October 30, 2009
The Class of the Liberal Elite
Über liberal Gore Vidal takes the disgusting practice of blaming the victim to the extreme, outrageously calling the 13-year-old rape victim that Roman Polanski drugged and brutalized, "
a hooker."
Quick, someone award him a Nobel Prize for Literature.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:35 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 50 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Remeber that Imus used the same language and the MSM got rid of him. Will they do that to the Great Gore?
Posted by: David at October 30, 2009 11:15 AM (PpoBw)
2
Either these people have absolutely no clue how bad they look when they do these things or the people they are trying to please are worse then they are. Of course, one famous business once said about the press something along the lines of, good, bad, whatever, just spell the name right.
This might simply be a way to stay in the press and have their names passed around. Perhaps it is our job to see that it doesn't get passed around, read, or watched? No t.v. here, I dropped the papers a bit before I dropped t.v., and I only read the bible, people like Chesterton, and well established classics up to a point. Gore who?
Posted by: Doom at October 30, 2009 11:43 AM (VB9Cw)
3
That old man is truly disgusting. He's an arrogant old patrician who must feel profoundly cheated that this country never paid him his proper due; he's in a permanent state of lese majeste. There's a grave waiting for Gore Vidal and I think he should shuffle along into it as soon as possible.
Posted by: zhombre at October 30, 2009 04:16 PM (kLU+g)
4
Is this self-description, irony or hypocrisy by Al Gore?
Apparently, in Al Gore's world, hookers cannot be crime victims. Fascinating. Assuming of course, that underage victim of Roman Polanski's drug fueled rape was a "hooker".
Posted by: Penfold at October 30, 2009 04:16 PM (lF2Kk)
5
My bad, thought it read Al Gore, though is there any difference?
Posted by: Penfold at October 30, 2009 04:17 PM (lF2Kk)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 26, 2009
Conservatives Top Liberals, Moderates as Top Ideological Group
So sayeth Gallup:
Conservatives continue to outnumber moderates and liberals in the American populace in 2009, confirming a finding that Gallup first noted in June. Forty percent of Americans describe their political views as conservative, 36% as moderate, and 20% as liberal. This marks a shift from 2005 through 2008, when moderates were tied with conservatives as the most prevalent group.
Let's keep those percentages in mind the next time we see a heavily-slanted poll that significantly under-samples Republicans and over-samples Democrats.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:08 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 98 words, total size 1 kb.
1
It's a shame that a lot of 'em stayed home on Nov. 4, 2008.
BTW, don't confuse "conservative" with "Republican".
Posted by: Diogenes Online at October 26, 2009 10:00 AM (2MrBP)
2
Remember though, the staff at the NYT generally considers itself to be moderate.
Posted by: kevin at October 26, 2009 10:45 AM (HjDx5)
3
It is a shame, Diogenes, but not a surprise, as there was no conservative candidate for President running on a major party ticket that time. You had the choice between an ultra-liberal Chicago corrupt Democrat, and a slightly liberal Republican who had shown over the years that he had great disdain for the conservative wing of his party.
In football, sometimes when your team is mediocre, you basically toss out everyone and start fresh - it's painful for a couple of years, but if the right people are put in place, you're usually back winning long before you would have otherwise.
Unfortunately for the Republicans, they didn't do that this time, so we're pretty much resigned to a much longer period of mediocrity.
Posted by: Skip at October 26, 2009 03:01 PM (G2eJS)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 24, 2009
Victicrat
Look closely, and you'll see James O'Keefe, the filmmaker who nailed ACORN for supporting child sex trafficking, wearing a pimp suit once again... and dancing.
Badly.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:18 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 28 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Badly.
All the girlies say he's pretty fly for a white guy.
Posted by: Pablo at October 24, 2009 11:22 PM (yTndK)
2
Whatchu talkin' bout?!?!? O'Keefe was gettin' DOWN!!!
These posers wouldn't last 30 seconds in Compton but the message was pretty catchy.
Posted by: Lipiwitz at October 25, 2009 05:41 PM (OX5qU)
3
These posers wouldn't last 30 seconds in Compton but the message was pretty catchy.
Why's that, Lippy? Is there something about Compton you'd like to tell us?
