And the non-Council nominations are here!
Seriously, in 2008 we elected a community organizer, state senator, college instructor first term senator over a guy who spent five years in a Vietnamese prison. And now he’s lecturing us about how America’s gone “soft”? Really?
'Nuff said. Well, maybe not -- here's Peter Kirsanow:
The Obama brand of liberalism not only is likely to contribute to a “softer” America, but a soft-headed America as well. We condemn tea-partiers and veterans as racists and potential terrorists but we release actual terrorists from Guantanamo because the evident cruelties of that country-club facility are too terrible to bear. We demonize the hard-won, self-made success of risk-takers, but shovel millions of their hard-earned dollars to prop up the uncompetitive but politically correct enterprises of the well-connected. Government policies proliferate that punish effort, risk, and success but reward sloth, identity, and failure.
Soft America calls a 26-year-old a “child” under Obamacare, but court martials him if he’s a Navy SEAL who slaps a vicious terrorist in the course of capture. Soft America promotes the expansion of speech codes on college campuses so as not to give offense to anyone or anything but the First Amendment. Soft America spends $4 trillion to no effect and then asks for more. Soft America works diligently to turn the societal safety net into a hammock. Soft America bows to tyrants but lectures allies. Soft America waters down our history to give minor or even inconsequential figures as much play as giants. Soft America eschews absolutes, derides standards, ridicules heroes, and scoffs at virtue.
If the president is worried that America might get softer and lose its competitive edge, he should take a serious look at his own administration and the ideology that motivates it.
NOW it's 'nuff said!
Cheeyeah, right. Who the hell is buying this nonsense:
First Lady Michelle Obama was spotted this afternoon on a recession-friendly shopping trip at the Target in Alexandria, Va. A casually dressed Mrs. Obama was snapped by Associated Press photographers wearing a baseball cap and sunglasses pushing her cart and carrying shopping bags.
While the White House does not provide details about the First Lady’s personal activities, “It is not uncommon for the First Lady to slip out to run an errand, eat at a local restaurant or otherwise enjoy the city outside the White House gates,” her Communications Director Kristina Schake said.
The woman who has an immense entourage with her when she's overseas and who spends her vacations in either Hawaii or Martha's Vineyard ... shops at Target.
... actually MAKES SENSE!!! Check it out:
Vice President Joe Biden told Florida radio station WLRN on Thursday that voters should hold President Barack Obama, not former President George W. Bush, accountable for the poor state of America’s economy.
“Right now, understandably — totally legitimate — this is a referendum on Obama and Biden and the nature of the state of the economy,” Biden said.
Polls indicating that more Americans blame Bush for the economy than Obama are not relevant, Biden said.
“Even though fifty-some percent of the American people think that the economy tanked because of the last administration, that’s not relevant,” Biden stressed. “What’s relevant is we’re in charge. And right now we are the ones in charge and it’s gotten better, but it hasn’t gotten good enough.”
Joe's right on both counts. More Americans do blame Bush for the economy. But the number that blame Obama has grown significantly. And why is that? Well, like maybe it's because many believe that Obama's own policies have exacerbated an already bad situation. And what should worry Obama and Biden is that there's only a 7-point economic "blame" gap between Bush and Obama among Independents, at present -- 67% to 60% respectively.
Another indoctrinated-in-ed school idiot, it seems. Or, just an idiot:
When someone sneezes, a common response is, “God bless you.” But one California teacher finds this statement so offensive and disruptive that he’s working to cut back on its usage in the classroom.
Steve Cuckovich, a health teacher at William C. Wood High School in Vacaville, California, has attempted to banish the friendly gesture, as he believes it is both disrespectful and disruptive. To punish students who do, indeed, say “God bless you” after one of their classmates sneezes, he purportedly knocks 25 points off of their grade.
Steve says it isn't about religion -- he merely thinks the saying is "outdated" and "disruptive":
When you sneezed in the old days, they thought you were dispelling evil spirits out of your body. So they were saying, ‘god bless you’ for getting rid of evil spirits. But today, I said what you‘re doing doesn’t really make any sense anymore.
Amazing that a supposedly educated man couldn't conceive that the saying -- uttered by children -- just might be a respectful and polite gesture. At any rate, thankfully, the school seems to be siding with parents over this nut.
One of the comics news sites I regularly visit is Newsarama. It's good for getting up-to-date information on the latest happenings in the comicverse, but unfortunately their "Top 10" lists (or whatever number) are woefully lame. Case in point today: Their "10 Comic Book Superpowers Way Worse Than Talking to Fish" includes the following characters: 3-D Man, Black Bolt, Venom, mutants (in general), and the Great Lakes Avengers. But if you know even a little about comics (and in particular, Marvel), you'd know such inclusions are ridiculous considering all the other characters that are out there. Consider, about those listed above:
If you want to read about character superpowers that are really much lamer than talking to fish, use Google -- because you'll discover sites like this which make a lot more sense in terms of "Top" lists ... which include NFL Superpro (above) which I myself panned here.
Seriously. You can't make this up. No matter what you do or don't do, you're "racist." It's like global warming and George W. Bush -- they're responsible for everything bad around us.
At any rate, third-rate actress/comedienne Janeane Garofalo says the following:
"Herman Cain is probably well liked by some of the Republicans because it hides the racist elements of the Republican party. Conservative movement and tea party movement, one in the same.
"People like Karl Rove liked to keep the racism very covert. And so Herman Cain provides this great opportunity say you can say 'Look, this is not a racist, anti-immigrant, anti-female, anti-gay movement. Look we have a black man.'"
Can't find actual racism? You then say it's "covert." Very convenient. And what happens, Janeane, if Cain wins the nomination? He's been steadily climbing in the polls? Would these "covert racists" actually elect a black man president of these United States??
You freakin' moron.
Frank Miller's long overdue Holy Terror is evoking just the reaction (among some) that I always knew it would. Case in point: Graeme McMillan at Robot 6. He says it's “visually impressive” but also “disturbingly simplistic.” To wit:
This isn’t a story as much as a revenge fantasy from someone who is clearly terrified of the world that he’s found himself living in, and closed himself off from reality as a result; not only are the terrorist villains of the book ridiculously simplistic, but so is the “war” that the Fixer carries out against them. The terrorist characters that appear fulfill almost every single stereotype imaginable about them, including an apparent ability to be wherever they need to be to destroy a helicopter just because the plot demands it, and because it makes the “enemy” more unknowable and scary, and yet they can easily be defeated with guns and bombs, because, you know, more violence is always the answer.
He goes on to say the book is "willfully stupid," "a mix of parody and propaganda," "just a crappy comic," and has "problematic propaganda and politics behind it."
Funny how, in today's contemporary comics, such a portrayal of Islamic fundamentalists is "problematic propaganda and politics," not to mention "stereotypical" and "closed off from reality," yet aside from obvious right-leaning comics opinion sites, we rarely, if ever, read criticisms about these same attributes in comicbooks which lambaste Republicans, the Tea Party, and conservatives in general. See here, here, here and here for starters.
