The New Yorker has an excellent story about the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case, which in a just world would be referred to as the Durham Prosecutorial Misconduct Case. (The New York Times has the worst coverage of the story, as Slate rightly points out.)
I find this story the best microcosm I’ve ever seen for the bizarre and harmful views some liberals — particularly on college campuses and somewhat in the media — harbor about race.
Numerous Duke professors condemned the Lacrosse team and treated its members as though they were guilty of rape absent any personal knowledge about the case.
And the primary reasons they assumed the players’ guilt? They are almost uniformly white and mostly come from wealthy backgrounds.
In academia these days “privelege” has become a secular equivalent to original sin. Those said to possess it are automatically guilty of a transgression — whether they’ve trangressed themselves is treated as though it is beside the point, and their ritual denunciations in the press is perfectly acceptable behavior.
The baptism that wipes away this sin is diversity training. Penance is also necessary in the form of acknowledging one’s original sin for the administrators and professors who are the high priests on campus — not all administrators and professors, mind you, but those who advance the aforementioned notions about race on campus and are often unopposed by more sensible professors and administrators who’d prefer not to be denounced as heritics.
I’d like to make a list of this system’s faults and nail it to their doors.
conor friedersdorf posted this at 4:12 PM EDT on Thursday, August 31st, 2006 as Uncategorized
2 Comments »
At least according to the Post:
Oh wait, that’s child pornographer guy with child porn and all around weirdo John Mark Karr. Does this happen to Democrats?
(click the picture for a larger screenshot)
Apollo posted this at 2:56 PM EDT on Thursday, August 31st, 2006 as Journalism
8 Comments »
I spent yesterday on a company field trip touring The Basic School at Quantico, Virginia where aspiring Marine Corps officers learn to break things and kill bad guys. The nearby townspeople often complain that things get pretty noisy at Quantico, especially when bombs are involved. But, as one Marine gleefully pointed out, “That’s the sound of freedom!”
Read the rest of this entry »
Dorothy posted this at 2:05 PM EDT on Thursday, August 31st, 2006 as Amer-I-Can!
2 Comments »
Given his tendency to write banalities and pass them off as gems, when Broder gets it right I pay attention. He’s unhappy with the Democrats’ heavily front-loaded primary efforts:
So Nevada, with a growing Hispanic population, was inserted before New Hampshire, thanks also to a boost from Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada’s senior senator. And South Carolina was an easy choice to fill the need for a state with lots of black voters, pleasing native son and former North Carolina senator John Edwards, an unannounced contender for the nomination that eluded him last time.
This Democratic version of affirmative action leaves a lot to be desired. Unions are a major source of Democratic votes and money. Maybe Rhode Island should be rewarded for being a stronghold of union activity at a time when labor elsewhere is beleaguered. And gays vote Democratic; shouldn’t the states that are home to San Francisco and Key West be allowed to vote early? And if Jewish contributors keep the party solvent, shouldn’t New York be up there with the other pacesetters?
This way lies madness, and madness is what the Democrats have wrought.
Apollo, have you infiltrated the Washington Post when we weren’t looking?
If the Democrats want my advice, they’d schedule early primaries where the moderate to conservative Democrats they need to win the general are concentrated; this would weed out the flaming liberals and boost the moderates. Forget states with large minority populations, or quirky states like dovish Iowa or libertarian New Hampshire. Hold primaries in places like Oklahoma and Wyoming, where the Democrats are more representative of the nation.
Spread out the primary schedule. This gives people time to study the candidates, get to know them. As John Podhoretz once noted, a long campaign is like a golf game: you win not so much by playing well as by not making big mistakes. In this respect, a long campaign mirrors governing—a presidential campaign is a dress rehearsal for the presidency.
Finally, relax campaign finance laws. A strong but underfunded candidate needs lots of cash quickly; current laws force him to find lots of donors since they can only donate cash in drips and drops. The time he spends raising money is time he could use to spread his message if he was allowed to raise money more quickly from a handful of donors.
In short, the Democrats are doing everything bass ackwards; their primary schedule could have been designed by Karl Rove with them none the wiser. It’s one reason why Republicans will do better than they deserve to in 2006 and 2008.
