December 20th, 2012

comedy | Condescending Wonka

"Ted Nugent blames Connecticut shooting on political correctness, moral decline in editorial".

With the issue of gun control more hotly debated than ever following Friday’s tragedy in Newtown, Conn., it should be no surprise that Ted Nugent – a board member of the National Rifle Association and staunch Second Amendment supporter – would make his opinion known.

The rocker, outdoorsman and political activist penned an editorial for the Washington Times in which he blamed the massacre that left 20 children dead on political correctness out of control and a decline in moral values.

“The ugly and dangerous truth is that we live in an embarrassing, politically correct culture that exalts and rejoices in the bizarre; aggressively promotes an ‘anything goes’ value system; and vilifies, condemns and mocks traditional societal values and customs at every opportunity,” Nugent wrote.

“We’ve embraced a culture of contempt that attacks the very institutions that make for a healthy and strong society, and then we’re shocked when it spirals out of control. The only thing I’m shocked about is that anybody is shocked.”

Nugent also accused anti-gun proponents of using the mass shooting to further their agenda.

“Some blabbermouths already are using the Connecticut school massacre to promote their anti-gun agenda even though more gun laws won’t prevent a psychotic from getting a gun and killing us,” he wrote.

Nugent, a Detroit native who owns property in Jackson County, isn’t the only Michigan-born celebrity known for his political opinions to weigh in on the subject.


Just a reminder, the National Review is still shit.

Top Conservative Publication: Shooting Occurred Because Women Ran The School

If there were fewer women and more “male aggression” in Sandy Hook Elementary School, the massacre there never would have taken place, according to a contribution to a leading conservative magazine.

National Review, whose in-house editorial suggested Newtown was the price of the Second Amendment published a piece on Wednesday from anti-feminist Charlotte Allen suggesting the reason the shooter was able to kill so many students was because Newtown was a “feminized setting:”

There was not a single adult male on the school premises when the shooting occurred. In this school of 450 students, a sizeable number of whom were undoubtedly 11- and 12-year-old boys (it was a K–6 school), all the personnel — the teachers, the principal, the assistant principal, the school psychologist, the “reading specialist” — were female. There didn’t even seem to be a male janitor to heave his bucket at Adam Lanza’s knees. Women and small children are sitting ducks for mass-murderers. The principal, Dawn Hochsprung, seemed to have performed bravely. According to reports, she activated the school’s public-address system and also lunged at Lanza, before he shot her to death. Some of the teachers managed to save all or some of their charges by rushing them into closets or bathrooms. But in general, a feminized setting is a setting in which helpless passivity is the norm. Male aggression can be a good thing, as in protecting the weak — but it has been forced out of the culture of elementary schools and the education schools that train their personnel. Think of what Sandy Hook might have been like if a couple of male teachers who had played high-school football, or even some of the huskier 12-year-old boys, had converged on Lanza.

Via Jessica Valenti who notes that this is extraordinarily “disrespectful to the female teachers and staff at Sandy Hook. Allen mentions their heroism as an anomalous aside rather than exceptional bravery that saved lives. The bravery of the women in Newtown – principal Dawn Hochsprung and psychologist Mary Sherlach who rushed the shooter before being killed, teacher Victoria Soto who died protecting her students, Kaitlin Roig and Abbey Clements who hid their students and calmed them – is remarkable.”

Allen went on to blame Lanza’s mother, saying “You simply can’t give a non-working, non-school-enrolled 20-year-old man free range of your home, much less your cache of weapons…Unfortunately, the idea of being an ‘adult’ and a ‘man’ once one has reached physical maturity seems to have faded out of our coddling culture.”


Time Names Mitt Romney Man of the Year 1912

NEW YORK (The Borowitz Report)—In an extraordinary gesture of recognition for a losing Presidential nominee, Time magazine today named former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney Man of the Year 1912.

In a press release explaining its decision, Time’s editorial board wrote, “Even though his quest for the Presidency was unsuccessful, Mr. Romney’s ideas about foreign policy, taxation, wealth inequality, and women’s rights typified the year 1912 as no one else has.”

In giving Mr. Romney the nod, Time said that he beat out such other candidates for Man of the Year 1912 as Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany, and Edward Smith, captain of the Titanic.

“It was very close between Romney and the Titanic guy, but we gave it to Romney because it took him slightly longer to sink,” Time wrote.

Mr. Romney could not be reached for comment, a spokesman said, because he was travelling around the world visiting his money.

