Sunday Reads: Broflake

Fuck Irma.

I don’t think it will replace my usual phrase, that being: Fuck Bernie Sanders. (I mean my iPhone knows that is what I’m typing once I get to the fuc…because it begins to suggest the ending…zip and easy, 1,2,3…Fuck Bernie Sanders.

We have been staying at Vogel State Park…my daughter works for the DNR…there at Vogel, and I really do not know what we would do without the park’s generosity. My mom’s biopsy is tomorrow…and on Friday we find out if she needs to resume her chemotherapy.

Internet and cell service is not strong here, in fact…we barely have a connection on either service. So the post is going to be a quick one.

I thought this Instagram picture below would get your attention. It sure got mine. And it introduced me to the term “broflake.”

“On the radar: broflake” by @OxfordWords

http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2017/07/on-the-radar-broflake/

Check that entry out…it gives the source of the word snowflake and more on the term, broflake.

All you need is LOVE. By Michael Owen in Baltimore. Follow: @theblonde

A post shared by StreetArtGlobe (@streetartglobe) on

Well, we have moved into the other cabin…this one has zero wifi and cell. I will have to end the post here. It is going to be a rough time ahead.

This is an open thread.

Advertisements

20 Comments on “Sunday Reads: Broflake”

  1. dakinikat says:

    Here’s number 2
    “Betrump: To deceive, cheat; to elude, slip from”

    • RonStill4Hills says:

      There is no word in the world that I would rather see on a list like this than “n!gger.”

      I don’t want to see it elevated by banning it.

      I tend to agree with George Carlin about “bad words.”

      The thoughts and intentions behind the words do the harm, not the words.

      Rather, I’d to see it die out due to disuse and obsolescence, like fussbudget or flibbertygibbett.

      Imagine if it were only ever heard in a historical context and people said, “What a funny old word, what does it mean?”

      • NW Luna says:

        Very good points.

      • palhart says:

        My choices for the graveyard are “bitch” and “c..t.”

        • Pat Johnson says:

          The worst part of those using those two words are they are often uttered by women against other women.

          Very common to hear them repeated on reality shows such as “The Housewives” franchises and others featuring women.

          They show the lack of respect and self respect altogether when they knowingly revert to this language in their quest for being called “stars”.

          Unfortunately this is considered “female empowerment” that they can use vile language that mirrors those of men.

          • Enheduanna says:

            Men defend using them because they apparently use them against one another as well. So “twat” is OK because men call other men that, too. I actually had an argument about that at C&L once.

          • NW Luna says:

            WTH???

            Misogynist male excuses.

  2. dakinikat says:

    http://www.papermag.com/40-years-late-talking-heads-most-valuable-member-is-still-its-most-under-recognized-1-2482571556.html

    When you listen to Talking Heads’ most iconic songs, they all have one standout element in common: Tina Weymouth’s funky, melodic bassline. Without her there would no “Psycho Killer,” no “Burning Down The House,” no “Once in a Lifetime,” — grooves which are immediately recognizable, ingrained in our collective memories even as the songs’ lyrics fade. It’s Weymouth’s basslines that continue to be sampled and resurfaced by everyone from Jay-Z to, most recently, Selena Gomez — yet her role in creating them is rarely discussed.

    Upon the release of Gomez’s “Bad Liar,” a track built on Weymouth’s iconic “Psycho Killer” riff, critics focused on David Byrne’s seal of approval, despite the fact that he wasn’t responsible for the seminal sample. As is often the case with women who back charismatic frontmen, Weymouth’s recognition was an afterthought.

  3. dakinikat says:

    some weird fucking shit in Baton Rouge:

    Sources: Baton Rouge police on ‘all-out hunt’ for gunman linked to 2 apparently random fatal shootings

    http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/crime_police/article_cd6b116c-9a57-11e7-a15b-c3f049b12555.html

    BRPD: Person of interest in two Baton Rouge slayings held on drug counts; shootings ‘possibly racially motivated’

    http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/crime_police/article_d0104d3c-9b2a-11e7-ab89-cb0d6d5953f1.html

  4. dakinikat says:

    Normalization for dummies

    by digby

    I just have to add that some of the top Democrats are enjoying the “good press” about all this “bipartisanship.” They too are normalizing Trump.

    He’s a monster and every time they embrace him he gets a little bit more undeserved credibility. Sometimes they have no choice. When 800,000 people’s lives and futures are at stake, for instance. But they should not be so celebratory or tell the media that “he likes them” even if they think they are being cute and trolling his base. His base doesn’t care what they think. Their base does though and there’s slightly foul taste their mouths over all this Trump love. They should carefully think through what they say as they work their way through this mess.

    • dakinikat says:

      Normalizing Trump: An incredibly brief explainer
      A conflict in the journalist’s code was created by a president wholly unfit for the job.

      JAY ROSEN

      http://pressthink.org/2017/09/normalizing-trump-incredibly-brief-explainer/

      If nothing the president says can be trusted, reporting what the president says becomes absurd. You can still do it, but it’s hard to respect what you are doing. If the president doesn’t know anything, the solemnity of the presidency becomes a joke. That’s painful. If they can, people flee that kind of pain. In political journalism there is enough room for interpretive maneuver to do just that.

      This is “normalization.” This is what “tonight he became president” is about. This is why he’s called “transactional,” why a turn to bipartisanship is right now being test-marketed by headline writers. This is why “deal-making” is said to be afoot when there is barely any evidence of a deal.

      What they have to report brings ruin to what they have to respect. So they occasionally revise it into something they can respect: at least a little.

      • NW Luna says:

        Uh….that smells that BS to me. Contortionist language. Why not add “contrary to fact” or “contradicts what he said on X/X/X” to the description of whatever it is that Drumpf does.

        This “conflict in the journalist’s code” was not created by a lying egotist, it was created by the journalist who doesn’t want to state the bald facts.

      • palhart says:

        As I remember the first of the year, major media outlets were unsettled by the attacks (fake news) and by being ignored or belittled or told to shut up or passed over. Little did they know how leaky the trump WH would become. But the media is guilty of not using the words liar and lying, or more politely, if necessary, “doesn’t compute with the facts” immediately. There were 65M Hillary voters out there who might have liked trump et al being faced with the truth along side of what they were reporting. I’ve read, without the truth, there can be no democracy, which Putin and his social media attackers have weaponized to destroy western democracies.

        • palhart says:

          Now, that I’ve read the post, I’ll add that, even though I knew all his points about trump, it’s scary to read and reread them. Formerly to remain calm, I relegated distressing trump facts to the edges of my mind. For the well-being of others, I will shorten my comment and admit I’m becoming terribly anxious.

  5. dakinikat says:

  6. dakinikat says:

  7. Enheduanna says:

    Wow – what a loser. Sad.

    https://shareblue.com/trump-humiliated-by-embarrassingly-small-crowd-size-at-pathetic-mother-of-all-rallies/

    What made these organizers think his sad loser base would travel to D.C.?