Let Montgomery Burns explain it all to you:
Let Montgomery Burns explain it all to you:
One of the young bucks in the wingnut bullpen, Senator Marco Rubio, gets an early start on his 2016 debacle with a GQ interview:
How old do you think the Earth is?
I’m not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that’s a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I’m not a scientist. I don’t think I’m qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all…
So, in less than one question’s answer, Rubio has
Oh, aside from his wife, Rubio’s best friend is Jim DeMint.
Did Rubio and Rmoney change bodies sometime over the weekend? And would you want someone who’s not qualified to read a high-school geology text running your country?
Here is the another story about fire fighters doing their jobs:
Firefighters are battling a six-alarm fire in the Breezy Point section of the Rockaway peninsula in Queens. Officials say the fire was reported at about 11 p.m. Monday…
The interesting thing about this story? The fire took place last night. In New York City. During Hurricane Sandy.
Firefighter personnel saved scores of people from the fire, sometimes maneuvering hoses through chest-deep water.
The backup power generator at NYU Langone Medical Center failed, forcing evacuation of patients, including 20 babies from the NICU (neo-natal intensive care unit), all during 60-mph winds and torrential rain.
A construction crane on 57th Street came loose from its moorings and is dangling 75 stories in the air by entangled cables. The NYC Building Department sent inspectors up into the building (during a freakin’ hurricane!) to assess the situation; a spokesman described the inspectors as “the best of the best”.
And this morning I found this:
From Deadspin, quote in toto because that’s the only possible way I could do it:
Baltimore Ravens linebacker Brendon Ayanbadejo has spoken out in favor of a Maryland ballot initiative that would legalize gay marriage. Yahoo has published a letter that Maryland state delegate Emmett C. Burns Jr. wrote last week to Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti, urging him to “inhibit such expressions from your employee.” This is Minnesota Vikings punter Chris Kluwe’s response to Burns.
Dear Emmett C. Burns Jr.,
I find it inconceivable that you are an elected official of Maryland’s state government. Your vitriolic hatred and bigotry make me ashamed and disgusted to think that you are in any way responsible for shaping policy at any level. The views you espouse neglect to consider several fundamental key points, which I will outline in great detail (you may want to hire an intern to help you with the longer words):
1. As I suspect you have not read the Constitution, I would like to remind you that the very first, the VERY FIRST Amendment in this founding document deals with the freedom of speech, particularly the abridgment of said freedom. By using your position as an elected official (when referring to your constituents so as to implicitly threaten the Ravens organization) to state that the Ravens should “inhibit such expressions from your employees,” more specifically Brendon Ayanbadejo, not only are you clearly violating the First Amendment, you also come across as a narcissistic fromunda stain. What on earth would possess you to be so mind-boggingly stupid? It baffles me that a man such as yourself, a man who relies on that same First Amendment to pursue your own religious studies without fear of persecution from the state, could somehow justify stifling another person’s right to speech. To call that hypocritical would be to do a disservice to the word. Mindfucking obscenely hypocritical starts to approach it a little bit.
2. “Many of your fans are opposed to such a view and feel it has no place in a sport that is strictly for pride, entertainment, and excitement.” Holy fucking shitballs. Did you seriously just say that, as someone who’s “deeply involved in government task forces on the legacy of slavery in Maryland”? Have you not heard of Kenny Washington? Jackie Robinson? As recently as 1962 the NFL still had segregation, which was only done away with by brave athletes and coaches daring to speak their mind and do the right thing, and you’re going to say that political views have “no place in a sport”? I can’t even begin to fathom the cognitive dissonance that must be coursing through your rapidly addled mind right now; the mental gymnastics your brain has to tortuously contort itself through to make such a preposterous statement are surely worthy of an Olympic gold medal (the Russian judge gives you a 10 for “beautiful oppressionism”).
3. This is more a personal quibble of mine, but why do you hate freedom? Why do you hate the fact that other people want a chance to live their lives and be happy, even though they may believe in something different than you, or act different than you? How does gay marriage, in any way shape or form, affect your life? If gay marriage becomes legal, are you worried that all of a sudden you’ll start thinking about penis? “Oh shit. Gay marriage just passed. Gotta get me some of that hot dong action!” Will all of your friends suddenly turn gay and refuse to come to your Sunday Ticket grill-outs? (Unlikely, since gay people enjoy watching football too.)
I can assure you that gay people getting married will have zero effect on your life. They won’t come into your house and steal your children. They won’t magically turn you into a lustful cockmonster. They won’t even overthrow the government in an orgy of hedonistic debauchery because all of a sudden they have the same legal rights as the other 90 percent of our population—rights like Social Security benefits, child care tax credits, Family and Medical Leave to take care of loved ones, and COBRA healthcare for spouses and children. You know what having these rights will make gays? Full-fledged American citizens just like everyone else, with the freedom to pursue happiness and all that entails. Do the civil-rights struggles of the past 200 years mean absolutely nothing to you?
