Now up to 70% less Daily!

Thursday, August 16, 2018

Save the Straight White Men!

No one plays the victim as well as conservative white men.

Except maybe Sheryl Lee?


Oh, sure, conservative white men are always out there decryintg the "culture of victimization" and whatnot, but no one can whine about imaginary repression better than a conservative hetero white man.

“White Men”: The Most Dehumanizing Insult Of Our Times


I mean, who would be insulted by being called a white man?
I guess a woman would.
But if you are a white man, how is being referred to as a white man insulting?

The charge of ‘white man’, the open discussion of ‘white men’ as a problem, a scourge, a primal, furious blob, is extraordinarily dehumanising. In the classic meaning of that word: it deprives a group of people of their individual qualities in preference for treating them as a great indistinguishable mass. 

Okay, first of all that is NOT the classic definition of "dehumanizing."

Dehumanizing is treating someone as less than human. Like, for instance, referring to a former employee as a "dog." Or telling someone that they are not allowed to use a public restroom like any other person. Making group generalizations is not dehumanizing.

Secondly, since when is "white man" a "charge?"
No one has ever said to me "you know, I'm beginning to suspect that you might be a white man!" I've never been reported to any authority as being a white man. If someone points out that I am a white man, that is not being charged with anything. It's like pointing out that I'm right-handed or six feet tall or devastatingly handsome. These are all just facts, there's no moral judgement here.

Image result for castle gif +ruggedly  handsome

Yes we are, Richard Castle. Yes we are.

Or check out this guy:

No difference. Seriously. No difference.
You think there's no difference? Here's a simple test. Walk up to a white man and say "Hey, I notice that you are a white man" and see what kind of reaction you get. I'll save you some time, you''ll get something along the lines of "yeah, what's it to you?" or "No, I do not wish to join the Klan, keep walking, asshole."

Now walk up to a black man, preferably a large, muscular black man, and say to him "Hello, I notice that you are a n****r." I'm not going to give you any hint as to what kind of reaction you'll get. I want it to be a surprise!

Image result for white boxer knocked out gif

Also, if you're comparing two phrases, and there's one of the two you can't print - that's the worse one.

Oh, I almost forgot what inspired this post. It was this tweet I saw the other day that has been kind of stuck in my head because of the sheer blinding stupidity and shittiness of it:

Friday, August 10, 2018

Random Thoughts interspersed with kitten gifs

1. You know how conservatives just hate hate HATE the elitist snobs with their fancy college defrees and their lattes and what-not? And how conservatives only care about the regular salt-of-the-earth Joe six-pack ordinary plain ol' folks? And how they hate career politicians and love political outsiders? Like every Republican campaign ad tars their opponent as a "lifelong inside-the beltway insider" and touts himself as the jus' plain folks "outsider" who is obviously the better choice because he ain't fancy and has never been in politics before? You know how they do that?

Well then along comes Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and suddenly they're all Dowager Countersses, looking down their noses and harumphing "why she's nothing but a bartender, a common bartender! A tender of bars has the insolence to suppose that she should take a seat in the august body that has been home to the noble likes of Louis Gohmert, Michele Bachmann, and Smoky Joe Barton? Well I never!"

Like here is one Twitter wag's reaction to OAC's disinterest in debating professional shitposter Ben Shapiro:

And I can't tell you how many times I've seen some version of "hell, she was a bartender just a year ago," as if that is somehow disqualifying to people who voted a syphilitic game show host into the Oval Office. Somehow lack of governmental experience is seen as a plus for tRump or Herman Cain or Ross Perot or Arnold Schwartzenneger, all of whom ran for top executive offices, but for AOC, running for an actual entry-level position, it's completely invalidating. (Also, these were the same people who complained that Barack Obama was "inexperienced," then turned around and voted for il Douche.)


2. Hey, NPR.
I know you're super committed to the whole "balance" thing, but sometimes it's okay to just present one side. Let me give you an example. Let's say you have a representative of Black Lives Matter on your network. You don't need to balance him out. If you really really feel the need for the phony both-sides garbage, you could maybe have someone on to give some bullshit defense of trigger-happy cops, maybe explaining why these brave men and women suddenly get to be in fear for their lives every time they see a black kid who might possibly have some sort of bulge in his pocket. You could do that if you really felt the need.
But here's what you don't do. When you have someone on to say that black lives matter, you don't, seriously don't, "balance" him out by having someone else come on and say "no they don't."

