Rebel Inside Voices

In the fat years and the lean years, the ideologues, the partisans and the activists never stop believing they're the oppressed. Republicans held Congress for years, spent like wolves in the hen house, but now lays blame for it all on Democrats. Yet, Democrats have ruled Congress for almost every session since World War II, but its the Republicans who block all their pet projects dreamed up by the proto-fascist heroes or their current corrupt jawboners, and not America's keen resistance to overbearing government (when we recognize it). Why does this happen? Because, I believe, American political culture, and culture in general, has become fully invested in victimhood.

Sometime ago, probably at the beginning of the leftist Cultural Revolution in the 60s, the idea of the eternal struggle against the Other (in their case, sanity) became mainstream. The New Left (democratic socialists, front group communists, etc) and the New Right (neoconservatives, big government conservatives, etc) both took and ran with the idea they were the ones who held the American idea AND were oppressed by the government or mass movement. It works well. Americans love to root for the underdog. Mr. Smith, Rudy, Rocky; American heroes in media are usually ones who start from nothing and achieve everything. These stories aren't always false. President Obama himself was born to an impoverished (and somewhat mentally damaged) mother. Obama used this story to his benefit to gain the love of even his political enemies. Yet, it clouds the fact that he was raised by well-off grandparents (who he threw under the bus) and became the center of the Chicago political machine way before even thinking about running for President. Like the President, the Democrats and the Republicans are hardly oppressed, and in fact do a lot of oppressing themselves, and that both ideologies have a long history with massive funding from think tanks, oligarchs like George Soros (by the way, f**k you, Jimmy Carter) and wealthy private citizens. People like Nancy Pelosi, who've got millions, and Micheal Bloomberg, who has billions, can hardly start complaining about being held back. Being the mayor of a city as giant as New York City, or being a American Congressman, makes you more powerful than 99.5% of the rest of the world. Shut up and actually lead for once.

But this infection has also hit we noble citizens as well. We sympathize with the party out of power. We feel the words of a politician recalling a past trauma though it doesn't explain his voting record. Americans give more in private donations than anyone else. We are too emotional for our own good. We are too nice to our political leaders and we suffer for it by being gipt out of our earned labor, our futures, our standard of living and our freedoms. If we were harder on our leaders, inflation wouldn't have destroyed the American family by forcing both parents to work for a good living. If we were more hawkish, the debt wouldn't be at $14 trillion. If we were meaner, they'd fear crossing us by putting a majority of teens out of work by raising the minimum wage beyond what most small business can afford.

It's nice to believe you're the rebel, even if you're a straight-line Democrat or Republican. But you're not, dear reader. You're part of the mainstream. You're okay with Social Security, like the Republican Party. You're a-okay with Obamacare, like the Democratic Party. You may think the Tea Party is racist and is oppressing you from having a big government view, like many leftist anchors... commentators.... no, wait, MSNBC anchors.... believe. You may think Fox News is the next Paul Revere. But none of it makes you the next American revolutionary. It makes you part of the problem.

The problem isn't Glenn Beck or Jon Stewart or the liberal/libertarian/socialist/atheist/agnosticwhatever Bill Maher. It isn't that Nancy StretchyFace has no clue what's in any of the bills her cronies write for her, though that's a big issue. The overall problem is the complanency of the citizenry with short-term programs and short-term issues when the entire facade of central banking and demcoratic socialism is coming down around them. Most people don't have a plan for that. Most people won't know its happened under the paper mache arches that held up the last 100 years of the American Republic are at their feet and our leaders are no where to be seen.

The name of the game is LONGVIEW, people. Not who has whose seat in 2 years, but what structure the American government NEEDS to be in the next 20.

The NPR’s Firing of Juan Williams: The Authoritarian Left at their Best

Poor Juan Williams. Recently, he found out that if you stray the slightest bit off message, the far left will destroy you. They’ve been known to eat their young in these situations in the past. Juan has also experienced what journalists and commentators on the right have experienced for years – left-wing outlets taking one line out of context and painting the person as a racist, a bigot or intolerant. Apparently, those on the left do not like what stares back at them when they look in the mirror. Juan has now come to this realization, and he told George Stephanopoulos that he “always thought the right wing were ones that were inflexible and intolerant and now I’m coming to realize that the orthodoxy at NPR, its representing the left.” (*)

The NPR has fired their only black, objective journalist; and the reason went far beyond his comment about Muslims that was taken completely out of context. The issue that they so desperately try to hide is the fact that Juan works for and makes regular appearances on the Fox News Channel. After all, leftists cannot attempt to indoctrinate the public about how the network is heavily biased, which makes it the furthest thing from “fair and balanced” if Juan Williams shows up there! Their attempts have had no success, as Fox destroys leftist media outlets ratings wise; and they don’t need taxpayer dollars to do so. The only people who currently hold this extremely ignorant view are people who have not watched Fox News outside of Media Matters clips that appear on “You Tube,” as the network employs a very long list of left-wing contributors who appear regularly on commentary programs.

I disagree with Juan more often than I agree, but he is one of few journalists on the left who have integrity and objectivity. Unfortunately, that’s what gets you into trouble with the George Soros’ of the world. Juan’s firing shows just how much of a tizzy the authoritarian left is currently in; and at times like these, they show their true INTOLARENT colors. I disagree often with conservatives and have been engaged in fierce debates, but there is only one group of people who will go to the gutter as NPR CEO, Vivian Schiller, did when she questioned Juan Williams’ psychiatric health. If she made the right decision, then why assassinate the man’s character? It was also noteworthy to see how she slipped and pathetically tried to cover herself when she said that Juan’s statement was “not compatible with a news analyst on NPR,” which she quickly changed to “the role of a news analyst on NPR’s air.” See her comments along with Bill O’Reilly’s interview below:

The O'Reilly Factor 10/21/10

Juan Williams firing was the most COWARDLY action I’ve seen by the left in some time, and unfortunately Mr. Williams had to learn the hard way. It is impossible to have a logical, rational conversation with these people about very complex issues. I’ve seen it first hand at Liberty Café, my Facebook political discussion group. Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg (who to my surprise came to Williams’ defense) walked off their own set, when they became too entangled in their web of political correctness. Frankly, it’s beyond embarrassing when people who preach tolerance can take their degree of intolerance to an unprecedented level.

George Soros can continue to pump millions of dollars into the NPR, Media Matters and all other left-wing outlets; but his efforts will be for naught. The authoritarian left cannot hide who they really are; and when they have two out of three branches of government monopolized, their ideas as well as their leadership will be challenged and criticized. Now we have seen how they respond to criticism by attempting to silence and publically degrade all who oppose them.

