Wow. Could this writer be any scarier? Go Read. Come back.
The psychosis of blaming a shitty movie for the violent orgy we saw last week is a spreading infection. Posner is a well dressed asylum inmate who acts the part of an American law professor. He implies we might have the right to ban the movie because “all sides” agree it’s worthless. What sides? Who decided? When did the Bipartisan Committee to Ban Bad Films get set up? Did I miss the memo? I want on that committee.
In Posner’s world what creepy government agency is going to decide which crappy movies have “value” and which don’t? Seeing Connie Britton and Jessica Lange tortured by the horrible writing on American Horror Story offended me. BAN IT! I’ve long thought Gangsta Rap is valueless and destructive. BAN IT! The endless stream of Geico ad campaigns work my last nerve…give me a minute…wait…okay, I just massaged my annoyance into a grievance. Mocking ancient cavepeople is offensive because I just now joined the cavepeople religion. (It’s called Flintstoneonism.) BAN ALL THE GEICO ADS! If you don’t I might burn a KFC or knock over something at Spencer’s gifts with a large cartoon mutton-chop. My feelings are hurt. Therefore, let’s discuss how we might curtail your rights.
Also, I demand that intelligent people stop being subjected to the relentlessly stupid in this country. It’s offensive. I’m angry about it. So here are some things and people who are offensive to the reasonably intelligent and ought to be banned:
Carlos Mencia, that Akin guy running for Senate, TV shows which involve eating weird food, mid morning television in general, Mika Brzezinski and Honey Boo Boo (separated at birth?), anyone who thinks Sideways was a good movie, Keith Olbermann and his psychotherapists, Madonna (It’s time, sister.), UFO Abductees, Occupy Wall Street (They are too stupid to be given free speech rights. I could have gotten more done from a phone booth in Fresno.) Breatharians, parents who don’t shut their screaming kids up in restaurants, the Kardashians, Obama’s Chicago church, and the film version of Midnight In The Garden Of Good And Evil. Also Scientology. All these things are so intellectually vapid they could potentially trigger intelligent people to riot. Ban them all.
I wonder – should The Book of Mormon be taken off Broadway because it’s religiously offensive to some? If a crazed Mormon shoots up a mall in Provo and blames that play should it be banned? Is it the play’s fault? Why yes. Yes it is. Thanks for pointing that out Professor Posner!
Seriously – people need to QUIT BLAMING A BAD MOVIE FOR MURDER. Our alleged leadership has spent 2 weeks distancing itself from a movie, implying the movie is the problem. The President called Google to encourage them to find a way to take it down. There were no terms of use violation so, thank God, Google refused. Presumably Obama felt it was worth a call, though. Screw our Constitution, some freaks in Goatfuckistan are angry.
A truly Ed Wood bad movie did not cause the eruption of blood lust in the Middle East. The Islamist cavemen murdered because they are murdering cavemen. Here’s a little news for Professor Posner: WE DON’T GIVE UP FREEDOM BECAUSE LUNATICS GET THEIR FEELINGS HURT. It’s a nonstarter. The conversation begins and ends with:
“Yep, it’s a bad movie, but he had the right to make it.”
So, the Breatharians are still alive? There is a G-d. I remember reading about them over 30 years ago and sitting there, pondering how they synthesize nutrients from breathing- and they weren’t particularly skinny either. I guess their metabolisms were even slower than mine, poor things.
Celebrate the joy of insanity, it is a refreshing departure from the self righteous and uncreative crap that permeates obamanation.
I knew a breatharian once. He lived in a tiny ceramic pot, affixed to my fridge with a magnet. He died.
The conversation begins and ends with:
“Yep, it’s a bad movie, but he had the right to make it.” Actually ends with “. . .And go fuck yourself if you don’t agree.”
BTW: the Taliban destroyed ancient artifacts and Islamists in Egypt are trying to do the same to priceless ancient Egyptian artifacts because they are offended by them as they “disrespect Islam.” Hey- Obama – the King Tut exhibit is here in Seattle. Maybe we need to have a big bonfire of all the artifacts lest Muslims are offended by it. ‘Cause you know all those ancients only created their religious and cultural mores in order to incite violence amongst rabid Muslims, so they need to be punished and silenced forever from history.
Maybe we should start an ongoing list of all the things that, according to Muslims, “offend Islam.” This actually started in the last thread, but can start it formally.
Things that “offend Islam:” – being left-handed (as using your left hand which Muslims haven’t evolved past doing unhygenic things with such as shaking hands is disgusting and offends Muslims)
Things that offend Islam: WOMEN.
Retweeted! The author did not stop to think (of course) that this slippery slope leads to a very bad place- floggings, stonings, beheadings………
It’s small-minded shits like Eric Posner who pave the way to fascism.
Thanks for the RT, Mom.
JWS–A most righteous and riotously funny rant. Thank you!
Trying to figure out what makes these whackos angry and homicidal is like trying to figure out why your alcoholic Uncle Louie got sloshed again. It really doesn’t matter why because tomorrow they will find some other excuse for their destructive behavior. It’s time to adopt the Al-Anon slogan for Islamic extremists: “I didn’t cause it, I can’t control it, I can’t cure it.”
That being said, I do see the point in reaching out to the majority within the Muslim world who are *not* storming embassies or burning American flags. In their countries, freedom of speech is an alien concept. To them, “movie made in the USA” equals “movie made by or at least sanctioned by the US government.” They don’t understand the difference and they really do need to have it explained to them. An explanation isn’t the same as an apology, or at least it shouldn’t be. Not everyone will listen or understand, but some people will. One can also denounce the content of that movie (I watched it and it was stupid) without taking away filmmakers’ rights to make and distribute such crap. I think Obama crossed the line when he asked Google to take down the movie. YouTube has all kinds of offensive videos, ranging from white power music to a deplorable Hamas-produced children’s TV program called “Tomorrow’s Pioneers” that depicts Israeli soldiers killing a Mickey Mouse lookalike. You’ve got to see it to believe it. I remember at the time it came out (2007-ish), the little girl who hosts the show received death threats, but as far as I know nothing happened.