NPR interviewed the racist behind ‘Unite the Right 2’ and it was a disaster
Two days ahead of what is expected to be a small white supremacist rally in Washington, D.C., NPR gave rally organizer Jason Kessler a national platform to peddle junk “race science.”
After the nearly 7-minute interview ended, NPR transitioned to an interview with a Black Lives Matter activist, a setup implying that white supremacists and people advocating for racial justice are two sides of the same coin.(via: Think Progress)


Bethenny Frankel's ex-boyfriend Dennis Shields dies of a supposed overdose in Trump Tower

If someone pseudo-quasi-famous had died in an apartment building owned by a Clinton, Republicans would have already appointed a special prosecuter.

4. Can everybody please please please stop giving a shit about Omarosa's book?
And whether or not she has tapes?
If she has tapes of tRump that somehow could cause him to lose support and she sat on them all this time while GOING TO WORK FOR HIM and going on TV to proclaim that everyone would have to bow down to President Cartman, she should be tarred and feathered and rode out of town on the same rail as Donald, his family, and every member of his administration.
Besides, what good could this possibly do? What could he have possibly said on those tapes that would hurt him politically? The N word? His base would love that! Foul filthy comments about the female contestants on his show? If the Access Hollywood tape didn't hurt him, what worse thing could he possibly have said.
Unless you have him on tape saying "I don't really believe this racist shit, I just say it to rile up the rubes," or maybe saying something positive about Mexicans, nothing he could say could possibly dissuade his base from supporting the guy they've decided to make their god-emperor. (not even joking:

Söpö kisse kiipeää olkapäälle - Söpö kisse kiipeää olkapäälle

5. What is Space Force?
I mean, I know it's nothing, but what exactly is the plan supposed to be?
'Cuz if it was like Reagan's Star Wars plan, at least there was some logic to that. It didn't work, bnut at least there would be some value in having satellites that could shoot down Russian missles. But I'm pretty sure that's not what this is. They're acting like this is going to be a new branch of the military, so that would mean actual troops flying around in X-wing fighters, battling Klingons or something? Has anyone actually heard any details of the plan? Has their been any public statement about what the space force would entail? Because absent any evidence to the contrary, I gotta think that the Dotard is picturing himself as Bill Pullman in Independence Day.

Probably it's just a mechanism for funneling taxpayer money into the coffers of Haliburton or Bechtel of Northrup - Gruman or whoever books the conference room at Mar A Lago first.

Kitten Massage GIF

Wednesday, August 8, 2018

Thanks a lot, Twitter!

Thanks a lot, Twitter!
Because of you, I now know who Candace Owens is.
And I was a lot happier not knowing who Candace Owens is.

My life was appreciably better before I saw this:

Don't bother watching the video. It's pointless. Here's a quick summary:

ANTIFA, which is neither all-white, nor a fascist organization (duh) yelled at Owens in and outside of a restaurant. The video contains zero instances of anyone "growing violent," zero instances of anyone attacking any police, and I don't believe there is any police force in the US that is "all-black and Latino," but if there is, it certainly doesn't make an appearance in this video.

Also, there is zero indication that what is upsetting these shouty people is that a black woman was eating breakfast. Maybe she was confused by their chanting "fuck white supremacy?"
This is a particularly offensive claim to make since, while Ms Owens may not be old enough to remember, it wasn't very long ago that black people actually were hounded out of restaurants merely for trying to eat a meal.


It seems especially egregious to diminish the struggle of actual Civil Rights era heroes when you know good and goddamm well that you are lying about pretty much every aspect of this incident to try to make yourself look like more of a victim.

You could just say "these Antifa jerks shouted and screamed at me until I left the restaurant just because they take issue with my schilling for a white-supremacist administration" or something. You don't need to lie. You don't need to trot out the tired "lefties are the real racists, antifa are the real fascists" sophistry.