Outrageous political correctness has not only infected modern comics, but too much of its press, too.
Democrtic North Carolina Gov. Beverly Perdue has a novel idea for fixing the economy: put off Congressional elections for two years.
Beverly Perdue appeared at the Rotary Club in Cary, North Carolina, today and suggested that the 2012 Congressional elections be suspended so that lawmakers can focus on repairing the economy instead of their next campaign.
“I think we ought to suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for two years and just tell them we won’t hold it against them — whatever decisions they make — to just let them help this country recover. I really hope that someone can agree with me on that,” said the North Carolina governor, a Democrat. “You want people who don’t worry about the next election.”
Ah yes ... so caring ... so noble. And, of course, so sneaky in that such an action would prohibitively benefit Democrats.
Now, you know as well as I do that if a Republican governor uttered this nonsense with a GOP president in the White House with a tenuous hold on the Senate and poised to lose even more House seats in 2012, the mainstream media would be having a week-long field day with this. As it is, Perdue's local fish wrap is already covering for her: "Perdue jokes about suspending Congressional elections for two years" is the Raleigh News & Observer headline. Author "jbfrank" sure seems to "know" that Perdue was "joking" although nothing in her statement -- the full context of which is provided by Frank -- indicates any joking. Frank never questions Perdue spokeswoman Chris Mackey's claim that the governor was speaking in "hyperbole," and immediately slams Republicans for making a big deal out of it, writing "The Republicans sure are taking it seriously as they look to score political points."
Again, where is the "joke" in her full statement?
And the non-Council nominations are here!
The Texas idiot says “Stop Playing Racial Politics,” then seconds later says she wants Obama’s "Buy American" to be “Buy Small Businesses -- African American Businesses, Latino and Asian" ... but in particular "Our African American Businesses.”
I see another has tried to cross over into politics from sports -- Mike Lupica of the NY Daily News. If you're gonna do that, it usually helps to 1) not act like you're part of MSNBC's late afternoon-prime time lineup, and 2) know what the hell you're talking about. Case in point about 'ol Mike: Headline -- President Obama has been so weak, even the laughable Mitt Romney could stand a chance.
What makes Romney so "laughable," Mike? We don't know because he doesn't say. Just like the grown-up children of MSNBC do all the time.
Then we read this:
Now, on a morning nearly three years later, it is quiet on Hyde Park Blvd., a Secret Service van parked in front of the house and Secret Service signs posted around the neighborhood, and metal barriers making sidewalks disappear. This happens to be around the corner from the home of Bill Ayers, the guy that idiots on the right tried to make into some kind of terrorist, and maybe two blocks from where Louis Farrakhan lives.
Um, the "idiots on the right" didn't have to "try" to make Ayers a terrorist; he is one -- at the very least a former one -- and he has said as much. Who's an idiot now, Mike?
One of the great candidates out of one of the great political campaigns we have ever seen, a candidate good enough to take out Hillary Clinton in what was supposed to be her year, has turned into this kind of mediocre President, despite his own best intentions and expectations.
Exactly what made Obama "great?" I mean, really. Why was he "great?" The real world answer is that he's not and never was, and Lupica unknowingly points out why: because intentions and expectations don't equate to good policies and leadership. Obama didn't "turn into" a mediocre president; he always was mediocre ... at best.
Obama has done the impossible: Less than five months after the Navy SEALs took out Osama Bin Laden, he's made the killshots a nonissue, even though at the time it was supposed to make him some kind of slam dunk for a second term.
Impossible? Again, this is why Lupica should stick to sports because he knows sh** about history. Just two paragraphs before the one above, Lupica writes that George HW Bush was "another guy whom a bad economy helped throw down an air shaft." Yet, just months prior to that, Mr. Bush had sky-high poll numbers thanks to the overwhelming victory against Iraq in Operation: Desert Storm. So why in the world would Lupica think that a significantly lesser military victory would help save Barack Obama from a significantly worse economy?
Lupica isn't even mediocre as a political pundit. And that makes him worse than the president about whom he writes.
They use an old movie with Anthony Hopkins as Hitler talking to his Nazi generals and add captions to make it Obama talking to his advisers. It really is repugnant. Tea party supporters need to stop this kind of propaganda.
Not only does it trivialize the evil Hitler and the Third Reich, it's just not right to show the president as Hitler.
Hey Bill -- where were you when these were all over the blogosphere:
And that's just scratching the surface. So, in other words Bill, spare us the whining.
... nary a word.
Back in 1995 you may recall then-Majority Leader Dick Armey let slip an anti-gay slur towards Barney Frank: He [supposedly] accidentally said "Barney Fag." I recall that evening at least one major nightly newscast -- ABC's -- led with the story with the byline somewhere along the lines of our leaders "should know better."
Fast forward to 2011. President Obama, speaking at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation gala Saturday evening, said the following:
If asking a billionaire to pay the same tax rate as a Jew -- as a janitor makes me a warrior for the working class, I wear that with a badge of honor.
Heard about that in the MSM yet? Cheeyeah, right. But hey -- at least he's keeping in line with the rantings of his pastor.
Kind of a misnomer this time as the song is in English, bit singer Carol C. of Si Sé usually sings in español ... and this tune is just too beatutiful to pass up. Here's "The Rain."
Henry Schleifer in today's Wilmington (DE) News Journal kinda proves he's merely working in the master's program at Georgetown University in Public Policy. What does his article offer that is truly innovative regarding education? Zilch. What he's saying is what his Public Policy professors want to hear -- the same old tired clichés about "not enough money," yada yada yada.
Interestingly, Schleifer invokes the story of a foreign (Colombian) student, a friend of his from college. Schleifer might want to check out this post of mine and how it pertains to foreign students, particularly from poor countries, vs. American students. Then again, he might not ... it might upset his college profs who view as anathema real world (and politically incorrect and inconvenient) situations and solutions.
Interesting pick up by Jonah Goldberg on how famous comicbook heroes earned their money ... vs. famous comicbook villains:
While the ruthless corporate CEO as villain is pretty much a stock character in modern pop culture, superhero comics have always conspicuously placed successful businessmen on both sides of the hero/villain divide. Yet an interesting, and perhaps counterintuitive, pattern recently occurred to me. Just off the top of my head, here are some of the most prominent superhero characters who have, for some significant chunk of their histories, been portrayed as CEOs of large corporations:
Bruce Wayne (Batman)
Oliver Queen (Green Arrow)
Tony Stark (Iron Man)
Ted Kord (Blue Beetle)
Here are the first four CEO supervillains who spring to mind:
Wilson Fisk (Kingpin)
Adrian Veidt (Ozymandias)
Norman Osborn (Green Goblin)
That's right -- all the heroes inherited their wealth, while the villains built their companies essentially from scratch. Of course, however, it helps that Wayne and Stark are geniuses and were successful (and Machiavellian) businessmen ... and Tony Stark was the antithesis of his trust fund attitude cousin Morgan who wanted to just live a life of all play. In addition, many issues of Iron Man showed Stark as the quintessential compassionate capitalist -- where he made sure his employees were paid well and taken care of, often at odds with Stark Industries' corporate board.
