Monday morning belabouring the point

Now, I know it's Monday, but in America at least, it's actually a holiday. Yep, it's Labour Day - and that by the way is the CORRECT spelling - a day that is rather ironic considering that it is a public holiday in which pretty much nobody with sense enough to count time to music actually does any real labour.

That being said - it is still a Monday, and since I am nothing if not consistent, I shall get on with the very serious business of mocking idiots of various kinds and posting pictures of hot girls. It's a real community service that I perform here, after all; hell, I should probably get some kind of public service medal for raising the morale of the troops, and all that...

Anyway - let's get on with it.

Our boy Razorfist had a number of things to say about a certain recently deceased senior Senator from the great state of Arizona - and not one of those things was particularly kind:

I must agree with the esteemed Rageaholic about Senator John McCain. A careful examination of his record shows one of the clearest cases of psychological projection that I think I have ever come across.

Then-Lt.Cmdr McCain's involvement in the massive fire aboard the aircraft carrier USS Forrestal in 1967 leaves a great many questions in the air about his character and competence, both as a pilot and a Naval officer.

It is well known that John S. McCain III broke both arms and his right leg when he ejected. What is not clear is whether he actually knew what he was doing when he did eject. Apparently other PoWs at the same camp went on the record stating that John McCain simply did not pull in his arms and legs when he ejected out of his A-4 Skyhawk after it was hit, and that is why he broke his limbs.

And it is also well known - because he admitted as much - that in order to get medical treatment for his injuries and stop the torture inflicted on him by his captors, John McCain "broke" and agreed to cooperate with the North Vietnamese.

I cannot and will not criticise the late Sen. McCain for this. As he said, I think quite legitimately, every man has his breaking point, and he had reached his. Since I have never been tortured or imprisoned, I hold nothing against him for this.

However, what is not so well known is that his cooperation very likely gave away a number of key points of intelligence regarding US air warfare strategies and tactics in the North, which led to a steep increase in American casualties over the North.

It is also not particularly well known that his own captors went on the record to state that John S. McCain III was not actually tortured.

When you put all of this together, along with Sidney Schanberg's massive expose on Sen. McCain's voting record with respect to releasing information about missing PoWs, you quickly realise that the reason why Sen. McCain never met a war or military confrontation that he did not like, was because of serious psychological issues.

It seems to me that Sen. McCain kept voting to go to war because he was haunted by the legacy of his legendary predecessors, and knew that he would never, ever measure up to his grandfather and his father. He realised quickly that his actions during and immediately after his military career would never find favour among the American people - who, for all of their many flaws, still love a winner and hate a loser.

So, based on the evidence that we have available, it seems that he worked to cover up a number of key records related to his time in prison, and then went overboard trying to expunge the ghosts of his conscience by voting consistently to send American troops into harm's way, as if those blood sacrifices would somehow wash away his own sins.

And then, of course, there is his despicable treatment of Gov. Sarah Palin - the woman who was his dark-horse pick for VP and who absolutely electrified the Republican base with her knockout speech at the RNC in 2008. Yes, she was woefully unprepared for the media's scrutiny, and yes, she was subjected to a relentless barrage of malicious attacks and lies by the entire establishment, but to my knowledge she has never uttered a single negative comment about Sen. McCain and has always been gracious and grateful to the man who catapulted her onto the national stage.

That is not the record of an honourable but flawed maverick of a conservative who consistently went down to Noble Defeat, as conservatives seem to think is their sole purpose in life. That is the record of a man who was an absolute creature of the Establishment, who believed in big government, big spending, massive foreign interventionism, and the spilling of American blood to no good end.

It is said that speaking ill of the dead is dishonourable and wrong. Well, fair enough, but given that Sen. McCain seemed to spend such a long time fighting to keep the secrets of his past in Vietnam buried, I wonder where the line for honour can be drawn in his case.


Related - people sometimes ask me why I have a T-shirt with Vladimir Putin's face on it. (It doesn't look exactly like this one, but it's close.) Well, this is why:

Contrary to the fevered delusions of the late Sen. McCain and men like him, the Russians ARE NOT America's enemies.

They are not America's friends - not any more, and will not be without considerable effort on both sides to mend fences and bury a number of very sharp hatchets.

But they are not America's enemies.

The Russians seek many of the same things that Americans do, and for many of the same reasons. Certainly they have their own rather devious methods of getting those things, but their intentions are the same: to protect their own interests and way of life.

President Trump understands what Sen. McCain and his ilk never did and still don't: the Russian Neo-Tsar has no desire for war with America and actually seeks at least cordial relations with the world's only hyperpower. But - and this is key - he WILL NOT allow his country to be pushed around any more.

It is well past time that Americans understood this - and, to their credit, I think more and more Americans do understand this now, since they are simply switching off the Fake News media and tuning out of the Clown News Network's non-stop barrage of wall-to-wall MUH RUSSIA!!! coverage.


