The ad campaign was just another layer of the onion of fail.
4 thoughts on “PajamaBoy”
I was surprised to learn his real name. I figured it would be “Jim.”
My favorite tweet about it was when Brit Hume looked into the ad (probably thinking it was a spoof) and said “OMG. This is real.”
The other day I ran across a very horrifying layer of the onion when I read that Americans living in the Northern Marianas islands might not be able to buy any health insurance – from anyone, because of Obamacare. Sprinled all throughout the ACA are references to “people in the 50 states and DC.” I suppose Obama and his progressive thugs were trying to force people living in US territories to secede just so they could continue to buy health insurance, thus correcting the blight of what progs see as our evil imperial possessions.
It’s too bad “fail fractal” doesn’t have the same ring to it as the onion metaphor; no matter how you look at it, on whatever scale, you see similar patterns of fail. Trying to gauge the extent of fail is like measuring the perimeter of z^2 + c –> z.
“Fail at any scale”. I wouldn’t call it a fractal pattern since the law isn’t actually self-similar at different scales, but rather has a property of failure that manifests at many scales. Maybe a “scale invariant property”?
I was surprised to learn his real name. I figured it would be “Jim.”
My favorite tweet about it was when Brit Hume looked into the ad (probably thinking it was a spoof) and said “OMG. This is real.”
The other day I ran across a very horrifying layer of the onion when I read that Americans living in the Northern Marianas islands might not be able to buy any health insurance – from anyone, because of Obamacare. Sprinled all throughout the ACA are references to “people in the 50 states and DC.” I suppose Obama and his progressive thugs were trying to force people living in US territories to secede just so they could continue to buy health insurance, thus correcting the blight of what progs see as our evil imperial possessions.
It’s too bad “fail fractal” doesn’t have the same ring to it as the onion metaphor; no matter how you look at it, on whatever scale, you see similar patterns of fail. Trying to gauge the extent of fail is like measuring the perimeter of z^2 + c –> z.
“Fail at any scale”. I wouldn’t call it a fractal pattern since the law isn’t actually self-similar at different scales, but rather has a property of failure that manifests at many scales. Maybe a “scale invariant property”?