Belatedly, I'm just now catching up with remarks that former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee made in April to Michael Tracey, a college journalist and a student at the College of New Jersey. Belatedly or not, those remarks deserve comment, because what they say about Huckabee's character is not pretty.
True, what Huckabee says about gay marriage isn't new, for him. But just listen to the way he says it.
You don't go ahead and accommodate every behavioral pattern that is against the ideal. That would be like saying, well, there are a lot of people who like to use drugs, so let's go ahead and accommodate those who want to use drugs. There are some people who believe in incest, so we should accommodate them. There are people who believe in polygamy, so we should accommodate them.
The gay marriage debate has been going on for well over a decade now. Yet Huckabee makes clear that he has not given the subject a moment's thought, beyond his initial, frozen-in-amber reaction-one which consists not of a reasoned argument but of a tone of contempt. As if it were self-evident that gay relationships are the moral equivalent of drug abuse. As if it were obvious, with same-sex marriage now six years old in Massachusetts and legal in five states (plus DC), that recognizing committed gay relationships must lead to every other random, bizarre change anyone can think of.
Huckabee also speaks up for Arkansas's ban on adoption by same-sex couples, as if same-sex parenting were a radical experiment. It never really was, but in 2010 anyone who reads a newspaper knows that thousands and thousands of kids have been successfully raised by gay couples, and there is no evidence that the kids are disadvantaged (see, for example, this article [PDF]). Which, by the way, is not true of kids adopted and raised by single individuals, which Arkansas and every other state allows. And is also not true of kids raised in foster care, the likely alternative for some kids when gay adoption is banned.
In 2000, these "I can't be bothered to think about it" responses were merely lazy. In 2010, they show deliberate refusal to even entertain the moral case that Huckabee's gay and lesbian fellow-citizens are making. All he is really saying here is, "I couldn't care less. Get off my planet."
Truly contemptible, though, is this: when, inevitably, Huckabee's words were noticed and he took some flak, he attempted to blame the young journalist for "grossly" distorting his views. In fact, Huckabee was quoted accurately and in context, as Tracey's rejoinder, and the audio of the interview, made clear. (Rachel Maddow plays choice excerpts.)
So supplement the word "contempt" with another, "cowardice." And remember the name of that young journalist, Michael Tracey, whom I met at a conference the other week and who is off, I hope, to a great career-having already launched a campus magazine.
More: In a recent New Yorker article, Huckabee is asked if he wouldn't be curious to know whether same-sex marriage has positive or negative effects kids and society. He replies, "No, not really. Why would I be?" And then...he laughs.
Couldn't be much clearer than that. Same-sex marriage. Real-world effects. Lives of children and gay people. All...a joke.
140 Comments for “Why Mike Huckabee Should Never Be President”
posted by Lymis on
Among the many sad things about all this, one of the saddest is that last.
People are very welcome not to care. So don’t care. Either way. It’s fine not to care what, for example, some tiny non-Christian sect believes, but the moment you start actively working to shut them down, deny them rights, or actively criminalize them, you damn well better care – and you have a responsibility to deal with both sides of the issue. You don’t get to care enough to run for President against it as a policy plank, and then “not care” when someone wants you to discuss your views intelligently.
Same for gay rights. You don’t want to care, don’t care. But then have the integrity to opt out of both the discussion and the battle. And you most definitely don’t get to “not care” about whether the BS you’re spouting is true or not.
posted by Tim Hulsey on
Actually, Arkansas’s ban on adoption applied to all unmarried couples. The voter referendum in 2008 politicized the adoption process to the point that the number of adoptions in the state dropped substantially after the referendum passed. The ban was ruled unconstitutional in April 2010, on grounds that it violated due process and equal protection, and did not serve a compelling state interest.
posted by Bobby on
So what’s the big deal? Obama himself doesn’t believe in same-sex marriage, so why focus on semantics? Is rejection better when the man who rejects you says “I really really like you, but I no, sorry.” And by the way, Jonathan, why do you assume that gay voters only care about same-sex marriage? I’d rather have Huckabee as president than Obama, besides, Huckabee would never act like a dictator. By the way, Kucinich supports same-sex marriage yet I’d rather stay single than get married in a socialist country, which is what Kucinich would create (if Obama doesn’t finish the job first).
posted by Yassuree Massa on
Nothing worse than a self-hating Uncle Tom.
posted by BobN on
Awwww…. Bobby ♥ Hucky
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Couldn’t be much clearer than that. Same-sex marriage. Real-world effects. Lives of children and gay people. All…a joke.
That’s because the gay and lesbian community IS a joke, Rauch.
As we see here, the gay and lesbian community screams “Uncle Tom” whenever a gay or lesbian person makes a decision on a politician based on anything other than whether or not that politician endorses gay-sex marriage.
But then, as Bobby adroitly pointed out, the gay and lesbian community openly and loudly endorses and supports politicians who oppose gay-sex marriage.
The gay and lesbian community whines that politicians who don’t support gay-sex marriage are attacking and hurting their children and are not fit for public office, then turns right around and endorses and supports them.
The gay and lesbian community whines about single parenting, then puts out statements that insist that single parenting and “households with multiple conjugal partners” are just as good as two-parent households.
All this makes it clear that the gay and lesbian community doesn’t really care about marriage OR their “children”; their only concern with either is as a smokescreen and rationalization to attack those who dare disagree with the leftist politicians and Obama Party that owns them. Furthermore, it also demonstrates that gay-sex marriage is not an end, but rather a means to completely redefine marriage and force society to accept every kooky form of relationship that leftists can create as “normal” and to be government-subsidized. Indeed, we just saw in the news this week how gay-sex marriage supporters were openly stating that their intent was to redefine marriage.
So yes, the gay and lesbian community is a joke, just as Al Sharpton is a joke, just as Jesse Jackson is a joke. It’s nothing more than another group of leftist, antireligious bigots and hypocrites trying to use their minority status to get special treatment.
posted by Jimmy on
“So what’s the big deal? Obama himself doesn’t believe in same-sex marriage, so why focus on semantics? ”
Because it’s about what legislation he will sign as POTOS. That’s the big fu**ing deal.
It won’t be Kucinich, or anyone else other than the American People who will continue to create this country and decide its destiny. Bet on it!
posted by Jeremy on
ND30:
I don’t know what gays and lesbians you hang out with (probably none, considering your despicable attitude towards your people).
First off, the article you linked to about the “study” about gay men’s monogamy has been pretty well debunked:
http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/07/15/24397
They drew convenience samples among gay men (some of who were only together for as little as 3 months). And even then, half said they value monogamy. Yes, some same-sex relationships aren’t monogamous, but many heterosexual MARRIAGES aren’t either. In fact, I’d say more than a few (see Ashley Madison).
Second, how does this “Beyond Marriage” group (whom I have never heard of) in any way represent the mainstream of gay Americans? That’s like saying the Black Panthers are the mainstream of Blacks (probably a bad example, as you would probably believe that too).
And I take great offense to you putting “children” in quotes. Gay people are parents. They raise children. They do it just as well as Straight people. Someday, you might even raise children, if you don’t already. To slander gay people (YOUR PEOPLE, whether you wish to accept that or not), by calling our marriage “gay-sex marriage” and to imply the bond between gay parents and their children is counterfeit is to deny that YOU people are inhuman.
What happened to you? I have seen you post in other places. I have seen your comments. What turned you into such a wicked person? What self-loathing exists within you that made you hate your people and blacken your heart? I pity you.
posted by Jeremy on
“…deny that YOU people are inhuman.”
I meant YOUR people.
posted by Jimmy on
POTOS=POTUS
posted by Jeremy on
Wow, I need more coffee. I meant: “deny your people are human”. In other words, ND30 wishes for gay people to view themselves as subhumans. Never going to happen. And that is not the opinion of a Conservative, but of an emotionally-damaged person.
But at the same time, Bobby’s opinion is perfectly valid. You can be Gay and Conservative. Some people value other issues more than gay rights (same on the left obviously, like how Gay Inc. sticks its nose into abortion issues). That doesn’t make them traitors. It proves we are as diverse as any other community.
posted by Jimmy on
“Yes, some same-sex relationships aren’t monogamous, but many heterosexual MARRIAGES aren’t either.”
And usually in same-sex relationships, they have the nerve to be open and unashamed about it, rather than go about on the sly as “dignified” married people do, like characters in a John Cheever short story.
posted by Throbert McGee on
Jonathan Rauch was definitely over-ambitious in his headline, “Why Mike Huckabee Should Never Be President.” He should have called it, instead:
Why Mike Huckabee Should Never Be President of the Gays, Lesbians, and Straight Allies Student Society (GLASASS)
or, possibly:
Why Mike Huckabee Is Off My Christmas List
But I’m not sure that Huckabee’s lunkheadedness on gay issues obviously disqualifies him for consideration as POTUS.
posted by Throbert McGee on
Errrm — I’m not sure if John Cheever was the best possible example you could have chosen.
(Sheesh, there was an entire Seinfeld episode about this… LOL!)
posted by Throbert McGee on
Season 4, Episode 8 of Seinfeld: “The Cheever Letters”
(Quick synopsis: After Kramer accidentally burns down a cabin belong to the parents of George’s fiancee Susan, a metal strongbox containing a large number of highly personal letters is the only item recovered…)
posted by Jimmy on
“Errrm — I’m not sure if John Cheever was the best possible example you could have chosen.”