In some part of O’s speech yesterday, he proclaimed that , ‘the future should not belong to those who would slander Islam” [sic] So the future will not belong to a few cartoonists, and an un-talented filmmaker.. Well, ok, most of us can agree to that.
Just imagine as a young man who can’t get laid, you could rampage through the streets, beating the crap out of people and starting fires, all the while getting your 15 minutes on t.v. In their world, it doesn’t get any cooler than that.
The West needs to stop making excuses, and trying to ‘understand’, which we never will, any more than they ‘understand’ us and our freedoms.
Trough enough, conner. Though I think that I do ‘understand’ their sensitivities, I agree with John that they do need to just grow the fuck up.
Luv the last 2 rants.
Another speech where the ‘great won’ blames an obscure movie for terroristic attacks. I heard that most of these rioters had NOT seen the movie or trailer – it was just a ploy by the imams / leaders to fire up the people. I’m not much for conspiracy theories but do believe Val Jarret is behind much of Obama’s posturing to the Arab world.
BTW – my family likes the Geico Gecko.
The future does not belong to those who insult the Gecko.
Things that “offend Islam:” – showing the bottoms of your shoes.
Love it – but sorry “Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil” is a guilty pleasure – I know it’s not a good movie but I always watch it every time I run across it no matter how far along it is. Maybe it’s because I love Savannah and Johnny Mercer music.
Seriously, Obama crossed the line from the moment he started blaming all this on a cheesy film clip. From the first hours onward our government has been complicit right along side the mullahs of inflaming, conflating, and promoting this stupid film. Our representatives have talked about that thing so much that what had 1000 hits on YouTube on Sep 10 has now become the most dangerous piece of cinematic drivel in the world. They knew within 24 hours at the most (and possibly had advance warning from Amb Stevens himself) of AQ attack. They have lied their asses off ever since then. No one cares.
Things that offend Islam? How about dogs and pigs . . . and anything not processed Halal.
Tell me you’ve read the book, greyledge gal. It’s dense, delicious, superb. Though I do love other Eastwood movies…
I am, however, in the market to blame SOMETHING on The Master. I’ll let you know.
I thought it was an excellent, though troubling, movie.
Everything went to hell after GRAND CANYON came out.
Things that offend Islam: Any businesses that won’t let Muslims take numerous hours/days of leave time that no other employee can take and that adversely affects their business. Such as – Hertz who’s Muslim shuttle bus drivers all wanted to be able to stop service 5 x a day to pray; A school district sued by a teacher who wanted the entire month of Ramadan off even though it was during the school year and she didn’t have the vacation time (and in a school which, reasonably enough, didn’t allow teacher to take vacation time during the school year).
Leave Mitt Romney alone!
Evidence submission # 3,692 that Zal is an Obama supporter. He would NEVER post ANYTHING like this about Obama with a gross Michelle Obama “impersonator.” He insults the intelligence and credibility of all those trying to defend him here – “you’re so wrong, Run, Zal really dislikes them both equally” – with garbage like this.
(Of course, it’s also evidence submission #6,841 that Zal has absolutely no sense of what actually is funny.)
Very Obot like behavior, Zal. You surprise me.
Yep I think it’s funny.
I also think run-dmc’s comment is funny because it reads like this woman sounds in the video.
And I’d love to know, NES, what’s “very Obot like behavior” about posting campaign satire.
Who wrote the rule that, if you oppose obama, you must support romney?
Tamerlane – My point is that I believe that Zal opposes Romney AND I don’t believe he opposes Obama. (Of course opposition to Obama doesn’t necessarily mean support for Romney, but Zal is not in that camp).
He pretends to oppose Obama but spends 98% of his time posting everything from unfunny insults (see: above) to barely coherent arguments against Romney; 1% of his time making inane, meaningless statements like “a pox on both their houses” before launching into long-winded anti-Romney tirades; and 1% of his time vaguely referring to Jill Stein who he supposedly supports but doesn’t seem to have enough time, energy or enthusiasm for to actually comment at length about her campaign. (In fact, the only time I’ve seen him comment about Stein in any length at all was as a reaction after being pushed repeatedly to answer why he actually thinks she would carry out her stated platform).
In this case, 98 + 1 + 1 to me = 100% Obama supporter. I prefer to believe what I see with my eyes not what I’m told contrary to all available evidence.
I have to admit, I find it telling that Zal keeps saying that Obama will win and yet he constantly attacks Romney. Why attack Romney and try to convince others that they shouldn’t vote for him if Obama is a shoo-in? If Obama is the clear winner and you really think he’s awful then why not spend your time trying to convince people to vote against him? It just doesn’t add up. But, hey, whatever floats his boat. I just hit the snooze button and don’t even try to navigate his word fogs.
If Zal is an Obot then rundmc is robot…just sayin’
1) If it weren’t for obama the Deceiver, this blog’s content would be all anti-Romney, all of the time;
2) OFA is presently making great efforts to suppress Jill Stein’s campaign, blocking matching funds and having obots berate anti-obama liberals with ‘remember Nader’ threats, because they know the race is actually tied. If Zal was an obot, he wouldn’t be promoting Stein’s platform as frequently and as eloquently as he has. Zal’s also spoken at length about the need to move away from the Uni-Party tyranny.
Stop this silly witch hunt: it’s tedious.
“And I’d love to know, NES, what’s “very Obot like behavior” about posting campaign satire.”
I won’t make a logical argument for it, Zal. I had a visceral reaction to the video clip because:
1. Personally, I believe politicians spouses are non-combatants and therefore not fair game. So, it troubles me at that level (although that alone wouldn’t have prompted my response).