Since the NPR is receiving plenty of money from George Soros, I think it’s time that this supposed “non-biased” organization stop receiving TAX DOLLARS. I expect legislation to be introduced in Congress immediately. It is quite clear who the NPR and all public television networks take their marching orders from. I’m all for the existence of left-wing media outlets; I just demand that they get PRIVATE funding.

I extend major kudos to those on the left who defied their zealot leaders and came to Mr. Williams’ defense and called this action for what it really was. I also would like to see Fox News make room for Mr. Williams’ to have his own television show in addition to the promotion he just received.

*http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/10/juan-williams-i-dont-have-a-psychiatrist-npr-ceo-low.html

Lester Burnham: American Hero

One of the greatest dramas I've ever seen is American Beauty. Lauded by tons of critics, winner of a dozen awards, on the lists of countless “Best of...”; its already been turned upside down in interpretation. It's a satire, a drama, a love story, an attack on middle America. It's everything to everyone. I haven't read all reviews and essays on it, but I haven't come across anything that has taken a more face-value interpretation of the movie. Specifically, that Lester Burnham, the hero of the movie because he rejects the materialism and hollowness of suburbia, is in fact a new icon of traditional marriage and alpha male behavior.

Let's summarize: 40-year-old Lester has hit his mid-life crisis with the speed of the space shuttle. Caught between his monotone job at a media magazine, insecure daughter Jane and cold wife Carolyn, Lester has felt hollow and “dead” for years. But, as he tells the audience in the first act, “its never too late to get it back”. Lester does this by becoming infatuated with Jane's flirty best friend Angela, buying pot from his new neighbors' son, quitting his job and blackmailing the company and pretty much doing whatever he wants. The movie also has several sub-plots including affairs, courtships, homosexuality, death, beauty, etc, but our focus is the lovable “Les”.

When we first see Lester, he wakes up like many of us do: completely unenthusiastic with what is to come in the next 10-14 hours. Dressed in a two-piece pajama outfit, which has vertical stripes akin to prison bars, he gets into the shower for a daily dose of his happy time. He calls it “the high point of my day”. Through a window, he watches his wife out in their garden, already in her work clothes, trimming roses. She chats idly with their very friendly neighbor Jim, and his lover... Jim. Lester's morning ends with his briefcase opening up on him after being nagged by Carolyn about being late. The look she gives him is as cold as liquid oxygen. Suffice to say, Lester could die in his sleep and he wouldn't be the only one happy with the death.

Between this sequence and the Angela catalyst, we are shown how much Carolyn is defined by status and work. When Lester tells her that his employer is making everyone write out a job description to find out who's worth keeping, she immediately tells him to write it. We don't hear the entire conversation, but it can be assumed he mentioned that a manager at the magazine lost $50 000 of company money on a hooker. During dinner, Carolyn plays old jazz and big band tunes much to the chagrin of her husband and daughter. She steamrolls their objections with a “I cooked dinner” defense. The next day, Carolyn, a realtor, shows a house to several people, but none bit at the juicy apple. She reacts to this failure badly, crying hysterically and slapping herself in an empty room of the house. But as fast as she began she stops, silently walking out of the room.

In the movie, Carolyn is made out to be the bad guy, and she is on so many levels. Her careerism, her materialism, her coldness towards her husband are all bad things, but she isn't entirely to blame. Lester is the man, the husband, the protector and provider. As a husband, its Lester's job to take control and direct the family. But he didn't. Somewhere, he let his responsibilities go and let Carolyn take hold. I noticed that Lester's actions are mostly defined by his relationship with Carolyn. Would Lester need to have a infatuation with a teenage cheerleader if his wife was more loving? Probably not. Though I'm not excluding that a major driving force of his change is to sleep with Angela; Lester was, before and after seeing Angela, controlled directly and indirectly by the actions of his wife. His relationship with Jane is not outside this, either. His long ignoring of his daughter is paralleled by his wife's, except she isn't remorseful about it. In fact, she celebrates not being the hated parent when Jane rips Lester for his lax affection, but later smacks Jane for questioning her love.

While the movie does skewer suburbia like so many other movies do, Lester doesn't really rebel so much as he takes his rightful place in the household. Yes, he starts smoking pot, quits his corporate job (dunno how “corporate” in the IBM sense a media magazine is, but whatever), plays 60s music and insults his wife by calling her a “money-grubbing freak”, but he also gets $60 000 from his job through blackmail, buys himself his dream car and chases after a young woman. Not exactly the icon of anti-corporate America. But what he is though is the icon of born-again masculinity and traditional gender roles. After “finding himself” through lust, pot and a giant set of balls, he begins to dominate his wife. Before, her screeching voice yelling “LESTER” would literally make him slump, but later in the movie he is taking her on and surpassing her control of the relationship. He becomes attractive in her eyes once again because he's standing up for himself and emitting alpha behavior, not because he's got a new car or dresses differnetly. Eventually, they almost rekindle their love life until Carolyn freaks at a couch almost getting stained. In one of the many loved scenes from American Beauty, Lester slams a pillow over and over and yells “Its! Just! A! Couch!” and “its just stuff”. Yet, just a minute previous, he congratulated himself for buying a perfect 1970 Pontiac Firebird that no doubt chewed up a good portion of his $60 000. While this materialist hypocrisy is never pointed out by the script, it does make me smile that only Carolyn, the materialistic wife, is hated for her materialism, while Lester, the “rebel” husband that buys classic cars, gets a pass. I don't think writer Alan Ball, a gay, new agey, leftie sort of guy, meant it to be that way, but that's how it came out. And because of that, Lester loses a big edge of his written anti-establishment persona and becomes a more realistic, more American, more alpha male hero. A rare find in Hollywood.

From my perspective, Lester goes from shlub to stud in every sense. He loses the accountant-style clothes that were no doubt suggested by his wife and takes up more blue collar outfits. He stands straighter, losing his “Walter Matthieu” walk. He works out and takes care of himself. His behavior goes from soft-spoken mumbler to stern voiced, though it doesn't always work out the way he wants. He quits taking orders and starts giving them in the family, with his wife and, most importantly, with himself. These are all things that staple the traditional gender role of a man. Of course, the provider role goes out the window when he quit his job, but in today's world, the provider role is considered shlub unless backed up by the more masculine behavior that was Lester's persona change. Otherwise, he'd just be a piggy bank with a penis.

And that isn't exactly a rare cage the modern American male lives in, is it?

On Everything: A New Series on Politics, Culture, Religion and Everything Else...

...WITH CUTE ANIMALS!!!!!

When the Apology is Longer Than The Crime...

...they ain't sorry.