I just remember Cheever creating characters of the East Coast, upper middle class, WASPY sub-urbanite variety. They all seemed to go about with their resentment and disgust with each other just below the surface. A lot of obligatory hate-sex going on. But, it’s been a while.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
I don’t know what gays and lesbians you hang out with (probably none, considering your despicable attitude towards your people).
I could just look at fine examples like “Yassuree Massa” and BobN.
And, since we haven’t seen you condemn their words, it seems quite obvious that you don’t see any problem with them, given how quick you were to go after me.
Isn’t that interesting? You spent all that time attacking me as “emotionally damaged”, but said not word one about an LGBT person screaming that someone else was an “Uncle Tom” for having a different opinion or made some sort of childish “Bobby hearts Hucky” remark.
The behavior of “Yassuree Massa” and BobN would seem to indicate a lot more in the way of “emotional damage”. But again, it’s not about what you say; it’s about whether or not you dare to criticize the gay-sex narrative.
And that’s what makes you really funny, Jeremy. As I pointed out, gay and lesbian “parents” shriek that anyone who opposes or publicly says that marriage should be between a man and a woman is a homophobe and is hurting their children — yet they regularly vote for and endorse these homophobes who hurt their children when said homophobe is the right skin color and/or political affiliation.
Why do you think gay and lesbian parents support people who hurt their children? Or do you think gay and lesbian parents who say that anyone who doesn’t support gay-sex marriage is hurting their children, and then turn around and support politicians who don’t, are hypocrites and liars?
posted by Throbert McGee on
I keep telling you guys — ND30 doesn’t have a heart, because he’s actually a sophisticated grammatical parser similar to ELIZA, but decades more advanced.
Yet, sadly, He Is Not Programmed For What We Hu-Mans Call “Love”!
posted by Throbert McGee on
And now, a Gay ’90s Musical Interlude:
posted by Jorge on
In 2000, these “I can’t be bothered to think about it” responses were merely lazy. In 2010, they show deliberate refusal to even entertain the moral case that Huckabee’s gay and lesbian fellow-citizens are making.
You hit the nail on the head there, and like you said, it is nothing new for him. He makes the incest comparison more explicit than Rick Santorum’s beastiality and polygamy comparison back in 2003. But I think you need to be clearer as to why this means he should never be president. Mike Huckabee, alone among the more credible and powerful conservative Republicans in the spotlight, refuses to ever engage the issue of what is best for gay people. We have Sarah Palin who said in the VP debate she’s not going to oppose hospital visitations for gays, even while being clear she would oppose civil unions. Rick Santorum famously had a gay staffer, and I invite you to look up what the Senator said about his employee after he was outed. The President of the United States is supposed to represent and strive for the best interests of all Americans, even if he is a partisan. In all this time Mike Huckabee has been famous, I would expect to know at least one nice thing he has said about the gay community.
Oh, and in response to some comments, I am also aware that President Obama was nice enough to meet with and say nice things about the HRC this year, and I’ve always considered Hillary Clinton incredibly gracious in her opposition to same sex marriage. Every Democratic candidate who participated in that HRC-sponsored panel in 2008 gets an automatic pass on this issue.
posted by Jorge on
Yes, some same-sex relationships aren’t monogamous, but many heterosexual MARRIAGES aren’t either. In fact, I’d say more than a few (see Ashley Madison).
Let me tell you, I could tell you such stories.
We’ve got serial monogamy now. It used to be called going around the block.
Do you know how many men I’ve met who’ve had babies out of wedlock while they were married? They don’t divorce, either. For some reason, snakes tend to marry saints.
People shake their heads about 40-year old grandmothers or those mothers with too many kids… well what about all those 40-year old grandfathers with 11 kids, huh? Oh wait, they aren’t married. My bad.
posted by Bobby on
I would rather be a so-called “Uncle Tom” than a ho of the Democratic Party. I’d rather get a tax cut than the empty promises democrats make about gay rights year after year. Learn you own gay history, Jimmy Carter claimed he supported human rights yet did he end the ban of gays in the military? No.
The democratic party is a pimp and gays who vote for the DNC are treated the way a pimp treats his “ho’s.” The DNC pimp may celebrate gay pride month, they’ll show up to your events and take your money, but in the end all they deliver is tax hikes, massive spending, and no gay rights except for meaningless gestures.
As for Huckabee, he has more integrity in his big toe than Obama has in his entire body. So I don’t care if he’s politically incorrect, as long as Huckabee isn’t a socialist he’s a far better choice than the black version of Jimmy Carter in the White House.
posted by Throbert McGee on
There shouldn’t be anything controversial about what Bobby is saying here.
Namely, a self-respecting gay person can in good conscience vote for a very anti-gay Presidential candidate, provided the gay voter is mindful of the fact that (a) there are many other political issues at stake, and taken together, they may outweigh — and possibly SHOULD outweigh — “gay issues”; and (b) the ability of any President to harm gay people with his anti-gay personal views is actually rather limited, since unlike the unfortunate citizens of Latveria, we don’t live in a Totalitarian Autocracy.
posted by Jorge on
…and (b) the ability of any President to harm gay people with his anti-gay personal views is actually rather limited, since unlike the unfortunate citizens of Latveria, we don’t live in a Totalitarian Autocracy.
I’m not buying that. The past 18 months have already shown us how powerful a far from center president can be with the media and in his pocket and Congress in collusion, even as a half-term president. It remains to be seen whether the damage Obama has done to the economy (yeah I said it, sue me) and is likely to have done to the health care system can be undone in a new election. Also, the willingness of a president to harm gay people with his anti-gay personal views speaks to his judgment and character, two very important general qualifications.
posted by Jorge on
Maybe I should make the point clearer: a President Huckabee could easily come into office in 2012 or 2016 with the liberal media dead and a large Republican majority. I’m not merely being hypothetical.
posted by Deep Throat on
Question for NorthDallas30, Bobby, Jorge:
You’re all really just Dr Dobson or that guy from the “Family” “Research” Council using a nom de guerre, right?
posted by Bobby on
“You’re all really just Dr Dobson or that guy from the “Family” “Research” Council using a nom de guerre, right?”
—Huckabee is not Keyes, Dobson, or any of those hardcore homophobes. Huckabee is not afraid to meet with gays and hear what they have to say. As for me, no, I’m not heterosexual nor do I work for FRC or any anti-gay organization. Besides, why would Christians go to gay websites, pretend to be gay, and argue? Unlike the left, Christians usually have integrity and they follow the bible which forbids bearing false witness. That doesn’t mean they don’t use research that helps them advance their cause, we all do that. If they talk about same-sex adoption they’ll look for bad gay couples just like we look for good gay couples for example.
Anyway, here’s an interesting clip of Maddow and some guy talking about how radical the tea parties are while footage of people holding signs against Geroge W. Bush plays out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEr65ZX6gLw
posted by Debrah on
Ah yes, so many issues.
So few hours in the day.
Throbert, as usual, highlights a very significant point when he calls the title Rauch uses for this post “over-ambitious”; however, one must understand—as I’m sure Throbert does—that people like Rauch must walk a tightrope occasionally.
Jonathan offers intelligent and pleasingly objective commentary with regard to gay issues which helps mitigate some of the irrational, loony, and emotional fare coming from many gay “activists”……as well as many gay Liberals on these very fora.
Some didn’t like his take on the Howell episode, so, consequently, he uses such a title for this post because it will bring some of his Leftist detractors into the fold and mitigate the differences he might have with them.
It’s a kind of Valentine, if you will, to say…..”Hey, we’re essentially on the same page!”
Don’t worry, loony, obsessed navel-gazers. Your gay brethren are with you all the way!
But I digress…….
As with all other topics, I have to be blunt about my opinion of Huckabee.
He makes me sick.
I can’t stand such a syrupy, down-home, “church-goin’ ” load of crapola in which he wraps himself.
But there are innumerable Leftists in the Democratic Party who are just as nauseating; however, they will never be criticized the same way.
IMO, the reason that most heteros such as Huckabee avoid many gay topics is precisely because of what happened to Professor Howell and what continues to happen to other people when they simply state the obvious.
And gay “activists” love to see such people damaged and embarrassed. They are propped up by a false sense of “enlightenment”.
As luck would have it, I don’t happen to suffer from this brand of “fear”. When someone—anyone!—operates under the illusion that they can push an agenda and do harm to anyone who offers an opposing view, then a special brand of hell will be delivered at their door.
In the form of “equal treatment”.
One has only to hold them to the same standards they offer others…….and watch them scream!
Gays want to bulldoze the gay agenda whenever they wish—(and that’s all the time)—but will not allow criticism and the illumination of reality without trying to demonize people.
Inside the academy, that is a full-force agenda as we’ve witnessed in the Howell episode.
We can make fun of people like Huckabee and the zealous use of religion in such matters; however, the zealous and totally inaccurate message that gays try to send by pretending that just because we’re inside the 21st century, the physical ramifications of gay sex somehow dissolve.
I laugh out loud every time I read gay “scholars” try to make this case by pretending what might have been taught in physical education classes decades ago has somehow become insignificant to their very practices.
The AIDS epidemic and the current escalation of STD’s among the gay male population once again would call for more responsible and honest commentary from such “scholars”.
Except when a gay man is writing on this topic, he can’t seem to do anything but push his own agenda. Inside the academy, such people will always receive an unquestioning free ride.
However, I have compassion for such people because they reside in their own hermetically-sealed bubble.
When you are surrounded on a daily basis by people 18-22 years old, fresh from their parents’ grasp, you perhaps come to believe that their naivete and lack of experience in the world represents the entire population.
