In Minneapolis, students, parents and teachers are miffed -- MIFFED, I tell you -- that some schools don't have A/C:
"I can't believe that 50 years after the March on Washington, we're still fighting for equity in our schools," said Anthony Newby, executive director of Neighborhoods Organizing for Change. "We know that in more affluent districts, parents aren't tolerating this. In Minneapolis, where a majority of students are children of color, our kids don't get climate-controlled classrooms. It's outrageous."
"I have a dream ... that one day, all classrooms will be clmate controlled ..."
Puh-lease. My school didn't have A/C until a mere four years ago, and it has a majority suburban population. But, alas, we now live in a world where everything is racist.
Whose military? MY military, says Boss Obama:
World Federation of Scientists changes its policy: “Climate change in itself is not a planetary emergency.”
Front page of Philly.com circa 5pm today:
Yep -- Boss Obama is "courageous" regarding Syria, and it's front page news that Bill O'Reilly admitted a mistake. Admitted!
Would that the dolts behind this site do the same when the cretins at MSNBC and elsewhere lie with impunity on a daily basis. Yeesh.
Well, what else would you expect from the wisher of death upon Republicans? In this ... predictable post, Delaware Dunce blames George W. Bush for the current administration's inability to intervene in Syria, and notes that if Al Gore had been allowed to serve as president (since he "really" won the 2000 election), Bush/Iraq fatigue wouldn't even be manifested now, and attacking Syria would be much more palatable. And DD would be for intervening now.
The non-Council winner was Mark Steyn with Obamacare’s Hierarchy of Privilege.
Full results are here.
In today's News Journal, there's a story about some Burger King workers who are striking for higher wages. There's certainly decent arguments on both sides of the minimum wage debate, but it's stuff like this that causes the sympathy meter to take a big dip downward:
KFC worker Jose Blas, 27, is concerned his wages will not be enough to make ends meet with a baby due in January.
Blas, a cook at the KFC Newport Gap Pike location, joined the strikers at Burger King to be supportive and help send a message to management at fast food chains.
"I'm fighting for more money so I can have enough to change my lifestyle and for my baby to go to school. Day care doesn't come cheap these days," he said.
Of course, one wonders what José was thinking before he decided to get a girl pregnant while working at minimum wage job. Similar situation here:
Shaniqua Davis, 20, lives in the Bronx with her boyfriend, who is unemployed, and their 1-year-old daughter. Davis has worked at a McDonald's a few blocks from her apartment for the past three months, earning $7.25 an hour. Her schedule varies, but she never gets close to 40 hours a week.
Again, what mindset led these two to have a child when one makes minimum wage, and the other is unemployed?? Oh, and
She pays the rent with public assistance but struggles to afford food, diapers, subway and taxi fares, cable TV and other expenses with her paycheck.
Again, it's not that I'm completely unsympathetic, but c'mon -- these are the best examples you can use to make the case for a higher minimum wage? Not to mention, let's get real -- why would anyone expect to make a living flipping burgers? These jobs aren't meant to be careers, they're meant for those looking to make some extra cash. Unless you're planning on moving up to management, you shouldn't plan on making a living at a fast food corporation. And if you do, this probably means you're lacking the education and/or skills to do much else. In which case, maybe the shi**y wages at places like Burger King will finally light a fire under your arse to do what you were supposed to do back in middle and high school.
... conveniently forgetting about the concentration camps.
UPDATE: Oh look -- ultra-dolt Chris Matthews of MSNBC said the same thing!
Can we blame him because he's from England? Hell, yeah! I mean, didn't golf begin around there, after all? (h/t to Ace)
Two words, idiot: "Tiger" and "Woods." And here's four numbers for you: 1997, 2001, 2002, and 2005.
As Insty owner Glenn Reynolds writes, "You know there's a Democrat in the White House when you see headlines like this in the Times." Read the whole thing and then tell me how the very same article couldn't have been written about George W. Bush and Iraq. If you do attempt to point out the "difference," be prepared to be mocked mercilessly.
TOTALLY RELATED -- TWEET OF THE DAY:
.@AceofSpadesHQ We need to start this war to find out what's in it.— Get It Right (@DraftRyan2016) August 29, 2013
Every time I see @MileyCyrus slap that black woman's butt, I think about the way that enslaved blacks were whipped for white entertainment.— Aura Bogado (@aurabogado) August 26, 2013
As if we needed more proof that those who constantly clamor about others' racism are the real racists.
*Siiiiigh* What's next, folks? Is race and/or racism lurking behind everything these days? Here, I made a few tweets myself so I could be like the HuffPo, Macklemore, and Ms. Bogado:
But in all seriousness, folks -- this is where we are today. "Racism" is everywhere to an alarmingly increasing number of people. Such is the fallout from inanities of like comparing Trayvon Martin to Emmett Till, claiming that requiring an ID to vote is like Jim Crow laws, and stating that comparisons of Boss Obama to Tiger Woods aren't due to golf, but due to the worst stereotypes of black men.
It'd be hilarious if it wasn't so sad. And ultimately, dangerous.
Just a refresher: Here's what candidate [Boss] Obama said in 2008: “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”
Does Syria's use of chemical weapons qualify?
As always, it's amazing how quickly positions change depending on the power a political party wields. Boss Obama is contemplating unilateral action (that is, without Congress's approval) against Syria, and he has loyal columnists to back him up. This, despite popular approval for such action of less than 10%.
Steve Newton makes the much more eloquent case about all this (sans the bit about atomic weapons, FWIW).
Sorry, I had a Bloomberg News moment.
The WaPo's Dana Milbank pontificates.
And the non-Council nominations are here!
Kenan Adams-Kinard, one of the two teens who brutally beat an 88-year old World War 2 veteran to death, claims it was the result of a drug deal gone bad. Adams-Kinard says "he and [the other] teen (Demetrius Glenn) were buying a 'zip of crack cocaine' from Delbert Belton, the vet.
Belton's daughter-in-law called the allegation “a bunch of crock.” Even Glenn's lawyer said “It doesn’t seem plausible to me,” and “I wouldn’t put any stock in it at this point.”
"Not plausible" is an understatement.
A Washington Post critic: Christians Threaten the Lives of Authors Casting Jesus 'In a Bad Light.'
Really? REALLY?? And people wonder why the dinosaur media is fading away? This alternate-reality mentality is staggeringly stupefying at times.
You gotta check out WPHT's Chris Stigall's debate/conversation/argument with Will "Panties In A" Bunch of the Philly Inquirer. Bunch, of course, accused Stigall of promoting -- wait for it -- racism on his morning radio show in a tweet last weekend, so Stigall had him on and called him out. Bunch used as "evidence" the usual canards: Voter ID measures, the Supreme Court decision to rescind a section of the Voting Rights Act, etc. Stigall shreds him.
At least Bunch had the cojones to actually go on.
SEMI-RELATED: Bloomberg News headline: “House Republicans Set to Defy Obama Are Mostly White Men.”
"racist?" Only an outfit like the Huffington Post could theorize that, natch.
RELATED: White rapper Macklemore claims his "white privilege" allows him to swear in his songs. Who knew?
Forum: Should Prostitution Be Legalized In America?
The consumption of media is changing. Kevin Spacey is at the forefront of that change. He knows that the customer is the ultimate driver and the Big Content managers can only fight against that tide for so long before they have to change. Netflix (and Mr. Spacey) are ahead of the industry in meeting that need. "Form factor" is big industry buzzword and so is "platform agnostic". Both mean that the means of consumption (i.e. viewing) of the movie/tv show should be ignored. What matters is "engagement". That is, how loyal is your audience, how well can you measure them and ultimately, can you sell to them? A show like House of Cards is way too smart for major networks. It is deft and assumes you have a brain which is anathema to the major networks. Methinks this is going to be the new normal in fairly short order.