The crime: 120 characters.

According to Patterico:

Fadlallah was a Holocaust denier who has justified suicide bombings and who “is believed to be responsible for the killing of 241 U.S. Marines during the 1983 Beirut barracks bombings,” according to the New York Times.

The apology: 747 words, emhapsises mine. With gems like:

It was an error of judgment for me to write such a simplistic comment and I'm sorry because it conveyed that I supported Fadlallah's life's work. That's not the case at all.

Life's work. Like terrorism and Jew hating?

I used the words "respect" and "sad" because to me as a Middle Eastern woman, Fadlallah took a contrarian and pioneering stand among Shia clerics on woman's rights. He called for the abolition of the tribal system of "honor killing." He called the practice primitive and non-productive. He warned Muslim men that abuse of women was against Islam.

He still supported things like, um, TERRORISM!

It goes on and on retelling mostly her encounters with him. She does say "Sayyed Fadlallah. Revered across borders yet designated a terrorist. Not the kind of life to be commenting about in a brief tweet. It's something I deeply regret." You didn't need to explain a terrorist to say sorry, Nasr. Just say "Sorry I lamented the death of an oppressor of Lebanon."

Or, if you actually care about Lebanon missy, you do what I did and say "YAHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"

The BP Oil Spill: Beyond Populism

Environmental disasters certainly draw their share of populist drivel, and the media on both the left and the right did not disappoint regarding what could be the worst environmental disaster in history. Fortunately, we here at Generation Patriot are interested in the truths that those who possess the power to inform people are not interested in reporting. The focus will be to gloss some reality over the useless populist nonsense that is circulating all over the airwaves, newspapers and blogospheres.

Populist Rant No. 1: BP makes billions of dollars, therefore, this greedy oil giant must pay for all cleanup and then some!

This is the Bill O’Reilly special. Not a night goes by where he doesn’t inform his viewers on just how much money BP makes, and how glad he is that the company will have to pony up billions of dollars. Before we delve into the heart of this ill informed statement, let me begin by saying that I am not suggesting that BP should not be liable, nor am I an apologist for Tony Hayward or BP. BP, under the leadership of Tony Hayward, has been a horribly run company. According to Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) records, BP has one of the worst U.S. safety records of any oil company. Over the past five years, BP has admitted to breaking several U.S. environmental and safety laws and has paid $373 million in fines to avoid prosecution. Therefore, I have no sympathy for Mr. Hayward nor the incompetent managers and leadership below him. BP must compensate all who were victimized by the oil spill. In addition, I fully support a criminal investigation and individual prosecution if gross negligence can be proven.

The problem with this statement is the failure to realize who really pays for this disaster. Does Mr. O’Reilly really believe that someone will turn Tony Hayward and other BP execs upside down until all of the coins fall out of their pockets? Does he really think Tony Hayward will have to sell his yacht to compensate the victims? Is he concerned at all about the rule of law – an essential element to a free society? If one has a modicum of knowledge of who, or should I say what, really owns a corporation, the gross ignorance is glaring. Among BP’s top ten shareholders are the following institutions: Bank of America, State Farm Insurance, T. Rowe Price, Wells Fargo and Vanguard. (1) What do all of these institutions have in common? They play a role in YOUR retirement, and the performance of these companies heavily impacts the world economy. Therefore, YOU pay for the mess…you who had nothing to do with the decisions made…you, who were most likely just driving to work the day the well exploded, are going to pay. It is tragic enough to see the environmental impact of this spill; to see people lose their livelihood as well as seeing the economic impact the spill will have on states for years to come – some that just finally recovered from all of the damage caused by Hurricane Katrina. However, the innocent people who ultimately pay for this disaster are the tragedy that has gone unaddressed. While President Obama is looking for someone’s ass to kick, and people are urging the government to shakedown BP with no regard for rule of law; do keep in mind just who they are shaking down. Got that Mr. O’Reilly?

Populist Rant No. 2: Unfettered capitalism is to blame and self-policing simply does not work.

This one is my favorite. My friends at the Guardian and many other left-wing progressive publications out there have people coming out in droves railing against a system that has given them their living (notwithstanding the fact that unfettered capitalism does not exist anywhere in the world).

If “unfettered capitalism” or economic liberalism existed, there would not be hundreds of pages of government regulations that govern deepwater drilling alone. There would be no restrictions on drilling apart from safety hazards; and the government would not be involved or, at the very least, MINIMALLY involved in the facets of business.

The major mistake my progressive friends always make is that they confuse statism with capitalism. The BP oil spill was not self-policing gone bad. BP simply drilled where the government told them to drill…where the government gave them the most ECONOMIC INCENTIVE to drill. Unfettered capitalism? I think not. Much like every other economic disaster (the housing debacle being the most recent), the government is always at the root, and the oil spill is no exception.

Has anyone seen the mainstream media report on the Deep Water Royalty Relief Act (DWRRA) of 2005? This was a government program signed into law by President Clinton that actually INCENTIVIZED risky deep water (minimum depth of 200 meters) drilling by implementing a royalty-relief program that relieves eligible leases from paying royalties on defined amounts of deep-water petroleum production over Federal Outer Continental Shelf lands. In addition, a law was passed to cap liability at $75 million. (2) (What a blow to lefties who were hoping I would have mentioned George H.W. Bush’s name, but do not despair. I will get to him momentarily.) Although the DWRRA expired in 2000, it was merely expanded to promote further interest in deep water drilling. We have the government incentivizing risk on THEIR continental shelves and capping liability if damage occurs. If anyone is interested in just how much royalty incentive there was, page 14 of the Department of Energy Report has an outline.

President Obama’s moratorium on offshore drilling is not the first, unfortunately. Moratoriums have a long history of preventing drilling in far less risky areas where accidents can be quickly contained and keep damage to a minimum. Going back 20 years, President Bush (I said I would get to him), imposed a moratorium that banned offshore drilling in the eastern part of the Gulf of Mexico. President Clinton then extended this moratorium until, ironically, 2012. In retrospect, can we say that government involvement and regulation caused the oil spill? Sure we can!

If economic liberalism existed, laws such as the DWRRA would not exist. Oil companies would be free assess their own risk, assume ALL costs and be fully liable for any damage. It is absolutely comical to see members of Congress humiliating Tony Hayward and the media tearing into BP, when it was these very same lawmakers who had absolutely no problem taking money from oil lobbyists and enacting into law the very policies that caused this disaster. It never ceases to amaze me how government always gets a “get out of jail free card;” but hopefully, this has cleared up the difference between statism and capitalism. More regulation anyone?

Populist Rant No. 3: This is President Obama’s Katrina.

