












Posted by on 01/31/05 at 10:51 pm
Category: Politics
ou would think that legislation to make domestic violence a crime would not be controversial. But you would be wrong.
In Montana a bill to specify attempted strangulation as a crime of domestic violence is under attack from Christian Evangelicals. They are up in arms because the bill would make this a crime not only for upright Christian families that slip into a little rough play from time to time but also for gay couples:
Representatives of the Eagle Forum, Montana Family Foundation and Montana Family Coalition opposed the bill, calling it a measure designed to legally recognize homosexuality and create a “designer crime.”
Yet another example of special rights for designers.
The lack of gay activists speaking out in the hearing indicated an attempt to pass the legislation without drawing attention to the homosexual agenda in it, said Harris Himes of the Montana Family Coalition.
Which means, of course, that, if you believe Harris Himes, just about everything is part of the homosexual agenda.
Posted by on 01/31/05 at 12:02 pm
Category: Politicsn article in the New York Times about fat Brazilians got a Czech woman from Italy, whose photo was used to illustrate the story, really pissed off:
One of the women in the photo, Milena Suchoparkova, said she was born in the Czech Republic and holds an Italian passport. She visits Brazil for a few months each year.And she says she is outraged that she was depicted as a fat Brazilian. She calls the reporter Rohter and the photographer Maier “cretins.”
She said when she gets back to Prague she plans to hire a lawyer to sue to The Times. She said she has written a letter, but had not heard back from the newspaper.
So the Times published this correction:
Two photographs with the article showed overweight people at Brazilian beaches. The photographer, a freelance who worked independently from the writer, believed that all the people he photographed were Brazilians. But three women in one picture have now told the newspaper O Globo that they were visitors from Europe. While the article itself has not been questioned, The Times regrets that the nationalities of the women in the photo were not verified.
Which is to say: Okay, maybe she wasn’t Brazilian but we still say she’s fat. . . .
Via Regret the Error.
Posted by on 01/31/05 at 11:27 am
Category: PoliticspongeBob SquarePants is a hermaphrodite. James Dobson reacted to the revelation by saying that although he wasn’t sure what a hermaphrodite is, it sounded really, really bad and was probably forbidden somewhere in the Bible.
Via Mustang Bobby at Bark Bark Woof Woof.
Posted by on 01/31/05 at 10:52 am
Category: Politics
n an unusually candid admission by the Bush administration that a large part of its base is really stupid, fat Dennis and other Republicanists were given talking points on the President’s plan to privatize gut Social Security that said this:
The Republican’s book, with a golden nest egg on the cover, urges the GOP to “talk in simple language,” “keep the numbers small,” “avoid percentages; your audience will try to calculate them in their head” and “acknowledge risks,” because listeners “know they can lose their investments.”
Which is to say, don’t say that benefits might be reduced by around twenty percent because people will get confused doing the calculation; say instead that the system will be “bankrupt.”
Posted by on 01/31/05 at 8:44 am
Category: Politicsrent Bozo-ell’s little helpers at the Parent’s Television Council have been busy watching the naughty bits on TV so that you won’t have too and then telling the FCC about them. Here are a few things that PTC complained about according to a recent FCC decision:
“Everwood,” September 16, 2002, 9 p.m. EST: a character remarks to another: “I got this black eye because of you, dick.”
“Dawson’s Creek,” October 30, 2002, 8 p.m. EST: one character remarks to another: “Listen, I know that you’re pissed at your dad for flaking on you. It doesn’t mean he’s a bad dad, and it doesn’t mean he doesn’t love you.” Another character responds: “No, it just means he’s a dick.”
“Dawson’s Creek,” December 11, 2002, 8 p.m. EST: one character tells another: “. . . you’re being a dick.”
“Gilmore Girls,” February 10, 2004, 9 p.m. EST: one character says to another: “you’re a dick.”
“Angel,” February 11, 2004, 9 p.m. EST: one character says to another: “you’re still a dick.”
PTC has also complained to the major news networks about constant references to “Dick” Cheney and requested that he be referred to instead as “Richard” Cheney or simply as the Vice-President. I say, however, that there’s nothing wrong with calling a dick “Dick.”