Hence, many, many of those in academia will forever be hobbled by their own lack of experience with life’s panorama.
I would caution anyone from taking advice from university professors on the “meaning of life”.
LOL!
posted by Throbert McGee on
No, I am Dr. James Dobson, and it can now be revealed that I’ve been posting as “Throbert” for years now as part of my brilliantly coordinated plan to underm… BAD DOG! NO! DADDY SAYS NO! YOU ARE A VERY, VERY NAUGHTY BOW-WOW!!
posted by Debrah on
Bobby often highlights the gross double standards utilized by the media when covering negative aspects of politicians.
Some great examples, although some might say, superfluous, are how first ladies are covered….or not covered.
We all remember how the homely Chelsea Clinton was treated with kids gloves…….ditto the Obama girls.
Yet the perky Bush twins were not treated to the same hands-off method.
Everyone seemed to like and admire the docile Laura Bush so few covered her negatively. Although, since the Bush women were more physically appealing than the aforementioned females they would have, no doubt, been played up very positively by the media if they had represented a liberal White House.
Scroll down to the bottom of the page for a good example of a revealing Hillary Clinton photo.
An illustration as to why fashion editor Robin Givhan once wrote an entire column advising Hillary to wear pants. Yet that was the only time I ever saw such commentary stating the obvious.
Take a look at Michelle Obama in this photo.
One can only imagine what bloggers and the media, in general, would have done with such photos if Laura Bush or any other first lady had walked outside the White House looking like that.
There are so many passes that the liberal Demos and their janissaries receive in the way they are covered or not covered.
There’s always so much effort put into trying to make very unattractive people look “glamorous”.
Ha!
posted by Jimmy on
“One can only imagine what bloggers and the media, in general, would have done with such photos if Laura Bush or any other first lady had walked outside the White House looking like that.”
Looking like what, a REAL American mother, wife, partner. God forbid, the woman likes walking her dog in casual clothes, on the grounds of her home.
I can’t imagine Laura Bush saying sh*t if she had a mouth full of it. Her husband did have a mouth full of it, and this was in evidence every time he opened it.
“There are so many passes that the liberal Demos and their janissaries receive in the way they are covered or not covered.:
Why do think that is, given that all MSM is completely corporate owned?
posted by Debrah on
Jimmy–
Stop obfuscating.
You know very well that Michelle Obama should have been a bit more circumspect on that one.
That photo is horrific.
And to respond to your point about walking around one’s home……
…….I don’t even walk to my mailbox without being cognizant of the fact that people are always around.
Although I have relaxed my methods somewhat lately, it’s still a good idea not to walk around looking like h/ll unless you live on some desert island.
Give me a break. She is in the White House!
As quaint as that idea might seem to you.
When you are a first lady or a president, every photo taken of you will be cemented in time and in stone…….forever.
posted by BobN on
It’s a pity we can’t split the universe into two paths. On one, you guys get to live in Huckabee America. In the other, the rest of us get to live in an America where the GOP elects gay-tolerant conservatives. You keep insisting they’re out there somewhere. Let them come forward and destroy “the Socialist”.
I’d rather that, apparently, fantasy America than the hell you guys would fight for. All you demonstrate is a tribal solidarity to support ANYONE who calls him- or herself a “conservative”. You know… you do get to pick and choose among your own, at least up through the primaries.
posted by Audrey the Liberal on
Mike Huckabee embodies the worst excesses of both Democrats and Republican and should be regarded with the utmost contempt by all right thinking people.
posted by Debrah on
Who’s having the most sex?
posted by Bobby on
Well BobN, my fantasy is that the liberals and progressives move to Canada while America becomes a nation of libertarians and conservatives.
posted by Jimmy on
“When you are a first lady or a president, every photo taken of you will be cemented in time and in stone…….forever.”
No obfuscation. Today’s Conservatives make a lot of hay on the backs of “real” Americans, as if they gave a damn about real Americans. I’m not sure what we are to be so bothered about when viewing a contemporary First Lady. The country thinks highly of its current First Lady, perhaps that’s because of such prepossessing behavior. I imagine many middle class working mothers have no problem with her momentary foray into reality. I think she is a perfectly confident woman, unafraid to be real.
posted by Debrah on
“I think she is a perfectly confident woman, unafraid to be real.”
**********************************************
No argument with you on that one, Jimmy.
With a posterior that size, you’ve got to be confident.
By the way, read through the fifteen items in that link above on who’s having the most sex.
Very interesting.
posted by Jimmy on
I don’t find in interesting at all. I know I’m not having it, at least with someone else in the room, so I don’t care who else is.
Do you have any female friends, Deb?
posted by Beauregard Jackson Pickett Burnside on
Notice how the “progressive” is open to splitting the country with the other side, but the “conservative” wants the other side booted out altogether.
posted by Debrah on
“Do you have any female friends, Deb?”
***********************************
What would I need them for?
LOL!
Seriously, I have a few; however, most of my friends have always been men—platonic and otherwise.
I just enjoy the company of men more.
posted by Jimmy on
Debrah – “There are so many passes that the liberal Demos and their janissaries receive in the way they are covered or not covered.:
Me – “Why do think that is, given that all MSM is completely corporate owned?”
_______________
Anybody – I’m still interested in the answer to my question.
posted by Jeremy on
ND30: “Why do you think gay and lesbian parents support people who hurt their children? Or do you think gay and lesbian parents who say that anyone who doesn’t support gay-sex marriage is hurting their children, and then turn around and support politicians who don’t, are hypocrites and liars?”
They are hypocrites and liars. I don’t dispute that. My dispute was with you using disparaging language against our people that would be better suited for a Jack Chick tract. I don’t disagree AT ALL with your assertions that LGBs’ blind loyalty to the Democrats and their knee-jerk leftism is stupid, and doesn’t serve our interests. Also, I did defend Bobby in my third comment.
posted by Bobby on
“Notice how the “progressive” is open to splitting the country with the other side, but the “conservative” wants the other side booted out altogether.”
—That’s ridiculous, it’s progressives like George Bernard Shaw that had fantasies about mass genocide, and I quote:
“In addition to socialism, Shaw was an advocate of eugenics. “Extermination must be put on a scientific basis if it is ever to be carried out humanely and apologetically as well as thoroughly,” he wrote. “[I]f we desire a certain type of civilization and culture we must exterminate the sort of people who do not fit into it.[17] In one public address, Shaw gave expression to the Nazi doctrine of “life unworthy of life” (Lebensunwertes Leben):[18]
“ You must all know half a dozen people at least who are no use in this world, who are more trouble than they are worth. Just put them there and say Sir, or Madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence?
If you can’t justify your existence, if you’re not pulling your weight, and since you won’t, if you’re not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little more, then, clearly, we cannot use the organizations of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive, because your life does not benefit us and it can’t be of very much use to yourself.[19]
”
One of Shaw’s long-term obsessions was mass murder by means of poison gas. In a 1910 lecture before the Eugenics Education Society, he said:
“ We should find ourselves committed to killing a great many people whom we now leave living… A part of eugenic politics would finally land us in an extensive use of the lethal chamber. A great many people would have to be put out of existence simply because it wastes other people’s time to look after them.”
http://www.conservapedia.com/George_Bernard_Shaw
posted by Jimmy on
It’s funny how conservatives hate communism so much they spent the last 25 years in bed with them (China) by enabling corporate profiteers to sell off this country bit by bit, job by job, tariff-free piece of crap by tariff-free piece of crap.
The only interest of conservatism is maintaining the grip of the ruling class in this country.
Well, is isn’t funny, really.
posted by Debrah on
Here’s some reading on the topic for all you geniuses.
posted by Jimmy on
“Is Chambers’s high-minded and moderate form of conservatism sustainable in an era dominated by Fox News, talk radio, and other forms of demagogic vulgarity? And if not, might American conservatism at the present moment be reverting to what it was before writers like Chambers and Buckley worked to civilize and domesticate it—namely, a politically marginal expression of cultural alienation and demotic rage?”
It’s an apt observation and a profound question for conservatism to reflect upon. I can certainly lament the dwindling of actual intellectual heft in conservatism today. It has been replaced by mouth breathers like Palin and Bachman, and side show barkers like Beck and Limbaugh.
At least Al Franken put is money where his mouth is and became a senator, thereby assuming accountability for his beliefs, allowing them to withstand the test of the voting booth.
posted by Debrah on
Jimmy–
You’ve raised some intriguing issues.
But you really must include the ever-blooming morons on the Left as well.
When you have some free time, read these two articles. They’re a bit lengthy, but worth the time.
David Horowitz—whom I had never really followed very much—has written a brilliantly layered piece on Christopher Hitchens. It contains lots of information I had not previously known as well as some intricate history on various aspects of the culture wars.
I can identify with Hitchens in many ways because he started out quite Liberal, but has become sensitive to many aspects of conservatism as well.
Simply because he’s so brilliant.
Horowitz completed this just before it was announced that Hitchens had been diagnosed with esophageal cancer. “Hitch” is still going about the business of writing—for Vanity Fair as well as for Slate, to name a few—but such a diagnosis seems dire……for when esophageal cancer is detected its progression is often complete.
But I hope against hope that he is able to beat it.
Comparing the writing brilliance of WFB, Hitchens isn’t that far behind.
Second Thoughts
Second Thoughts, Part 2
posted by Jorge on
You’re all really just Dr Dobson or that guy from the “Family” “Research” Council using a nom de guerre, right?