2. It tears the back off a woman in the most bitchy way — the way Obots did, ad nauseum, with Hillary and Palin. It smacks of the same intemperate, hysterical and over the top putdown of a woman in the public eye.
3. It was unlike your usual substantive contributions to this post.
4. It’s low-grade, and not particularly effective, ‘humor,’ and reeks of malice.
That said, I’ve never thought you were an Obot, and still don’t. That’s why I said “Obot-like,” which was a deliberate choice of words. At bottom, and as I’ve made clear here on many occasions, I agree with the view that these witch-hunts are tedious and should stop. Had I not commented impulsively, I’d have stated my feelings differently.
Tamerlane – I will continue to point out all the very obvious evidence of Zal’s duplicity here. He is playing a game with everyone here and I’ll continue to call him on it. Posting something llike this video that even a 7th grader would find idiotic is just one of those things where he slips up and his true colors are revealed. I’m not sure what eloquent defence of Jill Stein you’re referring to b/c I actually went back some weeks ago (ugh!) and looked at his past comments to verify my instinct about him with evidence. Didn’t see anything that came close to a full-throated argument FOR anyone, including Stein. But, paragraph after paragraph against Romney. So, no – I’m not going to stop. And, don’t compliment him by calling him a witch.
First of all, I do not proselytize.
Secondly, whether it’s Romney or Obama, either will be an utter disaster for our nation. In 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 I wrote thousands of posts attacking Obama. I am sick to death of him, he’s not doing anything new, and, unlike in 2008, I do not believe voting for his opponent is a better alternative. If I had my way nobody would vote for Romney and nobody would vote for Obama, so why on earth would I try to convince anybody either way?
My position since 2008 has been that both parties are ruinous and are in cahoots with corporate interests that are destroying our economy, our food and water, our environment, our education, and our ability to think and act clearly on our own behalf. If I could persuade anybody it would be to not vote for any Democrat or Republican, to vote and support third party.
If my participation on blogs has a mission it’s to inform, shine a light on the truth, and provide my original take on what’s going on, not to try to convince anybody of anything. That’s what some others come here to do, not me. I committed, decades ago, to be an authentic person and live an authentic life, to seek and tell the truth and let the chips fall where they may. Most people are not persuaded by the truth, they’re persuaded through seduction or manipulation or intimidation. My strength, what I have to offer, is authenticity, not machination.
Nobody here is voting for Obama. Even if I were inclined to proselytize, why would I try to convince people to do what they’re already doing?
I disagree when the spouse puts him or herself in the thick of the campaign. I wish satirists had the nerve to go after Michelle Obama.
That reads as your primary reason and although you, of course, have every right to it for yourself, I don’t give a shit about it. I generally reject identity politics, and anything as off limits to satire.
Well I rarely post humor and this is a good example of why.
I thought it was funny and I thought some people might enjoy a laugh, and if they didn’t think it was funny they’d scroll past. But of course, instead, some people get their panties in a twist and decide it proves I’m a secret Obama supporter and “obot like.” So now you and I know a little more about each other. You know I laugh at low humor and I know you’re prepared to be convinced I’m obot like.
The actual context of Zal’s video post, which he might’ve not been aware, is that “Leave Ann Romney Alone” is an internet meme based on the original “Leave Britney Alone” video when Britney Spears had her nervous breakdown a few years back.
It’s an intentionally stupid and lowgrade humorous video because its,lifting from the original meme
Zal has consistently commented against both Obama and Romney, and consistently been honest about his support of non Uniparty candidates as well as being completely honest and direct in his responses here and I’ve got no reasontothink he’s not authentic. “Zaldonis is an OFA troll” is becoming aN internet meme of its own based on arguments that blew up on other blogs and then found its way here.
FTR I think he’s right, both parties are corrupt abd if we continue along this path were headed for a reality that the majority of America is simply not prepared for. This current way of life that we have is being proven more and more to be unsustainable on many levels, the corrupt oligarchy would like us to believe that we can not only keep as we are, but return to the good old days
.. either the mythic past or mythic future… Rather than give it to us straight about the situation we are in.
Zal’s opinions and demeanor may be caustic at times, but there is something to be said for what he is sharing and the consistency in which he is sharing it.
Thanks Dan.
I knew the provenance of the sketch. That’s one of the reasons I thought it was funny. That gay Britney fan was so ridiculously childish and overwrought, and so is this caricature of both that fanboy and Ann Romney, it struck me as funny. Reminded me also of the John Goodman skit satirizing Linda Tripp on SLN. I don’t care if it’s a gay fanboy or an actor or actress playing a character, outsized melodramatic pleading for people to stop being mean to very privileged powerful people who feel victimized strikes me as good satire.
This is news to me. Where else besides here? The first time I ever saw anybody call me an OFA troll was right here. Before Lola I was always characterized as an Obama hater. Where did you see the meme blow up? I know Lola and her posse cozy with the clique on Crawdad, and myiq, a middle aged loser (a pity because he’s smart and a good writer, could’ve had a better life if he’d made better choices), put me in moderation for challenging Lolita, but other than that I know nothing about this internet meme. Please fill me in or point me in the direction where I can find it for myself. Again, thanks Dan.
“This is news to me. Where else besides here? The first time I ever saw anybody call me an OFA troll was right here.”
Zal, when I said that “Zaldonis is an OFA troll is becomnig a meme I was sarcastically referring to this:
http://peacocksandlilies.com/2012/07/08/zaladonis-the-ofa-troll/
I thought we all collectively already discussed this ad-nauseum and was making a joke.
I don’t think you’re a troll, like I said you can be on the gruff side and calling Anthony a stoner doesn’t help, but I’m not going to tell you how you should interact with others nor what your thoughts should be…which is generally in line with the spirit of the overall conversation we are having about freedom of speech… sometimes feelings will get hurt in the heat of the moment and in the heat of an argument and that’s unfortunate… my only suggestion towards everyone collectively is let’s not try and do that intentionally.