In closing, I would like to say that I hope this letter, in some small way, causes you to reflect upon the magnitude of the colossal foot in mouth clusterfuck you so brazenly unleashed on a man whose only crime was speaking out for something he believed in. Best of luck in the next election; I’m fairly certain you might need it.
P.S. I’ve also been vocal as hell about the issue of gay marriage so you can take your “I know of no other NFL player who has done what Mr. Ayanbadejo is doing” and shove it in your close-minded, totally lacking in empathy piehole and choke on it. Asshole.
Couldn’t have said it better if I’d had a gun to my head. I take back everything bad I’ve thought about American football in the last week or so.
I never thought I’d hear myself say this, but there is someone’s football jersey I want!
(I had to look up “fromunda”. Yeeechh.)
From Tom Tomorrow’s This Modern World:
The Spouse put a post on Facebook today about the annoyingly persistent whines you hear from inadequate GOP sheeple about how whites are being discriminated against (involving a racist SuperPAC — you can’t make this stuff up).
My brother rose superbly to the challenge:
My feelings about being a white, straight male in American society. I am in the most privileged group in the most privileged country in the history of the world. White men still control just about everything you see around you, one way or another. Things are not swinging to discrimination against white men in America. Things are swinging towards a more equitable society so that everyone has a piece of the peace and prosperity pie.
Women, people of color, and gays are all inching towards a bit more parity, but we still have a long way to go before they all get their fair share. Electing a black president is a big step for us.
Any time I hear some white, straight male colleague whine about being discriminated against, I just roll my eyes and think that at least your sex and race and orientation were never 3/5 of a person, could vote for more than the last 100 years, and could marry whomever you loved.
Preach, man, preach!
For a good stick poke at this and other GOP talking points, and for your general amusement:
I’ve whined regularly about the lack of a dependably objective source of news these days.
MSM is a lost cause, partially through corporate dictate and partially through viewer demand for entertainment in the place of hard news.
Internet sources…well, we all know that all mistakes made on the internet are accidental. Right.
That being said, I find myself more regularly depending upon liberal-leaning news sources; conservative sources are monotonously guilty of forcing “facts” into place to fit a desired viewpoint, whereas progressive sources usually make at least an effort to present reality. (Yes, yes, I know there are exceptions on both sides. I quit reading Addicting Info because the editor is fond of cutting and pasting others’ work and presenting it as his own.)
I read Thinkprogress pretty regularly. Or, at least I used to. I post contrarian comments to TP stories occasionally. I’ve complained about a lack of journalistic rigor when it comes to their research, I’ve complained about an ominous shortage of articles showing progressive and liberal personalities and events that lie about reality, and I’ve complained about occasional inflammatory headlines that don’t well reflect the contents of the story.
This was a story about people who genuinely want President Obama to lose the upcoming election. Their billboard’s wording is unfortunate, but it’s hardly an apples-to-apples comparison of Osama bin Laden and Barack Obama, despite the lead sentence’s implication.
It’s bad enough that sites like the Drudge Report and organizations like AFA distort facts to suit a conservative agenda; that’s the only path for those who ignore the truth. Progressives should know better than to walk down the same road.
If it were possible for a television show to drain viewers’ IQs, this would be the one:
Shellie Zimmerman was charged with perjury in Seminole County, Florida, today.
She and her famous husband George apparently (allegedly) conspired to hide his web-generated $200,000 nest egg before the trial judge twigged to its existence. Their behavior and actions indicate that they had both knowingly lied about its existence and tried to hide the money before George’s bail was set.
She hid a good bit of it in a bank account belonging to her sister.
First the discovery of George’s second passport (the existence of which he failed to divulge), then the discovery of the $200,000 (after George and Stella both lied and said they were “almost penniless”), and now a perjury charge.
Ain’t karma a bitch?
The news from Oceania this week:
“Since President Obama assumed office three years ago, federal spending has accelerated at a pace without precedent in recent history…”
From the Washington Post:
“Government spending under Obama, including his signature stimulus bill, is rising at a 1.4% annualized pace — slower than at any time in nearly 60 years.”
Even adjusted for inflation, Obama has the second lowest spending record in modern American politics. (Eisenhower wound down the economy because of the end of the Korean War.)
“Bottom line: The Facebook post’s claim that government spending under Obama is “slower than at any time in nearly 60 years” is very close to accurate.”
Hey, all you Republicans out there who are convinced that Obama makes the biggest spendthrift moves this side of Willard Romney’s rebuilt California mansion: what’s it like having a candidate that tells blatant lies?
Do you enjoy being lied to?
The Republican Party of Greene County, Virginia, is showing the true colors of ignorance and belligerence for all of us to see.
The March 2012 issue of their newsletter calls for:
The ultimate task for the people is to remain vigilant and aware ~ that the government, their government is out of control, and this moment, this opportunity, must not be forsaken, must not escape us, for we shall not have any coarse but armed revolution should we fail with the power of the vote in November
The real treat, though, is to see at just what level of ignorance the source comes from.
