August 22, 2016

Marvel's latest attempt at shaming you

As reported by Doug Ernst, Marvel's latest way to shame you is by lambasting any objection you may have to the new Spider-Man movie Mary Jane being a black woman.

Once again, any objection to this, however innocent, means you're a intolerant racist.

The gnomish Dan Slott, of course, was one of those screaming "racist," playing "Captain White Privilege." Maybe Dan could put actions where his mouth is by giving up some of his privilege via giving his writing chores to a minority. Don't count on it.

"Guardians of the Galaxy" director James Gunn chimed in too, stating that if you complain about MJ's ethnicity, "your life is too good."

Cripes, at this point, it is surprising that Gunn hasn't changed his last name to assuage the perpetually aggrieved SJW crowd.

Posted by Hube at 12:05 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

July 18, 2016

Now people should avoid Valiant Comics

Valiant Comics has jumped the shark:

In advance of San Diego Comic-Con 2016, Valiant is proud to announce that Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party’s presumptive nominee for President of the United States, will join forces with Faith “Zephyr” Herbert on November 2nd in FAITH #5 – a history-making, 48-page election special teaming the leading female hero in comics today with the first female nominee from a major political party for a special tale written by comics legend Louise Simonson with art by FAITH‘s own Pere Perez!

On November 2nd, just days before Election Day 2016, legendary writer Louise Simonson and Harvey Award-nominated artist Pere Perez present history in the making with a presidential milestone like no other!

GIVE. ME. A. F***ING. BREAK.

Hey, will Faith ask Hill why she trashed the reputations of the women who accused her husband of sexual assault and rape?

Will she ask her why she blamed a silly video for the attacks in Benghazi?

Will she ask her why she repeatedly lied about sending classified material on unsecured emails?

Etc.

This is why I have ceased giving my $$ to Marvel and DC for years now. Valiant is now added to the list.

Posted by Hube at 11:41 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

July 15, 2016

Marvel Comics absurdity update

It's bad enough that Marvel has a writer on one of its marquee books who was active in Democratic politics and who routinely trashes Republicans as "evil," but it also employs David Walker who writes (the poor-selling) Nighthawk.

Walker believes the biggest threats to black Americans are "racism and the criminal justice system that is infected by the disease or racism," and he's showing just that in his book.

The Nighthawk in this title is not, if you're an older Marvel reader, the hero from the old Defenders team book. He's the dimension-displaced vigilante from the J. Michael Straczynski Supreme Power/Squadron Supreme books, now in the Marvel Universe proper. The ... "hero" is stationed in Chicago, of all places, and in the preview of issue #3 we read this:

"The city of Chicago explodes in racial violence, but the nightmare is just beginning. NIGHTHAWK goes to war against a group of white supremacists, but with the cops also hunting him, he may have finally bitten off more than he can chew. And then there’s that serial killer on the loose…"

Also, someone has been "smuggling illegal arms into the city" -- which Nighthawk suspects involves the police. 'Hawk is "determined to keep the guns from making it onto the streets" ... he's "had enough of this @!#$", you see. (Those are the actual words.)

Indeed -- the greatest problems facing urban Chicago are white supremacists and cops smuggling illegal weapons into the city.

Here's what issue #3 looks like:



Y'know, the commonplace-in-Chicago "KKK," "Go Home," and "America First" protests.

And if you have an issue with what Walker's writing?



As you might consider, such racially conspiratorial nonsense doesn't sell all that well:

But these figures apparently are immaterial to Marvel. Walker's got a new gig called Occupy Avengers which "is hoping to be rather political."

Occupy? How 2011. And you may remember how the detestable Gail Simone's now-cancelled The Movement did in sales.

Consider what Douglas Ernst asks: "Imagine you are a writer on a Marvel comic book that can’t even sell 17,000 copies in its second month of release. Now imagine what would happen if you logged onto your social media account and mocked 'liberal black people' while flippantly telling them to 'eat a bag of d***s' if they were offended by your work."

Posted by Hube at 11:46 AM | Comments (10) | TrackBack

July 12, 2016

Marvel demonizes cops in the midst of Dallas police shootings

Well, Marvel writer Nick Spencer is at it again, this time going after law enforcement in Captain America: Sam Wilson #10:

Even ... "better" -- there's also the character Rage telling a group of young (black) men that it's "time we started hitting back":

Isn't that wonderful?

Interestingly, Spencer retweeted the following back on July 8:



Yes, yes, it's a link to an article in the Daily Kos using a graphic from the Democratic Underground -- two notorious left-wing hate sites -- and authored by the even more notorious fake black guy Shaun King. But consider -- even if the figures noted by Scott Walker are a fiction ...

... Spencer, on the other hand, bases his latest story on a different fiction: That police overwhelmingly, and unfairly, target blacks in the course of doing their jobs.

And there's more:








You simply cannot get a bigger disconnect from reality than this. The progressive bubble in which Spencer exists must be larger than the whole of Manhattan.

Whites are never portrayed as a "monolithic" movement? Tell that to white police officers across the country. It's never a bad apple or two, but a "culture of white supremacy" (or something) infecting whole police departments.

Tell that American college students who are routinely subjected to "white privilege" and "diversity" workshops (sometimes mandatory), let alone actual courses, which demonize all whites for the ills facing minorities and the world in general.

Tell that to Marvel itself, which routinely lectures its readers (and potential readers) of the need for more non-white characters, and anyone who disagrees is a racist. All the while the vast majority of its creators remain white (and male).

This is what Marvel thinks of you, America. Nick Spencer, writer of one of its marquee books, who uses sources like the Daily Kos and the Democratic Underground and has little compunction about trashing anyone with a contrary point of view (and, God forbid you be a member of the Republican Party) uses the company's published product to promulgate his personal point of view ... and give you the colossal middle finger.

(Image h/t: Doug Ernst)

Posted by Hube at 11:18 AM | Comments (46) | TrackBack

July 06, 2016

An old white guy is going to helm a 'young social activist' comic

Yeah, Marvel cares about diversity ... sometimes:

Marvel’s resurgent group of teenage crimefighters—whether that’s the time-lost young X-Men or the youngest All-New, All-Different Avengers—are doing something that’s very teen. They’re defying their older colleagues to go it alone, fighting crime and generally being all hopeful and grassroots-y while doing so.

That’s the premise behind Champions, a new book from Mark Waid and Humberto Ramos being released in the wake of Marvel’s “Marvel Now!” initiative later this year. Channelling a youthful sense of positivity and social activism, the new group is headlined by Ms. Marvel, Nova, and Ultimate Spider-Man Miles Morales, after they chose to quit the Avengers for reasons currently unknown.

Waid? Waid?? The guy is in his mid-50s. He's a straight white dude. What a laugh ...

But one thing's for sure -- he'll nail down the "social activism" part, you can count on that. Just check out his Twitter feed. And if you differ in opinion from him, you can f*** off.

Posted by Hube at 09:15 AM | Comments (15) | TrackBack

June 30, 2016

That's because insensitivity to Jews is acceptable

Marvel gabber Tom Brevoort on the Captain America-in HYDRA story:



Oh, I'm sure. But if the letter writers were complaining about homophobia, sexism, or Islamophobia, you can bet Brevoort would be oh-so delightfully contrite.

And here's our pal Dan Slott of Spider-Man [in]fam[y]:



Thanks for making that distinction, Danny. Using this standard, we should expect, then, no lectures from you about racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. because you're not black, female, gay, etc. Fair enough?

Douche.

Posted by Hube at 11:10 AM | Comments (31) | TrackBack

June 22, 2016

The Guccifer 2.0 docs

Just a quick link to the Guccifer 2.0 docs. I haven't had time to read through them but they do have some interesting stuff. There's a line item in the private jet spreadsheet that shows $1MM credit from a private jet company. How exactly does that work?

Posted by Duffy at 07:59 AM | Comments (284) | TrackBack

June 20, 2016

He forgot the exception

The gnomish Spider-Man writer Dan Slott:


What he forgot to add on his TwitLonger: "BUT, if the shooter is a radical Muslim who's proclaimed allegiance to ISIS, leave this part out and only zero in on the gun aspect."

To paraphrase Col. Henry Blake, "Biggest horse's patoot in the comic biz."

Posted by Hube at 05:27 PM | Comments (9) | TrackBack

June 12, 2016

Only we are worthy of protection, peasant

The California State Senate votes to exempt itself from its own strict gun control laws. The vote was 28-8.

Y'see, they're more important than YOU. They deserve protection. Not YOU.

Cali legislators also average approximately $140,000 in annual compensation. They get a free car and gasoline. Among other things.

And you thought things were wacky here in the one-party state of Delaware.

Posted by Hube at 08:25 AM | Comments (1181) | TrackBack

June 09, 2016

Just remember when Tea Partiers were dubbed 'violent'

HuffPost op-ed: Anti-Trump violence justified

"In the face of media, politicians, and GOP primary voters normalizing Trump as a presidential candidate — whatever your personal beliefs regarding violent resistance — there's an inherent value in forestalling Trump's normalization.

"Violent resistance accomplishes this."

Is that so.

(Via the Washington Examiner.)

Posted by Hube at 08:47 AM | Comments (47) | TrackBack

June 08, 2016

Progressive enclaves growing weary of ridiculously lax school discipline policies

What’s one of the first things that comes to mind when you hear “San Francisco”?

“Liberal”? “Progressive”?

Schools have been adopting liberal/progressive school discipline policies for years now, doing away with punishments like out-of-school suspension and replacing them with “less severe” alternatives like “restorative justice” — where misbehaving students get to “talk about” what ails them.

The idea is to keep disruptive kids in school so that they can learn, but it completely misses the point in that such kids don’t care about learning, and worse — they ruin it for the kids who want to learn.

And you know what they say about good intentions …

It seems even progressives have an upper tolerance limit. Teachers in the San Francisco Unified School District are fed up with restorative justice-style approaches as they claim “[s]tudents have been choked, they’ve been slapped, they have been given death threats almost daily.”

But the district, and the teachers union, remain committed to the current discipline policy.

“The policy is something we believe in, that kids should be in the school,” Lita Blanc, spokeswoman for Educators of San Francisco.

Ah, they believe.

From EAGNews.org:

The persistent problems with one first grade student at the school convinced teacher Erika Keil to complain to the principal, who opted not to renew the probationary teacher’s contract for next school year. The move sparked outrage from dozens of parents and teachers who descended on the school Tuesday to protest the principal’s decision.

The protesters toted picket signs reading “Advocating for student safety will cost you your job” and “Kick me, I’m a SFUSD teacher,” among others.

“To me, she did a fantastic job dealing with a difficult situation,” Keil’s colleague, Kathy Harriman, told ABC 7.

SFUSD board president Matt Haney told ABC 7 the school board could reverse the principal’s decision to dismiss Keil, but admitted that was unlikely.

Monroe students, parents and teachers, plan to continue to protest until Keil is reinstated.

The violent first-grader, meanwhile, remains in the classroom to torment his classmates, parents told the news site.

“That student has remained in the classroom without proper support,” [parent Louella] Hill said.



Across the country in another progressive enclave, New York City, a group of fed up parents have filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the city’s Department of Education because of school violence: “They allege that violence deprives black and Hispanic public-school students of their right to a sound, basic education — and that DOE refuses to confront the problem.”

Talk about your Catch-22. Given that the federal Department of Education’s own policies have played a very significant role in tying schools’ hands when it comes to discipline — based on the premise that penalties affect a disproportionate percentage of racial minorities — it should be very interesting to see how this turns out.

But until then, parents will continue to vote with their feet. They’ll lobby their legislators to allow (more) charter schools, they’ll hoof it to private and parochial schools, and they will homeschool their children.

Cross-posted at The College Fix.

Posted by Hube at 07:21 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

May 23, 2016

Captain America writer again equates legitimate political concerns with ultra-right fanaticism

If it wasn't bad enough that Captain America scribe Nick Spencer used one of Marvel's most despicably racist villain groups to chide Americans who are against illegal immigration, now he is utilizing Cap's deadliest enemy to castigate those who have issues with Middle Eastern immigration into Europe and how it's changing its societies.

Below is the Red Skull pontificating on the refugee crisis:

Perhaps the best response to this comes from Killer Moth, a regular commenter at FCMM (to whom the hat tip goes for this post):

"Hey, Spencer, I know you're trying to make Red Skull cartoonishly evil and racist, but when his rant -- or, really, the rant you put in his mouth -- actually sounds less insane than your regular words on Twitter and regular output, you're doing something wrong. "

I wonder how many Middle Eastern refugees Spencer has invited into his home? And if he has, has he had the "audacity" to establish any ground rules -- like "Hey, this is my house so here's how we do things"?

Posted by Hube at 09:41 AM | Comments (44) | TrackBack

May 09, 2016

The 'logic' of 'progressives'

"Right to privacy" = right kill an unborn child in the womb.

"Right to privacy" does NOT = right to avoid a grown, biological man watching you pee.

In fact, any laws contrary to the latter are like Jim Crow laws, according to our illustrious Attorney General.

That's right, if you don't want your young daughter going to a restroom with a grown person with a penis, you're just like the segregationist, racist bigots of the 1950s-60s South.

Here's what states like North Carolina ought to do: Establish "sanctuary bathrooms" which are (biologically) gender specific. Merely play the "progressives'" own game. And stick to it.

Posted by Hube at 06:55 PM | Comments (17) | TrackBack

May 07, 2016

Attention: If you disagree with comics creators, use the following method

Simply say "Fuck off."

After all, it's a favorite tactic used by Gerry Conway and Mark Waid:




So take this tweet, for example:



Here's what you say:


and

Posted by Hube at 06:54 AM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

Chutzpah

President Man-Child:


As Ace says, this, "On Day After It's Revealed His Foreign Policy Guru Has Been Deceiving America With Fictional Psyops"

Read more and be sick.

Posted by Hube at 06:03 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

May 05, 2016

Tweet of the Day

From our 'ol pal Ron Marz:



Indeed -- just look at what happened in November of 2008.

Posted by Hube at 09:06 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

May 02, 2016

Let's check in with the moonbat comics creators!

Retweeted by the gnomish Dan Slott:



Oh, so NOW the Left is concerned about free speech? Because of some dopey Trump supporter's (alleged) violence? Where have they been on college campuses the last decade or so? Why are they so determined to get Citizens United overturned? Where were they when Boss Obama had the creator of the video "responsible" for the Benghazi attacks jailed?

What a hoot.

Here's the ultra-PC (when it suits him) Ron Marz:



How dare people despise a movie trailer ... for a film that helps break the Hollywood "glass ceiling" (or whatever the hell the Left is pissed about today)!!!

Lastly, Kurt Busiek on being a citizen:



Yeah, except for the last seven years though. Gimme a royal break. So many of the things that pissed off guys like Kurt from 2001-2008 earned nary a peep from 2009 to the present. Not to mention, when people were "skeptical and wary" of Boss Obama, Kurt and his buddies were often ultra-quick to cry "RACISM!!"

Posted by Hube at 04:18 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

April 12, 2016

Imagine the headline if Trump or Cruz did this

Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton and New York City mayor Bill de Blasio make a racially insensitive joke? "Some" are "cringing," according to the New York Times.

Just imagine if Donald Trump and/or Ted Cruz had done that ... what would the Times' headline(s) be then??

Posted by Hube at 12:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 22, 2016

Two of our favorite moonbat comics folk react to Brussels attacks

Isn't the following tweet by the gnomish Dan Slott oh-so sweet?



He also snarkily retweets two tweets, one to which he reacts thusly -- "FFS" -- and another which says "@FoxNews right now blaming #brusselsattack on "political correctness."

Meanwhile 'ol Ron Marz has the cojones to tweet this:



Just not as shameless, you see, as Obama and the Left blaming mass shootings on the 2nd Amendment, the existence of Gitmo for the action of jihadis, and not to mention refusing to call what we're fighting what it is: Radical Islamic Terror. (Y'see, Slott, political correctness IS partly to blame for things like Brussels.)

Other than these, it was fairly quiet on the creator front regarding Belgium. Which also says something.

Posted by Hube at 07:30 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

March 15, 2016

Dare I ask?

What do you think the reaction would be from the media if Donald Trump (or Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio) supporters actively sought out Hillary Clinton/Bernie Sanders rallies and loudly protested them?

Here's a sample: Just recall the coverage of protests over ObumbleCare from 2010.

Among other things, despite ZERO evidence that racial epithets were hurled at members of the Congressional Black Caucus, the MSM dutifully repeated the accusations every chance it got.

Remember folks, no matter how bad a candidate Trump is, the mainstream media will make him (seem) far worse.

Posted by Hube at 12:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 29, 2016

Remember, "progressives" must all think alike

California Democratic Representative Karen Bass wants an African-American on the Supreme Court.

But, um, isn't there one already? Like ... Clarence Thomas?

“I think many people would like to see an African American on the Supreme Court,” Bass said. “We don’t really need to go into Clarence Thomas’ background or his behavior on the Court, but I think to have an African-American voice that has definitely not been there since Thurgood Marshall would really be an incredible contribution to our country.”

To his credit, host Al Sharpton clarified -- that "he and Bass weren’t suggesting Thomas wasn’t actually a true African American."

Gee, thanks.

Posted by Hube at 10:25 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 22, 2016

D'OH!


Posted by Hube at 05:23 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 18, 2016

February 17, 2016

Local moonbats cheer Scalia death

It's certainly been a while since we've checked in on the Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers which, for the uninitiated is actually called, aptly enough, Delaware Liberal.

Knowing they would be cheering on the death of Antonin Scalia is like predicting the sun would rise in the east. Here's a sample from their post "Proudly Speaking Ill of the Dead":

Post author nemski says "Scalia is dead and, if I believed in Hell, may he burn there for eternity."

Jason "Trust Fund" Scott: "Just Let me enjoy the thought of Scalia meeting Satan for a minute.”

puck: "This is how the conservative movement ends – one funeral at a time."

And from an earlier thread following the justice's death:

Jason "Trust Fund" Scott: "He was a terrible justice. . Everything was political for him. Good riddance."

nemski: "So fucking happy right now."

AQC: "I bet Scalia was with a young male prostitute when he kicked it."

Jason "Trust Fund" Scott: "If the heaven in hell Scalia believed in is real, Satan is ramming a red hot poker in his ass right now, and for good reason."

And so it goes ...

Posted by Hube at 08:34 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

February 15, 2016

Moonbat comics creators on Antonin Scalia's passing

This shouldn't come as a surprise at all:



Here's our constitutional scholar pal Ron Marz:



This was response to a tweet which said "Obama, on the other hand, not only voted against all of Bush's SCOTUS nominees; he voted to filibuster all of them, too. Precedent matters."

But, according to Marz, because Obama was elected (twice), this means he should get whatever he wants. Never mind that the decisions he made after being elected (twice) led to losing the House of Representatives and, more importantly, the Senate.

Y'know, the Senate which has the constitutional power to approve or reject the president's Supreme Court nominees.



No sh**, Gerry. Who said he didn't? Part you skipped: The Senate has to the right approve or deny ("advise and consent"). Whoops.

Read above, too, Dan Slott:



Mental midget.

And be sure to check out Mark Waid's timeline -- all chock full of selected quotes and instances of GOP SCOTUS politicization, but nary a word on those Democratic. Like Chuck Schumer calling for blocking all of George W. Bush's appointees. Or when, in 1960, when Democrats wanted to nix any election year SCOTUS appointments (remember, Eisenhower was prez that year).

Not to mention, here's then-Senator Obama himself on the "president won the election so he should get what he wants" line:

“There are some who believe that the President, having won the election, should have complete authority to appoint his nominee…that once you get beyond intellect and personal character, there should be no further question as to whether the judge should be confirmed. I disagree with this view.”

Always remember, those of you on the right side of the political spectrum (or even in the center) -- this is what contemporary comicbook folk think of you and your beliefs.

Posted by Hube at 09:46 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

February 08, 2016

The party of "science"

Remember, if you question in any way the science behind global warming climate change, you're "anti-science."

So, I wonder what that makes the ghouls at NARAL -- the National Abortion Rights Action League -- since they've taken issue with a Doritos ad from last night's Super Bowl:



"Humanizing fetuses ..."?? If fetuses aren't human, what, precisely, are they, NARAL?

(By the way, NARAL's current name is "NARAL Pro-Choice America," having altered it several times apparently to make it more "socially palatable." I decided to use the one which best describes its mission.)


"Science" says: "Not human."

Posted by Hube at 10:04 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 03, 2016

Marvel writer clueless about irony

Ms. Marvel writer G. Willow Wilson (who happens to be Muslim) not only fails to grasp the irony of her words regarding Marvel chief Ike Perlmutter and his donations to Donald Trump, but engages in that which is the very reason The Donald has been the GOP frontrunner for so long.

... a lot of people have been left wondering: was this really a donation to benefit veterans? Or was it a donation to benefit Donald Trump? And if it was the latter, what does that mean for fans of Marvel comics? Did the money come out of Perlmutter’s private fortune, or did some portion of what you spent on your Marvel pull list support a political candidate who wants to deport millions of immigrants, build a wall along the Mexican border and require religious minorities to carry ID badges?

Fact check: That would be deport illegal immigrants, and precisely when did Trump say he would require religious minorities to wear ID badges? Or, is that over-the-top hyperbole which totally twists what he had said (which was still wrong, IMO)?

Wilson goes on to complain about fans spending money where someone will benefit who has supported a candidate whose election will lead to "the real possibility of ... a dystopian autocracy."

Hey Willow -- where've you been the last seven years, huh?

The irony is delicious. "Progressive" creators have crapped on conservatives/Republicans for years with impunity, then complain and make wise-ass comments when comics fans who share that ideology react. And now, all of a sudden, because someone they hold in contempt is being supported by a person in their business, well, it's a CRISIS.

Wilson says "being a Republican isn't a crime," but "this is not an ordinary election cycle." Well, you can bet if she had her way, being a Republican would be a crime. And 2008 wasn't an ordinary election cycle, either. Then, you had a completely compliant press corps which refused to dig even an inch into Boss Obama's background. If they did, there's a good chance Hillary Clinton would be president now.

So excuse me, Ms. Wilson, while I laugh my a** off at you, Mark Waid, and all the other conceited, arrogant comics folk. Turnabout, as they say, is fair play.

The only thing which would please more is if Perlmutter told Waid and anyone else who is bitching about his donation to "please leave (the company), and don't come back." Just like Waid tells fans with whom he disagrees.

UPDATE: Check out Doug Ernst's take.

Posted by Hube at 05:24 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

February 01, 2016

LMAO -- Marvel CEO donates to Trump; social justice warriors lose their minds

Marvel CEO Isaac Perlmutter recently donated a YUGE $1 million to The Donald's personal nonprofit, and the SJWs are, needless to say, losing their minds:












In a matter of speaking, "Welcome to the party, people."

Thanks to the hateful, bigoted, hypocritical, insulting, and just plain stupid language of the likes of Ron Marz, Dan Slott, Tom Brevoort, Nick Spencer, Mark Waid, Gerry Conway and numerous others -- whose remarks have all been chronicled here and by fellow travelers Douglas Ernst, Avi Green, and Nate Winchester -- there are many right-leaning people who have dropped reading (modern) comics altogether.

After all, to paraphrase Colossus' sub-banner, why would any individual want to give money to those who spit in your face?

Hell, writer Mark Waid even told a fan not to buy his stuff because he didn't like how he was spoken to regarding a Twitter spat about ObamaCare:



No problem. We don't need to shell out $$ to so-called creators who tell fans to "f*** off."

Posted by Hube at 06:33 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

January 29, 2016

Germany's new found love of guns

Now this is strange. Not only are Europeans turning into xenophobic racists who are expelling migrants left and right, now they all seem to want guns. Wait, I thought guns were useless for self defense? I've always been told that you'll never be able to draw it fast enough to defend yourself. Just call a cop. Nobody needs a gun, don't be ridiculous.

Looks like you can turn liberals into conservatives. All you have to do is implement liberal policies and make people really enjoy living under the results.

Posted by Duffy at 03:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

My my, how quickly things change

Finland and Sweden are going to deport tens of thousands of "migrants" to avoid a "crisis".

Funny. When Texas and Arizona were up in arms about the tens of thousands of "migrants" overwhelming our borders and our services they were labeled racists and xenophobes and so on. I suppose now it would be acceptable to start rounding up our illegal immigrants (let alone the legal ones) and start shipping them home?

There's an old saying that comedy is when you fall down a well. Tragedy is when I fall down a well.

Posted by Duffy at 10:07 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

January 28, 2016

Hey, isn't it funny how ...

... "progressives" have immediately jumped on the fact that a Texas grand jury has indicted the two people responsible for the undercover sting videos of Planned Parenthood, meaning the latter is completely exonerated? But ...

... when it's a grand jury refusing to indict a cop who used deadly force (especially against a minority), it's a miscarriage of justice and an indictment of the justice system itself, right?

Posted by Hube at 01:17 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

January 23, 2016

Maybe he should relinquish some roles -- give 'em to minorities

Mark Ruffalo, perhaps most famous for playing the Hulk in the Avengers films, is considering joining Will Smith, Jada Pinkett and Spike Lee in boycotting the Oscars ... because white privilege is rampant in America:

I’m weighing it, yes. That’s where I’m at right now. I woke up in the morning thinking, ‘what is the right way to do this?’ Because if you look at Martin Luther King, Jr.’s legacy, what he was saying is the good people who don’t act are much worse than the wrongdoers who are purposely not acting and don’t know the right way.

It isn’t just the Academy Awards. The entire American system is rife with white privilege racism. It goes into our justice system.

Ruffalo is up for Best Supporting Actor for the film Spotlight; think he'll remove his name from consideration so a black or Latino actor can fill it?

Cheeyeah, right.

"Guilty" white progressives like Ruffalo never apply their beliefs to themselves. It's like progressives who demand everyone pay higher taxes because "we're all in it together" (as they define "it"); however, they don't send extra cash to the federal treasury. In fact, they often take advantage of every tax dodge their wealthy accountants can muster for 'em.

Posted by Hube at 07:57 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

January 18, 2016

Amen. You first.


Posted by Hube at 10:51 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

January 05, 2016

Another example of why Donald Trump is soaring

New Philly mayor Jim Kenney restores his town to "sanctuary city" status.

And look at the chick's raised fist of approval. Isn't that sweet?


Is that vodka in the water bottle?


Meanwhile, the Left is all aghast at the Oregon "standoff" by some militia types.

Regarding this, and the ridiculous contradictions and hypocrisy, National Review's Kevin D. Williamson sums it up perfectly:







And the awesome conclusion:



See also here.

Anyone think there'll be "firearm sanctuary cities" following Boss Obama's upcoming executive orders on gun control? If so, what's the big deal, "progressives"? You pick and choose which laws should be followed, and those in government are rarely, if ever, prosecuted for breaking 'em, so ...?

Posted by Hube at 05:24 PM | Comments (55) | TrackBack

December 23, 2015

Liberal logic 2

Posted by Felix at 08:53 AM | Comments (50) | TrackBack

Liberal logic

Posted by Felix at 08:43 AM | Comments (41) | TrackBack

Just imagine if this was done to Obama's daughters

Does anyone think a mainstream media outlet like the Washington Post would run a cartoon like this about Boss Obama and his daughters??

I now await all the self-righteous media talking heads discussing the racist stereotypes of Hispanic people, including that dolt Jorge Ramos at Univision.

Posted by Hube at 07:05 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

December 21, 2015

Moonbat comics creator Great Hypocrisy Alert

Our pal Dan Slott retweets:



But ... isn't the precise opposite what we've always heard from this 'bat, along with many others??

Here's but one of innumerable examples. We're sure you've read 'em all before.

In a nutshell, let's rephrase that tweet above from the real 'bat SJW perspective: "There is absolutely nothing bad in seeing yourself in a character who doesn't look like you, or is another gender, race, etc. than you ... unless that character is straight and white, of course."

Really wish this idiot would get his head straight. Just once.

Posted by Hube at 05:29 PM | Comments (41) | TrackBack

December 16, 2015

What a shame

Speaking of comics moonbats, Avi reports that writers Kurt Busiek and Gail Simone are a bit befuddled at being Twitter blocked by artist Greg Capullo:





Good to see them getting some of their own medicine, especially from a peer in the biz.

Busiek blocked me some time back, and I had never tweeted anything to/about him up to that point. (He probably saw some of the back-and-forths between Ron Marz, Dan Slott, Mark Waid, et. al. and decided to be ... "proactive.")

Simone, on the other hand, blocked Doug Ernst and I after we pressed her on the question of whether only white people can be racist. She was, at the time, busily retweeting messages from a radical feminist whose position was just that. (Simone never answered the question, natch.)

Posted by Hube at 04:54 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

He's a brain surgeon. You write comicbooks.

"Smart" Spider-Man write Dan Slott on GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson at last night's debate:



Three things:

1) Great grammar there, Dan: "a kid" and then the pronoun "they." Your editor sure must work overtime. Marvel's sure getting their money's worth.

2) Carson's a brain surgeon. You write comicbooks. In other words, you're an intellectual gnat compared to him.

3) You're a racist.

RELATED: Fellow comics moonbat Ron Marz engaging in cognitive dissonance:



But remember -- here's the guy who said Democrat debates are "conversations[s] between intelligent adults." Yet, our perpetually lying Democratic front-runner/former Secretary of State using a personal, unsecured server containing top secret emails is ... merely worthy of a "bingo game."

Posted by Hube at 04:41 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

December 14, 2015

Spare me: Who wants to hear about gun control from Hollywood??

Does anyone want to hear from pampered celebrities -- many of whom have armed bodyguards to protect them -- about "ending gun violence?"

Give me a freakin' break, already.

Posted by Hube at 04:42 PM | Comments (271) | TrackBack

December 07, 2015

Media upset at foreign-born being questioned at airports; still want folks to give up constitutional rights if on 'no-fly' list

The poor elite Left -- they just can't figure out what the f*** they want.

Headline in the Philly Inquirer today: "Paris terror fuels fear of American Muslims." It features the tale of a guy who's been here for 15 years, an immigrant from the West Bank, who was detained for a whole two minutes after passengers heard him speaking Arabic.

"They gave us that look - like we were terrorists," he says.

Naturally, the Inquirer wants this story to pull at your heartstrings. They even quote the laughable CAIR -- Council on American-Islamic Relations -- as saying after the Paris terror attacks there has been "an 'unprecedented backlash' against Muslims to an extent not seen since the days after Sept. 11, 2001."

Meanwhile, Jews remain overwhelmingly the target of anti-religious hate, not Muslims, and it's not even close:

So, we're supposed to get all irate about a dude getting questioned at an airport for a few minutes after speaking Arabic, but we should just nod and say "thank you" to stuff like this:



Now, why would any right-leaning person be wary of this?

As Glenn Reynolds says, "Now let me take your guns away based on a secret list that only I control."

After the IRS debacle and people like Fox News contributor Steve Hayes being placed on the "no-fly" list, not to mention the innumerable lies and obfuscations the administration has promulgated over these seven years -- with emphasis on its opinions regarding firearm ownership (or lack thereof) -- is there any ... ANY ... wonder about conservative skepticism?

Quite related: Our buddy Ron Marz:



Just imagine his reaction if a conservative replaced the part about guns with something about Islam.

*Yawn*

Posted by Hube at 04:59 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

December 06, 2015

Why Delaware is a deep-blue joke

Read this and try not to say to yourself "What. The. F***?"

Anyone think the morons at the News Journal or the three politicians would rush out there to exclaim same about the political right ... and/or law-abiding gun owners?

Posted by Hube at 09:26 AM | Comments (46) | TrackBack

December 03, 2015

Ignore Boss Obama, et. al. on gun control and read this

What the Clinton Library says about gun control:

The first find was nothing less than staggering—a fax from Jody Powell, President Jimmy Carter’s press secretary, to George Stephanopoulos, Bill Clinton’s new press secretary, warning Clinton to back off from gun control because … it just doesn’t work.

“If there is an area that needs ‘new thinking,’ ‘rethinking,’ ‘a different kind of Democrat’ and all that, crime/gun control is it. From the outside this does not appear to be happening. What I hear and read sounds like the same old ideas being presented with the same worn-out rhetoric.

“Much as I hate to say it, the NRA is effective primarily because it is largely right when it claims that most gun control measures inconvenience and threaten the law-abiding while having little or no impact on violent crime and criminals.”

Powell goes to note that, even though he supports gun registration "in principle," one has to ask: "Are the people causing the problem going to comply voluntarily? If not, do you have a way to effectively enforce compliance?"

Of all people, Bill Clinton's then-press secretary George Stephanopoulos wrote on Powell's fax sheet "This makes a lot sense."

Via Insty.

Posted by Hube at 10:05 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

November 30, 2015

Super-powered mutants vs. guns: Comics creators wildly stupid

Tying into today's previous post and the new Captain America: Civil War trailer, how is it that "progressives" are so in favor of taking away law abiding folks' means to protect and defend themselves, yet are loath to even register super-powered mutants with the government?

Former X-Men writer Chris Claremont was the first to raise the spectre of a "mutant registration act" back in the classic X-Men #141-142, "Days of Future Past." The dystopian "future" of 2013 came about as a result of Senator Kelly's assassination by the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants. But the resulting passage of the "Mutant Control Act" was declared unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court, so the government (presumably the legislative and executive branches working together) brought back the Sentinel program.

Kitty Pryde, who traveled back to 1980 to prevent Kelly's assassination (in the comics; in the film version it was Wolverine), said "bless 'em" regarding the Supreme Court's ruling while recounting to the X-Men how the future comes about. Moira MacTaggert says about the Act "Registration today, gas chambers tomorrow."

Senator Kelly pops back up in X-Men #158:



MacTaggert's immediate reply to this is "That miserable, sanctimonious sod!"

The first X-Men film has Jean Grey debating Senator Kelly thusly: Kelly makes an analogy to possessing and registering firearms, whereupon Grey retorts that we don't require registration for people to live. But many mutants are much more dangerous than guns! Including most especially Ms. Grey (see X-Men 3)!!

Claremont's clear intent is to have the reader sympathize with the rights of mutants. His views on gun control are hard to find (I couldn't discover anything on Google), but his feelings about the 1980s, Reaganism and the "dangers" of Christian fundamentalism are out there.

If Claremont and his fellow creators (most especially contemporary ones) want to be anywhere near consistent, they have to be pro-mutant (and superhero) registration if they are in favor of same for guns (or the outright banning thereof). There's really no discussion.

As comics journalist Tom Spurgeon wrote back in the day, "The same way that the X-Men or similar series can only go so far when speaking to identity and outsider issues before people begin to realize shooting raybeams from your eyes really is different enough from sexual or racial identity to kind of limit any insight to be gained ..."

"Go so far" indeed. And directly speaks to folks like this idiot.

The next time you see a guy like Ron Marz or Dan Slott or Nick Spencer yammering about gun control/confiscation on social media, don't bother trying to (easily) poke holes in their "arguments" -- simply ask them if they'd be in favor of at least registering mutants and other super-powered individuals. If they say "no," then you got 'em. Any rationalizations they offer will be stupid. Period.

Posted by Hube at 06:03 PM | Comments (51) | TrackBack

Boss Obama, libs, the press go nuts after Planned Parenthood shooting

Reason.com begins:

After Friday's mass shooting at a shopping center in Colorado Springs, President Obama issued his usual vague call for more gun control.

We have to do something, the president says. But what exactly? It is not surprising that Obama did not bother to address that question, because there is no good answer to it.

According to people who knew him, John Dear, the man arrested for killing three people and injuring nine in last week's attack, was an eccentric, off-putting loner with anger issues. But he apparently did not have the sort of criminal or psychiatric record that would have prevented him from legally buying a gun.

NBC News adds "there would have been nothing apparent in Dear's background—including a felony conviction or previous mental health issue—that would have disqualified him from buying firearms."

The usual suspects like Dan Slott and Ron Marz have their Twitter feeds chock full of snarky comments about guns and the right-wing, but like with Boss Obama you never actually see real solutions proposed.

Obama has mentioned that Australia is a model the US could look to; however, Australia confiscated firearms from private ownership. I've no doubt that that is ultimately what the president would like here, but he sure ain't gonna get that with an executive order. As I noted, the only real "short-term solution" is getting a liberal Supreme Court justice who will provide the needed balance tip to "reinterpret" the 2nd Amendment.

So what is it, "progressives?" Why not just come out and say it -- you want to ban private ownership of guns? If you want more restrictions, like what, for instance?

Take Marz's comment:



See the Reason (something which you're sorely lacking, Ronnie) article above. Where does the line get drawn? Who decides? And who's "not asking questions?"

Continue to challenge the 2nd Amendment clueless. Because the mainstream media sure won't.

Posted by Hube at 05:53 PM | Comments (42) | TrackBack

November 25, 2015

'Captain America: Civil War' trailer -- first look!

Here it is -- the first look at Captain America: Civil War due out May 6th, 2016:

Was that ... the Black Panther I saw? I believe it was!