Hah, you wish! Unfortunately, we’re three different right of center gay voters. Eat dirt and like it.
I’d rather that, apparently, fantasy America than the hell you guys would fight for. All you demonstrate is a tribal solidarity to support ANYONE who calls him- or herself a “conservative”. You know… you do get to pick and choose among your own, at least up through the primaries.
You know, the reason I became a Republican was to vote for my old mayor Rudy Giuliani in 2008.
…Rrrrright.
But don’t feel sad for me. There were other times I considered changing my registration and rejected. I knew what I was doing.
posted by Jorge on
I can certainly lament the dwindling of actual intellectual heft in conservatism today. It has been replaced by mouth breathers like Palin and Bachman, and side show barkers like Beck and Limbaugh.
Obviously I don’t agree with that characterization.
I think Sarah Palin says it best: this country wants to go back to common-sense values. I mean we have this insane racial thing kicking about these past two weeks because an organization populated and endorsed by race-baiters started pointing fingers, and the rest of the country was like, WTF? I’ll hold back what I’m really thinking, but may I suggest that the more obvious it is that the other side is nuts and harming the country, the less “intellectualism” and the more raw power is needed to prevail against them.
posted by Jimmy on
Jorge –
Why would you withhold what you’re really thinking? Do you imagine you are doing someone a favor? I’m happy to entertain the notion that that the left has its bad actors and clowns, too. But, my view as to what has been hurting the country is decidedly different from yours.
posted by Jimmy on
Debrah-
I agree with your comments on Hitchens. I was saddened to hear of his cancer a while back. I think I heard it on NPR. He’s one of those people with which I’d love to bar hop. Me as the Mad Dog, and he the Englishman.
I’ll read the links tomorrow.
posted by Jorge on
Why would you withhold what you’re really thinking? Do you imagine you are doing someone a favor?
I suppose I have an okay impression of you, but I prefer to flirt with unavailable straight men.
I don’t feel like starting a fight for no good reason. I think that’ll take me somewhere I don’t like to be all the time. I don’t like being asked that.
I’m happy to entertain the notion that that the left has its bad actors and clowns, too. But, my view as to what has been hurting the country is decidedly different from yours.
Yes, I was going through a depressing train of thought as I wrote that. Still, there comes a time to take a stand.
posted by Jimmy on
“I don’t feel like starting a fight for no good reason. I think that’ll take me somewhere I don’t like to be all the time. I don’t like being asked that.”
Another enigmatic thread of yours leaving me nonplussed.
posted by Jorge on
You asked. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. That is, my old boss informed us, a principle of chemistry. “Physics!”
posted by Audrey the Liberal on
Bobby, speaking as one libertarian to another I have to ask: Why do you think that conservatives are in any way a significant improvement over progressives?
posted by Bobby on
“Bobby, speaking as one libertarian to another I have to ask: Why do you think that conservatives are in any way a significant improvement over progressives?”
—Because you can negotiate with a conservative. With progressives there is no negotiations, remember when union organizer Andy Stern threatened the bankers by saying “we know where you live”? Progressives are dangerous, if you study their history you’ll see that in the early 1900 they were all supporters of eugenics. The woman who founded Planned Parenthood was a notorious racist, Woodrow Wilson himself re-segregated the military.
Modern progressives are no different, their conduct against the Duke Lacrosse players, pro-Israel students and speakers, conservatives, etc, shows that progressives have violent tendencies and if they don’t get their hands dirty, they’re willing to let somebody else do the job.
Read this article about progressives in the media from libertarian Magazine reason.
http://reason.com/archives/2010/07/23/hollywood-babylon-for-ugly-peo
Read this from the same magazine.
http://reason.com/blog/2010/04/19/progressive-history-101-minus
posted by Jimmy on
“Progressives are dangerous, if you study their history you’ll see that in the early 1900 they were all supporters of eugenics”
We don’t any longer. Movements change. All sorts of people subscribed to nutty ideas, but once you know better you do better. Southern, conservative white folks don’t lynch black men for looking at white women anymore.
See?
posted by Bobby on
“We don’t any longer. Movements change. All sorts of people subscribed to nutty ideas, but once you know better you do better. Southern, conservative white folks don’t lynch black men for looking at white women anymore.
See?”
—Have progressives really changed? Maybe they don’t hate blacks anymore, but they hate smokers, fat people, bankers, rich people (except for rich liberals), rednecks or anyone who doesn’t think like they do, etc.
Progressives are so Orwellian, they talk about love yet practice hate, they talk about responsibility yet spend money like a drunk in a casino, they demand everyone be tolerant yet they want to charge Glenn Beck with sedition.
It’s so funny how they would remove the ten commandments from a courtroom yet don’t mind using religion to advance their pro-illegal alien “immigration” bill as Pelosi does here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYoDymllAwc
posted by Jimmy on
Orwellian? What was W, Bobby? He gave us The Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security, illegal wiretaps, torture, violation after violation of the US Constitution, and imperial presidency, etc.
What color is the grass in Bizarro Universe?
posted by Bobby on
“Orwellian? What was W, Bobby? He gave us The Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security, illegal wiretaps, torture, violation after violation of the US Constitution, and imperial presidency, etc. ”
—At least Bush was fighting terrorism. Obama gets elected and suddenly the war on terror becomes the overseas contingency operation, Islamic Jihad isn’t condemned or even called that, American citizens in foreign lands are bombed just under the suspicion of being terrorists, etc, etc, etc.
This is a manchild in the White House, I can’t believe he tells people not to waste a bunch of money in Las Vegas yet is going yet again to Martha’s Vineyard. I love it how he says he’s working tirelessly for this and that yet finds plenty of time to party. Unemployment is nearly 10%, people are either unemployed, underemployed, working for less money, tightening their belts, yet what does the president do? He vacations and parties like Paris Hilton.
Oh, and don’t get me started on the financial bill. Remember when he promised to transform America? Well, he’s transforming us into Cuba, Venezuela and the former USSR. Seriously, I can only hope the republicans are able to fix all the damage he’s creating after Obama loses reelection in 2012. Seriously, I hope the next time around Americans aren’t so easily duped by the black version of John Edwards. The only thing Obama’s missing is a mistress.
By the way, Jimmy, how come you always defend Obama by mentioning what Bush did wrong rather than by saying what Obama does right? Me and the voters are getting sick of the “if you think I’m bad, look at George W. Bush” They did not vote for GWB, they voted for Obama, an they expect this manchild to do a good job without blaiming all his mistakes on Bush.
posted by Debrah on
Coverage was shaped on the 2008 Obama campaign
Beware the lame duck……..
……..“Barack Obama’s considerable political capital, earned on Election Day 2008, is spent.”
And perhaps most odious:
Rauf’s Dawa from the World Trade Center Rubble
“Feisal Abdul Rauf is the imam behind the ‘Cordoba Initiative’ that is spearheading plans to build a $100 million Islamic center at Ground Zero, the site where nearly 3,000 Americans were killed by jihadists on 9/11.”
posted by Jorge on
Orwellian? What was W, Bobby? He gave us The Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security, illegal wiretaps, torture, violation after violation of the US Constitution, and imperial presidency, etc.
Heyeaaaaah!
You’re conflating Bush with Ashcroft. Years from now the country will conflate Obama with Holder.
posted by Jimmy on
Bobby,
I’ve been on record with my annoyance with President Obama. His backtracking on the agenda he was elected on drives progressive Dems crazy. He has joined the ranks of the Clintonian triangulators, though he’s not savvy enough to pull it off successfully. This latest incident of once more reactively worrying about what some wing-nut wacko thinks of him is just one more brick in the wall he is building between himself and his supporters. I’m not going to vote for him again if he keeps it up.
Having said that, we had eight years of Shrub, and we all know what shape the country was in before Jan. 19, 2009. There was never a threat of vetoing a spending bill, all deficit growing, until the Democrats took over Congress. Why do you never recognize this? King George and his minions partied on Commie money, and suddenly, they bother to notice that future generations are strapped to the debt he created because His Imperial Majesty didn’t want to pay the band.
W racked up more vacation time than any other. I never knocked him for that because the president is the president 24/7, regardless of where he stands, golfs, or clears brush.
Las Vegas can be swallowed up by the earth, for all I care. Talk about plastic people, yuck.
posted by Jimmy on
“You’re conflating Bush with Ashcroft.”
They talked it over after Bible study, I’m sure.
posted by Bobby on
“I’ve been on record with my annoyance with President Obama. His backtracking on the agenda he was elected on drives progressive Dems crazy. He has joined the ranks of the Clintonian triangulators, though he’s not savvy enough to pull it off successfully.”
—Well, I have good news for progressives democrats. Your president has not really backtracked, if you read Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals you’ll see that nudging people towards radical policies is the way you change things in government. It’s the difference between raising the tobacco tax by $1 vs. $10, by doing things slowly you’ll take away much of the shock. It’s how Hugo Chavez does things in Venezuela.
“This latest incident of once more reactively worrying about what some wing-nut wacko thinks of him is just one more brick in the wall he is building between himself and his supporters. I’m not going to vote for him again if he keeps it up.”
—You mean the Shirley Sherrod thing? Well, I would not be surprised if he fired her only to get the liberal media to blame Fox News. Obama is that kind of politician.
“Having said that, we had eight years of Shrub, and we all know what shape the country was in before Jan. 19, 2009. There was never a threat of vetoing a spending bill, all deficit growing, until the Democrats took over Congress. Why do you never recognize this? King George and his minions partied on Commie money, and suddenly, they bother to notice that future generations are strapped to the debt he created because His Imperial Majesty didn’t want to pay the band.”