I would like to see Obama suck it up with a straw, but people on the right need to stop this absurdity because it contradicts their ideology – that is if they truly believe that the federal government’s powers should be limited in scope. It should be no surprise, whatsoever, that the federal government would demonstrate gross incompetence. The federal government shouldn’t have the power to act. The silly rants from the left after Hurricane Katrina were to be expected, as these people believe that the government is all knowing and can solve any problem better than the shoddy private sector.

There is plenty of criticism to go around. From the fact that Obama’s team of experts is comprised of lawyers (rather than experts who possess the expertise in dealing with a problem of this magnitude) to his delay in meeting with BP executives, to his failure to repeal the Jones Act (which would allow private firms and foreign nations to assist) to his overall poor leadership skills – all are legit criticisms, but let’s look at the bigger picture. Do we really want centralized planning to handle a disaster of this magnitude? Come on people – THINK! I would like to see him on the golf course and basketball court for the rest of his term.

The oil spill is no more President Obama’s problem than Hurricane Katrina was George Bush’s problem. Due to these types of inane political blame games, Americans have become more and more reliant on federal assistance. We have people standing around waiting for the government to act. Conversely, we have people who want to take action, but cannot due to the bureaucratic red tape that coincides with centralized planning. Worst of all, local officials such as New Orleans mayor, Ray Nagin, were completely let off the hook for their incompetence; and the same will be true for the current disaster.

The issue of the federal government trampling all over constitutional rights is the matter in which the right should be actively engaged. Nowhere in the constitution does it say that the federal government has the power to oversee an oil spill, and no one should be advocating for Obama to act apart from enabling private companies and LOCAL governments to do whatever is necessary to contain the damage. Instead, many are caught up in silly partisan politics.

Populist Rant No. 4: We need to stop our unquenchable thirst for oil and move to alternative energy now!

To all of my environmentally conscious friends whose love for Mother Earth is admirable, but horribly misguided, this one’s for you!

Let’s begin by addressing why it seems our thirst for oil is unquenchable. While I’m not going to list the hundreds of products that are made from crude oil (but you can look some of them up here), I will attempt to direct a little humor at our misguided friends. Oil consumption goes far beyond energy use. This is the most commonly overlooked fact by “green” conscious people. Calls for solar energy, wind turbines, natural gas (which still requires drilling) and hybrid cars not only have their own drawbacks, but do not provide a replacement for the hundreds of products that are made from crude oil. Let’s use a very staunch green advocate as an example – someone who really goes the distance. He lives in a house that draws on solar panels for heating. Little does he know that producing polysilicon, which is necessary for building solar panels, results in the dumping of a byproduct of polysilicon called silicon tetrachloride. Silicon tetrachloride is a highly toxic substance that poses many environmental hazards. He refuses to own a car, not even a hybrid, so he chooses to bike to work. If I told him he was sitting on and peddling crude oil, (from the tires, to the pedals, to the seat) and the oil he saves amounts to a mere couple of drops in a tank, he might just walk. The trouble there is the shoes he’s wearing are made from crude oil as well, and look out for any clothing with polyester including those nice little green bags he uses to carry his groceries (if made from polypropylene)! I hope he knows how to iron, but then again, that consumes electricity. We cannot discard that dirty coal, but then again, if the wind is not blowing in the right direction… So rather than walking to work barefoot in wrinkly cotton clothing, then coming home from the grocery store balancing the groceries on his head; let’s just acknowledge the reasons for crude oil consumption.

In all seriousness, do I believe there should be investment in alternative energy? Yes. Should we drive cars that maximize gas mileage and cut down on consumption? Yes, but market should ultimately dictate demand. All of the incentive in the world exists to find viable alternative solutions to crude oil since he or she will be our next billionaire. The government does not need to be involved, as the government has already proven that impending disaster looms when it does get involved. Legislation such as cap and trade will do absolutely nothing to speed along innovation, but it will do plenty to harm the economy and contribute to unemployment. One must understand the economic chain of events that high energy prices will trigger – higher costs of all goods being one of them.

To sum up a very lengthy article, I’m more than annoyed that so many people all over the political spectrum have missed the bigger picture on a very serious disaster. The focus needs to be on the consequences of knee-jerk, politically charged reactions and an educated awareness of the role crude oil plays in not only a vibrant economy, but the vast majority of people’s livelihoods. It is my hope that the spill will be cleaned up as soon as possible and our readers would consider donating to the many charities that help the victims, wildlife and cleanup efforts.



(1)http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=BP+Major+Holders
(2)http://www.mms.gov/econ/PDFs/DWRRA.pdf

Word Police: That's So Gay

I know I'm very late to this, but hey, I'm here. And GP will probably get a buttload of hits for some of the words I'm going to use in this post. Hmm....

***

For a long time, “gay” meant happy, elated and so forth. Shakespeare used it. Now its the identifier of homosexuals, specifically male homosexuals. Lo and behold, the thought police come out in force to make you feel guilty for co-opting a word they recently co-opted.

Meet thinkb4youspeak.com.

*shudder*

The simple truth is that THEY'RE JUST KIDS. KIDS WILL SAY OFFENSIVE, STUPID THINGS.

When I grew up it was “Jew”. You were “jewish” if you were cheap. You acted like a “jew” if you acted (GASP!) “gay”. Kids pick up on words and mutate them to their end... kind of like the Left (something I'm working on for a future, giant post). For God's sake, male white kids still go around calling each other “nigger” because the biggest market for black gangsta rap is young, middle class white kids. Even more disgusting is that the biggest market for stripper-inspired club music is pre-pubescent girls.

Anyway, jumping on them for using “gay” is stupid, totalitarian and, frankly, makes you a douche. But that's my opinion, you totalitarian douche!

Honestly, give “gay” 30-50 years and it'll mutate again.. It'll probably end up being a word for frivolous:

“Your honor, this lawsuit brought against my client is beyond gay. The plaintiffs have no grounds.”


“John Edwards was a lawyer that took many gay cases.”


“It is the finding of this court that the ACLU bring supremely gay issues to these chambers.”


“The President's new supreme court pick has a history of taking gay cases and making them gayer.”

And just because I can:

God bless America. May it be gay!

Not Your Average PMC Conspiracy

*PLOT SPOLIERS*

DO NOT READ IF YOU ARE PLAYING OR PLAN TO PLAY  

SPLINTER CELL: CONVICTION!

So Splinter Cell: Conviction's story is pretty short, hence the quick follow up on my post about the blood thirsty Canadian who has eyes for American contractors instead of terrorists.