If you're a creationist, Libs cite Darwin. If you say you adhere to survival of the fittest they tell you to be more christ-like in giving.— Dennis Miller Show (@DennisDMZ) August 25, 2013
Joanne Jacobs links to a gent who's a “multicultural educator who facilitates creative writing and education seminars, as well as social justice workshops.” Which means you can probably figure out much of what he's going to say. In this case it's
The teaching of non-cognitive skills pushes a socialization process that homogenizes students into the mainstream culture if they want to “succeed.” These skills send cultural messages on how a student exhibits “good behavior.” They are built upon mainstream beliefs and values that could prove to be culturally irrelevant. Are low-income students therefore “bad” when they don’t assume mainstream society’s cultural ethos?
*Sigh* As Joanne writes after the above, "I hope [his] students enjoy being poor because they’re likely to stay that way." I am constantly perplexed at how radical multicultis fail to recognize that any society must have certain "common" values in order to succeed.
At any rate, the answer to the gent's final question is "no;" however, they'll certainly find it much harder to succeed when out in the real world. After reading through the comments at the original link provided at Joanne's site, I was left wondering just what the hell the guy was actually referring to in the quote above in the first place. He appears to have no qualms about teaching manners, politeness, and even hard work, and seems to restrict his beef to "socializations" such as speaking "correctly" and the like. Such nebulousness is certainly not out the ordinary for multicultis (much more difficult to pin down on specific points, after all).
As a foreign lingo teacher I harbor certain sympathies along these lines; however, in my view, it contains a certain conceit to not believe -- or teach -- that, for instance, certain language skills are indeed necessary to be successful in our society. If this gent (remember, he's a "social justice workshop facilitator") wants kids to be "free" of mainstream values so that they can change ("Revolution!") the system, terrific. But, as Joanne noted, the kids'll just remain on the lowest rungs of the socioeconomic ladder. The solution would better be to inculcate both -- the values which make success possible in our country, and the knowledge (and/or pride) of maintaining certain personal cultural charateristics. For instance, over the years I've come across students who were embarrassed to speak their native language ... and only want to speak English. While most of these students' English had been exemplary, I tried to get across the huge advantage they have in being bilingual, and that it is no shame to be able to speak Spanish (or whatever), nor to be proud of one's heritage.
The problem with this overall theme, however, is that in the wrong hands (meaning, far-left educrats, which happens way too often anymore) we see stuff like this garbage, where vile profanity and even threats are explained away as "culture." This is insanity at its finest, and it's when it's never corrected that we see scores of unemployable individuals exiting our schools (those that actually graduate, that is). And then these same folks who never did the correcting will scream about said unemployment, in addition to poverty, hopelessness, etc. ... and they'll blame society.
Check out the headline of a recent post from our old pal Perry (who actually has his very own [very sparsely visited] blog now (but to which we won't link because of the proprietor's inherent lunacy):
Or, as he's better known to his colleagues, "Large Intestine" Powell.
Seen at the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington yesterday:
And so, from the late 1980s:
Salon.com: "The right’s black crime obsession" and "Conservative media’s total fixation on black-on-black and black-on-white crime isn’t going to end. Here’s why."
Gotta have those "real" convos on race, after all.
(h/t Da Tech Guy)
And that would be Will "Panties In A" Bunch's idiocy at the Philly Daily News today. It's precisely what you'd expect: Trayvon Martin-related stupidity, "voter suppression" BS, closing of city schools ...
Our bud Pixy at mu.nu central has been spectacular at zapping spam the last year or so, so we've decided to put back our Recent Comments section at the top right sidebar. Y'know, so you can better keep up with the convos, natch!
Howard Portnoy at Newsbusters provides (yet another) example. Like MSNBC, Salon.com is nearly inexhaustible in its specious attempts to "prove" their "cases" of racism, and is nigh in complete denial about basic facts. It's red meat for the LIV crowd, to be sure. Alex Seitz-Wald’s column is titled “No, Chris Lane is not Trayvon Martin!” and, as noted, botches the most fundamental facts about the Zimmerman-Martin case (among others):
... the decision by Sanford, Fla., police to initially release George Zimmerman “smacked of institutional, state-sponsored racial favoritism of the worst kind. It was only after public outcry that state prosecutors took over the case and pressed charges.“
To which Portnoy retorts:
That assessment nearly turns the facts of the case on their head. According to the report filed by the Sanford, Fla., police, a bloodied George Zimmerman was released on his own recognizance “for lack of evidence and lack of legal grounds for arrest” as well as Zimmerman’s “right to defend himself with lethal force” against a deadly attack. Seitz-Wald is right that Zimmerman was arrested following “public outcry,” but that was to avert a riot, not to correct an injustice.
Seitz-Wald also defends Pres. Obama for injecting himself into selected racial matters, especially the Henry Louis Gates incident from early in his presidency. Yet again, he totally botches the facts. He then concludes by stating "If you want to actually understand race relations in this country, you need to understand the difference between these (the Lane and Martin) cases."
Really? The understanding one comes to by reading Seitz-Wald or watching networks like MSNBC is that race relations remain as they were in 1950. That we should make a racial case out of those that aren't, and ignore those that are ... depending on the race of the perpetrators and victims. And, as we've noted here many times, so-called "real" conversations about race are not desired at all by the likes of Seitz-Wald. What they want is for you to LISTEN to them, and ACCEPT IT without question.
UPDATE: Be sure to check out Doug Ernst's related post! Spot on stuff.
The comics and entertainment world is abuzz with word that Ben Affleck will be the new Batman in the Man of Steel sequel. I read many "HUH??s" on Facebook and Twitter last night, but overall I think [nutty-but-right-in-this-case] comicbook guy Erik Larsen's tweet pretty much sums it up:
Mr. Mom played Batman. Think about that. Ben Affleck is certainly a less controversial choice than Michael Keaton. Sheesh.— Erik Larsen (@ErikJLarsen) August 23, 2013
Indeed. Think about how nuts everyone went when it was announced that Keaton was playing the Dark Knight. And hell, Affleck's already played a superhero. And apparently, I'm one of the few that thought Daredevil wasn't all that bad.
The non-Council winner was Via Medea with Bambi Meets Godzilla in the Middle East.
Full results are here.
Parents are up in arms about a policy at Calimesa Elementary School whereby students are not to be dismissed from anywhere ... until they kneel and wait for Principal Dana Carter (or another administrator) to allow them to leave.
The district superintendent called the now-discontinued policy a “positive behavior intervention.” A parent of a child at the school said that her daughter
ha[d] to drop down on one knee with her hands at her side, wait for the principal to come out, lift his arms and tell them to go to class ...”
If I was the kid, I'd have said "I'll kneel before you if it will save lives." Hopefully Carter's response wouldn't have been "It will -- starting with your own."
UPDATE (8/26): Ace reports there's more to the story, and that the principal has a good reason for what he does.
Reality is that which exists whether you believe it or not.
Capital flight is one such reality.
Fleeing New Yorkers took $46 billion with them when they left. The top three states with capital inflows: Florida, Arizona and Texas. All "red" states. Top capital outflows: New York, California and Illinois. All "blue" states.
Fact: Blue state fiscal policy encourages capital outflows. Red state policies encourage inflows.
Something that cannot continue forever, won't.
There he was the other night:
On Tuesday, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews claimed that conservatives and Republicans are attempting to “delegitimize” President Obama by calling him “Obama” or “a liberal leader,” Matthews said.
“It seems there’s a very interesting compelling continuing effort to delegitimize this president,” he told “Bush’s Brain” author Wayne Slater.
“People on the right say he’s a disaster, which he’s not. Look at what he’s already accomplished,” he added, apparently oblivious to Obama’s record deficits, failed foreign policy and the overall state of the economy.
“But they first of all referred to him, not as the ‘President of the United States’ but as a ‘liberal leader.’ They refer to the health care act of 2010 as ‘a bill.’ They refer to him as ‘Obama.’ They don’t say the ‘the president.’ They don’t say the ‘a law.’ They don’t even speak the language we normally speak in civilized political debate,” he added, as though he would know anything about “civilized political debate.”