Hubbard posted this at 9:21 AM EDT on Thursday, August 31st, 2006 as Lord, What Fools These Mortals Be!, Politics
1 Comment »
Recently, the Daily Telegraph did a profile of Ray Honeyford (H/T) that rang a bell for me. Honeyford’s sad story, abridged: he noticed that young Muslim students weren’t assimilating into British culture because parents would pull girls out of school and send them to Pakistan to marry first cousins; for pointing out the evil of forced marriages, the multi-culties hounded him out of a school that many poor families, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, tried to send their students to; the school was torched.
Honeyford’s great mistake was being right too early. But the reason I knew of Honeyford before this profile is that Theodore Dalrymple wrote about the saga some time ago for City Journal—and he wrote better than the Telegraph did. (I’ve sometimes thought it a loss to the world of intelligence that Dalrymple became a doctor, since very few people I know are so good at understanding trends before they explode; still, MI5’s loss was the world’s gain.) One key detail about Honeyford that the Telegraph left out:
Through nervousness rather than lack of ability, Honeyford failed the examination, given at the age of 11, for entrance to the local selective, state-run grammar school, a guaranteed (and by far the easiest) route out of the slums. He recalls having been disappointed by his failure, but it was not the blow to his self-esteem that today’s educationists claim that all such failure must be—so that the principal goal of education should be the preservation of the child’s self-esteem from the slings and arrows of outrageous competition.
As was the British working-class custom of the time, he left school at the earliest opportunity to find work, an office job that bored him. Restless, he decided to go to night school to get a high school education, and he then gained acceptance for teacher training. After receiving his teaching diploma, he obtained a B.A. by correspondence course and finally a master’s degree (in linguistics). Such a man is unlikely to wish to deny opportunity to others: and his experience led him to conclude that only educational traditionalism can offer the severely disadvantaged such opportunity.
Though he failed to gain admission to a selective grammar school himself, he bitterly regrets the passing of these quintessentially meritocratic institutions, which allowed so many poor but talented children a chance to join the mainstream and even to excel in Britain’s open society. (This fact alone suggests his large-mindedness: how many people can resist erecting a general principle out of their personal disappointments?) Such schools, which ideologues condemned as elitist, might have helped prevent the strife that convulses Bradford today by creating a common culture and an interracial elite. They would have drawn (by and large, though not of course with 100 percent accuracy) the most intelligent children from diverse areas, allowing lasting friendships to form across the races among people likely to grow up to be the most prominent citizens of their respective groups.
The whole piece is vintage Dalrymple: thoughtful, wise, peppered with aphorisms; I particularly like this one: “how many people can resist erecting a general principle out of their personal disappointments?“ Read it all.
Hubbard posted this at 6:33 AM EDT on Thursday, August 31st, 2006 as Another Great Victory For Jihad, Lord, What Fools These Mortals Be!
2 Comments »
Ilana Freedman has oodles of useful advice about airport screening, but it boils down nicely: focus on finding terrorists rather than potential weapons. For more details:
* Continue to use our outstanding technology such as puffers and baggage screeners, but enhance them with passenger screening.
* Interview all passengers in the airport. This should be done before ticketing by bright, observant, well-trained screeners, who have been trained to identify those passengers whose answers or demeanor suggest that further screening is required. For most passengers, it will mean just a brief interview – no more inconvenient than today’s maddening, random patdowns.
* Carry out more detailed screening of individual passengers whose responses or body-language warrant further examination. This can be done in a side-bar, away from the primary line of passengers so it does not hold up the process of others.
* Hire and train bright, highly motivated people as screeners – and pay them significantly more than minimum wage. If we want competent and effective screening to protect air travel, we must hire those most qualified to do the work well. And work them on short shifts – no more than three or four hours. Serious screening is intense, exhausting work; acute perceptive powers fade as the shift lengthens.
Some details of what we face are a reminder that we face evil:
Terrorists are happy to use the elderly, the disabled, pregnant women and even babies. One Palestinian baby was used to carry two detonators, inserted into his rectum. Only his screaming caused the inspector to insist that his mother undress him. The bloody detonators were found in his diapers.
Happy thoughts to start off the day.
Hubbard posted this at 9:13 AM EDT on Wednesday, August 30th, 2006 as Amer-I-Can!, Another Great Victory For Jihad
1 Comment »
The Post reports about the first year of the new SATs:
The average reading score on the SAT for last spring’s high school graduates had its biggest drop in 31 years, the College Board disclosed this morning in a report that decried a decline in composition and grammar teaching in U.S. high schools.