“In 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 I wrote thousands of posts attacking Obama. I am sick to death of him…”
Well, that’s certainly understandable. I’m sick to death of him too. Unlike you, I believe it’s likely that Romney is the lesser evil. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see. But after the Benghazi cover-up and Obama’s seeming endorsement of blasphemy laws, I’m worried (and pissed off) that I might have to vote for Romney which would totally fuck up my plans to enjoy casting my ballot this year. I am not a happy camper right now.
gxm, do you mind disclosing whether or not you vote in a battleground state?
I’m in Virginia. We’re a swing state but we’re pretty low in the pecking order of swing states.
Dan: I’m not clicking into anything called peacocks and lilies (I’m gay but not that gay!) but I’d hardly call Lolita’s site and her few dozen followers an Internet meme. Except in her own nicotine addled mind. The Internet’s a big place and although lots of people fancy themselves well known with a thousand or so hits, well to be vulgar about it: back in the day I slept with more men than that. It’s really not much, especially hits on the Internet, in a world with billions of people. A sense of proportion.
As for Anthony, he’s a stoner. If he didn’t want me to notice or mention it, he shouldn’t have waved around his bong. I know guys like that backwards and forwards: they’re left-behinds on the UWS who get confused by Walk/Don’t Walk signs.
I notice and I call it like it is. That upsets some people.
The truth will set us free; the rest is bunk.
“I notice and I call it like it is. That upsets some people.”
Or, some people are bothered by your insistence that how you see it is how it IS.
Like I said Zal.. I was being sarcastic referring to the internet meme.
I’m not trying to be referee here, and hope we can continue the ongoing conversation.
“That depends on what you’re definition of IS is.” – Bill Clinton
Dan: I don’t call people trolls, and I don’t know about any other blog memes that might be calling Zal that. I do know what I’ve read from him and my %s stand – 98% against Romney and 1% against Obama is NOT consistent in my book. (I’ve been reading JWS blog every day since it was Liberal Rapture too, and have no idea what Zal means by the “thousands of posts against Obama”). And, this grotesque video he posted is closing argument in my book. (His implying that he can’t find anything satirizing Michelle Obama and that’s why he hasn’t posted anything like this about the Obamas is transparent and moronic. 5 minutes on the web would find something just as bad and equally as unfunny featuring an MO impersonator or the like. He just wouldn’t ever post anything like that about MO and he knows it.)
As an aside, I believe both parties are significantly flawed too, but I also believe it’s childish to wish there was a third choice and spend all one’s time and energy on wish fulfillment since a 3rd party president is not to be in our lifetime. (I also wish that I was a bestselling author living on Anguilla, but alas – since it’s not to be – I have to get up every morning and do work that sometimes bores me to death for hours at a time. That’s just life). So, I’m standing up making a choice I wish I didn’t have to make, but feel is necessary and right – for Romney. And, I’ll continue to call people out who are intentionally trying to get people to make a choice that absolutely is supportive of Obama either directly or indirectly.
Run I’m going to skip the whole troll thing just becuase I’m more interested in engaging and talking about what you said regarding Romney/3rd Party.
1st of all, you’re completely within rights to actively show your support to Romney and campaign for other people to change their mind..so is Anthony, so is AnnaBelle. I don’t agree with your choice, but your right as a voter is to have that choice and if you feel like doing that, convince others to do that. That’s our political process.
2nd, by the same token, if Zal or anyone else wants to campaign against Romney/Obama either directly or indirectly, they have the right to do that too.
3rd, in terms of 3rd party, I can name some other political parties who’ve come and gone over the years just off the top of my head aside from the Greens, there were the Whigs, the Federalists, the Know Nothings (love that name), the Mugwumps (not really a party but an awesome name) etc.
Right now our poltiical system is dominated by two parties, The Republicans and Democrats, one of the reasons is because of the sheer amount of money required to run for political office and because nobody has the integrity nor the chutzpah to pass campaign finance reform, forcing every political candidate to only use public funding to run their campaigns.. if that happened, then candidates are defined by their ideas, not by their war chests. Obviously Democrats and Repbublicans who rely on that steady stream of money arent inclined to let that happen, nor are the lobbies that supply that money.
BUT.. as long as we’re conditioned by the media and bullshitted by politicians to think that it’s better to vote for the devil you know rather than the devil you dont, and by saying that third party will never be viable in our lifetime, we are guaranteeing that it will never be viable.
Mentioning that your pedantic, tedious posts were easier for some of us to get through after a bong hit does not a stoner make. And be advised, I most certainly wasn’t trying to get your attention. You’re just not that impressive.
Zal, we’ve never met, and I’ve already told you that I don’t appreciate your personal attacks. Are you an Obot? Who knows? Who cares? What I surmise is that for all your protestation, you’ll most likely vote for Obama, and I think you’re lying about how you’re going to vote for Stein. Since I don’t know you either, I can’t say I know that for sure, but everything seems to point in that direction.
I wouldn’t get too puffed up because Dan is defending you. You have your little posse who circles the wagons every time someone calls you out for being the jerk that you are, and its evident that this won’t stop. It would be more believable if they called “foul” when you make addlebrained accusations and lobbed personal attacks against some of us who also comment here. I’m sure Lola and run_dmc and I can take care of ourselves, but let’s be real: You’re a pompous ass who thinks he knows it all, and the fact is that you wouldn’t recognize an original thought if it kicked you in the balls.
You have claimed to be a financial whiz, freelance writer, a homeless person, the son of Rosie the Riveter who is still working in her 80′s, and as soon as immigration becomes a larger issue, I’m sure that you will claim to have had a career as a migrant day worker. To be clear, I don’t believe anything you say. It just doesn’t add up.