At any rate, it is, as article author Julian Sanchez writes, an interesting "inversion" of "the meritocratic ideal that seems to rule in most modern American fiction," yet
... fits quite naturally with a pre-capitalist aristocratic ethos, which persisted at least through the early 20th century in the form of Old Money’s contempt for the nouveau riche….
No pun intended.
Now get this: Some football coaches got into hot water because they -- GASP! -- bowed their heads during a student-led prayer.
What's wrong with this picture? A mere sign of courtesy and respect gets these coaches in trouble -- but this a-hole encourages his students to attend a meeting where he makes a royal jackass out of himself, and not a thing happens to him.
How utterly ridiculous can Media Matters get now? Answer: Pretty damn ridiculous.
At the Fox News-Google GOP presidential debate, co-moderator Chris Wallace used the pejorative term "illegals" to refer to undocumented immigrants and read a question from the public that used the term, as well. Journalists have called on the media to stop using the term "illegals," but Fox's "straight news" shows use it consistently nonetheless.
Wallace Tells Romney, "You Vetoed Legislation To Provide Interstate Tuition Rates To The Children Of Illegals." From the debate:
WALLACE: Governor Romney, I want to continue a conversation that you had with Governor Perry in the last debate. In Massachusetts, you vetoed legislation to provide in-state tuition rates to the children of illegals. Governor Perry, of course, signed the Texas DREAM Act to do exactly that."
Get it? Because some journalists got together and "called on the media to stop using the term 'illegals,'" it is thus now a "perjorative" term. And since FNC's straight news shows use the term, this means that these straight news shows ... aren't really straight news shows.
This PC nuttery sure sounds familiar.
As yet another example of how "progressives" view free speech, not to mention how teachers should NOT do their job, we see this:
Great job there, teach. Not only do you bring your students along to witness your how you're not impartial, but you call people with whom you disagree -- not to mention who hold a very popular (and legitimate) point of view -- "Nazis."
As WR Chandler notes (to whom the hat tip goes for this video), "If he taught my kids, I would pull them out of his class yesterday." Got that right, brotha.
UPDATE: Thanks to AJ Lynch, check out this local news story on the teacher. As AJ noted, notice how they don't ID the teacher but do mention how he's "in good standing." He also, by the way, expressed "regret" that his comments "went too far." Well that's a relief.
Via Ace -- a "progressive" yells "Your mom is a whore" to Bristol Palin:
I like this a-hole's "intelligent" retorts to Bristol's query as to why he said what he did: "Because she's evil." "Because she's the devil." But wait -- I thought "progressives" hated the extreme Religious Right! Why is he sounding exactly like them, then?
MSDNC's Keith Olbermann replacement, "Crazy" Larry O'Donnell, went on yet another idiotic rant the other night, this time about GOP presidential candidate Rick Perry:
And secondly, the Republican party of the 21st century, if we are to judge by the debate audiences, has obviously lost its soul . . . This Twilight Zone: how can this happen? Here's their favorite killer, state-sanctioned killer up there. They boo him after he calls them heartless.
Right. So now we're going to judge the entire GOP by the reactions/utterances of a few idiots at some debates. Boy, this tactic sounds familiar -- what was done to the Tea Party! Y'know, I wonder why when a few assorted knuckleheads at Democratic events make a scene that the entire party isn't so labeled ... nah. I don't wonder why. It's so pathetically obvious by now, why. Yeesh.
Oh, and Larry -- if you're so concerned about "state-sanctioned killing," when will you do a semi-coherent rant about liberal states' abortion policies? If you're SOOOO concerned about the government getting involved in "killing," where's the concern about purely innocent life? Why do so-called "progressives" seem to always reserve their outrage for the executions of heinous killers? Our old friend Perry is a textbook example (surprise!) of this; in comments here and at CSPT he believes he has a consistent "pro-life" view because he "personally" is against abortion and capital punishment. However, when pressed on the issue, he admitted that he "doesn't have the right" to tell a woman what to do with her body ... but he does believe it his duty (right) to lobby state legislatures to abolish the death penalty. The counter to this is, obviously, why does Perry believe he has the right to overturn what a jury and judge(s) have determined through a lengthy judicial process when it comes to a brutal killer ... but not to tell a woman she cannot terminate the life of a 100% innocent baby?
It makes not one iota of moral sense. Much like, as you may have recently read, his views on Israel and the Palestinians which are also shared by far too many fellow "progressives."
Kilroy has more.
... when there are such ridiculous idiots teaching at them -- and they have absolutely NO idea what a college is supposed to be about when it comes to freedom and exchange of ideas?
Students at Sam Houston State University (SHSU) in Texas found this out the hard way yesterday when they erected a “free speech wall” — a recently popular way for students to highlight the importance of free speech in which students put up a freestanding wall covered in paper, upon which anyone can write anything they want. Students jumped on the chance to participate. To cite a few examples: “Don’t hate against Gays …,” “If you make less than $200,000 Republicans don’t care about you,” “Life’s not a bitch, Life is a beautiful woman …,” “Han Solo Shot First,” “My boyfriend is a liar!,” “Legalize Weed!!!,” and “NAZI PUNKS FUCK OFF!!!”
But just hours in, the free speech wall was vandalized by a professor — yes, a professor! — who was offended that someone had written “FUCK OBAMA” on the free speech wall. Students being students, the “F-word” was written on the wall many times about many different topics, but apparently the only expletive that offended this professor enough to take action was the one referring to President Obama.
The professor, whom students identified as Joe Kirk, demanded that the student groups sponsoring the wall — including Republicans, Democrats, libertarians and socialists — cover up only the Obama statement. They refused. He then told them that he would come back with a box cutter and cut it out of the wall himself, which he then did. You can see the before and after pictures at thefire.org.
Shocked that a professor would do this, the student organizers got in touch with the campus police. When the police arrived, they interviewed the students and the vandalizing professor. Then came the surprise: The police told the students that since Prof. Kirk was offended by some profanity on the wall, the students were engaging in “disorderly conduct,” a misdemeanor, and had to cover up all the swear words on the wall or take it down. Realizing that this would make a mockery out of the purpose of a free speech wall, the students simply disassembled the wall. Thus ended SHSU’s several hour-long experiment with free speech.
This is the conundrum the faux "progressive" academic Left has put us all in. They're all for freedom -- including speech -- but you have to exercise those freedoms in a manner that they want you to. Is it any wonder, then, why the faux "progressive" academic Left are so enamored with Marx, communism, Castro, Chávez, Mao, etc.? Nope. They act just like 'em.
