Wednesday, January 16, 2019

What are conservatives outraged about today?

You know, it must be exhausting being a rightie. Having to scour the news and pop culture media searching trying to find something - anything - that you can use to gin up each day's poutrage. Then having to work yourself up into a lather over it. And to keep having to do this over and over, day after day. It must be absolutely draining!

So, what has the right foaming at the mouth today?

Couple things.

First there was a razor commercial.
I know what you're thinking "did this commercial show a gay person shaving?" No. Well, maybe. I don't know who's gay and who isn't. What this ad did was ask men to not let other men get away with being assholes.

aSo who could be upset about that? Well, pretty much everyone who makes a living being an asshole on TV or online. Like Piers Morgan, for one.

I know. My eyes still hurt from how hard they involuntarily rolled.

Anyway, Piers was the first one I saw taking umbrage at an ad that says "hey, you know, maybe we could do a little better," but not the last. And for some reason, a lot of the umbrage-takers siezed on D-day as a really terrible analogy.

Which makes sense, because when I think of the courage, the valor, the heroism of the Allied troops who stormed the beaches on D-Day, sacrificing life and limb to rid the world of the scourge of Naziism, I think "that's the kind of bravery and mettle that it takes for a man to yell 'shake it, don't break it' at women on the street."

Although, if you're going to use D-day as an analogy, the men in the video who are most not unlike the Allied troops are the ones stopping their friends from harassing women, or chasing the bullies away from the kid they're attacking. They're the ones who are stepping up to right a wrong. Everyone who is upset about this ad. . . you're the Nazis in this analogy.  Great job not understanding fucking anything.

So what else has the right's knickers in a twist?

Apparently, they have found a way to be offended by someone referring to an anti-abortion rally as . . . "anti-abortion."

No, really.

The "pro-life" movement is literally a movement dedicating to ending the practice of abortion. This is their entire raison d'etre. They oppose abortion. Yet somehow, referring to them as "anti-abortion," is offensive to them? As if it's some sort of disingenuous use of language? To point out the one thing they all oppose?

And it's not only this hack who is Pence's spokesperson or something, but other "pro-lifers" as well.

Myself and a few other people tried to get someone on this thread to explain what it was that they were upset about. No response.
I assume they don't actually know why they're offended, they just know that they are. They have to be. They NEED to be. They absolutley can not survive without their daily dosage of self-righteous indignation and being in the highest of dudgeons.

And of course, because rule number one for Conservatives remains that no conservative will ever argue anything honestly, she followed up with this nugget:

Because of course she has to pretend that the annual March-For-Life-But-Not-anti-Abortion-Just-Want-To-Outlaw-Abortion is usually ignored in the media. A quick Google search shows that this is not exactly completely accurate.

Trump's speech to March for Life marks a U-turn on abortion

01/17/2018 01:35 PM EST

NPR logo

'You Love Every Child': President Trump Addresses March For Life

Anti-abortion bill passes the House ahead of 'March for Life'

Published on Jan 19, 2018


Anti-abortion activists and protesters carried posters and shouted slogans in support for the unborn on Friday, when they descended on the nation's capital from various parts of the country for the annual March for Life rally. (Jan. 19) Subscribe for more Breaking News: Get updates and more Breaking News here: The Associated Press is the essential global news network, delivering fast, unbiased news from every corner of the world to all media platforms and formats. AP’s commitment to independent, comprehensive journalism has deep roots. Founded in 1846, AP has covered all the major news events of the past 165 years, providing high-quality, informed reporting of everything from wars and elections to championship games and royal weddings. AP is the largest and most trusted source of independent news and information. Today, AP employs the latest technology to collect and distribute content - we have daily uploads covering the latest and breaking news in the world of politics, sport and entertainment. Join us in a conversation about world events, the newsgathering process or whatever aspect of the news universe you find interesting or important. Subscribe:


Live stream: Trump makes historic speech at March for Life 2018

That's just from last year's march. But of course, no one who's following Mike Pence's press secretary on Twitter is going to do the 30 seconds of research required to find this out. Because if they did, they might lose out on some grade A outrage.

Friday, January 11, 2019

Flashback Friday -- Goth covers of classic rock songs

Please don't let's start debating whether any or all of these bands are technically "goth." Or whether "goth" is really even a thing. It's not important.

Just enjoy some interesting versions of classic rock tunes by mainly 1980's bands with dyed black hair and too much eyeliner.

Thursday, January 10, 2019

There are monsters among us.

NBC News 2011.svg

Evangelical group wants gays removed from anti-lynching bill

O my God.

You know, you come to expect a certain amount of fuckery from these anti-LGBT bigots.