Dan – thank you for pointing out my rights and Zal’s. I understand fully what my rights are. I also understand what Zal’s are. I further understand that I can (and will as long as JWS allows free commenting here) continue to voice my belief that Zal is obfuscating where his true support lies. Frankly, I think, in addition to other evidence I’ve pointed to, my case is made with his posting the above video, particularly since I have yet to hear him or anyone else deny my contention that he absolutely would never post anything so gross about either Obama.
The point you are making about long ago 3rd parties actually makes my point that a 3rd party right now cannot field a viable presidential candidate. Yes, parties have come and gone but that was hundreds of years ago – at times – with some of the parties you mentioned- when we had only a few more than 13 states and you could get the word out about your candidacy by pamphleteering and horseback. Do you think we are ever going back there?
And, your comment about conditioning by the media and bullshitted by politicians is condescending, but also untrue as relates to 3rd party viability. I don’t think we have only 2 parties because people are sheep and the media dominates. Nor does the dominance of $ or some reform of campaign laws matter. After all, we’ve had 2 party government in the US since before there was tv or even radio and when $ did not play anywhere near the role it does now. We have 2 party control primarily because of our system of government which forces us towards duopolies in control of the government. If we lived in a parliamentary system, we might see a difference, although even modern parliamentary structures are evolving more towards 2 party control.
The current (relatively recent) domination of the media and resultant apathy in the voting citizenry has resulted in our candidates having platforms that are quite similar to each other, I would agree, but that is very different from why we don’t have a viable 3rd party choice. (I would point out that in the last few years, the one emerging movement that looked like it might turn into a 3rd party with some success at a state and local level and who knows where from there was the Tea Party – until the loose membership decided to work within the 2 party system. As I receall, the TP received some pretty choice epithets from a number of commenters here. 3rd party viability didn’t seem so great then.)
As for my choice for President – you see, I don’t need to be “inspired” by a candidate. I don’t need them to make me feel better about myself. I don’t even feel the need to believe they actually will be able to do most of what they promise – no one ever does and I’d be a fool to believe in campaign promises anyway. Our Presidency, unlike some countries, oversees a vast and complicated machine that needs a competent, fully engaged and smart (not just book-smart) leader in order to actually do things that our vast and complicated country needs it to do. It’s a real job job. Not a “job.” This leader plays a critical role, not in our spiritual uplift, but our ability to have a functioning society and he/she needs to make incredibly complicated decisions every single day, if not hour, in between welcoming the most recent NBA winning team and easter egg role attendees. Maybe Jill Stein and Gary Johnson and whomever else are really super competent managers. But, I personally do not believe either would be up to the task of running the executive branch competently. I certainly did not believe and now I KNOW that Obama is not up to the task. Of ALL the people running for president, I believe Romney is up to that task by far.
OMG – the “migrant day worker” comment had me rolling. Now THAT was funny.
Hi Run, thanks for responding. Im not trying to be condescending, nor am I trying to stir the pot between and arguments or axes to grind on this blog, I just like taking part in the conversation… Im stepping out of any other arguments people are having.
Like I said, my thought about third party candidates and the money involved in campaigning wasn’t meant to be condescending but I appreciate what you said..if nothing else that just makes me want to dig deeper in terms of third parties. I would actually wonder if anyone would be interested in having a conversation about that.
My reaction comes more from my frustration that there isn’t another option…that we constantly have to pick between the right or the left, that these two giant parties dominate our electoral choices and we’ve become pretty deadlocked as a result. I would think that if a third party was able to pull 10-15% of the vote in every election, that the Democrats and Republicans would have to work harder to sway those voters back to either Democratic/Republican votes based on their platforms and proposals.
Again, I think that this topic does merit a larger discussion and would love to have that somehow? This thread is getting kind of long.
No question about it, Jay, that irks a lot of people. Infuriates some, even.
The reason I comment as I do, however, is I’m now in my mid-50s and have a long track record of getting it right. Recent examples are the Arab Spring and Trayvon Martin, and there are hundreds of examples going back. Sometimes I get it wrong, but rarely. This is the case for a few reasons: I stick to what I know, I know a lot about what I know, I’m uncommonly observant and see without the distortion of sacred cows and alliances. And because I know I’m probably right when most people are getting it wrong, I carry the confidence of decades of correct calls. There’s a lot of false confidence around today, tons of narcissism and bluster wrapped up in likable verbiage and ultra white smiles; only a few people can recognize the real thing, confidence presented forthrightly and earned through experience. Foolish people aren’t my fault, and like all old fashioned New Yorkers I don’t suffer fools gladly. I get occasional thanks from people who read my comments, sometimes from very unexpected sources, and that feels good; otherwise I just deal with attacks from others (who invariably insist they don’t attack me) best I can, and sometimes the way I do it isn’t pretty. Truth is like that; it’s lies that can be wrapped up in pretty.
Hah – Anthony, you can add a few other items to ALL the many facets of Zal. He’s also an “old fashioned New Yorker” and Omniscient – kind of like Carnac the Magnificent. I think I’m going to have to start a roll of everything Zal claims to be.
Honey, I was born and raised on Central Park South. Trust me, Zal is no New Yorker. My guess would be he’s someone who moved here from Connecticut, or more accurately from New Jersey. The closer they are, the more stupid they behave. We natives speak a different language than he speaks.
A couple of years ago I took on a medical ‘intern’ in our office. She had superb grades, glowing references and she was funny and smart. She was taking a year off from her last year of medical school to either explore a specialty or decide if public health was for her.
She was from Bangledesh, and was semi modern, in that she wore tightly wound scarves on her head and neck, always long sleeves, and flowing pants and caftans. This was a lot to haul around, she was, at best, 5’2″ and less than a hundred pounds. She had a lovely face and beautiful smile. Her parents were paying full freight for all her very expensive schooling. One Friday she asked to leave early as she was attending a weekend retreat at Columbia. She casually mentioned it was for Muslim girls to learn how to find husbands, [oversimplifying here} Not a month later, she quit without notice, due to being ‘needed at home’, and a month after that, I received an invitation to her wedding..