I don't want to put up mega spoilers, so it'll be sufficient to say that the rouge PMC (aka, “military industrial complex” to said gamer) is just the tip of the iceberg. From what I can tell, the brains behind the plot in SCC are foreign, but that's not for sure. It is definitely not some half-assed right-wing conspiracy to make the US a corporate-fascist nation using a Blackwater clone. Not in the least. To me, it's more a one-world conspiracy by big government supporters and corporate honchos (George Soros, for instance). All of the baddies in SCC are pawns, even the top villian, so that gives you an idea of how big the conspiracy is. For now, the story is way above the stupidity of 24 season 7 and above the intelligence of the dumbass Canadian who gets the blues when taking out non-American baddies. I plan on buying the novelization of SCC to see if it has any more depth to this interesting take on the media's second-favorite military whipping boy.

Egotastic Me

I've always enjoyed the irony of today's world. The human species is six point six billion strong spread across every landmass and sea. If it exists, there'll be signs that humans have been there, usually in the form of our trash. We are everywhere. The other side of that coin is our modern individualist society. The West is the most powerful and most comfortable of civilizations. In control of pretty much half the planet, Western-based nations influence everything. If not with our ideals, then with our inventions and products. We are everywhere. And yet, as individuals, if we are metaphysically separated from our civilization, we are nothing. We are simply human. We are specks in the sea of billions. And that puts the fear of Almighty God into so, so many. Including me.

The World Around Me

I have been, and probably still am, very self-centered. I know many others are like this, but I won't assume you, dear reader, are one of them, so I'll take the time to expand for the sake of argument. What I mean about self-centered is that much of what I do and think involves advancing my own interests (material, mental, emotional) over that of others. May it be simply walking faster so I can get around a slow walker at the supermarket or complexly maneuvering at work so I can get on the boss's good side. My politics had and still have a lot to do with my personal ambitions. From socialist revolution to anarchist nihilism to conservative free-market dogma, connected to my wants. My patience with people, especially those truck drivers at work who have the inability to understand directions, are mostly based on the mood I have when I walked in. If something went wrong that morning, I'd probably treat them with them a little contempt. I justify such behavior by blaming it on them and their actions. It's not my fault they can't see the stop sign or understand the other signs around the lot, so it's not my fault if I'm an asshole to them.

My daydreams are in the same realm. I've had the running theme of heroism and historical significance since I was little. The politics may have spun them to the left or the right, but overall, I'm the center of the story and I'm the awesome guy with the kung fu and the accurate shooting. I've written countless short stories and attempted first chapters of novels that usually involve my views with heroes that have my personality (or the one I wish I could have). Hell, I play video games and watch movies with the express intent of sating a fantasy land where its not the actor, but me kicking the ass of terrorists, Persians or backward CIA employees trying to knock me off. Whatever I thought or imagined, it was all about me. It's all for me. It's all fun, but it's also all fake and slightly unnerving.

I've talked a lot of talk about my future over the years to many people. I was going to be a war reporter, an author, a game designer, a movie director, and that was all in high school. In college, I was going to be an music video director, a action movie director, a TV producer, then I stopped wanting to do TV. I kept at the college courses though and moved to LA to work in the industry. There, I was going to be a Marine, but marriage and family cut that down quickly. I then decided on pursing a police career and after moving to Utah, I took a police standards test... and failed. A year later, and a year at my rent-a-cop job, I tried again. That time I passed. I was going finally be the hero.

Except that heroes aren't being hired right now. The current economy is killing every level of government in Utah. The cities and the state aren't hiring any officers. The world isn't playing my game. It's not playing fair.

The World That Is

Reality is a bitch. I'm no hero. I'm not even close. I've never been one. Probably closer to the opposite.

For as long as I can remember, I've been pretty introverted. Girls and friends were few, if any at the several schools I went to. Within the introverted personality was a selfish ass. A prime example was in grade 8. A little kid, probably a first grader, was wandering in the bus area one day. A group of girls from my class saw her, got worried about her safety among the cars and asked me if that was my sister. I shook my head and just walked on as they took her within the safety fence and started to look for her teacher. My only thought during that time was “Not my sister, not my problem.” I didn't want to get in the middle of anything. I wanted the world to stay away.

As newly minted teenagers, we were all selfish. We were all confused and emotionally immature. It's a right of passage to deal with that. But the key is to get passed that and mature to where you can deal with hiccups like a bad economy, a failed test or old dreams dying due to circumstances you yourself created. For the longest time, I couldn't. As recently as last week, I was brooding on the idea of being at my rent-a-cop job for any longer. It was supposed to be a hold over job until I could become a police officer. I've been at it for a year and a half now. It's mind numbing and, at times, so dead that a paraplegic could take my place without any dip in productivity. It put me in a mood that was less than friendly, giving me thoughts that were less than rational. My fantasy land of heroism and shit were directly conflicting with the real world where I was going to be stuck at a dead-end well past my 25th birthday. How could I be a SWAT member or an agile young super cop after 25?

The Speck and the Fear

Then, one recent night, unable to sleep even though I was dead tired, it came to me. I'm not special. Not in the slightest. No matter how many dreams I have, no matter the stories I write, the movies I watch or the games I play, I am not the character that I see. I am not the assassin, the scholar, the agent or the famous fighter. I am one of six billion people trying to carve out a section of this world for myself as best I can. And I have six billion people all wanting to do the same thing as well. In the Salt Lake Valley alone, there are over one point five million people, all jamming to have some sort of space. That's still a lot of people in an area shedding jobs.

I've never been a man with confidence in myself. It took over twenty years for me to break past the embarrassment of working out alone in public. I spent more time talking to girls on the internet than I did in real life. I faked confidence, even to to the point of making myself believe I had it. A house of cards. A cover for the insecurities I developed between birth and now. We all have insecurities, of course. Some deal with it better than me, some don't. One will never fully overcome them. They'll crop up sometime, even if for just a moment. It's the way we deal with them that shows us our real confidence and our real maturity.

I handled the realization that my dreams of grandeur would not come true quite badly. I basically whined and kicked and made a fuss that I couldn't reach heights I probably had no good reason to expect I could reach. My house of cards fell and I spent a week trying to justify it without blaming myself in anyway. The economy was the fault of bankers and government. The lack of hiring money in the Valley was because of entitlements. They're all corrupt. It's not my fault.

And in some way, it's not. I don't control the economy, but neither does Salt Lake City or the Great State of Utah. The economy of the United States is based on everyone. The economy is the collective result of millions of actions being preformed every day by Americans and others around the world. Our lives today were build by the world of yesterday, the world that consisted of billions of individual actions crashing and colluding with each other. The beautiful chaos.