Posted by Clif on 01/30/05 at 10:37 am
Category: Politics
Michelle Malkin, who hates illegal aliens even more than liberals, speculated last week that Juan Manuel Alvarez, who caused the fatal Glendale train derailment, was an illegal alien:
The Los Angeles Times reports today that L.A. County is finally getting around to dealing with the criminal illegal alien population. . . . The OBL (open borders lobby) is naturally up in arms. What does it matter if someone has violated immigration laws? Go ask the relatives of the dead train commuters.
Because of course anyone with a name like “Alvarez” or “Maglalang” is bound to be an illegal alien.
As it turns out Alvarez is a U.S. citizen. Did Michelle mention this? Nope. Has she said anything since about Alvarez? Not one single word. Once it turned out that Alvarez wasn’t an illegal alien, then he and those “relatives of the dead train commuters” weren’t useful anymore to Michelle and her racist agenda.
Posted by on 01/30/05 at 9:32 am
Category: Politics
And the obligatory quote from South Park:
Stan: Dude, what the fuck is wrong with German people?
Posted by on 01/30/05 at 7:27 am
Category: Politics
erfesser Glenn “InstaHayseed” Reynolds starts his recent screed about how the Democrats are going to hell in a handbasket this way:
HATE-FILLED STUPIDITY FROM LEFT-LEANING ACADEMICS ISN’T NEWS anymore, which is why I haven’t been paying much attention to the story of Colorado professor Ward Churchill’s comparison of 9/11 victims to Eichmann. But go here and look at the picture.Isn’t he exactly what you imagined? Shoulder-length hair, grimly self-righteous expression, black turtleneck, Abbie Hoffman sunglasses. A man whose look, like his rhetoric, is frozen in the amber of 1969.
[W]ell, this is the authentic face of the Left. Or what remains of it.
The Perfesser’s point is, more or less, that the Democrats are doomed unless they shoot Churchill or, at least, give him a haircut and a makeover so he can look as cool as the guy on the right which would be, of course, the Perfesser himself.
And even though the Perfesser thinks he looks way cooler than Churchill, the Perfesser, like Churchill, also says some pretty vile things himself. Like this:
MONKEYS WILL PAY TO SEE MONKEY PORN: And they’re into “celebrity gossip,” too:
The rhesus macaque monkeys also splurged on photos of top-dog counterparts, the high-ranking primates. . . . The scientists actually had to pay these guys, in the form of extra juice, to get them to look at images of lower-ranking monkeys.I guess that’s why Oliver and Max blog about InstaPundit so much more than the reverse . . . .
Doesn’t this wanker understand how unspeakably vile it is for him to compare Oliver Willis, an African-American blogger, to a monkey? Should we say that kind of racism is the authentic face of the right?
Posted by on 01/29/05 at 4:27 pm
Category: Politics
onathan Adler, anti-environmentalist wingnut, takes a few moments off from explaining why global warming isn’t such a bad thing (”Beach front property in the Nation’s Capitol; palm trees in Vermont; golf courses in ANWR, year-round surfing in the North Sea!”) to wade into the paid pundit swamp. This is a big mistake for the pseudo-enviro-whiz-kid.
The problem, Adler says in the pages of National Review (where else?), isn’t Armstrong Williams or fellow National Review-ista Maggie Gallagher; the real problem (completely ignored, of course, by the evil liberal media) is this:
In October 2003, for example, World Wildlife Fund (WWF) chairman William K. Reilly wrote an op-ed, “The EPA’s Cost Underruns,” celebrating the cost-effectiveness of federal environmental regulation. Reilly claimed Environmental Protection Agency programs have produced a “solid return on our investments and declared environmental protection “one of the two foremost achievements of American public policy in the post-World War II period.” Yet while Reilly’s byline acknowledged he was EPA administrator from 1989 to 1993, there was no mention that WWF is a substantial recipient of EPA funds — well over $1.5 million in the past ten years. According to WWF’s Form 990s filed with the IRS, the group received over $15 million in government funds in both 2002 and 2003.
Of course, Professor Adler, hasn’t figured out that maybe there’s just a tiny little difference between writing as a (supposedly) objective journalist (like Williams) and as the chairman of an environmental advocacy fund (like Reilly).