I sent what I hope was an appropriate gift, and had ‘other commitments’ for that weekend. I was so sad to see so much potential lost, but her parents were ‘very traditional’ as she had often remarked.
The whole experience left me wondering how many super smart, funny and kind, young ladies are down in the same rabbit hole with my friend.
This whole episode, nay, the last four years has a very North-Koreanesque odor to it. Nothing that goes wrong is Dear Leader’s fault; therefore, the true culprits must be identified and punished.
I hope this doesn’t come across as pedantic because we’ve all talked about it, but I’m just trying to organize my thoughts.
I agree that the huge fundamental disconnect that is being, at this point, probably deliberately being reenforced in the media as the simple explanation of what happened – is that the movie (and the inflamatory things in the movie) have caused the unrest in Egypt and the concurrent terrorist attack in Benghazi.
Aside from being slimy, weak and pandering… Obama’s quote about the equating the slander of the prophet of Islam to the persecution of Christians and the genocidal suffering that the Jews suffered is pretty Neville Chamberlain-esque in it’s naivety.
The issue is not so much that free speech is inflaming the Islamic masses, it’s that for the most part the Islamic masses are poor and ignorant, and have been poor and ignorant for the past 1400 years… they aren’t even bothering to connect the dots. While the masses are poor and ignorant, the Islamic aristocracy live in a state of disparate wealth that must boggle the mind. So if you’re poor and ignorant and you can’t partake in the usual ways of letting off steam (sex, drinking, eating, watching TV, etc.) one needs to channel all of that energy outward at something… usually a scapegoat… while being promised the eternal rewards in heaven to make up for the fact that you aren’t eating, drinking and fucking whoever you like.
So as Sophie said above, when you’ve got a population that, for lack of a better word.. head-fucked over their religion… rioting, burning, looting… they are ways to pass the time and take the edge off. Had that JUST been a riot in Egypt and a couple of American flags burned, this wouldn’t even be a blip on the radar because that kind of stuff happens on a daily basis throughout the region.
So aside from the very rich on top and the very poor on the bottom, in the middle you’ve got the people who actually believe all this shit, mostly probably young poor angry and sexually frustrated men with a sadistic streak a mile wide, who are willing to strap on a suicide vest, decapitate someone, blow up a building, mutilate a live human being and rip a dead human being to pieces in the street…those are the guys who really believe they’re doing Allah’s work. And if you’re on of those men it’s pretty easy to get access to weapons and explosives and become a mujadeen and take part in the jihad.
Since all three teirs of Islamic fundamentalists have got access to high speed travel, air travel and internet/phone communications, they can be hateful and sadistic on a much larger scale rather than focus their hatred exclusively on Israel. And through our own attempts at nation building and securing oil in the Middle East over past 100 years (give or take), we are essentially The Great Satan.
So there’s a bunch of ways to deal with it, here are 4 I can think of:
OPTION 1. Kill every militant Islamic fundamentalist we can find until there are no more militant Islamic fundamentalists to kill while simultaneously capturing and if neccessary destroying their resources and capability to be militant… thus reducing the capacity for other militant Islamic fundamentalists to be created… not the best solution, certainly not the most “American” solution. Certainly not a solution I advocate, but generally the rule of war is to kill enemy combatants as efficiently as possible while sustaining as few casualties as possible. In the past we’ve contented ourselves with having other individuals in the region wield the hatchet for us with disastrous results (Quadaffi, Hussein and finally Osama Bin Laden) so I think that option is off the table as well…but if we keep collectively dicking around Israel may just solve that problem for us.
OPTION 2.Cultivate an “Arab Spring” where we are encouraging intelligent/moderate Islamic leaders to wrest control of their governments from the despotic and sadistic leaders and live in American style peace and love and Democracy… with bacon, porn, casual sex, liberty and justice for all. If this is ever going to work, and I’m not really sure that it ever will, it will take generations. Islamic contact with the modern world is limited to about 120 years? Some countries have taken to it better than others (Turkey being one example) but for the most part, not so much.. I think the best one can hope for is a return to Arab Socialism but given the current climate of the region not likely.
OPTION 3. UNDERSTAND Them – Let’s figure Islam as a religion is about 650 years old at this point and lets say 100 years of those have been exposed to modern culture… and their exposure to modern culture hasnt been all that productive…other than providing the elite with tons of money and the poor with tons of anger and weaponry… our level of understanding must correlate on some level with “whats in it for us?”… oil isn’t getting any cheaper and the region isn’t getting any more stable with our attempts at understanding. I’m fine with the idea of being a City on the Hill, but in our City on our Hill you don’t get decapitated for making fun of Santa Claus… True understanding lies in seeing the situation for what it is,not for what we want it to be… and I think as a culture we’re looking at the Middle East through the gaze of what we want it to be (like us) rather than what it is.
OPTION 4.LEAVE – Once we finally come to the understanding of option 3, give up waiting for an arab spring in option 2 and are unwilling to have option 1 on the table either by doing the killing ourselves or doing it by proxy, all we are left with is just leaving the region. We keep our alliance with Israel (they’ve got about 200 nukes in their arsenal so we really dont have a choice there), tell the Sauds to go screw themselves and take the learnings of beating our heads against the wall for the past 100 years and just walk away and let the chips fall where they may. As long as there is oil there, that will probably never happen because we have to control that flow of oil on some level not just to maintain our way of life, but to stop other countires from challenging our position as king of the hill…and until we change our way of life, we’re stuck there in a bizarre and bloody codependent relationship.
