more. (I’m glad he’s in Canada, because lately I’d started to think that we’d cornered the market on nutjobs here in the US.)
If you didn’t catch the story, he finally got in real trouble this past week, when a reporter staked him out and got some pictures of him without his ridiculous drag-teacher costume, and looking like a regular, schlumpy middle-aged guy.
So now the school board in Ontario has removed him from the classroom, and it sounds as if he might actually get fired. Which makes perfect sense, and is obviously way overdue.
The insane part is that as long as this guy was parading in front of his students as a grotesquely disproportionate female impersonator, this uber-woke school board didn’t think that they would be justified in intervening. Because he identifies as a woman who apparently caught a chest-full of whatever radiation it was that caused the titular actress (HA!) in “Attack of the 50-Foot Woman” to get her most famous leading role, I guess?
But now, after it turns out that he only intermittently identifies as a gender-confused circus freak, the school board is galvanized to take action!
In other words, the Ontario school board decided that whenever this guy had a posture-threatening pair of patently fake breasts strapped onto his idiotic carcass, he was teacher of the year material.
But when he took them OFF, he had to be fired immediately.
If you haven’t been a reader here for long, you may be tempted to challenge me. “Martin,” you might say, “it is impossible to top the sheer idiocy of that reasoning!”
My response is to say, “Hold my bourbon” — which I am medicinally forced to drink whenever my high calling as your Roving Correspondent requires me to see or even think of that Canadian mammarian monstrosity (try to type THAT when you’re two bourbons in to a column!) – “and watch this!”
Attorney General Merrick Garland was questioned by several GOP senators this week on various topics, and it is beyond my humble powers of description to communicate to you how badly it went for him.
If it were a fight, they would’ve stopped it.
The senators beat him like a rented mule.
It was more lopsided than the infamous Rumble on the Runway, when Joey Gaffes squared off against a mobile airplane staircase, and was TKO’ed after three falls on the first 12 steps.
Senator Mike Lee asked Garland about why the DOJ has gone after a lot of non-violent pro-life people for protesting at abortion clinics, and only a very few pro-abortion vandals for violent and expensive property damage to pregnancy support clinics and churches.
The numbers are pretty damning: since the start of 2022, the DOJ has pursued charges against 34 individuals for blocking access or damaging abortion clinics. On the other hand, since the leak of the Dobbs decision, there were over 81 attacks (vandalism, break-ins, firebombings) on pregnancy centers and 130 on Catholic churches, and Garland’s Guerrillas have only been able to bring charges against 2 suspects.
Garland stuttered through a transparently foolish lie — “We apply the law equally” – before admitting the obvious: there are many more prosecutions of actions against abortion clinics than those against crisis pregnancy clinics or churches.
But he had an explanation: it’s because the actions against abortion clinics happen in the daytime, when “seeing the person who did it is quite easy.” On the other hand, the criminal geniuses who are attacking Catholic churches and pregnancy centers are – and I am not making this quote up – “doing this at night. In the dark.”
Got it? The dastardly pro-aborts have been waiting for nighttime!
What do you expect Merrick Garland to do? It’s not like DOJ workers have superhero-like powers to see in the dark! They don’t employ Doctor X, the man with X-ray vision, or any other Marvel or DC character with similar abilities whom I can’t name right now because I’m a grown-ass man and don’t read comic books any more.
If only someone could invent some sort of power source or device that would allow us to illuminate our surroundings, even after the otherwise impenetrable “cover of darkness” (I just now invented that phrase – thank you, noble Kentuckians who invented Knob Creek 9!) descends at sunset to protect evildoers from detection.
Can you imagine that?
I mean sure, if such a thing ever became a reality, we’d first use it to put up what I suggest we should call “lights” at Wrigley Field so that the Cubs could start playing some night games. And next we should probably use some of them in Las Vegas, because gamblers keep bonking into one dark casino after another, resulting in many minor injuries and spilled drinks.
But right after that, we could give that awesome power of illumination to Merrick Garland, and in no time he’d be blinding hundreds of red-handed pro-abortionists like they were Paul on the road to Damascus!
I mean, if Paul had been on his way to Damascus to firebomb Catholic churches. (I mean, if Catholic churches had been invented when Paul was heading to Damascus.)
Garland looked commensurately worse when asked why he has done nothing to arrest the packs of leftist thugs who have been staking out and screaming at SCOTUS judges’ houses, in clear violation of the law. Inconveniently for Marvelous Merrick, those creeps have been out in full daylight for months.
And it’s not like they couldn’t be tracked down just on eyewitness descriptions alone:
Look for males who are malodorous, effeminate, unkempt, and look like they live in their parents’ basements.
Look for unwell females – either morbidly obese or frighteningly spindly – with a general demeanor that just screams, “I hate you, dad!” and who elicit in all who see them a phrase that ends in, “…not with a ten-foot pole.”
For both genders, watch for hairstyles involving colors not found in nature, and/or erratically shaven heads. In terms of facial piercings, think “fell head-first into a huge tackle box.”
So let me leave this poll question up to CO Nation: what reasoning is more idiotic?
Canadian educrats saying that they were fine with a perv teacher wearing obscenely ginormous fake boobs, but not with him taking them off,
Merrick Garland saying that the United States Department of Justice will vigorously pursue all crime… as long as it happens when the sun’s out.
I know one thing: we should thank our loving Creator every day that Merrick Garland is not on the Supreme Court!
“Dr.” Jill Biden/ Merrick “Sherlock” Garland, 2024!
5 thoughts on “One Goodbye, & a Choice Between 2 Rationalizations (posted 3/6/23)”
I cannot elucidate how I despise Mitch McConnell, but he gets his mug added to Mt. Rushmore for keeping Garland off the “Supreme” Court. (It’s in quotes because they’re not all that supreme. Jumanji Jones, or whatever the hell her name is, should never have risen higher than Traffic Court.)
I’m with you there, Harry!
Oh, dear Marticus… I’ve been on a social media cleanse, so haven’t read your columns recently and I’m simply overjoyed to have this as my first meal! My hubby is a witty bourbon man and I maaaaay have to share you to him. How selfish of me to hog your writings!
It’s great to hear from you, Julie, and to hear the great phrase “social media cleanse!” I’ve only heard about the colon version of cleanses, which is somehow also an apt comparison to social media. I’m glad you’re back, and if I can give you some advice: avoid all social media except for the CO site, and my columns! 🙂