I'll be interested to see just how much they play up the "We want Bucky Barnes" angle vs. the whole "superhero registration" thingie. In the comics, Tony Stark was turned into an ogre, completely obliterating the history of his character, not to mention we were supposed to feel sympathy for Cap and his team.

This is how you gotta love the "logic" "progressive" comics creators -- law-abiding Americans (or whoever) are supposed to register and/or give up their guns as a means of personal protection ... but don't dare advocate that a superhuman -- who might be able to single-handedly blow up an entire city -- register himself with the feds!!

Posted by Hube at 07:33 AM | Comments (336) | TrackBack

November 18, 2015

Refugees

via Insty.

Posted by Hube at 06:49 PM | Comments (55) | TrackBack

November 17, 2015

The hilarious cognitive dissonance of the Left

This image was making the rounds yesterday and earlier today on social media:

Aside from it being inaccurate -- um, anyone recall the Boston Marathon bombers? -- we see this headline on Philly.com today: Islamic State threatens attack on Washington, other countries

Now, anyone remember how "progressives" let George W. Bush have it for supposedly ignoring that PDB -- President's Daily Brief -- a few months into his presidency that said al Qaeda was determined to strike against the US? And then 9/11 happened?

Now, however, these same "progressives" are excoriating the "right-wing" for wanting to cease allowing refugees in to the country (or, at least their state) because, supposedly, no refugee has ever committed a terrorist act here yet.

But here is ISIS saying just what they want to do. And they've already gotten Russia (bombing of the airliner), and now France.

I'd call it hilarious if it wasn't so damn stupid.

Posted by Hube at 05:23 PM | Comments (58) | TrackBack

November 16, 2015

Moonbat comics creators on the Paris terror attacks

You knew it was gonna happen -- the usual comicbook 'bats have chimed in with their "superior" intellects about the terror attacks in France last Friday ... because, after all, they're soooo smart. Because they write comics. And have thousands of Twitter followers.

Here's Captain America scribe Nick Spencer saying that the LAST thing we need to do is ... stop allowing mid-east refugees into our countries:





Can you believe this? ISIS -- is worried about public relations! A genocidal terror group was pissed off at the world assisting the people they scared out of their own homes, most especially at how "it would make them look." Who knew??

Folks, it doesn't get much more progressive-elitist bullshittery than that.

Here's our 'ol pal Ron Marz:



Wait -- you mean we shouldn't have responded by attacking Afghanistan??

Then there was this retweet by Marz, Mark Waid and Kurt Busiek:



I really would like to hear what these geniuses suggest the West do. Of course Western nations have to balance the civil rights of its Muslim citizens with that of (militarily) responding to groups like ISIS. But, unfortunately, groups like ISIS understand only one thing: force. To suggest we can actually reason with these barbarians is akin to believing Bernie Sanders can actually pay for all the things he is promising Americans in his presidential campaign.

The sad fact of the matter is that ISIS knows it can count on touchy-feelie types like these dopes to disseminate memes like the above. Face it: there was NO massive anti-Muslim backlash after 9/11, no matter what "progressives" tell you. The Left fears the "dreaded" right-wing -- and groups like the NRA -- more than they fear radical Islamist groups. Remember, Hillary Clinton referred to the GOP as her "enemy," not ISIS or al Qaeda, or anyone like that.

President Lemon immediately went after the NRA and believers in the 2nd Amendment after shootings in Roseburg, Oregon. But Friday after the France attacks? "I don't want to speculate." Absolutely unbelievable.

Speaking of Bernie Sanders (and not France related), here's Marz again:



Uh huh: Bernie Sanders says climate change causes terrorism. Hillary Clinton uses 9/11 to defend her Wall Street connections.

Real "high bar" 'ya have there, Ronnie.

Lastly, this may be the most sensible tweet of all:



"I feel like I know nothing at all." The reason for that is simple, Gail: Because you don't.

Posted by Hube at 05:37 PM | Comments (12) | TrackBack

November 09, 2015

Why are Ron Marz, Mark Waid, Kurt Busiek, Nick Spencer, and Erik Larsen racists?

I mean, why else would they tweet stuff like this?







And retweets by Busiek and Larsen:





Aren't these special.

Need I remind you what these hypocritical dolts would be tweeting if such was being said about candidate Barack Obama?

Let's take a little gander at a comparison of the two African-Americans -- the president and the would-be president:

Early years and academics:

Ben Carson has admitted to being a punk in school. Born in Detroit and raised by a single mother, Carson lived through what many would call the “black experience.” But his mother wouldn’t let Ben become a statistic. She forced him to read and not watch TV. When Ben was 14, he made a turnaround which he has credited to his faith and good decisions. He cleaned up his act, got great grades and “had the highest S.A.T. in 20 years Detroit had seen.” His stellar academic record is what prompted the West Point’s informal “offer” which he didn’t accept. Yeah, that’s the “controversy.” No, really. That’s the entire controversy. Ben Carson applied to and was accepted at Yale. The only school to which he applied, by the way.

Barack Obama was raised by his white mother in Hawaii. He moved around, including some time spent in Indonesia. He was accepted to Occidental College after high school. His grades are unknown, his SAT score is unknown but from all relevant accounts, was likely below average. So for most information, we just have to take Obama’s word for it. Lucky for us, Obama admits to being a “loafer” who “abused drugs” which isn’t exactly how premier students at either Columbia and Harvard describe themselves…

Obama’s academic records from Columbia and Harvard are still sealed. The media has not investigated at all, because they don’t want to know, and they don’t want the rest of us to know.

Actually, Obama's academic records are not "sealed" by any legal order ... just at relevant folks' request. No essential difference, really.

Associations:

Ben Carson spent a great deal of time learning medicine, and therefore likely spent the majority of his time with neurosurgeons. Call it a hunch. He also served on the boards of many businesses.

Barack Obama has associated with marxists and terrorists: Frank Marshall Davis a communist poet, Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dorn, David Axelrod and many other “questionable” people. Don’t worry. Whenever anyone found out about them, he immediately threw them under the bus.

Awards:

Carson:
  • Received the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2008
  • Named one of “America’s Best Leaders” by US News & World Reports in 2008
  • Received the Jefferson Award in 2000 for “Greatest Public Service Benefiting the Disadvantaged”
  • Awarded the Healthcare Humanitarian Award in 2004 because he has “enhanced the quality of human lives and has influenced the course of history through ongoing contributions to healthcare and medicine.”
  • Named by CNN and TIME Magazine as one of the nation’s 20 foremost physicians and scientists in 2001
  • Recipient of the 2006 Spingarn Medal which is the highest honor bestowed by the NAACP.
  • Awarded 60 honorary doctorate degrees and dozens of national merit citations.
  • Authored over 100 neurosurgical publications
  • Author of 6 books

Obama:

  • Freedom of the City of Cape Town (jointly with Michelle Obama)
  • 2009 Nobel Peace Prize
  • Best Spoken Word Album Grammy Awards for abridged audiobook versions of Dreams from My Father in February 2006 and for The Audacity of Hope in February 2008
  • 2011 Transparency Award jointly offered by OMB Watch, the National Security Archive, the Project on Government Oversight, the Reporters’ Committee for Freedom of the Press and OpenTheGovernment.org

Even the mainstream press admitted they didn't know much about candidate Obama:

It's their own fault ultimately, of course.

As for stupid statements, the media has been on Carson's case for utterances about the Egyptian pyramids, the Founders, and his faith. But what about Boss Obama?

(Oh wait -- don't forget Hillary Clinton's I tried to join the Marines and NASA, not to mention being under sniper fire!)

Look, anyone with half a brain knows that Carson is getting this frenzied treatment because he's a Republican. The media shrugged (and shrugs) at Obama's whoppers with a "Wellll, he embellished a little, yeah ... maybe misremembered some details ... so what?"

It's just like how Dan Quayle's boneheaded gaffes meant he was as dumb as a slice of bread, but Joe Biden? "Just Joe being Joe." Nothing to see here.

In conclusion, the media and "progressives" in general have themselves to blame for the complete skepticism of many folks when it comes to scrutiny of Ben Carson and other GOP pols. Which is a shame because if/when one of these folks do utter a legitimately huge whopper (which Carson's West Point saga was not), a sizable segment of the population simply won't believe it.

As for Marz, Waid and the rest of the moonbat comics creators -- you reap what you sow. Racists.

Posted by Hube at 06:26 PM | Comments (303) | TrackBack

November 05, 2015

Why is Mark Waid a racist?

I mean, why else would he tweet something like this?


Posted by Hube at 07:12 AM | Comments (10) | TrackBack

November 01, 2015

October 29, 2015

Still missing the point about 'Captain America'

New Captain America scribe Nick Spencer tweeted out the following yesterday:



Well, duh. Because he agrees with you.

But the article's author, Brett White, like Spencer is missing the point. (And they're doing it on purpose, too.) I won't bore you again with the reasons why -- you know why by now.

I'll merely point to this post, this one, and this one.

Lastly, the article notes that yeah, the writer has a left-wing point of view. Gee, thanks. Now, show me the last Cap story with a distinctly right-wing bent.

Posted by Hube at 05:00 PM | Comments (18) | TrackBack

The difference between the early 70s and now

The GOP actually joined with Democrats regarding the impeachment of Dick Nixon.

Now? The Dems slam the move to impeach the arrogant and sniveling IRS commissioner.

“Calling this resolution a ‘stunt’ or a ‘joke’ would be insulting to stunts and jokes,” Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (Md.) the committee’s top Democrat, said in a statement. He said the impeachment resolution was “ridiculous” and a waste of taxpayer money.

“Instead of squandering millions of taxpayer dollars on baseless partisan attacks,” Cumming said, “the committee should focus on issues that matter to all Americans, like bringing down the costs of prescription drugs, as I have requested for the past year with no success.”

Of course, Cummings not only tried "to obstruct the investigation into the IRS for targeting conservatives, his office took part in the targeting."

This is the way things are, now. No one at the State Dept. has been held accountable for anything Benghazi-related, but the maker of that supposedly "riot-inciting" video is in custody.

Dinesh D'Souza does jail time while Lois Lerner gets off scot-free.

If Hillary is elected, does anyone think this will get any better?

Posted by Hube at 04:54 PM | Comments (42) | TrackBack

October 27, 2015

Quote of the Day

"Lois Lerner is free. Kim Davis was imprisoned. Hillary is free. Filmmaker is in prison." -- John Nolte

Posted by Hube at 05:36 PM | Comments (40) | TrackBack

October 26, 2015

Dan Slott gets caught -- blames 'those with agenda,' Internet

From the guy who constantly moans about having so much work to do, ya'd think he'd get off the Internets for long stretches at a time, eh?

But no, he is so obsessed with what people think of him that he has to scour the Intertubes looking for any and all criticisms ... and if he can't make them go away, he'll make stuff up.

Case in point: Doug Ernst nailed Slott on his comments about Peter Parker -- how his love is more superficial than that, of all people, Dr. Octopus:

... when you read all the Otto Octavius stories of his background, of his growing up, of who he was — and even as Dock Ock — all the women he falls in love with, he sees them for who they are inside.

Look at Stunner. Look at all these, like, nerdy girls he was dating as Otto. I think that’s something Otto does something better than Peter. He sees people who are truly beautiful and loves them for that.

And you look at everyone Peter has fallen in love with, and every single one of them is superficially beautiful on the outside. And the reason for that is they’re all created by John Romita Sr., who drew everyone woman beautiful.

What guy wouldn’t fall for Gwen Stacy or Mary Jane? Or even if he falls in love with like a Deb Whitman, yeah, she’s the girl with glasses, but she’s the girl with glasses who can suddenly take off her glasses and whip out the hair.

Everyone Peter falls in love with is so classically beautiful, and to me that is anti-Marvel.

Here is the actual video, too, so you can see for yourself.

But Slott, the little obsessed gnome that he is, says Doug (without mentioning him by name, natch) took him "out of context." But of course!

The frustration of being in the public eye (even in a small pond) is everything you do or say gets scrutinized, pulled out of context, and twisted by those with an agenda.

Oy.

In a video from a convention in January I talked about two or three different characters from the Spider-Man supporting cast being designed/drawn as being "superficially beautiful on the outside". That was talking about the characters' external appearance ONLY-- and NOT about them being superficial on the inside as well.

Gwen (as drawn by Steve Ditko and later by John Romita Sr.) and MJ (as drawn by JR SR.-- Ditko only drew her obscured by a vase) were both classically beautiful characters. They practically walked off the covers of the Romance comics of the day.

It's pretty much stating the obvious when you posit that "it's easy to see why Peter Parker would be attracted to them at first sight".

That's NOT saying that their characters WEREN'T well written or that they DIDN'T have depth.

The lengths people will go to bend, distort, or twist what you say-- because you made Black Cat evil, or you worked on Brand New Day, or you "killed" Peter Parker (for 30 issues before he came back) will never cease to amaze me. :-P

Internet, you just go on being the internet. You're adorable.

This, from a guy who routinely tweets and retweets political stuff that really takes words and meanings out of context.

Read Slott's own words on this, and watch the video. You decide if Ernst "bent," "distorted" or "twisted" Slott's words. For me, it's rather easy to conclude exactly what Ernst did. Again, based on Slott's own words.

Posted by Hube at 07:11 PM | Comments (16) | TrackBack

October 21, 2015

As the comics creators go nuts justifying their biases ...

... just remember the following:

Yeah, that's Marvel bigwig Tom Brevoort saying they "probably" wouldn't allow Frank Miller to do a Captain America tale a la his Holy Terror story.

Cap can, however, go after the Tea Party and put forth messages that being against illegal immigration is racist/hateful/xenophobic/outoftouch ... but battle radical Islamic terrorists? INSENSITIVE! INTOLERANT!

And this from Grant Morrison on the Miller work:

Batman vs. Al Qaeda! It might as well be Bin Laden vs. King Kong! Or how about the sinister Al Qaeda mastermind up against a hungry Hannibal Lecter! For all the good it's likely to do. Cheering on a fictional character as he beats up fictionalized terrorists seems like a decadent indulgence when real terrorists are killing real people in the real world. I'd be so much more impressed if Frank Miller gave up all this graphic novel nonsense, joined the Army and, with a howl of undying hate, rushed headlong onto the front lines with the young soldiers who are actually risking life and limb 'vs.' Al Qaeda.

I'd be impressed if Morrison bought a pricey mansion along the US-Mexico border with no fences or other means of security. Or spoke out against the government so that he'd become targeted by the IRS (or whatever state enforcement arm). Or had his healthcare premiums skyrocket after being outright lied to by the chief exec. Or ...

But comics creators at large didn't have to be that vocal about Miller's anti-al Qaeda work, because the innumerable media voices did it for them:

Newsarama: “[Holy Terror] doesn't look at the villains in any way or explore the differences between Muslims and terrorists "a mean and ugly book.”

Robot 6: “ ... the work of someone who was profoundly affected by the events of September 11th, to the point where fear took over from whatever artistic drive used to push [his] work."

Wired: "Fodder for the anti-Islam set."

Comics Alliance: "The slurs against Islam continue as the book goes on ..."

USA Today: "winds up buried under its one-dimensional barrage of patriotism ... the rah-rah enthusiasm for wasting terrorists so nastily would seem more fitting or even a cathartic experience for some."

ComicBookMovie.com: "probably the most ridiculous, shallow, offensive piece of propaganda I think I’ve ever read."

Think Progress: "noxious politics ... viciously Islamophobic sentiments ... twisted thinking."

Las Vegas Weekly: "... in service of an ugly story and uglier politics."

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: "a nasty, though visually arresting expression of xenophobic rage against Muslims ... conflates all Muslims with terrorists with a racist gusto."

So, comics have always involved politics, the contemporary creators say? Sure, but now and for many years, the tales have had to be of the "right kind." That trashing radical Islamists is "racist," "noxious," and "ugly," while going after the Tea Party and utilizing a long-time racist group as the voice for a very legitimate and popular political point of view, shows just how far "progressives" and the Democrat Party has fallen.

Posted by Hube at 05:03 PM | Comments (13) | TrackBack

I prefer anti-Semites, thank you very much

Our pal Ron Marz tweets:



He might say "Sorry, dear, but I prefer listening to sickening anti-Semites":



Background here.

Posted by Hube at 04:45 PM | Comments (48) | TrackBack

October 20, 2015

Uh huh. Right.

Idiot Dan Slott wants to play a game:



This is regarding the controversial Capt. America storyline recently covered here and here.

I can play a game too:

1) If it was just Sam (as in Wilson, as in the former Falcon, as in a black guy) then why the f*** were conservatives upset when Bucky Barnes-as-Cap went after the Tea Party? (Bucky's white.)

2) Using that "logic," then Slott's pal Ron Marz said the following ... just because it's Ben Carson:



Remember, just because these dopes write marginally popular funny books doesn't mean they're actually smart.

Posted by Hube at 06:46 PM | Comments (18) | TrackBack

i09 writer completely misses the point about the Cap and illegal immigration story

James Whitbrook swings and fans -- completely -- in his criticism of the critics of the latest Captain America yarn where we're supposed to feel guilty if we're actually against illegal immigration.

Part of this is down to the bristling idea that superhero comics shouldn’t—and, bizarrely enough, can’t—feature commentary on current social issues. That, to some people, superhero comics are meant to be for young kids, and because they deal with people in spandex punching people in spandex, they should be sequestered off in a land of magic pixie dust, not rooted in our own world.

Is it political? Of course it is. It’s what Captain America as a character has been like since his creation. Like I mentioned, in his first appearance, he punched a goddamn fascist in the face.

But the other part of it is an alleged shock that a dude running around calling himself Captain America and fighting for the little guy might have some left-leaning ideals. The main furor that burst forth this weekend over Sam Wilson: Captain America #1 has been very much from sites that Spencer and Acuña lampoon in the issue itself: That somehow, by choosing to not be a mouthpiece of the Government or SHIELD and stand solely for the American people, Sam is now “Anti-American.”

"Fighting for the little guy?" What about the little guys who are miffed about the politicos who could care less about unabated immigration, especially those along the southern border who bear the brunt of it, with all that entails? Why doesn't Wilson stand up for them?

Whitbrook and innumerable commenters at the article scream about how Cap is "political" because his first cover had him punching Hitler in the face. As if a genocidal fascist and lawful immigration concerns of millions of Americans are on the same level?? Seriously? Is that where we're at now?

Conservatives aren't upset that Cap is "suddenly political" as Whitbrook and others would have you believe -- it's the continuation of the politics that superheroes champion ... as we've detailed here quite often.

The author mentions Cap's "Secret Empire" tale; as I wrote over two years ago, "I wonder if any comics writers out there would be brave enough to have Capt. America fight the Secret Empire again ... but this time with Barack Obama as Number One?" The crimes for which Richard Nixon would have been impeached arguably pale in comparison to some of the things we see today; however, because the media, in its myriad forms, likes and approves of Barack Obama -- while it hated Nixon -- don't hold your breath waiting to see Boss Obama as the new Number One.

Also as we've written here at Colossus, conservatives and the very concept of patriotism are routinely lampooned in comics' panels. In Captain America itself, the Cap of the 1950s was shown to be a mentally unstable loose cannon -- so much so that his virulent 1950s anti-Communism led to unveiled racism in the 1970s.

In the 1980s one of Cap's replacements was John Walker, formerly the Super Patriot. He too was portrayed as a psychotic, with even a panel in an issue of West Coast Avengers showing him mumbling to himself ... and the Avengers who are listening in are freaked out about it.

l love, also, how Whitbrook ponders conservatives being upset that Cap wouldn't represent the federal government. Why would conservatives be miffed that Cap doesn't want to be the "mouthpiece" for the feds ... or SHIELD? Are not conservatives inherently distrustful of government?

Perhaps the most laughable aspect of this whole thing is how "progressives" are pooh-poohing the very notion of why wouldn't Cap get political and go after people who are breaking the law (who, ironically, are trying to stop people from breaking the law) ... because these are the very same folks who were upset that Batman was going to go after Islamic terrorists! That's right -- as the LA Times reported, DC insiders were wary of the political concept behind what eventually would become Holy Terror ... sans the Caped Crusader.

Cap can punch Hitler in the nose, but Batman can't off radical Islamic killers. This is the politics of contemporary comics ... and this what pisses off conservatives.

Posted by Hube at 05:50 PM | Comments (45) | TrackBack

October 14, 2015

Racism, straight up

Here's our 'ol pal Ron Marz engaging in racism (hey, simply using his and his philosophy's very own playbook):


Posted by Hube at 11:30 AM | Comments (11) | TrackBack

October 09, 2015

Then why do you support the Iran nuclear deal, dope?

Hillary Clinton on guns and the NRA: "The NRA's position reminds me of negotiating with the Iranians or the Communists... There’s no possible discussion and it’s for political purposes.”

So then tell us, Hill -- why did we ram that pathetic deal through??

Posted by Hube at 05:08 PM | Comments (53) | TrackBack

Sanctuary city numbers climb, thousands of illegals released ...

... and Boss Obama wants to take your guns away. Don'tcha feel safe??

Posted by Hube at 05:07 PM | Comments (323) | TrackBack

Racism, straight up



Just imagine -- IMAGINE!! -- if this was National Review on Barack Obama in 2008.

It'd be the topic for at least a week on the pundit shows. And racism, natch.

Posted by Hube at 05:06 PM | Comments (42) | TrackBack

October 07, 2015

Howard Stern rips Pink Floyd's Roger Waters over his anti-Semitism

Read all about it.

Waters recently scolded Bon Jovi for performing in Israel; Stern ripped Waters in a "seven-minute profanity-laden rant yesterday:

“What is with Roger Waters and the Jews?” Stern asked, referring to the aging singer as “Mr. Pink Floyd.”

“Why does Roger Waters live in America, a country that was founded on white people coming in and obliterating the native population? How does he stand it? Why don’t we all leave?”

The Palestinian people could live in Egypt or Saudi Arabia, Stern said. “But guess what? Those countries don’t want them either. And it bugs the sh*t out of Roger Waters. He can’t f*cking deal with it. He’s writing letters to Bon Jovi.”

“Where do you want the Jews to go Roger?” Stern exclaimed. “Where do you want them to go? You want them to just go back to the concentration camp? What is it you want, f*ck head?”

Hey, you know who's a big Roger Waters fan? That's right -- 'ol Ron Marz himself:



Remember what Ron has said: "Because I think what you choose to support matters."

Posted by Hube at 06:34 PM | Comments (17) | TrackBack

Scary, scary stuff

What we are in for if Hillary wins in 2016?

From her adventures in cattle trading to chairing a policymaking committee in her husband’s White House to running for Senate in a state she’d never lived in to her effort to use superdelegates to overturn 2008 primary results to her email servers, [Hillary] Clinton is clearly more comfortable than the average person with violating norms and operating in legal gray areas.

Committed Democrats and liberal-leaning interest groups are facing a reality in which any policy gains they achieve are going to come through the profligate use of executive authority, and Clinton is almost uniquely suited to deliver the goods. More than almost anyone else around, she knows where the levers of power lie, and she is comfortable pulling them, procedural niceties be damned.

She truly is the perfect leader for America’s moment of permanent constitutional crisis: a person who cares more about results than process, who cares more about winning the battle than being well-liked, and a person who believes in asking what she can get away with rather than what would look best.

In other words, f*** the Constitution and how things are supposed to work. If she doesn't get what she wants, she just do it anyway.

Such is banana republic politics.

Via The Corner.

Posted by Hube at 06:28 PM | Comments (40) | TrackBack

October 03, 2015

Loved-by-Ron Marz anti-Semitic musician blasts Bon Jovi

... for performing in Israel.

Remember:



More on Waters:

... Israel is a “racist apartheid regime” that practices “ethnic cleansing.” A great artist such as himself will not play in a country equivalent to “Vichy government in occupied France.” Likening Jews to Nazi collaborators was not enough. Waters then went further, comparing Israel to the Nazis themselves. “I would not have played in Berlin either … during the Second World War.” Waters believes that Israel is guilty of genocide, only “this time it’s the Palestinian people being murdered.”

Marz is a guy who wastes no time lecturing us about why buying something from Orson Scott Card is beyond heinous, or how he'll have nothing to do with Dragon Con -- "Because I think what you choose to support matters," he says.

And yet ... there's Roger Waters. Let that sink in.

Posted by Hube at 08:17 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack

October 02, 2015

Yes, our leader 'makes political' wanting to take your guns away, while ...

... we hear of this accusation of nigh traitorous activity:

On Monday afternoon, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, who has served as the President of Argentina for nearly eight years, spoke for forty minutes during the 70th session of the General Assembly. While discussing the nuclear arms agreement involving several world superpowers in relation to Iran, Kirchner dropped what seems like a bombshell claiming that Gary Samore — the former White House Coordinator for Arms Control and Weapons of Mass Destruction under Obama — tried to convince the Argentinians to provide the Iranians with nuclear fuel in 2010.

Thankfully, there's a real leader in the world who's willing to do something like this:

Posted by Hube at 09:10 AM | Comments (47) | TrackBack

The usual suspects ...

As in "the usual moonbat comicbook suspects":







And a retweet from Mark Waid:


Notice anything? All white guys.

Do you ever see these dopes constantly tweeting about guns/gun violence in, say, Chicago after a typical weekend?

Of course not. And if you were like them, you'd call that racism.

Posted by Hube at 08:56 AM | Comments (13) | TrackBack

September 23, 2015

PETA: Monkey should get ownership of 'selfie'

Seriously. PETA, the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is suing a photographer "in hopes of giving a monkey copyright ownership of a selfie."

Yet, we still have the ridiculous argument about whether a fetus is actually a "human." Hell, our US Senate won't even pass a ban on abortions after 20 weeks.

Where are all the American "progressives" citing the typical "we need to be more like Europe" now? Oh, that's right -- because Europe is actually quite a bit more conservative in the abortion realm.

Posted by Hube at 12:58 PM | Comments (11) | TrackBack

September 18, 2015

Let's check in with the moonbat comics creators!

Poor Ron Marz. Always looking for something with which to rip that "other" political party. Here, he's jumped on a comment by Jeb Bush (made at the most recent GOP debate) regarding his brother Dubya:


Indeed. Not even eight months on the job after his predecessor, Bill Clinton, turned down an offer to have Osama bin Laden handed over to the US ... because supposedly the legality was dubious.

How many were cheering Clinton on for that?


This is in response to fellow comics guy Fabian Nicieza tweeting that Ben Carson "was probably a great neurosurgeon, but can someone please tell me based on WHAT QUALIFICATIONS should he be President?"

Hmm, as opposed to what -- a community organizer, say?

Oh, and Marz and Nicieza must be RACISTS for mocking Dr. Carson.


Isn't that special. Apple, tree and all that. (Note: I've deleted the previous "offspring" reference as, after consideration, it's out of bounds. Even though Marz brought it up for his own silly purposes, I should have left it alone. Bigger fish and all that ....)

And, as "good" "progressives" always do -- jumping on the SJW bandwagon for ridiculous causes -- here's the gnomish Dan Slott on the Texas clock-making kid:


Oh gosh -- CNN's tweet was "offensive." You know why you've never seen Slott tweet about the many other students younger than Ahmed who were ridiculously disciplined for antics supposedly involving "guns?"

1) Because like all SJWs only "certain" people matter;
2) Slott hates guns and as such probably secretly agrees with what happened to those kids, and
3) Slott is a douche.

Of course, many other creators jumped on the Ahmed bandwagon. We all know why, too.

Posted by Hube at 04:34 PM | Comments (11) | TrackBack

September 17, 2015

The insanity regarding #IStandWithAhmed

Yesterday, a 9th grader at a school in Texas brought a homemade clock to school. According to reports, Ahmed Mohamed, a supposed technology aficionado, wanted to show it off to his engineering teacher.

But apparently it began beeping in English class, and when Ahmed showed it to that teacher, she said "It looks like a bomb."

Here's a pic of Ahmed's device.

The English teacher held on to the clock, and, it seems, notified the principal. A little while later, the principal and a cop pulled Ahmed out of class. And that's when things got a little ... silly.

They led Ahmed into a room where four other police officers waited. He said an officer he’d never seen before leaned back in his chair and remarked: “Yup. That’s who I thought it was.”

Ahmed felt suddenly conscious of his brown skin and his name — one of the most common in the Muslim religion. But the police kept him busy with questions.

The bell rang at least twice, he said, while the officers searched his belongings and questioned his intentions. The principal threatened to expel him if he didn’t make a written statement, he said.

“They were like, ‘So you tried to make a bomb?’” Ahmed said.

“I told them no, I was trying to make a clock.”

“He said, ‘It looks like a movie bomb to me.’”

The police believed Ahmed was being evasive. Nevertheless, they ended up not pressing charges after they were convinced everything was kosher.

It's seems highly unreasonable that Ahmed had to be cuffed and fingerprinted.

The police ended up not charging him with anything after everything settled down.

But the social justice warriors were aghast. Automatically, as if on cue, social media lit up blaming the fact that Ahmed is Muslim for his treatment. That (like the quote above says) because his skin is brown.

A popular former Delaware blogger took to social media yesterday too, emphatically stating that "His name is Ahmed -- that's all you need to know."

To all of which I say, "Bullsh**."

Ian Tuttle at The Corner shows exactly why:

  • "In Maryland, there was the seven-year-old Maryland boy who bit a Pop-Tart into the shape of a gun." He was suspended.
  • There was a five-year-old who had a bright red cap gun. He was suspended.
  • There were "three six-year-old boys suspended for making 'finger guns' during a game of cops and robbers." All were suspended,
  • There was an "eleven-year-old who said the word 'gun' on a school bus." Suspended.
  • "There was an eight-year-old finger-gun wielder in Florida." Also suspended.
  • "There was the 12-year-old keychain-gunslinger in Rhode Island." Guess what? Suspended.
  • What about "the two Virginia seventh-graders who were playing with airsoft guns at one of the student’s homes"? SUSPENDED!

And the list keeps going.

As Tuttle says, the story isn't about “Islamophobia” and “white privilege”— "it’s about a few people in positions of authority who overreacted to the possibility of a weapon. Which, as it happens, is a too-frequent occurrence all over the country, regardless of the color of your skin."

The real difference between Ahmed and all those above is that the former got invited to the White House and numerous other places as a result of his school's actions.

You can probably figure out why, in part. That bullet list (no pun intended) features discipline related to guns. All Ahmed did was make a clock that just happened, at a glance, to look like an explosive device. (/sarcasm)

If race/ethnicity played any part in this whole fiasco, in the long run it was to Ahmed's overwhelming benefit. What did all those (younger) kids get for their even more obvious innocent actions?

I dunno. Do you?

John Nolte has still more.

Posted by Hube at 09:33 PM | Comments (42) | TrackBack

August 25, 2015

Just don't give them any of your money!

That's what you do to people who rely on your cash for their living ... but for some reason feel the need to piss all over you if you have different opinions.

You may have read about the nonsense at this year's Hugo Awards. Check out Larry Correia's take on it all if you want to get caught up. Basically, science fiction has been hijacked by those of similar mind to college campus nuts who go out of their way to label anyone who disagrees with them as "racist, sexist, homophobic, etc." All in the name of "diversity," you see.

Scifi author John Scalzi is one of these nuts, unfortunately. Scalzi jumped onto the scifi map with the awesome Old Man's War a decade ago, and while his tale borrows heavily from greats Robert Heinlein (Starship Troopers) and Joe Haldeman (The Forever War), he makes his own mark.

Unfortunately, his subsequent stories went downhill from there. As did Scalzi's relationship with approximately half of his audience due to his smug, I-know-better-than-you elitist style of "progressivism."

Scalzi is currently at it on Twitter, natch, pointing to all the "right" articles about the recent Hugo mess, and swarmily denigrating those who differ.

One article to which Scalzi links is sadly funny. Seriously, who freakin' cares about the gender/race/sexual orientation of a writer ... as long as the story is damn good?? Not to mention, what has stopped women, minorities and/or gays from entering the field ... if their tales are good ones?

Oh, but guys like Scalzi care. There are now, it seems, gender/race/sexual orientation quotas for science fiction quality. And if you disagree, "[fill in '-ist' epithet]."

John has his latest book out set in the Old Man's War universe, titled The End of All Things. But y'know what? Despite having read (bought) all the previous entries in the series, I'll be skipping this one. Because why should I give my money to a person who openly sh**s on people for (honest) political and cultural disagreements? He's the same as comicbooks guys Dan Slott, Ron Marz, Mark Waid, Gail Simone, and Kurt Busiek.

Screw 'im.

Posted by Hube at 11:24 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

August 12, 2015

Dan Slott snivels before the S.J.W. crowd

How delightfully delicious.

Dan Slott, writer of Spider-Man and more hypocritical than a Bill Clinton-loving feminist, sniveled before the social justice warrior crowd a week and half ago after he supposedly was "insensitive" -- insensitive to an apparently gay comicbook fan who stated he was metaphorically "bleeding" (because of lack of progress on the comics diversity front. I guess.)

The Outsiders has the story.

It seems Danny Boy was defending Marvel editor-in-chief Axel Alonso who had also taken issue with the race/gender/sexual orientation SJW bean counters in an interview.

Of course, Alonso incurred that group's wrath -- for the "crimes" of giving creator chores for Blade to white guys, and stating that Hercules would be straight (not gay or bi) in his new upcoming series.

*Sigh*

But, after Slott's initial defense of his editor, check out his mewling apology to the SJW snowflakes:

An apology to any & all LGBTQ readers and fellow geeks and fans.

I screwed up. I was so focused on seeing a situation from my side of the equation, I didn't come to the table with enough empathy for others. That's all on me.

Saying the equivalent of "change is coming" and "can you cut us some slack" is a pretty awful thing to say to someone who's hurting-- to someone who wants, needs, and deserves change NOW. Not tomorrow. Now.

Not going to couch this in "Here's what I was thinking", "here's how you misread what I said", or "here's how I have been trying to bring diversity into comics". Because the word that keeps popping up in any of that is "I", "I", and "I". And, end of the day, "I" don't matter in any of this.

This is about the people who are being effected by the actual injustice and unfairness of it all. And the only thing you really need me to say that starts with "I" is:

I screwed up. And I am genuinely sorry.

(Um, you'd think a writer of a Marvel flagship title would know the difference between "effected" and "affected.")


PLEASE FORGIVE ME!! MWAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA .... !!


Alas, Slott is attempting to maintain his "progressive" bonafides by getting on his knees and seeking forgiveness from a perpetually aggrieved group.

But he'll keep shitting on right-of-center fans who arguably make up a (much) larger percentage of comicbook readers and fans than the eternally angry SJWs.

And so it goes ...

Posted by Hube at 07:08 PM | Comments (114) | TrackBack

August 09, 2015

Wonder why people don't trust the media?

Look no further than CNN idiot Chris Cuomo lecturing Florida Senator Marco Rubio:



And remember -- "progressives" believe in science!! (But it's not Cuomo's personal belief, right -- he's just "saying what scientists say." Right.)

Posted by Hube at 10:40 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack

August 07, 2015

Uh, no

Yesterday, a commenter named "mouse" -- a frequent guest at the LGOMB -- made three comments here at Colossus of a nature which you can probably guess.

Here's the deal: If you're associated with a site that allows no one of differing mind to participate, and bans such people just for their opinion(s), what makes you think you should be permitted to comment here?

Posted by Hube at 11:01 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

August 06, 2015

But remember -- voter ID is 'racist' blah blah blah ...

... but such measures may actually be ineffective in preventing illegal voting.

Jim Geraghty reports:

How many non-citizens participate in U.S. elections? More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote. Furthermore, some of these non-citizens voted. Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010.

If they mean 6.4 percent of 11 million illegal immigrants … we’re talking about roughly 700,000 votes being cast by non-citizens in 2008. Stunning.

BUT:

We also find that one of the favorite policies advocated by conservatives to prevent voter fraud appears strikingly ineffective. Nearly three quarters of the non-citizens who indicated they were asked to provide photo identification at the polls claimed to have subsequently voted.

So, not only is the "progressive" claim that voter fraud not being a problem false, the main effort to combat is actually not very effective.

Just imagine if someone comes up with a better method to combat the fraud.

Posted by Hube at 09:37 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

July 29, 2015

Silly liberals, Jon is for hackery!

Jon Stewart’s secret Obama meetings reveal he’s a partisan hack.

“It turns out Jon Stewart isn’t our Edward R. Murrow or our Mark Twain. He’s more like our . . . Jay Carney. Don’t count on future generations knowing Stewart’s name any more than they will know Carney’s. Remember when, under a Republican president, it was the duty of all comedians to be the loyal opposition, to speak truth to power? Stewart does the opposite. He’s more like a referee who sneaks into the Patriots’ locker room to ask Tom Brady how much he wants his footballs deflated.”

Via Insty.

Posted by Hube at 03:03 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

Priorities

Our 'ol good "progressive" pal Ron Marz:



'Ya think we'd have also outgrown, as a species, the harvesting of body parts from innocent, unborn human beings, too.