Thats all I really have on this, just dismay. Following Obama’s speech yesterday I was just shocked about the whole “prophet of Islam” thing… not all religions are created equal, not all relgious beliefs should be revered a priori… in comparison to the rest of the world, we’ve got a free and open society because our laws allow us and protect us and enable us to have a free and open society. The very notion that we would change the freedoms we hold dear and the laws that protect them our country so as not to inflame the opinions and religious beliefs of other countries who do not share those values is something that should be absolutely repugnant to every thinking person residing in this country.
If the leadership of the United States of America wants to collectively wring it’s hands over a video posted on the internet, I suggest they google “Daniel Pearl” on YouTube in order to truly “understand” the type of mentality and mindset of the belief system that we are “slandering”.
I know Im oversimpliftying a little here and didn’t really get into the plight of women in Islamic culture, but Im still trying to get my head around all of the stuff from yesterday and taking in everyone’s comments.
I offer a more radical plan.
Withdraw from the Middle East entirely. Wash our hands of the whole damn region. Cut all financial aid to Israel. With 200 nukes in their arsenal they should be able to defend themselves very nicely. If the Palestenians and the Israelis want to bomb each other to smithereens they should be allowed to. Have fun, guys!
We’d no longer be “The Great Satan” or a target for terrorist attacks.
The collective wringing of hands over the film is just a distraction, a subterfuge, as many have pointed out. It is a method to either scapegoat incompetence, or more likely, allow a way out for the Islamists. I don’t know if any of you have been on college campuses lately, but there has been a pervasive alignment with the Palestinians as being an oppressed people with a concomitant displeasure with Israel. It is scary, as it has become anti-semitic and fuels the insanity. Of course, there is a speck of truth to everything, so it is difficult to completely refute the opinion that some Palestinians have been oppressed, but the singular distaste for Israel is disconcerting. I saw a talk a few months ago on CSPAN where the son of Ariel Sharon was invited to an upstate NY college to talk in general terms about the current state of affairs. He was booed and rudely interrupted repeatedly and many of the questions posed to him by students were pointedly defamatory and obnoxious. None of the faculty moderators intervened. I am not talking about free speech here- everyone present was and should be able to voice their opinions, etc., I was just shaken by the vitriol. I assume this is part of the reason the wringing of hands is occurring- a covert message to the elite class that the obamalots are in agreement.
Dan, replying, I think, to your comment below; you are not oversimplifying, that is not the problem. The problem is the politicians who, because of their enormous insecurities, want us to think every action is ‘complicated’, when it is they who are the problem..
How do you feel about burning crosses (with no violation of property rights) next to the homes of black folks in the 1950s rural south? How do you feel about the nazis marching through heavily Jewish Skokie Illinois, specifically choosing a route through a Jewish neighborhood? These are uses of the first amendment which cloak an intent to intentionally cause mental and emotional distress. They are also examples of political based free speech. If you are cool with these examples, you are most likely at least a purist for political free speech. If not, then you see an area here that is worthy of thoughtful discourse and consideration. There are competing social goods here. And they are more complicated than placating religious fanatics and murderers or allowing douchebags to cause intentional havoc.
Angela, your WAY off. Again, you go to emotion and if you insist on this then ALL speech must be included as potentially harmful to someone. Hence my jokes above. Are we to stop speech for causing ” mental and emotional distress.”? Attacks on Hillary caused ME emotional distress in 2008. I did not think they should be banned. This feelings centered take is Oprah-esque nonsense and it leads to fascism. Obama supporters were entirely run by “feelings” in 2008 and they were the most fascist group we’ve seen in a while in this country in practice and instinct. Alinsky’s rules are essentially brown shirt tactics. They used them. Feelings might get hurt so we must control things….and control is finally what it’s all about. Some bozo film maker caused upset so the easy choice it to blame him, not the people who went nuts over it. This is classic co-dependance….no no…it’s my fault for not understanding the violent drunk…not his.
I agree with the ACLU on skokie and the burning crosses example is specious on so many fronts I do not know where to begin. Lets just say this: the issue wasn’t speech it was direct intimidation – YES people get to burn crosses. restricting were and when is totally in bounds. How you get THERE from a bad film made months ago in orange county CA “caused” murders 5000 miles away defies logic. We’re to ban films that might give people in another hemisphere an excuse to riot months later ? No one went to a mosque on a friday in Dayton and torched korans for sport…after decades of lynching muslims and centuries of enslaving them.
By your logic Huckelberry Finn should have been banned. Uncle Tom’s Cabin too. That book upset ALOT of people and it’s not really very good either. The Satanic Verses, every episode of South Park, the piss christ, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, The Book of Mormon, both the play and the book itself,…they all caused ” mental and emotional distress.” Just because THEY are thin skinned doesn’t me WE must diminish our rights.
The deification of feelings is the real problem here. We’re to “understand” the rioters in the ME from a Western psychological construct, and adjust OUR values to assuage THEIR immaturity. No. Not having it.
While we’re at it let’s ban the Bible. The ” mental and emotional distress.” it’s caused gay people by the millions is overwhelming.
And “intentionally” is a red flag. Damn right that film maker had an intention. So what? On this blog I “intentionally” want to cause emotional distress to Obama fanatics all the time. I want some posts to be a metaphorical plank to the head. There are a lot of these people. Do I need to avoid voicing my opinion because they might get upset?
And, Family Guy, John. Don’t forget Family Guy would be banned too. (Just watched a very funny one last night that was Jesus-centered and not shall we say in a reverential way!)
Are you recruiting for the Thought Police, Angela?
Angela, the only free speech we can control is our own, at least in America, for some of us that is a full time job, and not an easy one, at that.