I mean, why pretend that they were upset at you for brunching while black when there are so many other things about you that might cause a negative reaction from normal people.

Like this, for instance:

First of all, do you not see the irony here? Or I guess hypocrisy would be a better word. Or, what's the next step after hypocrisy? Shameless craven grotesque duplicity? I mean, BLM is upset about unarmed and innocent black people being shot dead by racist cops and you're saying they're "a bunch of whiny toddlers?" You got your breakfast rudely interrupted and you're acting like you're John Lewis on the Edmund Pettis Bridge. And this was like three months before the screamed-at briuch incident.

Or maybe, the anti-fascists were a bit bothered by this call for something awfully fascist-esque:

Yeah, having political opponents jailed? That's the sort of thing that a Mussolini or a Pinochet would do. And I'm not even going to get in to the insanity of thinking that George Soros and Jeff Bezos are somehow part of some left-wing conspiracy to. . . you know what, yeah. Let's get into that.

You know that when you pretend that George Soros is some kind of criminal for donating money to liberal causes and campaigns, you're doing what the neo-Nazis do. Like it's fine for the Kochs, the Mercers, the Waltons, the Coorses, etc etc etc to pour million into right-wing "think tanks" and political campaigns, but when Soros donates to causes he supports, suddenyl it's part of some globalist Jewish conspiracy to . . . do . . . something bad, I don't know, but ya know it's bad because why else would we want him locked up, hmm?

Logical indexing. Good for R aliens and R pirates.

And Bezos? I mean, if you wanted to lock him up over his labor practices, you could make a pretty good argument, but I'm pretty sure that isn't your beef with him. You think he's bad because your god-emperor, President Cartman, says he's bad. And Il Douche says he's bad because Bezos owns a newspaper that doesn't get with the "positive stories only about Trump" program. Jailing newspapermen who don't toe the party line? That's what a Franco or a Suharto would do. So maybe, just maybe, people who rightly oppose fascism might have a legitimate beef with you?

Hahaha, just kidding! Obviously it's because you're a black lady! Duh!

 J. K.  Rowling  

Elle Macpherson on ELLE Australia November 2016 Cover                         Elle MacPherson Elle cover

Or maybe it wasn't your proto-fascist leanings. Maybe it was, um, what do you call it when a woman is a misogynist?  That thing.

I can't tell if you have actually just been so incredibly lucky to have never had any interactions with abusive men, or if you're just trying to be the new Ann Coulter, saying the most shockingly obtuse, crass, indecent thing you can think of to get the attention of the FOX News bookers. And I don't really care. Honestly, I was a lot happier not knowing who you were.

Monday, August 6, 2018

The past is never dead. It's not even past.

So Wesleyan College in Macon, GA , the oldest Women's college in the nation, announced that they are going to be dropping one of their longstanding traditions. For decades, incoming classes have given themselves names, choosing from a roster of possible monikers inlulding the Green Knights and the Purple Knights.
I found this news in today's paper under the headline
  "Some Alumnae Unhappy About End of 'Knights' Era."

And sure, when you change a tradition that goes back over a century, naturally some people are going to be upset. So why do it? Why end the tradition of incoming classes choosing little nicknames for their groups?  Well, the Atlanta Journal Constitution did a little digging. And here's what they came up with:

Class names first appeared on campus in 1909 when that year’s seniors called themselves the Ku Klux Klan.

Okay, but. . . I mean, surely. . . They can't possibly have. . .That was just that one horrid class, right?

The class four years later utilized the Ku Klux Klan name and that year’s yearbook was titled Ku Klux. 

Seriously? The Ku Klux? That was the yearbook you took home to show your parents? That was the book your friends wrote "have a great summer, stay cool!" in? The Ku Klux?

 A sketch of a masked night rider on horseback galloping under crescent moon graces the title page of the 1910 Wesleyan photo

I mean, I know it's turn of the Century Georgia, but Christ sakes! The Ku Klux?

Eventually the name changed to the Tri-Ks, then morphed into the Tri-K Pirates before the school dropped Tri-K and simply used the Pirates 

. . . the school dropped Tri-K and simply used the Pirates  
starting in the 1990s.