I just thought I’d throw in a few helpful hints on grammar, spelling, syntax, legibility, and sentence construction. (The rest of the newsletter is in about the same shape — but then, I’m sure that comes as no surprise to anyone.)
How the hell are we supposed to take anything these wackaloons say at any serious level?
Orson Scott Card, author, member of the board of the National Organization for Marriage, and poorly-disguised closet case, is at it again:
Those signs on people’s lawns, warning you that the [North Carolina] pro-marriage Amendment One will harm children.
Of course it’s a lie – in fact, it’s really designed to fool careless people into thinking that the amendment is against traditional marriage. They’re co–opting the language of conservatives in order to trick conservatives into voting against their moral values.
But they’re inadvertently tipping their hand; they’re letting us see what’s really at stake.
There’s no need to legalize gay marriage. I have plenty of gay friends who are committed couples; some of them call themselves married, some don’t, but their friends treat them as married. Anybody who doesn’t like it just doesn’t hang out with them.
It’s just like heterosexual couples who are living together without marriage. Their friends still treat them like married couples, inviting them places together; they’re a social unit. Those who strongly disapprove leave them alone.
There are no laws left standing that discriminate against gay couples. They can visit each other in the hospital. They can benefit from each other’s insurance.
No, legalizing gay marriage is not about making it possible for gay people to become couples.
It’s about giving the left the power to force anti-religious values on our children. Once they legalize gay marriage, it will be the bludgeon they use to make sure that it becomes illegal to teach traditional values in the schools.
Our children will be barraged with the deceptions of the left. Parents will be forbidden to remove their children from the propaganda.
Any child with any gender or sexual confusion will be pushed inexorably away from the decision to establish a traditional family. They’ll be told, again and again, that any sign of effeminacy or gender confusion or same-sex attraction is an irrevocable, lifelong compulsion and they might as well shape their lives accordingly.
The left is at war with the family, and they want control of our children’s education. That’s what those signs on the lawns are about.
I’m not making this up – it’s already happening wherever the left has complete control of education. Parents in those places are already forbidden to opt out of sexual and gender propaganda.
And with the teachers’ unions absolutely under the control of the extreme left, don’t kid yourselves: Legalizing gay marriage will make the false claims of the gay lobby the established religion of the American school system.
If there were even a shred of science behind the absurd claims about gender and sexuality coming from the left, there might be a case for allowing this to happen. But there is no science behind it.
In fact, the scientific evidence we have points in the opposite direction: Same-sex attraction is not a strait jacket; people’s desires change over time; gay people still have choices; a reproductive dysfunction like same-sex attraction is not a death sentence for your DNA or for your desire to have a family in which children grow up with male and female parents to model appropriate gender roles.
Heterosexual pair-bonding has been at the heart of human evolution from the time we divided off from the chimps. Normalizing a dysfunction will only make ours into a society that corrodes any loyalty to it, as parents see that our laws and institutions now work against the reproductive success (not to mention happiness) of the next generation.
But your children will never hear any of that information, true as it is, because it contradicts the dogmas of the left.
Legalizing gay marriage is about driving all contrary evidence or argument out of the public discussion. That’s why the gay-marriage lobby tries to stifle discussion – they have no arguments that stand up to serious investigation.
They brand their opponents’ arguments as religious, and therefore illegitimate; but in fact their own arguments are just as faith-based, just as lacking in evidence, as any Bible-based argument.
So a vote for the amendment is a vote to keep alive the possibility of educating our children without having the false dogmas of the extreme left drilled into them, while contrary arguments are barred.
It’s a vote to allow actual research into human sexuality to continue (or begin again), because the question will remain open.
It’s a vote for freedom of religion – the only right that is in serious danger in America today.
Like black people, gays are reeeeeally reeeeeally scary to some people.
I wouldn’t demand that people not buy Card’s books or read his stories.
But I sure as hell won’t.
Sometimes blog posts practically write themselves.
The Spouse pointed out this exquisitely beautiful pile of selenium crystals, and an exquisitely high pile of pseudo-scientific horse manure:
(Notes: #1–I refuse to redact the names of the guilty. #2–My Facebook language setting is “Pirate”.)
The picture of the crystals is real; it was taken in the selenite crystal chambers in the old Naica Mine in Mexico.
The commentary about the crystals is not real; it’s from the mind of someone who cannot take her reality straight without a chaser of wishful thinking and a tumbler-full of complete bullshit.
I’m not going into this tonight, but while I think big-L Libertarians are a bunch of pie-in-the-sky numbskulls and I agree with a number of the entries, I have quibbles with portions of the content:
My biggest argument is that Libertarianism would be morally correct if we lived in a world populated by nothing except morally correct angels who can live in complete isolation from any other social networks.
But we don’t and they can’t.