UPDATE: Looks like UVA is dealing with its own similar incident. Again, "progressives," this is what you've sired with your overzealous zeal for multiculturalism and "sensitivity." In your world, "free speech" is the goal -- unless it offends some designated "historically aggrieved" group, that is.
Yours truly came out on top. Thank you for the honor, fellow Watchers!
And the non-Council results are here!
MSDNC's Chris Matthews let out this whopper the other day:
Professor Peterson, let me ask you about white votes. Do you have a sense as you've looked at politics in America that there are some white voters who will vote for an African-American say once? And they will hold that person to a very rigorous standard. Perhaps a much higher standard than they would a white politician.
Hey Chris -- do you honestly believe a white politician with Barack Obama's quite skimpy experience and background would have won the primary -- let alone become president?
I wonder if this is a phenomenon you professors have looked at analytically at all, this sense of, okay, you've got your shot, but let's see you do it, if it isn't really, really good, you know, you're out of there.
"Really really good?" Hell, Obama's poll numbers against the current GOP field are pretty freakin' spectacular considering his job performance has been really, really bad. What does that say, Chrissy? Would that be the case with a white president in this situation? Why did voters vote out George H.W. Bush and Jimmy Carter when their economic situations were arguably less severe than what we see now?
But just keep playing that "card," Chrissy, with guests that'll always be sympathtic to your racer viewpoint.
What an idiot:
And the non-Council nominations are here!
Infuriating!!!!!!!!!!!! O. Hatch: "Solyndra rcvd more money than 35 states got for roads and bridges"
The Messiah in 2009:
The Messiah just recently:
You can't get more moronic than the absolute cretins who continually criticize Israel about their "occupation" and "harsh" treatment of the Palestinians ... yet either completely overlook how the Palis (and their Arab allies) feel about, and treat, Israelis and Jews in general ... or just refuse to address it. I'm serious. These people have serious flaws in their basic moral structure.
The catalyst for this post is two-fold. First is this Jay Nordlinger piece:
I was talking yesterday to a friend of mine about the Israel Philharmonic’s experience at the BBC Proms. Demonstrators refused to let the orchestra proceed with its concert. My friend said, “Were they pro-Palestinian?” I said to her, “Well, I would call them anti-Israeli.”
I am pro-Palestinian, and so is Natan Sharansky — and so is Bibi Netanyahu. We want Palestinians, and everyone else, to live in peace and freedom. We are so pro-Palestinian that we actually think they should be free of dictatorship, tyranny, want, squalor, and lies. Something like 1.5 million Arabs — “Palestinians,” if you like — live in Israel. (It used to be that the only “Palestinians” were Jews. The Israel Phil. began life as the PSO, the Palestine Symphony Orchestra.) When Palestinian homosexuals and other “undesirables” flee for their lives from the West Bank or Gaza, where do they flee? You bet.
“Pro-Israeli” and “pro-Palestinian” — very unhelpful terms. Decent people are pro-everybody. But these terms are unavoidable, I suppose, like those other unhelpful terms “pro-war” and “anti-war.” We’re all anti-war (except for psychopaths): Some of us think that this or that war is necessary and justified, some of us don’t.
Precisely. How would history have been different if the Palestinians accepted the 1948 UN Partition Plan? There was the ever-sought after "two state solution" right then and there. But no; though imperfect (as all plans are), the Plan fairly dealt with increasingly difficult issues that the British had gotten weary of (hence, their turning the hassle over the then-nascent UN). What we had was one side accepting the plan and beginning to make their new sovereign home, and the other shunning it -- and then teaming with numerous surrounding countries to obliterate the other new sovereign state. That's right -- obliterate.
And this was just the beginning.
Jews, hundreds of thousands of who were forced to flee their homes in myriad Arab countries as a result of the Israeli-Palestinian-Arab conflict, settled elsewhere -- many in Israel. But the Palestinians? Two of their "friends" gobbled up the territory allotted for them (as per the Partition Plan) after their unsuccessful attack on the new Israel. Then, the Palis weren't accepted by their Arab "friends" if they wanted to resettle there. Like ... why?
The history since then, as any fan of history knows, is one of continued Arab aggression towards Israel, and one of continued Israeli survival and victory. 1967 and 1973 were the other two "big" conflicts, but there have been many more "smaller' skirmishes in between and beyond. But the utter idiocy of those believe there is some sort of ... "equivalence" between Israel and the Palestinians continues to know no bounds.
One of those utter idiots (and the second part of the catalyst for this post) is our old "friend" Perry, once a prolific commenter here before he took his morally questionable antics over to Common Sense Political Thought and most recently to his own blog. (I won't link to it; he doesn't deserve the hits.) Some of his past dreck regarding Israel and the Palestinians here at Colossus can be seen here; most recently, however, he's been at his usual self in this CSPT thread. Check out some of his comments (my emphasis):
* How about discrimination against Arabs and Palestinians by Israelis in their own territory – West Bank? Not anecdotal, and pathetic. Your anecdotal information is a starter, but on Israeli/Palestinian/Arab relations, being selective is typical propaganda ...
* Please show me the evidence that the Palestinians want the Jews “eradicated”, or that they have “genocide on the brain”. Based on the Israeli utter inhumane treatment of Gazans, one might be tempted to conclude the opposite as you have. (Perry claims to know about the Hamas Charter, yet amazingly then demands evidence that Palestinians wants Jews eradicated.)
* My problem with the Jews is the way they have behaved toward the Palestinians for over a century now! And make no mistake, the Arabs have put the Israelis on the defensive with their threats and intransigence. (Oh! Good to know Perry cedes a point to the Israelis! Except, of course, there has been a LOT more than just "threats and intransigence" now, hasn't there?)
* The “Jews right of return to Arab lands” based on what, Hube? A proclamation from God? I have just received a proclamation from God that the 1967 boundaries should be recognized and obeyed! (This was response to my question about the JEWS' "right of return" since Perry is in favor of the Palis' right of return to their old homes. Perry didn't know that hundreds of thousands of Jews -- perhaps as high as over one million -- were either expelled from Arab countries after 1948 or basically had to leave due to deteriorating conditions -- threats, violence, killings.)
* Wrong again, Hube! Who is it that is seeking a two state solution for Palestine. Not the Israeli’s, as they continue to encroach on Palestinian territory, which is the behavior of a country who wants a one state solution – Israel. (Perry has obviously forgotten 1948 and all the way up to 1967. Then the Clinton-initiated peace offer which Yassir Arafat rejected. Then the Israeli pull-out of the Gaza Strip. Meanwhile, the Palestinians finally SAY they want a two-state solution, and all of a sudden there's a "serious" offer/plan. Despite the fact that, y'know, Hamas still has the destruction of Israel in its charter.)
Nothing really new here, as I noted. And please excuse my profanity in some of the comments at CSPT in response to Perry. The reason for that is 1) Perry perpetually plays a game whereby he conveniently "forgets" what other people have posted, and then demands sources, etc., and even claims that you've lied; and 2) frankly, I've about had it with Jew-bashing. What is it with this irrational distaste for people of the Jewish faith?