Posted by: Pablo at October 25, 2009 06:38 PM (yTndK)
4
Okeefe is a great dancer, what a unique kinda guy. Wonder why Letterman hasn't booked him and Hannah. Who were the posers?
Posted by: Jayne at October 25, 2009 11:31 PM (dwIL0)
5
Not at all Pablo. You should visit there yourself. You'll love it!
Posted by: Lipiwitz at October 28, 2009 02:58 AM (bhNGz)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 16, 2009
I don't Get the Controversy
It's the only thing she's ever posted online that was worth the amount of time it took to understand it.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
07:41 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 30 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Welcome to The World, Meghan - you know, the one that existed before you entered it and will continue to after you exit. All women need to understand that in order to look good (whether "good" is professional or sexy or fit or whatever's appropriate for the occasion), they must dress for their particular body type. Meghan has an awesome rack, but she needs to accept that if she posts a pic in which her GINORMOUS boobs are half exposed and the focal point of the photo, she will likely look like a tramp. Don't bitch about it. Just accept it. And put on real shirt.
Posted by: Sif at October 16, 2009 08:28 PM (od0G0)
2
I'm starting to think that she's a lot sharper than most folks realize.
Considering how dumb I think she is, that might be true and she'd STILL be rather stupid.
And people mocked Palin's intellect ....
Posted by: Steve at October 17, 2009 07:58 AM (TzDt5)
3
She'd call them "knockers," if she could spell it.
Posted by: Bleepless at October 17, 2009 06:50 PM (7l1hN)
4
The Democrat party is full of boobs, so I don't understand why they would object to Meggie Mac's ramblings. For most conservatives, she's just irrelevant.
Posted by: daleyrocks at October 18, 2009 12:23 PM (5Fo+S)
5
Like someone else once said, "I'd snork her in the squeaker hole".
Posted by: Boss429 at October 18, 2009 04:32 PM (T/k/7)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 12, 2009
Like E.F. Hutton Said... You Earned It.
Progressive bloggers pushing for the adoption of the LGBT agenda President Obama said he would implement on their behalf have now been given the cold shoulder by the White House. Once they complained that Obama failed to live up to his campaign promises, they were summarily dismissed by the Administration as part of "
the internet left fringe" that needs to "
take off their pajamas."
The reaction to the betrayal is as you would expect, with lots of wailing and gnashing of teeth.
I guess it isn't quite so funny when the real teabaggers are dismissed just as easily as those smeared as such.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:07 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 117 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Sure, I figured that the gay community will get from Obama pretty much what Reagan gave the "Pro-Life" community ... lots of words with the best of intentions, but this White House seems to have lost their minds.
Now, every gab at the White House is personal.
Go ahead Barack
et al ... insult your critics into submission. Even Bush wasn't that stupid. I apparently missed this technique for making friends and influencing people.
Posted by: Neo at October 12, 2009 12:11 PM (tE8FB)
2
Wow. Another promise with an expiration date. Who would have thunk it. Besides, where the heck are they going to go, to the Republicans. HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!11!!1
Posted by: TimothyJ at October 12, 2009 03:26 PM (IKKIf)
3
"real teabaggers" -- At the risk of being politically incorrect, that's kind of funny!
Posted by: Lipiwitz at October 13, 2009 04:13 AM (bhNGz)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 10, 2009
Diluted
Democrats in the media and in politics have so over-used cries to racism in an attempt to marginalize legitimate opposition that the word has rapidly lost the stigma attached to it. Indeed, in the context of the political blogosphere, bloggers on the center-right have been using the term self-referentially as a sarcastic bit of snark to the constant knee-jerk claims of racism they know will radiate from progressives.
It's a shame the left has decided to make such reckless use of the word in an attempt to stifle opposition, because when real racism occurs, calling it out with the level of derision it deserves becomes that much more difficult.
This is real racism.
When you walk into the Georgia Peach Oyster Bar in Paulding County, you feel like you've walked into a different era.
Behind the pool tables stands a mannequin in a Klu Klux Klan costume, but it's what's outside of the Patrick Lanzo's restaurant that has some people angry.
Lanzo put up a sign that reads "Obama's plan for health-care: N*&%*r rig it."