Alas, REPRODUCTIVE CHOICE!!!



Just lovely. If someone did this to a Planned Parenthood office, Marz would be screaming for federal terrorism charges to be brought.

And the politically correct "progressive" insanity rocks on ...

Posted by Hube at 01:43 PM | Comments (14) | TrackBack

July 27, 2015

Great question

MSM journalist David Ignatius yesterday:

The new lone-wolf era will test America’s ability to balance security and civil liberties, hopefully more wisely than was the case in the overreaction after Sept. 11, 2001. It’s a delicate task. More attacks will drive new calls to crack down through surveillance and more aggressive policing – creating more jihadists.

To which Jim Geraghty asks in his e-mailed "Morning Jolt":

Really? Surveillance and aggressive policing create jihadists? Why does this sort of “don’t look into their lives too hard or intervene too quickly, you’ll only provoke more aggression” philosophy never apply to, say, IRS audits?

Indeed. When have you ever seen a MSM type excuse an anti-government militia dude's murderous actions due to "aggressive" government policies?

I'll wait.

Posted by Hube at 10:31 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack

July 24, 2015

Repeal the Second Amendment, then

Good luck.



Also remember:
  • There was no IRS targeting of political opponents.
  • There were no sensitive emails sent on Hillary's private server.
  • If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Period.
  • We are safer now with this deal with Iran.
  • A video was to blame for the Benghazi attack.

And so on ...

Posted by Hube at 03:44 PM | Comments (12) | TrackBack

July 22, 2015

Remember, though ...

... Senator Al Franken said exactly what Donald Trump said about John McCain and the Vietnam War -- and you barely heard about it:

I doubt I could cross the line and vote Republican. I have tremendous respect for McCain but I don’t buy the war hero thing. Anybody can be captured. I thought the idea was to capture them. As far as I’m concerned he sat out the war.

Franken expressed that sentiment twice -- in 2000 and 2004.

And you didn't hear much about it 'cuz ... why?

The same reason President Moron gets away with saying shit like this. And the result of our ridiculous MSM is that a guy like this -- who, despite his babyish blowhardness, isn't afraid to speak his mind -- gets nods of approval.

Posted by Hube at 11:59 AM | Comments (38) | TrackBack

July 20, 2015

Love it

It's beyond hilarious when so-called "progressives" can't keep track of the politically correct hierarchy and f*** up. Such was the case this weekend at the annual Nutroots Nation lunatic fringe conference in Phoenix.

MSNBC reported that Martin O’Malley and Sen. Bernie Sanders both failed to appease the angry protesters chanting “Black lives matter,” who forcefully approached the stage partway through O’Malley’s conversation with journalist Jose Antonio Vargas.

“It’s not like we like shutting s**t down, but we have to,” Black Lives Matter founder Patrisse Cullors said. “We are tired of being interrupted,” she asserted with no apparent sense of the irony.

“Every single day folks are dying. Not being able to take another breath," she explained to any listeners who might be unclear on the concept of dying. "We are in a state of emergency. If you don’t feel that emergency, you are not human.”

Translation: if you don't side with us unequivocally, you're not worthy of consideration or conversation.

O'Malley made the fatal mistake of saying "Black lives matter, white lives matter, all lives matter.”

He should have stopped right before that first comma.

"Proudly undocumented" MC José Antonio Vargas couldn't regain control of the conference after O'Malley's "gaffe," and then Bernie Sanders' attempt at placating the crowd. And he really didn't try:



So there!

Posted by Hube at 11:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

July 13, 2015

Says the guy whose industry routinely 'objectifies' women

Our pal, Spider-Man writer Dan Slott:


Wonder how Danny would react if someone asked him why women superheroes don't just wear something like a t-shirt and jeans ... because, after all, it's their work and experience that really counts, right?

Gad, PC-infused dopes are SOOOO easy ...


Don't confuse me, dammit!!

Posted by Hube at 11:45 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Post-racial America

Megyn Kelly on Boss Obama's "priorities":

Kate [Steinle]’s murder has since exploded into a national debate on illegal immigrants, sanctuary cities, and crime. With the White House ducking the issue of its own acquiescence in these cities’ decision to flout the federal immigration laws which were duly enacted. When asked repeatedly this week to speak to this case, White House spokesman Josh Earnest declined to weigh in other than to refer folks to the Department of Homeland Security.

A stark contrast to what we saw after Michael Brown was killed in Ferguson. A man we know was attacking a police officer at the time of his death. His funeral saw three Obama officials in attendance, his death drew comments from President Obama personally and his administration also sent in the DOJ and 40 FBI agents dispatched to Missouri after Michael Brown was killed. Where is the swarm of agents in San Francisco?

Then there was Freddie Gray in Baltimore, a repeat drug offender who was killed in police custody. Here again his funeral was attended by three Obama administration officials and again the President spoke personally to Freddie Gray’s death. And again sent the DOJ in to investigate. When Trayvon Martin was killed in Florida, the president spoke to his death which was later ruled to be in self-defense. But Katie Steinle, nothing. No comments, no swarm of FBI agents, no DOJ investigation, nothing. Why?

Obama has a bit over a year left in office. If the answer isn't obvious by now, you're a moron.

Jim Geraghty from his e-mailed Morning Jolt adds:

The message from the White House was pretty clear after the Trayvon Martin shooting, Ferguson, and Baltimore: This is a legitimate reason for outrage, and we’re as outraged as you are. The silence from the White House indicates Katie Steinle’s murder is not a cause for outrage. And while Donald Trump made his comments about crimes committed by illegal immigrants from Mexico before Steinle’s murder, the gang-tackling denunciation indicates that quite a few media voices believe that just bringing up the issue of crimes committed by illegal immigrants is somehow illegitimate or morally wrong.

But of course. It's just like anyone who wants a secure border, better immigration enforcement, and no assorted perks for illegals (like drivers licenses, in-state college tuition) is "anti-immigrant." It's a pathetic, sad joke, put forth by "progressives" like Boss Obama and perpetuated by the dopes in the mainstream media.

Donald Trump is an opportunistic blowhard, but his I-don't-care honesty has struck a chord with the anti-PC segment of the population.

The "sanctuary city" bullsh** has to end. As WPHT radio's Rich Zeoli was tweeting last week, why don't people begin thumbing their collective noses at other laws ... and declare a "sanctuary city" against those laws?

Posted by Hube at 11:12 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

July 06, 2015

Dan Slott schooled by a true professional

Two things: Look at how raging lunatic Dan Slott acts when he has no control over the moderators and/or editors of the site. It's completely different than his persona on Twitter and elsewhere.

Second, it was a true treat watching the legendary John Byrne put Slott in his place.

Y'see, Danny, Byrne is remembered today as a legend, and will be decades from now.

You'll be nothing but a footnote.

Posted by Hube at 09:33 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Mirror. Look in it.

Comics dolt Ron Marz:


Posted by Hube at 09:22 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

June 30, 2015

NBC fires Trump ...

... but keeps Brian Williams and worse, allows Al Sharpton his own show.

Go figure.

Posted by Hube at 08:19 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

June 28, 2015

My prediction: Guns are next

Remember these?

Turns out it was a complete fabrication. Y'know, to get some popular will for the law.

Then there was this:

Then he "evolved" on the issue. So much so that we got this the other day:

So, remember this:

But there was always stuff like this prior to 2008, too. And, just like the above, we were treated to "palatable" answers necessary for election. The press didn't seem concerned about it (why would they? Stealth gun control fits their agenda), and just like the situation with Reverend Wright, in whose church Obama sat for twenty years, words speak louder than actions.

So get ready, America. The Second Amendment is next. If anything happens to a member of the conservative bloc of the SCOTUS, or even Anthony Kennedy, and Obama or Hillary get to nominate a new justice, watch out. McDonald v. Chicago will be revisited and overturned.

Or perhaps, the way things are going, Obama or Hillary won't even try to wait for that. There is a GOP-majority Senate, after all, which still has to approve a president's nominee. There still is that form of checks and balances. For now.

Would it really surprise anybody today if Obama (or Hillary) tried something like this? Sure, Kennedy (and Roberts, in one instance) gave 'em what they wanted this week.

But their palates have only been whetted.

ADDENDUM: Just to be clear, of these three items, I believe the (rightful) gay marriage conclusion was inevitable, either via the SCOTUS or the states. Obama's (and Hillary's) supposed "evolution" on the issue, while obviously brazenly politically calculating, no doubt hastened the settlement of the issue.

Posted by Hube at 10:44 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

June 25, 2015

Civil War re-enactments are next

Apple is removing App Store games that show Confederate flag.

Looks like Brandywine Creek State Park may have to cease those Civil War re-enactments soon.

Posted by Hube at 11:56 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

June 24, 2015

But "racist" is the new "communist"

If this were the 1950s it might be a story: FBI Files Reveal Valerie Jarrett’s Father, Grandfather, Father-In-Law Communists, Connection To Soviet Agent

Remember, to the Left in the 50s, to denigrate someone, cost him his career, ostracize him ... just for his political beliefs was negatively referred to as "McCarthyism."

To the Left in the 2010s, to denigrate someone, cost him his career, ostracize him ... just for his political beliefs is positively referred to as "racism."

Posted by Hube at 10:54 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 22, 2015

Brian Michael Bendis's Avengers and original Star Trek crew

Based on Marvel Comics' Brian Michael Bendis's claim that the new Spider-Man isn't one "with an asterisk," here's what his Avengers roster and TOS Star Trek crew would look like:


The "half" asterisks for the Hulk and Spock are due to the former being a plain 'ol white guy only some of the time, and the latter being only half (white)-human.

Posted by Hube at 11:28 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 21, 2015

A white Spider-Man can't be "for everybody"

It truly is amazing the mindset that Marvel Comics has these days.

It was recently announced that the "new" Spider-Man will be Miles Morales, a teen of black-Hispanic descent. Co-creator of the character Brian Michael Bendis appears to have a very warped idea of how young kids play:

The enormity of Miles Morales’ place in comic book history didn’t really hit Bendis, a father who has two kids of color among his four children, until recently. His 4-year-old adopted African-American daughter found a Miles Morales Spidey mask in the toy aisle of a department store, put it on and said, “Look daddy, I’m Spider-Man!” he recalls.

“I started crying in the middle of the aisle,” says Bendis. “I realized my kids are going to grow up in a world that has a multi-racial Spider-Man, and an African American Captain America and a female Thor.”

Many kids of color who when they were playing superheroes with their friends, their friends wouldn’t let them be Batman or Superman because they don’t look like those heroes but they could be Spider-Man because anyone could be under that mask.

As Douglas Ernst (to whom the hat tip goes for this story, and who totally shreds Bendis's insanity) says:

What? What neighborhood did Mr. Bendis grow up in, where little white kids were telling black friends they could pretend to have been bitten by a radioactive spider, but they couldn’t pretend to look like Steve Rogers?

What neighborhood did Mr. Bendis grow up in, where a white kid’s imagination allowed him to be a green ninja turtle, but not James Rhodes?

It must have been a neighborhood that cultivated a mindset which comes up with this sort of logic: “Our message has to be it’s not Spider-Man with an asterisk, it’s the real Spider-Man for kids of color, for adults of color and everybody else.”

This is just like the "bigotry of soft expectations" that many (white) "progressives" harbor with respect to minorities. Just as blacks and other minorities can't, and shouldn't, be expected to conform/do/behave/etc. as the majority population does, they also now can't identify with white superheroes.

But ... whites can identify with minority superheroes, you see!

Does it surprise anyone that a rich, white liberal like Bendis has just inadvertently reinforced white supremacy?

In closing, here's Doug again:

One of my favorite G.I. Joe characters as a kid was Roadblock. When I watched the Rocky movies I loved Apollo Creed. My brother introduced me to Marvel’s Iron Man, and I took a liking to James Rhodes. My favorite football player was Marcus Allen. Likewise, I loved G.I. Joe’s Flint, Rocky’s “Italian Stallion,” Iron Man’s Tony Stark, and the New York Yankees’ Don Mattingly. My “heroes” weren’t heroes because they were black or white — they were heroes because they were just “cool.”

According to Bendis's logic, it's perfectly OK for Doug to have liked all the minorities he mentioned. However, if Doug were black, Stallone, Stark, Mattingly, et. al. would all have to have asterisks after their names -- because Doug would not be able to relate to them.

Because of their white skin.

Posted by Hube at 05:59 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

OK, so here's a solution: Don't run


Solution:


Posted by Hube at 10:14 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Yep


What the press won't ask (as in Hillary Clinton) is this: As Governor, Bill Clinton Honored Confederacy On Arkansas Flag.

In contrast, Jeb Bush had the stars and bars taken down in Florida when he was governor. Haven't heard much about that, either. No surprise.

Mr. Gabriel nails it closed on the media with this:


Just like Memory Lane from Colossus two years ago.

Posted by Hube at 09:35 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 19, 2015

Yeah, it was stupid. But consider --

Comedy Central's Larry Wilmore had a fit yesterday due to some of Fox News's talking heads not immediately diving in with the "racist" label to describe the horrific church shootings in South Carolina.

Saying the network's coverage “makes my fucking head explode,” Wilmore was miffed at

Elisabeth Hasselbeck suggest[ing] the violence was an “attack on faith,” her co-host Steve Doocy also suggest[ing] it had something to do with religion, guest E.W. Jackson outright disput[ing] race-based suggestions about the crime, and anchor Jenna Lee later sa[ying] that despite the “hate crime” designation it’s too early to know what happened.

Since it was pretty clear early on that the killer's motivation was racial hatred, I get Wilmore's angst.

HOWEVER -- how many times have we seen the mainstream media equivocate over other instances of such violence?

Answer: Many. Here's but one (very good) example.

If the MSM -- and the Obama administration -- were consistent, here's how they'd have played out the coverage of the S. Carolina shootings:

  • minimal mentions of his race/religion
  • minimal-to-no mentions of the term "terror" and "terrorism"
  • many mentions of "no clear indication of (shooter's) motivation
  • Boss Obama would caution against "jumping to conclusions"
  • stories about worries of a "backlash" against Caucasians
  • (sympathetic) stories about how the killer was taunted, teased in his youth
  • mentions that "other races/cultures have their lunatics, too"

In addition, despite the now-silly sounding comments by some at FNC, at least they weren't immediately sucked into a narrative like, say, "Hands up, don't shoot" which still persists among some MSM types despite it's (proven) falsehood.

Posted by Hube at 11:16 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

June 17, 2015

Hollywood

Ed Driscoll via Ace:

There were two films of that era that in retrospect are particularly of note: 1997's Air Force One, which starred Harrison Ford as a 50-something American president who knew his way around the cockpit of a jet aircraft, refused to take any guff from terrorists, and had a woman as a vice president to boot. And 1999's Three Kings, which starred George Clooney, and denigrated George H.W. Bush for not toppling Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

No wonder Hollywood has been so miserable after 9/11; they got everything they had previously wished for in a president and as a result, thoroughly hated his guts.


GEORGE W. BUSH: There's NOTHING for which
he can't be blamed!

Posted by Hube at 12:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 16, 2015

Who is he to judge?

The News Journal's Carron J. Phillips chastises Rachel Dolezal's self-identification as black.

As "progressives" would say in any other case, "Who is HE to judge, hmm??"

Maybe that Politically Correct Hierarchy Handbook will eventually come out so us average peons will know how to, well, navigate it.

Also be sure to get a chuckle out of Phillips' "cultural appropriation" nonsense. Good to see the News Journal is hiring some "original thinkers!"

Posted by Hube at 10:31 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Here's a thing -- P.C. has made you idiots twist yourselves into pretzels

Speaking of "progressive" comicbook morons, here's Gail Simone who apparently prioritizes forms of self-identification:




Got that, everyone?

Someone who identifies as a certain race: laughable.
Someone who identifies as a certain gender: inviolate.

I'd ask Simone to explain the lack of consistency, but there's no concept of the "C" word among "progressives."

Posted by Hube at 09:55 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Just remember -- disagree with him, and he'll want you to stop buying his stuff

Lesser comicbook guy Mark "Go F*** Yourself" Waid shows he is "better" than greater comicbook guy John Byrne:


Of course, Byrne just pulled that idea out of his ass, right? Oh, wait ...

Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital and its current Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry, said that transgenderism is a “mental disorder” that merits treatment, that sex change is “biologically impossible,” and that people who promote sexual reassignment surgery are collaborating with and promoting a mental disorder.

Dr. McHugh, the author of six books and at least 125 peer-reviewed medical articles, made his remarks in a recent commentary in the Wall Street Journal, where he explained that transgender surgery is not the solution for people who suffer a “disorder of ‘assumption’” – the notion that their maleness or femaleness is different than what nature assigned to them biologically.

And Waid is the author of ... plenty of funny books.

Waid'll probably tell Dr. McHugh never to buy any of them now, too.

Just remember, contrary to the claim that "progressives" are the "party of science": To the radical "progressive" set, it's more important to believe the "right" things than to believe actual facts.

(Note: I could care less what transgendered people do or want, as long as they leave me alone. And, "progressives" are not unique in believing the "right" things over facts. But they're the ones who actually boast about being the party of the latter.)

Posted by Hube at 08:53 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

June 07, 2015

Salon writer engages in superhero anti-Semitism

No, not really, but just consider ...

It’s time for Marvel to make Magneto black.

Writer Eli Keel says "And fans who grew up with a certain version of a character have a hard time letting go of the past. (Also, unfortunately, a bunch of fans are way racist.)"

Of course. So why isn't Keel an anti-Semite -- or, why can't we call him such -- based on his article's headline, hmm? Or, why does he want a black guy to become a popular Marvel villain? Why not a hero?

Of course, social justice warriors are anything, if not inconsistent, natch.

You gotta read his ideas for a rebooted X-Men. Is it any wonder why comics are failing? Who the f*** wants to read about Professor X and Magneto embroiled in the real civil rights movement, them following Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr. respectively?

Maybe Keel doesn't get that we're dealing with SUPERHEROES. The whole premise of mutants is to write fiction with a civil rights allegory -- super-powered beings with abilities far above those of normal man.

His solution for "erasing" the Jewishness of Magneto? "... make the many other Marvel Jewish characters interact with and respect their heritage and culture more openly."

Yeah, that'll work. After all, the new Muslim Ms. Marvel's pontificating on things Islamic has resulted in a "whopping" less-than-thirty thousand books sold per month. (If you want to see how these sales figures stack up historically, just Google it. Hint: They suck.) So now we should demand characters like Kitty Pryde ramble on about the significance of the seder plate.

In a superhero comic.

Yet another reason I haven't bought a new comicbook in almost ten years. I'll stick with Essentials and assorted trade paperbacks of great stories of the past.

Posted by Hube at 08:46 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

June 02, 2015

Yeah! Save it for the GOP!

Politically correct-when-it's-convenient Ron Marz:


Speaking of the GOP, expect a lot more of this crap as the campaign season rocks on:


The above was retweeted by Mark "Go F*** Yourself" Waid, natch. Except, as is the case with a lot of what the moonbat comics tweet and retweet, that's not exactly what Walker said.

And here's Kurt Busiek:


Is that so? PLEASE nominate him, then.

Posted by Hube at 04:19 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

June 01, 2015

End of the line

Woman of the People:


Posted by Hube at 06:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

May 31, 2015

Blame John Scalzi and the SJW's

Tweet from comics guy Kurt Busiek:


Yep. See the title of this post.

Posted by Hube at 11:18 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

May 30, 2015

Civics 101

Comics guy Ron Marz, Bill of Rights expert:


Wrong. (Spoken) Hatred doesn't "try to pass itself off" as free speech in the United States. It is free speech. (The Chaplinsky standard being an exception, which doesn't apply here.)

As with the Marz-ian crowd who were apoplectic about George W. Bush's "shredding" of the Constitution but are now virtually silent about that of Barack Obama, "progressives" really need to be careful in what they wish for when it comes to free expression, and lack thereof.

What speech they like may be what a right-leaning leader doesn't. And what will Ron Marz and crowd yammer about then when said leader says "Hatred trying to pass itself off as free speech is still hatred" ... and should be thwarted?

Posted by Hube at 01:40 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

May 27, 2015

Ron Marz miffed at the one conservative teacher who goes too far

But you can bet that if this teacher was a "progressive" (and make no mistake, most teachers fall into that category) and said something like this about George W. Bush or Ronald Reagan, well, then, you can bet the tweets would be lauding the guy.


Oh oh! It's the LAST STRAW for big 'ol RON MARZ, folks!

A few thoughts here:

-- As a trained social studies teacher myself, IF what Marz's 6th grade son told him is accurate, then the teacher was way out of line. A social studies/history teacher's job, when covering politics and/or controversial topics, is to be as fair as possible, covering -- and allowing -- multiple perspectives to be voiced.

-- Marz's son is in 6th grade. What are the chances he might -- just might -- be exaggerating? Especially if he knows dad's politics pretty well? Middle schoolers never lie or pump up a story, right? Is it possible the teacher examined ways in which some people view Obama's actions as "tyrannical?" Y'know, like how guys like Marz viewed (many of) G.W. Bush's actions?

-- At least Marz didn't name the teacher or the school publicly. Anonymous complaining via Twitter is fine, and if he decides to go in and discuss the matter with the teacher as a first step, that's the right course of action.

-- As noted, you can bet your bottom dollar Marz would have NO problem with a left-wing instructor involved in a similar situation.

Be sure to read the comments at the tweets above to get a good laugh. It's a perfect example of the "progressive" "It's OK when I do it, but don't dare you do it!" mindset.

Posted by Hube at 06:26 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

May 11, 2015

This is what we're dealing with

Majorly f***ed up comparisons, that's what.

Just look at what Osama Siblani, publisher of the Arab American News -- "the largest and most widely circulated Arab American publication in the United States" -- said recently:

Yes, you heard that right -- Pamela Geller is worse than ISIS for hosting that Mohammed cartoon contest (among other things).

Let that insanity sink in for a moment: Worse. Than. ISIS.

And Siblani is supposed to be one of those "moderate" Muslims we hear the administration (and many other lefties) talk about?

Posted by Hube at 05:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

May 10, 2015

You can bet this would never, ever happen to Boss Obama

Check out this example of contemporary "biting journalism":

Yes, that is "journalist" Mark Halperin grilling GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz on how "authentically Cuban" he really is.

Now imagine -- just imagine -- Halperin asking President Obama what his favorite soul food is ... and who his favorite rapper is. Not to mention, asking him to welcome a colleague in a "black dialect."

(FWIW, Cruz's pronunciation [and accent] of "picadillo" was pretty darn good.)

Posted by Hube at 10:35 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

May 05, 2015

Ron Marz: "Hard not to think ..."

Comicbook dolt Ron Marz says it's "hard not to think" that Pam Geller and the crew in Garland, TX were hoping for a (radical) Islamist attack:


Wonder what folks like him would say if someone tweeted those words after a comicon at which he was in attendance was attacked -- for some far-left quackery he inserted into one of his comics?

Not to mention, is good "progressive" Marz actually implying that Muslims had a right to be so angry that they should have shot up Geller's event? Is this the bigotry of low expectations -- that Muslims "just can't control themselves?"

Posted by Hube at 06:31 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

May 03, 2015

April 30, 2015

On Baltimore

The WaPo is reporting that a prisoner in the same van as Freddie Gray claims the now-deceased Gray was attempting to injure himself in the police van that was transporting him.

Given the police-community situation in Baltimore, how plausible is it that the cops offered some sort of deal to that prisoner to say what he said about Gray?

Meanwhile, one of the biggest idiots in the Delaware blogosphere offers this up about Baltimore and the riots that followed:

The very same tea party “patriots” who have been decrying government and authority for 7 years now are telling anyone who listen that you can never question police authority.

Attention Delaware Douche: What party has been in control of Baltimore for over 40 years? What party has controlled its police department? And haven't African-Americans been running the show there ... including the PD?

But let's make this about the Tea Party.

Attention Delaware Douche part 2: You're a complete and utter blathering Neanderthal.

Attention Delaware Douche part 3: Maybe you can round up those Tea Partiers and have 'em shot, huh?

Two main points in conclusion:

1) There has to be NO excuse for police brutality. None.

2) It's not society's fault for the bleak situation in many of our inner cities. It's the breakdown of the family. Period. A 70+ percent illegitimacy rate is a catastrophe that cannot -- cannot -- be rectified by government ... or, if you wish, "society."

Posted by Hube at 05:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Tell 'ya what: I'll care when you start setting an example

Hillary Clinton delivers a speech on crime, policing and race.

She at one point said "There is something profoundly wrong when African-American men are still far more likely to be stopped and searched by police, charged with crimes, and sentenced to longer prison terms than are meted out to their white counterparts."

How about this: There is something profoundly wrong when people with little-to-no power are far more likely to be charged with crimes and thrown in jail than people with a lot of power and a great many political connections.

In other words, Hil, "F.O."

Posted by Hube at 05:14 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 22, 2015

MSNBC: Where tax delinquents go to lecture us about "the little guy"

Joy-Ann Reid. Al Sharpton. Melissa Harris-Perry. And now Touré. All tax delinquents.

Taxes must be racist.


Posted by Hube at 03:14 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

April 21, 2015

I'm all for screening for mental health issues when it comes to guns ...

... but this is just ridiculous, not to mention yet another example of how deranged our administration is:

Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder expressing deep concerns over Veterans Affairs evaluations classifying veterans as "mentally defective" and banning them in the federal background check system from purchasing or owning a firearm.

According to Grassley's office, the VA "reports individuals to the gun ban list if an individual merely needs financial assistance managing VA benefits," keeping them from exercising their Second Amendment rights.

"The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is effectively a national gun ban list and placement on the list precludes the ownership and possession of firearms. According to the Congressional Research Service, as of June 1, 2012, 99.3% of all names reported to the NICS list’s "mental defective” category were provided by the Veterans Administration (VA) even though reporting requirements apply to all federal agencies. And that percentage remained virtually unchanged as of April 2013. Given the numbers, it is essential to ensure that the process by which the VA reports names to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for placement on the NICS list recognizes and protects the fundamental nature of veterans’ rights under the Second Amendment," Grassley wrote in the letter. "Specifically, once the VA determines that a veteran requires a fiduciary to administer benefit payments, the VA reports that veteran to the gun ban list, consequently denying his or her right to possess and own firearms.

We know how President Lemon feels about guns; this is just yet another swarmy end run around the Constitution by this cadre of elitists.

Remember -- obeying the law starts at the top. Pretty soon there's going to be a helluva lot of "F*** yous" said to those at the top if this garbage doesn't cease.

And if you want to be freaked out further, be sure to read this.

Posted by Hube at 05:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 14, 2015

But don't call him anti-Latino!

Comicbook idiot Ron Marz is at it again:


Then later:


Just remember the "progressive" maxim: Only conservatives are racists if they differ with an "oppressed minority."

Here's a perfect (local) example of what I mean from the not-too-distant past.

Posted by Hube at 12:53 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

March 28, 2015

Erasure


Posted by Hube at 10:55 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

March 26, 2015

Just imagine if the editor of a mag devoted to white people said this:

"Nothing says 'let kill some cops' and refers to women as 'bitches' and 'hos' like rap music."

People at the usual networks/papers would be screaming you-know-what. Even though ... it's often an accurate statement.

On one of the usual networks, we heard this from the editor of Ebony magazine: "Nothing says 'let's go kill some Muslims' like country music."

Has anyone ever heard a country tune advocate, even in a subtle manner, the killing of Muslims? Toby Keith's "Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue" is about the closest to the meaning, but it's hardly referring exclusively to (radical) Muslims.

The show's host eventually apologized for the idiotic assessment.

Posted by Hube at 07:40 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 21, 2015

True. And then there's the flip side

Marvel's Joe Quesada:

It has never ceased to amaze me how some people, in defense of their favorite fictional characters or stories, treat creators and each other, flesh and blood people living actual lives with actual feelings and families, with such disrespect and cruelty as though they were two-dimensional, fictional villains who merely exist on a page or the imagination.

And it never has ceased to amaze me how some creators, in defense of their own creative product, treat long-time fans, flesh and blood people living actual lives with actual feelings and families, with such disrespect and cruelty, due only to honest disagreements over (story) direction, politics, and/or culture, as though they were two-dimensional, fictional villains who merely exist on a page or the imagination.

And by whom were Quesada's words retweeted? Yep, Dan Slott.

You just can't make this sh** up.

Posted by Hube at 02:04 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

March 12, 2015

Moonbat comicbook creators pretend they're educated in civics

How dare members of Congress write a letter to Iran's leadership telling them that any deal reached must be approved by them (the Senate, specifically).

Naturally, because the below are WRITERS of popular funnybooks, and have legions of followers on social media, this somehow "translates" into them "being smarter than you."

Our old pal Dan Slott asks the following:



It didn't have to imagine. The GOP had to deal with Democrat members of Congress actually meeting in person with foreign (enemy) leaders during Republican presidencies, remember?


Regarding the former, the Democrats actually passed the Boland Amendment which forbade US assistance to the Nicaraguan Contras in the early-mid 1980s. This amendment did a lot more to interfere with the president's foreign policy-making than a single letter ever did.

Next, the bloated Gail Simone weighs in (pun intended), mocking Senator Tom Cotton in the process:





At least, Gail, those leaves are healthy, and not the five-cheeseburger meals of which you routinely partake.

Oh, and by the way? Sen. Cotton is a veteran.

The only Simone has served is herself -- a giant milkshake.


Gail Simone -- a "ton" 'o fun.

Posted by Hube at 05:16 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

March 11, 2015

Kerry's upset at the GOP's Iran letter?

Yeah, he can pretty much go screw himself:

Recognize that Marxist on the right? During whose presidency was this?

Posted by Hube at 06:08 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

March 04, 2015

Nancy Pelosi can pound sand. Hard.

Pelo-Tox on Bibi Netanyahu's speech yesterday:

I was near tears throughout the Prime Minister’s speech -- saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5 +1 nations, and saddened by the condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran and our broader commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation. (Source)

Awwww, is that right?

Pelo-Tox back in 2007 (y'know, when George W. Bush was president):

I'm saddened at the insult to the intelligence of the American people that lunkheads like Nance, Boss Obama, Hair-Plugs Biden, and Harry Reid exhibit each and every day.

Oh, and Nance? Using your own playbook, you're an anti-Semite.

Posted by Hube at 04:10 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 03, 2015

If this was a Republican administration ...

... ah, hell, you know by now!!

-- Boss Obama considering raising taxes through executive action. Technically it'd be closing tax "loopholes," but the constitutionality is certainly dubious. But when has that ever mattered to the Boss?

-- The Justice Department closed down search for IRS' Lois Lerner's emails. Isn't this the sort of sh** that got Dick Nixon into so much trouble? Oh, right, he was a Republican.

-- What's that? Hillary Clinton never used a government email address while she was Secretary of State? 'Ya gotta be jackin' me! A clear violation of the law, this, but when has that ever been a concern for this administration?

Posted by Hube at 06:20 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

February 24, 2015

Marvel must not care about printed comics anymore as Dan Slott runs amok

Douglas Ernst has the latest insanity via one of Marvel's "progressive" bigwigs, Spider-Man writer Dan Slott.

You see, if you have an issue with Peter Parker being anything but a white guy, you're a racist. In fact, when describing Peter Parker, the word "white," Slott says, shouldn't be included in the first one thousand words of any description.

He also believes, because Peter Parker -- Spider-Man -- is white, non-Caucasians cannot "relate" to him.


Dan Slott showing the age he acts on social media.


Perhaps most ridiculously, when a commenter noted that Parker's identity as white is "cultural saturation," and that his "grandma knew him [Parker]," Slott responded by saying "My grandma knew Jim Crow laws. Din't make 'em right."

What. The. Hell.

Maybe the heat got too much for the thuggish gnome, for earlier today he tweeted the following:


This is typical Slott -- go off on some ridiculous rant where you infer people are "racist," then backtrack. Which, of course, makes him look like even more of a snobbish a**hole.

And notice how he obfuscates "Peter Parker" with "Spider-Man." This is typical goal-post moving. *Yawn*

We then see this most recent tweet from the gnome:


Let's be clear: There is absolutely nothing wrong with stating "I'm not racist, but I think Peter Parker/Spider-Man should be white." None. Especially since the character was conceived as just that, and has been that, for over fifty years. It's ridiculous to even include that preface, for what it's worth.

I seriously doubt Slott would take issue with someone saying "I'm not racist, but I think T'Challa/Black Panther should be black." Because it's a perfectly legitimate sentiment. In fact, T'Challa has to be black, Slott says, because that's how Stan Lee and Jack Kirby envisioned him -- a king of an African nation.

Yet, somehow Peter Parker/Spider-Man being white because that's how Stan, Jack, and Steve Ditko envisioned him is ... stupid. And racist.


Slott thinks this microphone is a cheeseburger.


(By the way, Dan, you do know there are white Africans? That the whole continent isn't a single entity?)

On a related note (and you just knew this was coming!), here's Slott when someone points out that Luke Cage would never be turned into a white guy:




So, again, Peter Parker being raised in a white New York City suburb by two white relatives, attending predominately white schools, dating white women, hanging out with mostly white friends ... means there's "nothing inherently white" about him.

And why is Luke Cage/Power Man's origin specific to an African-American? Explain to me how that couldn't easily be modified to suit a Caucasian?

Confused? Trying to figure this all out?

Good luck. Slott is a master at making little-to-no sense. As noted, he's already trying to backpedal. I don't blame him, but how/why Marvel lets this dope spew his nonsense as he does on social media I'll never know.

Hell, even ESPN draws the line when one of its employees goes haywire on social media. I'm not advocating that Slott be suspended or anything; however, it would serve Marvel Comics well if it were to tell him, "Act like a damn grown-up and a professional for once, huh?"

Posted by Hube at 07:13 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

February 20, 2015

Can't say "radical Islamic terrorism," but ...

... can infer that a killing is based on Islamophobia, even when the evidence is scant:

“No one should ever be targeted because of who they are, or what they look like or how they worship,” [Obama] said. “Most recently with the brutal murders at Chapel Hill of three young Muslim Americans, many Muslim Americans are worried and afraid.”

The motive for those killings is a parking dispute. This may change, of course, as the investigation continues, but really? Our president can't utter say "Islamic" and "terrorism" in the same sentence, but like a good "progressive" can immediately infer "hate crime" even when the motive appears to be anything but.

Posted by Hube at 08:33 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 16, 2015

Just don't mention his ideological background!

Comicbook moron Ron Marz is at it again, this time with regards to the shooting of three Muslim students near the University of North Carolina:


Y'know what else the killer had?

A review of the Facebook page of the man charged in these murders, Craig Hicks, shows a consistent theme of anti-religion and progressive causes. Included in his many Facebook “likes” are the Huffington Post, Rachel Maddow, the Southern Poverty Law Center, Freedom from Religion Foundation, Bill Nye “The Science Guy,” Neil deGrasse Tyson, gay marriage groups, and a host of anti-conservative/Tea Party pages.

Gee -- why did Ron leave that info out, hmm?

Elsewhere, Kurt Busiek likewise never mentions the atheism and/or "progressive" causes of this madman ... but he sure rushed to retweet stuff like this!

As for the other 'bat writers? Pretty much silence. Perhaps because they were smart enough to realize this killing didn't fit their NarrativeTM.

Posted by Hube at 08:09 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

February 08, 2015

Best critique of the Brian Williams snafu in one paragraph

Via Jim Geraghty's Campaign Spot:

Here’s the thing: NBC News employed Chelsea Clinton under that ridiculous contract, and MSNBC keeps Al Sharpton around (allegedly to keep him happy with corporate parent ComCast), has a correspondent that accused “American Sniper” Chris Kyle of going on “killing sprees,” has guest commentator claim Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal is “trying to wash that brown off his skin,” has a host wearing tampon earrings, and gave a weekend show to Hillary Clinton’s former deputy press secretary.

Posted by Hube at 08:34 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 06, 2015

Weirdly

Weirdly, the same "fibs" that Dubya and Cheney offered up were the same ones that all these Democrats did.


Ron Marz = complete idiot.

Posted by Hube at 06:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 04, 2015

So, this means the president is what -- in kindergarten?


Posted by Hube at 04:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Make no mistake ...

... the topic of vaccinations -- or, more specifically, those choosing not to get them -- is NOT a right-wing idea. The anti-vax movement has a LOT of "progressive" bona fides. See here, here, here, and here to just name a few.

A study by Pediatrics shows that "many of these [anti-vax] clusters are in very politically liberal areas of California like “northern San Francisco and southern Marin County.”

But, natch, this won't stop the media from its usual defense.

Take yenta Joy Behar, for instance, who yesterday attempted to portray the anti-vax movement as conservative.

And the WaPo jumped in too, with the headline "The biggest myth about vaccine deniers: That they’re all a bunch of hippie liberals."