“They’ve changed it so much that he’s actually not really supposed to be there,” he continued.
Did'ja catch it? Yep, he ranted about all that ... to the guy who wrote the book Bush's Brain. Not President Bush's Brain.
Thanks, as always, for the giggles, Chris.
And the non-Council nominations are here!
Or, The NARRATIVETM, if you will.
(Just keep silent about such, though, during "honest conversations about race," you racist.)
But so what? (Warning: Rambling rant to follow):
Despite what the film's director and star Matt Damon claim, the movie is very political. But, much of it's just stupid political if you ask me. As you may have heard by now, "Elysium" is the name of the huge space station orbiting Earth and home to the very richest of the planet's [former] citizens. These folks essentially can live forever thanks to the pinnacle of modern medical technology. Just don't ask how this tech works, however. I had to guffaw when bad guy Sharlto Copley's disintegrated lower skull was instantly rematerialized in one of these medical pods. C'mahn.
You're sure to ask just how this tech is so miraculous ... when even those on Elysium are still using alpha-numeric keyboards and large screen LC monitors or their computers, for one thing. It's supposed to be 2154, after all. That's over 130 years from now, dammit. Consider where we were 130 years ago and then tell me we'll still be using such tech for computers. Not to mention, given the year, why the hell were there 1970s model automobiles on the streets of the dilapidated Los Angeles? 1970s!! I mean, really? The poor residents of LA couldn't use makeshift 2110 model cars? Even 2080 models?? I know that director Neill Blomkamp wanted to give the city a sort of "Cuba" feel -- like how cubanos have to make do with revamping old 1950s-era American automobiles among other tech -- but this just goes too far.
But, after all, those are just scifi nits. The big question is, how the hell did the world situation come about that gave us this ritzy space station, and the ridiculously poverty-stricken planet below? All of LA looks like Rio de Janeiro's favelas, even once-modern downtown with its skyscrapers and all. Blomkamp wants us to analogize the situation to the US-Mexico relationship, or even the Western world to the Third World in general. We see "illegals" taking off from LA in a desperate attempt to reach Elysium to make use of a medical pod. The pod won't work, however, unless you have a tattoo of an Elysium citizen. (Get it? Green card, Social Security card, etc.) For some reason, the citizens of Elysium refuse to share the miraculous medical tech with Earth. At all. Really. I mean, one damn medical pod can instantly heal anything and any number of people, yet Elysium refuses to even loan one out. (I guess this is supposed to be analogous to the dastardly pharmaceutical cos. not giving free drugs to poor nations.)
Poor Matt Damon, who's accidentally irradiated at work and hence has but five days to live, is merely given a few pain pills to ease his agony. Such sets in motion the main plot: Damon will somehow get to the space station and heal himself. I won't offer up any spoilers from here on out, but my question remains: How could such a situation come about? Elysium ruled Earth with an authoritarian fist, via their robotic police force. It would have taken many years -- decades, at least -- to construct such a station; did the "evil" one percent manage to build it all ... by deception? Perhaps with a promise that anyone could venture to live there sometime?
Blomkamp certainly isn't the first to relay such a message. In the 1970s we saw the likes of Soylent Green (starring Chuck Heston) and Rollerball (starring James Caan) where wealthy corporate types have control of the world and care not much about anything but themselves. In the former, the Soylent corporation begins making food out of people after it, and many other corporations, have essentially trashed the planet's ecology. In Rollerball, nations' borders are defined by which major corporation is HQ'd there, and the public is kept placated by ultra-violent "sports" like the film's title.
"Progressives" will champion Blomkamp's vision; however, the important thing to consider is just how and why certain countries are successful ... and others aren't. The same "progressives" will clamor that the US (like other developed nations) has basically "robbed its way to prosperity" from the very beginning, starting with the Native Americans. Certainly, a chunk of this has merit, but not nearly to the degree "progressives" would have us all believe. This isn't the post to now delve into all such reasons; just consider what I noted above, and then ask yourself to what degree countries like ours obligated to help others less developed. And how.
The problem with k-12: Common Core
TL;DR: Whether or not the answer is correct is immaterial. The important thing is if the child appears to be "thinking"
And at the university level: Music 286, called Music as Culture, or Emcee Lab, is being offered for the first time at UNC this fall.
Yes. You can take a college level course in being an emcee.
Gotta love the Wilmington News Journal -- always acting in the public's best interests. That is, unless political correctness interferes:
A report of shots fired shortly after 11 p.m. Monday sent University of Delaware police to the Laird Campus along Del. 896 in Newark.
Police said in radio broadcasts they found shell casings at the scene.
There were three or four men in the car, including the gunman, he said. Police were able to provide no description of the men, except for their race, which The News Journal does not publish as a matter of policy.
Got that? The cops know a major descriptor of the suspects -- their race -- but in their infinite "wisdom," the News Journal ain't gonna tell 'ya. Because shut up.
Actually, we've known the reason for years now. And it remains one of the most ridiculously PC policies I've ever seen. For what it's worth, UD police ID'd the shooter as a black male. Why it took me over 15 minutes to find that out via various Google parameters is beyond silly.
Forum: What do you feel you know now about life that you wish you’d known when you were eighteen?
By way of the inimitable Nate Winchester comes word of a new ... novel that purports to be something of a "case study" of what would happen if the Religious Right ever got its way. It's called Christian Nation and, well, you can just guess at the usual "progressive" clichés:
Christian Nation is a work of speculative political fiction, arising from the counterfactual of a McCain/Palin victory in 2008 followed soon after by McCain’s sudden death and Sarah Palin’s ascension to the presidency.
When the book opens, eight years have passed since the Holy War ended in victory for the fundamentalist Christian forces. Americans live in bondage to a comprehensive authoritarian law called The Blessing, enforced by a totally integrated digital world known as the Purity Web.
Yeesh. As a big fan of alternate history, I believe the single biggest factor involved in establishing an alternate reality is the plausibility. So, how exactly did Palin manage to pull all this off?
Struggling with perspective and memory, the memoirist recounts the country’s long slow descent to religious authoritarianism, propelled by economic distress, a second major terrorist attack, and the fanatical ambitions of an extremist evangelical minority.
Oh, I see. So after another radical Muslim terror attack (which kills substantially more than 9/11, FWIW), we traded what those fundies wanted ... for what other fundies wanted. Got it.
Interestingly, Nate mentioned to me that this whole premise makes an interesting addendum to our post about Orson Scott Card, which soooo irritated the [comicbook] Left with its fantasies about Boss Obama creating a national police of disaffected "urban youth" ... even though Obama actually stated a desire to create a civilian "security" force some years earlier. Can someone point to me where Sarah Palin has indicated where she wanted to create a fundamentalist Christian government here in the United States?
Hilariously, the irony of some of the reviews put up at the book's website seems to have escaped the author/publisher. For instance,
Though McCain did not win the 2008 election, in recent years controversial actions like drone strikes, invasions of privacy and unlawful detainment have been condoned in part due to greater worries over terrorism. So it’s not for us to say, “It can’t happen here.” This disturbing book argues that much of it already has.
Uh, helLO?? And just which administration has done that?? The irony that is completely missed by the author via his HAL-9000esque (thanks, Ace) dialogue is beyond head-scratching. He has his protagonists pondering how the Right would completely overlook "their self-proclaimed values and their own interests" in order to get power ... and that if Obama had won in 2008 this same Right would be "screaming bloody murder" if he took the same measures that President Palin did. Apparently author Fred Rich must exist in the reality in which his novel is set. After all, in our reality it's the Left which was screaming bloody murder about George W. Bush's methods of fighting the War on Terror -- for seven long years -- but now that "their own" inhabits the White House, these very same measures, and much, much more, are EMBRACED by the Left. Or, at least, their complaints are kept very mute. And why is that? Yep: They're overlooking "their self-proclaimed values and their own interests" in order to get (and maintain) power.