Keep that link bookmarked, lefties. The next time you feel the urge to tar someone as a racist as a catch-all smear, you can use that as a touchstone.
Sadly, labeling people such as Lanzo as a racist simply isn't the pejorative it once was, thanks to those who have turned the label into a joke.
Update: Another Black Conservative is on the same wavelength.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
08:29 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 242 words, total size 2 kb.
1
"The term 'racist has been seriously over-used recently. It's time for a one month moratorium on the word to allow it to build up power again. Until then, use xenophobe, sexist, homophobe or fascist to get your insult across."
- Democrat arguing guidelines
Posted by: Kevin at October 10, 2009 09:16 AM (hNk8s)
2
Mr. Yankee,
Go read:
http://www.politicalbyline.com/2009/10/10/georgia-oyster-bar-owner-not-telling-the-truth-about-being-a-racist/
Might wanna make a mention of it.
-Pat
Posted by: Pat at October 10, 2009 09:58 AM (BH4he)
3
Easy folks, we are dealing with an
Psychological illness
It explains much of the left's behaviour and we should definetly make use of this suggestion from the article:
"Humor has great value in any attempt to work with projection..."
So when they complain that we are making fun of them, it's okay, it's part of their therapy.
I feel better already.
Posted by: Dr Hooligan at October 10, 2009 10:56 AM (wMqJV)
4
@Pat: bringing facts into this discussion will go nowhere. It's hate that is cultivated here.
Posted by: e40 at October 10, 2009 12:05 PM (rsjdo)
5
Meh. You think that's racist?
THIS is racist.
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2009/10/kill-blue-eyed-babies.html#readfurther
Posted by: Steve at October 10, 2009 12:24 PM (vafEQ)
6
>>"The next time you feel the urge to tar someone as a racist as a catch-all smear, you can use that as a touchstone."
You lead a sheltered life if you think that is the touchstone of racism.
Posted by: Steve at October 10, 2009 12:26 PM (vafEQ)
7
Bob sees the N-word and the light bulb goes off.
For the record, racism is about hate, not just words. Hate based on superiority is racism.
And, it comes in many different forms.
But, you'd know that now wouldn't you Bob?
Posted by: Bob is clueless at October 10, 2009 12:49 PM (BV0VE)
8
Pat, what is interesting is that if you go to Stormfront, they are offering the exact type of defense that Bob is here: a very narrow definition of racism that suits their need.
Grow a pair and be proud of your racist leanings.
Posted by: Seriously at October 10, 2009 03:30 PM (BV0VE)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 08, 2009
Fake Mais Précis
Apparently, the Obama's questionable taste in art includes a penchant for frauds.
Alma Thomas' 1963 "Watusi (Hard Edge)" is unmistakably a knock-off of Henrí Matisse's 1953 "L'Escargot." No, I'm not an art buff, the symmetry is uncanny, and forms a near-perfect overlay.
In other news, Michelle Malkin is plagiarizing my original.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
08:12 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 57 words, total size 1 kb.
1
well it takes a good froud to apreciate a good froud...
Posted by: rumcrook® at October 09, 2009 11:25 AM (60WiD)
Posted by: rumcrook® at October 09, 2009 11:26 AM (60WiD)
3
There's no fraud here whatsoever.
She traveled to France, fell in love with the Matisse piece, announced that she was going to do her own "study" of it and did so - publicly and openly.
This happens all of the time in the art world. Don't forget that we're seeing these two images in 2 inch squares on flat computer monitors. The two pieces are of different sizes using different techniques and materials creating different textures.
If she HADN'T written extensively about the fact that this was a "study" of Matisse, then we could easily accuse her of fraud.
Posted by: Able Stanton at October 09, 2009 01:36 PM (O64c3)
4
It shows Obama's bad taste in art? In fact, it shows just the opposite. Obama was able to recognize the artistic merit of a work by one of the world's greatest artists, even though he had no idea who painted it.
Posted by: Green Eagle at October 10, 2009 02:54 PM (iuhJB)
5
" Obama was able to recognize the artistic merit of a work by one of the world's greatest artists, even though he had no idea who painted it."
Not only did he not have any idea, he has no clue.