But the "progressives" themselves claim to be the "party of science" and the "reality-based" community.

Besides many of them being anti-vax, many also believe (as noted in the WaPo comment section:

  • genetically modified foods (GMO) are inherently dangerous
  • hydraulic fracturing poisons the water table despite being several thousand feet below it
  • taking guns away from law-abiding people reduces crime
  • radical Islamist terrorism isn't related to Islam

At any rate, hey, I can understand the "freedom" aspect of the vaccination debate; however, if you opt out, then you should also be opted out of schools and other public accommodations. Fair enough? Freedom, as always, is balanced with responsibilities.

Posted by Hube at 04:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 02, 2015

Indeed. And ...

Words of wisdom from Ron Marz:


And we also have people -- in power -- who pretend there's no terrorism associated with Islam, even its radical interpretation.

Just don't expect to see a tweet like that from the usual suspects, though.

Posted by Hube at 05:43 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

February 01, 2015

Now they may be getting it!

Retweeted by Marvel Comics moonbat Dan Slott:


Has it sunk in yet, Dan? How 'bout you, Ron Marz? Gail Simone? Mark Waid? Erik Larsen? Et. al.

Posted by Hube at 10:44 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

January 31, 2015

Hey! Look!

Comicbook moonbat Ron Marz is a racist and a sexist:


Posted by Hube at 12:17 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

January 24, 2015

If this was George W. Bush, well, you know ...

President Lemon to supposed YouTube star on what he does "if he has any free time":

"You know, I'm really big on sports. The truth of the matter is, I'm mostly watching SportsCenter."

Not reading or even exercising. Just watching the boob tube.

Posted by Hube at 11:19 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

January 22, 2015

Let's check in with the moonbat comicbook creators!

Our 'ol pal Ron Marz keeps, well, a lie alive and ticking:


Yes, the 'ol "Bush lied us into war" canard. *Sigh*

Once again, if Bush lied, so did all of these people. Bill Clinton. Nancy Pelosi. John Kerry. Madeline Albright. Al Gore. Ted Kennedy. And so on.

Further (again) WTF sense would it make for Bush and co. to knowingly lie about WMD being in Iraq ... only for that very lie to easily be exposed?? Bush et. al. may not be the brightest bulbs around, but they certainly ain't that dumb.

OK, now see if you can follow this one from (Muslim) writer of the (Muslim) Ms. Marvel:


So, by making middle eastern countries poorer via buying less and less of their main product (oil), this will "stamp out" (Islamic -- she, like President Lemon, can't bring herself to say it) extremism. Got it.

Mark Waid retweets:


If you follow the link to the story in question, here's what you'll find:

... an investigation of public records by the Washington D.C.-based District Sentinel online news site showed that between 1995 and 2009, Ernst’s family received nearly a half-million dollars in government handouts, payments targeted toward subsidizing farms with taxpayer funds.

BUT: "... Ernst’s own father, Richard Culver, received $38,395 in taxpayer handouts, almost all of which went to corn subsidies."

That means Ernst's pappy got a whopping $2742 per year (in corn subsidies) in the time period noted. Say it with me now: "Oooooooooohhhhhh ....!"

The article goes on to note that Ernst "failed to mention her own family’s reliance on government assistance ..." Right. If her family "relied" on $2700 per year, this gives a whole new meaning to American poverty.

FWIW, I'm against government farm subsidies of virtually any kind. But, as usual, SJWs like Waid typically go after ridiculous "targets" when there a lot bigger fish to fry.

Posted by Hube at 05:49 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

January 18, 2015

What a surprise

White #BlackLivesMatter Boston Protesters Found Living with Parents in Luxury Mansions.

"WBZ also went to the upscale Brookline home where protester Jim Billman lives with his parents."

Posted by Hube at 05:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

January 09, 2015

Let's check in with the moonbat comics creators!

Here's our 'ol pal Ron Marz showing how he dialogues with folks who hold an opposing viewpoint:


Gail Simone on the attacks in France:


And that's her only tweet about it at present. Good thing it wasn't some right-leaning anti-government type who did it, or worse -- a cop who shot an unarmed African-American. Then, her feed would be flooded with tweets!

Lastly, Tom Brevoort retweets this laugher:


Talk about your ever-lovin' straw man to take down oh-so easily! First, who the hell ever blames the entire black race for the actions of a black shooter? And who but the most outlandish extremists (on the other side) blame all Muslims for radical Islamist attacks?

But here's what Tom and his buddies do: For the actions of a lunatic who shoots up something related to government, they hurry to blame the most remote of ancillary evidence on 1) conservatives, 2) Republicans, 3) the Tea Party, 4) Rush Limbaugh, and 5) the Tea Party (again).

Don't believe me? Just check out their Twitter accounts whenever such an event hits the news. That, and there is ample past evidence archived here at Colossus, not to mention at Avi's and Doug's.

Speaking of which, here's some from a fairly recent post, courtesy of Kurt Busiek:


Notice it's not "Hey, c'mon, all politicians use such imagery so let's stop the nonsense," it's an immediate (and stupid) repetition of what the MSM was yammering about at the time.

If Palin was a Muslim, she'd be inviolate to folks like Busiek.

Posted by Hube at 07:25 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

January 08, 2015

Just remember this when you hear the usual dolts (and more)

... talk about "standing with Charlie," etc.

Q: Would you say the same things about Mohammed as you just said about Joseph Smith?

A: Oh, well, I'm afraid of what the…that's where I'm really afraid. I would like to criticize Islam much more than I do publicly, but I'm afraid for my life if I do.

Q: So you can be bigoted towards Mormons, because they'll just send you a strudel.

A: They'll never take a shot at me. Those other people, I'm not going to say a word about them.

That is MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell responding to radio host Hugh Hewitt back in 2007.

My pal Douglas Ernst also noted that Muslim Marvel Comics scribe G. Willow Wilson (who writes the new -- Muslim -- Ms. Marvel) tweeted this yesterday:

While I am the last to trust our media implicitly, and while Ms. Wilson probably does have a point to some degree, what she and others who're quick to jump on the "it's only a small minority of Muslims" etc. bandwagon tend to forget are uncomfortable facts like these.

Here's a sampling:

  • NOP Research: 1 in 4 British Muslims say 7/7 bombings were justified

  • ICM Poll: 20% of British Muslims sympathize with 7/7 bombers

  • Populus Poll (2006): 16% of British Muslims believe suicide attacks against Israelis are justified. 37% believe Jews in Britain are a "legitimate target"

  • Pew Research (2013): Only 57% of Muslims worldwide disapprove of al-Qaeda. Only 51% disapprove of the Taliban.

  • Pew Global: 68% of Palestinian Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified.
    43% of Nigerian Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified.
    38% of Lebanese Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified.
    15% of Egyptian Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified.

  • Center for Social Cohesion: One Third of British Muslim students support killing for Islam

  • Policy Exchange: One third of British Muslims believe anyone who leaves Islam should be killed

  • NOP Research: 78% of British Muslims support punishing the publishers of Muhammad cartoons

  • Pew Research (2010): 84% of Egyptian Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam
    86% of Jordanian Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam
    30% of Indonesian Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam
    76% of Pakistanis support death the penalty for leaving Islam
    51% of Nigerian Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam

Source links are available for each cite at the link above.

Here's another tweet for 'yas to chew on:

And another:

Lastly, here's Marvel bigwig and resident moron Tom Brevoort offering up a supposed "lie" that no one has actually said or even implied to my knowledge:

Nevertheless, I'll help Tom out: How is "harmful" to hate terrorist barbarians like those who killed the cartoonists in France and folks like ISIS? WTF should we do, Tom -- invite 'em over for dinner, for cripe's sake?

I've a feeling that Brevoort's "become terrorists ourselves" idiocy is a not-so veiled reference to the waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation methods utilized post-9/11. If so, simply spare us -- because any such moral equivalency is insane.

Indeed, a much greater and harmful lie in this 21st century is the notion that "outreach" and "being understanding" to ... "people" who could give less of a sh** about either and would still murder us without a second thought is a sensible policy.

Another great and harmful lie is what is noted above -- the "tiny minority" aspect along with the notion that Islam "has nothing to do" with folks like the France killers.

Posted by Hube at 04:31 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

January 05, 2015

Hey, wait! We didn't mean us!!

Harvard experts on ObumbleCare who opening advocated for the "remedies" involved in such are now -- wait for it! -- AGHAST that said remedies will now be applied to them:

Members of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, the heart of the 378-year-old university, voted overwhelmingly in November to oppose changes that would require them and thousands of other Harvard employees to pay more for health care. The university says the increases are in part a result of the Obama administration’s Affordable Care Act, which many Harvard professors championed.

Richard F. Thomas, a professor of classics "called the changes 'deplorable, deeply regressive, a sign of the corporatization of the university.'”

Mary D. Lewis, a professor of modern France history and a leader of the opposition to the benefit changes, said the changes "were tantamount to a pay cut."

“Moreover,” she said, “this pay cut will be timed to come at precisely the moment when you are sick, stressed or facing the challenges of being a new parent.”

Yeah? Well, get bent. Welcome to the real freakin' world -- and in this case, one which you helped make.

A**holes.

Posted by Hube at 04:59 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

December 30, 2014

Of course!

ObumbleCare architect Jonathan Gruber in 2009: ObumbleCare will NOT be affordable; NO cost controls.

This, despite (or course) what President Lemon kept telling us.

Posted by Hube at 09:40 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 29, 2014

And we should care why?

Via Ace: The new House majority whip once attended a gathering of the group "Euro-American Unity" ... a product of David Duke (remember him?).

This was back in 2002 and the rep, Steve Scalise of Louisiana, said that he "was unaware at the time of the group's ideology and its association with racists and neo-Nazi activists."

Yeah, whatever. Maybe I'd be more concerned about this if the mainstream press was grilling our president on why he associates with a racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic race hustling punk like Al Sharpton.

UPDATE: Aaaaand, guess who didn't wait a second to jump on this?


Still waiting on your tweets about the number of times Sharpton has been to the White House, Ronnie.

Posted by Hube at 07:43 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

December 22, 2014

Laugher of the Day

The Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers' Delaware Douche:

And it is the only thing I can think of to explain the outrageous overreaction of a few on the right to the horrible and evil murder of two police officers in Brooklyn this weekend. NYPD Union President Pat Lynch and Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani went out of their way to directly blame President Obama and Mayor de Blasio for the murder of Officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos.

Indeed. This, from the guy/crew who constantly go out of their way to blame any right-leaning outfit the actions of some barely-associated lunatic. The Tea Party. The GOP Congress. Anti-abortion protesters. Anti-tax groups.

Hell, Delaware Douche once blamed the entire GOP for the poor economy and wanted them all shot.

And their buddies in the mainstream media do, too. And even presidents. Bill Clinton blaming the Oklahoma City bombing on talk radio, anyone?

If there was one person carrying, say, a "Go Back to Kenya, Obama!" placard at some Tea Party rally, well, then, the entire organization is suddenly the lunatic fringe.

If some guy who shot up a tax preparer's office had a Tea Party website in his Internet browser's cache, well, then, the TP is partly (mostly?) culpable for the dude's actions.

However, in the case of the cop killings of this past Saturday, some of the recent anti-cop protests actually had people shouting for the death of police officers: "What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want them? Now!"

But don't you dare implicate in any way President Lemon or Comandante De Blasio! Or even Al Sharpton.

These LGOMB ... "specimens" are so full of hypocritical arrogance that to even begin to take them seriously should make one question his very sanity.

Posted by Hube at 04:36 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Let's check in with the moonbat comics creators!

Hey, remember how these dolts' Twitter feeds were all a-flutter after Michael Brown's and Trayvon Martin's shootings? And how self-righteous they all were about how incorrigibly racist and hateful society (still) is? And how anyone who disagreed with them was racist, stupid, hateful, extreme, etc.?

But now that several cops have been executed, we hear mostly ... crickets.

For example, here's Kurt Busiek back on the 19th parroting a John Scalzi tweet about supposed Ferguson grand jury shenanigans:


What's even more pathetic about Busiek is that he was one of those who "wondered" if Sarah Palin's "target" language was partly responsible for the shooting of Gabby Giffords:


That, of course, disregards the fact the practically every politician uses such imagery. Nevertheless, there's been nary a word from Kurt about actual language of calling for the death of police. But, of course!

As for Gail Simone, look -- here's a retweet by her about Dick Cheney and torture!

She also retweeted this and this about that big protest at the Mall of America.

Tom Brevoort was similarly still concerned about that "torture" report with this retweet.

Nothing about the cops, though. But, of course.

Ultra-bat Gerry Conway offered nothing about the police over the weekend, yet retweeted this ridiculous nonsense:


The exceptions to all this were Dan Slott and Ron Marz:




Gotta be fair -- good for them.

Posted by Hube at 04:18 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

December 21, 2014

It'll be quite interesting in NYC over the next few months

Watch as NYPD officers turn their backs to Mayor Bill De Blasio as he heads to a press conference following the murder of two NYPD officers yesterday:

And apparently that wasn't all that faced the mayor:


(via FrontPage Mag)

Posted by Hube at 08:53 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

December 20, 2014

Jack 'King' Kirby and Joe Simon were threatened by Nazis ...

... when they had Captain America punch Hitler in the face. And our government told them they'd be protected.

But a penny ante dictator threatens movie goers in 2014 because of silly satire, and, well ...

Posted by Hube at 07:59 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

December 11, 2014

So the mainstream media will ignore this, too, and continue to push 'GOP/Bush torture'

... the "torture" of which most Americans could give a sh** about since 1) the "torture" involved some "harsh" interrogation tactics against barely-human radical Islamist fundies who only want to off Westerners, 2) happened around a decade ago, 3) sorta makes killing terrorists via drone -- along with "collateral" women and children -- seem tame in comparison, and 4) serves to distract from things like Jonathan Gruber continuing to lie (on Capitol Hill this time), and this:

Sadly, the 18 month investigation into the IRS targeting of conservative groups isn’t over, and it may be worse than anyone thought. A federal judge has broken loose more emails that the DOJ had surely hoped would never surface. The picture it reveals isn’t pretty. The documents prove that Lois Lerner met with DOJ’s Election Crimes Division a month before the 2010 elections.

It has to be embarrassing to the DOJ, which may not be the most impartial one to be investigating the IRS. In fact, the DOJ withheld over 800 pages of Lerner documents citing “taxpayer privacy” and “deliberative privilege.” Yet these internal DOJ documents show Ms. Lerner was talking to DOJ officials about prosecuting tax-exempt entities (yes, criminally!) two years before the IRS conceded there was inappropriate targeting.

Remember, Richard Nixon would have been impeached for much less than this. Look at Article 2, part 1 of his never-used impeachment:

1. He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavoured to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposed not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.

Not to mention, the other parts seem pretty fitting, too.

Posted by Hube at 04:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 09, 2014

Ponder. Marvel. Deliberate.

Ah, the Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers. They couldn't WAIT for this day. Something -- anything -- to get the subject of the biggest joke of a chief exec ever off the front pages ... even for just a bit.

MARVEL at their hilarious pomposity that "Republicans are for torture," knowing all the while that rendition began under Bill Clinton, and that President Lemon has droned the living f*** out of terrorists -- including known American citizens -- which has had the side effect of offing quite a few women and kiddies.

PONDER how waterboarding and preventing regular sleep of heinous terrorists is somehow "worse" than killing same without the coveted "rights" and "due process" we heard from "progressives" throughout the 2000s.

PUZZLE over why this had to be made public today, when Jonathan Gruber was testifying on the Hill about ObumbleCare and all the associated the lies about that train wreck. Not to mention that barbarians like al Qaeda and ISIS will use this for propaganda gold.

MULL over how Democrats, including the White House, can (laughably) claim some "moral high ground" by releasing this ... saying stuff like "We can do better," while the IRS has systematically targeted right-leaning groups and individuals for years now (something Richard Nixon never did), how we were lied to repeatedly about ObumbleCare which affects one-sixth of our economy, and ....

REALIZE, however, that next month is the beginning of the END for the inept charlatans who've been running our government.

Posted by Hube at 06:53 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

December 08, 2014

Surprise

Hey, does anyone think that tomorrow's release of that Senate report on CIA "torture" is anything but coincidental? Not to mention one big middle finger by the outgoing Democrat Senate to George W. Bush?

"There are some indications that the release of the report could lead to a greater risk that is posed to U.S. facilities and individuals all around the world," White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Monday. "So the administration has taken the prudent steps to ensure that the proper security precautions are in place at U.S. facilities around the globe."

Hey idiots -- then don't release it. If you're so f***ing concerned, then the solution is quite simple.

If you're actually willing to put more American lives in danger because a few hardcore, barbaric Neanderthals who are only dedicated to offing as many Westerners as possible were waterboarded for vital intel, yet you continually refuse to release vital emails about how the country's own quasi-secret police targeted conservative-leaning groups for audits and squelched their free speech rights ... well, that shows you plenty of how your modern Democrat Party -- and current chief exec -- operate.

"The president believes that, on principle, it's important to release that report, so that people around the world and people here at home understand exactly what transpired," Earnest said. He added that "something like this should never happen again."

Spare me. See my paragraph above. The president has no principles, other than to screw over anyone who doesn't agree with him.

And it doesn't matter one f***ing iota if American lives may be put in danger as a result.

Posted by Hube at 06:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 07, 2014

Unfortunately, we don't get 'em -- nor just them -- from you

Comicbook scribe Gail Simone:


Unfortunately, Gail, in the last decade (give or take a few years), readers haven't gotten many good comicbook stories.

And you state they "just" want good stories. Then why do you and so many of your ilk rant and rave about (leftist) politics on social media? It's bad enough that in these rants your knowledge of actual history and facts is often wanting, but you also demean and demonize those with different views and opinions.

Yes -- you are correct, Gail. Comicbook readers just want good stories. I guess acknowledgement of that is the first step in your "recovery," so to speak.

Posted by Hube at 10:22 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

November 28, 2014

Something like this inevitably pops up

Oh my: a black cop shoots an unarmed white teen. Grand jury doesn't indict the officer.

No outcry. No riots. No 24-7 media coverage. That last one is key, of course. The media is, and always has been, the driver of stories like Ferguson and last year's Trayvon Martin debacle.

And remember the "reverse" Martin case?

Posted by Hube at 06:27 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

November 26, 2014

More comicbook creator moonbattery

Remember folks -- they want your money for their product, but if you disagree with them you're an instant pariah. And if you keep buying their product, they're laughing at you all the way to the bank. Hard.

Courtesy of the FCMM, here are some more creator tweets about Ferguson:


And perhaps best of all, this:


Get it? Capullo knows Officer Wilson was guilty. He can feeeeeeel it, dammit!

But you gotta give props to Capullo for one thing:


Good for him, as that makes him quite unlike most in his field.

Nevertheless, FCMM's Avi Green nails it after this Capullo tweet:


Avi: "And if there was he'd come to the same conclusion he did when the jury decided not to approve an official indictment."

Posted by Hube at 06:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 25, 2014

Moonbat comic creators' reaction to Ferguson

It will come as no surprise, but the usual suspects, of course, feel the need to "chime in" because, y'know, they're so "smart" and "up on things."

It's been a while since we've checked in on Gail Simone; but she sure didn't let us down:


And then there was this lovely retweet from her:


Indeed?

The sad thing about all this is that "progressives" routinely claim to be those who believe in science -- y'know, deriding global warming climate change skeptics as lunatics, laughing at disbelievers of evolution (rightly, of course), and right-wing historians who only want to emphasize the good America has done and ignore its sordid side (also rightly).

Yet, people like Simone will ignore all the evidence that grand jury saw, re-saw, heard, re-heard, debated, and re-debated ... all the science. Like, if the person whose tweet Simone retweeted really is worried about her son's life, she shouldn't worry about folks like Darren Wilson, but about residing in a predominately black inner-city community. The chances of being a victim of violence with the latter are magnitudes greater.

Remember, too: this grand jury included three African-Americans. Will these three now be referred to as "Uncle Toms?"

Maybe Simone is doing all this so that she can maintain her "progressive" cred. Maybe she feels guilty because she lives in a state with a black population of around two percent.

Either way, it's ridiculous and irresponsible.

Here are a few examples of some of our other "pals":


A Mark Waid retweet:


A Dan Slott retweet:


Remember, these are the folks that believe in SCIENCE! Except when it conflicts with THEIR political dogma.

And hilariously, many of these folks are criticizing the prosecutor (who's a progressive Democrat, by the way) for lambasting social media's role in the whole Mike Brown saga ... all while posting frivolous social media commentary like "I worked in a prosecutor's office once and I can tell you this is a travesty!"

Meanwhile, here's a "surprise" locally.

Posted by Hube at 03:13 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

November 24, 2014

Reaping what you sow

I can’t wait for President Scott Walker to unilaterally order all federal agencies to stop withholding union dues and refuse to enforce mandatory fees because Congress hasn’t acted on PEU reform quickly enough or to his satisfaction. Unions can then thank Obama for setting the precedent of presidential authority on Walker’s behalf

Indeed. Candidate Obama wanted a weak executive. President Obama realizes politics is hard and executive orders are easy.

They will, of course, rise and condemn Walker or any Republican without a trace of irony.

Posted by Duffy at 11:45 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 23, 2014

Don't dare use my logic against me (or my party)!!

Check out how President Lemon twists and scrambles to make "sense" regarding how a future GOP president should NOT be able to do what he has done:

This guy's credibility has LOOOOONG been shot.

Posted by Hube at 04:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Let's check in with the moonbat comics creators!

Our 'ol pal Ron Marz just never can seem to grasp what's known as "irony":


So much to say to that ... but it's just way too easy.

Next, "brave" Marz goes after a dead guy:


Yeah, not lost on me: How the saving of a "progressive" pacifist prior to World War II ended up allowing the Nazis to win the conflict -- and eventually rule the planet ... and galaxy.

Except that ... actress Joan Collins, who played pacifist Edith Keeler, is actually right-leaning in her politics.

Sort of the reverse situation of Chuck Heston's Taylor in Planet of the Apes, who was a pretty liberal guy:

"Time bends. Space is...boundless. It squashes a man's ego. I feel lonely. That's about it. Tell me, though, does man, that marvel of the universe, that glorious paradox who sent me to the stars, still make war against his brother...keep his neighbor's children starving?"

"I'm a seeker, too. But my dreams aren't like yours. I can't help thinking that somewhere in the universe there has to be something better than man. Has to be."

"Imagine me needing someone. Back on Earth I never did. Oh, there were women. Lots of women. Lots of love-making but no love. You see, that was the kind of world we'd made. So I left, because there was no one to hold me there."

So, essentially, what we have is Ron Marz making not much sense as usual -- only trying to score more "progressive" cred, and further alienate any right-leaning audience he may have left.

Posted by Hube at 04:19 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

November 19, 2014

Dick Cheney didn't have anything to do with the Iraq War

He was "just an advisor" about the conflict, and even though he was, y'know, vice-president, he didn't really have any hand in war strategy.

In fact, George W. Bush "just heard about" Cheney talking about the war. He was "briefed" on it.

In fact, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said he "never heard of" Dick Cheney.

Such is the complete and unbelievable nonsense that this farce of an administration -- and Democratic leadership -- has become ... especially with regards to Jonathan Gruber.

For your pleasure:

Posted by Hube at 05:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 18, 2014

More moonbattery from First Staters

We saw a few days ago how one blogging Delawarean thinks about disagreeing with President Lemon; now, our old pal Perry has finally chimed in -- not only about the mid-term election results, but offers up a similar sentiment to "Progressive Populist" of the LGOMB.

Let's take the latter from Perry first, regarding ObumbleCare:

Sometimes the ends justify the means, and this is the perfect case for it. As a result, there are millions of people relieved who now have coverage which they could not have had before this law.

There you have it -- because Perry is a fervent believer in ObumbleCare, it should be implemented by any means necessary. Just imagine if George W. Bush and the GOP ... well hell, you know.

Next, here's some of Perry's nonsense about November 4th (my comments are in italics):

Republicans won without much of an agenda, but with lots of negative campaigning and racism in the South. (What about the racism of the Left/Democrats of which there was MUCH more?)

Republicans won without a mandate, with only a plurality of less than 50%, reminiscent of GWB. (And Bill Clinton in 1992.)

Democrats must retake the Senate and retain the White House to curb Republican extremism. (Uh, that's why the GOP won two weeks ago -- to curb Democratic extermism.)

Republicans, starting with Reagan and continuing with GWB, cut taxes, increased spending, therefore increased the deficit. GWB doubled it. (Selective amnesia, natch. Obama skyrocketed both the deficit and the debt. In fact, he increased the latter more than all presidents combined before him!)

Democrats under Clinton and Obama enabled the country to recover, prosper, while still slowing the deficit. (Nonsense. Clinton did so because he worked with the GOP landslide Congress of 1994; Boss Obama's policies have done nothing to initiate a "recovery;" indeed, the unemployment figures are largely smoke and mirrors as we've seen record numbers of people leave the workforce, and most of the new jobs aren't good-paying full-time jobs anyway.)

Yeah, 'ol Per sure is an easy target, but it sure is fun -- and scary -- to check in once in a while on how these not-so-closeted authoritarians think.

Posted by Hube at 05:15 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

November 16, 2014

The ultimate in moonbattery

The Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers' "Progressive Populist" thinks that opposition to President Lemon's climate deal with China is ... treason.

Seriously. For real.

This is how the contemporary Left thinks -- not only that you're f***ing stupid (Gruber, Obama, most Democrats), but that opposing what they want is actually criminal.

Posted by Hube at 03:42 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

November 14, 2014

Game. Set. Match

It has often been said that in order to get elected, Republicans tell voters what they plan to do then don't follow through. Democrats lie about what they're going to do and then do it. I wasn't cynical enough to really believe that intentional lying and deceit was the purpose. I always chalked it up to lack of foresight and refusing to believe in immutable laws of nature and economics.

Along comes Jonathan Gruber to prove me wrong. He has said, directly, that he and the Democrats lied repeatedly and intentionally to get their law passed.

Patterico has the concrete quotes that prove, in no uncertain terms, that the central architect is a serial liar.

This is Chicago politics on a national scale. This is going to be Waterloo for the ACA. It is also going to be the beginning of the end of Federal domination of the states. California has decided it likes weed and Texas has decided it likes business and those two poles are going to pull and stretch until the fabric of federal micromanagement of the states is torn. Hopefully forever. I believe the next great political battle is going to be over federalism. Let's just hope the right side wins this time.

Posted by Duffy at 03:01 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

November 13, 2014

Why did anyone think this was remotely a good idea??

Eminem drops numerous F-bombs at Veteran's Day concert:

Eminem bombarded an audience filled with veterans with the f-bomb on Tuesday night as he performed on the National Mall at The Concert for Valor.

The 42-year-old rapper, dressed in cap and hoodie, yelled into a microphone: 'Happy motherf****** Veterans Day' before launching into the show's closing set which ended with the anthemic Lose Yourself.

Also causing a bit of a stir was Bruce Springsteen, Dave Grohl and the Zac Brown Band doing a cover of the anti-war, Vietnam era "Fortunate Son." You can probably take the meaning, and writer John Fogerty said that the song was “my confrontation with Richard Nixon.”

Except that ... Nixon was anything but a "fortunate son." He actually refused the exemption he was permitted (he was a Quaker) to serve in World War II.

At any rate, why sing such a song at an occasion celebrating soldiers' valor?

Posted by Hube at 06:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 03, 2014

The 'honesty' of a member of the L.G.O.M.B.

L.G.O.M.B. = Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers, natch.

Check out the latest from The First Street Journal. After FSJ's Dana took up Jason "Trust Fund" Scott's $50 bet about so-called GOP economics -- and did so completely and unswervingly thoroughly -- here was Trust Fund's reply:

Do you know who owns the Wall Street Journal? Probably not. You are an idiot. I’ll probably ban your ass for stupidity again pretty soon.

Enjoy talking to yoursf here in the meantime.

But of course.

FWIW, Dana provided several sources for his points besides the WSJ (Dallas News, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, the Sacramento Bee, and Wallet Hub), but to any radical nutjob "progressive," the mere fact that a conservative-leaning (well, the editorial board, at least) publication is mentioned is enough for complete disqualification.

Hey, look -- whenever you start thinking Trust Fund is a serious thinker, always remember this nugget: "While reasonable people can disagree about whether or not George Bush had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks ..."

Posted by Hube at 09:07 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

November 01, 2014

Election nonsense round-up

Locally, 'ya gotta love this story: the hubby of State Senator Bethany Hall-Long was nabbed stealing GOP campaign signs from a roadside ... at 3:00 in the morning.

When asked for comment, Ms. Hall-Long said,

Sadly, this race has become tough and personal. My husband is my high school sweetheart and he loves me very much. I was not aware that he had allowed his frustration over the campaign attacks to get the better of him. Of course I'm disappointed and wish that it had not happened.

In Wisconsin, how did "journalists" not discover this little nugget about Democratic gubernatorial challenger Mary Burke ... until just now? Yeah, gee, I wonder ...

New York State Democrats who haven't voted in recent elections got "menacing" letters from the New York State Democratic Committee: “we will be reviewing voting records . . . to determine whether you joined your neighbors who voted in 2014. . . . If you do not vote this year, we will be interested to hear why not.”

Not too creepy ...

In Massachusetts, you'd think a Dem gubernatorial candidate would be a shoo-in ... except here it's Martha Coakley:

Down in Texas, wanna know why Dem gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis ain't gonna win? Redistricting, says co-founder of the Daily Show, Lizz Winstead, on MSNBC. Chee-yeah, OK ...

Posted by Hube at 10:39 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

October 28, 2014

We've come full circle

UC Berkeley protests Bill Maher as commencement speaker.

Why?

Remember, he spoke ill of Muslims, taking on Ben Affleck in the process.

Like a good "progressive," ASUC Senator Marium Navid said “It’s not an issue of freedom of speech, it’s a matter of campus climate.”

Of course.

Posted by Hube at 05:40 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

October 27, 2014

People have had it

... with the pathetically tired "progressive" lines.

Case in point: At a debate for New York's 23rd district, check out the reaction to Democratic challenger Martha Robertson's ridiculously overused talking points line "War on Women":

Even better is her reaction!

(h/t to Legal Insurrection)

Posted by Hube at 06:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

October 25, 2014

Remember 'You didn't build that'?

Hillary Clinton may have outdone her former boss with this insane comment:

Yes, she actually said “Don’t let anybody tell you that corporations and businesses create jobs.”

Don't be surprised, though -- like Boss Obama, WTF would you expect from someone who never held a job in the private sector??

Posted by Hube at 10:39 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

What voter fraud?

The WaPo asks: Could non-citizens decide the November election?

How many non-citizens participate in U.S. elections? More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote. Furthermore, some of these non-citizens voted. Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010.

Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample), we find that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections.

But, as we all know from yammering "progressives," voter fraud is a "myth" and certain groups -- minorities and old people -- are just too damn dumb to get a photo ID.

Posted by Hube at 09:29 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

October 23, 2014

Delaware's own Joe Biden

He -- and his family name -- ain't one of us.

Posted by Hube at 07:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

October 17, 2014

You knew this was coming, right?

If you're concerned about Ebola, you're ... racist. The headline and sub-headline are sufficient; the whole article will make you scratch your head wondering just how pathetically stupid some people really are.

The problem with the west's Ebola response is still fear of a black patient
Ebola is now a stand-in for any combination of ‘African-ness’, ‘blackness’, ‘foreign-ness’ and ‘infestation’ – poised to ruin the perceived purity of western borders and bodies

The biggest racists must be Africans themselves, then, since (as Insty notes) they are closing borders and imposing travel restrictions.

Posted by Hube at 08:58 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

October 07, 2014

Calling Ben Affleck

Here's what your "moderate" Muslims think, Benny:

"When you ask Muslims to condemn or denounce heinous actions, ideologies or groups," argues one Muslim writer, “what you’re saying is that you don’t trust any Muslim."

If I condemn ISIS, I am – in essence – condemning myself: I am condemning myself and my communities to the continuation of the never-ending onslaught of suspicion, dehumanization and interrogation that is far from unique to us (especially when living as minorities) but is the most public.

When I am watching TV and I see pictures of ISIS fighters, I don't feel any relation to them, I don't feel any connection to their theology. I want Muslims to get to the point where we see an act of terror and don't have to think, "How will I get blamed?"

I was about to write up my own rebuttal, but the first commenter at the link above did it for me perfectly:

Isn't it funny, "Huffington Post" provides a rationale for some Muslims who do not condemn "radical" Islam, yet as a white, conservative, Christian, heterosexual, legal, American, I'm made to feel by the Left that I have to apologize for everything perpetrated by white, conservative, Christian, heterosexual, legal, Americans going back hundreds of years!

Posted by Hube at 05:13 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

October 06, 2014

Even a dirty nuke exploded in NYC wouldn't sway these idiots

NBC's "point man" in the Muslim Middle East, Ayman Mohyeldin, couldn't say which extremism—Christian, Jewish or Muslim—poses the greatest current threat to civilization":

That's right, this idiot actually invoked the Crusades. And then was "rescued" by a NY Times reporter who jumped in to say that global warming is civilization's greatest contemporary threat.

Elsewhere, ultra-moonbat Rosie O'Donnell amazingly has her "The View" gig back -- despite her 9/11 Trutherism (actually, that's a plus in Hollywood, apparently) -- and went out of her way to praise Ben Affleck for "taking on" (if you can call it that) fellow lib Bill Maher on the subject of radical Islam.

Geez, the one time Maher makes a rational point and his fellow "progressives" are all over his sh**. Par for the course, natch.

As an aside, can anyone imagine an ultra-right wing Birther with the popularity of a Rosie O'Donnell not only being on a mainstream like "The View," but having been invited back to it?

Posted by Hube at 08:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

October 02, 2014

I'll take projection for $1000 please, Alex

Remember all those BDS fantasies about President Bush being murdered, or maimed or what have you? Since liberals all wanted to see him dead, naturally, they assume that anyone who disagrees with Obama must want him dead. Witness:

WASHINGTON — President Obama must be touched by all the concern Republicans are showing him these days. As Congress examines security breaches at the White House, even opposition lawmakers who have spent the last six years fighting his every initiative have expressed deep worry for his security.

Even!?

Simply amazing. The reporter (and editor) are astonished that even people who disagree with Him don't want him to be murdered.

Posted by Duffy at 03:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

October 01, 2014

September 30, 2014

Will School 'Heckler's Veto' Ruling Get Shot Down by the SCOTUS?

Back in May of 2010 -- May 5th, to be exact -- several (Caucasian) students at California's Live Oak High School wearing shirts with the American flag on them were asked to leave school because they refused to turn their shirts inside-out.

What, what? Students had to turn their shirts around ... because American flags were on them?

Yep -- it was Cinco de Mayo, after all.

School officials at the heavily Hispanic school were concerned that Latino students would be offended by seeing Old Glory on the Mexican holiday (a holiday not even widely celebrated in Mexico), and that some fights could result.  Indeed, some 200 Mexican/Mexican-American students protested in a march that day upon hearing about their devious Old Glory-clad peers.

The gringos went to court ... and lost. The Ninth Circuit recently declined to hear their appeal, citing "prior events" that took place at the school, including an "altercation" (presumably between a white and Hispanic student), as a rationale. (There had been some 30 fights between white and Latino students in the past six years at the school.) The appellate panel said "school officials 'acted properly to prevent a substantial and material disruption of school activities.'”

(Check out The College Fix coverage of this case here and here.)

The US Supreme Court indeed has granted a lot of leeway over the last few decades to public school officials when it comes to regulating student speech. One notable ruling from seven years ago is the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" case (Morse v. Frederick) in which a (public school) student unfurled a banner with "BONG HiTS 4 JESUS" on it across the street from his school during the Olympic torch relay.

SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority in the case (emphasis added):

Student speech celebrating illegal drug use at a school event, in the presence of school administrators and teachers . . . poses a particular challenge for school officials working to protect those entrusted to their care from the dangers of drug abuse. The First Amendment does not require schools to tolerate at school events student expression that contributes to those dangers.

Perhaps anticipating the ensuing controversy, those in the majority with Roberts emphasized that this ruling "applied only to advocacy of illegal drug use." Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justice Anthony Kennedy, noted the "Bong Hits" case "'provides no support for any restriction of speech that can plausibly be interpreted as commenting on any political or social issue' ... including student opposition to the drug laws themselves" (emphasis added).

Confused yet?

You probably should be. The courts have pretty much been all over the map when it comes to lower ed. student speech rights.

The standard for such rights had been the Tinker case from 1969. The SCOTUS ruled then that students were indeed permitted to wear black armbands at school to protest the Vietnam War. The famous quote to emerge from the case was "Students don't shed their constitutional rights at the school house gates."

But since then, Tinker has arguably been eroded, despite Justice Alito's reassurance in the Morse case. In addition to Morse, 1988's Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier allowed school administrators to censor student newspapers, even despite "protective" measures taken by student writers and editors.