As I mentioned in one of the comments at CSPT, I think one of the reasons "progressives" hold Israel in disdain is because they've violated an important "progressive" tenet -- not playing the victim. Israel doesn't play the victim even though they've often been the actual victim. They've held fast, fought back, and developed a modern nation based on democratic principles ... all the while their neighbors have been constantly at their throats. "Progressives" despise that, for this means that Israelis don't need them.
Personally, I think this has a lot (all?) to do with anti-Semitism worldwide. People hate Jews precisely because they've been so successful -- even though they've been persecuted for just about all of their history. But ... why? Why do people disdain a group who values education and hard work? Values family and religious belief? Good Lord, just stop and consider what the Jewish people have contributed to mankind over the centuries -- for example in the fields of medicine and science alone. It's astounding.
As I once told the inimitable Soccer Dad in a fairly lengthy e-mail conversation years ago, I once was a "member" of that elitist "progressive" cadre who viewed the Israelis as conquering ogres who were "subjugating" and "oppressing" the Palestinians for no good reason other than simple hatred and for an outrageous land grab. Yes, that was back in my college days. Surprise that, eh? But, of course, as with anything else, I then grew up.
All of this does not mean to imply that criticism of Israel is anathema. Debating the utility of building more settlements in the West Bank, the effectiveness of myriad security measures, etc., are certainly items for legitimate debate. But do not attempt to play it "straight down the middle" as if there is any real such equivalence between the Israelis and the Palestinians. To wit:
The Palestinians could have their "two-state solution" tomorrow if they dropped their arms, renounced terrorism, renounced terror groups like Hamas, and recognized Israel's right to exist as a sovereign state. Period. Unfortunately, they (and their Arab "friends") are too consumed by the irrational hatred of Jews to do this. And there will be no real peace in the Middle East until this ridiculous and maniacal hatred is expunged.
UPDATE: Great timing. Check out Cal Thomas's article about Israel over at Newsbusters.
We are creating the first comprehensive statistical encyclopedia of the great black baseball teams and leagues that operated behind the color line in the days of Jim Crow segregation. The database also collects a vast amount of biographical information about these players, much of it previously unpublished.
Among the injustices visited upon the ballplayers of the Negro leagues, the lack of a statistical record of their accomplishments might not leap out as one of the worst; but it has proved one of the most lasting. The Negro National League was founded in 1920; it has taken 91 years to find out for sure that Cristóbal Torriente was the batting champion, that Sam Crawford struck out the most batters, that Dave Brown compiled the best ERA, Pete Hill collected the most walks, and Oscar Charleston garnered the most win shares.
I've always wondered how many baseball records would be altered if blacks were permitted to play in the Majors a lot sooner. Or, if their league's statistics were more meticulously kept.
Look at these two shlubs. At least they didn't take the dead guy into the bars with them.
Awwww. Poor Pat Engelhardt of Hockessin is upset because people aren't "respecting" President Obama ... and in the process of complaining totally contradicts her (his?) thesis:
It is so upsetting to me to see the lack of respect for the office of the president, always calling our president "Obama" and not "President Obama."
Lowering the sound of the health care bill is another shot at the man: Obamacare. The reader probably knows the reason. Why has this practice begun with this president? Newspaper articles do the same.
He's not a "hail-fellow well-met" like President Bush; he is a thinking, intelligent planner who is heads above the common man, and does not say anything without thinking it through and meaning what he says.
Yeah, there 'ya go -- it's upsetting, that lack of respect for the office of the presidency ... as long as it's a guy you like in there, right, Pat? Not some "hail-fellow well-met" dude like our last president. And as for not saying anything without thinking it through, well of course -- that's easy to do when you never speak without a teleprompter.
And the non-Council winners are here!
How friggin' sick is this:
London’s Daily Mail newspaper reports that teachers are being pushed to brand thousands of children as racist or homophobic in a permanent database run by Great Britain’s Department for Education.Records of these juvenile utterances follow students when they switch schools, and can be used against them if a future employer or university asks the school for a reference.Teachers who do not report any incidents are criticized for “under-reporting.”
Using the word “gaylord” was considered a hate crime. One child was entered into the database as a racist for calling another student a “broccoli head.”
A total of 34,000 primary and secondary school pupils –and some children in nursery schools that teach children age three and under — have already been classified as bigots. More than 20,000 students under the age of 11 were reported for “hate-crimes.”
This blessed database, this political correctness, this multiculti madhouse ... this England.
This video has been viral the last couple days showing the First Lady saying something about the American flag, and then making a face of obvious derision. Obviously, we don't know what she really said, although I think Michelle Obama's communications director, Kristina Schake's, "explanation" is outright ludicrous:
The First Lady was commenting to the President on how moving and powerful it always is to watch all that America's firefighters and police officers do to honor the flag. It was an emotional moment on a powerful day and she was awed by the ceremony and all that the flag symbolizes.
What?? Watch the video again and tell me the Obamas' reaction is one of being "moved" and "awed." No freakin' way.
As JoshuaPundit notes, there's plenty of reason to believe what many think Mrs. Obama said -- something like "All this just for a flag?"
My point is that The Obamas have a very different take on what our flag and our traditions mean than most Americans, and that's been evident for quite some time.
So it would certainly not be out of character for our First Lady to say something disparaging like this, which is why the White House has mostly kept her selectively muzzled or away on high -priced vacations for the past three years. I don't know what she said, but the body language, the head shaking and the eye rolling definitely reinforce that whatever she had to say it probably wasn't something the Obama campaign wants to have surface.
What do you think the First Lady was whispering to her hubby in the vid?
Snark from Ace regarding the silly "jobs saved or created" used by The Messiah:
Baseball batting average should include both hits and *intended* hits. But only for some players, the ones whose avgs we want to goose
Sure looks that way. Guess this is what you do when you begin descending into irrelevance.
"Shared sacrifice" my ass.
The Messiah wastes half a billion of OUR money to back a company which he was warned was no good. Now there's news of some ObamaCare accounting fraud. And it certainly ain't just limited to Democrats/liberals (although usually it ain't the GOP clamoring to raise taxes): George W. Bush's ill-advised sojourn into Iraq has cost us what -- over a trillion by now? And for what? Bush himself said in 2000 that he didn't believe it was the American military's role to play "nation-builders." And no -- I don't buy that 9/11 "changed things" with regards to Iraq. It wasn't, frankly, worth the money we put into it and the lives of over 4,000 Americans to "build" a nation at the point of a gun. Indeed,
... "nation-building" has been effective only 27% of the time since 1850, and he argues that these sucesses were not the products of military intervention. One group of countries that seem especially resistant to democracy-building efforts are the Arab lands. There have been are nine interventions in Arab countries in the past century. In no case did stable democracy follow the military occupation.