Posted by: Cowboy Logic at October 12, 2009 12:17 PM (vog1p)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
RDU Acclaimed as #1 in Daily Beast America's Smartest Cities Ranking
Obviously, they chose to forget the IQ displayed by Duke University's
Gang of 88, but overall, I agree with
their assessment.
I've been working in the Research Triangle Park most of my adult life and have worked with and for some brilliant companies (including my current employer), and advanced degrees are commonplace. Combine that with the overall culture and climate, and it's a tough place to bet against.
That said, their methodology is questionable, even as it is flattering.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:53 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 101 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I'd think the presence of all those NC state politicians (or Bev Perdue alone) would be enough to knock Raleigh waaaay down the list.
Posted by: jdb at October 08, 2009 06:22 PM (Dj4BX)
2
"I am obliged to confess I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University."
William F. Buckley
Posted by: Actual at October 09, 2009 12:22 PM (j5fpu)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 07, 2009
In Chicago, Blameshifting on Youth Violence Continues
Loyal Bloomberg employee John McCormick certainly knows who signs his paycheck. McCormick's article
Chicago Violence Haunts Obama as Gun-Control Backers Left Cold laments the fact that when U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder meet with Chicago Mayor Richard Daley today, they won't be able to blame Chicago's most recent and high profile youth death on firearms.
Honor student Derrion Albert was beaten to death with splinted railroad ties on September 24 by other youths in a crime that was captured on cell phone video and broadcast around the world.
Gun control vultures are predictably dismayed that they cannot use Albert's young corpse as a prop:
Some gun-control advocates question the administration's timing as Duncan and Holder arrive after a highly publicized beating that didn't involve a gun.
Missed Opportunities
"Where there have been opportunities for the president to speak out about the issue of firearm violence, he has missed any number of opportunities," said Thom Mannard, executive director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence.
Doing so in the Albert case "provides the cover" to address youth violence without confronting the gun lobby, said Mannard, whose group's board of directors included Duncan until he left for his current post.
Groups like the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence, the Violence Policy Center and the Brady Campaign have a structural flaw in their basic underlying philosophy. They have deluded themselves into thinking that a banning a device (a firearm) will somehow mitigate the cultural problem of violence in certain groups. It doesn't work that way, as Derrion Albert's death at the hands of an angry mob of his peers so readily proved.
A subculture that accepts, embraces, and glorifies violence in their entertainment (music, video games, television shows, movies, etc) unsurprisingly develops and nurtures individuals and groups that accept, embrace, and glorifies violence in the real world. Individuals so desensitized to violence find it socially acceptable—in many instances expected—to affect violence upon others with found objects, homemade weaponry, or their fists and feet.
Put bluntly, most pay lip service to the idea of quelling violence, but none are willing to face the fierce opposition that will arise when the offending subcultures are named, nor are they willing to face the economic backlash of taking on industries that make billions profiteering off the glorification of this lifestyle.
Such reflection is necessary for change, but interests that thrive of the status quo—Hollywood, record companies, clothing manufacturers, professional victims advocates, politicians, lobbyists, etc.—have no motivation to cut their own profits merely because urban youth are killing themselves in neighborhoods they will never visit.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
02:14 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 447 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Arrest, try, and emprison, Mayor Daley, the city council and Daley's backers. They are the only persons legally allowed to have handguns in the Peoples' Republic of Chicago. As we know gun control absolutely workd and criminals never get guns, it must the legal gun owners, Daley and his cronies doing all the shooting. Stands to reason.
Posted by: DavidL at October 07, 2009 03:13 PM (AK8DM)
2
The underlying problem is multigeneration fatherlessness. Neither Chicago's or the nation's wealthy Progressive elites want to go anyway near belling the illegitimacy cat because to do so is to undermine the sexual revolution; and to correct this problem will require a sea change that reestablishes Christian marriage as the universal norm in America. Both prospects are unacceptable to America's wealthy Progressive elite. Chicago will have more fatherlessness, more crime, more dead kids, more Black males in prison, and more taxpayer funded helping professionals. And the Kabuki theater about gun control will continue.