At least the Kirkus Reviews blurb knows precisely what the book's intended purpose is: "Dystopian, wonkish fun for the Maddow set.”
Even more gut-busting hilarity ensues at Ace's, where he dissects the stodgy -- and ridiculous -- dialogue (or, as Ace calls it, "Compelling and Realistic Simulacrum of Human Speech") of the book. Be sure to read this one all the way through. It'll make your day for sure. But before all that, Ace has the money quote: "When Alex Jones prattles on about this, the right goofs on him; when 'Frederic Rich,' leftist fantasist extraordinaire does, W.W. Norton books says 'Let's publish that.'"
Oh, Ace also bets that the terror attacks in the novel actually were not enacted by Muslim fundies, but by some Christian militiamen framing Muslim fundies. Because that's how the fringe "progressive" Left rolls, after all. It's the same 35-some percent that believes G.W. Bush orchestrated/knew about 9/11, y'know.
Here's USA Today's review of the book. And here's a [very cheesy] video summarizing the story:
The vid includes a blurb comparing Nation to Philip Roth's The Plot Against America. Uh huh. Aside from the fact both are alternate history, that's where any and all similarities end. Remember what I said about "plausibility." I liked this comment about the video (at YouTube): "I'm an atheist and I found this ridiculous and idiotic."
I'm always fascinated by those who "warn" about a Far-Right Christian takeover of America. I really -- and I've tried! -- cannot fathom how such could realistically (key word) come about. Lefty scifi author Joe Haldeman's novel The Accidental Time Machine (which I liked a lot, by the way) unfortunately spent a lot of time on a future America ruled by a similar regime found in Nation. I had to laugh at the premise. Tom Kratman's Caliphate approaches the same American society from a bit of a different angle: radical Muslim attacks against the US leads to Islam basically becoming illegal in the country, and the world geopolitical breakdown includes a US "empire" which encompasses all the Americas, and Muslim caliphate presiding over Europe and much of Asia. Though seemingly more plausible than Haldeman's scenario, I still couldn't buy many of the actions taken by the future US and especially the Muslim domination of Europe as if those countries' majorities would just sit still and meekly accept their new overlords.
At any rate, expect to see Christian Nation proferred about by many of the usual suspects as "insightful," "prophetic," and "realistically frightening." Which, of course, it's anything but.
President Chimpy Bu$hitler was a complete moron but also somehow an evil genius who continues to be responsible for all our ills today. Terry McAulliffe shows the "proper" role of a leader:
Here are the facts: I’ve not been contacted in any way by those conducting the investigation and have no knowledge of it beyond what has been reported. From what has been reported, the investigation appears to be looking at a document allegedly prepared for potential investors — something I was not responsible for as chairman.
Got that? I'm supposed to believe that the Chairman of the board was unaware of any attempts at finding investors.
That means either:
1. He is chairman in name only and was only in it to make a quick buck
2. He is the most incompetent chairman since Jeff Skilling
If it's #1 he's in violation of the corporate charter and a shameless money hungry greedmonger 1 percenter. If it's #2 then he has no business running anything in an executive capacity.
I'll let you decide.
Liberals tell me that there is no voter fraud and that we don't need to check the voter roles. North Carolina has 583 Democrat Votes Over the Age of 112
Actually, it's worse than that:
At latest count, Susan has garnered a total Absentee Ballot vote of over 2,660 people over the age of 110. Someone contact the Guiness Book and warm up the Ford, the Fountain of Youth exists and its right here in lovely NC. It's no wonder people are moving here in droves--maybe the use of tobacco isn't such a bad thing after all? But, on a more serious note, with all of the irregularities going on all over the place, we can now begin to wonder about a few things.
Got that? Over twenty six hundred people are over the age of 110 in NC.
Hube has been deriding Will Bunch of late with his double standards. I have no beef with that but in this post, I think Bunch is dead on. The former Marine commander is correct. They are standardizing tactics and equipment across lines of responsibility. One wonders why they would do that? Make it easier to operate with different units? Why would a town like Nashua New Hampshire need an armored command vehicle? Under what circumstances would that be necessary? If some terrorist attack did come there, would there not be another such vehicle that would be available from another entity? The FBI for instance? Is there any evidence that the declaration of martial law...sorry "shelter in place" and illegal house to house searches of citizens being thrown out of their house at gunpoint and rolling down the streets in APCs helped find the Boston Marathon Bombers? No. They were found when the cordon was lifted and some guy looked at his boat and noticed something was wrong.
The militarization of police combined with the panopticon of the NSA, and license plate readers et al has be very concerned about the direction our nation is headed. Am I alone?
I'm filing this one under "Comics" because it comes close to the things Hube has been posting about viz. race and gender and politics in comics. The author (NB: a woman) hates the "strong woman" character in tv/movies. Her reasons are sound IMNHO. To affirmatively show that the woman character is "tough" and "strong" is imperative in Hollywood. How many times have you seen the male character being rescued in some form or fashion by the female lead even when it makes zero sense? Many, many times. The one upshot of this through the looking glass plot device is that I have much more sympathy for women who have complained about how poorly women have been portrayed in media. Ugh. How many times do we see the dopey move where a woman is being chased and she has to fling her high heels off before running? Conversely it's equally stupid and insulting to always have the male heavy character get knocked out only to be saved by the Strong Woman Character. (c.f. Worf in every NextGen episode ever).
This may be reaching but my libertarian senses tingle here because if we treat people like, oh, I don't know, individuals instead of tropes or members of a group, we'd probably get better storytelling. Yes, women can be the physical types that can kick ass. Anyone who's seen Linda Hamilton in T2 will see that. That's great and I bought it then and I buy it now. You didn't need to beat me over the head with it. What I'd rather see is a whole character. Give them some strengths, some weaknesses and show me the range. At the bookend of the Linda Hamilton in T2 portrayal is Dracula. Yes, the original Bram Stoker book. Mina Harker is portrayed as a very strong character. Not in the ass kicking Buffy The Vampire Slayer (Joss Whedon edition) mold but rather, she is the brains of the outfit. She is courageous, intelligent, resourceful and strong. The difference being that when there is physical danger, the men keep her safely away. (This is vastly oversimplifying things but bear with me) The practical problems with mode of dress for instance preclude her from scaling walls to assault Dracula's castle for instance. The key difference is that Mina is allowed to be strong and weak. She fears for her husband whom she loves dearly but knows she needs help and that physically she's not up to this. The men aren't even sure they are but everyone, despite their fear, presses on. That, my friends, is the very definition of courage and courage is the first virtue. Without courage, none of the others are possible.
Please, can we stop insulting everyone and just acknowledge that everyone has a very wide range of skills, abilities, weaknesses, strengths and it's ok for men and women to embody all of these things.
UPDATED with link because I'm an idiot and forgot to put it in.
What was the last big/important thing you changed your mind about? What made you change your mind?
Federal student loan program rewards colleges for jacking up tuition, gives left-wing lawyers a free ride at taxpayer expense.
Folks in the real world left shaking their heads:
AMHERST, Mass.—In an effort to recognize a relatively young academic discipline that many in the academy have never heard of before, nearly a hundred students and scholars gathered at Amherst College over the weekend to discuss their research and ideas for how to grow Black German Studies.
Like African American, Women and Queer studies, Black German Studies has an admitted social justice focus, says Dr. Sara Lennox, a professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst and an early founder of the Black German Studies movement in the U.S.
“We’ve made the field legitimate. You can now do this work and get tenure,” says Lennox.
Indeed! And that tenure surely a good thing since without that college employment (with said degree) you'd be waiting tables at Olive Garden.