—King George lowered income taxes by 5% in all tax brackets, he also lowered dividend taxes by half, which created a stock market boom that lasted 6 years of his administration. Then we had a real estate market boom because interest rates were so low. With Obama we’ve had two stimulus packages yet most of that money has been wasted and none of it has been used to build anything. With Obama we have a president that wants to tell bankers how much to pay their employees, oil companies where they can drill, and the government takeover of GM. Does this seem like a democracy to you? If GWB had taken over GM people would be crying murder, but because Obama does it, the liberal media stays quiet.
“W racked up more vacation time than any other. I never knocked him for that because the president is the president 24/7, regardless of where he stands, golfs, or clears brush.”
—Don’t worry, Obama’s quickly catching up to him.
“Las Vegas can be swallowed up by the earth, for all I care. Talk about plastic people, yuck.”
—Thanks for the example of how progressives see the world. I don’t think I’ve ever heard Rush Limbaugh say that San Francisco should be nuked, yet you, Mr. Progressive, have no appreciation for Las Vegas whatsoever. Plastic people? What bullshit, Las Vegas has excellent suburbs, museums, art galleries, amazing restaurants, amazing shows, incredible nature, plus no income tax.
Las Vegas is also the kingdom of originality, where else in the world will you find a hotel shaped like a pyramid next to one that looks like a castle, one inspired by the arab world, another by pirates, another by Venice, etc, etc, etc.
Even the museums are off the wall, where else in the world will you find an Atomic Museum?
http://www.atomictestingmuseum.org/index.html
Honestly, between Las Vegas and San Francisco, I’d rather go to Vegas. At least in Las Vegas I can buy a Coke at city hall and not have the mayor scream at me for violating his food police sensibilities.
posted by BobN on
Las Vegas is also the kingdom of unoriginality, where else in the world will you find cheap copies of other places?
Seriously, Las Vegas is fine for what it is and a heck of a lot better than it was during its flirtation with “family entertainment”.
posted by Bobby on
“Las Vegas is also the kingdom of unoriginality, where else in the world will you find cheap copies of other places?”
—Epcot Center. But lets be realistic, most Americans can’t afford to travel to Egypt, France, Venice, Japan, Fiji and plenty of other great places. Yet Vegas is totally affordable, even if you’re dirt poor you can stay at Circus Circus for $30 a night, eat a buffets ranging from $6 to $50 (The Bellagio buffet includes lobster and caviar), stand in line to see all kinds of shows, usually for much less than what you’d pay in Broadway. That’s not counting all the free attractions each hotel has, like the volcano at The Mirage, the pirate fight at Treasure Island, the Grand Canal at The Venetian, etc, etc, etc. And if you get bored of Vegas, you can drive to Hoover Dam or even see amazing things at death valley.
“Seriously, Las Vegas is fine for what it is and a heck of a lot better than it was during its flirtation with “family entertainment”.”
—I agree, it has something for everyone. There’s event adult pool parties like Rehab and shows with sexy men like Thunder from Down Under.
My favorite thing about Las Vegas is how comfortable I feel in the crowds, and I’m not the type of person who usually likes crowds, but in Vegas there is a sort of energy that puts you in a good mood, it’s hard to explain, you have to feel it to believe it.
posted by bls on
God, this place never changes….
posted by Lori Heine on
“They did not vote for GWB, they voted for Obama, an they expect this manchild to do a good job without blaiming all his mistakes on Bush.”
Exactly. I voted for Obama both in the Democratic primary and in the general election. But I certainly never imagined that nearly two years into his term, he’d STILL be blaming everything on Bush.
Time for him to put the long pants on and start acting like a grown man.
As for the next presidential election, I won’t be fooled again.
posted by Jorge on
The alternatives aren’t looking to be very easy to stomach, though: Romney, Gingrich, Huckabee, Palin, maybe Jindall. Possibly Hillary, now there’s an alternative.
posted by Debrah on
You’ll never believe what this White House is missing from Dowd.
Yada, yada, yada.
Maureen goes overboard on this one just the way most grovelers in the media do.
Sherrod is no Mother Teresa as has been ridiculously depicted to overcompensate for the unfortunate events.
No real suffering was endured for within 24 hours she was being showered with 24/7 nationally-nauseating apologies, a personal ring from the Prez, and was offered a much better job.
She was incorrectly called a “racist” when she was actually lamenting her past behavior on the video…..detailing events when she actually was a racist.
Consequently, she was calling for reconciliation.
This episode was analogous to an Alcoholics Anonymous member coming clean and revealing change as well as urging others to do better.
It’s not as if Sherrod had never been a racist as so many of the media are trying to pretend.
Although, she should be applauded for her change of heart; however, all this goo-goo, ga-ga over her sainthood has pretty much packed the magnet.
Maureen does make great points about the Obama administration’s ineptitude.
posted by Debrah on
Jonathan Rauch on Liberal Science and the UIUC Case
Perhaps BobN will finally understand that ALL people have their points-of-view and that NO ONE is required to invent a parallel reality just to make others comfortable inside their fantasies.
Howell is far too invested in religion; however, his detractors who have tried to ruin him and take away his job for having a different belief system are the ones who are actually trying to force their way of life onto others.
So odious beyond mention.
Little gay men pulling a hissy fit because this guy dares to state the obvious.
Even gay “scholars” who put on a show of defending Howell’s rights come across as condescending.
Ha!
IMO, it’s difficult to put on a believable air of condescension when you actually do take on the role of a hetero female inside your sexual relationships.
These mini-tyrants should cop to reality and cease trying to harm others. What cowards they are by going after someone inside such an insular environment as a university campus where they know they will have ample props and no one will speak out.
FIRE has asked for a response by July 30.
posted by Jimmy on
Debrah,
From a professional standpoint, Ms. Sherrod is owed a setting straight of her record, since she was defamed and grossly misrepresented, and a public apology from the inept White House, which once again feels the need to elevate low-lifes like Breitbart, a sign of a lack of confidence. Where it done to you, you would expect no less. MSM needs to give as much time to getting it right as they took in exploiting her defamation. MSM continues its massive failure to fulfill its role as the Fourth Estate.
The passing of Daniel Schorr could not be more poignant.
The same goes for ACORN; it deserves an apology.
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/014953.php
posted by Jimmy on
“Howell is far too invested in religion; however, his detractors who have tried to ruin him and take away his job for having a different belief system are the ones who are actually trying to force their way of life onto others.”
If the Newman Center was paying his salary, let them give him a job. To send an e-mail that says, in effect, “You better agree with me, or else,” cannot and should not be construed as academic freedom; in fact, it is a violation of it.
posted by Bobby on
ACORN is a corrupt organization, the video proves that. Don’t believe the lie that they called the police after the actors told them about setting up a brothel and importing children from Nicaragua. As for Breitbar, don’t hate him just because he finds videos that incriminate progressive. Unlike the left, Breitbar doesn’t simply accuse people of being hateful, he provides the proof.
“The alternatives aren’t looking to be very easy to stomach, though: Romney, Gingrich, Huckabee, Palin, maybe Jindall. Possibly Hillary, now there’s an alternative.”
—Well, Hillary would be better than Obama, but I think we need to go back to voting for ideology and ideas than for race or gender.
By the way, here’s a video of MSNBC’s Ed Schultz telling the crowd that he worked his ass for Obama and he resents his administration for paying more attention for Fox than to him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJbK33f5jvk&feature=player_embedded
posted by Jimmy on
A little thing called ‘the law’ says you are wrong with regard to ACORN, Bobby. We are left with only your prejudice.
posted by Debrah on
Jimmy–
Regarding Sherrod, I became so sick of that repetitive, over-extended, and oily parade put on by the media that I had to stop watching cable until it leveled.
” To send an e-mail that says, in effect, ‘You better agree with me, or else,’ cannot and should not be construed as academic freedom; in fact, it is a violation of it.”
*************************************************
What fresh hell is this?
Are you saying that Howell wrote such an email?
Where is it?
posted by Jimmy on
Debrah-
Wasn’t Howell’s e-mail to his students essentially ‘you must accept my definition of natural law, or else you grade will not be to your liking’? That’s the way I read it?
posted by Jimmy on
Last sentence is not a question, obviously.
posted by Debrah on
Jimmy–
This is Howell’s email.
A bit “white-bread” and provincial, perhaps; however, any reader who is honest and who also has an IQ above two digits has to admit that this email contains the reality of the human condition.
Not the procrustean-ized version designed to make gay men feel comfortable in their denial.
It also irritates them because it’s another bit of push-back on SSM.
There are some professors—gay, no doubt—who put on a facade of defending his rights, but questioned the intellectual quality of his effulgences on this topic.
Trying feebly to draw comparisons to the race-hustlers and gender-baiters inside the academy.
Ha!
I see no proof that Howell is trying to push his personal beliefs on students.
But I do see the results from outstretched fingers over a multitude of keyboards from gays in the academy who will do all they can to discredit him…….
…….as well as condescend to him in the failed attempt to sweep the truth inside this email under their desperate, salivating rugs.
posted by Jimmy on
Ok. so long as we establish that your version of “reality” with regard to the complexities of the “human condition” is just that – your version.
posted by Debrah on
Jimmy–
I suspect that this debate will go on long after you and I are off in the ozone………embarking upon another fascinating life………which is my version of reincarnation.
I’ll lighten things up a bit with a very simple analogy.