Posted by: Mike O'Malley at October 07, 2009 04:04 PM (5CVyu)
3
The underlying problem is multi-generational fatherlessness. Neither Chicago's or the nation's wealthy Progressive elites want to go anyway near belling the illegitimacy cat because to do so is to undermine the sexual revolution; and to correct this problem will require a sea change that reestablishes Christian marriage as the universal norm in America. Both prospects are unacceptable to America's wealthy Progressive elite. So Chicago will have more fatherlessness, more crime, more dead kids, more Black males in prison, and more taxpayer funded helping professionals. And the Kabuki theater about gun control will continue.
Posted by: Mike O'Malley at October 07, 2009 04:07 PM (5CVyu)
4
>>"Groups like the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence, the Violence Policy Center and the Brady Campaign have a structural flaw in their basic underlying philosophy. They have deluded themselves into thinking that a banning a device (a firearm) will somehow mitigate the cultural problem of violence in certain groups."
You give them way too much credit. They are indifferent to violence. They oppose private citizens owning firearms, full stop. If you could prove to them beyond a shadow of a doubt that private ciizens bearing arms led to a reduction in violence, their position would not change, because their position is not contingent on the amount of violence in the world.
Posted by: Steve at October 07, 2009 04:37 PM (9HZWQ)
5
"A subculture that accepts, embraces, and glorifies violence in their entertainment (music, video games, television shows, movies, etc) unsurprisingly develops and nurtures individuals and groups that accept, embrace, and glorifies violence in the real world."
Bob I gotta call you on this one.
Humans are inherently violent and our entertainment is merely a reflection of that. In fact I'd go so far as to postulate that movies and video games provide an outlet for humanities' violent nature.
There are fewer wars, armies, and general bloodshed in one's everyday life than there were even 100 years ago. Violent individuals found their outlets in crime (or law enforcement) as they still do. They also has the "frontier wars" in America and the various conflicts that raged across Europe that culminated in WWI and II. We are creatures of violent habit in a world where real violence is less and less acceptable (unless your Muslim) and virtual violence becomes the outlet.
Posted by: Scott at October 07, 2009 06:02 PM (sQmd1)
6
There is violence and there is violence. Portrayals of righteous violence - St. George slaying the dragon - onscreen probably do provide a catharstic of some kind while reinforcing the idea of right and wrong - violence as a final resort to preserve the moral and social order. Grand Theft Auto, on the other hand, may provide a cathartic experience, but does not encourage a moral sense at all, to put it mildly (I have seen it played, and it is just as bad as folks say). Augustine of Hippo argued that all violence is caused by the presence of evil, but not all violence is evil in and of itself, I believe. It is a useful distinction, think.
Another issue is that violence, as well as any other strong emotion, can be titullating as well as cathartic, and thus encourage violence instead of merely providing an outlet for something already there. It is a hard line to draw, unfortunately, but I think Bob is right that at least some of the blame can be laid upon the entertainment industry, which seems to lean heavily towards titullation. What we see and listen to does have an effect on the character, I would imagine.
Incidentally, it is interesting to note that while our ancestors may have been more violent, we are more removed from the real effects. We see it portrayed all around us onscreen, but few of us have any real experience with violent death, even animal death, first hand. Most of our ancestors had to kill their own chickens for Sunday dinner, or saw them killed at any rate, and natural death of humans was more immediate and common for them. We may be as much or more likely to treat violence casually than they (or maybe not, depending on place and time), but much more squeamish about it in the real world. Interesting to reflect on, though what significance it may have I am not sure.
Posted by: Grey Fox at October 08, 2009 10:40 AM (d1ae8)
7
Are you kidding? Gang members VOTE!
Posted by: bobdog at October 09, 2009 01:47 PM (SKEgy)
8
all 18 year olds who are legally entitled to carry rifles should be give/loaned weapons by the NRA many of them are unable to afford to purchase them on their own.
Posted by: John ryan at October 09, 2009 01:57 PM (gj3cv)
9
all 18 year olds who are legally entitled to carry rifles should be give/loaned weapons by the NRA many of them are unable to afford to purchase them on their own.
Silly liberal. The
CMP should be doing that, not the NRA.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at October 09, 2009 03:19 PM (gAi9Z)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 05, 2009
51kb generated in CPU 0.0206, elapsed 0.0938 seconds.
61 queries taking 0.0805 seconds, 200 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.