You expect a lot of assholishness, a good bit of prickishness, more than their fair share of just general stupidity and shittiness, but this? Holy fuck, this is monstrous!

The Senate passed a bill to make it a federal crime to lynch people, and your reaction is not to say "about god damn time, shoulda done this 150 years ago," but to say "yeah, but it's okay to murder someone if they're gay, though, right?" And you're just going to put this out there in public as if saying this didn't qualify you for tar, feathers and a free rail-ride out of town.

What is even the rationalization for this grotesque and obscene stance?

The U.S. Senate last month unanimously passed a bill that would explicitly make lynching a federal crime. Not everyone, however, is pleased with passage of the Justice for Victims of Lynching Act.
Liberty Counsel, an evangelical nonprofit that opposes gay rights, and its chairman, Mat Staver, are taking issue with the bill’s inclusion of LGBTQ people.
"The old saying is once that camel gets the nose in the tent, you can't stop them from coming the rest of the way in," Staver said

The camel's nose? I'm trying to figure out how this analogy even would work. I assume that in this analogy, the camel is the gay people.  The tent is. . . I don't know, NOT being murdered, I guess? So if the gay people get a little taste of not being murdered, they're just gonna want to not be murdered ALL the time? And they'll just push their way into the "it's not okay to murder this person" zone? And this is bad? Somehow? 
Maybe if I let him continue it will make more sense.

"The old saying is once that camel gets the nose in the tent, you can't stop them from coming the rest of the way in," Staver said in an interview with conservative Christian news outlet OneNewsNow. “This is a way to slip it in under a so-called anti-lynching bill, and to then to sort of circle the wagon and then go for the juggler [sic] at some time in the future."

Ah, for one brief, beautiful moment, I forgot that Louis CK is a huge asshole.

It might make even less sense now.

Let's start with the phrase "a so-called anti-lynching bill."  This is a bill that makes lynching a federal crime. It is pretty much the dictionary definition of an anti-lynching bill. It's like calling LeBron James a "so-called basketball player,"  or calling Donald Trump the "so-called disgrace to the nation."

Then there's "circle the wagon." First of all, you can not circle A wagon. You need several wagons. Circling the wagons means taking all your wagons and forming a circle out of them, which is, as anyone who has ever seen a western movie or a television show or has the sense God gave a mule knows, is a DEFENSIVE maneuver.

You don't circle your wagons in preparation for going for the "juggler."

Also, what is it that they're "slipping in" to this bill? The idea that, even if you don't approve of someone's love life you still don't get to murder them? Because it seems like they're being pretty up-front about that. Nothing really sneaky there.

Maybe the original source has more context. Let's see, where was this interview? Some site called "One News Now?" Let me just click on over and . . .

Ron Swanson Throwing Away His Computer - Parks And Recreation GIF - Nope No Throwingcomputer GIFs

Oh, dear God.

Staver: LGBT 'rights' sneakily added to anti-lynching bill
A constitutional law expert is asking Congress to block the latest attempt to force the LGBT agenda on the country.

Hmm. I'm not all that familiar with Mat "One T" Staver. Is he a "constitutional law expert?" If I were a betting man, I'd say no. He is not. And I sure don't feel like doing the research to find out.

The Justice for Victims of Lynching Act passed unanimously in the U.S. Senate but Liberty Counsel founder Mat Staver says it passed without some senators realizing an amendment was added providing special rights for homosexuals and transgenders.

Oh, of course. "Special Rights." We've been hearing about "special rights" since the first day someone suggested that maybe the gay people should be treated as equal citizens and human beings. It's one more example of rule number one for conservatives. No conservative will ever argue anything honestly. No conservative will just say "I don't like those people, so I want them to not have rights." They will always come up with some sort of bullshit like "well why should they get 'special rights?'" or "if we let those people get married, it will damage our hetero marriages." or "look, I'd love to have equal rights for everyone, but I'm just worried that God might smite us."

So what "special rights" were snuck into the bill? Well, it may surprise you to learn that he doesn't say. I guess it's just so obvious that there's no need to waste time enumerating all the special rights that were secreted into this bill. Like um. . .  well there's. . .  uhhhh. . . hmm! You know what, I can't come up with anything. Weird!

"The old saying is once that camel gets the nose in the tent, you can't stop them from coming the rest of the way in," he explains. "And this would be the first time that you would have in federal law mentioning gender identity and sexual orientation as part of this anti-lynching bill."

Well, yeah. Good point. This bill would be the first time that gender identity and sexual orientation are mentioned as part of this bill. Can't argue with that.