Which brings us back to the situation at Live Oak High School. Does Morse apply here? Why or why not? Have we actually reached the point in this country where showing the American flag can legitimately be banned ... despite it being displayed in front of our schools ... and in each classroom within?

As an educator, I can fully appreciate the need for an "orderly educational environment," and back in 2007 during the Morse case I was fairly sympathetic to the high court's reasoning.

But these days, I'm not so sure.

If we're actually at the point where a display of our own flag can be considered "offensive" -- and hence banned -- then where does it end? Will administrators now ban student displays of other national flags because they may offend some students, i.e. native-born Americans? And/or because such displays, like at Live Oak HS, may lead to some student scuffles?

Or, are only certain (politically correct) groups permitted to be "offended?"

More importantly, will this case now go to the US Supreme Court ... and will the justices legitimize the heckler's veto that the case enshrines?

(Cross-posted at The College Fix.)

Posted by Hube at 07:23 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 27, 2014

Jumping the gun on Philly "hate crime"

Back on the 19th I wrote a post ridiculing Philly.com for, among other things, offering up a sympathetic look at one of the alleged attackers of a gay couple. It appears I may have been hasty in voicing my frustration with the inconsistency of so-called "hate crime" laws, and about the nature of that apparent "hate" attack in particular.

While I still feel that any hate crimes legislation is laughable if it doesn't include provisions for gay Americans, it seems there was (a lot) more to the story of the gay couple's beating than previously told. For instance:

According to court records, the couple, ages 28 and 27, were walking around 10:30 p.m. when they encountered a group of friends out celebrating a birthday.

The couple and the group exchanged words, leading to an argument that resulted in an altercation, during which members of the group used antigay slurs, according to the records. One man suffered a broken jaw, broken orbital bones, and a cut that required 24 stitches; the other, facial fractures.

Attorneys for Williams and Knott have characterized the incident as a mutual fight and not motivated by the victims' sexual orientation.

OK, so it wasn't just the group berating the couple for merely being gay. Both parties apparently tossed around some epithets and then things got out of control.

This doesn't justify the beating; however, how often have we read, say, about a black-on-white attack where racial epithets were used against the victims ... but no hate crimes charges were filed (because the motive ascribed was "robbery/economic")? If the gay couple in this case uttered some nasty words themselves, then why isn't their attackers' motivation then, just "retributive?"

If hate crimes laws are to be used in addition to other charges, then -- again -- they need to be utilized consistently. (But don't hold your breath.)

RELATED: The LGBT community's hypocrisy.

Posted by Hube at 12:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 23, 2014

More RFK Jr. insanity

It's bad enough when a guy with a famous name -- and a ton of cash -- lectures average people on the "need" to alter our lifestyles so that their latest pet cause can be attained; it's 100% worse when that same person wants to toss you in jail because you disagree with him.

Posted by Hube at 08:49 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 22, 2014

"Progressives" HATE being called out on their hypocrisy

Gotta love RFK Jr.'s reaction to being questioned about "setting an example" regarding climate change. It's always "It really doesn't matter what I do -- just shut up and listen to what I say."

I love how RFK Jr. says our lifestyles "won't be affected," then goes on to demand that automobile mileage standards be raised to some ungodly figure, and that electric cars be mandated. Indeed -- those won't affect Joe Six-Pack's bottom line at all, right?

Also check out how these climate change marchers listened intently to folks like Leo DiCaprio, who, as Human Events points out, has "a bigger carbon footprint bigger than most of the crowd put together."

Posted by Hube at 10:35 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 16, 2014

Pro-Israel Students Arrested at Ohio University for Standing Up to BDS-ers

It began a week ago when Ohio University Student Senate President Megan Marzec took advantage of the then-popular ALS "ice bucket challenge" to ... bash Israel.

In a video she made, instead of ice/water, Marzec uses a red liquid to symbolize the shed "blood" of Palestinians for which Israel is supposedly responsible, all the while muttering about the "genocide in Gaza" and "occupation of Palestine":

Marzec goes on:

“I’m urging you and OU (Ohio University) to divest and cut all ties to academic and other Israeli institutions and businesses.”

“This bucket of blood symbolizes the thousands of displaced and murdered Palestinians- atrocities which OU is directly complacent in through cultural and economic ties with the Israeli state,” she explained.


Ironically, Israel has been at the forefront of developing treatments for ALS.

Despite the rest of the Student Senate not taking kindly to Marzec's stunt, things went to the "next level" this past Wednesday.

At a meeting of the Student Senate that evening, pro-Israel students, the so-called "Bobcats for Israel," spoke out in favor of the embattled nation and against Senate President Marzec and her "blood bucket" stunt, among other things. For this, the students were arrested and charged with "disturbing a lawful meeting" (a misdemeanor):

Screenshot 2014-09-13 12.51.08

Video is available at here.

Professor William Jacobson at Legal Insurrection (to whom the major hat tip goes for this story) received a note from an Ohio U. tipster stating (my emphasis)

I don’t see how Ms. [Becky] Sebo was being unduly disruptive. Some of the context from the livetweeting shows that she was being shouted down by Marzec, and that audience members were attempting to physically assault her.

At any rate, Marzec ordering the arrest of her critics is ironic, because Marzec has been arrested for the same thing. And the crowd’s chanting of “fascist” and “undemocratic” is ironic, given their applause for arresting the Bobcats for Israel.

The student newspaper The Post reports that President Marzec appears to have been the instigator of the whole imbroglio, interrupting the initial "Bobcats" speaker (Sebo) who was criticizing Marzec and her past actions:

Three minutes into Sebo’s speech, Marzec interrupted Sebo, saying that the speech was blocking other students from speaking.

A chant was led by many of the Student Senate members, repeating phrases such as “this meeting is being hijacked by fascists” and “shame on bullies.”

Keep in mind that Sebo was speaking during time allowed for public comments, the "Student Speakout."

After the arrest of Sebo and three of her companions, Marzec "stood on a table" and said "she would 'never apologize for standing up for the people of Palestine.” She also stated "And I will never stand up for fascists. And this body won’t either.”

This, despite her interrupting someone else talking and then shouting her down (Sebo) ... and then having her thrown out of the forum.

Missed irony much?

(Cross-posted at The College Fix.)

Posted by Hube at 08:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 07, 2014

Laugher of the Day

Al Sharpton -- Al Freakin' Sharpton!! -- issues a statement on Atlanta Hawks owner Bruce Levenson. Sharpton "urges" more action from the NBA.

Gag me with a spork.

Posted by Hube at 02:58 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 01, 2014

Check your own backyard, first

Check out what comics writer Brian Michael Bendis tweets:


I get wanting Twitter to scan the medium for harassing garbage like that, but ... calling the cops? Aside from an actual threat of rape, alerting the authorities for someone calling you a "whore?" Or "slut?" I can't even see a harassment charge given that Twitter has a "block" function.

And here's a thought, Bendis: How 'bout clamoring for same w/regards to some of your foul-mouthed colleagues?

Should we call the cops for someone telling me (and others) to "Go f*** yourself?" Or what about telling someone to "STFU" (short for "Shut the F*** Up")? Or, what about demeaning comments in general towards those who don't share their political beliefs?

I won't hold my breath.

Posted by Hube at 05:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

August 30, 2014

Clueless "poet" cleverly omits key facts to make dopey Gaza-Ferguson point

Naomi Shihab Nye in today's News Journal, like way too many other anti-Israel zealots, omits tons of key facts regarding the current plight of Palestinians/Gazans.

Oppression makes people do desperate things. I am frankly surprised the entire Palestinian population hasn’t gone crazy. If the U.S. can’t see that Palestinians have been mightily oppressed since 1948, they really are not interested in looking, are they?

*Sigh* If I've documented once, I've documented it a million times. You have only your Arab neighbors to blame for any oppression you suffer, Ms. Nye. If "the entire Palestinian population hasn’t gone crazy," it sure isn't because of lack of effort by the likes of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, et. al.

For they gobbled up the land allocated for the Palestinians in 1948, and then they, along with the Palestinians, attacked the nascent Israel. They lost. And they kept losing every other time they tried.

You casually mention the Six Day War without reference or context. This is not, sadly, surprising in the least.

It's really just boring already, Ms. Nye. Sympathy and needed change begin with taking responsibility. Try taking a page from the late Anwar Sadat and see if things don't begin to look different.

Posted by Hube at 07:30 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

August 26, 2014

Only self-avowed socialist in Congress: Paying higher taxes is patriotic!

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a self-proclaimed socialist, ripped Burger King for making the move north to Canada to get a lower tax bill.

Sanders said BK's move would be "completely unpatriotic."

Hey Bern, 'ya know what else is unpatriotic? Moron politicians like you who tax the living sh** out of us yet waste gazillions of our money on complete bullsh** year in and year out. Not to mention putting us further into debt so that our grandkids are royally f***ed.

Go pound sand, Sanders.

Posted by Hube at 07:58 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Imagine if George W. Bush did this

Your federal government will now track "false, misleading" ideas on Twitter. What could go wrong?

The federal government is spending nearly $1 million to create an online database that will track “misinformation” and hate speech on Twitter.

The National Science Foundation is financing the creation of a web service that will monitor “suspicious memes” and what it considers “false and misleading ideas,” with a major focus on political activity online.

The “Truthy” database, created by researchers at Indiana University, is designed to “detect political smears, astroturfing, misinformation, and other social pollution.”

Ricochet's Jon Gabriel: "In 2004, dissent was 'the highest form of patriotism.' A decade later, it’s called 'subversive propaganda' ...”

And how 'bout this: "Truthy" would "add a button to Twitter so that people could report their neighbors and family members ..."

Again, look at the title of this post.

'Nuff said.

Posted by Hube at 05:45 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

What happens when you set yourself up as a paragon of virtue

As we noted yesterday, Marvel's Dan Slott -- certainly not the most mature gent on social media -- got hoisted on his own petard when he defended Marvel's use of this Spider-Woman cover by artist Milo Manara.

He now claims he hasn't defended the cover; however, what exactly do you mean here, Dan?

Oops.

Best of all, Slott is getting hammered by the Left. And why not? It consistently has been he, and his cohorts in the industry, who present themselves as paragons of virtue, lecturing everyone (especially those dastardly conservatives) about racism, sexism, homophobia, and the like.
Except when their employer(s) needs to make a buck.

Here's what The Mary Sue notes about the Spider-Woman title (my emphasis):

At this year’s San Diego Comic-Con, at a panel called “Women of Marvel,” the publisher announced a new ongoing Spider-Woman series. The series, part of Marvel’s “Characters and Creators” publishing initiative that “aims to speak directly to… women and girls,” joins nine other female-led series published by Marvel. According to company’s Editor-in-Chief, Axel Alonso, these superheroines “are not the big-breasted, scantily clad women that perhaps have become the comic-book cliché” but are “defined by many things—least of all their looks.”

I suppose Alonso has an "out" in that, on the cover in question, you can't tell if SW is "big-breasted" and she's certainly not "scantily clad." You could even argue against the "looks" aspect, although that'd certainly be pushing it. Having a perfectly shaped ass is part of (a girl's) "looks."

Still, it'd be amusing to see Alonso make the above "case," wouldn't it? Couldn't be any worse than Slott's meandering over the matter of this cover. But to the point: How freakin' hypocritical is it for Marvel to state what it did about Spider-Woman ... and then hire a dude like Manara who's known for drawing (overly) seductive poses like that on the cover? And then hypocrites like Slott and Tom Brevoort exercise verbal gymnastics in every way imaginable to justify it?

Nevertheless, Slott isn't giving up -- with being a SJW (Social Justice Warrior), that is. Here he is from yesterday:


In the back and forth in that thread, race is brought up, too. In SlottWorld, making sweeping generalizations about men ("all men are rapists!") -- and white people (Leonard Jeffries, anyone?) -- are permissible, because the "playing field" is not yet equal.

Whatever. There's so much ridiculous inconsistency in Slott's Twitter feed commentary as to defy description. No freakin' wonder the guy is such an Obamanaut.

Posted by Hube at 05:34 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

August 25, 2014

Let's check in with the moonbat comics creators!

It's been a while, and I see there was a recent "controversy" over a variant Spider-Woman cover, so let's get right to it ...

... the cover in question can be seen here, and was asked for by Marvel. Now, for the NON fun-extinguishers among us (i.e. the non-politically correct), this cover is no big deal. But for the 'bat creators this should be -- after all, how in the hell can Marvel commission such a flagrantly sexist and objectifying piece of art?

Dan Slott, who has no shortage of the "right" beliefs, amazingly defends the cover, calling the matter a "false controversy." And that's just for starters. Be sure to check out his Twitter feed, if you can stomach the hilarious hypocrisy.

Then there's our 'ol pal Ron Marz, who's miffed -- MIFFED, I tell you -- about some of the "abject and unapologetic racism" seen in Ferguson, MO. Of course, by that we know he means only white racism, but that aside, Marz is "concerned" about that, yet mocks comics blogger Avi Green thusly:


Not only has Avi brought up what a raving hypocrite Marz is for continuing to back a raging anti-Semite like (Pink Floyd's) Waters, yours truly has, too. Ya'd think that someone concerned with racism, bigotry, sexism, etc. 24-7 (like Marz) would take a stand ... shun Waters for his Jew hatred. But, nah -- the music's good! Funny how that didn't matter with regards to Orson Scott Card and Ender's Game, eh?

In addition, as Avi notes, unlike Dan Slott, Marz is upset at the Spider-Woman cover:


Except that ... "If only he'd admit he went overboard with Green Lantern's fridge scene ..."

Lastly, there's good 'ol Mark Waid, who back on the 19th tweeted the following (see if you can spot the irony):


"Non-hyperbolic," yet ... "hands-in-the-air," "in the back" ... Uh huh.

And so it goes ...

Posted by Hube at 06:29 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

August 22, 2014

Bergdahl prisoner swap broke law

In news that should surprise no one outside of the Boss Obama True Believers, news today says that President Lemon broke the law with regards to the prisoner deal for the Army's Bowe Bergdahl:

Officials neglected to give Congress a 30-day notification and illegally switched money from one account to another to conduct the swap, the Government Accountability Office said.

Mr. Obama defended the exchange as legal use of his powers as commander in chief and said he had to withhold information from Congress to preserve secrecy in delicate negotiations with the Taliban.

The GAO said the Defense Department did not break any law when it determined these five Taliban were no longer threats to the U.S. Rather, the violations were Defense officials’ failure to tell Congress ahead of time about the transfer and the $988,400 expenditure to conduct the operation.

Rear Adm. John Kirby said the Boss Obama's lawyers and the Justice Dept. said the deal was "a lawful exercise of presidential powers delegated to him as commander in chief under Article 2 of the Constitution."

The Justice Department? Of course it did!

Posted by Hube at 07:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

August 19, 2014

The Limits of Academic Freedom

Jonathan Adler at The Volokh Conspiracy discusses the case of Steven Salaita, the former Virginia Tech professor who had been offered a gig at the University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign.

Salaita's U. of Illinois job offer was abruptly rescinded after he had made a series of hateful tweets about Israel and defenders of that country. (The College Fix has numerous articles about the situation.) Immediately, many spoke out in favor of Salaita's right to free expression -- his "academic freedom," if you will. The support comes from both sides of the political spectrum, but has been most vociferous on the left.

Some of the pro-Salaita free speech arguments are persuasive (like FIRE's Adam Kissel's), but I find myself more in Adler's corner. He writes:

I largely share [Northwestern University law Professor Steven] Lubet’s views. His point about the disingenuous (or uninformed) characterization of the tweets in question is particularly well taken. As he notes, when defending Nazi marchers in Skokie, Ill., “the ACLU never soft-pedaled the Nazis as merely passionate critics of international banking.” I agree with Lubet that an academic should not be fired or denied a job offer, because of his or her political views, but I also question whether someone with Salaita’s record of hateful and offensive rhetoric is capable of being an effective academic and educator.

That last line really sticks with me. Trained in my last college undergrad years as a social studies educator, my (high school placement) cooperating teacher (amazingly, a conservative) was adamant about never allowing his personal opinions to leak into class discussions. He even outright refused to offer them when directly asked about them by students, in and out of class.

And these were mere opinions. We're not even talking about outrageous/vulgar/profane remarks in public forums.

Imagine if you were a Jewish student in one of Salaita's classes. What if his class was a requirement for your major? You think you'd get a fair shake knowing he knew you were Jewish? Or even worse, Israeli?

Which brings me to another aspect of this situation which really gets me: the brazen hypocrisy of "progressive" (I usually use quotes with the term because all-too often contemporary progressives are anything but) academics. They're often right on the front lines in the effort to abolish speech they do not like ...  often dubbing it "hate speech." Speeches against affirmative action are "racist" (or, at least "racially insensitive"), people against abortion are "anti-women," and those in favor of traditional marriage are "homophobic," are a few examples.

Yet, Salaita's vulgar anti-Jewish/Israel tweets were instantly defended by "progressives." "Academic freedom," you see.

If Salaita's remarks are to be inviolate due to academic freedom, would Salaita's defenders say the same regarding a white supremacist professor? How many of you reading this believe they would?

There's a substantial difference between having a political opinion ... and gross inappropriateness. Salaita's feelings about Israel and Jews could have been offered in a much more seemly manner; indeed they should have been, given his position.

This being said, I admit this is a difficult arena in which to tread. Too broad a brush should not be used in making judgments; each instance, including that involving Professor Salaita, needs to be considered individually and carefully.

(Cross-posted at The College Fix)

Posted by Hube at 07:16 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

August 18, 2014

Amen, brotha

As we noted here and here, Texas Governor Rick Perry was indicted for "abuse of power" because -- wait for it! -- he had the audacity to demand the resignation of Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg after her arrest for drunk driving. Check it:

In April 2013, Lehmberg was arrested after a witness called 911, describing her as driving erratically, swerving back and forth into the bike lane, and into oncoming traffic. Officers at the scene reportedly found an open bottle of vodka in her car, and a blood sample obtained later that evening purportedly showed a blood alcohol level of 0.239—almost three times the legal limit—even that many hours later.

If you already haven't seen it, be sure to view this video of Lehmberg's police booking.

But to the point regarding this insane lawsuit against Perry, here's Insty's Glenn Reynolds:

If the GOP doesn’t like it, it needs to ruin lives and careers just like the Democrats do. If it’s not willing to do that, then it can expect more of the same. The GOP would do better to respond like Dems, going after the attackers mercilessly and standing shoulder-to-shoulder regardless of the issue.

However, Professor Jacobson notes that the Dems may have overreached in this instance, as the indictment is "uniting unlikely allies" against Lehmberg and co.

One of these is Boss Obama strategist David Axelrod.

Posted by Hube at 10:35 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

August 15, 2014

Here we go again

There's been another shooting of an unarmed black teenager, and what played out last summer is sort of repeating itself. To wit:

  • There are discrepancies of what actually happened
  • The victim's side says Michael Brown -- the suspect who was shot dead in Ferguson, MO -- did nothing wrong; the police claim otherwise
  • The media, and popular culture in general, are reviving the meme that this is yet another example of the "epidemic" of police brutality against black Americans
  • There are calls, again, for "honest discussions" about race in America
  • But, in these "honest discussions," just don't dare to raise the issue of wildly disproportionate black crime rates
  • Black American leaders and others are making the claim that black lives "aren't valued" as highly as white lives
  • But, again, don't dare bring up the "not valuing" of black lives with regards to the black-on-black violence which permeates (mostly) urban areas
  • Progressives are missing the point that the militarization of police forces is big government in action

Today the name of the cop involved in the shooting was revealed: Darren Wilson. His race, at this point, still remains a mystery, however. Also revealed was the situation which led to the confrontation between Wilson and Brown: It seems Brown was a suspect in a robbery.

Here is the Missouri statute pertaining to the use of deadly force to effect a felony arrest. Based on the police's initial statements, these (at least one, certainly) appear to apply to this case.

To be sure, the Ferguson police didn't do themselves a lot of favors with the delay in issuing Wilson's name and the account of the incident (which, I understand, still isn't 100% complete). Nor was, as noted above, the overly "military" nature of the post-shooting response to protests.

But also not doing anyone favors are responses like that of WDEL's Al Mascitti who today went on a rant about "white people" (especially Tea Party types, of course) being the only ones who support police in this case, and even made a comparison of the "hopelessness" of black communities across the country to that of ... Palestinians in Gaza. (He even said that people "know" Hamas rockets launched into Israel "don't hurt anyone," but they provoke an unreasonable response.)

The details will keep coming out, and the inter-political philosophy squabble of various viewpoints about the incident will make for interesting discussion.

But there's certainly one thing you can count on: The mainstream media has its NarrativeTM, and it will stick to it ... no matter the facts.

UPDATE (by Hube): The latest reports indicate that Wilson was unaware of Brown's robbery activity when he stopped him. Brown and a friend were stopped for walking in the middle of the street and blocking traffic.

UPDATE 2 (by Hube): This site notes that, although Wilson stopped Brown and friend for walking in the street, once he saw cigars in Brown's hand he thought he might be the robbery suspect.

Posted by Felix at 12:22 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

August 13, 2014

August 12, 2014

Just like "If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor," right?

Seriously, how does anyone believe anything this guy says anymore?

Wait, I did find some suckers ...

Posted by Hube at 07:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The Rev. Donald Morton avoids basic points

... because they'd ruin his argument.

Unfortunately for the readers of the News Journal, Morton is yet another selective history aficionado, picking and choosing points to make a case against Israel. I will not bore you with a point-by-point approach; here are just a few snippets towards the end of the reverend's piece:

Tell her the truth about her violation of international law and arrogant behaviors. Stand up for human rights, including Palestinian human rights.

With all due respect, reverend, you can pick any violation of international law you wish ... but any since 1948 is pretty much moot as the Palestinians and their Arab neighbors violated the very first of the Israeli-Palestinian UN edicts -- that which created the two states in the first place.

... we call on our public servants to stand up for what’s right and just! U.S. Sens. Coons and Carper and U.S. Rep. Carney, stop voting for military aid to Israel. Don’t say one thing and do another.

Good enough. Then also call on a cessation of aid to the Palestinians, Egypt, Syria, et. al. Especially until all parties agree in writing to recognize Israel and to cease any and all terrorist support/attacks against her.

We speak now to Palestinian people who are indigenous to their land – those who have been made to live in poverty and have been relegated to the margins – we are here to tell you that you are not forgotten!

And whose fault is that, reverend? The original 1948 Partition Plan created two states (just like the Palestinians and other Arab states claim they want now) -- one predominately Jewish and the other Arab. It wasn't the nascent Israel which gobbled up the land relegated to the Palestinians. The surrounding Arab countries did so, notably Egypt and Jordan. They are the ones who have "relegated (the Palestinians) to the margins" and have made them live in poverty for over sixty years.

Such historical ignorance like Rev. Morton's is disheartening, especially given his obvious good intentions. But the Palestinian situation is not very much akin to that of black Americans from fifty or so years ago and prior like he further claims.

To make it so, one would have to believe that black Americans had been kept as second-class citizens by other blacks from countries surrounding the US ... and that land given to them was appropriated by same. Then, black Americans would have been used as scapegoats by these other countries in the cause of destroying the United States proper, with black enclaves within the US launching terrorist attacks without.

That doesn't sound at all like the actual black American experience, does it?

The constant blaming of Jews and Israel for the plight of the Palestinians is truly baffling. Aside from the Partition Plan of 1948, the same Arab states which gobbled up Palestinian land in that year attacked Israel again in 1967 and 1973. In the former, the Israelis had had enough and kept some conquered land as "buffers" against future aggression.

If you don't believe Israel would be willing to trade land for peace, just ask Anwar Sadat (in heaven, mind you). He got Egypt back the Sinai Peninsula in exchange for peace with Israel. During Bill Clinton's presidency, Yasir Arafat had an opportunity to get most of the rest of the pre-1967 territory back. He declined.

Nevertheless, Israel still gave Gaza its independence ... and the powers that be there turned the territory into a terrorist outpost, launching rockets constantly into Israel. Does anyone seriously believe Israel wanted to blockade Gaza as a result -- knowing what the predictable reaction (like the reverend's) would be? Are Israelis simply gluttons for (world) punishment?

Get real!

So let's summarize:

  • The Palestinians had their state in 1948 with the original UN Partition Plan
  • The territory for that state was gobbled up by Arab neighbors in the (futile) attempt to drive out the Jews from the land allotted to them in the UN plan
  • The Palestinians and Arab countries attempted to destroy Israel again 1967 and 1973
  • The two attempts noted above are in addition to constant terrorist efforts against Israel
  • Israel gave back the Sinai to Egypt in exchange for recognition and a true peace
  • Years later, Israel offered almost all of the rest of conquered territory to Yasir Arafat. He turned it down.
  • Israel still allowed Gaza autonomy despite Arafat's refusal.
  • Those who run Gaza (like Hamas) turned the land into a terrorist enclave which constantly launched rockets into Israel and served as a base from which other attacks were generated.

But, somehow, the Jews are to blame for all of this.

Yes. Somehow.

Posted by Felix at 07:08 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

August 10, 2014

New smartphone app is -- wait for it! -- racist

There's a new app for your smartphone called SketchFactor which helps you avoid "sketchy" neighborhoods while you're traveling/visiting an unfamiliar town, but this doesn't sit well, natch, with the usual suspects. Take Gawker's Sam Biddle:

Is there any way to keep white people from using computers, before this whole planet is ruined? I ask because the two enterprising white entrepreneurs above just made yet another app for avoiding non-white areas of your town—and it’s really taking off!

Crain’s reports on SketchFactor, a racist app made for avoiding “sketchy” neighborhoods, which is the term young white people use to describe places where they don’t feel safe because they watched all five seasons of The Wire.

Best response to this comes from Insty's Glenn Reynolds: "For a certain class of people — many of whom are white, work at Gawker, and avoid sketchy neighborhoods with care — everything is racist."

I also direct you to this recent post of mine, particularly the second paragraph.

Posted by Hube at 10:57 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

August 07, 2014

The border crisis in a nutshell

NRO's Jim Geraghty from his e-mailed Morning Jolt:

The unsecure border is an entirely theoretical problem for most of our political class. Lawmakers rarely if ever encounter illegal immigrants, much less dangerous ones, on Capitol Hill, or at their high-dollar fundraisers. Illegal immigrants don't climb over the fence of Camp David or the White House. The president isn't likely to run into many illegal immigrants in his upcoming two-week vacation at Martha's Vineyard.

Indeed. Just like Robert Redford's recent example of "doing as I say, not as I do" (cripes, how many examples of such "progressivity" do we need??), you don't see the likes of Nancy Pelosi or Joe Biden (who yesterday said that the illegal children who have made it to the border and beyond are "our kids") lining up to open their spacious mansions for the very illegals whose "rights" they so vociferously defend ... do you?

This, and the predilection for the current administration to either thumb its nose at the law AND/OR sue anyone who gets in the way of what they want, is why I advocated what I did here: border state governors and other officials should do what they have to to secure and enforce the damn border. Let Boss Obama, Eric Holder or whomever else sue 'ya. And if you lose, just do what they've done: use agencies at your disposal to "do what you have to do." Y'know, like they did with the IRS. At least, in your case, you'll be adhering to and enforcing the law.

Posted by Hube at 11:03 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Whaa ... ? I thought paying taxes was 'patriotic'

Good 'ol Bobby Redford is suing to get out of paying taxes to New York State.

But ... according to Our Dear Leader, trying to do that is unpatriotic!

Posted by Hube at 10:35 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

August 05, 2014

John Scalzi's Old Man's War series heading to SyFy

The Hollywood Reporter (via Insty) notes that the "progressive" scifi author's Old Man's War universe is being adapted for the small screen on the SyFy Channel. It'll be titled "Ghost Brigades" after the second novel in the series:

The NeverEnding Story's Wolfgang Petersen will oversee development on the project alongside Scott Stuber (Safe House), with Jake Thornton and Ben Lustig (Winter's Knight) on board to pen the first script. The drama hails from Universal Cable Productions, Petersen's Radiant Productions and Stuber's Bluegrass Films.

Ghost Brigades follows John Perry, who at 75 enlists in the Colonial Defense Force to fight a centuries-long war for man's expansion into the cosmos. Technology allows experiences and consciousness to be transplanted into younger bodies that are outfitted to endure the harsher rigors of war in space. However, soon after John arrives, he finds himself involved with a mysterious woman, and at the same time, at the center of an unraveling conspiracy involving an elite fighting force known as the Ghost Brigades.

I was initially a big fan of Scalzi and the series ... that is, until two things transpired. First, the author became just like the usual "progressive" comicbook creator cadre on social media. On his blog and elsewhere, Scalzi has no compunction about belittling those with whom he disagrees, which, the majority of the time, happen to be conservatives/Republicans. Like I and many others have informed said comic creators, there's no better way to prevent future additional profits than pissing off a (big) portion of your audience.

Second, while Old Man's War (the first book in the series) was very good, the sequels devolved into the usual "blame the US humans first for all the ills of the planet galaxy" ... the worst being the latest installment, The Human Division.

Irony/Hypocrisy Alert: All those involved in the adaptation of Scalzi's series are ... white males. Why is that, John? What's supposed to be good for everyone else isn't good enough for you?

Posted by Hube at 05:41 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

Alternate reality



Posted by Hube at 05:05 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

But the Tea Party is still worse!

Pro-Palestinian demonstrators chant "Heil Hitler" in Canada:

But remember: "The Tea Party doesn't do this, and gets called 'Nazis' anyway. Arabs do this, and the media covers it up.

Posted by Hube at 11:35 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

August 04, 2014

July 31, 2014

The dumbest member of Congress strikes again

That'd be, in case you were unaware, Texas Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee who the other day whined about the GOP supposedly seeking to impeach Boss Obama (something they're not doing), and as part of her "argument" claimed the Democrats never attempted to impeach President Bush.

Except that they did attempt to do just that. And Jackson-Lee was a co-sponsor of the legislation.

Posted by Hube at 10:38 AM | Comments (740) | TrackBack

July 27, 2014

Delaware's own Joe Biden

Ah, Joe. Always demonstrating you've never recovered from the disease known as Foot-in-Mouth:

To wit: “You know,” Biden continued, “so when they put me in a home, I get a window with a view. You know what I mean? But my daughter is a social worker.”

As the IJReview notes, "... one of your other children is Delaware’s Attorney General, and the other is a lawyer who works for a Ukrainian gas company. I think you’ll be fine."

I thought Dems were the party of "compassion" and "for the little guy."

Posted by Hube at 12:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

July 26, 2014

Does she really not see the irony?

The ever-politically correct Gail Simone tweets:


Yes, Gail, and YOU are one of the most willing. Any dissent from your far-left PC orthodoxy, no matter how innocuous and/or well reasoned, is labeled "racist," "sexist," "homophobic" and whatever other "-ism" or phobia you can think of.

You've been a big supporter of radical feminist Suey Park, she of "only white people can be racist" infamy. And when asked if you agreed with her statement, you refused to answer, and then proceeded to block on Twitter those who had asked the question.

Way to willingly embrace that Newspeak, Gail. Hypocrite.

Posted by Hube at 11:57 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

July 25, 2014

Absolutely beyond parody

It's bad enough (for the Boss Obama administration) that a recent court ruling said ObumbleCare subsidies are only available via states that have established health exchanges (as per the language in the actual law); it's worse that one of the law's architects said exactly that in the past.

Even though the administration, et. al. are arguing that the law "infers" that the federal government can offer subsidies.

Still worse are this architect's -- Jonathan Gruber -- pathetic excuses for his statements ... and the ObumbleCare law's actual language:

"It is unambiguous this is a typo. Literally every single person involved in the crafting of this law has said that it's a typo, that they had no intention of excluding the federal states."

Un-freakin'-real. The law has a TYPO, for cripe's sake. That NO ONE caught.

Then again, Nancy Pelosi did say that the bill had to be passed so that we could know what's in it, right?

"I honestly don’t remember why I said that. I was speaking off-the-cuff. It was just a mistake," he (Gruber) said.

He continued: "There was never any intention to literally withhold money, to withhold tax credits, from the states that didn’t take that step" [of creating their own exchanges]. That’s clear in the intent of the law and if you talk to anybody who worked on the law. My subsequent statement was just a speak-o—you know, like a typo."

Got that? Even though this Obamanaut has more than once stated what the recent court ruling said -- that, again, only states with exchanges can offer healthcare subsidies -- he "misspoke" ... just like the "typo" in the healthcare law.

Anyone who still buys anything that comes out of this administration really is living in an alternate reality.

Posted by Hube at 02:54 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Governor Markell, like Boss Obama

The First State's governor sure has learned well from our president -- when it comes to lying, that is. Despite stating that Delaware had nowhere to place any illegal immigrant children that have been flooding our southern border, Jack Markell recently announced that 117 of these children have been placed with families in the state.

[Markell] urged lawmakers to "remain mindful that we are called upon to provide for the least of our brothers and sisters."

He called the U.S. a "nation of immigrants," saying "the humanitarian crisis of unaccompanied minors fleeing dangerous situations at home does not just affect our border states; it impacts all of us as Americans. Whatever one's politics, we are a nation of immigrants."

*Sigh* The 'ol "nation of immigrants" schtick, eh? Conveniently forgetting the term "illegal," eh Jack? Spare me. Not to mention, the whole "fleeing dangerous situations" is mostly bunk. Interviews have shown that the vast majority of those arriving at our borders currently have fled not because of "dangerous situations at home," but because they think they can stay in the United States.

Markell also noted that "the presence of child migrants in Delaware may come at a cost for state taxpayers." Perfect. Just perfect.

He also pulled the racism card, saying "Unfortunately, the debate around immigration has been marked too often by scare-mongering and xenophobia." Again, perfect. *Yawn*

Markell, like Boss Obama, has become a laughing stock; however, unlike Obama and the Democrat Party nationally, Markell and his party will easily maintain power here in the First State. This fact shows how utterly moribund the GOP is here in DE.

Posted by Hube at 11:15 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

July 17, 2014

More comics news: The Falcon becomes the new Cap, and ... Superior Iron Man??

As reported by Doug Ernst and many others, aside from the ludicrous media stunt that is the female Thor, this fall Sam Wilson -- better known as The Falcon -- will assume the mantle of Captain America.

As Doug notes, this makes perfectly logical sense. Sam and Steve Rogers (Cap) have a long, storied history that dates back to the late 1960s. They even shared the marquee on their book for a time. Early 1970s Captain America features some incredibly biting social and racial commentary.

It's akin to Tony Stark and Jim ("Rhodey") Rhodes in the Iron Man title. Rhodes first appeared in IM #118, but chronologically the duo's first encounter -- Stark as Iron Man, that is -- took place during the Vietnam War. Rhodes first assumed the role of Iron Man in the early 1980s when Stark succumbed to alcoholism. He did it again in the early 90s when Stark's nervous system deteriorated. And, of course, he went on in his own suit of armor as War Machine.

Doug notes, too, how Marvel Political Officer Tom Brevoort continues to make an ass out of himself. Here's what he said about Wilson coming on as Cap (my -- and Doug's -- emphasis):

While Sam shares many of Steve’s beliefs in a general sense, he’s also a very different person with a very different background. He didn’t grow up in the 1930s, he’s a modern day man in touch with the problems of the 21st Century. For most of his professional life, Sam has worked as a social worker, so he’s seen the worst of urban society up close, and how crime, poverty, lack of social structure and opportunity can affect the community. So he’s got perhaps a greater focus on the plight of the common man, and perhaps a greater empathy for the underprivileged than maybe even Steve himself.

First, read Doug's take on the "common man" statement. It fits Brevoort (and many at Marvel and DC) to a tee. Second (and admittedly Brevoort gets more leeway here since he used "perhaps"), what was Steve Rogers?? The kid grew up without a father, he and his mother (who died while he was still young) were dirt-poor, and he endured constant bullying due to his sickly, frail nature. Granted, being white as opposed to black in the 1930s was a whole different ball of wax than it is today, but if anything the Captain America title itself has shown time and time again how socially and racially progressive Rogers is.

One of the most poignant examples, in my opinion, was a more contemporary issue -- an annual of The Ultimates, if memory serves. It featured some in-depth conversation between Wilson and Rogers, with the latter remembering some days during World War II. Steve (as Cap) had just finished up attending a benefit party, and after practically everyone had gone, a few black soldiers approached him asking for his autograph. They had not been allowed to attend the party ... for obvious reasons. Rogers was not happy about that. At all.

Nevertheless, if history is any indication, you can bet that Brevoort and the usual cadre of creators will be quick to assign the "racist" label to anyone who doesn't like this Cap transition, even if it is completely devoid of any racial pretext. Because that's what modern "progressives" do. Just look at how these 'bats react to criticism of our president, after all.