And on and on and on. This is why people are fed up -- fed up with politicians and government in general. Dick Morris pointed out last night on O'Reilly that presidents always get a 5-6% jump in the polls after a speech to a joint session of Congress. Obama got just a one percent jump after his last week. People are just tuning out. And it ain't beer and skittles for the GOP: Just six percent believe the GOP-majority Congress is doing a good or excellent job. In addition, O'Reilly pointed out how, despite reports about how income tax levels are at the lowest level in a generation, Americans are getting socked by other taxes on just about everything. He went on to list other "hidden" taxes in New York State that blew my mind.
So spare me about "shared sacrifice." When our government and politicians begin exhibiting some of that sacrifice, maybe I'll be inclined to go along. Until then, STFU, thank you very much.
Gotta love our current administration. It's NEVER to blame ... for ANYTHING:
After spending months touting the Obama administration's decision to loan $535 million to the California solar energy upstart Solyndra, top officials took a new tack Wednesday while testifying before Congress about the company's abrupt shut-down and bankruptcy: the loan, they said, was actually the Bush administration's idea. The Energy Department's top lending officer told Congress that the Solyndra loan application was not only filed during President Bush's term, but it surged towards completion before Obama took office in January 2009.
"By the time the Obama administration took office in late January 2009, the loan programs' staff had already established a goal of, and timeline for, issuing the company a conditional loan guarantee commitment in March 2009," said Jonathan Silver, who heads the Energy loan program. (Link)
There's just one small problem with this: Bush and co. refused the loan.
The results of the Congressional probe shared Tuesday with ABC News show that less than two weeks before President Bush left office, on January 9, 2009, the Energy Department's credit committee had voted against offering a loan commitment to Solyndra.
Even after Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, analysts in the Energy Department and in the Office of Management and Budget were repeatedly questioning the wisdom of the loan. In one exchange, an Energy official wrote of "a major outstanding issue" -- namely, that Solyndra's numbers showed it would run out of cash in September 2011. (Link)
And waddya know? It's September, 2011.
Only at the modern American campus, folks. Only at the modern American campus.
Tupac Shakur, 15 years after his death: Tell us where you were when you heard the news #tupactribute http://wapo.st/rjaMq8
Yeesh. Hell, I used to think his name was "Too-PACK," not "Too-PAHK." Silly me.
Of course, if you bring this stuff up, you're "mean-spirited," "heartless," yada yada yada ...
● Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
● Fully 92 percent of poor households have a microwave; two-thirds have at least one DVD player and 70 percent have a VCR.
● Nearly 75 percent have a car or truck; 31 percent have two or more cars or trucks.
● Four out of five poor adults assert they were never hungry at any time in the prior year due to lack of money for food.
● Nearly two-thirds have cable or satellite television.
● Half have a personal computer; one in seven have two or more computers.
● More than half of poor families with children have a video game system such as Xbox or PlayStation.
● Just under half — 43 percent — have Internet access.
● A third have a widescreen plasma or LCD TV.
● One in every four has a digital video recorder such as TiVo.
● At a single point in time, only one in 70 poor persons is homeless.
● The vast majority of the houses or apartments of the poor are in good repair; only 6 percent are over-crowded.
● The average poor American has more living space than the average non-poor individual living in Sweden, France, Germany or the United Kingdom.
● Only 10 percent of the poor live in mobile homes or trailers; half live in detached single-family houses or townhouses, while 40 percent live in apartments.
● Forty-two percent of all poor households own their home; on average, it’s a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
As one who has seen true poverty in a Third World country (and not just while on a vacation, thank you very much), it's sorta hard to fathom how such people/households are considered "poor." I think perhaps the most staggering of those stats above is how American "poor" have more living space than non-poor folks in various Western European countries. And, I can attest to that, too, having spent quite a bit of time in that continent. I was quite amazed (and thankful) how we Americans have so much more to tend to our personal comfort and convenience than our First World colleagues.
Fox News's Facebook page asks "Should Paul Krugman be fired for his comments in the New York Times?"
Er, uh, whaaaaat?? Like, why?
Hey, I, like many others, thought that Krugman's column yesterday was a pathetic POS, but why should he be fired for it? The column is not even out of the ordinary for him, and his views are pretty much in line with the publication for which he works.
It was offensive, yes. But that's what "freedom of speech" is all about. It's easy to protect speech everyone likes; the challenge is allowing unpopular views to be aired. If Krugman should be fired for his comments -- and remember, he is paid to do just that, offer his opinion -- then that would send a chilling signal to freedom lovers across the land.
On this day of "Always Remember," it is indeed fitting to always remember what some of the mental pygmies on the left have said about this somber day:
Well, it appears I was right when I asked "How 'bout some truth in advertising?" regarding Image Comics' The Big Lie -- its Trutheresque comic about the 9/11 attacks. Avi Green over at the indispensable Four Color Media Monitor reports on its debut, and the initial reports about it were chock full of ... well, lies. Avi notes via Wired:
It’s enough to make you void your Comixology pullbox. Rick Veitch, a legend in the comic book industry, published The Big Lie on Wednesday, a sleazy 9/11 Truther screed in sequential-art form. Spoiler alert: pseudo-scientific hysteria married to paranoia about How Bush Knew isn’t any cuter when told by cartoon figures.
[...] Veitch doesn’t stop at one conspiracy. They build in their scope and scale. First it’s about Norad unexpectedly preoccupying U.S. air defenses with frivolous training exercises. Then it’s about how the neocons in the Bush administration are looking for an excuse to invade Iraq. (“I’ve heard more than one of these nut-jobs say what the U.S. needs is a ‘New Pearl Harbor,’” says a character who informs us he voted for Reagan.) Finally, the skeptical husband, an engineer who did his thesis on the World Trade Center, dismisses his future-wife by assuring her that “the only way to bring down these structures down is with explosives.” You see where this is going.
Sigh. Yes, planes loaded with jet fuel and used as missiles can — and did — destroy the World Trade Center. Read the authoritative Popular Mechanics story about the physics of 9/11 if your mind is open to persuasion. Bush and company indeed wanted to take down Saddam Hussein from the start of his administration and they cynically tied Saddam to 9/11 absent evidence. But sorry: there is no evidence they planned an invasion before 9/11; no evidence that they knew about 9/11 and let it happen; and no evidence at all they brought the Towers down.
Actually, Bush and Co. didn't do any such thing, despite the "progressive" conventional wisdom. The only thing I can ever recall of "making" any such "connection" was one time Dick Cheney, after being asked about a relationship early on, said "we don't know at this point." But the fact is, President Bush specifically stated there was no a direct connection between the 9/11 attacks and Saddam Hussein.
But back to the comic: Remember what author Veitch said about it in its initial reporting: "[he] has aimed the book itself straight at the middle." In other words, Veitch's words about The Big Lie were themselves a big lie. There's nothing "straight at the middle" about George W. Bush somehow orquestrating 9/11. What it is is pure moonbat lunacy. Not only should Image Comics be ashamed of itself for publishing this drivel, but MSM outlets like USA Today should ashamed too for not accurately reporting on the book.