No one can or should oppose a bill that bans lynching, says the Liberty Counsel attorney, and thus it's being used as back door approach 

Seriously, dude? A "back door" approach?

Paging Dr Freud, Dr Sigmund Freud...

No one can or should oppose a bill that bans lynching, says the Liberty Counsel attorney, and thus it's being used as back door approach to pass legislation such as the controversial Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

Okay, first of all, no it isn't. There is no parliamentary trick that would allow the Senate to pass one bill and then go "aha! You fools! You passed one bill that prohibits people from being total pigfuckers towards LGBT people, that means that ALL the bills about not being total pigfuckers to LGBTs also pass!"
Also, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act is not controversial in the real world. Only in your stupid shitty evangelical hate-bubble. In the real world, if you ask someone "should your boss be able to fire you if he doesn't like who you date?" about 99% of people will respond "hell, no!"  It's controversial to you the same way that the RICO laws are controversial to La Costa Nostra.

"So far they've been unsuccessful over the many years in the past," Staver observes, "but this is a way to slip it in under a so-called anti-lynching bill, and to then to sort of circle the wagon and then go for the jugular at some time in the future."

Okay, we've already been over this part, but fucking hell! Who doesn't understand the expression "circle the wagons?"

Staver tells OneNewsNow that Liberty Counsel is talking to lawmakers in the House in an effort to convince them to strip the bill of the amendment before taking a vote.

You know, I'd like to think "you're too late, Staver, the Democrats have retaken the House and Nacy Pelosi has the gavel!" but if there's one thing I've learned, it's that trusting the Democrats to do the right thing is a recipe for heartbreak.

Wednesday, January 9, 2019

You run across the weirdest people on Twitter!

This is Matt Stephens. He knows things.


Not really sure how promiscuity and femininity are mutually exclusive, but I guess I will defer to Matt on this one, seeing as how he is so wise. How wise? Well, wise enough to be a person who helps other people with advice about how to live their lives.

How did he attain this wisdom? What life struggles has he overcome, what triumphant heights has he reached? Glad you asked.

He used to be a little chubby and now he's not.


I believe the experiences I’ve had in life have provided me with a unique perspective that could be as valuable to others as it has been for me, so I want to share it.
I’ve hit “rock bottom” and climbed my way back up. I’ve gone from being 40 pounds overweight to placing in bodybuilding competitions.

I know, it's hard to believe, but Matt does provide us with photographic proof.

Before/After comparison of my rock bottom vs now

Left: The day I hit rock bottom. Right: Three years later—with my whole life turned around. 

Can you believe it? I mean, you hear the term "rock bottom" thrown around a lot by recovering addicts and whatnot, but holy Christ, to see a man who has come back from that! Just three years ago, this man was kinda chubby! Somehow, he fought against the instinct to give up, resisted the siren call of  the sweet relief of death and now, miraculously he is no longer chubby! He's in good physical condition! So of course he's someone who should be telling women what kind of sex life to have!

Today, I’m an engineer for a multi-billion dollar corporation. 

Wow. I am also employed by a multi-million dollar corporation. Probably most of us are. Let's all got out there and tell women not to do sex!

Today, I’m an engineer for a multi-billion dollar corporation. I’ve placed in multiple bodybuilding competitions and won Mr. Tuscaloosa 2017 in classic physique. I set the Alabama state record in powerlifting for the 220 lb. weight class in all lifts in 2015. I’ve read over 30 books. 

Wait, 30? As in THIRTY books? Is that even possible? Are there that many books?  God, the wisdom you must have accumulated! Has there ever been such a combination of brains and brawn before?

I’ve read over 30 books. Some of them I’ve read multiple times. 

Okay, well now you're just being unrealistic. You can't read a book more than once. Everyone knows that.

Still, though. You've piqued my interest. I would very much like to read the sage writings of Matt Stephens. Have you an archive?

Oh, you do? Splendid!



And what have we to peruse here in the archives? Bear in mind, I'm not as voracious a reader as you, so I may not ever be able to work my way through all the many volumes of enlightenment.

Let's see. . . There's this pearl of wisdom from last month:


december 15, 2018

Then there's one from November:


november 05, 2018

Then one from July:


july 31, 2018

And then. . . . um. . . that's it? There's three articles? In your "archive?" THREE?

You know, I'm starting to think this Matt Stephens guy may not be the enlightened guru I had been led to believe.

World's Stupidest Headline.


Influencer says she was on a 'tapas and cocaine' diet to stay thin – here's why that's not healthy

 Kerry Justich,Yahoo Lifestyle 29 minutes ago

Wait, it's not? Boy, I learn something new every day!