Speaking of Iron Man, in other Marvel news there will be a new Shellhead title, Superior Iron Man. No, it won't be written by that idiot Dan Slott, but the premise does sound a bit like Superior Spider-Man:

"What you're seeing in 'Superior Iron Man' is a Tony Stark who’s seen both his worst and best impulses all let loose," (writer Tom) Taylor told Mashable. "It is Tony, but he’s going to be in a zone now where he’s never been. He's more ambitious, cunning, egotistical ... all of those quantities are unharnessed. He has a vision for the world. I like to think his position is defensible — controversial, but defensible."

In other words, Stark will be a dick. Granted, he's always had that potential, but Taylor is gonna "open it up."

Oh joy.

UPDATE: As if on cue, regarding Cap:




What'd I tell 'ya? And just wait until the actual stories in the new Captain America come forth. If they're anything like a lot of other contemporary comicbook tales (y'know, like the Cap vs. Tea Party yarn), it'll give even more of an excuse for guys like Marz to call out legitimate criticism as "racist."

But, alas, that's easier than thinking. Which makes sense since there ain't a whole of original thinking going on in the 'ol House of Ideas, that's fer sher.

UPDATE 2: This Graeme McMillan piece gives hyperbole a whole new dimension. Sam Wilson will be "working for a white master" because Steve Rogers will be "running Cap’s missions from his headquarters in Avengers Mansion” and will "also tutor Sam in how to throw the shield," etc.


I'm racist/sexist/homophobic if
I don't like a comicbook storyline?

Garbage.

Posted by Hube at 02:29 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

July 13, 2014

Spare us the outrage

Here's Marvel's editor-in-chief Axel Alonso on the recent (manufactured) controversy surrounding Captain America writer Rick Remender:

"Let me be clear: An attack on Rick’s integrity is an attack on Marvel’s integrity."

Is that so. Gosh.

As was the point of this post last week, many of the creators at both Marvel and DC have helped create the very atmosphere which led to the silly Remender situation. Anything anybody says/does that (seemingly) goes against the prevailing "progressive" wisdom is immediately pounced upon by these creators ... unless it's (seemingly) done by one of their own. And then the self-righteous indignation begins in earnest.

It's quite obvious Alonso doesn't really believe what he said about Marvel, above. If he did, he'd tell guys like Dan Slott, Ron Marz, Mark Waid, and Gail Simone to curb their condescending, hostile, rude, and factually challenged social media behavior towards those who differ politically from them.

And just in case, spare me the free speech "argument." No one is saying those named above cannot say what they want. It's merely a matter of manners but most especially business sense. One wonders why Alonso hasn't said something like "When you behave like that on social media, it reflects poorly on Marvel."

Posted by Hube at 10:59 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

July 09, 2014

Then why don't you stay off of it, Dan?

Marvel's gnomish Dan Slott:


Problem solved: Stay off of Twitter, Dan.

Posted by Hube at 10:24 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

July 07, 2014

Laugher of the Day

Here's Mark Waid on the recent controversy surrounding fellow comicbook creator Rick Remender's current Captain America storyline:


That's rich. This, from the guy who tweeted this about last week's Hobby Lobby Supreme Court decision:


Now, I've no idea about the character and story in question, but I find the irony very delicious here. The self-righteousness of people like Waid, Dan Slott, Ron Marz et. al. knows no bounds, most especially when they're wrong about something. And they always do it in the most snide, condescending manner.

Not to mention, this crew is always on "speech patrol" for something on which to post a grievance. It's always fun to watch when they're on the defensive. You've made the bed; now lie in it.

UPDATE: Gotta love it: The gnomish Dan Slott alludes to this post (without linking to it, natch) only including the "Now, I've no idea about the character and story in question ..." part in his tweet. Which, natch, has little to do with the actual point.

Brilliant, Danny. Now you've done precisely what those fired up about Remender have done.

UPDATE 2: This comment perfectly illustrates the point Slott purposely missed:

I LOVE IT when Liberals eat their own. How does it feel Rick… to be hoisted by your own petard? The PC “Thought Police” showed their usual ignorance and intolerance while revealing their own insecurities and hate.

Remember when this used to be a free country?

Posted by Hube at 10:46 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

July 06, 2014

Laugher of the Day

Watch out!! Democrat Senator "I'm A" Dick Durbin is -- wait for it! -- fed up with critics of the Boss Obama administration regarding the situation on the southern border. Why? Because the problem was started by ... George W. Bush. In 2008. Six f***ing years ago.

"It was the Homeland Security Act signed by President George W. Bush which says we treat these children humanely,” Durbin said.

Of course, we could humanely send them back to their own country. Not to mention the Act in question was overwhelmingly passed by Congress. Also not to mention, a thing called THE LAW has never stopped this administration from doing whatever the hell it's wanted in the past, but all of a sudden ... well, George W. Bush, dammit!


GEORGE W. BUSH:
There's NOTHING for which
he can't be blamed!

Posted by Hube at 07:45 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Does he really not understand the difference?

Here's a Twitter pic retweeted by our pal Dan Slott:

Slott asks of writer Tony Lee, a London-based writer who had also retweeted it, and Peter Anghelides, the tweet's originator: "Eep! Is this really how we look to the Brits?"

The text on the original tweet says "Spot the difference competition."

Y'see, it seems the "message" we're suppose to draw from this is all religions have their extremists, and that society shouldn't judge everyone based on the actions of "a few."

Except, as clear thinking people realize (and, thankfully, some pointed out on the Twitter feeds in question), the person on the right won't hesitate to kill you merely for not believing as she does. Or for saying something against her religion. Or merely because you're an Israeli. Etc.

The girl on the left, simply, wouldn't do any of those things. Not even close. The Bible and gun simply represent rights embodied in the very Constitution which governs us (represented by the flag in the background).

Dan Slott often tweets about bigotry and intolerance -- the kind he doesn't like. Like here, for instance. But as we've seen, he gets upset when people think he implies "everyone" of a certain group, yet he doesn't waste any time doing just that to someone else if there's no "requisite disclaimer."

Here's an example of bigotry which is perfectly acceptable to Dan Slott:

Just like the top pic above, that there's little/no difference between an American female who believes in the First and Second Amendments and a Middle Eastern jihadist woman who wouldn't hesitate to detonate a set of bombs strapped to her body just to off a few "infidels," people who believe in gun ownership rights -- again, rights which are codified in our highest legal document -- are dimwitted, gutteral-voiced "'Muricans" to people like the gnomish Dan Slott.

There are many contemporary comicbook creators who think as Slott does. It's how they think about you.

(Thanks to Doug Ernst for the various screen caps.)

UPDATE: My 'ol pal David Gerstman notes that the woman on the right is Reem Riyashi. Check out her story here.

Posted by Hube at 11:31 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

July 02, 2014

The dumbest "progressive" arguments about the Hobby Lobby decision

Via The Federalist, here are some of the dopiest emotion-over-fact "arguments" about the SCOTUS decision from the other day:


Yep, because we all know the SCOTUS ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby being allowed to set up a paramilitary group to make sure its employees do not visit local pharmacies for contraception.


Are condoms covered by ObamaCare? Nope. And guess what? Vasectomies aren't either.


Sounds like an argument against Hillary for president. I don't want a woman deciding what happens to me, my dad, my brother-in-law, etc.


Best response to this:


More moonbat goodness at the link above.

Posted by Hube at 11:04 AM | Comments (15) | TrackBack

Those rational, tolerant, and willing to learn comicbook guys!

The recent SCOTUS Hobby Lobby decision really has caused many a "progressive" to get his/her panties in a real tight bunch. So much so in Mark "Go F*** Yourself" Waid's" case that, well, he's gonna tweet about the case ... and you're gonna accept what he says, dammit!!


Posted by Hube at 10:27 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

June 29, 2014

Good thing he ain't in government anymore

Former stand-in Delaware senator Ted Kaufman falls into line with radical environmentalists with the usual apocalyptic swill. Most laughable part of the article:

An ICF International study commissioned by the NRDC concludes "the first-ever limits on carbon pollution from power plants can save American households and business customers $37.4 billion on their electric bills in 2020 while creating more than 274,000 jobs. … The federal carbon pollution standard could fuel a surge in energy efficiency investments, creating new jobs filled by electricians, roofers, carpenters, insulation workers, heating/air conditioning installers and heavy equipment operators, among others."

Does anyone with a modicum of sanity actually believe this -- especially after all the other eco-nonsense from our administration since early 2009??

As I've said ad nauseam here, it is very hard to worry about appeals (like Ted's) to "my children and yours" when the same scientists Ted and other global warming climate change climate disruption alarmists cite have told us there is nothing we can do about the quantity of the CO2 currently in the atmosphere ... for at least a millennium.

Couple that with this bit of Kaufman limousine elitism: "Who is right about the costs? It seems to me the question isn't very important if you are not in a state of denial about the NASA study." Uh huh. Easy for you to say, Teddy. Guys like you who're monetarily comfortable may not think costs are "very important," but ye gad, c'mon.

Here's an idea: How about you and yours do something about our sputtering economy and then offer up the worrisome platitudes about our nigh annihilation, huh?

Posted by Hube at 09:57 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

June 25, 2014

Double standards

Hey, did anyone else catch the LGOMB's "El Somnambulo" on Al Mascitti's WDEL show yesterday? Did you hear his mocking Mexican/Spanish accent?

Do 'ya think if a conservative/Republican did something like that that the "progressive" crew over there would be whining about "racism?"

Yep.

Posted by Hube at 10:25 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

June 21, 2014

'Ya just gotta laugh

Marvel dopey minion Tom Brevoort (who, I'm sorry to say, is a Delaware native) claims there is no blacklist at Marvel, and that Chuck Dixon -- who recently co-authored an article in the Wall Street Journal about comicbooks' liberal bias -- isn't banned from the company:

No, he isn’t.

Though, after this latest campaign, I don’t know that it would be easy to find an editor up here who’d want to risk working with him.

****

Nobody is refusing to look at Chuck’s work because of his beliefs. They might be refusing to look at his work because of his behavior. Different thing.

Given the way he’s comported himself, the things he’s said and how he’s said them, I would be reluctant to work with Chuck. I don’t work with people I cannot trust.

Chuck is a long-established, facile writer. He’s got proven skills. What seems to be short-circuiting his career at this point isn’t his politics, it’s his professionalism.

Are. You. Kidding. Me???

This hypocritical brazenness is without limit. First of all, what sort of "unprofessional" behavior is Dixon guilty of, Tom? Second, even a cursory examination of many creators' social media behavior -- especially that of Mark Waid, Ron Marz, and Gail Simone as we, Douglas Ernst and Avi Green have all documented scrupulously -- reveals unprofessionalism to the Nth degree. Where's your concern there, Tom??

I know, I know, but don't even bother. Hell, your very own Facebook thread on the Dixon issue proves our point perfectly. Just look at the aforementioned Mark Waid's childish antics (yet again) in the comments. The fact is, you don't CARE about behavior like THAT, Mr. Brevoort. Because it aligns with your own personal world view.

It's really that simple.

So, f***ing SPARE US your pathetically useless screeds about "behavior" and "professionalism." Standards only work in one direction in Bubble Land.


Tom Brevoort: Stylin' like George Michael since 1987.

Posted by Hube at 11:54 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

June 19, 2014

Just a reminder ...

... about what Democrats said about Iraq, Saddam Hussein, and WMD before that dastardly George W. Bush actually did more than just complain:

Gee, whaaat?? Nancy Pelosi said Iraq had chemical and biological weapons ... there was no doubt about it??

As many regular readers know, I was against the Iraq invasion from the start, but this doesn't take anything away from the sickeningly brazen two-faceness of folks like Pelosi, Reid and "Plugs" Biden who, when things got tough, became whiny pu**ies merely for political gain.

And it worked: We got Boss Obama in 2008. Aren't we all happy with that?

Posted by Hube at 11:45 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 18, 2014

Further comicbook creator cognitive dissonance

Remember, these folks are putting out the funny books these days. Here's our 'ol pal Ron Marz retweeting Senate Leader Harry Reid's(!!) tweet:


Yes, this is the same Harry Reid who -- wait for it! -- voted to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq unilaterally. Note that last word, too.

Oh, but wait -- Reid and others (notably Hillary Clinton and "Plugs" Biden) would later claim their votes were "only to continue diplomacy."

Maybe Bush, Cheney, et. al. can claim "Oh gosh, sorry -- the plain language of the authorization fooled us. Mr. Reid, Biden, et. al. should have informed us what it 'really' meant."

Posted by Hube at 02:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 13, 2014

Marvel's value system in a nutshell

Via FCMM: Marvel's Tom Brevoort commented that Marvel would "certainly be interested in the abstract" in hiring legendary Frank Miller to do a Captain America story ... as long as it's not akin to the creator's Holy Terror tale.

But, as Avi Green notes, Marvel had little issue with the ridiculous Truth: Red, White, and Black Captain America tale which painted American scientists as on par with Nazis.

Get it? OK to portray the US as Hitleresque; not OK to have a symbol of America go after Islamic terrorists.

This is the modern value system that Marvel and DC (and some other companies) possess at the moment.

Posted by Hube at 12:54 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Suitable

Posted by Hube at 12:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 12, 2014

Priorities

The Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers regarding the Las Vegas shooting last week:

  • Yet another example of right wing Republican terrorism.
  • Time to use this as probable cause to raid the Bundy compound and arrest all on his and his occupied federal property. They are all traitors. Time to violently treat them as such.
  • Far right terrorism is by far the dominant source of terror attacks in America
  • Now, everyone who loves the Tea Party is a Nazi, by default.
  • We can all thank Rush, Beck and Henney along with Fox Noise for this

And, laughably, "Trust Fund" Scott is pissed off at the local sheriff out there, for calling this an isolated case and pondering a motive. This, from a true Boss Obama believer ... an admin that gave us terms like "workplace violence" and "overseas contingency operations" and constantly warns us not to assign motives for beyond-obvious jihadist actions.

A few days later: Welcome Home, Bowe Bergdahl. Be sure to read the whole thing, then remember the bullet points above. This is Boss Obama's America, folks.

Oh, and speaking of "Trust Fund" Scott, check this out. If this is in any way true -- and happens -- here's my first press conference question: "Do you really believe that 'reasonable people' can disagree as to whether George W. Bush had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks?"

Posted by Hube at 12:47 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

June 09, 2014

Comicbook pros lambaste liberalism in the field

Nice to hear -- finally -- from some pros, after guys like Doug Ernst, Avi Green, Carl and myself have been doing it for years. Chuck Dixon and Paul Rivoche take to the pages of the Wall Street Journal to pen "How Liberalism Became Kryptonite for Superman." (If you Google the title you'll get around the pay wall.) In it, they note:

The 1990s brought a change. The industry weakened and eventually threw out the CCA, and editors began to resist hiring conservative artists. One of us, Chuck, expressed the opinion that a frank story line about AIDS was not right for comics marketed to children. His editors rejected the idea and asked him to apologize to colleagues for even expressing it. Soon enough, Chuck got less work.

The superheroes also changed. Batman became dark and ambiguous, a kind of brooding monster. Superman became less patriotic, culminating in his decision to renounce his citizenship so he wouldn’t be seen as an extension of U.S. foreign policy. A new code, less explicit but far stronger, replaced the old: a code of political correctness and moral ambiguity. If you disagreed with mostly left-leaning editors, you stayed silent.

This is just the tip of the iceberg, really. Much more in-depth examples are found in Colossus's comics archives, and at the aforementioned Doug Ernst and Avi Green blogs. Doug has his take on Dixon's and Rivoche's article here.

And just to throw a few examples in here, today here's our 'ol microcephalic pal Ron Marz not wasting a single minute to jump on the MSM bandwagon -- because finally it seems a shooting has fit their perpetually sought after NarrativeTM:


There's never a word from this dolt when it's a non-NarrativeTM shooting, most especially when the politics are aligned with his own.

But he cares, don'tcha know ...

And example #2: Mark "Go F*** Yourself" Waid:


*Sigh* Says a guy who lionizes a president for whom telling the truth is the most difficult activity imaginable.

Posted by Hube at 05:25 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

June 07, 2014

Shuns homophobes, digs anti-Semites

Our comicbook-writing pal Ron Marz has a big problem with guys like Orson Scott Card -- y'know, because of his homophobia; however, he doesn't appear to have much of an issue with anti-Semites. Check it:


Roger Waters? Waters is one of the creative minds behind Pink Floyd, in case you're unaware. He also has a big problem with Jews and Israel:

According to Waters, Israel is a “racist apartheid regime” that practices “ethnic cleansing.” A great artist such as himself will not play in a country equivalent to “Vichy government in occupied France.” Likening Jews to Nazi collaborators was not enough. Waters then went further, comparing Israel to the Nazis themselves. “I would not have played in Berlin either … during the Second World War.” Waters believes that Israel is guilty of genocide, only “this time it’s the Palestinian people being murdered.”

To counter this idiot's "points" one by one is a waste of time, not only because I've done it so many times before, but because it would also be treating such outright ignorance with even the slightest modicum of respect. No dice.

So ... Marz? How does it feel to support a man who compares to Jews to Nazis? How would your colleague Dan Slott feel, considering the lengths he's gone through to denounce Douglas Ernst (whose comments he purposely misconstrued)?

But maybe you can have a chat with Danny about Waters' musical genius. Oh wait, that's right -- for you guys to be consistent, that should be completely immaterial.

Posted by Hube at 09:14 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

May 31, 2014

Child-like comicbook creators just can't decide

Via Ace comes this: Why I Support the Mutant Registration Act.

I know the left are always going on about how mutants are being discriminated against and questioning them at all makes us basically evil racists, but the left’s position on this issue makes absolutely no sense. Right now, if a kid in school so much as draws a picture of a gun, the cops get called. But if there is a kid in class with mutant exploding powers who could easily kill everyone in the classroom — either maliciously or accidentally — then we’re all Nazis for saying, “Hey, maybe we should reevaluate whether that kid should be in the same class as everyone else.” Not only that, we’re bigots for wanting to even know about that kid. How does this make any sense? I guess dead school children is better than “discrimination.”

And it’s not like these mutant powers are the same as someone walking around with a concealed gun like millions of Americans do and not necessarily harming anyone; no, they’re actively using them. Many of the mutants are in this paramilitary organization — the X-Men — and flying around in military-grade hardware to “fight evil.” Some of us think that maybe — just maybe — the government should watch these people. And of course we get called racists for this basic common sense.

I know I've written similar sentiments in the past here (our search function is still an active victim of our outage a couple weeks back), but I'll reiterate my sympathies with the author of the above. The Left seeks to make hay out of every gun tragedy (the latest being a psycho pampered college kid who killed a half dozen people because he couldn't get laid ... or something) with "progressive" comicbook creators some of the most vocal. And some of these same creators, who seek "real life relevancy" in many of their stories, suddenly take the "Oh, but I only write comicbooks!" excuse when called on their hypocrisy. Take Amazing Spider-Man scribe Dan Slott:


Please. How many times have we heard that the X-Men are a comicbook parable for just about any historically marginalized group? Blacks. Jews. Gays? Which goes directly to the quote above's point: What if these (or any other) groups had the ability to manipulate the weather to their will? Blast holes through armor plate with their optic blasts? Detach the Golden Gate Bridge and levitate it across a sound?? Would average folk be reluctant to call for the government to do something about this ... for fear of being called a "bigot?" Would the Left be hesitant?

If they would be, then they'd be immensely hypocritical given their stance on gun control.

In the mid-2000s Marvel devoted an "event" to a similar topic -- "Civil War." It was clearly sympathetic to the non-registration side (how could it not be with Captain America as its leader?); once again, can anyone imagine a contemporary creator at Marvel doing up a story about the ineffectiveness of gun control? Or even a yarn about the debate, and being even slightly even-handed about it?

Cheeyeah, right. Remember -- they "only write comicbooks." That is, until they want to make a "statement." Then they're cultural commentators. Unless too many people disagree. Then they're "just comicbook writers."

Or something.

Posted by Hube at 09:48 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

May 26, 2014

OK to blame ALL men for Cali mass shooting

Carl brings word of comicbook scribe Chris Roberson blaming -- wait for it! -- ALL men for the psycho in California who murdered a half dozen people because he wasn't getting laid.

Get it? ALL MEN. Even if you don't come anywhere close to the mental instability of the killer (Elliot Rodger), it just doesn't matter:

So many women have been the victims of violent assault that it’s easy for well-intentioned dudes in the majority to play the “Not All Men” game, even if they are smart enough not to SAY that phrase. THEY don’t assault women, after all. They might not even objectify women. They might have had their consciousness elevated, and are consciously feminist, and avoid doing or saying anything that could be interpreted as overly sexist.

But I’m here to tell you, as one of those kinds of guys, that we are STILL part of the problem. Because of the culture that we belong to, and the unexamined assumptions that were engrained in all of us, even those raised by the more forward thinking and progressive of parents.

Now just imagine for one moment Roberson opining the above ... and replacing "Muslim" for "men." Think it would happen? What about "black" for "men"? Nope. Those two demographics are sacrosanct, dammit. Only men -- or to be more precise, white men -- can be blamed as a group for the ills of all mankind. Roberson will get nothing but cheers from "progressives" for his thesis, and his prog bonafides will remain in good standing, without a doubt.

But in the real world, guys like Edward Trimnell know better.

I'm always struck by straight white guys like Roberson (and scifi writer John Scalzi who retweeted Roberson's screed) who launch into these self-righteous lectures, but never seem to do anything concrete about it. Y'know, like scoot on over and let an historically oppressed female or minority take over their gig. Oh, but forget that. Because in this case (and seemingly, in this case only) THEY have earned what they've gotten.

But you? You're just a beknighted peon. Do what they tell you.

Posted by Hube at 08:47 AM | Comments (183) | TrackBack

May 23, 2014

"Progressives" had praised VA health care

The Washington Examiner today details how prominent "progressive" pundits had lauded the Veterans Administration as evidence that government-run healthcare works. Like, take Paul Krugman for example:

In a 2006 column, Krugman argued that the system was, “one of the best-kept secrets in the American policy debate.”

He explained, “pundits and policy makers don't talk about the veterans' system because they can't handle the cognitive dissonance. ... For the lesson of the V.H.A.'s success story -- that a government agency can deliver better care at lower cost than the private sector -- runs completely counter to the pro-privatization, anti-government conventional wisdom that dominates today's Washington.”

Krugman also had blasted Mitt Romney for having the audacity to suggest partially privatizing the VHA. Oops.

Both Krugman and Vox.com's Ezra Klein touted Phillip Longman's book Best Care Anywhere: Why VA Health Care is Better Than Yours. Longman argues that the VHA, "has incentives for investing in quality and keeping its patients well -- incentives that are lacking in for-profit medicine.”

Double oops.

Posted by Hube at 07:27 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

May 21, 2014

Eric Holder speaks about Brown v. Board of Ed.; misses irony

Our DOJ chief did this at Morgan State University, an Historically Black College (HBC) in Baltimore whose enrollment is over 86% black. Yep, legal segregation has long since ended, but somehow, HBCs continue to exist, with percentages akin to the above.

And this -- when diversity is supposed to be the educational end-all to be-all. But where's the "diversity" at an institution like Morgan State where there is less than 2% white population, and the rest spread out among other groups? As Jeffrey Lord notes,

The school at which Holder spoke — had those percentages of race been reversed, with an 86.7 percent white majority and a 1.8 percent black minority — would soon have Eric Holder’s Justice Department swooping down on it to charge it with “disparate treatment.”

Indeed. First Lady Michelle Obama was in Kansas for the same reason Holder was in Baltimore, and lamented “Many young people in America ... are going to school with kids who look just like them.” Uh huh.

*Sigh* Just like "hate crimes" laws, "diversity" applies to only one group.

Posted by Hube at 05:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Hey Howard Dean -- F*** you!!

What further evidence does one need that we've come full circle. Ages ago, righties would tell hippies "America: Love it or leave it!" and chide their lack of patriotism. Now, it's mainstream Democrat politicians who engage in that sort of stuff ... against Republicans:

Yes indeed, that is former DNC Chairman and presidential frontrunner Howard Dean saying about the GOP "They are not American," and that "They would be more comfortable in the Ukraine, or Russia, but stay away from our country."

"Our country."

Dean also chimed with the ludicrous yawner that Republicans "are taking away the right to vote through voter ID laws." Now, just imagine for one second Mitt Romney telling a crowd that Obama and Democrats "are not American," and that they'd be more comfortable in Castro's Cuba or the Chávez-made Venezuela." And that Democrats "want to give the right to vote to illegal immigrants and their families back home."

You know what would happen.

Posted by Hube at 05:10 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

May 20, 2014

Former MSNBC host demands wants apology for specious racism claim

The chutzpah knows no bounds. "Wheel of Fortune" host Pat Sajak tweeted the following yesterday:


Now, anyone with half a brain should pick up the sarcasm and baiting instantly. But not so David Shuster, former MSNBC dimwit (that is, former in that he used to work for the low-rated cable network, not that he is a former dimwit):


'Ya just gotta love it. A guy from the network that specializes in diminishing the significance of actual racism has the stones to seriously tweet the above. Chutzpah at its pinnacle.

(Via Twitchy)

Posted by Hube at 07:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

May 19, 2014

The "wisdom" of Dan Slott

The writer of Spider-Man (Superior, Amazing, or whatever) once again meanders into the realm of philosophy. Because, y'know, since he's a "hotshot" comicbook writer at the moment, he's "smart":


With lefties, it's funny how "progressive" viewpoints and ideas always are permitted to "evolve," whereas conservative ones are to be perpetually stuck in the Dark Ages. But using Slottian "logic," "progressive" could be a cowardly term for eugenics. Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was not only pro-eugenics, but a racist, straight up. And let's not bother to bring up the sordid history of the Democrat Party ... !

In addition, "traditional values" still has valid meaning in many ways: Hard work, [actually] raising a family, not screwing your fellow man, manners, altruism ... wonder why Slott overlooked these?

Because he resides in The Bubble, that's why.

Posted by Hube at 05:04 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

May 15, 2014

Speaking of denying reality ...

If "progressives" and Greens get off on dubbing global warming climate change skeptics/deniers "anti science" and "deniers of reality," then how many examples such as this do fiscal and government conservatives have to demonstrate about the reality that big government constantly wastes big money?

Posted by Hube at 08:01 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

Just remember this when the NY Times whines about the "pay gap"

Or the "War on Women." The NY Times axes its first female chief:

In the wake of Wednesday’s news, The New Yorker’s Ken Auletta reported that Sulzberger had grown frustrated with Abramson after she pushed for more pay upon learning that her salary was significantly lower than that of her male predecessors. In response to that report, Times spokesperson Eileen Murphy told POLITICO: “Jill’s total compensation as executive editor was not less than Bill Keller’s, so that is just incorrect. Her pension benefit, like all Times employees, is based on her years of service and compensation. The pension benefit was frozen in 2009.”

Some high-level female staffers also voiced frustration with Sulzberger’s decision to fire the paper’s first female executive editor. Both national editor Alison Mitchell and and assistant managing editor Susan Chira suggested in a private meeting that Abramson’s firing “wouldn’t sit well with a broad swath of female Times journalists,” according to a Capital New York report.

What Ms. Murphy says above may certainly have merit. But so does virtually every other reason why a woman may make less than a male counterpart. The Times has rarely conceded this fact; instead, it has engaged in (like most of the Left) politically correct sound bites, like the oh-so monotonous "Women only make 77 cents to a man's dollar!!" So let the Times stew in a broth of their own making. Like, check out the following via Mediaite:


This situation is not unlike the ridiculous Media Matters fighting an attempt by its employees to unionize. The so-called "conservative media bias" watchdog site has long criticized the GOP's stance on unions, and has been quite favorable towards Democrat policies on same.

Posted by Hube at 07:54 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The last acceptable bigotry

Hmm, sounds like a movie title. Maybe it will be someday. But not if this professor has anything to say about it:

One professor wrote: "My approach would be to assure this student that going barefoot is not against the rules because the assumption is that by the time they reach college, students are expected to understand why wearing shoes is expected on campus. If s/he disrespects his or her peers and the college community enough to (un)dress like a hillbilly here, I would say, then s/he should be prepared to be dismissed as one, in whatever pursuits s/he favors, in the preference of someone more attuned to proper decorum and respectful behavior."

One can only imagine the reaction if this prof wrote about having one's pants down past your ass, thus showing off your underwear: "If s/he disrespects his or her peers and the college community enough to (un)dress like a gang thug here, I would say, then s/he should be prepared to be dismissed as one ..."

You know what would transpire: Protests by [minority] student groups. Demands for required "sensitivity" workshops. Demands for mandated "check your privilege" training (hey -- Harvard is doing just that!). Demands for a more diverse (i.e. minority) teaching staff.

It doesn't matter, you see, that Appalachia is a historically poor region. Most of the population is white. Thus, in higher ed-speak, check that privilege, 'ya redneck.

RELATED: Almost all "progressive" publications are overwhelmingly staffed by ... white people. But they believe the "right" things, so it doesn't matter. There's a similar situation with modern-day comicbook creators.

Posted by Hube at 07:18 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

May 11, 2014

Today's must read

That would be Larry Correia's post Operation Pouty Face. Here's a taste:

For the idiot libprog pussies with the selfies, the world is a violent place, filled with violent men. If you actually want something to be done about these evil people, maybe you shouldn’t bitch, whine, and moan every time our military takes action against evil people. It seems odd to me that the same people demanding military action for this are the same ones that complain about military action for anything else. Oh, but wait, I forgot, the left has no overriding principles, and to them violence is always bad unless their guy does it, and evil is relative depending on how it trends on Twitter.

(h/t to Carl)

Posted by Hube at 09:02 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

May 09, 2014

And you thought the Donald Sterling situation had some issues?

One of the concerns of the dirty Donald Sterling matter was the right to privacy -- the expectation that whatever you say in the privacy of your own domicile is (or should be) sacrosanct. Pundits discussed state laws which require only one party's consent to record something (audio or video; most states in the US are one-party consent), and, of course, whether Sterling has the "right" to be a bigot in his home.

Chug on over to Lewis & Clark College in Portland, Oregon where even if you tell a racially insensitive joke between two people of different races and a bystander/someone passing by hears it, you can be brought up on charges:

Lewis & Clark College has declared two students, one African-American and one white, guilty of creating a “hostile and discriminatory environment” after racially themed jokes spoken between the friends at a private party were overheard and reported to campus authorities.

On November 23, 2013, roughly 20 students, many of them members of Lewis & Clark’s football team, attended a private party at a campus residence hall. During a game of “beer pong,” one African-American student jokingly named his team “Team Nigga” and would exclaim the team’s name when scoring a point. The student also exchanged an “inside joke” greeting with a white friend, who welcomed him by saying, “How about a ‘white power’?”, to which the African-American student replied in jest, “white power!”

A student not present at the party overheard the language and reported it to Lewis & Clark’s Campus Living office, which turned the matter over to the college’s Campus Safety division. Campus Safety investigated the alleged “racial and biased comments” made at the party, interviewing the two students and questioning them about the language used both at the party and within Lewis & Clark’s football program. After the investigation’s conclusion, Lewis & Clark charged both students with “Physical or Mental Harm,” “Discrimination or Harassment,” and “Disorderly Conduct.” Although the students’ conduct charges and ensuing disciplinary hearings were spurred by the complaint about the November 23 party, Lewis & Clark made clear that it intended to investigate “[o]ther acts of potential hate speech and bias that have occurred recently on campus” as well.

Lewis & Clark found both students guilty on all charges and rejected each of their appeals. In one student’s disciplinary letter, Lewis & Clark wrote that the student’s language “contributed to the creation of a hostile and discriminatory environment.” In rejecting the same student’s appeal, Lewis & Clark claimed his speech “caused reasonable apprehension of harm to the community.” Lewis & Clark placed both students on probation and required each to complete “Community Restitution” in the form of “Bias Reduction and Bystander Intervention Training,” among other sanctions.

Sterling made legitimately racist comments and was clandestinely recorded to pretty much reveal that fact to the public at large. These two students are friends and if anything, their "racial jibes" towards each other demonstrate that -- gasp! -- we can indeed laugh at each other ... and still be comrades!! Who'da thought? (Idiot college administrators, that's who.) And they're reported on by someone who happened to be passing by?? I mean, REALLY?

Thank goodness for groups like FIRE (The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education). Their tireless efforts provide that needed "sunshine" as "disinfectant." It recognizes that Lewis & Clark is a private college; however, it

... does make promises of free speech to its students. Its policy on Freedom of Expression & Inquiry states, for example, that students are “free to examine and discuss all questions of interest to them and to express opinions publicly and privately.”

How 'bout that.

Thankfully, even many in the L&C community know this case in BS. Forty faculty members sent a letter to college administrators "criticizing the college’s 'questionable treatment of free speech and of our students’ right to due process,'” and the stonewalling by same.

We'll keep you posted.

Posted by Hube at 07:28 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

May 06, 2014

Climate change "harangue" making kids nuts

Via Classic Values comes an article about how the constant "sky is falling" narrative about climate doom is harming our kids:

Child psychiatrists, psychologists and educators say they’ve seen an escalation in the anxiety levels of today’s youth, who are constantly exposed to doomsday talk about the destruction of our planet. But despite the fact that we live in a world with more volatility and fear, experts say there is hope. And to stay mentally strong, they all advocate not just calling for change, but acting for it.

Dr. Anthony Levitt, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre’s director of research in the department of psychiatry, agrees climate-change anxiety increasingly enters into the discussions he has with many of the young people who come to see him. “Younger people [teens to mid-20s] appear to be much more accepting of the science and facts than older people,” Levitt observes. He’s also seen an uptick in climate-change-related anxiety in parents with younger children.

“For most people who are anxious about climate change, the anxiety is escalated by the fact they do not see an answer or a way to make a change. Worry plus powerlessness leads to distress,” says Levitt, who is also a professor in the psychiatry department at the University of Toronto.

Let's see, in my youth we had bouts of nasty weather, but then we were warned of a new ice age. (Anyone else recall the brutal winters of the late 1970s?) In addition, what about "the world is doomed" scenarios posited by the likes of Paul Ehrlich? Guess what: Neither of those were even close. Ironically, probably the greatest actual danger kids of my era were (also) warned about was (and is) scoffed at by many on the Left. Hell, even basic facts like JFK assassin Lee Harvey Oswald being a commie are downplayed and outright ignored.

So, let me reiterate once and for all for those who care: Yeah, I believe there's climate change or whatever nom de guerre is on the plate currently. Is man part of it? Yeah, probably. But this doesn't mean you and I have to drastically alter our lifestyles to conform to whatever it is that morons like Al Gore or Barack Obama say we should. Especially when their carbon footprints are magnitudes larger than our own. Just as the world didn't end due to overpopulation and/or lack of food based on ridiculous Ehrlich-ian "evidence," I highly doubt humanity will cease to exist, or even be in grave danger, because it cannot adapt to whatever climate changes come about. Indeed, if anything, it is highly likely that as the technology curve increases ever-dramatically in the next few decades we'll move to cleaner, safer and renewable energy sources. All easily within grasp this century.

But hey, if you insist on remaining a pessimist, keep in mind that the climate chicken littles have stated that the amount of CO2 already in the atmosphere will remain there for about a millennium. There's nothing we can do about it. So why worry about it, huh??

Posted by Hube at 07:18 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

May 03, 2014

Condi Rice withdraws as Rutgers speaker

As reported this morning by The Corner, former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice has withdrawn from the commencement ceremony at Rutgers University. Why? What else? Because some radical, hypocritical "progressives" had protested her appearance, and she ultimately did not want to be a "distraction."

Jay Nordlinger's subsequent take is spot-on. (I particularly like this: "If conservatives wanted to try their hand at the Left’s game, they could say, 'Rutgers apparently can’t stand the sight or sound of an independent black woman.'”) Conservative students have to put up with "progressive" speakers all the time. And there's nary a protest. I'd add that's partly because conservatives, compared to many "progressives," actually have manners. Nevertheless, as personal anecdote, I had to put up with Jumpin' Joe Biden as my college commencement speaker back in the late 80s. Although I wasn't happy about it, and certainly didn't heckle the guy during his speech, my good buddy seated next to me wasn't as constrained. And in retrospect, good for him. Some of his heckling even caused a few profs to turn around and give him a nasty glare, but he remained undeterred. What were they gonna do, after all? We graduated!

Nordlinger calls it "a dirty game," but in my view, that's precisely what the Right has to start playing. Indeed, as a commenter notes at the link above, Boss Obama didn't withdraw as Notre Dame commencement speaker despite protests related to the president's abortion views. The college suffered millions in lost donations as a result, but it didn't back down, just as President Lemon did not. Conservative invitees need to follow this example.

Posted by Hube at 10:37 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

May 02, 2014

Don't attempt logic; your opponents have none

The Legislative Black Caucus in South Carolina is demanding Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom apologize for comments he made about HBCs -- Historically Black Colleges. Let's just see what he said:

"I'm committed to the university because it's a university, not because it's a historically black university. I think the sooner this state gets away from the concept of talking about historically black universities is a step forward for this state," he said. "We no longer talk about historically white universities. I think we need to deal with the issues of funding needs at South Carolina State because it's an institution of higher learning."

