Teddy "Batman" Roosevelt

Was Teddy Roosevelt Batman? That's how I'm misconstruing this interesting post at the American President's blog. They suggest several similarities between T.R. and the Dark Knight. In addition, I would list the following parallels, some fake some real, can you tell which is which?:

1). Both studied forms of karate

2). Both walked the streets at night fighting crime

3). Both were the 26th President of the United States

4). Both went to Ivy League schools

5). Both had their first loves die young

6). Both were friends with William Taft


Answers in the comments.

Lessons From History

According to the Awesome Talks blog, Lincoln played a "jews' harp", or jaw harp, at the debates with Stephen Douglas. That's hilarious. Picture Barack Obama, orating eloquently on some topic at the first presidential debate, the audience listening with rapt attention. Meanwhile, John McCain sits in the background on a rocking chair, going back and forth between shaking his head with folksy disbelief at Obama and lazily playing the jews' harp, bored and absentminded. History calls Senator McCain, will you pick up the phone? - I mean, jews' harp?

Whoa-bama!

Zee Germans present us with evidence of Obama's badassness (badassitude? badassicity?). In fact, so badass is the evidence, that it is a little hard to swallow. Apparently, Obama was seen in a gym curling 70 pound dumbbells with each arm. This should quell rumors that Obama will try to balance the the ticket by selecting Gregg Valentino as V.P.

Lincoln: Back-Snapper

From the A. Lincoln Blog comes this great image of young, badass, Lincoln wrasslin' with some young punk. Notice the stoic, unemotional look on his face as he, apparently, prepares to break his opponents spine.

Wasted Opportunities

Close your eyes and imagine this: You are a premier 3D digital artist and a die-hard fan of Abraham Lincoln. You've decided to combine your skill and your obsession and digitally recreate events in Lincoln's life. The question is, what moments do you recreate? They lay-historian is drawn to the obvious; the Gettysburg Address, the Lincoln Douglas Debates, even his assassination in Ford's Theater. The historian of Presidential combat knows better, and thinks of the time Lincoln fought river pirates, or trained with a broadsword for his duel with James Shields. "Perfect, any of the above will do," you think.

Hold on, though. What about investing your time and money into recreating a nearly perfectly realistic rendition of our nations 16th president eating a sandwich? Or even better, looking at an apple? "Stop wasting my time with your maniacal suggestions," you'd probably say.

Well, the geniuses at Studio Macbeth disagree. A digital art studio specializing in realistic 3d Lincoln images, the studio's goal is not to recreate Lincoln's historical moments as never seen before; in stunning realism. No, what they want to show, in their own words, is "Lincoln in human situations for which there are no other extant depictions, e.g. Lincoln at table, Lincoln descending a staircase, Lincoln mourning a child."

If they'll depart slightly from their theme and show Lincoln engaged in mortal combat with Rutherford B. Hayes, then they'll have my support. Until then, I'll pass on 3D digital Lincoln brushing his teeth, tying his shoes, or wiping his ass.

Uncouthiness

Here's a tasteful headline from Time via Yahoo! News:

Obviously, Obama went to Iraq to give Nouri al-Maliki a terrorist fist bump and roll dice with Jalal Talibani. Alternative headlines they might have considered:

Obama's Trip: Statesmanship or Jive-Talkin'?

Obama's Trip: Realpolitik or Gangsta Rap?

Obama's Trip: Diplomacy or Jazz Trumpet Solo?

"Honey, Wolf says we should be offended." "Then we're offended, goddamnit."

As committed as we are to the majesty of the written word (and equally so to tired platitudes), the notion of a picture being worth a thousand has long outlived its usefulness in American political discourse. Sound bytes, slogans, and declamatory castigations made succinctly by human caricatures rule this day and age. One need only look upon the ongoing hypocritical clusterfuck that the media's collective chastisement of New Yorker magazine represents to understand that there is no standard, there is no agenda; there is only a sliding scale of sensationalism built from piles of data that every last outlet uses to coax reader / viewer / listener-ship to their product. So when one form of media presents a product of questionable decorum, the only real outrage will come from counterpart medias needing to fill their 24-hour coverage.

Then again, it's naive to assume that already misinformed people will so remain (or, perhaps even read the Lizza article and revaluate their preconceptions) and that people who understand the satire will smirk and move along, thus leaving the net effect of the cover hovering right around zero in a vacuum-world study. No doubt, a percentage of the dumb-as-fuck will try to process such information, fail, and arrive at the non-conclusion that the only way to crack this riddle of how to think will be by turning on the TV.

That brings us to blame time. Can we really upbraid news corporations for being so unscrupulous? God knows how many polisci hookups between faux-outraged square-rim plaid dudes and retardedly out of their league freshmen hotties have occurred using the perniciousness of media globalization as an in for "further mind expansion back at my place." Similarly, stupid people are effectively unblameable and a necessary concession for the rest of us to go through life so self-satisfied.

So, you're asking yourself: Can anyone be blamed for anything ever?

The short answer is: No

The long answer is: The educational system

Inconclusive Evidence

According to the AP, John McCain owns a ferret. Does that make him more tough or less tough? The evidence is inconclusive. Exhibits A and B strongly suggest ferret ownership is correlated with toughness, but I'm not sure how to interpret exhibit C. 

Exhibit A Exhibit B:

Exhibit C:

Hayes vs Lincoln

The votes are flowing in like... like... well they're flowing, let's just leave it at that. The Rail Splitter is taking an early lead over Bulletproof Hayes; probably getting a lot of the freed slave vote. It's still a close one though. Let the debate ensue in the comments below... FIGHT!

the Contenders

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The time is nigh at the Pugilist for us to postulate on that Great Question that plagues the political and social landscape: Who would win in a fight between the current presidential hopefuls? 

We all want the answer before we cast our precious ballots so let us debate!

Please provide reasonable evidence for your conclusions.

We will keep Hillary in the discussion so feel free to bring any other candidate into the fray (I'm thinking of some interesting under card battles---Dennis Kucinich vs Mike Gravel? A shovel full of gravel vs. Mike Gravel?)

Welcome!... and get out

You want to tell us that Lincoln wasn't Jewish or that Chester A. Arthur didn't smother Garfield with a pillow soaked in laudenum? Or maybe you just don't like us. Well, first off, shut up. But second, tell us more. We're incredibly insecure and get off on your criticism and insults. And as Ben Franklin said "whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger, or gives you something to think about when you're cutting yourself".