Don't expect this to deter the usual suspects, however:
Obama had announced at the beginning of the year his push for three major gun control initiatives — universal background checks, a ban on “assault weapons,” and a ban on “high-capacity” magazines — to prevent future mass shootings, no doubt hoping that the CDC study would oblige him by providing evidence that additional gun control measures were justified to reduce gun violence. On the contrary, that study refuted nearly all the standard anti-gun narrative and instead supported many of the positions taken by gun ownership supporters.
For example, the majority of gun-related deaths between 2000 and 2010 were due to suicide and not criminal violence.
In addition, defensive use of guns “is a common occurrence,” according to the study.
The current report from the CDC echoed findings the CDC published back in 2003 that showed that suicides were responsible for 58 percent of all firearms-related deaths in 2000. Also noted is that back in 2003 Americans owned an estimated 192 million firearms, while today that number is estimated to be closer to 300 million, an increase of more than 55 percent.
Said the CDC back in 2003, “Evidence was insufficient to determine the effectiveness of any of these laws" (Emphasis added.):
Bans on specified firearms or ammunition,
Restrictions on firearm acquisition,
Waiting periods for firearm acquisition,
Firearm registration and licensing of owners, and
Zero tolerance for firearms in schools.
As noted above, this won't change one iota the dogma of those supposedly interested in "science" and "facts." Just recall the condescending "brain child" comics creator Ron Marz shortly after Newtown:
Please,don't bother tweeting at me about your right to bear arms and how it's "people, not guns." Dead children. Again. Just STFU.— Ron Marz (@ronmarz) December 14, 2012
Yep. "STFU" about facts and let me spout off like an overly emotional five year-old, dammit!!
That's about the size of it.
Chuck gave us five National League East titles, two National League pennants, and best of all, a World Series ring in 2008 -- the second in the team's history. (I was fortunate to see both.) His reign was the best ever in Phil's history.
Ryne Sandberg takes over the team immediately.
Robot 6 offers up a startling revelation about the classic Batman one-shot, The Killing Joke:
“No one gets the end,” the writer (Grant Morrison) says, “because Batman kills The Joker. [...] That’s why it’s called The Killing Joke. The Joker tells the ‘Killing Joke’ at the end, Batman reaches out and breaks his neck, and that’s why the laughter stops and the light goes out, ’cause that was the last chance at crossing that bridge. And Alan Moore wrote the ultimate Batman/Joker story — he finished it.”
Check out the ending panels of the tale at the link. It so totally works. And, like just about everybody, I never caught it. Everyone was way too wrapped up in what is normally considered to be the shocking highlight: the Joker shooting Barbara Gordon point blank.
He's (at left) been in the news in recent months first because he was slated to write a Superman tale (which was delayed due to the outcry), and lately because his classic scifi novel Ender's Game will soon be out as a major film. These instances had to deal with the controversy of Card being vehemently anti-gay.
Despite my (and other comics bloggers') posts either defending Card from boycotts or (more in my own case) pointing out the hypocrisy of the boycotters, I believe it safely can be stated that Card is pretty much a nut. A big nut. If calling for a revolution if gay rights continue to expand in the US wasn't enough for you, maybe this is:
Where will he (Obama) get his "national police"? The NaPo will be recruited from "young out-of-work urban men" and it will be hailed as a cure for the economic malaise of the inner cities.
In other words, Obama will put a thin veneer of training and military structure on urban gangs, and send them out to channel their violence against Obama's enemies.
Instead of doing drive-by shootings in their own neighborhoods, these young thugs will do beatings and murders of people "trying to escape" -- people who all seem to be leaders and members of groups that oppose Obama.
Really? Really? Card thinks Boss Obama will actually be able to cull a "national police force" out of disaffected urban youth" to act as his personal ... gang? Even [ridiculously] allowing for the fact that if Obama wanted to do such -- how would he manage to do it?
This is 9/11 Truther territory, folks. But the problem with the contemporary comics world, though, is that they put out comics about the "truth" regarding 9/11, whereas views like Card's are in desperate need of Maoist re-education. Thus, I don't give much more than a shrug to the screaming and yelling from comics creators (and fans) about Card's nuttery.
UPDATE: As Nate notes in the comments, Card, in his original article, states that his is just a "silly thought experiment" and that he wasn't serious about it. But -- he also then writes
It isn't my work as a writer of science fiction and fantasy that prepares me to write about unlikely events. My job in writing sci-fi is to make impossible events seem not just possible but likely. Inevitable.
I admit this is one of the rare instances I didn't go to check out the original source material (which was linked to in critical article I linked to originally); however, while I agree that Card's "disclaimer" lessens the impact of his lengthy treatise, as noted he qualifies such enough throughout to get a reader wondering.
I'd laugh my ass off if this wasn't possibly a dangerous precedent. Unreal.
Via the WaPo:
The National Security Agency has broken privacy rules or overstepped its legal authority thousands of times each year since Congress granted the agency broad new powers in 2008, according to an internal audit and other top-secret documents.
Most of the infractions involve unauthorized surveillance of Americans or foreign intelligence targets in the United States, both of which are restricted by statute and executive order. They range from significant violations of law to typographical errors that resulted in unintended interception of U.S. e-mails and telephone calls.
The documents, provided earlier this summer to The Washington Post by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, include a level of detail and analysis that is not routinely shared with Congress or the special court that oversees surveillance. In one of the documents, agency personnel are instructed to remove details and substitute more generic language in reports to the Justice Department and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
In one instance, the NSA decided that it need not report the unintended surveillance of Americans.
Boss Obama's response?
(Image/caption h/t to the e-mailed "Morning Jolt.")
The non-Council winner was Mark Steyn with Know Thine Enemy.
Full results are here.
I don't do this much anymore (used to in the blog's early days), mainly because it's usually so damn easy. And Philly.com's Will Bunch is a prime example. Check out his take on terrorism from his "Attywood" column from this past Sunday, where he gleefully quotes Ted Koppel:
Will terrorists kill innocent civilians in the years to come? Of course. They did so more than 100 years ago, when they were called anarchists—and a responsible nation-state must take reasonable measures to protect its citizens. But there is no way to completely eliminate terrorism.
The challenge that confronts us is how we will live with that threat. We have created an economy of fear, an industry of fear, a national psychology of fear. Al Qaeda could never have achieved that on its own. We have inflicted it on ourselves.
Over the coming years many more Americans will die in car crashes, of gunshot wounds inflicted by family members and by falling off ladders than from any attack by al Qaeda.
There is always the nightmare of terrorists acquiring and using a weapon of mass destruction. But nothing would give our terrorist enemies greater satisfaction than that we focus obsessively on that remote possibility, and restrict our lives and liberties accordingly.
Don't forget to read Bunch's "tear-jerking" portrayal of author John Grisham making friends with a Gitmo inmate before Koppel's message above! I know I had to fight back the tears. (/sarcasm)
OK, so you get Koppel's message via Bunch? Terrorism has always been around, we can't let modern terrorists drastically alter our lifestyles, we're crushing our civil liberties .... got it. But back on August 6th, Bunch wrote:
But after one mass shooting after another after another, we still have a system where individuals who are known to the local authorities as in the least disturbed, like Rockne Newell, nonetheless manage to fall through the many, many cracks in the mental health system.
And we also still have a country that cried over Newtown, cried over Aurora and dozen of similar, senseless shootings like this -- and yet has done absolutely nothing in response.
That's not "liberal," "libertarian," or "conservative." It's just a national embarrassment.
So, Bunch laments the loss of the American "soul" with Gitmo still being open, and our overall "over-reaction" to terrorism, yet it is a "national embarrassment" that we haven't further restricted one of the very constitutional rights specifically written about in our Founding Document ... because of a[n] [erroneous] claim about an epidemic of mass shootings.
Basically, to Bunch, having to deal with organized terrorism is the price we pay for living in a free society. But, having to deal with the occasional loony tune who manages to get a gun and shoot up a bunch of people isn't.
Ah, "progressives" ...