What the fuck, Wesleyan?

Other class names created after the Klan moniker included the Green Knights, the Purple Knights and the Golden Hearts. For nearly a century, each new incoming class adopted one of the four names on a rotating basis. The freshman adopted class colors, cheers and went through an initiation process that for years incorporated hazing.

Oh, hazing. Oh my God, that's the first normal thing I've heard about this school. Hazing! Wow, what sort of harmless fun the hazing must have been, being carried out by the delicate Southern Belles an this upscale Methodist university populated by only the finest young ladies, and. . . I'm about to be disappointed and horrified, aren't I?

  • In the 1950s (photo above), hazing rituals for new students (run by students) featured women with painted faces and carrying nooses.

Actually, I'm a bit relieved. I was expecting blackface, not KISS Army.

  • As recently as 2006, a student group wore hooded purple robes for an initiation event for new students -- and that robed activity ended only around 2010 or 2011.
Oh, fuck.

Purple hooded robes? Were they like. . . you know? With the pointy hoods?

Like other first year students corralled in Wesleyan College’s auditorium in Macon, Dana Amihere didn’t know what to make of the spectacle unfolding on stage.
It was fall 2006 and the freshman had been awakened in the dead of night. A group of sophomores stood on stage yelling, screaming and cheering as part of a hazing ritual that seemed part pep rally, part seance, she said. But one feature struck Amihere, an African American, about the young women on stage tormenting the first year students: They wore purple, hooded robes.
“They looked just like Klan robes,” she said. “It was kind of like bells and whistles going off.”

Judi Durand was in the freshman class of 1991 that opposed the use of the Tri-K Pirates name and fought the use of nooses during the school’s initiation rituals. The college got rid of the nooses and dropped the Tri-K from the Pirates name during her time on campus, but refused to eliminate the class names altogether.

They got rid of the nooses.
Stay Klassy, Wesleyan!

Fuck. Seriously?

So let's hear some of the objections to Wesleyan trying to FINALLY - in Two Thousand Eighteen! - sever the last of its ties to the Ku Klux Klan, because if there's one thing today's media climate has taught us it's that racist retrograde revanchists must always be heard and have their bullshit taken seriously lest their feelings be hurt and then they're forced to vote to re-elect Trump or something.

"When Wesleyan was founded in 1836, the economy of the South was based on the sin of slavery. ... "
Sigh. In 1836, many US Southerners believed that slavery was a "positive good."
There is no mercy for those who fail to anticipate future standards.

Yes, it is so unfair that people who thought that enslaving their fellow human beings was somehow "good" are now being judged by the standards of basic human decency!

Avatar for Driving Mrs. Daisy
Driving Mrs. Daisy

Yeah, because you know who are a bunch of "liberal snowflakes?" These guys:


Avatar for Babycat
Don't erase history, learn from it so it's not repeated!

Sure. And the best way to learn from history is to keep honoring the worst aspects of that history by naming your class. . . wait, that can't be right.

Avatar for GAretailer
If you did your research then, and you knew this info, you would have chosen NOT to attend that college.  If you knew this stuff and you still went there because you were going $free, then don't wait years to complain about it.  You are responsible for the choices you made.  You could have transferred at any point.  We can't change history and those of us today should not have to apologize for attitudes and actions before our time.  ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.   

You should have known better than to attend a racist school! I guess. If racism bothers you, then you can just go somewhere less racist? I guess? Also, I'm assuming that whoever I'm addressing went to college for "$free," because of reasons having nothing to do with racism, which was a thing that happened in the past before I was born. I guess.

Avatar for bthehux
@ConcernedCitizen0000 wish you and Midingo checked facts.

time... to start.
quit blaming whitey... he has said 'sorry' long enough.

Yeah, quit blaming white people for. . . the Ku Klux Klan? Um. . .
Also, whitey has said "sorry" long enough, apparently. I mean, I've never heard him say it and I've never heard of anyone who heard him say it, but he must have said it at least once and that is long enough!

And anyway, how can you blame whitey for this?

I gotta think there's plenty of blame on both sides. As there are many fine people on both sides of the Klan debate.