But that’s not the best part. No, ExxonMobil is the best part. ExxonMobil, the largest purveyor of global-warming fossil fuels on the face of the planet, gives hundreds of thousands of dollars to various foundations that have employed Adler: $315,000 to the Competitive Enterprise Institute while Adler worked for them; $20,000 to the Property and Environment Research Center while Adler was there; $60,000 since 1998 to the Federalist Society where Adler is a liaison; and $45,000 since 1998 to the misnamed Consumer Alert for which Adler is an advisor.
And do we hear a peep about this from Mr. Adler when he tells us that global warming is a good thing? Nope, not a freeping word.
Posted by on 01/28/05 at 9:02 am
Category: Politics
ell, well, well. Another paid shill for the Bush marriage initiative crawls out of his dark corner. According to this report in Salon (subscription or day pass required):
One day after President Bush ordered his Cabinet secretaries to stop hiring commentators to help promote administration initiatives, and one day after the second high-profile conservative pundit was found to be on the federal payroll, a third embarrassing hire has emerged. Salon has confirmed that Michael McManus, a marriage advocate whose syndicated column, “Ethics & Religion,” appears in 50 newspapers, was hired as a subcontractor by the Department of Health and Human Services to foster a Bush-approved marriage initiative. McManus championed the plan in his columns without disclosing to readers he was being paid to help it succeed.
If you have a strong stomach, you might want to read some of the hooey that McManus pushes in his columns, archived over at his “Marriage Savers” website. Consider this little gem of logic:
However, marriage is not a civil rights issue. No one at the [Massachussetts] Constitutional Convention noted that America’s major black denominations support a Federal Marriage Amendment which states “Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.”
Got that? It’s not a civil rights issue if African-American churches don’t say so. Silly me, all this time I thought it was what the Bill of Rights said that was important.
Posted by on 01/27/05 at 9:09 pm
Category: Politics
aggie Gallager claims that she was hired by HHS because she was a marriage expert, something she says they didn’t have at HHS. (HHS, in case you didn’t know it, is central headquarters of the vast left-wing gay conspiracy and has to outsource straight married women).
Maggie also claims that she has a husband and two sons. This last claim, of course, is intended to back up her claim to be a marriage expert because, excuse me for saying so, but looking at her she would have to be rather a pro at the marriage business to get married in the first place, much less engage in childbearing-related activities.
One of these sons, she tells us, was 18 years old in 2001. He would be 22 years old now.
Okay, maybe so, but I’m having a little math problem here. Her buddy James Taranto says this today:
In 1991-95, we rented rooms on the second floor of a house Gallagher owned. For the first part of that time, Maggie herself lived on the lower floor; she subsequently moved to a different house after getting married (to a male human, we hasten to add).
(No comment on why Taranto feels inclined to add that).
So let’s see. The son is question would have been born in 1983 and would have been twelve in 1995 when Maggie, according to Taranto’s chronology, got married . So, either one or the other of these two things is true: Maggie, the marriage expert, had an illegitimate son which she raised by herself; or Maggie, the marriage expert, is a gay divorcée. Donchya think that maybe disclosing in her pro-marriage columns that she was a divorced women and/or an unwed mother might be even more important than disclosing the third-rate pundit welfare grant she got from the Bushistas?
We report. You decide.
Posted by on 01/26/05 at 11:18 am
Category: Politicsell, somebody commissioned the American Psychological Association to get the low-down on high self esteem, and here is what they found:
Self-esteem doesn’t make adults perform better at their jobs either. Sure, people with high self-esteem rate their own performance better — even declaring themselves smarter and more attractive than their low self-esteem peers — but neither objective tests nor impartial raters can detect any difference in the quality of work.
But we knew that already, didn’t we? I mean look at this and this. I don’t think a five-year study by the APA was at all necessary.
Posted by on 01/26/05 at 9:01 am
Category: Politics
nce upon a time, there was a king named George W. He surveyed his kingdom and saw that not enough people were married. So, he asked his faithful liege Wade Horn what should be done. “A marriage initiative,” said Squire Horn. “Pay people to get married.”
So King George and Squire Horn sent a call throughout the kingdom for someone to help them. The call was answered by not-so-fair maiden Maggie Gallagher. Maid Maggie, herself unmarried, was also convinced that not enough people were getting married, mainly because of all the gays in the kingdom who were bedding down all the eligible men. King George and Squire Horn paid her $21,500 to travel the kingdom and “promote marriage.”