Former Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. was sentenced to two and a half years in prison today after pleading guilty to scheming to spend $750,000 in campaign funds on personal items.
And the non-Council nominations are here!
MSNBC graphic of cities on Obama bus tour:
Real locations of cities on Obama bus tour:
Noah Berlatsky at The Atlantic takes issue with Todd MacFarlane's (and others') statement that "political messages don't make good comics." These creators did so at a forum, where we noted writer Gerry Conway got grief from his "progressive" cohorts for his comments.
Berlatsky has a beef with the "politics" statement. He writes,
There are various problems with this statement. The main one is that "historically," it is complete and utter hogwash. It simply is not true that superhero narratives with political messages have been unsuccessful. On the contrary, the most lauded, and really most popular, superhero stories of recent times have embraced explicit political content and controversy. With its fake Mandarin, Iron Man 3 is explicitly about Orientalism and prejudice. The Dark Knight Rises exploited the Occupy movement and class tensions. Buffy the Vampire Slayer, perhaps the most successful new superhero of the last 20 years, was a feminist model and dealt with feminist themes throughout its run.
As a fairly quick aside, Iron Man 3 was nothing about "Orientalism" and prejudice. I cannot imagine how anyone could claim that the film was "explicitly" about such; indeed, if anything, the tongue-in-cheek Mandarin (played by Ben Kingsley) was sort of a "this former Iron Man arch-nemesis has to go because he's a product of a geopolitical situation that doesn't exist anymore" character. Only people with way too much time on their hands (like, obviously, Berlatsky) could state the film's concentration was on something it clearly wasn't.
Of course, IM3 and DKR etc. are movies. What about comicbooks? The best Berlatsky comes up with are Sailor Moon and Wonder Woman because of their "feminist" themes. But the definition of "feminism" is so wide-ranging, and encompasses so many ideas, that calling these two books "political" is very debatable. Berlatsky even says that fighting the Nazis and Japanese was "political." If this is the case, then hell -- even Superman battling a clearly evil alien monster is "political." But even allowing Berlatsky's point here, he attempts to bolster it -- wrongly -- by saying that "Back in the 1940s, these issues moved hundreds of thousands of copies each -- dwarfing sales of all those present-day non-ideological superhero comics that Todd McFarlane draws." Well, actually, that may technically be true depending on how you look at "present-day." But MacFarlane at his peak (the 1990s) sold over a million copies of [usually non-ideological] comicbook. That is a lot more than "hundreds of thousands." Not to mention, Berlatsky is making an unfair comparison. Paper publishing is going the way of the dinosaur with the Internet and digital publishing, so comparing 2013 with the 1940s is, in many ways, just silly.
But let's use Berlatsky's formula for a second: How many overtly ideological comics are being sold these days? The top sellers -- ideological or otherwise -- usually number between 100-200 thousand. But, aside from the top two or three, the figures are below 100K. How do these fare to those 1940s figures, Mr. Berlatsky?
Lastly, as we've noted many times here and elsewhere, the big difference between "political" comics now vs. then is that contemporary ones have veered hard left in orientation. Many have taken viewpoints shared by a minority of the country and glorified them, all the while demonizing the other side. Even with issues that have more or less a 50-50 split among the populace, you wouldn't know that by reading the work of certain creators. It was difficult to find a sizable portion of the public which would have had a problem with Captain America socking Hitler in the kisser; modern Captain America, on the other hand, goes after a popular political movement (the Tea Party) because it's radical and racist ... while DC comics glorifies an opposing entity which actually is/was radical, not to mention destructive and violent (the Occupy Movement) ... by giving it its very own title.
(Thanks to Nate Winchester for the tip!)
Comics guy Ron "STFU" Marz:
@brubaker Movies, TV, politics, social issues -- everything is good or bad, no room for nuance or complexity.— Ron Marz (@ronmarz) August 13, 2013
But earlier he tweeted:
Ted Cruz: "Everywhere I go people are afraid for the future of our country." Maybe that's because you're there, Ted? http://t.co/J9VDEoXNda— Ron Marz (@ronmarz) August 13, 2013
LMAO! Such "complexity!" Such "nuance!!" Go Ron, go!
Forum: Do you think the House will pass some version of amnesty for Illegal aliens? Why Or Why not?
Left wing (surprise!) comics guy Gerry Conway has learned the hard way what it means to be a modern "progressive." It doesn't matter what you've said/done over the course of many years; just be perceived to have wandered off the "orthodoxy plantation" one time ... and you'll be destroyed:
This whole blow-up over comments at the PBS Superheroes panel has left me horrified and heartbroken. I feel completely misunderstood.— Gerry Conway (@gerryconway) August 11, 2013
Conway is talking about a panel discussion he attended alongside some other creators, notably Todd MacFarlane.
But really, Gerry? You're surprised this happened? It doesn't matter what your life's philosophy has been. It doesn't matter what you support and believe. You say the wrong thing -- even if it was just perceived wrongly -- and you're through when it comes to contemporary "progressives." Just ask Bill Clinton about the 2008 Democratic primary and subsequent presidential campaign. Or Geraldine Ferraro. And many, many others. Modern "progressivism" is PC-bound to several ideological stances, criticism of which is anathema. [Certain] races is one. [Certain] religions is another. And, certainly, alternate sexual lifestyles.
Heck, I get regular hate-tweets from right wingers, religious bigots, GOP supporters, and misogynists.— Gerry Conway (@gerryconway) August 11, 2013
To get hate tweets from people whose positions I've always defended is disheartening. Read my stuff, THEN attack me.— Gerry Conway (@gerryconway) August 11, 2013
Live and learn, Ger. You're learning the hard way, unfortunately, when it comes to your present-day ideological brethren.
Via Taranto we see that Reuters is hyping President Lemon's call for some "soul searching" on race here in America because -- gasp! -- "many Americans have no friends of another race" (the actual headline) according to a poll it cites. Of course, based on the first paragraph alone, Reuters could have easily written a headline that says "Most Americans have friends of another race":
About 40 percent of white Americans and about 25 percent of non-white Americans are surrounded exclusively by friends of their own race, according to an ongoing Reuters/Ipsos poll.
So, about 60% of whites and 75% of non-whites have friends of another race. Yet, Reuters writes a headline from a negative POV. Because, y'know, it wouldn't fit in with Boss Obama's [faux] request for that "soul searching," after all. Or, if you will, The NARRATIVETM.
And the inconsistent race reporting rolls on:
There are regions and groups where mixing with people of other races is more common, especially in the Hispanic community where only a tenth do not have friends of a different race. About half of Hispanics who have a spouse or partner are in a relationship with non-Hispanics, compared to one tenth of whites and blacks in relationships.
Y'see, here the MSM is back to merely using the term "Hispanic" as essentially a separate race. When the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin affair was in full swing, it was then important to note the former's race as "white" -- separate from Hispanic. Of course, Hispanics can be of several races as the classification "Hispanic" (or "Latino") is mainly due to language/cultural difference. Just see any official government/state/educational form if you don't believe me. But the MSM -- as Reuters does here -- rarely, if ever, acknowledges such. If acknowledging the difference can further The NarrativeTM -- that is, that America remains an incorrigibly racist nation that hasn't changed much since the Civil War (as was the case with George Zimmerman) -- it will do so without hesitation. In this article, however, merely utilizing "Hispanic" as a separate racial category paints the group in a positive light -- they're more "racially enlightened" as they have more friends and marriages outside of their "race."
Sterling Beard on Slate's decision not to use the team name "Redskins" for the country's capital football team because it's "extremely tacky and dated" (it'll use just “Washington” or “Washington’s NFL team”):
We await the day that Slate decides to refer to the New England Patriots as “Massachusetts' NFL team” on the grounds that the name is too nationalistic.
The A.P. helps out President Lemon:
[T]he AP is still hoping to keep the ugly truth under wraps, and in his write-up of Obama’s “Tonight Show” appearance, he shamelessly demonstrated why the AP has become a trusted member of the president’s Lapdog Media Corpse.