Since about the age of 18 I’ve had a penchant for Louis Vuitton bags. Not those huge LV bags framed with that creepy tan-colored leather on each corner that many women carry around like overnight gear, but the sleek, rectangular shoulder bag with no gaudy additions.
I’m not a big fan of labels, but the Louis Vuitton brand uses only simple, understated initials. It has a centuries-old history of excellent quality.
There’s something that is chameleon-like about their bags that seem to blend in with any color you’re wearing.
And they last forever……which makes for a good investment.
Now….as with all sought-after merchandise there are counterfeits sold.
There are even grand attempts to sweetin’ things by stamping the inside of the counterfeit bags with “Louis Vuitton–Paris, France” just like the real ones.
But the very quality of those faux bags—even as much effort is put into making them seem so comparable—is inferior. They will not hold up and will eventually fall apart simply because their very structure was not designed to be a Louis Vuitton.
But for a while, those who choose the procrustean-ized, faux version can certainly pretend.
And they probably love those bags as much as the people who actually own the real ones love their bags!
Gross analogy, you say?
That’s just how insane I think it is for a man to allow his elimination canal to be a substitute for a vagina.
I’m not concerned with “moral” or “religious” impulses.
Just the REALITY.
OK?
And it makes me sick that students have to be afraid to voice their true feelings and opinions about something so fundamental.
No one wishes to tell anyone not to engage in whatever sexual expression they want.
As I’ve said many times, I can discuss this issue dispassionately on theoretical terms all day long, but when you get down to the actual “reality”, I will not be forced to characterize things any differently than the way they are.
Forcing others not to express their true feelings on the realities of the human body—(and respective gender limitations)—will not be tolerated.
Is Throbert the only one who can understand this issue on its objective terms?
posted by Jimmy on
An expression of true feelings is just that, feelings. They do not resemble facts. Mr. Howell expects his “feelings” to be taken for fact by his students, regardless of whether they are able to argue their posits soundly by logical processes. He is certain his “feelings” are not inaccurate, or wrong even. As they pertain to him, he is free to feel whatever he wishes.
Of course, using logical argument in a course about something so irrational as Catholic catechism is probably a non-starter; but nevertheless, academic freedom is a two-way street.
posted by Jorge on
From a professional standpoint, Ms. Sherrod is owed a setting straight of her record, since she was defamed and grossly misrepresented, and a public apology from the inept White House…
This is not a story I would use to attack the White House or the mainstream media, which some have, saying it is part of a pattern.
It was said later on the O’Reilly Factor that if you missed Monday’s show, you missed what was going on. In other words, FNC is very powerful. I think that on Monday O’Reilly’s guests were saying on another story that even the MSN not picking up a lot of FNC’s stories, you better believe the people in the White House pay attention to Fox.
I’d be interested to know your thoughts on that.
posted by Jimmy on
“I’d be interested to know your thoughts on that.”
I think it would be foolish on the part of the White House not to pay attention to the most popular outlet of misinformation there is. What is disturbing is the way in which Obama and his staff deal with Fox. The network is open about its hostility and it should be treated like an unruly dog, with a swat on the nose.
To not do due diligence and simply react to what was reported was amateur and deserving of criticism.
posted by Jorge on
Misinformation, bah. We have a Fox News parrot here and you haven’t caught him in a lie yet. I also think the Obama administration tried swatting them already by encouraging other media outlets to ignore their stories. The other media does ignore their stories.
Your point about not ignoring a powerful network is well-taken.
posted by BobN on
A bit “white-bread” and provincial, perhaps; however, any reader who is honest and who also has an IQ above two digits has to admit that this email contains the reality of the human condition.
And what of the canine condition? Are they natural receptacles, as well?
posted by Jimmy on
“Misinformation, bah.”
This very scenario is case in point.
“We have a Fox News parrot here and you haven’t caught him in a lie yet.”
When flies circle a pile of sh*t, no one bothers saying, “Hey, look at the flies.”
Look at Faux’s coverage of the gulf oil spill, if you can see past the hoard of flies.
http://mediamatters.org/research/201006240025
posted by Throbert McGee on
I will merely observe that no dog likes having its temperature taken, and leave it at that.
posted by Jorge on
Sorry, but I don’t like to look at links when people don’t tell me what their point or argument is and they just say “look”. It tends to lead to me and the other person talking past each other.
Well, okay, the real reason is I don’t take MediaMatters seriously. That time a couple of days ago when I pulled up their coverage of Tea Party racism was a once a year thing, and it did nothing to improve my opinion of the website.
I don’t have quite the number on MM that other people do, but every time I go on that site what I find is they cite events without explaining what their point is, or they make points and cite articles that say something completely different. Fine, I’ll look at the link. So they cite Fox News myths, eh?
BP was victim of a “shakedown.” On at least 10 occasions, Fox figures criticized BP’s escrow account as an Obama “shakedown” or “slush fund.”
This is true, you idiot!
For example, on the June 21 edition of Fox News’ America’s Newsroom, contributor Andrea Tantaros stated…
Contributer? They’re saying FNC calls it shakedown and they cite a contributer. WTF, Fox isn’t allowed to people on the show who have opinions?
Yeah, Jimmy, I don’t want to be rude, but you can take Media Matters and shove it up your ass.
posted by Jorge on
…Fox isn’t allowed to people on the show who have opinions?
>>Fox isn’t allowed to *have* people on the show…
posted by Jimmy on
“This is true, you idiot!”
Explain how this is true, Prick (and I meant to be rude).
posted by Jorge on
No.
posted by Debrah on
Jimmy and all–
This is but one more—amid a multitude of incessant cases that abound—example of what students are put through these days on university campuses.
This is a horrific violation and “scholars” who purport to stand for fairness will not be seen or heard very often, as we have seen over and over again.
That’s what is so unconscionable.
And no matter how you come down on the issue, this coercion and violation must stop.
As I have illuminated before, when many gay “activists” try to pretend that those in their teens and twenties look at the issue differently…….
…….one can see very clearly that many of those students are simply afraid to speak out.
And gay “activists” and “scholars” seem to love it.
If this trend continues, they have no idea the brand of push-back that is in store for them.
posted by Bobby on
Jimmy, Media Matters is funded by George Soros, a leftwing billionare who supports all kinds of progressive causes. In fact, I’ve yet to find an article in media matters complaining about a liberal. They are so obviously biased, and they have been caught in lies before.
By the way, Obama’s going on the view. I guess our comrade in chief is scared of the tough questioning of Bill O’reilly, or the polite yet important questions from Brett Baier.
If Obama and his fellow travelers want to ignore Fox they do it at their own peril. As Rush Limbaugh said, the mainstream media is dead, they are nothing but a propaganda machine for Obama and the democratic party. Most Americans are too smart to fall for propaganda, which is why they turn to Fox.
By the way, did you see the Schultz video I posted? The man is so desperate for ratings he is demanding that Obama go on his show. After all, MSNBC and Ed have worked their ass for Obama, so I guess they expect a little payback. According to them, Obama should appear on TV shows with microscopic ratings just because they work their asses for him. Hmmm, maybe Barry will do that eventually.
posted by Jimmy on
Debrah –
Is Ms. Keeton entitled to receive a graduate degree from a program she is at odds with? The accepted science in the mental health world is that homosexuality is not a psychological disorder. Should a grad student in biology assert that the earth is 6,000 years old and evolutionary biology is invalid, I would have reservations about said student’s future in that program being rosy.
The university must uphold the integrity of the degree it confers, and it may be that Ms. Keeton is at the wrong school. She should try Bob Jones or Liberty, and I suspect she knew this from the start. How the case progresses will be interesting.
posted by Jimmy on
“Jimmy, Media Matters is funded by George Soros…”
It could be funded by the Devil himself (likely you opinion of Soros) for all I care….facts is facts. If Media Matters, founded by David Brock, whose book “Blinded by the Right” is a fun read, chooses to hold Fox’s feet to the fire, it’s free to do so. For every Soros, the is are five Scaifes, so…yeah – whatever.
And don’t even get me started on Rev. Sun Myung Moon!
posted by Debrah on
Jimmy–
I have no idea why some students choose the schools they choose; however, in the interest of so-called academic freedom, they shouldn’t be forced to tout views they do not personally believe in.
Most people make allowances for religious beliefs…..or whatever.
I’m mainly concerned with the force involved on a university campus regarding such a case.
Yes, it’s an interesting one.
“By the way, did you see the Schultz video I posted? The man is so desperate for ratings he is demanding that Obama go on his show. After all, MSNBC and Ed have worked their ass for Obama, so I guess they expect a little payback.”
************************************************
That is the funniest thing I’ve seen in a long time.
As Krauthammer said, Obama perhaps doesn’t come on the show because no one watches it.
LOL!
LOL!
posted by Debrah on
Obama’s been holding out.
Saving it up for the women of The View.
Ed Shultz must be going nuts!
posted by BobN on
Academic freedom for students? For students seeking a license to treat other people?
I know “academic freedom” is a catchy talking phrase, but seriously, Debrah.
“I understand the need to reflect client’s goals and to allow them to work toward their own solutions, and I know I can do that… (but) I can’t alter my biblical beliefs, and I will not affirm the morality of those behaviors in a counseling situation.” She says she was told by two assistant professors that “it was a life and death matter to not affirm a client’s sexual decision, and that failure to do so has led and could lead to suicides by clients who are not affirmed in their sexual preferences.”