For most of the past 100 years, we've based our economic lives, and our lives in general, on the fear of everything coming crashing down and stopping us from finding our dreams. Every recession is met with outlandish claims and overreactions. Every dip in employment is considered the end all of capitalism and markets. When things go bad, our confidence sinks and we panic. We fear the dream will die.

Like my house of cards, based on the fantasy of heroism, greatness and historical significance, our past century has been based on that as well. Militarily, for good or bad, ending in victory or defeat, America has done much based on high hopes and ideals. While there have been true moments of greatness, there have been plenty of disasters. Economics has been a different story. Since the Great Depression, we've been living on the idea we can stop disaster like we thought we could stop war. The Great Depression was the Great War, so we created the League of Nations called the welfare state. The post-WWII boom was the World War. Things were hell everywhere but where we were, so we prospered. The 80s and its crash was Vietnam, a dream turn to rot. And today, our decade or two of vast prosperity has been, for better or worse of an example, Iraq. We went in thinking we had it all. We had the perfect reason. We had the best idea. We had the moral high ground. And in the face of it all, after all we said and did, the confidence is collapsing. It's civil war. It's the real world vs. the fake one. It's 2006 and the country is at a crossroads.

Back to the Beginning

What does the current economic crisis have to do with my personal story of a shitty personality, egotastic fantasies and horrible self-confidence?

It's the rubble.

When the house fell all was left was the foundation.

What was the foundation?

Me. Just me. Who I really am. The man that was hiding beneath layers of neurosis, emotional cloaks and mental walls. All that I learned, all that I saw and experienced became the reason, the lessons and the rational. It may have been an accident or an act of God, but its there now.

My adult foundation.

America needs to find its foundation. It needs to find its true confidence, not build up another house of cards upon the collapsing deck that came before it. This has happened for nearly 100 years and it cannot continue.

As I could not rely on the displacement of blame onto others for my misfortunes and for just plain ol' bad luck, the world as it is today cannot just levy punishment on the crooks and liars that put us here, because it wasn't just them. It was us as well. Our fantasy dreams of easy wealth and no-risk happiness brought us to the point where we have to choose the world we made up or the world as it is.

The world we made up says we can keep trying to make everyone happy, rich, beautiful and comfortable. We can waste ourselves for utopia. We can spend the world and gain only an illusion of progress.

The world that is says we have to go back to basics. We have to start trusting ourselves to improve ourselves. We have to use our own two hands to brings ourselves beyond the primordial ooze. We have to make our dreams come true the hard way: years, probably decades, of unrelenting hard work without even the glimpse of finish line.

What I feel now and what I know now doesn't mean I won't become the immature kid again. Just because I've become grounded now doesn't mean I won't stick my head up my ass again. It's up to me, not you, not the state, not the feds and not God, to make sure I'm on the right path. It's up to me to make sure I'm not going to revert back to that new teen, watching a little kid put herself in danger and ignore it because its not my problem. Pretending it wasn't only added to the fantasy that I was going to be someone amazing. It was my problem then, it's my problem now.

Our lives are our choices. What we are is what we choose to be. The responsibility rests with no one else.

It's a hard lesson, but its a necessary one. Because basing a life on egotistical fantasies doesn't do shit for you or anyone else. You can't get out of bed purely on the will of you dreams.

What gets you out of bed is moving your body to the edge, swinging your legs to the floor and standing up.

All by yourself.

House - Season 6 - Episode "5 to 9"

Newsbusters took a swipe at the most recent episode of House, MD because of perceived bias for nationalized health care and a demonization of insurance companies. I recently got around to watching the episode and while I did see some over the top “eeeeeevil” from the insurance CEO, there wasn't really that much mallet-on-the-noggin advocacy in the show.

Newsbusters left out some important information. I'll fill it in. Starting with this:

In one story line, a former patient was suing the hospital for reattaching his severed thumb. The surgeon who had done it explained that, "his insurance only covered 60 percent of his in-patient expenses," so the patient wanted only the least expensive option. The surgeon reattached it anyway. "I wasn't going to let him throw his thumb away over a few dollars." Owing the money for the procedure to the insurance company, the man protested to Cuddy that he was in danger of losing his house.

What wasn't acknowledged is that the bottom-feeder lawyer hired by the patient starts going on a tantrum about the expensive cars the doctors have. Cuddy rebuts with reality, telling them both that doctors get paid like everyone else and that man's procedure costs money, and because of his suit the hospital may (rightly) have to take his house to get it.

Polite Dissent, a blog that reviews House, MD from a medical standpoint does make this observation though:

Though it was mentioned briefly at the beginning, both Cuddy and the lawyer are glossing over the key fact that the treatment Mr. Acevedo received was not covered by the informed consent he signed. Chase may have done what he thought was best for the patient, but he did it through lying and dishonesty. Sure, Mr. Acevedo kept his thumb, and this will probably restrain the jury’s and judge’s enthusiasm for a large payout, but there is clear written evidence that Chase was deceitful in his treatment of the patient. The hospital’s insurance company will pay this off long before it sees a courtroom. And as for Chase, skipping informed consent or lying on it is a good way to lose a medical license.

Newsbusters continues:

In another scene, Cuddy was consulting a patient with cancer was convinced that human breast milk was his only cure. When she refused to write him a prescription for it, he accused her of being "some type of shill for the insurance company." He had paid premiums all this life, he said, and never been sick a day, but was now being denied the only thing that would save him. Cuddy assured him her refusal had nothing to do with insurance, and the scene ended.

Polite Dissent agrees with Cuddy:

First, she’s right: the insurance company will not pay for it, even with a prescription — they’ll consider it an experimental treatment. Second, it’s her signature on the prescription, and she should not write any prescription she is not comfortable signing. Finally, and she should have pushed this part harder, the breast milk is at best a shot in the dark — it’s wishful thinking — and by writing the prescription she would be confirming the patient’s false hope. She handled it well: she was upfront and truthful and told the patient she would not write the prescription. He didn’t like what she said, but he’s free to find a new physician.

Moving on to the main plot. Newsbusters:

But in the main story, Cuddy was renegotiating the terms of the hospital's contract with a major regional insurer. Because her hospital was small, it couldn't get the same reimbursement rates that larger, though less prestigious institutions received. "It's about leverage," said the insurance company negotiator. "They have it. You don't."

Going above his head, Cuddy burst in on the head of the insurance company at lunch in suitably exclusive-looking restaurant. "Princeton Plainsboro has the highest rated ER in the state," she said, "the most advanced ICU, "and the most innovative diagnostic medicine department in the entire country."