Here’s how Obama is quoted in reporter Russ Bynum’s story:
"If we don't deepen our ports all along the Gulf — (and in) places like Charleston, S.C., or Savannah, Ga., or Jacksonville, Fla. — if we don't do that, these ships are going to go someplace else and we'll lose jobs," Obama said.
Yep -- Bynum corrected Boss Obama's idiot geography gaffe by adding the words in bold: "(and in)." In the original, President Lemon mentioned those ports as being Gulf ports.
It amazes me that Old Media dinosaurs still think they can get away with this sh**. With outfits like Newsbusters and Twitchy (which caught Bynum's lapdoggery) around, you're just asking for trouble. Bynum had to add a "correction" later: "Charleston, Savannah and Jacksonville are not Gulf ports. It wasn't known if the president was suggesting they were. The AP should not have added the phrase in an effort to clarify his statement."
Gee, 'ya think?
Former Philadelphia Eagles great Hugh Douglas tweeted about embattled current Eagles WR Riley Cooper:
S/O to Riley Cooper.. For keepin it 100.. At least now we know!— Hugh Douglas (@Bighugh53) July 31, 2013
In case you missed it (and how could you, after all, given our MSM?), Cooper used the "N" word in a video taken at a Kenny Chesney concert. He was fined by the team and forced to undergo re-educa, er, um, "sensitivity" training.
Now the ... funny thing:
Hugh Douglas was inebriated and threatened to beat up his colleague Michael Smith three times Friday night, a source who witnessed the altercation at the House of Blues in Orlando tells The Big Lead. According to the source, Douglas, who appears on Numbers Never Lie on ESPN with Michael Smith and Jemele Hill, was trying to get on stage where the DJ was playing, and threatened to beat up Smith if he couldn’t help out. After the third threat, Smith tried to walk away, at which point Douglas grabbed Smith’s wrist and hurled two racial epithets at him, calling him an “Uncle Tom” and a “House N—-.” Smith, the witness says, turned around to protect himself, at which point onlookers rushed in to break it up.
Of course, Cooper's transgression was plastered all over the front page of Philly.com; Douglas' was relegated to the NFL section of their sports page. But, alas, that's how the MSM rolls racially, and we all know that by now.
The non-Council winner was Michael Gurfinkiel/Mosaic Magazine with You Only Live Twice. Is there a future for Jewish communities in Europe?
Full results are here.
Numerous embassies across the Muslim world are closed due to a heightened terror alert, and what does Boss Obama do? Go on The Tonight Show to yuk it up with Jay Leno. Part of the "yuks" included the Boss telling Leno that we don't have a domestic spying program.
Oh, and the Boss is really miffed at Russia's anti-gay laws, too. He said he has "no patience" for such and "the anti-gay laws in Russia are a prime example of violating 'universal rights.'” Of course, you'll never hear Obama pontificating about such regarding Muslim countries whose human rights record -- most especially including homosexuals -- are arguably much worse than Russia's. Oh, and did you catch Obama's gaffe on Leno when he threw in the bit about Russia hosting the upcoming Olympics? They're hosting the winter Olympics, but the Boss mentioned numerous summer Olympic sports like gymnastics, swimming and track. What a freakin' dope. Just imagine (sigh) if he was G.W. Bush or Dan Quayle.
This lemon is beyond parody.
UPDATE: Here's still more from President Lemon:
“The odds of people dying in a terrorist attack obviously are still a lot lower than in a car accident, unfortunately,” President Obama told NBC’s Jay Leno last night.
“The Panama [Canal] is being widened so that these big supertankers can come in. Now, that will be finished in 2015. If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf – places like Charleston, South Carolina, or Savannah, Georgia, or Jacksonville, Florida – if we don’t do that, those ships are going to go someplace else.”
(There are major ports along the Gulf of Mexico, most notably the Port of South Louisiana and the Port of Houston. But Charleston, Savannah and Jacksonville are all on the Atlantic coast.)
And the non-Council nominations are here!
That'd be one Mike Matthews on the local cable access "Community Crossfire" always on Sundays on Comcast. Since I no longer have Comcast, I had to beg Mike to alert me when the show was uploaded to YouTube. And, here it is:
I'll always remember his appearances on Letterman's old 12:30 show which followed Carson. His down-to-Earth demeanor, un-PC approach and humor made him the ultimate storyteller. Here's a couple classic clips to show you what I mean:
An appearance on the aforementioned David Letterman:
Forum: If you could be anyone else living or dead, whom would you be?
Via Twitchy, check out the ENTHUSIASM! The SHEER NUMBERS!! The DEMAND!!!
This lone attendee is so enthused, he's probably busy texting his dog:
And this, er, uh, duo "aren't backing down!"
Perhaps, just perhaps, the hype is so subdued due to sh** like this:
The White House has approved a deal that will exempt members of Congress and their staff from some of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act, Politico reported late Thursday. Under the law, popularly referred to as Obamacare, lawmakers and their aides were required to source health insurance “created” by the law or offered through one of its exchanges, and without the subsidies they currently enjoy, the members of Congress would have faced thousands of dollars in additional premium payments each year, the report said. However, the Office of Personnel Management now plans to rule that the government can continue to make a contribution to the health-care premiums of the lawmakers and their staff, it said, citing unnamed congressional sources and a White House official.
ObamaCare: For us peons only.
Last week, 10 checks totaling $3,764.61 were delivered to ex-prosecutor Steven Pagones — the first payments Brawley has made since a court determined in 1998 that she defamed him with her vicious hoax.
A Virginia court this year ordered the money garnisheed from six months of Brawley’s wages as a nurse there.
She still owes Pagones $431,000 in damages. And she remains defiantly unapologetic.
I'm sure she does. Because her mentor, Al Sharpton, remains likewise. In fact, if anything, the Brawley hoax helped his career immensely.
The funniest thing I'll always remember about this whole mess was Howard Stern constantly replaying a clip of Brawley trying to say "Nobody manipulates me or my family." She must have never seen/heard the second word for it came out as "manip-shnapes." It was one of the most hilarious Stern moments ever.
It's a rare thing, especially in the contemporary era, but there are the occasional issue (or issues) that simply emotional affect you. Because they're freakin' so well done, done by great writers. Here's three of mine:
IRON MAN (vol. 1) #78 -- "Long Time Gone." This was actually a "filler" issue, if you can believe it, back at a time when Marvel actually fulfilled its monthly publication obligations even if the next story wasn't yet ready. Writer Bill Mantlo has Tony Stark reminiscing about a particular adventure in Vietnam. He had Iron Man on site to check out how one of Stark's new weapons worked on the battlefield. Along the way, Stark is witness to the utter brutality of war, and eventually encounters a young -- and blind -- Viet Cong guerrilla. His hitches the young lad to his back and they both trek to safety. If you have dry eyes at the end you must have been an extra in Equilibrium.
MARVELS (Trade Paperback). Specifically, the chapter dealing primarily with the X-Men and the "Mutant Scare," which is supposed to coincide with the mutant team's first encounter with the robot Sentinels. If you don't already know, Marvels is a huge retrospective of key moments in Marvel history written by the modern master of continuity, Kurt Busiek (with painted art by Alex Ross). Told from the perspective of a Daily Bugle photographer, Phil Sheldon, the heart-wrenching moment comes about when Sheldon returns home from work one day to discover his daughters have befriended a homeless mutant girl. The girl, Maggie, was abandoned by her parents most probably because of her horribly misshapen facial features. Maggie is taken in by the Sheldons, but after the climactic night of the Mutant Scare where the Sentinels patrolled New York, Phil rushes home to make sure his family is OK -- knowing they're harboring a mutant. His girls greet him with tears running down their faces; Maggie had run away ... because she didn't want to put the welfare of the Sheldons in jeopardy (according to her cute handwritten note -- see below). The conclusion is a tear-jerker, with Sheldon's oldest daughter tearfully asking him if Maggie will be OK. All he can respond is "I hope so."