[community] Troy
  • aviv

Ukraine okays ‘zhyd’ slur for Jews

Right-wing parliamentarian was challenged for using the term to disparage actress Mila Kunis

Mila Kunis

The Ukrainian Justice Ministry has ruled that using the derogatory term “zhyd” to describe a Jew is legal, turning back a petition demanding that the word be banned from the public sphere for being offensive to the county’s Jewish population.

According to reports Wednesday in the Ukrainian media, Eleanor Grossman, the editor of the “Jewish Kiev” website, had appealed to the ministry to block right-wing nationalists from using the term, whose equivalent is pronounced “yid” in English.

The ministry wrote in its response that, after looking into the matter, it had found no prohibition against using the word, or its feminine derivative “zhydovka,” although it did point out that in official government communications, the word “Jew” should be used.

The decision cited a Ukrainian academic dictionary to the effect that the term “zhyd” is an archaic term for Jew, and isn’t necessarily a slur.

In November 2011, Grossman asked representatives of Ukraine’s nationalist Svoboda party to stop using the phrase Grossman made her appeal after Svoboda deputy leader and parliament member Igor Miroshnichenko launched a tirade against Mila Kunis in which he wrote that the Ukraine-born Jewish American actress ”is not Ukrainian but a zhydovka.”

Svoboda has repeatedly said it will not stop using terms that, it claims, are legitimate Ukrainian parlance.


Peter Donaldson - NMTD/LLL

On abortion, both Britain and Ireland need to rediscover the spirit of 67

We pander to the anti-abortion lobby, and are too willing to settle for a few scraps of reproductive rights

When, this week, you rea a headline saying, Ireland to legalise abortion; or see a statement from the Catholic church saying "Irish abortion reform is a 'licence to kill innocent babies'", you should treat it with great scepticism. For a start, nobody has suggested changing the law, nobody's legalising anything, and innocent babies have more to fear, as ever, from the Catholic church, than from any Irish abortion providers.

Nobody has suggested, even out of respect for the recently kille Savita Halappanavar, the slightest modification in the law, so that an abortion might be permitted in a case where the mother would probably die without it, and the foetus would probably die regardless. There are no new ideas, and no concessions to anybody – all that's been mooted is the codification of a supreme court ruling, so that the abortion provision they do have is no longer just precedent, it's actually enshrined in law.

Civil liberties and family planning organisations are rejoicing, quietly, nevertheless. To understand why this looks like progress, we need to consider how it looked before.

Collapse )


Murasaki Shikibu
  • homasse

Strictly 4 everyone: Why do Kremlin apparatchiks, African rebels, and the Vatican all love Tupac?

Strictly 4 everyone: Why do Kremlin apparatchiks, African rebels, and the Vatican all love Tupac?

Tom Friedman's column today reveals the Vladislav Surkov, the deputy prime minister and political strategist known as "Putin's Machiavelli," is actually more of a "Makaveli":

Surkov, once described as Putin’s Machiavelli, is impressive, and his plans to stimulate innovation in Russia sounded real to me. But I couldn’t resist noting that innovative cultures don’t do things like throw the punk band Pussy Riot into prison for two years for performing a “punk prayer” in a cathedral. That sends a bad signal to all freethinkers. Surkov, who also keeps a picture of the American rapper Tupac Shakur behind his desk, pushes back. “Tupac Shakur is a genius, and the fact that he was in prison did not interrupt either his creative juices or the innovative development of the United States.” Pussy Riot is no Tupac Shakur, he added. “Being orthodox myself, I feel really sorry for the girls from Pussy Riot, but [their situation] has no implications for the innovative developments of Russia.”

Collapse )

Party of "We Hatez Everything About Obama" Still Not Done. Chuck Hagel is Next.

Next Four Years Will Be Like the Last Four Years... Great.

Smearing Hagel, Ctd

Bill Kristol lost the last presidential election; and the one before that. He was responsible in part for fomenting the Iraq War (and still doesn't take any personal responsibility for the catastrophe and countless innocent deaths that war led to) - and president Obama is president in part because he opposed it. Kristol believes in torture; president Obama ended the war crimes of his predecessor. Kristol believes Greater Israel should always be backed by the US - including its neo-fascist ethnic social engineering on the West Bank, now once again put on steroids by its unhinged prime minister, essentially ending any pretense of good faith with its European allies. President Obama supports the
long-standing US view that there should be a two-state solution, along 1967 lines with land swaps. Kristol supports illegal settlements.

So why does Kristol merit any conceivable interest in a re-elected Obama's cabinet appointees? Why are we even talking about someone who has done so much damage to his own country and so much damage to Israel internationally, a man who has the blood of thousands of innocents in Iraq on his hands and appears to feel not a twinge of conscience, let alone introspection?Collapse )