The two assistant professors are correct. A bad therapist can do enormous damage.
posted by Debrah on
From Media-ite……
Although it would be convenient to say Fox News’ relentless coverage of this internet video led to Shirley Sherrod’s unfair ouster, it’s just not true.
posted by Debrah on
BobN–
Countless people have careers that require them to be in uncomfortable situations and interact with those whose beliefs about a lot of things do not align with theirs.
Making that graduate student’s case such a huge issue is a deliberate move to push an agenda.
It’s like saying you wouldn’t invite someone to a dinner party because their views on aspects of the culture wars don’t align with yours.
I have dealings with people all the time whose views are different from my own.
One of the best dentists I’ve ever had is a Turk who grew up in Egypt and is most certainly a Muslim. He’s a great person and a great dentist.
If we were to discuss Middle East issues, I wouldn’t ask the Dental Association to take his license because of his personal beliefs.
There is far too much coddling…..especially on university campuses.
Even professors who put on a show of being fair on most other issues come across as less so when you read what they have to say about Howell and other cases.
It’s similar to the insidious behavior of the Duke Gang of 88 during the Lacrosse Hoax. Gay professors and their supporters seem to think there is a “special aura” around the gay agenda.
Good luck with that.
Lastly, anyone who would commit suicide because someone out there doesn’t like gays most certainly has a multitude of problems to begin with.
That’s always a convenient explanation which the “activists” will exploit ad nauseum.
Every young person has problems galore.
posted by Jimmy on
Technically you are right, Debrah, propagandist Andrew Breitbart is ultimately responsible for the defamation of Sharrod. The wholly corporate owned MSM’s following of Fox’s suit simply makes them complicit, and the White House’s reactionary behavior was foolish.
posted by Bobby on
“It could be funded by the Devil himself (likely you opinion of Soros) for all I care….facts is facts.”
—Lies aren’t facts, Jimmy. Breitbart uses video evidence against the people he attacks. Media Matters simply attacks the messenger. Breitbart did not defame anyone, he never called Sherrod a racist, her own words did in the video and after the exposure of the video did.
“If Media Matters, founded by David Brock, whose book “Blinded by the Right” is a fun read, chooses to hold Fox’s feet to the fire, it’s free to do so. For every Soros, the is are five Scaifes, so…yeah – whatever.”
—David Brock was never blinded by the right, he’s an asshole opportunists who left the right after seeing how much money he would make by changing sides.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23079
As for the funding of media matters:
”
Media Matters has not always been forthcoming about its high-profile backers. In particular, the group has long labored to obscure any financial ties to George Soros. But in March 2003, the Cybercast News Service (CNS) detailed the copious links between Media Matters and several Soros “affiliates”—among them MoveOn.org, the Center for American Progress, and Peter Lewis. Confronted with this story, a spokesman for the organization explained that “Media Matters for America has never received funding directly from George Soros” (emphasis added), a transparent evasion. ”
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7150
See? They receive funding inderectly. Soros is like a spider, he has a web of organizations around him, he funds them and then they fund Media Matters, moveon.org, and other dangerous progressive organizations.
“And don’t even get me started on Rev. Sun Myung Moon!”
—I don’t care who owns the Washington Times, I only care how well they do their job, and frankly, they’re a lot better than the Washington Post which admitted bias in favor of Obama.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/11/08/washington-post-admits-bias-towards-obama
posted by jimmy on
One also has to appreciate the fact that the dialogue on IGF is generally much more tasteful than that which can be found on Mediaite.
posted by Jimmy on
You last post is why I don’t take you seriously, Bobby.
posted by Jimmy on
The Wikileaks story get juicier by the moment.
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/wikileaks-documents-show-isi-pakistan-intelligence-helped-afghanistan/story?id=11250487
posted by BobN on
Countless people have careers that require them to be in uncomfortable situations and interact with those whose beliefs about a lot of things do not align with theirs.
Yeah, and they don’t go around seeking special exemptions for their religious beliefs like Ms. Keaton.
Making that graduate student’s case such a huge issue is a deliberate move to push an agenda.
This must be in reference to the Alliance Defense Fund and — coming I’m sure — FIRE. [Wouldn’t it be refreshing if, for a change, either of these groups took on a liberal client?]
One of the best dentists I’ve ever had is a Turk who grew up in Egypt and is most certainly a Muslim.
I suspect he was a very nice, reasonable man, but if had been a religious fanatic, what would you have done to accommodate him? Wear a burqa? Schedule your appointments to avoid putting him in contact with an “unclean” female?
If we were to discuss Middle East issues, I wouldn’t ask the Dental Association to take his license because of his personal beliefs.
Middle East issues aren’t part of his job. Counseling people involves talking about their personal lives.
You’re making much less sense than usual, Debrah. Long weekend?
posted by Debrah on
BobN–
()))))))) YAWN (((((((()
Here’s the Fire website.
Knock yourself out and go back through the archives. They do defend all groups across the ideological spectrum.
But I am moved to ask about your weekend.
Did you hit your head on something while dancing the night away?
The academy is awash in totally LIBERAL pedagogy. So much so that not even the most dyed-in-the wool loony Leftist would deny that fact.
Consequently, when a biased majority group violates the principles of teaching and uses their positions for their own personal agendas, you are, necessarily, going to see more cases from people at FIRE against those who seek to violate the rights of others.
Religion is no different than any other aspect of life.
It’s a factor for some……and not for others.
Kind of like homosexual tendencies.
LOL!
posted by BobN on
Knock yourself out and go back through the archives.
You couldn’t find one either, could you?
FIRE seems to me to be a more principled outfit than ADF. Still, they sure do push the strong-arm approach of threatening legal action in defense of pretty bad “scholarship”.
posted by Bobby on
“You last post is why I don’t take you seriously, Bobby.”
—You don’t take me seriously because you’re a true believer, convincing you would be like convincing Osama Bin Ladden that maybe he should try a BBQ pork sandwich and wash it down with a glass of Jack Daniels.
Face it, you’re a progressive, you come here because you enjoy people disagreeing with you which gives you a chance to “prove” them wrong in your mind, that’s something you’d never experience at the Huffington Post.
Maybe you should write a book, call it “Blinded by the Left.”
posted by Throbert McGee on
Jimmy, I’m trying to reconcile your position here with what you said about Prof. Howell in that other case:
The standard you are applying appears to be that if Jimmy personally approves of an academic program’s content, students have an obligation to agree with the content if they want to pass the class; but if Jimmy personally dislikes the content, either the professor shouldn’t present the content in the first place, or the students should be “free” to not learn the content.
posted by Jimmy on
My dear Throbert, my ego is not nearly so needy that I should choose to make everything about me. While I can hold a note, and can most certainly be heard in tha back of the room, I am no Diva.
As it happens, neither Mr. Howell nor Ms. Keeton call the shots at their respective institutions, and as it is with the real world, life ain’t fair. This much is true, neither are forced to be there. What I approve of, or not, is immaterial. If Ms.Keeton’s advisors don’t feel she has it, who am I to argue?
posted by Jorge on
They are so obviously biased, and they have been caught in lies before…. Most Americans are too smart to fall for propaganda, which is why they turn to Fox.
Years ago, Media Matters got its clock cleaned (by Fox) for this reason, driving them underground. Rathergate and other scandals followed. Now, a combination of a powerful watchful eye and continued incompetence leads to mainstream media backtracking with increasing frequency.
Look, there’s no hope convincing people who hang onto a partisan’s every word to switch sides. Most people are not like that. Most people filter out trash and go to where there is the least trash.
posted by Jorge on
My dear Throbert, my ego is not nearly so needy that I should choose to make everything about me. While I can hold a note, and can most certainly be heard in tha back of the room, I am no Diva.
As it happens, neither Mr. Howell nor Ms. Keeton call the shots at their respective institutions, and as it is with the real world, life ain’t fair. This much is true, neither are forced to be there. What I approve of, or not, is immaterial. If Ms.Keeton’s advisors don’t feel she has it, who am I to argue?
The false prophecy of one whose only claim to humility comes from a judgment by default.
posted by Debrah on
Jimmy and Bobby–
This one is for you.
The guy is hilarious.
Listen to the whole thing.
Some of his other video commentary is hilarious as well.
I think Throbert could do something like this on YouTube if he wanted.
posted by Jimmy on
I wonder about people like this skinhead. How many black people do they know? Would they go out to dinner with black people? Have they worked along side blacks?
I can say with absolute honesty that I have never experienced anything close to what he is talking about. There would have been countless opportunities, goodness knows. I’ve never been slighted, never lost out, never turned away due to my whiteness. I don’t have a chip on my shoulder, always expecting to be a victim of reverse racism.
So, one more aggrieved white guy on the web is no novelty.
posted by Bobby on
“I wonder about people like this skinhead.”
—Excuse me? I shave my head do to hair loss and I’ve yet to burn a church, a cross, attend a klan rally or beat up a black person with a baseball bat. The only skinhead thing about that guy is his head.
By the way, Jimmy, perhaps you’re just another self-hating white man. Maybe your ancestors owned slaves and you feel guilty about it and are trying to make up for it by always agreeing with the NAACP and any black with an ax to grind. Maybe you’re oblivious to racism of blacks against whites, after all, Eminem used to get beat up by blacks when he started rapping, he knows what it’s like to be white and live in a ghetto.
Or why not talk about how successful black people are often accused of acting white? Even Obama was accused of acting white before becoming president, of course, I think the problem with him is that he’s acting red, LOL.