Perhaps the drop in composition and grammar teaching has something to do with the fact that, thanks to the focus on standardized testing, composition and grammar are no longer useful for getting into college?
I’m torn, though, because I’ve got a rather deep conviction that standardized written tests are also pretty weak. It encourages formulaic, key-word oriented, verbose writing, which is hardly any better than agrammatical nonsense.
The best way to teach good writing is to have students read good writing, and then to write a lot. But public education is geared away from that now. It’s geared toward short answer questions, and learning “themes” instead of facts. There’s a symbiotic relationship between good thinking and good writing, and you cannot have good thinking in the sort of fact-free environment that public schools have become.
Ugh. So many problems with public education, perhaps it’s best just not to think about it.
Apollo posted this at 1:20 PM EDT on Tuesday, August 29th, 2006 as Edjamacation
1 Comment »
John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, who co-wrote the allegedly (and I agree with these allegations) anti-semitic “Israel Lobby” paper, came to Washington to speak to the Council on American-Islamic Relations. No word yet on whether Mel Gibson had accepted their dinner invitation.
Apollo posted this at 11:26 AM EDT on Tuesday, August 29th, 2006 as Uncategorized
13 Comments »
It is more or less official now: Virginia Republicans have defeated the governor’s $1 billion tax hike. I’ll pour myself a drink (of out-of-state liquor) tonight to celebrate. Of course, tax hikes are never really defeated, they’re only delayed:
“He has not backed down on anything,” said Senate Minority Leader Richard L. Saslaw (D-Fairfax). “How are you going to fix [transportation] statewide without a tax increase? Kindly tell me that.”
Dear Senator Saslaw:
I got into a little fender bender in April and had to pay a $500 deductible to get my truck fixed. That money wasn’t part of our normal budget, and there was little chance of getting an immediate raise to cover our expenses that month. Therefore, we cut back on some of our other expenses and delayed some purchases. I humbly submit that this principle, if applied at the state level, might help solve the problem you raise.
Now that I have kindly told you how to fix statewide transportation without a tax increase, would you kindly fix statewide transportation without a tax increase?
Yr obd’t serv’t,
Apollo
Apollo posted this at 9:01 AM EDT on Tuesday, August 29th, 2006 as Conservatism, Politics
No Comments »
Accountants for the Commonwealth screwed up and lost $137 million in a math error. Well they didn’t really lose it. Actually, it seems, the problem was fixable even after the mistake. The gist of the story (this comes at the end) is that someone miscalculated the amount of money supposed to go to schools. Pretty easy to solve–”Oops, we miscalculated. Fire some administrators and make due.” Schools are already overfunded. Of course, the governor proposed giving schools the inappropriately large sum, and the senate passed it. The House of Delegates seems to be holding it up, but from what I see in the story they’re just demagouging about how a Democrat governor’s accountants screwed up. Doesn’t seem like they’ve got the backbone to actually fight it on principle.
So now there’s a new backdoor way to increase spending. “Oops, we screwed up and told schools they’d get more money than they should. Therefore, let’s give it to them.” And my loathing for public education rises just a little higher.
Apollo posted this at 8:31 AM EDT on Tuesday, August 29th, 2006 as Politics
No Comments »
John McCain would consider speaking at Bob Jones. You can read about that place’s anti-Catholic bias here, which includes such quotes from Bob Jones III like: “A pope must be an opportunist, a tyrant, a hypocrite, and a deceiver or he cannot be a pope.“ I prefer this old quote from their language program:
Spanish II
Begins with a thorough review of Spanish I with special attention to practical, original communication. Spanish II then continues with an in-depth study of other tenses, moods, and vocabulary with a strong emphasis on written and oral communication as well as oral and reading comprehension. A greater spiritual emphasis is added as students increase their ability to witness through a study of Catholicism and Spanish history. Special emphasis is placed on how to effectively use God’s Word in addressing false doctrine in the Catholic Church.
If enough people make noise about it, McCain will back off. It’s what he did in 2000 regarding gays in the military. Miss King wrote:
John McCain got stuck in a verbal tar pit in his recent attempt to paint himself as a blase man of the world. Ironically, it began on his campaign bus, the “Straight Talk Express,” and continued in a store selling extra-sharp cheese.