When the CEO tried to dismiss her, she said, "While Atlantic Net Insurance has a marketing budget that's more than our pediatric ICU and transplant units combined. Your PGA sponsorship could pay for our walk-in clinic, and the money you spend to fuel your two private jets could fund our air ambulance service for the next three years."

Cuddy's point, she explained, was that "Your growth may be good for your bottom line but ours allows us to save lives." She then threatened to go public with Atlantic Net's ... well, the show never really explained what exactly the company had done wrong. But it's an insurance company, so it must be something.

I believe Cuddy did say what she was going to go public with: AtlanticNet's false PR. Her point of holding out for a fair increase in reimbursements in the contract was based on the fact her small hospital was the reason AtlanticNet gets high ratings in quality, modernization and other sectors. Without it, AtlanticNet's ratings would be lowered and their PR machine would have a hog trying to explain it away. It was a very vaild point.

The most “eeeeeeevil” part of the show was the response to the CEO to Cuddy's logical explanation to holding out for a fair deal:

Had he had a black mustache, the CEO would have twirled it while delivering his response: "You can portray me as a rich bastard in the press all you want ... just as long as I stay rich."

That was totally unnecessary.

I think the episode was pretty well balanced, minus the evil CEO. What Newsbusters needs to understand is that Cuddy is an idealist despite her position as dean. Throughout the series, she has been confronted with countless situations where House is the voice of reason to her idealism and naïve views. Though, Newsbusters is right to point out that there aren't any exposition lines explaining why she's being an ass.

Newsbusters is a great site to find the latest in liberal media bullcrap, but I've noticed that many of its reviews of television shows have been less than stellar, in my opinion. I hope they can find a way to improve them to the quality of their reviews of the news media.

Who Dat!

Saints win by 14. Congrats!

But I wouldn't want to be any kind of law enforcement in New Orleans or Jefferson Parish...

Big Hollywood Approves of 24 - Season 8

They say it much better than I did.

As in previous seasons, the villains feel no compunction whatsoever in killing people, taking hostages, and committing a diversity of explosive mayhem in pursuit of their goals. The forces of good and order, by contrast, are constrained by their adherence to certain moral standards, although the protection of innocents justifies the performance of otherwise prohibited actions, and Jack’s actions and conversations about his choices (and Renee’s) typically reflect this tension.

Just when the danger to innocents is sufficient to override these ethical concerns without becoming an “end justifies the means” excuse is an eternal moral question, and it’s what has always been at the center of 24. It’s what makes the show serious and important while adding to its entertainment value.

Tebow Ad

Just saw that evil, evil Tebow Ad.

Wow. I can't say anything else, but wow.

You must be seriously f***ed in the head to think that is controversial.

The E*Trade baby has more reason to be pulled off the air than that ad.

UPDATE: American Power has some fun with it too.

UPDATE II: Powerline takes AP to task for making crap up about the ad.

UPDATE III: Even more reaming of the anti-Tebow lefties by theblogprof

201st Post: On 24 - Day 8

Happy 201st post for GP! Yay!

***

SPOLIER ALERT! DO NOT READ IF ONE IS CATCHING UP ON DAY 8 of 24!

This is probably blasphemy to some, but I think this season of 24 is actually pretty good.

In the last few seasons the world has been on edge from all sorts of super complicated terrorist attacks like EMP bombs, backyard ICBMs, chemical weapons hidden at Ontario Airport, more nukes, a remote control for every nuclear plant in America... you get the idea. There's been a ton of out-of-this-world plots by all sorts of terrorist groups and international cabals. Not to mention the constant stream of traitors in CTU. The last few seasons, in fact, have had an arching storyline for those who can stomach some of the worst parts of the 24 series.

But here comes Day 8 and what do we have so far after 6 hours? A Rafki Harri attempted assassination on the moderate leader of the "Islamic Republic". The realization there is weapons-grade uranium in the US in the hands of criminals. A CTU member whose criminal ex-boyfriend is manipulating her battered person syndrome. And the most interesting plotline, Renee Walker's decent into darkness.

No insane plots. No twisted family connections. No lame love torn apart by terrorists. Day 8, aside from Day 1 and Day 3, seems to most realistic and most entertaining season yet.

Hopefully it stays that way.

Reality Sucks

By Josh Kim

The White House State Dinner is not your typical MTV episode of Cribs: It is a time-honored function of statecraft in which the leader of a visiting nation is ceremoniously received by our President. To any serious citizen, no matter the political affiliation, the State Dinner's importance should be understood. But apparently a couple from the upcoming reality television show The Real Housewives of Washington didn't feel this way.

Tareq and Michaele Salahi were not on the guests' list at the White House on Wednesday but they somehow managed to get in. The Secret Service say the couple slipped past security.

Why did the couple do it? I don't know but if I'd have to guess, it was for fame. The couple posted pictures of the evening's festivities on their Facebook page. Do these people understand that this is potentially embarrassing for our nation, not to mention dangerous?!

Two unaccounted people getting into the White House to brush shoulders with the Bigs is itself not serious but they could have easily have been assassins, one for each World Leader. The Visiting leader was Manmohan Singh, the Prime Minister of a nuclear power nation of over 1 billion people. What the fuck were these people thinking?

This is what's wrong about the times in which we live: Just about anybody can be on TV as long as they have a marginally fascinating life. It doesn't matter who they hurt or what they do. It's time to get real, after all. It's unscripted.

Only this time the reality is that these two people were potential Presidential Assassins.

There's a pattern. A radio station holds a contest and a mother dies of water poisoning because she wanted to win her son a game console. The Opie and Anthony Show dared couples to find the most outrageous places to have sex and phone the station; one couple did and it was inside a Cathedral. The Balloon Boy Saga only cost some Colorado counties and the FAA a few measly million dollars. The Salahi White House State Dinner crash could have cost America prestige if it had turned out the wrong way. But we're also to blame. Society as a whole encourages this type of behavior exactly because we reward it with our attention, attention that translates into money. We like to gawk and stare and snap pictures, even if it's the body of Heath Ledger as it's being wheeled out of Mary Kate's SoHo apartment.

Is nothing sacred? And now the Salahis are to appear on Larry King Live. That doesn't surprise me. Every time something occurs, King is one of the first people to take advantage of it by having on as the guest(s) the ones who were in the middle of said incident. He is someone who helps to feed the sickness.

I'd weep for us but we're not worth it.

You're Too Stupid To Argue Politics: Racism

Welcome to the new sporadic series on Generation Patriot. This series, You're Too Stupid To Argue Politics, will be mostly rants against the stupidity of people who think they can argue in politics. This won’t be a partisan series. It will cover both arguments from the left-wing and the right-wing because, honestly, there are idiots everywhere. It will be blunt, offensive and full of asshattery. However, this is a subject where if you're offended, then you're probably too stupid to argue politics.