By the way, I interviewed at an African American Agency years ago, they didn’t know my race from speaking on the phone, but they liked my work so they spent good money flying me over to Atlanta. They said they would call on Monday yet they never did. So, did I not get the job because I’m white? I don’t know, what I do know is most companies don’t fly copywriters unless they really like their work.
So I think reverse racism does exist, after all, reverse racism is rarely condemned just like fat bias or sizism is often ignored by the media. However, rather than play the race card I would simply support getting rid of the EEOC and affirmative action and letting companies hire whoever they want.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
I find it interesting that gay-sex liberals are hyperventilating over how “harmful” a counselor who disagrees with them could be, but say nothing about a gay psychiatrist, fully supported and endorsed by the Association of Gay and Lesbian Psychiatrists, openly endorsing and supporting dressing children as sex slaves and taking them to sex fairs to “show off” for naked and masturbating adults as an “educational experience”.
When BobN and Jimmy state that sexualizing and exploiting children as gay and lesbian psychiatrists support doing is wrong, then perhaps we can take their whining seriously. But until then, it’s really hard for them to argue about the “damage” a counselor can cause when they themselves have no problem with using children as sex toys for gay and lesbian adults.
posted by Jorge on
Call child abuse charges against the parents. That’ll stop em.
Or better yet, BAN children from it.
posted by Debrah on
Thomas Sowell opines:
“As liberals replaced central planning with more reliance on markets, their countries’ economic-growth rates almost invariably increased, often dramatically. In the largest and most recent examples — China and India — people by the millions have risen above these countries’ official poverty rates, after they freed their economies from many of their suffocating government controls.”
posted by Debrah on
Jimmy–
Bobby is right. The guy is certainly not a “skinhead”. Many men—especially black men—choose to shave their heads because they have a drastically receding hairline.
He’s very blunt as is Bobby.
And basically says lots of things that most people avoid saying.
You should check out some of his commentary on women.
LIS!
posted by Debrah on
Why the Left hates Conservatives
“Hatred of conservatives is so much a part of the Left that the day the Left stops hating conservatives will mark the beginning of the end of the Left as we know it.”
posted by Debrah on
Jimmy–
Check out this 2007 Book TV interview with Horowitz as he details the time when he was associated with the Black Panthers. Their crimes have always been glossed over. Their murder of a woman who worked for him marked his split.
Duh!
The Left is intoxicated with its own virtue.”
Also, a Book TV interview with Christopher Hitchens.
posted by Jimmy on
I’m glad the ‘skinhead’ misnomer got the reaction I was looking for….whatever.
I’ll have you know, Bobby, that I am a self-loving white man, usually once a day, right after Rachel Maddow…lol
posted by Jimmy on
“Their murder of a woman who worked for him marked his split.”
The murder, I believe, is unsolved. Unless you have proof, you ares spitting into a gale.
posted by Jimmy on
Why do conservatives care what liberals, or anybody else, thinks of them? There are partisans in media, and the sun rises in the east.
posted by Jeremy on
ND30: I read that article (from 2005) you posted twice, and nowhere did I see a quote from any LGB psychiatrist. The only thing I read was from a grad student who condemned bringing kids to these events. Where did any LGBT Physch Association say taking babies to adult sex events was ok?
“…state that sexualizing and exploiting children as gay and lesbian psychiatrists support doing is wrong…”
WHERE is your evidence to back this assertion? I am not saying it has never happened (there are stupid people everywhere) but you are talking out your ass.
“But until then, it’s really hard for them to argue about the “damage” a counselor can cause when they themselves have no problem with using children as sex toys for gay and lesbian adults.”
Again, where did ANYONE say it was ok for adults to abuse children?
And you are so disingenuous. You know full well that the creeps on Folsom do not in any way represent the LGB mainstream. They do not represent gays & lesbians living in rural Missouri, or in the suburbs of DC, on military bases, or anywhere else. The majority of us are probably WAY closer yo your lifestyle than theirs (assuming you yourself don’t attend S&M parties in Dalls, which would fail to surprise me for some reason).
posted by Bobby on
“I’ll have you know, Bobby, that I am a self-loving white man, usually once a day, right after Rachel Maddow…lol”
—Well Jimmy, you’re not the only one playing with yourself. The Obama’s are playing with themselves as well, and with our money.
Have you heard of King Obama’s vacations plans? His Queen and Princess Malia are headed to Spain.
“Michelle Obama has reserved about 30 rooms for herself and her daughter, their friends and bodyguards at a five-star hotel in Benahavis near Marbella, hotel sources said.”
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/news/336549,michelle-obama-vacation-spain.html
Isn’t that nice? 30 rooms for the King and Queen of America, all at taxpayer expense of course, so that the American president and his wife can vacation in a foreign country.
I have an idea, since celebrities love the Obama’s let that family vacation with them. I’m sure Sir. Richard Branson’s private Island in the caribbean must be quite fun, and I’m sure Sir. Richard won’t mind hosting the Obama’s free. AFter all, JFK was a regular at Frank Sinatra’s house in West Palm Beach. Then again, the Obama’s aren’t happy being Rulers of America, they are now trying to take all over the world. Hail Obama! God Save Malia! LOL.
posted by Throbert McGee on
ND30 : Jeremy :: guy with laser pointer : cat
posted by Jimmy on
Spain is a fantastic country. The First Family would be remiss if they didn’t check out The Canary Islands also, especially Tenerife. I wonder if Obama will kiss King Juan Carlos.
He’d have a long way to go to catch up with W and Poppy Bush. Practically every Saudi prince walking has a wet spot on his ass where someone named Bush has kissed it.
posted by Bobby on
“Spain is a fantastic country. The First Family would be remiss if they didn’t check out The Canary Islands also, especially Tenerife. I wonder if Obama will kiss King Juan Carlos.”
—Fine, they can go to Spain on their own dime and let’s see then if they’re still going to reserve 30 rooms.
You’re being contrarian, Jimmy, if it was Laura Bush going to France and renting 30 rooms you’d be raging mad.
Obama is not a King, he should not be treated like one. We need to put all these politicians in their place. They work for US, they are our public SERVANTS, not MASTERS.
In fact, if you study US history you’ll notice that extravagances like the presidential pension didn’t happen until Truman died in the house he lived. Now that was a democrat with integrity.
Frankly, I’m sick of these liberal politicians that want us to pay more taxes while they live the good life at our expense. Did you hear about John Kerry’s yacht? I heard it wasn’t even built in the USA and what’s worst I heard Kerry isn’t even paying taxes on it.
posted by Jimmy on
“You’re being contrarian, Jimmy, if it was Laura Bush going to France and renting 30 rooms you’d be raging mad.”
Being contrarian on this forum is equivalent to breathing.
I liked Laura Bush and I saw in her a bit of what I see in my Mom. Both women know what it is like to be married to a functional alcoholic, and both made the best of it and are still with their husbands. And even my old man, a life long UAW member who voted GOP every time, knows W effed up.
If the Secret Service says 30 rooms, or the whole friggin’ hotel, is needed to accommodate security and guests of the First lady, then make it so. Were this Empress Laura, this wouldn’t even be reported. The First Lady has a 70% approval rating. One quarter of this nation will hate her no matter what, so eff ’em. It’s good to be a Queen.
The White House says the president will not be joining his wife and daughter at any point on this trip.
posted by Jorge on
The First Lady has a 70% approval rating. One quarter of this nation will hate her no matter what, so eff ’em. It’s good to be a Queen.
Well, yes, but when that 25% includes Sesame Street, you have a problem.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=druQ6olIfm4
posted by Jimmy on
“Well, yes, but when that 25% includes Sesame Street, you have a problem.”
Eff Big Bird, and those queens Bert and Ernie, too.
posted by Bobby on
I doubt the secret service said 30 rooms, and if they did then the Obama’s would be better off renting a mansion in the countryside instead of charging the taxpayers with 30 rooms we didn’t get to use.
When Bush was president the media was watching him like a hawk, now they report outrageous stuff as if it was a normal, everyday occurrence. Perhaps in this administration, it is.
Either way, it’s highly-insensitive that during our great recession the first family would choose to vacation in a foreign country. Then again, progressives are never as sensitive as they claim to be, quite the opposite. The only open minded progressive is a dead progressive.
posted by Jimmy on
“I doubt the secret service said 30 rooms, and if they did then the Obama’s would be better off renting a mansion in the countryside instead of charging the taxpayers with 30 rooms we didn’t get to use.”
Partisan that you are, Bobby, you make about as much sense as usual, which is to say, zero. Better in an exclusive mansion that a resort where anyone can go. Typical Republican mentality.
“Either way, it’s highly-insensitive that during our great recession the first family would choose to vacation in a foreign country.”
The First Family will be vacationing in the Gulf region in August, after visiting Maine earlier in this month.
You’re not even good enough to be called a hack.
posted by Bobby on
“Partisan that you are, Bobby, you make about as much sense as usual, which is to say, zero. Better in an exclusive mansion that a resort where anyone can go. Typical Republican mentality.”
—It’s about money, the mansion would be cheaper than 30 rooms at the Ritz. Assuming that each room costs $500 a night, that’s $15000 per night.
“The First Family will be vacationing in the Gulf region in August, after visiting Maine earlier in this month.”
—Don’t avoid the issue, they’re vacationing in Spain. When they vacation in the gulf I’ll shut up, then again, if they fly that dirty dog of their in a gulfstream V like they did in Maine, I won’t be that happy.
Call me a hack all you want, I know I’m right.
posted by Jimmy on
“Call me a hack all you want, I know I’m right.”
You’re a hack.