The Black Caucus said "Eckstrom needs to research why historically black universities exist."

Funding matters aside, I'd imagine Mr. Eckstrom is fully aware of why such institutions exist. But how does that make what he said inappropriate? As we've noted numerous here at Colossus (see here, for one), when the University of Michigan argued before the US Supreme Court about affirmative action, much of its rationale hinged on what they dubbed a "critical mass" of diversity that [supposedly] enhances educational benefits. So ... where is this "critical mass" at HBCs that would enhance the education of its students?

Don't attempt to rationalize it. Because, like much of political correctness, you can't.

Posted by Hube at 03:46 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

May 01, 2014

Maybe a lifetime ban and $2.5 million penalty will learn 'im

Shaquille O'Neal mocks disabled person in photo.

Posted by Hube at 07:01 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 30, 2014

What a bigot!

Execrable congressman Alan Grayson is filing for divorce from his wife ... because he claims she was married to someone else during their marriage. In other words, bigamy.

Doesn't this make Grayson a bigot? How dare he show intolerance towards his wife's alternative lifestyle!!

Posted by Hube at 05:02 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 27, 2014

Irony

Boss Obama: Comments by Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling were "racist."

Two weeks ago: Boss Obama speaks at Al Sharpton's National Action Network conference.

UPDATE: Clippers owner Sterling is a -- wait for it! -- Democrat. Not only that, he was scheduled to receive -- wait for it, again! -- a Lifetime Achievement Award from the ... NAACP.

UPDATE 2: As commenter dan notes in the comments, it seems Sterling is a registered Republican. However, he has (as dan also notes via his link) donated extensively to Democrats and Dem causes. Expect to hear the former a lot, now, in the MSM, natch.

Posted by Hube at 10:59 AM | Comments (21) | TrackBack

April 24, 2014

Today in "This is racist"

These days there is virtually nothing that "progressives" won't dub the R-word. Because, after all, 1) "progressives" aren't particularly bright, and 2) one thing they do know is that R-word is the modern day Scarlet Letter and an effective negative campaign tool.

But the ever-increasing problem for them is overuse. We all know this, but that doesn't stop them. Not at all. So, the first instance we see today as the latest in neo-racism is ... distrust of government. Yep. New York Magazine's Jonathan Chait (with a straight face) states that "America’s unique brand of ideological anti-statism is historically inseparable...from the legacy of slavery..." Chait claims this even as he denounces other [specious] claims of racism against the GOP by the likes of MSNBC. He says that the GOP is disintegrating before our very eyes:

It exposed a sense in which their entire party is being written out of the American civic religion. The inscription of the civil-rights story into the fabric of American history—the elevation of Rosa Parks to a new Paul Revere, Martin Luther King to the pantheon of the Founding Fathers­—has, by implication, cast Barack Obama as the contemporary protagonist and Republicans as the villains.

Except that, y'know, "intellectuals" like Chait are largely responsible for this incorrect perception. I mean, really -- Republicans are the party of slavery abolition and of the Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s.

Chait claims that the dissolution of the GOP will be akin to -- wait for it! -- that of white rule in apartheid South Africa. Of course. All this, based on one study of "political habits and history in counties of the Old South."

Elsewhere via Douglas Ernst, Salon.com is at it again. Writer Reihan Salam says that if you're attracted to someone who looks like you, you're ... yep. Salam was "struck" by the considerable number of people who indicated on OkCupid's dating site (yes, the very same site which strongly objected to Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich and his "intolerable" view on gay "marriage") that they'd prefer to date someone of the same race.

Well, my. God.

Posted by Hube at 10:37 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack

April 23, 2014

Speaking of female concerns ...

Edward Trimnell shreds leftist "feminism" in just a few short sentences.

Posted by Hube at 10:16 PM | Comments (40) | TrackBack

The industry itself is not blameless

Interesting quote today at Robot 6 which captures comic creator Greg Rucka's thoughts on the douche who thought this shirt was appropriate for a big [comic] convention. Of course, as the ever-lovin' Furious D points out, the comics industry isn't exactly blameless when it comes to gender insensitivity, now is it?. After all, they routinely churn out material like this. And here, is it possible that many creators' shitty attitudes online are due to having to deal with "fans" on a routine basis who would wear shirts like that? Or, the other way around -- many fans' shitty attitudes are merely emulating those of many creators?

But back to Furious who nails it here: "When I was just a fledgling nerd a woman having an interest in the same things that I was interested in was viewed as a gift from Heaven." Indeed! What sort of "guy" would wear a shirt at a huge convention that exemplifies pre-fifth grade male sensibilities? Y'know, the 'ol "girls are icky" schtick? Doesn't that mind-set disappear around age 13 or so when the hormones begin moving and all of sudden you notice that girls are the greatest thing ever? Apparently not, for some.

Furthermore, don't let dopes like this turn the case of one (or more) socially inept buffoons into a cause célèbre for feminism and gender parity. Seriously -- equating the term "fangirl" with "blacks," "Jews," "Asians" or whatever? Dude, WTF.

Lastly, does anyone think if the offensive shirt had "conservatives" instead of "fangirls" there would be such an uproar? Yeah, me neither.

UPDATE: Well well WELL! Looks like the company that made the offensive shirt also offers it with "fanboy" instead of "fangirl." And has so since a year ago. But don't let stop the self-righteous!! No, no, NO. Take writer Kieron Gillen, for instance:


"Hate speech." Ye gad.

Posted by Hube at 03:20 PM | Comments (50) | TrackBack

April 21, 2014

The Atlantic asks if 'white privilege' is responsible for ... blacks not following standard debate formats

It just keeps getting "better" and "better":

These days, an increasingly diverse group of participants has transformed debate competitions, mounting challenges to traditional form and content by incorporating personal experience, performance, and radical politics. These “alternative-style” debaters have achieved success, too, taking top honors at national collegiate tournaments over the past few years.

Well, if your judges share the same idiotic philosophy, of course you'll score well.

Two black women won a recent debate on whether the U.S. president’s war powers should be restricted; however, instead of actually addressing the topic, they changed it: "The more pressing issue, they argued, is how the U.S. government is at war with poor black communities."

Over four hours, the two teams engaged in a heated discussion of concepts like “nigga authenticity” and performed hip-hop and spoken-word poetry in the traditional timed format. At one point during Lee’s rebuttal, the clock ran out but he refused to yield the floor. “Fuck the time!” he yelled.

This year wasn't the first time this had happened. In the 2013 championship, two men from Emporia State University, Ryan Walsh and Elijah Smith, employed a similar style and became the first African-Americans to win two national debate tournaments. Many of their arguments, based on personal memoir and rap music, completely ignored the stated resolution, and instead asserted that the framework of collegiate debate has historically privileged straight, white, middle-class students.

Aaron Hardy, who coaches debate at Northwestern University, tells of instances where "... judges have been very angry, coaches have screamed and yelled. People have given profanity-laced tirades, thrown furniture, and both sides of the ideological divide have used racial slurs."

Truly unbelievable. I wonder how these folks would feel. What's even more unbelievable is that this actually has to be said in 2014: “I think it is wildly reductionist to say that black people can’t understand debate unless there is rap in it—it sells short their potential.”

Uh yeah, 'ya think?

Posted by Hube at 08:44 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

April 20, 2014

Today in what modern comicbook creators think of you

On a day when Spider-Man writer Dan Slott demonstrates he must be an obsessive-compulsive as he is still ranting about Douglas Ernst's post criticizing him from almost a year ago ... not to mention lecturing Israeli Avi Green about Muslim superheroes, we see Slott's fellow comic creator Erik Larsen retweeting the following, um, "sensitive" tweets:

(Direct links to the tweets are here and here.)

Aren't these ... "lovely?"

Personally, as a non-practicing Christian and fervent believer in free expression, the above images don't bother me. What does bother me is -- you guessed it -- the brazen hypocrisy of these infantile "professionals." It just never ends. It truly is astonishing how several part-time bloggers (agree with them or not, and I don't always, for what it's worth) -- exhibit more professionalism and decorum than ... "people" like Slott and Larsen.

Posted by Hube at 07:01 PM | Comments (52) | TrackBack

April 18, 2014

Correct: There needs to be some changes made in comics. Start with the professionals' attitudes

Erik Grove pens an op-ed today at Bleeding Cool which addresses, in part, a post of mine from yesterday. It's titled "8 Things that Need to Change in Comics – Threats, Harassment And Understanding," and not surprisingly, many of these changes need to occur from within. Let's take a look at these eight:

  • No One Should Threaten Violence or Sexual Assault – Ever
  • No One Should Use Hate Speech During a Disagreement – Ever
  • We Need to Be More Upset About Threats and Hate Speech in Our Community
  • We Need to Endeavor to Understand But Not Judge
  • We Need to Stop Pretending That Harassment Is Not Happening
  • We Need to Stop Jumping to Easy Conclusions
  • We Need to Talk To Each Other to Figure Out How to Fix This
  • We All Have to Be Part of the Solution

Grove's main point is sexual harrassment of females among the "comic community" spurred (in part) by this article regarding the supposed [in]appropriateness of a DC Comics cover. It's directed mostly at fans (the "community") but there's also this issue among the professionals. And Groves' point about hate speech and "endeavoring to understand" also needs to extend to the professionals. We've often documented here -- as have Doug Ernst and Avi Green -- how comicbook professionals (maybe I should put that term in quotes?) have often used, if not "hate" speech as it's typically defined, at the least vile speech ... and little-to-no inclination to "endeavor to understand."

Is Mark Waid telling me to "Go f*** myself" hate speech? Does it demonstrate an "endeavor to understand?" I mean, even if I was 100% wrong (I wasn't), what is up with a so-called professional responding in that manner? What about these comments?

There's also, of course, Ron Marz, Gail Simone, Erik Larsen and Dan Slott, among others. (Please venture over to Doug Ernst's place today to see how an insanely obsessed Slott is STILL ranting about Ernst's criticism of him. Check out the last update at the end of the post.) I wonder: Is a lot of their unreasonable attitude towards guys like Doug, Avi and me due to frequently dealing with ludicrous fanboy types who are completely irrational ... so that when one of us brings up a calmly worded criticism or question these guys are ready to rip our heads off? Maybe. I could see that. But, again, these guys are supposed to be professionals.

Alas, "progressivism" such as that practiced by these folks, is loaded with contradictions -- some (most?) of which aren't even noticed (or cared to be noticed). Like, for example, Grove not explicitly mentioning the comicbook professionals' behavior in "the community." And, even better, Ron Marz lamenting a lack of civility(!) regarding his article about boycotting Orson Scott Card's Ender's Game. I mean, really??

Ultimately -- and ironically -- the online behavior of many of these "professionals" is astonishingly akin to that of "rabid [comicbook] fanboys" whose stereotypical image is that of egotistical, socially inept, creepy, and condescending quasi-nerds.

Posted by Hube at 03:05 PM | Comments (11) | TrackBack

April 17, 2014

OK to make "correct" generalizations

I had to chuckle at this Kurt Busiek retweeted response to politically correct scifi writer John Scalzi:


Now, while the "ALL" part of her second point is certainly debatable, I would certainly buy it if she said "A LOT." But this is beside the point. A tweet like this tweet is permissible among the Scalzis and Busieks of the [entertainment] world because it impugns a politically incorrect group -- men -- and "protects" a politically correct group -- women.

I wonder: Does anyone think Scalzi or Busiek would tweet (or retweet) something like "So again, let's say we don't pretend that terrorism isn't a issue MOSTLY about Muslims. Not ALL Muslims, but certainly too many of them"? Or, "And the point isn't "MOST Muslims are terrorists." The point is "MOST terrorists are Muslims"?

Nah. Neither do I. That subject ain't "incorrect" enough for them.

Posted by Hube at 01:38 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

Most Laughable Attempt at Skewing the Facts of the Day

That would be CNN's "National Security Analyst" Peter Bergen's contention that “U.S. right wing extremists [are] more deadly than jihadists.” To wit:

White supremacists, anti-abortion extremists and anti-government militants have killed more people in the United States than have extremists motivated by al Qaeda’s ideology.

OK, now let that sink in for a moment.

Ready? First, that "contention" is based on [supposed] figures from 9/12/2001 to the present. Pretty convenient that, wouldn't'cha say? Second, Bergen is a director for the George Soros-funded "progressive" New America Foundation which conducted the study from his "facts" are gathered. Also quite convenient. Third, the "political reasons" used for the "right-wing extremist" attacks are dubious. The study included "hate crimes" as "political" in its tally, and some of the killings are clearly questionable as to their "political" nature:

For example, they included a 2009 shootout in a Pittsburgh home where Robert Poplawski killed three police officers after his mother called the police during an argument. Later it was revealed that Poplawski had anti-Semitic views and was an alleged skinhead.

Fourth, the study cites the ridiculous Southern Poverty Law Center as a source. Lastly, Doug Ernst picks up on this hilarious nugget from Bergen:

Yet the disparity in media coverage between even failed jihadist terrorist attacks and this latest incident in Kansas is emblematic of a flawed division in the public’s mind between killing that is purportedly committed in the name of Allah and killing that is committed for other political ends, such as neo-Nazi beliefs about the need to kill Jews.

What a riot. Bergen actually believes there's a paucity of media inclination to cover incidents like that in Kansas City the other day as opposed to jihadist-inspired violence. What freakin' planet do guys like Bergen live on?? Because it's certainly not the same planet on which its American mainstream media immediately pounces on any smidgen of evidence to link conservative/right-wing/Republican-based/Tea Partyesque groups to a terror-style attack. Just ask ABC's Brian Ross, for cripe's sake. This, not to mention, the reflexive MSM screaming of "Islamophobia" whenever [radical] Islam is questioned or implicated in a matter as if it's endemic, when in fact anti-Jewish hate crimes far outnumber those that are anti-Muslim. Not surprisingly, Bergen doesn't see fit to mention Muslim anti-Jewish hate, which is just as virulent -- and overall much more common -- than that of neo-Nazis.

The NARRATIVETM, natch.

Posted by Hube at 08:33 AM | Comments (47) | TrackBack

April 13, 2014

Idiot Ron Marz applies "law of the land" very selectively

Our pal Ron "STFU" Marz believes the now-deflated "stand off" between the feds and a Nevada rancher is a simply understood matter: The rancher is a deadbeat who owes the feds around $1 million, and the whole dispute is a conservative "plot":


Now, keep in mind, again, that this "stupidity" that is "manufactured" by Fox News and talk radio warrants the attention and denunciation of dedicated "progressives" like Marz -- who are sooooo concerned about the rule of law and the obedience of such:


Which leads one to ask: Where the f*** was Marz during the innumerable times Boss Obama unilaterally altered the "established" law known as ObumbleCare? Answer: Completely silent. Because shut up, you simpletons deluded by Fox News and talk radio.


Indeed. Much like LIVs like the ignorant and woefully uninformed Ron Marz. Guys like President Lemon NEED folks like you, Ronnie. Keep truckin', brotha!

Here's ABC's report on the apparently resolved situation.


Ron Marz: Hit in the head one too many
times by that mace.

UPDATE: Uh, Ron, "uber-conservative?" Just because someone points out what an LIV moonbat you are doesn't make him the same on the other side. Wrong once again. It's an on-going trend with you. Not too many "uber-conservatives" I know have this or this up on their websites/blogs.

Idiot.

Posted by Hube at 09:35 AM | Comments (43) | TrackBack

April 10, 2014

What does this mean for Boss Obama, then?

Ah, Illinois. A Democrat minority legislator (I add the description as it's necessary for the whole report), a Ms. Linda Chapa LaVia, was busy ripping charter schools and "appealed to her fellow minorities within the chamber." She snarkily added “we’re all over on this side [of the aisle], right?” but Republicans took issue with that.

“Wait, we have a half. We have a half,” LaVia said. She was referring to GOP State Rep. John Anthony who is apparently half black. Isn't that soooo tolerant? Welcoming? Understanding? Empathetic?

Good thing our president is no longer in the Illinois legislature. He wouldn't rank very high in Ms. LaVia's notions of racial purity. Here's LaVia's yammering:

Posted by Hube at 06:44 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

A good GOP ad for November

So, Boss Obama and his acolyte Democrats are planning to make "equal pay" an issue this year ... even though the White House itself pays its women employees less than men, and LIVs like comics guy Ron Marz fall for the oft-cited myth.

Not only would yesterday's mumble-mouthed Jay Carney presser be campaign ad gold, but so would these little nuggets:

  • Hank "Guam May Tip Over" Johnson lamented the pay "gap," but pays his female staffers less than men.
  • Mark Udall pays women 85 cents for every dollar that a man makes.
  • Mary Landrieu pays women 88 cents for every dollar that a man makes.
  • Mark Begich pays women 82 cents for every dollar that a man makes.
  • Mark Warner pays women 75 cents for every dollar that a man makes.
  • Gary Peters pays women 67 cents for every dollar that a man makes.

(h/t to Insty for the last five examples.)

Boss Obama and co need LIVs to fall for this crap, but they'd better get their own talking points straight if they plan on going full force with the likewise mythical GOP "War on Women."

Posted by Hube at 06:33 PM | Comments (45) | TrackBack

April 05, 2014

Mozilla CEO forced out due to radical P.C.

What's more, his donations to the "controversial" cause were leaked by the IRS to the Human Rights Campaign, a gay advocacy group. Brendan Eich was recently named CEO of the Mozilla Corporation, makers of the popular Firefox web browser. What Eich did with his own money a few years back is what -- gasp! -- is so "controversial":

Why, then, the ruckus? Amazingly enough, it is entirely due to the fact that Eich made a $1,000 donation to the campaign urging a ‘yes’ vote on California’s Proposition 8. When this fact first came to light in 2012, after the Internal Revenue Service leaked a copy of the National Organization for Marriage’s 2008 tax return to a gay-advocacy group, Eich, who was then CTO of Mozilla, published a post on his personal blog stating that his donation was not motivated by any sort of animosity towards gays or lesbians, and challenging those who did not believe this to cite any“incident where I displayed hatred, or ever treated someone less than respectfully because of group affinity or individual identity.”

Upon being named CEO last Wednesday, Eich immediately put up another post which among other things pledged in direct terms first that he would ensure Mozilla continued offering health benefits to the same-sex partners of its employees; second that he would allocate additional resources to a project that aims to bring more LGBTQ individuals into the technology world and Mozilla in particular; and third that he would maintain and strengthen Mozilla’s policies against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. It’s worth emphasizing that Eich made this statement prior to the storm of outrage which has since erupted, and that with these policies and others Mozilla easily ranks among the most gay-friendly work environments in the United States.

It wasn't enough. Eich resigned yesterday. Amazingly, numerous employees had taken to social media to call for Eich's ouster. How d'ya like that? The supposedly "tolerant" employees call for their boss and part founder of the company for which they work ... to leave??

Because he donated to a campaign promoting traditional marriage.

You see, it's not enough in today's society to believe as Eich does -- favoring traditional marriage yet simultaneously holding anti-discriminatory views about gays. I wonder if Eich has an issue with gay civil unions; I would doubt that he does, based on the quote and statements above. A Google search did not provide anything specific. Granting Eich has no issue with civil unions (and California's Prop 8 had nothing to do with [gay] civil unions, by the way, just the definition of the term "marriage"), that still would have been insufficient for the gay lobby. Don't agree? Then see here. Even though civil unions would [have] confer[red] precisely the same governmental benefits as traditional marriage, the gay lobby argues it would "relegate [gays] to second-class citizenship, maybe third-class -- and that's not enough." And it's about rights and not politics? Uh huh: "Being married and wearing a wedding ring sends a message to society," said Jeffrey Zarrillo, one of the plaintiffs who sought to overturn Prop. 8.

Lastly, here's Andrew Sullivan (who, if you don't know, is gay):

Will he (Eich) now be forced to walk through the streets in shame? Why not the stocks? The whole episode disgusts me – as it should disgust anyone interested in a tolerant and diverse society. If this is the gay rights movement today – hounding our opponents with a fanaticism more like the religious right than anyone else – then count me out. If we are about intimidating the free speech of others, we are no better than the anti-gay bullies who came before us.

I simply await the day when a socialist/leftist who harbors sympathies with, say, Maduro in Venezuela, or Castro in Cuba, or Morales in Bolivia is hounded and forced out of his/her job. Oh wait -- that sounds like 1950s McCarthyism?? BINGO.

Douglas Ernst has more on this.


Two can play at this game: One of these will NOT
be used anymore.

UPDATE: Business Insider and Slate reporters call Eich's donation to Prop 8 as akin "to someone who 'donated some money to the KKK'" and said that "support of traditional marriage to supporting the 'the civil right to own slaves.'" I'm surprised they omitted that it was like the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. Sheesh.

UPDATE 2: James Taranto contradicts the earlier report that the IRS was the culprit behind the revelation of Eich's Prop 8 donation. He notes that Califorina law requires "disclosure of personal information–name, address, occupation and employer’s name–of anybody who gives $100 or more to a campaign for or against a ballot initiative."

Posted by Hube at 08:20 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

April 03, 2014

Possibly the most hilariously unintentionally funny story you may ever read

And that is Helen Ubinas's Philly Daily News article "We allowed Bartram High fiasco to happen." The high (or low) light:

[The whole situation] should sicken and shame us. But if it did, we wouldn't have generations of young people more schooled in combat than chemistry.

Charles Williams, professor of psychology and education at Drexel University, calls it the "soft bigotry of low expectations."

"The message here is that we don't think poor and black [and] Latino kids can learn, that they ought to learn," Williams said.

"Soft bigotry says that Bartram High School is going to be off the hook because well, those are poor black and Latinos, so what do you expect? And so behavior that is not normal suddenly becomes normalized and accepted."

Uh huh. Isn't this the same high school that emphasizes so-called "restorative practices (or justice)," which is supposed to "build relationships" with chronically disruptive students instead of suspending or expelling them? How many times have schools all across the country been treated to inservices and workshops like these? How many times have teachers across the country been told that blacks and Latinos have their own "unique culture" and hence many "traditional" disciplinary measures enacted by teachers and/or administrators are "biased," "insensitive" and ultimately ... "racist?" And, perhaps "best" of all, our own president has issued edicts to address the "disparate" (and "racist") disciplinary rates in our schools.

Astonishingly, Ms. Ubina didn't even once mention what Bartram's students' home lives are like. Now, why would that be? Given all of this, please enlighten us, Ms. Ubina, how exactly -- and realistically -- would you remedy a situation like that at Bartram High?

You say we allowed Bartram High to happen. True. And it happened virtually purely a result "progressive" policies and theories.

Posted by Hube at 07:01 PM | Comments (281) | TrackBack

April 01, 2014

Comicbook diversity concerns the same as those on campuses

Check out the quote from Kelly Sue DeConnick, writer of Captain Marvel and Pretty Deadly, made at the Emerald City Comicon:

The message that we send when we don’t represent the broader culture in our stories is that ‘You are other.’ … As a community, as an organism, it is a thing that makes us ill. It is actually bad for us.

*Sigh* Of course, the clamor for "diversity" for folks like contemporary comics creators does not include political diversity. Or diversity of certain types of religion, like, say, Mormon. Are these folks "The Other," Ms. DeConnick? Am I, as a right-leaning comicbook fan, "made ill" by, the not only omission of [positive] role models, but the denigration of those like me in your medium's stories?

Like college/university "diversity," comicbook diversity is only concerned with skin hue and the "right" beliefs. Political ideology, and certain religions and ethnicities are exempt from the interminable demands for diversity. But for comicbook creators, maybe you should take a bit of advice from this commenter: Instead of a paroxysm over diversity, " 'the message we send' when publishers put out crappy comic books is that they don’t care about their characters and they don’t care about their readers."

Posted by Hube at 04:32 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

March 30, 2014

Irony

Spider-Man writer Dan Slott:


I will never understand it when a comicbook creator goes online and bashes those who don't share his/her politics. Especially those who would otherwise purchase his/her creations.

Posted by Hube at 06:05 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

March 26, 2014

Dems attempting to play on Repubs' supposed "lack" of education?

Andrew Johnson at The Corner reports on the latest -- Iowa Democratic Senate candidate Bruce Braley diss of Chuck Grassley, suggesting the GOP senator "isn't qualified" because he doesn't have a law degree. Braley later apologized, but Charles Cooke notes a "progressive" website that refers to Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker as "College Dropout Scott Walker." Cooke notes,

I don’t care whether you love or loathe Scott Walker and his politics, the use of “college dropout” as a pejorative is absurd. The increasing fetishization of education is leading us all to some pretty bizarre places, not the least of which is to the conflation of one’s educational achievement and one’s intellect or worth.

Indeed. Maybe Boss Obama could lead the way by releasing his college transcripts so we could see Just how "smart" he really is. Another example of what Cooke is talking about is Sheila Jackson-Lee, whose education includes UVA law school. This cretin thinks the US Constitution is 400-some years old, and can't even put a coherent English sentence together. (And that's just for starters.) And what about Rep. Hank Johnson, another law school graduate, who once hilariously worried about the island of Guam tipping over if too many Marines were stationed on it?

How can one forget Delaware's own Joe Biden? Here's yet another law school graduate whose list of microcephalic utterances may know no equal. One of my favorites is this, regarding AZ Rep. Gabby Giffords: "Gabby Giffords, my good friend, was shot and mortally wounded.” Except she's, y'know, still alive. And doing quite well.

Just as Hillary Clinton plans to make climate change a big part of her 2016 campaign, I sure do hope Democrats attempt to portray Republicans as stupid. It'll make folks look like the entire Boss Obama administration -- "progressive" elitists who think they know it all, yet in practice are complete idiots. (Um, just look at the last six years.) It's like those who like to point out that those who watch Fox News rank lowest in terms of overall education -- what these buffoons omit is that, unlike the vast majority of the LIV American public (a majority of whom voted for Obama), at least the FNC-watching folks are interested in the news, and don't rely exclusively on quick sound-bites (if on anything at all) like Boss Obama's Lie of the Year, or tweets / Facebook posts which frequently carry nary a nugget of truth.

Posted by Hube at 07:15 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

March 17, 2014

"Ban the Bossy" -- unless you're Republican, natch

Forty People Who Called Mitt Romney "Bossy" during the 2012 Campaign. Once again, many "progressives" just make sh** up in order to have a cause, in this case the word "bossy" is an epithet aimed at women. Except, y'know, that it's not. We showed that already:

And much more recently are these examples contra the GOP presidential candidate of 2012:


Color me shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you! And best of all:


The irony is delicious.

Posted by Hube at 08:35 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

March 12, 2014

Comicbook lefties strike AGAIN!!

We've certainly had our experiences with Mark Waid's anger issues, with fellow blogger Doug Ernst asking him once straight up "Why are you so angry?" Instead of getting an answer, we were blocked (on Twitter). It seems Waid's anger hasn't subsided; indeed, it's gotten worse -- so much so that the Twitter compilation site Twitchy took notice:


Boy, we're familiar with that sort of lingo from Waid, aren't we? He really likes that phrase "Go f*** yourself," doesn't he? And let's go for that race card while we're at it, natch:


And best of all, he tells someone not to buy his stuff because his poor widdle self was "attacked" by someone with the AUDACITY to disagree with him:


Hey, no problem, Mark. We'll happily oblige -- and we'll tell all our friends to do the same ... and about what an intolerant, angry jerkoff you are.

Elsewhere, Marvel's Tom Brevoort, who likes to talk a lot about diversity, yet won't act and step aside so that his old, white guy self can be replaced with someone of the appropriate color, attempts to discredit Bosch Fawstin, a born/raised-and-now-reformed Muslim, because, y'know, DIVERSITY (or something):


Brevoort's ultimate recourse? Block them. Y'know, because someone who disagrees with a "progressive" is anathema. Especially when he's made you look foolish:


It's a lot easier than thinking, Tom. (Sadly, Brevoort is Delaware native. But he'd fit in perfectly again here, given its solid blue nature.)


Posted by Hube at 04:54 PM | Comments (704) | TrackBack

March 11, 2014

Evil is "very relative"

So says writer Geoff Johns. Johns is the guy whose "Forever Evil" story arc in DC Comics features ... Superman arch-nemesis Lex Luthor joining the Justice League. This is the Lex Luthor who in contemporary comics does this sort of stuff:

  • Blows up a space shuttle just to make Superman look bad
  • Pushes his female assistant off a roof when she attempts to report the above
  • Looses one of his creations on a hapless security guard just to "test it out"
  • Said creation rips the security guard's head off
  • Threatens to kill a guy who won't sell his business
  • Drives said guy's wife to suicide by turning their son into a junkie
  • Kills five of his employees as a "test of loyalty"

But "evil is very relative."

Does anyone recall DC's (or Marvel's) "old fashioned" real heroes ever doing anything like that? I don't. Hell, if anything, the heroes were constantly grappling over the morality of actually following through and executing heinous villains -- villains that clearly deserved it. Just look at the classic DC Kingdom Come, for example, where Superman has taken the homicidal Joker into custody after a murder spree. Suddenly, one of the "new breed" of heroes, Magog, shows up and blasts the Joker to ashes for his crimes, right in front of the Man of Steel (see below). Magog's popularity skyrockets as a result of what he did, while Superman's approval rating plummets. Much of Kingdom tussles with the "appropriate measures" taken by the costumed vigilantes known as superheroes.

In the pages of the X-Men for the longest time the same debate took place. Storm, for one, refused to kill anything, even the savagely brutal Alien-esque Brood. Not to mention, the team perpetually struggled to keep the killing instincts of Wolverine in check. But this premise has long since gone out of date.

But, the above is what's actually a legitimate debate about the nature of "evil" and what to do about it, not declaring that "evil is very relative" and then showing one of your most vicious villains casually murdering people, followed by ... turning him into a "hero." It's also laughable how creators like Johns view evil as being "very relative," yet before Barack Obama's reign as president the nature of "evil" seemed quite clear to them:

  • Image Comics creator Erik Larsen said George W. Bush's "criminal activity dwarf[ed] Richard Nixon's by a wide margin," and "who cheated his way into the Oval Office -- twice"
  • Mr. Bush was "treated" to the superhero Savage Dragon slugging him in the face for his misdeeds
  • Artist Alex Ross sure showed who he thought was evil, and who was good ...
  • Superman enemy Lex Luthor, who was once elected president, cited "circumstantial evidence" as an excuse to invade the nation of "Qurac." Get it? Lex Luthor=George W. Bush, Qurac=Iraq.
  • Who can forget when Captain America went after the Tea Party?

Indeed. Evil wasn't "very relative" between 2000 and 2008. It was quite clear. Hell, Batman couldn't even go after al Qaeda -- AL QAEDA!! -- without there being a politically correct controversy, and when the creator of the tale, Frank Miller, morphed the story into one featuring a generic hero, he still got a ton of flak for it from "progressives."

Let's summarize:

Evil is "very relative." Unless a Republican sits in the White House.

Evil is "very relative." So relative so that one of the most popular superheroes ever cannot even go after the world's premiere terror organization, the one responsible for the deaths of 3,000 Americans.

Evil is "very relative." So much so that the current president gets comicbook "fist bumps," superhero endorsements, and numerous comicbook covers ... even though his lawlessness while in office equals and even surpasses that of his predecessor. That which these same creators didn't think were "very relative."

Guys like Geoff Johns are beyond boring already. The only thing "relative" to him and his comicbook cadre is how their stories will portray the political philosophy and party you agree/disagree with.

(Thanks to Nate for the tip to the original article.)

Posted by Hube at 06:11 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

March 09, 2014

What's wrong with "progressive" government in a nutshell

Frank Knotts nails it over at Delaware Right regarding yet another supposed-to-be "tug at the heart-strings" piece in the News Journal (my emphasis):

And even with these numbers, we are told that “ONLY” 77% of eligible citizens have signed up for food stamps, even though the state actively recruits people with marketing and advertisement. Also Delaware expanded eligibility to make it possible for even more people to obtain food stamps.

Of course the economy has played a large role in driving more people to depend on government subsidies to survive, but we cannot completely ignore the personal choices of some of the people receiving these hand outs.

The WNJ article of course had a couple of examples of people suffering because the amount of food stamps they receive is not enough.

One was about a sixty-eight year old grandmother raising her grandchildren. She stated that she couldn’t afford the juices and vegetables for a balanced diet, but I couldn’t help noticing that in the photos of her and her grand-daughter, she was looking at TV dinners and that is what the child was eating. These are the most expensive foods in a store. For what she pays for five of these, she could buy a cheap cut roast, or a chicken and get several meals out of it. Of course this would not be as convenient as TV dinners in the microwave oven.

Then there was the story of a mother of seven, ages 18-2 years-old, with another on the way. Really? Do I have to point out the personal choices that this woman has made that make her life more difficult?

And, Frank continues, with all this the Democrat one-party state that governs us wants to raise our taxes (gas and property being the latest). They actively advertise about food stamps, but they want to raise our taxes. How about using the monies for getting people on the relief rolls for a little common sense education instead -- like inexpensive and smart food purchases choices, not to mention labeling what it is -- ridiculously stupid -- that is having a gazillion kids without adequate means to support them?

Posted by Hube at 03:35 PM | Comments (41) | TrackBack

Let's check in with the moonbat comics creators!

Our pal Gail "The Movement was Canceled" Simone retweets this gem from Media Matters:


Of course Gail, being the complete LIV that she is, wouldn't likely know that the important thing in this whole deal isn't how many died, but how and why they died. Why wasn't the counsulate equipped with more security after requests? And even more shockingly, why was a man thrown in jail for making the video on which the attacks were [falsely] blamed?

As you'd expect, the post brought out the true moonbattery:


Elsewhere, a fan realizes how futile it is to disagree with a 'bat like Ron Marz, because, well, he's just "smarter" than you, dammit!


Yep, "total dick" about cuts it. That's how the radical moonbats roll, unfortunately. Disagreement with them is worse than an al Qaeda terror attack.

UPDATE: Speaking of Marz, here he is on Dr. Ben Carson, a guy who has about 100 IQ pts. on him:


There's nothing more threatening to a white "progressive" than a potential black candidate who goes against everything he holds dear ...

Posted by Hube at 10:40 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack

March 06, 2014

Where's this sentence from?

"No employee should be forced to violate his religious beliefs in order to earn a living.” This sentence is from this article, uttered by the director of the Philly EEOC, about a Muslim man employed by the Philly School District who, in conjunction with the US Justice Dept., sued the district because it wanted him to trim his beard. Apparently, it is against Islam to cut a beard. (One may wonder, then, why so many Muslim males do not have beards. Must be infidels.) That's right, the same Justice Dept. who dropped charges against members of the New Black Panther Party for voter intimidation at a Philly polling place several years back is now suing because they're pro-beard.

Well, actually it's suing because of religious discrimination. Because, after all, No employee should be forced to violate his religious beliefs in order to earn a living, right? I wonder, then, why didn't the Justic Dept. sue on behalf of the Christian couple who refused to bake a cake for a lesbian couple that was getting married? Was this couple "forced to violate their religious beliefs in order to earn a living?" If they can be so forced to go against their religion, why can't this Muslim gent?

We're not taking sides here; we're just pointing out the ridiculous (PC) inconsistencies and priorities of the current administration. I can see why the Muslim guy has a beef ("What does it really matter that my beard be a certain length to work in a school?"), and I can see why the bakery couple has a gripe, too.

Posted by Hube at 07:29 PM | Comments (53) | TrackBack

Shocker: NAACP and libs blame racism for Adegbile confirmation failure

Supporters were outraged -- outraged, I tell you -- that Adegbile lost the Senate vote:

"You hate to raise that (racism) up, but it smells very bad," said Hilary Shelton, director of the Washington office of the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid warned Republicans just before the vote that if Adegbile lost there would have to be a "broad discussion" of civil rights in America.

Oh gee, would that be like having an "honest discussion" about race? Y'know, because, as Eric Holder has said, "we're a nation of cowards" when it comes to race? Puh-lease. Race only matters in instances like these -- when a "progressive" Democrat meets a failure like Adegbile. After all, remember Miguel Estrada? He was nominated by George W. Bush for the DC Court of Appeals ... but the Democrats in the Senate used the filibuster to block the nomination. The Dems said Estrada was "far beyond the mainstream," to quote New York's Chuckie Schumer. Estrada would have been the first Hispanic to sit on that court, and is an immigrant from Honduras who immigrated to the US at age 17, not knowing a lot of English. But he ended up graduating from Columbia and then Harvard Law School.

I wonder -- did Ms. Shelton of the DC NAACP speak out against this "bad smelling" defeated nomination of an obviously qualified Hispanic?

Cheeyeah, right. If Estrada was "far beyond the mainstream," then Adegbile was in an alternate reality.

ELSEWHERE: As could be predicted, Philly.com is all pissed off about Adegbile's defeat. What a shame.