Remember what I said back in June:
Would anyone credibly state that "wondering" about our current president's place of birth is "down the middle?" Hell, no. That's the exclusive realm of the extreme right.
And you can be sure USA Today would be damn sure to point that out -- and not at all sugarcoat a a report about a comic whose premise is President Obama really being born in Kenya. Not to mention you can bet that major MSM outlets would be screaming bloody murder about the story ... how crazy Image is, what our political discourse "has descended to," and all the other [hypocritical] BS.
Oh, and if I didn't already say it, I'll paraphrase Maxine Waters: Veitch can go straight to Hell.
... in their transcript of the president's jobs speech. My latest Newsbusters post.
Just imagine if Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry or Sarah Palin had said this whopper:
Eh, not quite:
Lincoln wasn’t even the GOP’s first Presidential nominee; the first Republican nominee was John C. Fremont in 1856. As the Independence Hall Association recalls, the actual founders of the Republican Party are “Northern leaders such as Horace Greeley, Salmon Chase and Charles Sumner.” Lincoln joined early, as did other anti-slavery Whigs whose party was unraveling at the time, and Lincoln came in second for the 1856 vice-presidential nomination, but he was not a founder of the party. By the time he became a factor in the GOP, the party had already taken a majority in the House of Representatives (1855); it also carried 11 states and 114 electoral votes in the 1856 election that sent Democrat James Buchanan to the White House.
Nice. But Obama is smart, remember. Just like he demonstrates here. (Check out the earliest entries.)
The Messiah gives a basically useless "jobs speech," and because the opposition party is highly skeptical, MSNBC and other MSM suddenly transform into the Executive Branch Sensitivity Police.
MSDNC's Andrea Mitchell made herself look like an idiot by taking Speaker John Boehner totally out of context -- just to ask if he was "disrespectful":
John Boehner today just slammed the President and said, you know, that the American people shouldn't be forced to watch some politician they don't want to listen to and frankly, most of them would rather watch a football game. Is that disrespectful? (Link)
To her credit, unlike most MSDNC talking heads, she actually corrected herself later, indicating that the Speaker's comments were in reference to the GOP not doing an official response to the president.
Elsewhere on that network, Ann Curry asked if three members of the GOP not attending The Messiah's speech was "disrespectful."
Then there was the inevitable invocation of racism by the network's Martin Bashir to GOP Rep. Joe Walsh: "I'm asking you- I am asking you, are you able to be as disrespectful to the office of president by simply walking away from something that every member of the Congress is going to attend? Is that also because he's black?
And the non-Council winners are here!
Just as the Left's and MSM's demands for "more civility" were a bunch of pure horsesh** (they were, in actuality, an attempt to muzzle the Right and Republicans -- here's the latest example of the blatant hypocrisy), so too, are their standards. Case in point:
On Tuesday, The Blaze posted extensive reports on the mass shootings in both Nevada and West Virginia.
Both stories involved elements regarding the U.S. military. In Nevada, of course, many of the victims were in the National Guard. The gunman’s motives, though, are still not entirely clear.
The shooter in West Virginia, who killed five people (and also an unborn fetus) in one home, seemed to voice a variety of grievances including some anger at having been rejected for military service.
Shayne Riggleman’s murderous actions are getting a great deal of media attention; however, few media outlets are including Riggleman’s self-declaration of his Socialist ideology.
That's all really you need to know. Well, actually, if Riggleman's self-professed belief was National Socialism, the MSM, not to mention our "progressive" friends, would be foaming at the mouth to connect him to talk radio, Fox News, conservative blogs, Rick Perry, Michelle Bachmann, Ronald Reagan, and of course George W. Bush. It happens all the time.
Of course, Riggleman's girlfriend claims he was bipolar and skipped his meds. This is a huge factor, probably the biggest of course -- a lot bigger deal than any self-professed socialism. Rational people can recognize this.
But the MSM and modern "progressives" are increasingly far from rational. They demand "civility" then act more uncivil than a prison riot. They connect the Right to virtually any act of violence because the perpetrator once wrote the word "Republican" in a high school term paper. They cry "racism" because a Republican politician jokes that he is the "black sheep" of his/her family.
It's. All. They. Have.
And the non-Council nominations are here!
Whaaa ...? See if you can decipher the latest semi-literate screed from the "Rev." Al Sharpton on his new MSNBC show:
Another no-talent rapper wanting to get some ink:
A proud military veteran is demanding an apology from Soulja Boy — after the rapper posted a video saying, “f**k the army troops.”
Soulja ignited a wave of controversy this week over his new song, “Let’s Be Real” — which includes the lyrics:
“F**k the FBI and the army troops … fighting for what? Be your own man …
… I’ll be flying through the clouds with green like I’m Peter Pan.”
To which Michelle Malkin retorts: "Just wondering: Has 'Soulja Boy' ever penned lyrics telling jihadists to 'f*** off?' Be your own man for once, 'Soulja.' Try it."
Labor leader James Hoffa to a crowd of supporters in Michigan:
A few minutes later, our president personally thanked him.
(h/t: New Zeal)
Moms and educrats lament the use of plastic bags for [homemade] school lunches:
“Ziplocs are the biggest misstep,” said Julie Corbett, a mother in Oakland, Calif., whose two girls attend a school with an eco-friendly lunch policy. In school years past, she said, many a morning came unhinged when the girls were sent to school with disposable sandwich bags.
“That’s when the kids have meltdowns, because they don’t want to be shamed at school,” Ms. Corbett said. “It’s a big deal.”
Well, how about that. Apparently schools deem it acceptable to shame kids who have the temerity to use plastic, but they'll pay for everybody's lunch just so students who may not be able to afford 'em won't feel "singled out."
In addition, if you're really concerned about waste, maybe schools oughta keep track of how much "free meal" food is squandered on a daily basis. After all, if you don't have to pay for it, why do you care how much of it you eat/throw away?
Think John Boehner's refusal to let The Messiah speak before a joint session of Congress (when he wanted) is "unprecedented?" That's what the MSM would like you to believe:
In an extraordinary turn, the House speaker fired back his own letter to the president saying, in a word, no. Might the president be able to reschedule for the following night, Sept. 8?
Congressional historians said Mr. Boehner’s move was unprecedented.
“The Senate Historical Office knows of no instance in which Congress refused the president permission to speak before a joint session of Congress,” Betty K. Koed, associate historian with the Senate, said in an e-mail. “Permission to speak in a joint session is given by resolution of the House and Senate, and arrangements are made through the leadership offices of each chamber.”