SUPERMAN: SECRET IDENTITY. This, in contrast to the two above, is a feel-good story that should leave you with a big smile on your face at story's conclusion. Also written by Kurt Busiek, it's about an alternate universe Superman who only wants to help out humanity and live in peace with his family -- a wife and twin daughters. But, the US government keeps harassing him. Eventually Supes works out an agreement with a government agent which enables him to protect his family. Like with the Marvels chapter above, if you have a family, the ending of Identity should have you closing the book and sighing in complete satisfaction.
What are some of yours?
Is it pure coincidence that these two landmark cities, known around the world as fountainheads of the most vibrant and creative aspects of American culture, have become our two direst examples of urban failure and collapse? If so, it’s an awfully strange one. I’m tempted to propose a conspiracy theory: As centers of African-American cultural and political power and engines of a worldwide multiracial pop culture that was egalitarian, hedonistic and anti-authoritarian, these cities posed a psychic threat to the most reactionary and racist strains in American life. I mean the strain represented by Tom Buchanan in “The Great Gatsby” (imagine what he’d have to say about New Orleans jazz) or by the slightly more coded racism of Sean Hannity today. As payback for the worldwide revolution symbolized by hot jazz, Smokey Robinson dancin’ to keep from cryin’ and Eminem trading verses with Rihanna, New Orleans and Detroit had to be punished. Specifically, they had to be isolated, impoverished and almost literally destroyed, so they could be held up as examples of what happens when black people are allowed to govern themselves.
*Sigh* WTF can one say to such utter and complete moonbattery? And if you think this is crackers (as in "nuts," not Caucasian-ness), be sure to check out Ace's dissection of this idiot's movie reviews, most recently that of The Conjuring.
Or, why workers in "Civil Rights" offices must have waaaaay too much time on their hands:
From now on, words and phrases such as “brown bag lunch” and “citizens” will be off-limits for Seattle government employees. The city’s Office of Civil Rights sent out a memo this week advising employees to refrain from using “potentially offensive” language in the workplace and in official government documents.
The Office recommends "lunch and learn" or "sack lunch" instead. I never heard of the former, but out west "sack" is frequently used in place of "bag," so that's certainly not weird. But whoever says "brown bag lunch" anyway? Isn't it just "bag lunch?" At any rate, you know why the word "brown" has to be excised, right? "To avoid potentially racial connotations to the phrase." Couldn't just apply, y'know, to ... the COLOR OF THE FREAKIN' BAG!!
In lieu of "citizen," the Office recommends using "resident." Because, after all, non-citizens might get offended. I've no idea why they might get offended since they're not citizens, but who ever can figure out the types of "intellects" the inhabit contemporary Offices of Civil Rights, right?
UPDATE: Prof. Stephen Clark writes to Insty:
You are absolutely right when your write, “These people are illiterate idiots. They should be mocked mercilessly and never taken seriously. Likewise the even bigger idiots who listen to them.”
However, not only are they idiots, they reveal themselves, all of them, to be racialist to the core. They are literally not normal. Normal people, and by that I mean the great majority of people, do not read racial intent into colloquial expressions of longstanding that have never before had racial coloration. These people are not normal, and they should be dismissed as such. In truth, they are paranoid cranks.
The former, whose highly regarded Ender's Game will shortly be released as a major motion picture starring Harrison Ford, is anathema to Hollywood types and is the subject of a rather large boycott effort. Why? As we've noted here several times, Card is a Mormon and outspoken opponent of homosexuality. Polanski is a highly regarded film director and producer who just happened to have brutally raped a 13 year-old girl in 1977. He subsequently fled the country and hasn't returned since. He was rewarded for this with myriad awards, including Academy Awards.
Angie Hartley pretty much nails it:
In 1977, Roman Polanski pleaded guilty to raping then 13-year-old Samantha Geimer inside the home of Jack Nicholson. Before his sentencing, he fled the country and has not returned to this day.
Geimer, who is releasing a memoir in September about the attack, has expressed forgiveness of Polanski. In 2003, when her attacker was nominated for an Academy Award, she wrote in the L.A. Times:
I believe that Mr. Polanski and his film should be honored according to the quality of the work. What he does for a living and how good he is at it have nothing to do with me or what he did to me. I don't think it would be fair to take past events into consideration. I think that the academy members should vote for the movies they feel deserve it. Not for people they feel are popular.
If people including Samantha Geimer can look past the wrongs of Roman Polanski, why can't we also ignore the crazy bantering of Orson Scott Card? For gay rights activists, the crime Orson Scott Card committed isn't really a legal offense, but the wound is very fresh. It's wise to do whatever they can to bring attention to their cause, but it might be a bit of a stretch to reject a film with so many well-intentioned contributors for just one crazy, old sci-fi writer. Still, for a group like Geeks OUT, it means a lot to have so many science-fiction fans standing against something they might otherwise hold sacred.
I'm sure Hartley knows that the issue is a fundamental difference between "progressives" and classical liberals (modern conservatives). The former want to eradicate the latter, not just debate/argue with it. To the former, there are certain issues which, if violated, are much worse than actual crimes like Polanski's. Orson Scott Card's "violation" is one such example: Being an outspoken advocate against the gay agenda. But anally raping a minor? Yeah, it may have been rape, "but it wasn't 'rape-rape,'" in the words of Whoopi Goldberg. Hell, we see this with our current administration and, of course, the mainstream media, too. Boss Obama and company tiptoe around [accurate] terminology like "War on Terror," "Radical Islamists" and the like, but there's never any vacillation when it comes to using harsh language against domestic political and cultural opponents. Never. (Here's a recent example. Here's another.)
To be sure, I abhor Card's past screeds against gays and find his recommendations quite dangerous if there were actually any way to implement them. And, I've no problem with any group or individual who wishes to nix seeing Ender's Game because of this. Or, any group or individual who wishes to boycott anything out of some strong conviction. But DON'T pretend that you modern "progressives" and Hollywood types occupy some moral high ground. Because you don't. Not at all. Even on iota. You make excuses for people like Roman Polanski, praise him, and bestow awards upon him. He RAPED a 13 year-old girl!
I'll never forget the one Academy Awards show (it was 1999 -- I just checked) when the Academy [remarkably] gave Elia Kazan a Lifetime Achievement Award. Why do I say "remarkably?" Because in one non-hypocritical moment, Hollywood bestowed an honor on a guy who was/is a cultural enemy. Kazan had named names back in the day -- Communists in Hollywood during the so-called "Red Scare" of the early 1950s. During the 1999 presentation, many of those in attendance remained seated and silently mouthed opposition. Among those I remember were Nick Nolte and Ed Harris. (One who bucked the trend and even gave a standing O to Kazan was Warren Beatty.) Yep. Those two, and many others, perfectly exemplified the above mentioned "political/cultural" hatred of [fellow American] enemies to a tee. They were still livid at what Kazan did half a century prior, and to which Kazan had stated was "only the more tolerable of two alternatives that were either way painful and wrong." But that doesn't matter to "progressives" in the poli-culture wars.
Always keep this post in the back of your mind the next time a Hollywood type/modern "progressive" lectures us all about some "moral" issue.
The Chattanooga Times Free Press editorial page editor was later ousted. The newspaper released a statement Thursday saying Johnson had been fired for "placing a headline on an editorial outside of normal editing procedures."
But in an interview with Fox News, Johnson said that policy -- requiring that last-minute changes to headlines be approved -- was only implemented after they published his piece.
Sounds exactly our current Administration, doesn't it? Making rules/laws on the fly, ignoring laws when it's convenient ... makes perfect sense, now.
Yeah, no sh**. Now tell us something we don't know.
The non-Council winner was Bill Whittle with The Lynching.
Full results are here.