Posted by Hube at 07:23 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

IT'S THE LAW OF THE LAND, DAMMIT!!!!

Hey, remember when all the GOP wanted in exchange for extending the debt ceiling was a delay of ObumbleCare's individual mandate by one year? And remember how the Democrats reacted? Here's Boss Obama, for starters:

A lot of Republicans seem to believe that if they can gum up the works and make this law fail, they’ll somehow be sticking it to me. But they’d just be sticking it to you.

Democrats called Republicans who wanted a delay -- a delay, mind you, not a repeal or anything -- were called "terrorists" and "extremists," among other colorful terms. Democrats chided the GOP: "[ObumbleCare] is THE LAW OF THE LAND!! NO CHANGES OR DELAYS!!"

But not only has Boss Obama change and/or delayed provisions of the "law of the land," he's done it several times. The latest came yesterday:

In a move that was pre-emptively attacked by House Republican leaders, the administration said plans that were grandfathered for one year after millions received cancellation notices in the individual market will now be able to continue, but will not be able to be renewed after Oct. 1, 2016. The announcement means an estimated 500,000 people in those plans won’t get cancellation notices right before the midterm elections, but does set up a situation where some could get cut off right before the next presidential election.

To coin a cliché, this is beyond parody. The administration, of course, [laughably] denies a political motive. But each and every GOPer running against a Democrat for the House or Senate should pound the airwaves with the numerous contradictions and lies of this pathetic cadre in the White House. And the future Republican chief exec should always remember the precedent President Lemon has set for him: Change laws as you see fit, enforce laws you like, and don't enforce laws you dislike.

Posted by Hube at 07:12 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

March 05, 2014

The Democrats' War on Women

The execrable Democrat representative from Florida, Alan Grayson, has been accused of domestic violence.

A judge has granted a temporary protective injunction against U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson after his wife filed paperwork accusing the Orlando congressman of shoving and injuring her during an incident this past weekend.

Lolita Grayson's petition for the injunction, dated Monday, says her husband pushed her against a door, causing her to fall to the ground, during a confrontation Saturday at their home on Oak Park Road near Windermere.

Mrs. Grayson, in her complaint, notes that her husband has a history of such incidents. The representative, natch, denies the allegations and claims that it was the wife who began the violence during the encounter.

In such an ordeal one should be very careful about making judgments; however, Rep. Grayson's antics and shrill attacks against anyone who disagrees with him over the years make such even-handedness less likely. Grayson's press secretary said that his wife's allegations "are absolutely false, completely unfounded, and clearly designed to vilify and harm Congressman Grayson.”


No, do NOT take "left hook" literally. Maybe.

Is that so? What a shame. After all, were Grayson's claims "completely unfounded and designed to vilify and harm" his numerous political opponents, not to mention people who he doesn't like in general? Y'know, like his former opponent Daniel Webster whom he dubbed “Taliban Dan” and claimed he "hated women?" That said opponent Webster "wanted to ban divorce and deny battered women medical care?"

In addition, "in 2012, Grayson highlighted an accusation of abuse made by the ex-wife of Todd Long, his opponent in the race to represent Florida’s Ninth District." He also made a Facebook post which said “just imagine what Todd Long did.”

Grayson deserves anything that comes his way, the f***ing creep.

Posted by Hube at 04:42 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

March 02, 2014

News Journal pays no mind to Harry Belafonte's radicalism

Great job, robin brown (yes, that's how she spells her name, in lower case; she must think she's the next e.e. cummings). You really did some terrific reporting on Harry Belafonte's appearance at the University of Delaware and didn't write a single word about how ridiculously radical this guy has become:

"If you believe in freedom, if you believe in justice, if you believe in democracy," Belafonte once said, "you have no choice but to support Fidel Castro!"

Also in the eighties, Belafonte praised Soviet “peace efforts” around the world. Speaking in October 1983 at a "World Peace Concert" run by East Germany's official Communist youth organization, Belafonte gave his blessings to the Soviet-sponsored "peace" campaign pushing unilateral Western disarmament -- at a time when the USSR was deploying SS-20 missiles in East Germany.

In June 2000 Belafonte was a featured speaker at a rally in Castro's Cuba, honoring the American Soviet spies Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. He lauded Cuba's efforts to "kee[p] the principles the Rosenbergs fought and died for alive."

Belafonte is also now known for his denigration of other African-Americans if they have the gall to be Republicans and/or work for GOP administrations, using the most offensive terminology possible. And the attacks of September 11, 2001? America's fault, natch.

Maybe Robin (oops, excuse me, robin) can ask Mr. Belafonte the next time he's in town how black Americans would fare under a system like Casto's Cuba.

Posted by Hube at 08:34 AM | Comments (72) | TrackBack

February 24, 2014

Harvard editorial: "Academic justice" should trump academic freedom

Oh boy, you know what that means:

According to one Harvard student, the “doctrine of academic freedom” should be replaced by a standard of “academic justice.”

“If our university community opposes racism, sexism, and heterosexism, why should we put up with research that counters our goals simply in the name of ‘academic freedom’?” asked Sandra Korn, a member of the class of 2014, in an editorial in the Crimson, Harvard’s official newspaper.

Korn proposes instead that “[w]hen an academic community observes research promoting or justifying oppression, it should ensure that this research does not continue.”

Of course, you know by now that to radical "progressives," "justice" is whatever they deem it to be. In effect, no matter how factual or scientifically-based, Korn would thwart a study or class being available to students because it may fly against her supposed notions of "[academic] justice."

By the way, Korn "is a joint history of science and studies of women, gender and sexuality" major. So, this ridiculous edu-garbage is pretty much what you'd expect.

The original article is here.

Posted by Hube at 05:59 PM | Comments (10) | TrackBack

February 21, 2014

If I didn't know better, I'd think there was an Obama-media conspiracy here

On second thought ...

So let's see -- two of the most prominent GOP candidates for the presidency in 2016, New Jersey's Chris Christie and Wisconsin's Scott Walker, just happened to have scandals erupt ... even as Boss Obama's poll numbers continue to plummet. As you know, Christie is dealing with "Bridgegate," whereas Walker is now dealing with a campaign finance matter. Naturally, the mainstream media is (and was, in Christie's case) is frothing at the mouth. As if this is really a surprise, right?

Now, just compare Christie and the whole bridge imbroglio to Boss Obama and the IRS scandal. Which do you think is a more important matter? Then compare Walker's investigation to that (if there even was one) of Boss Obama's 2008 presidential campaign's failure to enact proper security measures for online contributions, which included being able to verify the identities of donors. The MSM's response then? One big collective yawn.

The right-leaning (and many independent) American public is really growing quite weary of this media nonsense. Christie's favorability among conservatives has risen in the wake of Bridgegate, largely as a result of MSM overkill. If the Walker matter proceeds as Bridgegate did, expect same from the GOP and conservatives there, too. Anyone recall how Newt Gingrich rocketed up the standings in 2012's GOP primary?

AAAAAAND, in the wake of all the above, Boss Obama's FCC wants to have a "representative" "monitor" newsrooms and radio stations for "appropriate content":

Last May the FCC proposed an initiative to thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country. With its “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,” or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run. A field test in Columbia, S.C., is scheduled to begin this spring.

The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about “the process by which stories are selected” and how often stations cover “critical information needs,” along with “perceived station bias” and “perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.”

If this doesn't chill you to the bone, then you're a complete moron. (The FCC has said they'll "re-evaluate" the program after its existence was leaked. Right.) I'd be saying the same exact thing if George W. Bush was in office right now. The difference with that, however, is that the mainstream press would be screaming about it ad nauseam too. But since liberal Democrat Barack Obama is doing it, again, there's a big collective MSM yawn and only the right-leaning press is covering it. At least as long as they're able to continue covering it if these Obama "monitors" begin showing up in newsrooms!

The U.S. currently ranks 46th in press freedom. It has dropped thirteen places in the latest rankings. Does anyone recall the media fracas when Robert Novak printed the name of Valerie Plame in 2003? "How dare a member of the GW Bush administration commit such a leak which could have repercussions to our intelligence community!" we were lectured. The coverage and punditry on the case was endless. Fast forward to today: The feds seize phone records and snoop on the emails of Fox News reporter James Rosen. CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson's computer is mysteriously hacked. The feds also spy on Associated Press phone records. Where is the continuing coverage of this?? Why does the mainstream press appear to give less than two hoots??

The president of Venezuela has threatened to boot CNN from his country for doing some actual reporting on the current goings-on there; how is what Boss Obama is planning all that different with regards to his FCC move, not to mention his and his acolytes' continual war on Fox News and talk radio as "all lies" and "not real news?" The reason the US isn't worse than #46 on press freedom (when there's a liberal Democrat in the White House) is because of Fox News and talk radio. And more and more, right-leaning Internet media.

This is another perfect example of what I meant when I wrote that "progressives" view their domestic political opponents as worse than actual threats like al Qaeda.

Posted by Hube at 06:48 PM | Comments (45) | TrackBack

February 19, 2014

Remember -- they're the "tolerant" and "understanding" ones!

Here's a tweet from comics moonbat Gail Simone yesterday:


What -- political correctness is not a legitimate topic for debate? So much so that one should be compelled to resort to violence? Maybe Simone is still smarting from her ridiculous The Movement being cancelled.

What is it about these supposedly "tolerant" "progressives?" Do we need any more evidence that their tolerance ends -- utterly and completely -- when they simply disagree with you on an issue? And always remember this lovely example.

Posted by Hube at 04:33 PM | Comments (51) | TrackBack

February 18, 2014

Good thing our government cares about the important things

Like "climate change." First, "Lurch" Kerry, our illustrious Secretary of State, told Indonesia of all places, that climate change (not global warming) is like a weapon of mass destruction, and "the greatest challenge of our generation."

Elsewhere, Boss Obama ordered truck efficiency standards raised because, y'know, climate change.

Good thing the Boss Obama admin is keyed right in to the cares and worries of Americans, eh? I mean, climate change is WAY up there on the list of public priorities, right?

*Sigh* Amazing how we're supposed to be chomping at the bit to somehow curb climate change so that 500 years from now things won't be a bit warmer. Meanwhile, our federal debt screams along out of control, and no one seems to care one about that much more immediate concern not one bit. Anyone who makes an issue of that is demonized to the Nth degree as "holding the country hostage."

Posted by Hube at 07:46 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

February 17, 2014

Except if you're a Republican. Especially a black Republican

Boss Obama: "I think America is stronger where everybody's being treated ... with respect and dignity."

Posted by Hube at 10:13 AM | Comments (304) | TrackBack

February 13, 2014

Like city, like state

One phone call from new socialist NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio got a buddy out of potential jail time.

State-wise, Gov. Andrew Cuomo aide Jerome Hauer was caught illegally carrying a firearm ... and was retroactively issued a waiver after the revelation.

In "progressive" banana republics, this is how things work. No wonder de Blasio was a huge fan of Nicaragua's Sandinistas.

Posted by Hube at 12:23 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Power

Posted by Hube at 11:41 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Let's make a spastic federal case out of it ...

... and then completely back off and endorse the idea. Remember when the GOP wanted a one year delay in ObumbleCare in exchange for agreeing to raise the debt ceiling last year. "Forget it," said Boss Obama and the Dems. Yet, somehow, Boss Obama has unilaterally done just that for various provisions of his law -- even more so with the employer mandate. The GOP got pilloried by the MSM for their "intransigence," etc., and of course, President Lemon gets a free pass as per usual.

Now, Ace brings word that "Abortion Barbie" Wendy Davis (Democrat gov. nominee in Texas) who made her name filibustering a Texas bill which would have outlawed abortions after 20 weeks ... now says she's OK with the idea.

There's a bit more to it, natch, but *SIGH*

Posted by Hube at 08:39 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 10, 2014

Generous with other people's money

Insty: Those who strongly agreed that “the government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality” gave away $140 on average to charity. Among those who strongly disagreed, the average gift was $1,637.

Full article here.


Posted by Hube at 04:14 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

Local lib makes the case for dissolution of gender-based restrooms, showers

Here's Delaware Douche at the LGOMB (that's Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers) making the case:

Whatever locker room disruption there was by having a gay teammate was minimal and was overcome, and did not prevent the team from having success. And yet there were the bigots on the radio this morning, talking about how it would disrupt the lockerroom, because they all shower together and the gay one would looking with lust at his teammates, echoing Jonathan Vilma. I always laugh at that. If a gay teammate looks at your naked body, so that fuck what? What harm is being done to you? Are you so insecure in your manhood that you don’t want any one looking? (Indeed, wouldn’t you be more worried if the gay teammate was not looking? But I digress).

Douche is referencing the story of Michael Sam, a top NFL prospect from the University of Missouri who just the other day came out as gay. You gotta give Sam his due taking this action before the NFL draft, since this news could potentially affect his NFL "worth." Still, reading about his story, it was pretty much common knowledge among the town and Sam's teammates that he was gay. As long as he doesn't pull a Chris Kluwe and constantly yammer about being gay so as to distract from the team, he should be an asset to any NFL squad.

But back to what DD writes above, and it's a point I've written about before, mainly regarding gays in the military: If the matter of straight and gay men showering together is a matter of "so the f*** what," then so the f*** what if straight men and women shower together, right? Douche asks "what harm is being done?" if a gay man checks you out in the shower; what harm is there if a straight dude checks out a female in the shower, eh?

Please, someone fill me in as to how this is a bad comparison. If you say that "the two instances aren't the same," be sure to explain precisely why. If Douche's treatise is legit, yet mine is not, then you are basically saying that homosexuals have greater hormonal urge control than straights. That sounds pretty heterophobic to me.

Posted by Hube at 04:10 PM | Comments (21) | TrackBack

February 09, 2014

You can't make this sh** up

Speaking of the NAACP, in North Carolina for a protest against voter ID measures, the group required participants to bring with them ... a photo ID:

Life imitates lunacy in "Progressiveville."

Posted by Hube at 09:18 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

It doesn't matter. Color is all

The Massachusetts NAACP is supporting a convicted woman-beater, who just happens to be a member of the State House who was recently booted from the body. Why?

Well, first, his case is being appealed. He was already convicted, mind you, but to the NAACP we should leave him alone until all appeals have been exhausted. Second, there's "there is currently no rule for expulsion that applies to misdemeanor convictions."

Yep, these are the arguments one of the oldest civil rights organization in the country is using to back the woman-beater, Carlos Henriquez. The real reason, of course, is because he's a black liberal Democrat. Sit tight for the accusations of racism. But keep this in mind when the mythical "War on Women" raises its silly head again.

Posted by Hube at 09:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 08, 2014

Missed irony (again, *sigh*)

Carla Hoffman at Robot 6 completely misses the irony in an article about Marvel's new Ms. Marvel. (You may recall that this new incarnation is a Muslim teenager.) She writes:

What we do or don’t do shouldn’t be an indicator of gender, or race or sexual identity. I mean, we can make guesses, but that doesn’t tell you who you are inside, and it’s the inside that really counts, or so years of cartoon morality lessons have taught me. There’s no such thing as “not black enough” or “you act too gay to be straight,” because that says more about the person making those statements than the person they’re defining. The United States started out as just some humble little colonies trying to forge their own identity, coming to America to be themselves.

Let that sink in for a moment.

OK, ready? IT IS "PROGRESSIVES," MS. HOFFMAN, WHO DEFINE PEOPLE BY THEIR SKIN COLOR, GENDER AND SEXUAL IDENTITY. That is what. They. Do. This is what Marvel and DC do, via their writers, artists and editors. It's what "progressive" politicians do, too: If you're black or Hispanic (but especially black) and conservative, you're "not authentically black." If you're a woman and staunchly pro-life, you're not "authentically female."

I wonder if Ms. Hoffman is "pro-diversity." If she says "yes," why, exactly? The only diversity truly worthy of the term is diversity of opinion and experience. And Hoffman has already noted that skin color/gender/sexual ID has nothing to do with that. Thus, the supposed need for set numbers -- the so-called "critical mass" argued for by racial bean counters in academia -- is moot.

Posted by Hube at 09:28 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

First, it's not "hate." But here's why we don't like him

MSNBC resident microcephalic Chris Matthews yesterday: "Let me finish tonight with something that's been bothering me. Why do people hate this president so much?"

*Sigh* Of course, it's not hate. It is, as with anything else political, a disagreement and if anything else, a dislike. Ignore Matthews' absolutely false narrative as to why people (mostly GOPers and conservatives) "hate" Boss Obama; here's the real scoop (as if any loyal Colossus readers really need this, eh?) including many recent occurrences/revelations:

  • The nomination of Debo Adegbile to head the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ. The dude made a cause célèbre (like many way-out-there "progressives") of Mumia Abu-Jamal, convicted of killing Philly police officer Daniel Faulkner over 30 years ago. WPHT radio's Rich Zeoli made a great point yesterday that it isn't about Adegbile representing Abu-Jamal. Everyone is entitled to a defense, of course, and Adegbile is entitled to work. However, Adegbile, as noted, is not entitled to the position for which he is now almost confirmed. He went beyond the mere defense of Abu-Jamal and turned his conviction into an indictment of the American justice system as a whole. Adegbile opposes "criminal-background checks by employers and pushes extreme racial-hiring quotas." And, naturally, he rejects voter ID measures. Most recently, he lost both voting rights cases he argued before the Supreme Court.

    Make no mistake -- this is a "f*** you" appointment by Boss Obama. And if confirmed, you can bet Adegbile will try to do still more about Abu-Jamal. Is a Boss Obama pardon for the cop killer in the works? Why not? It'd just be one more middle finger he's given the American people.

  • Adegbile will be the perfect supplement to an already-over racialized civil rights division. Recall what the Education Department's CR Division is up to.

  • A**holes like Chris Matthews would be apoplectic if Obama was a conservative Republican. They cover for him and hilariously ask why people "hate" him for one reason only: Obama is a [black] liberal Democrat. If he was of the reverse politics and was involved in all that he is, Matthews' channel and the rest of the MSM would be calling for his scalp. "Not even a smidgen of corruption" at the IRS? Bullsh**. Yet, the MSM is still screaming Gov. Chris Christie's bridge scandal ... and then shrugs at the national news regarding the IRS. The disaster known as ObumbleCare? The MSM continues to yawn and/or make excuses for the administration ... even after Boss Obama sold this mess via the Lie of the Year.

The list could go on and on, natch. Benghazi. Fast and Furious. Unilaterally altering laws. And Matthews knows -- KNOWS -- if Obama was a Republican he's be in grave danger of impeachment about now.

Posted by Hube at 08:59 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

February 06, 2014

Jerry Seinfeld takes on P.C. idiot, gets called a racist in return

Via Doug Ernst: This shouldn't surprise a soul:

Buzzfeed Editor Editor Peter Lauria: I have noticed that most of the guests are mostly white males. Of 22 episodes you’ve had —

Seinfeld: Yeah, let’s get into that. Take a look over here, Peter. What do you see? A lot of whiteys! What’s going on here?!

Oh, this really pisses me off. This really pisses me off, but go ahead. [...] There were a lot of things about ‘Comedians and Cars’ from the very beginning — the first ten I did were all white males and people were writing all about that. People think it’s the census or something. It’s gotta represent the actual pie chart of America. Who cares? Funny is the world that I live in. You’re funny, I’m interested. You’re not funny, I’m not interested. I have no interest in gender or race or anything like that, but everyone else is kind of calculating ‘Is this the exact right mix?’ To me it’s anti-comedy. It’s anti-comedy. It’s more about PC nonsense than “Are you making us laugh or not?”

In response, complete dolt Kyle Chayka at Gawker says Seinfeld is a racist:

Jerry Seinfeld, the most successful comedian in the world and maker of comedy for and about white people, isn't interested in trying to include non-white anything in his work.

Which is too bad, because Seinfeld is downplaying the work of everyone from Richard Pryor and Bill Cosby to Aziz Ansari, Mindy Kaling, and Eddie Huang, who are all in various stages of their own sitcoms that just might turn out to be the next Seinfeld.

In conclusion: Yes, comedy should represent the entire pie chart of America, and the glorious, multicolored diversity pie should be thrown directly at Jerry Seinfeld's face.


Are you KIDDING me??

Hmm. Let's see what sort of "multicolored diverse" articles Mr. Chayka has written of late:

  • "Kraft Reports String-Cheese Recall, Probable Shortage." I'm sure many people of color were dying to know about this.

  • "Up to a Billion Birds Die in the U.S. Annually Crashing into Windows." But ... how many were birds of color?

  • "Bitcoin Is the Latest Plot to Save the Post Office." How many minorities even know about bitcoin?

  • "NYC Waiters Can Now Legally Give You Water Without Asking." Look at how Chayka skips the word on fast food joints, popular among lower income minorities.

  • "Chili Peppers Bassist Owns Up to Faking Super Bowl Half Time." How many minorities are fans of the Red Hot Chili Peppers, pray tell?

  • "Eleven-Year-Old Attempts Suicide After Bullying Over My Little Pony." What, no bullied black child to write about??

  • "Did Emma Watson Paint This Angsty Self-Portrait?" Really?? No minority painter to write about, Chayka?

Of course, you see how utterly ridiculous this is. And for "progressives" like Buzzfeed's Lauria and Gawker's Chayka, "multi-colored" and "diversity" are only necessary when it comes to Caucasians. Unless, that is, when it comes to applying the concept to themselves. (See also here and here.)

Maybe next Chayka can do an article on this worthy topic: Using white paper can cause racism in young children. I sh** you not. So says, natch, an “early years consultant who advises local authorities on equality and diversity.”

The very best thing we can do to such complete nonsense is just what Seinfeld did -- laugh at them and look 'em in the eye and tell 'em how f***ing ridiculous they are.

Posted by Hube at 08:10 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

February 04, 2014

Yet another "tolerant" Delaware "progressive"

Duffy has many times already exposed kavips as having a major screw loose; here's her latest -- a true example of how contemporary "progressives" view conservatives:

Yes! what Mark Blake says. Arrest and prosecute those Conservatives with illegal firearms….

You ran too easily. no one said guns have particular political affiliations. Just like cars don’t have political affiliations. Unlike guns, Conservatives DO have political affiliations. If you do a close reading of my text, you will notice I am talking about Conservatives, not guns.

If Benedict Arnold were alive today, and trying to underpin America by selling us out to another foreign power, would anyone be on his side? That is what conservatives are doing. Selling out the American Middle Class to 1% of the population who couldn’t care less about America.

For that reason, any Conservative should be arrested and prosecuted for possession of illegal firearms… Just as one would arrest Benedict Arnold….. or any other Tory walking through the countryside in 1782….

If no judicial court be handy, rolling them in hot tar until they scream, and then cooling them off in chicken feathers, would be a good secondary alternative….

Bottom line; no difference between Benedict Arnold and say, Sean Hannity.

How many times have we said it? Too many to count: "Progressives" don't just view their American ideological opponents as just that -- fellow citizens with differing points of view. They view them as the enemy. Evil. To be extinguished. They're even worse than, say, al Qaeda.

Remember the good 'ol times when "progressives" screamed for free speech, and how "dissent was patriotic"? Remember how toxic phrases like "America -- love it or leave it" were? But now that they've gotten power, to hell with all of those concepts. Free speech from conservatives has to squelched "for the greater good." Dissent is now, like kavips says, traitorous. If you disagree with "progressives" now, leave America.

kavips doesn't sound any different than this mental midget. No wonder she enjoys commenting where she does.

Posted by Hube at 08:28 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

January 31, 2014

Let's check in with the moonbat comicbook creators again!

Our pal Gail Simone retweets the following:


However, if you take the time to check the link, here's what it actually says:

No school board or school administrator may prohibit a teacher in public or nonpublic school from providing instruction on intelligent design or other related topics.

Now while I agree that public schools shouldn't be teaching this stuff, this bill, however, also states that non-public schools shouldn't be hindered from teaching such. Although I'd be curious why such a bill would be needed to ensure that non-public schools can teach I.D. Is some state law prohibiting such?

Elsewhere, Ron Marz is still obsessing over acquitted [WHITE HISPANIC] George Zimmerman:


That second one being snark about Amanda Knox. Why does Marz obsess so about [WHITE HISPANIC] Zimmerman? He's tweeted "gotcha" tweets every time he supposedly had threatened his girlfriend (the girlfriend, who seems to have a screw loose, has backed off from her complaints/charges each time), tweeted when [WHITE HISPANIC] Zimmerman might get in trouble for copying someone's photo, and now ...? Because Amanda Knox made the news?

We're not here to defend [WHITE HISPANIC] Zimmerman by any means. The guy certainly appears to have some issues, to be sure. But the "progressive" obsession with the guy is bizarre. Guys like Marz keep it alive ... why? To [re]establish their bona fides as "one of the ["progressive"] team? To keep alive the idea that "racism is just as bad now as it was in, say, 1954?" I mean, if [WHITE HISPANIC] Zimmerman's case is such an "example" of never-dying racism, what explains Roderick Scott?

And, sadly again there's Kurt Busiek, who seemingly has no problem at all with the Lie of the Year from our president, yet is so miffed at the GOP for apparently hyping up a not-quite accurate anecdote that he's compelled to retweet it:


Earth to Busiek: Try counting the number of whoppers President Lemon told you in the SOTU. That is, if you can manage to get past your dogma.

Posted by Hube at 07:44 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

January 29, 2014

A trip back in time (moonbat hypocrisy alert)

I was rereading the comment section of this post yesterday whilst adding it to this one regarding comics writer Mark Millar being a socialist. Keep in mind the first link is from 2006, a little over seven years ago, to be more specific. One of things I complained about in the post was how Millar had Captain America kill his opponent, Colonel Abdul al-Rahman, who's basically an Iranian counterpart to Cap. (In my original post, I referred to al-Rahman as the "MCA," or "Muslim Country Analogue.") And who commented about this? None other than Delaware Liberal's Jason "Trust Fund" Scott:

This is an intersting [sic]post. You seem to be doing the kind of thinking that the writer hoped for. Without any trace of irony you say:*

...but certain characterizations are (or, should be) maintained. Like Cap's purity (or attempted purity) of purpose. Anyone who's anyone would simply not have Capt. America killing a person in cold blood. Unless, of course, he wanted to disparage a certain country!

How much more does it disparage out [sic] country to torture confessions out of people or hold them in solitary confinment [sic] without charging them with any crime?

How is Capt America different from our America when he kills in cold blood? Shouldn't we be more mindful of our national "purity of purpose"? Isn't that the very thing we chucked out the window when we decided that premptive [sic] war was okay? When we decided that Iraqi civilian deaths did not count as much as American civilian deaths?

Some of the "Terrorists" in Gitmo are called "Terrorists" because they are in Gitmo. It is supposed to be the other way around.

If, like Capt America, we set aside our principles for the sake of security, we are no longer America. I know you don;t like to face this reality, but the new habeas corpus rules mean that you are I could be held without being charged is Bush decided that our blogs were threats to national security.

I know you have a lot of faith in Bush not to grab you off the street and toss you in jail - but I don't.

You can see my responses to this at the original link; however, let's talk about *"traces of irony." When this original post was written, George W. Bush had two years left in his presidency, and in one month the Democrats were elected back into the majority of the House of Representatives. In two years, Boss Obama was elected president promising to end much of what Trust Fund complains about above. After five years of Boss Obama's presidency, what have we seen with regards to the above?

Words. Not actions. Words. He. Has. Done. Nothing.

In fact, in many areas, he's upped the ante from the Bush era: Unmanned drone strikes in sovereign countries. Drastic expansion of NSA wiretapping. Continuation of "black site" interrogations. Gitmo still wide open for business. And Trust Fund had "no faith" that Bush administration operatives wouldn't "grab you off the street and toss you in jail"? Tell that to Nakoula Basseley Nakoula. Or, most recently, Dinesh D'Souza. And have I yet mentioned Boss Obama using the IRS as his personal vendetta team?

The DE Liberal (aka the LGOMB, or Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers) site was fledgling in October of 2006, for what it's worth. But head over there now (if you can stand it) and search the archives for Trust Fund's strongly worded complaints about Boss Obama and his continuation of Bush presidency policies. If you can find any. Best of luck.

RELATED: I saw Zero Dark Thirty this past weekend. If you don't know, this is the film that documents the behind-the-scenes machinations in the hunt for Osama bin Laden. Despite what myriad "progressives" may say, the film is fairly plain in stating that the few waterboarded captured terrorists led to valuable information ... and it takes a jab at Boss Obama for ending the practice. However, don't think that G.W. Bush escapes unscathed; when the protagonist (Jessica Chastain) is growing weary of waiting for action to be taken on the bin Laden compound, her CIA boss confronts a Boss Obama official about the delay. The official, and administration, want as precise as possible intel. When the CIA boss says "It's as good as it's gonna get," the official says, "Sorry -- you gave us better odds on WMD being in Iraq."

As for the scenes featuring the waterboarding, if they were designed to elicit sympathy for the victims, it was a failure. Chastain is noticeably uncomfortable in the first of such instances (much less so, if at all, later on), but even then I, and those watching with me, didn't feel unease at all. And why should we? I know I've debated this issue at times very heatedly with folks like my friend Steve Newton; my stance hasn't changed. I often think of films like Taken when "enhanced interrogation" of terrorists is discussed. Why are films like the Liam Neeson actioner so damn popular? Would you do what Neeson did (given the skills) to rescue your own flesh and blood? I would. Most everyone I know would. Then why would you hesitate to discomfort a few barbaric individuals whose only goal in life is to kill as many "infidels" as possible?

Posted by Hube at 06:16 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Thanks, Jack

Delaware Gov. Jack Markell will seek a ten cent hike in the state's gas tax for road and bridge improvement.

Gee, thanks man. Considering the problems with DelDOT in the past, not to mention some of their ridiculous choices (repaving the already-newly repaved Naamans Road in the early 2000s and making the road worse, the new Route 1 overpass by Christiana Mall which inexplicably still merges into one lane after about a quarter mile, to name just two), who the hell wants to add a dime per gallon to their fill-up? Especially in this economy??

But hey -- that's what you get, folks, in a one-party system. Remember -- this is the government that spent eight million of your tax dollars to bail out the state casinos. But Joe Six Packs have to shell out an extra buck-plus every fill-up.

Democrats: The "party of the working man." Chee-yeah, right.

Posted by Hube at 04:16 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

January 27, 2014

Let's check in on the moonbat comicbook creators!

Look! It's our old pal Ron "STFU" Marz whose mocking those who would mock the fact that Hillary Clinton hasn't driven a car since 1996:

Yeah, because we all know that an example of being "out of touch" in the early 1860s was "not driving a car in some time," right? At least, if the GOP makes this an actual issue, it'll be based on something real, unlike this perpetual lie. And Marz ain't done -- he then goes on to mock Benghazi:

Stay classy, Ron.

Marz also perfectly demonstrates why he, like so many other insulated "progressives," lives in a bubble:

It's bad enough he cites the ever-predictable Frank Rich, but as if Fox News is unique in being a sort of "echo chamber." Only one as comfortably (by choice, natch) isolated as Marz would think FNC stands alone in that regard. As with many others, he's just miffed that there is a [lone] network that grinds against the liberal MSM behemoth. That's a cryin' shame, Ron.

Lastly, he tweets:

And the last part is stupid, isn't it? Having to be 21 to buy a beer, that is. Yet, you only have to be 18 to die for your country. Who knows, maybe Marz would like to raise that to 21. But if that's the case, then we should repeal the 26th Amendment, right? Because that was a big reason (only having to be 18 to be drafted, but 21 to vote) that amendment was ratified.

Next, Gail Simone is upset because a plaque of Boss Obama in Eugene, Oregon (a very "progressive" enclave, mind you, but she skips that part) has been vandalized including -- gasp! -- racial slurs:

While this is certainly not a very pleasant happening, I wonder how many tweets Simone offered up when likenesses of George W. Bush were vandalized -- including her peer Erik Larsen's [never published] cover of his character Savage Dragon punching out the former president. So, break out the small violins, everybody.

Elsewhere, Simone is so LIV-ish, she is clueless as to why the store Hobby Lobby doesn't want to provide certain aspects of health insurance to its employees:

Here's why, you dope. Because before the clusterf*** known as ObumbleCare, entities like Hobby Lobby didn't have to go against their religious conscience for things like including contraceptives in their health plans. I wonder how'd Simone would feel if a Muslim-owned restaurant was mandated to serve pork products.

Aaaaand then there's our bud Dan Slott who retweets the following:

*Sigh* First, that actually is freedom. The essence of a free people means having the means to defend yourself. Second, it is beyond hyperbolic to say you cannot go out in public without fear of getting shot. But gun grabbers do this routinely. Even though so-called mass shootings have actually declined over the years.

Here's something to consider, Dan: How about actually enforcing the gun laws already on the books? I mean, our VP, Joe "Plugs" Biden, actually said that "we simply don’t have the time or manpower to prosecute everybody" who breaks various gun laws. So, naturally, we need more gun laws! Or, how about doing something about the lenient judges who let people serve ridiculously light sentences for using a gun in the commission of a crime?

Nah. Much easier to f*** with law-abiding citizens who are totally responsible with their guns.

Remember, it's easy to shrug off what these dopes say, and ultimately in the big picture, their opinions mean little. But keep in mind they have thousands of LIV Twitter followers who hang on every word they say. Reminds me of a certain White House occupant and those who voted for him ...

Posted by Hube at 05:44 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

White man's fault hip hop lyrics are vulgar

So says Harry Belafonte while on -- you guessed it -- MSNBC:

“[T]hey’ve gotten distracted by the gold,” Belafonte said. “Wall Street that invested so much in the hip-hop culture gave it a lot of gold, a lot of cars, a lot of flavor and that flavor was abused. The lyrics became very anti-woman. They became very anti-black. They used language that constantly diminished us as a people and as a country."

*Sigh* Yet another example of the 'ol "soft bigotry of low expectations." In this case, young rappers were "seduced" by whitey Wall Streeters flappin' Benjamins around. Is there anything for which the white man is not to blame?

Posted by Hube at 04:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

January 26, 2014

Don't say the following anymore:

"Thug" and "street cred." Especially the former, because that is the "new 'N word.'" And of all people, Bill Maher says so:

"I think it's a very creative way to point out that racism has really kind of gone underground in this country," Maher said. The comedian then said he believed that whenever whites "see a black guy they don't like: thug."

"Because it's socially unacceptable now--unlike when it once was--to say the 'N-word,'" he said. "So that's sort of the word that they use instead."

Charles Barkley said that "street cred," as noted, is a racial slur, too. But it's Maher who has one big pair of stones to say what he did. This -- from the guy who has used some of the vilest language imaginable to trash people he doesn't like. Anyone recall him calling Sarah Palin a "c**t"?

Posted by Hube at 05:56 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

January 25, 2014

Saturday quick hits

-- Al Sharpton thinks voter ID laws are a "poll tax." (The 24th Amendment abolished poll taxes fifty years ago.)

Even while acknowledging that the IDs are generally issued by states for free, Sharpton cited Attorney General Eric Holder and Georgia Democratic Rep. John Lewis in complaining that simply having to travel to obtain the free ID amounts to a tax.

We've been through this sort of bullsh** before. WTF is next -- a stamp on an envelope to get a voter registration form is a "poll tax?" Why yes, as a matter of fact according to Florida Rep. Alcee Hastings. Unfortunately for both Hastings and Sharpton, even the left-leaning PolitiFact (see last link) rates as "mostly false" that voter ID laws amount to a poll tax.

Elsewhere, race-obsessed Attorney General Eric Holder spoke out (again) against voter ID laws. “They’ve come up with a remedy in search of a problem,” Holder told MSNBC on Friday. “I think it is being used in too many instances to depress the vote of particular groups of people ..." He also said that in a "vacuum" he would support such laws ... Cheeyeah, sort of like he would support school disciplinary measures "in a vacuum," eh? Puh-lease.

-- New York City's new [communist] mayor, Bill De Blasio, agrees with the recent "F*** you, Righties" sentiments of New York Governor Andy Cuomo. Is that surprising??

-- Did I mention Eric Holder already? Well, he is sticking by his "nation of cowards when it comes to race" comment from 2009. “Certain subjects are off-limits and that to explore them risks at best embarrassment, and at worst, the questioning of one’s character,” he said. He's certainly right about that -- but not in the way he thinks.

-- The MSM keeps George Zimmerman in the news, this time because George -- gasp!! -- did a painting based on an AP photograph. The photog is threatening to sue Zimmerman. This is big news, folks.

-- Lastly, io9 has a list of Marvel comics the company probably wish they'd never had published. Included are "winners" we've covered previously like U.S. 1 and NFL Superpro.

Posted by Hube at 06:37 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

January 24, 2014

Gail Simone still doesn't get it

As we posted back here, some fans of Simone's comic The Movement were miffed that the TV show Arrow (based on the DC character Green Arrow) utilized a group by the same name who were a bunch of terrorists. We wrote "Isn't that pretty much the case?" and posted several images from various Occupy Wall Str