Asked about gays in the military, he stated in his modestly boastful way that he had served with many in the Navy, though he had never discussed the subject with them. He probably thought this proved that “don’t ask, don’t tell” works, but there was a slight problem: McCain was in the Navy back when gays were barred from the military and faced instant dismissal if exposed. Naturally they never discussed it with him.
That being the case, the reporter shot back, how did McCain know they were gay? It was a Biblical moment, recalling the world’s first Gotcha! question: “Who told you that you were naked?” It’s not hard to imagine the sensation that must have slammed through him. Since we’re recalling notable moments in gardens, we can go with Emily Dickinson’s “zero at the bone” on seeing a snake in hers.
McCain had three choices: He could say his gay shipmates told him they were gay, which would have contradicted his original statement; he could say he found them in flagrante and failed to report them; or he could say he “just knew.”
With no choice but the last, he lumbered into a wordy answer about recognizing “by behavior and by attitudes,” whereupon gay spokesmen issued their usual condemnation of stereotyping. Their reaction was fairly tepid as these things go, but McCain panicked and made another statement, explaining that he had merely had “suspicions” about certain shipmates, and that someone else had told him they were gay.
Two days later, he went before Katie Couric in the obligatory clarification rite, explaining that a fellow officer had indeed confessed his homosexuality to him, but only after leaving the Navy.
I still doubt McCain thinks through his words and actions. At least 2008 will be interesting with him around.
Hubbard posted this at 4:38 PM EDT on Monday, August 28th, 2006 as Politics
3 Comments »
Angelo Frammartino seemed like a decent enough person, appalled at the Israeli-Palestinian cycle of violence. In his own words:
We must face the fact that a situation of no violence is a luxury in many parts of the world, but we do not seek to avoid legitimate acts of defense. … I never dreamed of condemning resistance, the blood of the Vietnamese, the blood of the people who were under colonialist occupation or the blood of the young Palestinians from the first intifada.
Ashraf Hanaisha, however, mistook Frammartino for an Israeli and murdered him. The Frammartino family has more or less called it an understandable mistake:
Damage control soon followed. The Palestinian Authority’s news agency, WAFA, carried a statement by the Burj al Luqluq community center condemning the murder in no uncertain terms: “Nothing could describe our emotions for what happened. Our thoughts are with the family and friends of Angelo, they have our deepest sympathy.” Several Palestinian NGOs then organized a vigil in Frammartino’s memory. For her part, Hanaisha’s mother launched an appeal, via the Italian newspaper La Repubblica, for the forgiveness of her son.
In response to this outpouring, Frammartino’s parents did forgive Hanaisha. From the family home in Monterotondo, the father, Michelangelo, said that “he welcomes and appreciates, despite the undeletable sorrow, the plea for forgiveness made by the murderer’s mother” and he expressed a hope that the parents’ gesture “will bring to an end this extremely sad story.” The father went further, telling the Corriere della Sera newspaper that he felt no hatred toward his son’s murderer:
Angelo was working to promote peace. The message he sought to convey is greater than anything else. … the circumstances confirm that Angelo was a victim of the war, of the injustice in the world. When we are talking about a situation of tension, absence of common sense dominates. I do not feel hatred because Angelo’s thought, the principles that always motivated him, were definitely not of hatred or revenge.
When will the Palestinian Authority apologize for the Jewish young men murdered? Daniel Pipes bluntly asks:
Put more cruelly, given Frammartino’s idiotic views (”I never dreamed of condemning resistance”), had he survived his knifing, perhaps surviving in a state of total bodily paralysis, would he have seen the attack on him as terrorism? Or would he have learned nothing and still considered it an act of legitimate self-defense?
Contrast the Frammartino parents with Judea and Ruth Pearl, parents of Daniel Pearl. In today’s WSJ, Judea and Ruth write:
Whatever success the U.N. Security Council would presume to claim, it cannot be said that Resolution 1701 has effectively addressed the direct cause of the fighting–the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers, Ehud Goldwasser, 31, and Eldad Regev, 26, by Hezbollah, and the earlier abduction of Gilad Shalit, 19, by Hamas. Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s call for the unconditional release of these soldiers has been ignored. Moreover, in flagrant violation of international humanitarian law, the terrorists have not only seized the soldiers as hostages for political blackmail, they have not allowed the Red Cross to visit them. Their families do not know their physical condition; they have no proof they are even alive.