Oh, one last comment. I don't really get what this person is trying to get at here, but I'm fairly sure it's proof that racism is a thing of the past:

Avatar for bthehux
Enough  i
s never ENOUGH 'less I say it is....

Quittin time !!!Who say it quittin time at Tara?

I say it quittin time!!!!

Wednesday, August 1, 2018

They're not even trying!

Is this a joke?

I mean, this can't really be a serious argument, can it?

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration says people would drive more and be exposed to increased risk if their cars get better gas mileage, an argument intended to justify freezing Obama-era toughening of fuel standards.

I mean, why even bother?
Why not just say "fuck fuel economy, let's bring back Hummers?"

If you're going to try to trot out some flimsy attempt at justifying your middle-finger-to-humanity policy, couldn't you at least put a tiny bit of effort into it?

This reminds me of a tv show I saw when I was but a young lad, I believe it was "CPO Sharkey" with Don Rickles. (maybe) Anyway, the main guy's undelings were asking for food and the main guy says something like "Food? Food attracts cockroaches! You don't want cockroaches, do you?" I mean, that's the level of effort that went into this statement. 1970's sit-com writing level of laziness.

Transportation experts dispute the arguments, contained in a draft of the administration’s proposals prepared this summer, excerpts of which were obtained by The Associated Press.

Overall, “improvements over time have better longer-term effects simply by not alienating consumers, as compared to great leaps forward” in fuel efficiency and other technology, the administration argues.

Dave Chappelle GIF

Oh, of course. Right that makes total sense.
Like I remember when they first came out with plasma TVs and we all said "woah, slow down there, fellas! We don't want THAT much improvement! Not all at once anyway. We're still getting used to our cathode ray tubes being able to show pictures in color! Why don't we make the picture just slightly better, and then in a couple of years, we can improve it a bit more, and in 10-12 years, maybe we'll be ready for this realistic life-like sort of picture. For now, we are all perfectly happy not being able to tell if the ball was on the line or out of bounds."

Angry Tennis GIF by NOWNESS

An April draft from the Trump administration said freezing the requirements at 2020 levels would save people $1,900 per new vehicle. But the later draft raises that to $2,100 and even as high as $2,700 by 2025.

Hmm, it's almost as if this administration just pulls numbers out of thin air! You'd almost think they were so comfortable with lying that they feel free to make up any numbers they want. "Oh, we estimate a savings of about $1,000 per vehicle. Not enough? Okay, then we estimate oh, let's say $2,100! Would you believe $2700?"

Maxwell Smart

No? Would you believe twenty-five bucks and tickets to the gun show?
How about thirty-seven dollars and a MAGA hat?

Asked if he thinks a freeze in U.S. mileage standards is warranted, EPA acting administrator Andrew Wheeler told a small group of reporters at EPA headquarters last week, “I think we need to go where the technology takes us” on fuel standards.

So. . . .nothing. He said nothing.

Wheeler did not elaborate. Agency spokespeople did not respond when asked specifically if the EPA acting chief was making the case that modern cars could be both fuel efficient and safe.

Wow, what a mystery! Can cars be both fuel efficient and safe? I guess we'll never know

2018 Toyota Prius

Small car
2017 Toyota Prius shown

If only someone could figure out whether smaller, fuel efficient cars could possibly be safe!

2019 Mini Cooper

2016 Mini Cooper shown

I guess there's just no earthly way of knowing whether an Ameriucan car company could manufacture a fuel-efficient vehicle that is also safe.

2018 Chevrolet Volt

Small car
2017 Chevrolet Volt shown

Shakespeare in Love (1998) 

The Department of Transportation said in a statement that the final fuel economy standards would be based on sound science. 

Oh my God!
Yes, because if you want policies based on "sound science," you can'y go wrong with the Republicans! Yes, the party that is pretty sure every climatologist in the world is in on some colossal hoax to make believe that the ice caps are melting is going to have to wait for "sound science" to weigh in on their fuel efficiency policy! 

Yep, right after they've concluded their studies on whether dinosours existed and whether or not immunizations turn kids gay, they will be very eager to hear what the "sound science" is on CAFE standards!

Seriously, it's like they're not even trying.