Maggie, not surprisingly, thought that King George and Squire Horn told her the money was to help her “get married” herself. Alas, there was not a single man in the kingdom, including those missing all their front teeth and those that were completely blind, who would marry Maggie for any amount, even when her life savings were added to the $21,500 she had received from the king.
Several years later the evil Howie the Putz discovered this payment and confronted Maggie: “Even though I am a total shill for King George, he has not paid me a nickel. Thou hast been paid a treasure chest by the king and thou hast told no one!”
Maid Maggie replied: “Be gone, evil putz! That money was to buy a husband and, as I still have no husband, this money is none of your business.”
And Maid Maggie and the Evil Howie the Putz lived unhappily ever after.
The End.
(Okay, Maid Maggie is incredibly enough actually married and claims that she forgot the $21,500 payment to push the marriage initiative, but I figured since Maggie is making shit up when she says she forgot, I could make shit up about her not being married.)
Posted by on 01/25/05 at 9:42 pm
Category: Politicseremiah Jenkins
If there’s one thing I learned, it’s that if you want to interrupt the President of the most powerful nation in the world while he’s delivering his Inaugural Address, it’s going to cost you twenty-five dollars.
And a night in jail, if you’re lucky.
King George W, in his coronation speech:
America’s belief in human dignity will guide our policies, yet rights must be more than the grudging concessions of dictators; they are secured by free dissent and the participation of the governed.
Except, of course, at home.
Posted by on 01/25/05 at 8:11 am
Category: Politics
eah, I know almost everybody reads Wonkette, but I couldn’t resist this little tale, reported by Wonkette operative, about Representative Flake’s wife behaving badly while in town for the Coronation:
At around 1pm last Thursday the Capitol South Metro station was packed with tourists, Hill staffers and apparently members of Congress. Rep. Flake (R-Arizona), his wife and son were in line to get through the ticketing gate when Mrs. Flake’s ticket was rejected because the ticket only had a 90 cent credit. While all other patrons of the Metro would have had to get out of line to add fare to their ticket, Mrs. Flake pulled a ‘Do you know who I am?’ move by pointing and loudly declaring that her husband was a member of Congress. Metro staff followed by allowing the entire Flake family in for free
The whole Flake family has a penchant for pushing people in DC around. The aptly named Representative Flake is one of the sponsors of the initiative to force school vouchers down the throat of the D.C. government.
Posted by on 01/24/05 at 6:31 pm
Category: Politics
ere’s something I missed from last week. The Council of Conservative Citizens (warning: bigot site link) is, not surprisingly, still complaining about the Martin Luther King holiday:
Gordon Baum, CEO of the Council of Conservative Citizens, said he’s upset because King is the only single person to have a holiday named after him.“It’s hard to believe that Martin Luther King was so important that he should have a holiday named after him when other great men and presidents don’t,” Baum said.
Columbus Day, you see, is named after the town.
Atrios links to an article revealing that certain unnamed members of Congress will be addressing the Council in a “fish house” in Jackson, Mississippi on Thursday. We can’t wait to find out who. You’ll be the first to know when we do.
Posted by on 01/24/05 at 11:29 am
Category: Politics
oday we are saying goodbye to Carnac the Magnificent, who passed away on Sunday, and good riddance to William the Congenital Safliar, who disgraces the Gray Lady one last time today with his final over the Top-Ed. One of the two had extraordinary mental capacities; the other did not. You decide.
Carnac the Magnificent (holding sealed envelope to head and answering question inside):
Answer: Until he gets caughtQuestion: How long does a U.S. Congress Member serve?
William the Congenital Safliar
Answer: Soon the independent counsel will present evidence of wrongdoing on Whitewater, Travelgate and the rape of privacy in the F.B.I.’s files.Question: What was the lie I told in my January 13, 1997 New York Times column?
William the Congential Safliar never apologized for his relentless, and false pursuit, of the Clintons on these matters. Indeed, today he takes time in his final column to once again call Hillary a “congenital liar” for having claimed, rightly, that she had done nothing wrong. To quote Carnac the Magnificent (again): “Mr. Safire, may a camel with a weak kidney condition find your hope chest.”