And so now these families of Ehud, Eldad and Gilad are asking to meet with Kofi Annan. They wish to plead with the secretary-general to use the full weight of his moral authority to mobilize and intensify the efforts of the international community he leads–an influential body that has managed to compel two fierce armies to cease hostilities–to address this flagrant violation of humanitarian law.
On that score, these families are correct: The time has come for Mr. Annan to personally and aggressively intervene, and to insist publicly that, at the minimum, the Red Cross, or his personal humanitarian representatives, be given immediate access to these soldiers.
Will he? It seems unlikely.
Jeremiah 31:15—
Thus saith the LORD; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, bitter weeping; Rachel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not.
Hubbard posted this at 12:48 PM EDT on Monday, August 28th, 2006 as Another Great Victory For Jihad, Arafatistan
No Comments »
Here are the first few graphs of a WaPo story:
GAZA CITY, Aug. 27 — As the sun beat down on the city’s central market, Khitam Shahleen, 37, glumly picked through a pile of cheap pencil sharpeners, searching for something — anything — she could afford to buy her two sons for the start of the new school year.
“We don’t have money,” Shahleen said, eyes downcast beneath her head scarf. Her husband, who works as a laborer in Israel, has been trapped inside the Gaza Strip by a blockade. “We are imprisoned here,” she said.
The war in southern Lebanon has overshadowed Israel’s second front, a military and economic siege of the Gaza Strip that is deepening the poverty and desperation in this dense area of 1.4 million people.
More than 200 Palestinians, at least 44 of them children, have been killed in the past 8 1/2 weeks. Three Israeli soldiers have been killed. Huge Israeli bulldozers and “pinpoint” missiles have razed at least 40 houses and dozens of other buildings, according to the army, leaving many families homeless.
The Palestinians have the most dysfunctional society on the planet. If there were an award for “World’s Worst People,” they would win it. Their culture of death, their dedication to being unproductive, their resolute practice of the lowest forms of terrorism, the way they actively teach their children untruths to make them hate Israel more–and that was before they elected a terrorist group to power. The world would be much better if we could just vote them off the island.
Yet they get sympathetic coverage like this story. It’s all about the big, bad Israelis coming in and attacking these helpless people. Look, they lost 200 people and only 3 Israelis were killed, so it’s a one-sided fight and Israel is just bullying around these helpless people. And note that the bulldozers are “huge.” I’ve seen pictures of them, and they looked like pretty normal sized bulldozers to me.
Why isn’t the story about how amazingly stupid the Palestinians are to continue to pick a fight with a country that is so much more powerful than them? If, let’s say, I go up and start trying to shove Jonathan Ogden around, he would be a bully if he immediately pounded me into the ground. But if I followed him around trying to shove him, and then finally got in a punch and busted his lip, he’s not a bully for turning me into paste, I’m a moron for picking a fight with him.
Of course, that’s only in a just world. And on a journalist’s list of priorities, there’s no room for justice. They want to tell an underdog story, and right now the world’s worst people going up against perhaps the most remarkable state since ancient Athens presents an obvious underdog. The fact that this makes them cheerleaders for the enemies of Western civilization–indeed, enemies of all of civilization–worries them not one whit.
Apollo posted this at 10:04 AM EDT on Monday, August 28th, 2006 as Journalism
No Comments »
The missus and I just got back from a rare outing, this time to the Philadelphia burbs, and Valley Forge (more on that later). Some thoughts:
1. One of the reasons I get upset when people talk about “diversity” in terms of race or immigration status is because of how diverse America is on its own. I’ve lived in Missouri, California, and now Virginia, and much of what we saw on this trip could have passed as a foreign country. I’ve never seen the old style row-house ethnic neighborhoods before, but northern Delaware and the Jersey burbs were full of them. The people talked funny, they built their houses differently, and the names they used (the Schuylkill River, King of Prussia, Chester and West Chester) were of a sort largely unfamiliar to me. In New Jersey there was a traffic pattern that I’ve never seen in the 35 other states I’ve been to. There were also toll roads, lots of them; you had to pay to get just about anywhere. Where I’m from, tolls are the rare exception, yet people there take it as a normal matter of life.
Yet there’s a common American culture that combines peoples with some fantastic differences into one rather exceptional nation. Valley Forge was as good a place as any to think of this; the Revolution was the first time when large numbers of men from the different states assembled for a combined purpose. Had they met and focused on the remarkable differences between the men from New Hampshire and the men from North Carolina, perhaps the Revolution would have fallen apart. Instead they saw a shared Americanness, strange countrymen rather than strange foreigners. This country spans a continent, and there’s infinitely more diversity beneath our skin than there is in its color.