Dan: What you said! The one thing I’d add to your analysis of the region is the demographic bulge which you alluded to but which there has been some very interesting analysis about combined with Peak Oil (or at least the 2 are inter-related). Due to procreation patterns and practices that encourage more births of males and less thriving of females, these countries have a bulging male youth population which – in the most economically secure of societies can become a problem to channel that energy constructively. Then, you have Peak Oil essentially upon us which I have no doubt the leadership of these countries dependent either directly or indirectly on relatively cheap oil well understands. Their days of relying on oil as a resource – and face it – what else do most of these countries have to support their economy – is dwindling and they are scared as hell over what to do with an increasing population of young males with a increasing potential of economic devastation far beyond what they even may face now within about a generation. They are trying to prepare in the only way their short-sighted leaders know how – figure out who to turn the wrath of these young men on outwardly before the shit really hits the fan after they can’t sell their one resource anymore.
That’s why I agree with Your #4. We need to get out of that area of the world. We need to absolutely figure out how to marshall all available resources over the next generation outside of that area of the world and change our lifestyle so that we do. not. ever. have. to. go. there. I would also end immigration to the US from any countries where anti-American sentiment is over 50% and/or where there are active radical Islamist cells and/or where institutional violence against women is in place and end all aid and beef up aid to Israel.
Angela: As an African-American and a former card-carrying member of the ACLU (which sued and won to allow Nazis to march in Skokie), I’m not “cool” with the activities you mentioned but I ABSOLUTELY believe they should be allowed to happen. And, guess what – I wouldn’t riot and rampage and kill if/when they do happen. If I do do so in response, I should rightfully be arrested, tried and likely imprisoned.
The Klan and Nazis have a right to express their hateful views. And, this is not 1950s south, so as you know, that example is inapposite. Cross-burnings then accompanied violence by the Klan and it was the violence on a widescale level that was rightfully stamped out. The Klan still burn crosses at their rallies. (I doubt they’d be able to in a residential neighborhood due to most zoning and safety laws, but they certainly do in rural areas). They still march. So do the Nazis. The appropriate response as carried out by people of all walks of life in Skokie was to counter-protest and march – peacefully. Or – as with the example of the lunatic churchmembers who say horrible things about gays outside high profile funerals – either ignore them or put up barricades so you can’t see them. Our most revered leader should have used this situation as one of his legendary “teachable moments” to point out to our Muslim “friends” how civilized people react to speech which they find deplorable or with which they disagree.
You can always find views that people find abhorrent like the ones you mentioned, but I hope you do understand that it is well settled law that all of those types of examples you mentioned are protected speech, just like burning the flag or submerging a crucifix in urine and displaying it as art. I find it unsettling in the extreme that you think this is some kind of “purist” view. It’s actually a basic American tenet. It’s not being a “purist for free speech” to uphold our 1st amendment freedoms as first principles it’s the essence of being an American. Any degredation of that principle is what I find abhorrent.
“It’s actually a basic American tenet. It’s not being a “purist for free speech” to uphold our 1st amendment freedoms as first principles it’s the essence of being an American. Any degredation of that principle is what I find abhorrent.”
Well said, Run.
I shudder to think how many Angelas are out there with this mushy feelings-based ‘reasoning.’ People who wear their liberties and principles lightly tend to lose them.
The correct response to offensive speech is more speech.
Quite right, JWS.
Very well said, Run. I’m impressed by your eloquence.
This video did not mortally offend all Muslims or even the majority of Muslims, so it is not hate speech unless you consider bad acting a hate crime. Less than a hundred terrorists stormed the embassy in Libya. A few days later, 30,000 Libyans actually marched in protest demanding justice for Ambassador Stevens.
A small faction of extremists have used this movie as an excuse for their cause, most of whom did not even watch it. President Obama’s words giving legitimacy to their alleged offense probably did more to pour fuel on the fire then the video itself.
“President Obama’s words giving legitimacy to their alleged offense probably did more to pour fuel on the fire then the video itself” Absolutely agreed. Although I would say that even if a video did offend all or a majority of Muslims, the filmaker had a protected right to make it and display it. Doesn’t mean he should get a development deal, but he shouldn’t face legal sanctions or restraint from showing it.
Define “hate speech”.
John – completely different topic, but i’ve noticed the ad squares under your posts. do you get credit for clicks through on those ads? I assume you do but I keep forgetting to click through to them and I don’t usually click on ads on most blogs. If I knew for sure you did, though, I’d make a point to click.
Run, I’ve agreed not to encourage or discourage any clicking so I can’t say one way or another without messing with my terms from WP. I can say there are two ways most blog ads work, one is by “impression” and I am blessed with a very loyal crowd here that stays on the page for a while. So presumably the more people who come here and stay a while the more pennies I earn. Another way some blog ads work is click throughs. This blog works in one of those ways.
I will say that if something interests me I will click through even on my own blog. Example: a spanish language course and the GOP “i switched my vote” campaign are both items i’m naturally interested in so I checked them out.
That is my non answer answer. I cant tell you to click and can’t tell you not to.
Got it, John.
Nice lawyerly response, JWS. Want a job at my place?
John check your TOS to see if your own click-thrus will be a violation. On many (most) platforms they are. Adsense removes people from their program for clicking through their own ads, so do NOT click adsense yourself on your blog regardless of how appealing the offer. The appeals process to google once removed from adsense is usually futile.
run_dmc, clicking through the adsense ads aids John. Excessive click-thrus will get him banned by adsense (so don’t be too “helpful”), again with no appeal. A purchase on an ad through adsense gets John more dollars, and if you did purchase daily, adsense would not hold it against him (no one buys daily, it is just that google looks at the click in a different way, purchase vs passive).
Impression ads are always a good thing for a blog owner with decent traffic, and if the other ads John is running pay that way, the more times people stop by the blog during the day, the more he earns (unless the ads only pay for unique daily views).
Thanks, Ann too – that’s helpful info. It’s more that I see one of the boxes above and think – hey – that seems interesting, I should click on that and see what it’s about and then I get distracted and don’t check it out. I’ll make more of a point to if I see something that interests me.
I will work at your place, NES. Happily. Please advise.
Very funny, Anthony!!
Thanks Ann. I’ll follow up and see.
Pingback: air max blog