The June 24, 1986, edition of The Wall Street Journal featured a story headlined, “President’s Bid to Address the House On Nicaragua Is Rejected by Speaker.” That’s right, no quibbling over the date and time, just a flat-out rejection. In that case, President Ronald Reagan wanted to address the House before its critical vote on funding for the anti-communist “Contra” rebels in Nicaragua. Then-Speaker Thomas “Tip” O’Neil said that he was willing to host a Reagan speech if it was expanded to include the Senate in a joint session, or he would allow the President to speak to the House alone if the President would also agree to take questions from lawmakers. Otherwise, there would be no Reagan speech in the House chamber. Reagan already had the votes to prevail in the Senate, and Mr. O’Neil wanted to avoid having the spotlight turned on the House, which would make him and his colleagues accountable to the public if Contra aid were rejected.
So "technically" Ms. Koed has a point about a joint session refusal; however, such a technicality is trivial. Tip O'Neill flat out said "no" to Reagan's request to address the House -- unless he agreed to the Speaker's conditions.
What a surprise. But hey, bringing up 'ol Tip doesn't fit The NARRATIVETM, after all. I'd also bet, back in 1986, that The NARRATIVETM meant that the MSM was cheering O'Neill's move against The Gipper. Because, y'know, those dastardly Contras were just "bad news" for those poor, nice ol' Sandinistas.
Wilmington's Paul Donohue takes global warming paranoia to a whole new level:
The facts: Earth is warming and atmospheric carbon dioxide is increasing. The proof that CO2 is the cause of the warming are warmer nights and poles. Because CO2 traps heat, nights are hotter and polar ice and permafrost is melting. On the planet Venus, extreme warming from CO2 makes night as hot as day and poles as hot as the equator. Mercury is closer to the sun but has no atmosphere; heat is not trapped, and night is colder than any place on Earth. Venus was once like Earth, but suffered extreme warming due to feedback releases of CO2.
Continued warming could make Earth like Venus. I worry this will gradually become serious in the lifetime of my grandchildren.
As you might text someone, "OMG." To seriously claim that Earth could become like Venus anytime within even a few generations is beyond insane to the extreme. To claim Earth will become like Venus in a few millennia is similarly insane. Now, in millions of years time? There's the possibility, as the sun grows cooler but expands -- thereby heating up the Earth to a degree never before encountered since the Solar System's earliest days.
After all, gee -- 'ya think the fact that our second planet is almost 30 million miles closer to the Sun than Earth has anything to do with its climatic conditions, hmm?
Check out this line by our own Labor Secretary, Hilda Solis, regarding illegal immi ... oops, undocumented workers in an interview with the LA Times:
LAT: You come from a stalwart pro-union and pro-immigrant back-ground. I've read that Cesar Chavez complained that people coming here illegally were breaking strikes and undercutting the United Farm Workers' ability to negotiate.
Solis: I can understand. Undocumented dry-wall construction workers -- the employer's going to be able to pay them maybe $5 an hour as opposed to $11 or $12. I get that. I would rather have these people understand their rights, what the standard of pay should be. We have a lot of people here who remain in the shadows and don't understand there's a law that you have to be paid the minimum wage. We get these complaints all the time, not just in the field [but] the garment district, hotel, motel areas, and not just Latino but Asian.
What can one say about this? A representative of our own government worried about the rights -- not of the workers whose jobs these illegal, er, um, undocumented workers may displace -- but of the undocumented themselves, making sure that, even though they've broken the law coming to our country via illegal means, they are paid properly.
Screwed. Up. Priorities.
Via Discriminations: If you openly debate affirmative action, or have a TV on which is showing Fox News, you might be racist:
For example, the article mentions a conversation one day after the trial let out with Capt. Paul Washington, a black officer in Engine Company 234, in Brooklyn, and Firefighter John Coombs, president of the Vulcans, the black firefighters organization pressing discrimination claims. The two men, the NYT reported,
... complained of a corrosive obliviousness to race, discernible in acts as unsubtle as dinner-table condemnations of affirmative action and as seemingly innocuous as a recreation-room preference for Fox News.
“Our experience is different,” Captain Washington said. “There’s 50 white guys in a firehouse from the same background — middle-class, Long Island, the kids play soccer together — so, yeah, they’re having a ball. But if you’re the one black guy in the house, maybe you ain’t having so much fun.”
It is this experience of difference that forms the emotional underpinning of the suit. Firefighter Coombs said the city had not only ignored this shared experience, but had moved to combat it only under threat of legal action.
Make sure you understand this: If you openly discuss (condemn) the merits of affirmative action, this is "racist." And yet, how often have we heard about the need to have "frank, honest discussions about race?" What, then, could be more frank than discussing affirmative action? So, y'see, when educrats and/or business "diversity experts" clamor about needing to "talk about race," they're full of sh**. What they really mean is that certain viewpoints must be listened to and accepted without question. And one guess what those "certain viewpoints" are. Hint: they certainly don't include believing that affirmative action ain't a good thing.
As for playing Fox News on the TV, how much more of a mainstream media-driven piece of nonsense can one come up with? Does this then mean whites can file a discrimination suit based on a company/outfit regularly showing MSNBC? CNN? CBS? Or BET?
What a joke.
Wonder what grades 'ol Joe got in math?
(h/t to Hitch.)
Why hasn't Barack Obama done anything about the historic flooding in Vermont? Doesn't he care about white people??
Maybe we can have another telethon to raise funds ... and maybe invite Kanye West again.
Apollo 18 is not a documentary. The film is a work of fiction, and we always knew that. We were minimally involved with this picture. We never even saw a rough cut. The idea of portraying the Apollo 18 mission as authentic is simply a marketing ploy. Perhaps a bit of a ‘Blair Witch Project’ strategy to generate hype.
Gee, thanks. They must not be very busy, then, with their Muslim outreach, huh?
Next up: Historians reveal that Oliver Stone's "JFK" is a "work of fiction."
Because it won't. For reasons like these: Unauthorized U.S. Workers Claimed $4.2 Billion in Tax Credits Last Year.
And the non-Council winners are here!
... comes from Pandora over at the Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers (LGOMB) where she unbelievably excoriates Delaware Politics' Don Ayotte for censoring comments he doesn't like. The censoring of the comments isn't the issue (I happen to think it's stupid, too, for the reasons Don gives) but the outrageous hypocrisy by ANY member of the LGOMB for complaining about censored blog comments. Because they do it all the time to anyone who dares not toe their belief system. It doesn't matter if they're conservative or a fellow progressive. They don't like what you say, you're deleted ... or even banned.
So please, Pandora -- spare us the utter nonsense. And grow the hell up.
... comes from a Media Blog reader regarding former Treasury Secretary Robert Reich's derisive comments about Fox News and the Wall Street Journal:
The American Left's reaction to Fox News reminds me so much of how the international Left reacted to the testimony of defectors from the Soviet Union or East Germany during the Cold War. Tales of people waiting years to buy a motor vehicle or lining up to buy toilet paper were greeted with accusations that the defector (or escaper) was - yes- you guessed it - lying and a CIA 'stooge'. It was all lies concocted by the West as a means to discredit the utopia they fervently believed in. Nothing has changed. (Link)