#1 Racism

Since the day President Obama announced his candidacy, there have been accusations that his opponents, both Clinton supporters and conservatives, were racist. Mentioning Reverend Wright was racist, telling people that Bill Ayers was a terrorist was racist (though Obama had no connection with him, wink wink), and questioning his policy was racist. The frequent use of the term took away the meaning and the importance of the word. False events like the “Kill him!” and the viral videos of “raging” McCain supporters just made the view even more widespread and more idiotic.

Fast forward to today. Ex-president and the official National Crazy Old Man Jimmy Carter just accused Representative Joe Wilson of racism. The Republican's outburst of “You Lie” during the President's congressional address has rallied conservatives and offended liberals. While boorish and uncivil, Mr. Wilson, who apologized, was correct as shown by the reinsertion of enforcement provisions into “Obamacare” to prevent illegal aliens and unqualified immigrants from getting government funds. However, don't let that stop the chorus of “RACIST!” echoing out of the Church of Tolerance. Once a heretic is found, he must be punished!

In the similar manner “fascist” is used, “racist” is a codeword for “shut the hell up!” It's something you use continuously when you don't have an argument. It's something that is supposed to shame your opponent into removing him/herself from debate because how could you ever argue when people think you're a raging racist? Classical liberal Republican nominee Barry Goldwater was accused of hooking up with neo-Nazis in Germany so he could get his racism mojo working. Ronald Reagan was accused of supporting slavery when he talked about states rights in his first campaign speech. Newt Gingrich was accused of genocide with a smile when he invited the Congressional Black Caucus over for drinks after the 1994 sweep. Sarah Palin was accused of racism when she said Obama was “paling” around with a terrorist. Does any of this sound like actual racism? Do you see Hitler, George Wallace, whips or eugenics?

The funny thing about all this screaming of bloody racism is that the people who are pointing it out are the same people who believe in the classification and promotion of races based on broad racial categories and based on skin color. On top of that, the label may or may not be accurate to the person's ethnic heritage. There are many, many ethnicities that fit into “black” or the more inaccurate “African-American” label. “Hispanic” is a broad category that covers pure blood Spanish living in South America, as well as a variety of mixed race groups. Not to mention that if you mix up the nationality of a “Hispanic,” they may or may not be pissed at you for mixing up Guatemalan and Honduran. These nations have distinct cultures and histories and their citizenry are proud of it. Don't think that's true? Just walk around Toronto, pick out a white resident, and call them an American. Bring ear plugs.

Racism, real racism, is a horrible and fringe belief in today's America. Institutionalized racism against minorities hasn't been a problem in decades. There is no enforced federal law that puts minorities on one side and whites on the other in which the minorities are put below whites. There are, of course, local issues and schisms born from institutionalized racism, but those are, like I just said: LOCAL. Drunk white teenage skinheads in Louisiana aren't a microcosm of the entire white race. No local problem is a statement on the entire nation, unless you're an opportunist racialist like Al Sharpton.

Racism is much too important a word to throw around like a rag doll. Racism is much too important an issue than leftist moralism or rightist indignation. Racism, like fascism, like any word now used as a term for “Shut The F**k Up,” is way too important than the crybaby whiners that use it to cover their lack of intellectual capacity.

Comment on the Glenn Beck Hysteria

I am not a fan of Glenn Beck. I do listen to his show sometimes and watch some clips of his show on Youtube, but I mostly steer clear of him. That said, I think the attempted boycott of his show over what he has said is stupid, just like the attempts to boycott Disney over the "gay agenda" and other such things on the right.

Beck has said some really stupid things. His race baiting of Obama probably the worst on record. He panders to the extreme libertarians and the conspiratorial section of viewership (not to mention the rest of his broadcast being populist), but he also profiles mainstream politicians and mainstream ideas. He is not Mike "The Right Killed Kennedy" Malloy of the left, or Mike "Dirty Savages" Savage of the right.

The Left's frothing hysteria is pretty pathetic, though. For the entire run of Olbermann's show during the Bush administration, thousands of words, many of them disgustingly negative and false, were spoken from the mouth of a man that considers himself the new Edward R. Murrow. Olbermann, who is backed by current Obama administration partner General Electric, accused the previous president of war crimes, called on him to resign over a LEGAL surveillance program, and pretty much outright blamed President Bush for almost every ill that befell the country, including 9/11.

Beck isn't someone that should be the icon of the Right (he's no WFB), but unless the Left is willing to turn on their own red-faced polemicist, they need to simply shut the hell up and let crazies be crazies, failed political radio hosts be failed television hosts (coughMADDOWcough) and mediocre sportscasters be rage-filled paper tossers.

Don't Wet Your Pants, Shep

I was listenting to Fox News on my SIRIUS radio on my way to work and it seemed poor Shepard Smith was making a mess about how the DHS report on right-wing terrorism was correct in the light of the Holocaust Museum shooting. He didn't cite it by name, he kept using the words "report" and "reports". He went so far as to read kook emails about Obama's birth certificate to show the insanity of the far-right and how the DHS was correct. All this before they really knew the age and politics of the shooter.

Shep, I don't think the DHS talked about an elderly, mentally ill, racist World War II vet.

I despise kooks just as much as the next sane folk, but that DHS report was far from nuanced and wouldn't have done crap to stop this attack, considering the guy parked his car, walked up and started shooting. It wasn't like hung out in the Museum and whispered about Jew money and the Holocaust myth.

Comedy Fail

The LOLZ world can be quite hilarious. Sadly, politics has entered it to the point of, well, sadness.

Funny

Funny

Not funny plus missed opportunity.

Not funny plus future journalist

Not funny plus sick moral equivalence only teenagers and liberals can create

I recommend you stick to the cats, dogs, accidents and Asians.

Some Things Just Aren't Funny

And I'd like to put Wanda Sykes entire skit in that column.



Honestly. The President's basketball game? Then, a novel that spits venom at Rush, Gov. Palin and the rest of the current targets of the liberal/leftist hit list.

Mr. Colbert's ballsy and hilarious roast of President Bush spared nothing. Colbert could be a out-of-his-mind communist, I'd still think what he said was great. I have to say that Colbert is one of the best satirists of the right wing.



The whole point of the dinner is for journalists to pat themselves on the back and for comedians to roast the President to his face. If that's gone out of the window for our new President, as it seems everything else has including mustard choice, I think I'd rather endure a rendition of Cats, in bad Gaelic translated from Chinese by Japanese game programmers, as performed by Code Pink. Naked.