2. There is one commonality across America: People want to know about Dorothy’s racial background. She and I find this an absolutely hilarious joke, which I sum up, in my best redneck voice, with “What breed of Chinaman is you?” But the truth is that, contra Asian activists, it is never whitey who asks this question. The only time a white person has asked her was a man who spent several years in Cambodia and was surprised to see a Cambodian in rural Missouri. Immigrants, however, are fascinated by her and feel no qualms about asking where she’s from. She answers “California,” which always confuses them. This trip she was asked by a waitress in a Chinese restaurant, and I was asked about her by the Arab guy who pumped our gas in Jersey. Do you ever get that, Hubbard?
3. Speaking of pumping gas in Jersey, I am dumbfounded by a state where I cannot legally put gas in my own car. I prepared myself for this when we passed through Oregon a coupld of years ago, but I completely forgot about it this time. When the guy approached my car I thought I’d pulled up to the wrong pump. Slowly I remembered that New Jersey had this goofy law. As any fan of the free market must ask when he sees this, “What the hell?” I’ve been pumping my own gas for 8 years; I wouldn’t call myself an expert, but I’ve yet to screw it up. Not once have I sprayed a fellow motorist with fuel, not once have I accidently put the gas in my backseat instead of the tank, not once have I consumed the gas myself. Nope, not a single incident. This strikes me as the same thing as a state mandating that waiters must feed us our food: why the heck is that person getting paid money to do something I’d rather do for free?
But this time there was a different question for me: Why was gas cheaper in New Jersey than elsewhere. When we crossed back in Pennsylvania, the price of gas went up 30 cents a gallon. Shouldn’t it have been the other way around, since in New Jersey I was paying for a needless middle man?
4. I once again purchased liquor outside of Virginia. While “civil libertarians” spend much of their time griping about things that largely don’t impact law-abiding citizens, the restrictions placed on alcohol purchases strike me as a major infringement on personal liberty. Whether it’s blue laws that restrict or bar sales on Sundays, or states where you must buy alcohol from the state, can a people who tolerate this truly be “freedom loving”? Even if it weren’t cheaper (which it certainly is), I would buy my liquor outside of the Commonwealth for ideological reasons. Which strikes me a strange thing to say, and it’s unfortunate that I have to say it. Sic semper tyrannis.
Apollo posted this at 12:02 AM EDT on Monday, August 28th, 2006 as Ourselves, Philosophy
6 Comments »
As those of you who are familiar with me might imagine, I don’t really pay that much attention to the world of fashion. The one exception to this is Prada. The reason is that Miuccia Prada gets it. She gets fashion in the same way that Jack Nicholson gets Hollywood; she understands what it is and isn’t, and what a good fashion house can and can’t do. Therefore Prada puts out fantastic shoes (for men and women), good eyewear (for men), a few snazzy accessories (such as the world’s sturdiest umbrella), and then a bunch of joke stuff.
But the joke stuff is only a joke to Miuccia. Most designers take themselves seriously. They walk down the catwalk at the end of their show as though we care what they look like. Miuccia (see the pictures at the top here) peeks out from behind the curtain to accept applause, and then leaves. They go on about the significance of their work, Miuccia says “It’s a job.” She more or less says that she thinks much of what she does is a joke, but no one believes her.
As a result, she has made nylon purses, ranging from $400 to $1200, and people buy them. Nylon. Admittedly, she uses high quality parachute nylon, but nylon.
Yesterday at the mall, though, I saw something that tops the nylon purses. For a mere $400, gentlemen, you may own your own pair of button-fly polyester khakis. Because I know what you all think. You think “Man, my cotton khakis are way too breathable. I am not sweating nearly enough. And if there were a fire, my pants my burn up instead of melting to my legs. What I need are some pants not made from these yucky natural fibers. I need some $400 button-fly polyester khakis.”
When people wear great looking designer clothing, it often makes them look fabulous. On the other hand, when someone wears $400 button-fly polyester khakis, it makes Miuccia Prada look fabulous.
Apollo posted this at 10:57 PM EDT on Sunday, August 27th, 2006 as Lord, What Fools These Mortals Be!
No Comments »