Do NOT mess with the Crypt-Keeper's shtick:


Spoiler alert: NO, they didn't:


Sometimes you need a bit of inspiration to get yourself motivated in the morning - and here is a great way to get exactly that:


Did anybody actually bother to watch either Pacific Rim: Uprising or Tomb Raider? The new one starring Alicia Wossname, not the really entertaining but incredibly stupid one starring the highly pneumatic Angelina Jolie (as she was back then, anyway).

I honestly LOVED the original Pacific Rim. As the Honest Trailer for that film points out, it is either the most awesome dumb movie of all time, or the dumbest awesome movie of all time. And it comes with an absolutely bitchin' soundtrack:

Even so, I did not have high hopes for the sequel to Pacific Rim once I saw that Guillermo Del Toro and Charlie Hunnam would not be involved in its production and release. I like Scott Eastwood as an actor - he reminds me a lot of his legendary father, both in terms of looks (stoic, square-jawed, gruff) and acting range (virtually non-existent), but he gets typecast in just about every film.

And then of course there was the fact that John Boyega was going to be in it. That guy couldn't act out a seizure even if you shot him with a Taser. All he does is stick his chin out, frown a lot, and act like a mopey, stroppy Brit from Hackney in London.

Which is basically what he is.

Anyway - I watched the film on the flight back from Singapore last week, and I have to say, it wasn't quite as bad as I was expecting it to be:

Don't get me wrong, it was still monumentally stupid in a lot of ways. There were far too many plot holes in it. The amount of brain-melting idiocy in the movie was jaw-dropping, especially considering how stupid the original was. The difference is that the original movie worked with and around the stupidity, whereas this movie tries to take itself at least somewhat seriously and fails miserably in the process.

And there were a number of plot points in there that just made no sense at all.

Even so, it was a somewhat entertaining and quite loud way to pass a couple of hours spent on a plane full of Indians. And, trust me, when you're dealing with Ugly Indian Fliers, you NEED all of the distraction you can get.


Oh hey speaking of Ms. Jolie:

And speaking of Ms. Jolie's somewhat psychotic tendencies:


Monday always hits like a nut-shot - and speaking of which:

Related - don't mess with the black water!!!

See also:


Pictures by Power Line:

This one had me in stitches - old horndogs never, ever learn new tricks:

I do so love mocking vegans - even though a really good friend of mine is one:

(Don't worry - he likes making fun of vegans too. Some of them are actually pretty swell folks.)


Related - Dom Mazetti goes vegan:

Don't worry, Dom, veggies actually taste a lot better if you cover them in butter and salt. And bacon.

Note - I did not say, "OR bacon". I said, "AND bacon".


No Monday is complete without a comprehensive display of gym idiocy:

A post shared by gymfuckery™ (@gymfuckery) on

A post shared by gymfuckery™ (@gymfuckery) on

Nothing pisses me off on a Monday quite like watching a skinny wuss with twigs for legs doing one-eighth squats:

A post shared by gymfuckery™ (@gymfuckery) on

This next one is simply beyond my comprehension:

A post shared by gymfuckery™ (@gymfuckery) on


After that monumental display of gym idiocy, here are some clips of REALLY STRONG DUDES lifting REALLY HEAVY SHIT to get you motivated again:

Konstantins Konstantinovs has to be the baddest deadlifter alive today. It's amazing how he can lift over 900lbs without a belt or knee wraps and make it look really easy.

It was actually hard to find good clips of guys doing really heavy squats. See, the thing about squats is that a LOT of powerlifters never break parallel in competitions. And all of the various powerlifting federations have different rules and standards as to what is, and is not, a good squat.

The natural consequence of this is that even drug-tested federations like the IPF and USAPL tend to be a little overzealous when it comes to squat depth. And even then, you can see plenty of clips of absolute beasts squatting truly gigantic amounts of weight, but from the camera angles, you cannot be sure whether they hit depth or not.

For example:

So I decided to go dig up some old footage of 4-time World's Strongest Man title-holder, Zydrunas "Big Z" Savickas, doing heavy back-squats:

That is amazing, and not just because of the weight or the reps, but also because of the extraordinary control.

Anyone who has ever touched the bar to the guards in a squat rack knows how difficult it is to control the weight and push back up out of the hole. Touching the guards upsets the careful balance of the weight on your back and destabilises your lift if you are not expecting it.

On top of that, in the WSM Finals, the weights on either end of the barbell are fixed. They do not move or spin freely the way that regular weight plates do. This makes controlling the bar during both the eccentric and concentric movements extremely challenging relative to just squatting in the gym.

Ah, but don't think that I left out the favourite lift of gym bros everywhere:


It is not Monday without metal:

And, of course, IRON MAIDEN:


And last but never least, here is a hot THOT to get your Labour Day off to the right start. Since I was in Southeast Asia last week - and it was a great trip with a lot of fun memories - here is a lady from that region who definitely looks good both with and without clothes:


  1. I don't quite know why, but one thing that pisses me off is 'swoles' that blow off their leg days. I'd rather have my popeye calves than look like a gorilla on stilts.


Post a Comment

Contact the Didact:

Popular Posts