Lack of Perspective

Paula Deen thinks that Paula Deen is sorta like Micheal Sam.

Seriously.

Deen says in the People magazine coming out Friday that "I'm fighting to get my name back. I feel like 'embattled' or 'disgraced' will always follow my name. It's like that black football player who recently came out," Deen said, referring to NFL prospect Michael Sam. "He said, 'I just want to be known as a football player. I don't want to be known as a gay football player.' I know exactly what he's saying."

How?

How does she know what. . . wait, first of all, who says "black football player" like that's something unusual? Like how old guys sometimes say "lady doctor" or "lady cop" because they still think that female doctors or cops are unusual. Does she not know that there are lots and lots of black football players? They're even allowed to play quarterback now, Paula!

Also, Micheal Sam is saying he doesn't want to be known for being unusually courageous, for taking a big risk in the interests of advancing the cause of equality, whereas you don't like being known as a racist. Not really the same thing, you know.

“I’m fighting to get my name back,” says Deen, who adds that weathering the scandal involved facing her “greatest fear.”
“I used to have dreams that I lost everything,” she says. “And when it finally happens, you think, ‘I’m still alive.’ ”

Yes, you totally lost everything. EVERYTHING!
Except you're still really rich.
And you still have a hugely successful restaurant.
And people still buy your cookbooks.
And you'll probably be invited to CPAC.

But other than that, yeah you lost everything! It's a miracle you survived!

Oh, but don't woory, you may be getting another chance to pull yourself up out of destitution:

Nearly nine months later, she is now hoping to reboot her business with a new company funded by a $75 million deal with private investment firm Najafi Companies.

Hopefully you'll be able to survive on that!

A New Twist On Victim-Blaming

Generally, when a Priest is accused of molesting boys, the defense follows one of two victim-blaming templates.
There's the traditional "Ah, kids make stuff up, this child is a wicked little liar" defense. Then there's the Bill Donohue "damn choir boys always seducing these innocent priests!" defense.
 Now the arch-diocese of Minneapolis has a new defense: Blame the victim's parents.

Reverend Sexually Abuses Two Young Boys, Church Blames Their Mother

By Lina Batarags, Wed, February 26, 2014

In 2012, Rev. Curtis Wehmeyer pleaded guilty to sexually abusing a 12-year-old boy and a 14-year-old boy, and to possessing child pornography.
The reverend reportedly abused the boys in his white 2006 camper, which he kept parked outside of Blessed Sacrament Church in St. Paul. Here, he “got drunk, smoked pot, and looked at child pornography.”
He also lured his 12 and 14-year-old victims in, “plied them with alcohol,” and told them to touch themselves while he turned on pornography. Police records indicate that he touched one of the boys several times.

So, you know, standard priest stuff.

Now, the boys’ mother has said the church officials are blaming her for not protecting her sons.
In court earlier this month, Archdiocese lawyers said that she should not have allowed her children to spend time alone with Wehmeyer.
“She was aware of the time (her son) spent with Mr. Wehmeyer, and she knew that such interaction was contrary to established Archdiocese policy,” the Archdiocese said in its filing.

Holy fuck!
(no pun intended)

Their defense is seriously "hey, you shoulda known better than to leave your kids alone with a fuckin' priest! I mean, whaddidya think was gonna happen? What's he supposed to do, NOT molest 'em? He's a priest for fuck sake!"

Leaders in the Archdiocese reportedly knew of Wehmeyer’s “risky sexual behavior” when he was appointed as a pastor of Blessed Sacrament and St. Thomas the Apostle in 2009. The two St. Paul parishes later merged.

Because of course they did. It's standard operating procedure. You know you got a degenerate priest on your hands, what are you gonna do, warn somebody? Yeah, that'll go over great with the higher-ups!

The church has cut back on payments for family therapy and treatment, further adding to the family’s strains.
For example, although the Archdiocese followed through on promises to pay for family therapy, it did not pay for one of her son’s 66-day stay at a Washington County crisis home this summer, because the bill was for housing, not mental health treatment.

Jesus Christ!
(No pun intended)
These bastards are going to exploit loopholes to keep from paying for the trauma that they caused?  Is this a church or Union Carbide?

And they want to make John Paul II a saint!







a a a

Responsible Journalism

I always like to look at the headlines on Yahoo's home page, mainly because I no longer subscribe to our local paper the Atlanta Journal Constitution (and they know why!) Anyway, it's not only a quick way to get a glance at what's going on in the world, it's also a place to find just stunning examples of the most top-notch journalism available!






For example. This story from the website "OddNews" with the reasonable, objective-sounding headline:

 
‘Pure evil’: City caps sewer of woman fighting to live ‘off the grid’

 The fight of Cape Coral, Florida resident Robin Speronis to live “off the grid” has escalated with the city’s recent decision to cap her access to the sewer so she can no longer use it. It’s a move she calls, “pure evil.”

Gee, that does sound like a total dick move on the part of Cape Coral, which is a city in Florida so what did you expect?

Since November 2013, WFTX Fox 4 has reported on Ms. Speronis’ ongoing battle with the city to live without most utilities. The self-sufficient woman has lived for more than a year-and-a-half using solar energy, a propane camping stove, rain water, and eating mainly non-perishable food

Wow, she sounds like she could be a pretty awesome environmentalist. Also, she sounds like she could be a paranoid Libertarian nut. So I Googled her to find out.

Yep, Loonie Libertarian!
Here's a sample from her website:

The basic premise that people have rights that can trump government power is not seriously disputed, at least not in the America that I grew up in. Natural rights, in particular, are considered beyond the authority of any government or international body to dismiss.

She has written three books with chapter headings like:
2  Our Founding Fathers Did Intend For Us To Have Medical Freedom – Just Like Religious Freedom

5  Noncooperation With Evil A Moral Obligation

and

7	We Are At War With Our Government…Yes We   Are…!!      And let's not forget Chapter 8: 8  Where I Buy My Colloidal Silver Generators

Yeah, Colloidal Silver, the substance that offers all sorts of health benefits like turning people blue, and um. . . that's pretty much it.

 

Also, it seems she may have killed her husband:

She has been in Restaurant Management, a Massage Therapist, an Esthetician, and a Real Estate Broker. Her advanced studies in the Natural Sciences allowed her to completely free her husband from the healthcare system and home death him naturally.

Robin considers her first book, “My Love Was Greater Than My Fear: Freeing My Husband Completely From The Healthcare System And Home Deathing Him Naturally”, as detailing the basis of the foundation of her “off-grid” journey.

But I digress.
So she's a nut. But it seems like she certainly has the right to live "off the grid" if she wants to. And it doesn't seem right that the city should be punishing her for that choice. Oh, but wait. This is a story about a right-winger being "victimized" by evil guv'mint bureaucrats, so there's probably going to be a little more to it. . .
What if we scroll all the way down to paragraph 5, past the helpful photos of her rain barrels and her pro-bono lawyer, past the part where most people have already gotten bored with this story and are searching for Kim & Kanye news. . . and. . . yep! There it is!

Also discussed at the special hearing was the fact that Speronis had been using the sewer system for the past year yet not paying for the service amassing a past due bill in the thousands. After her testimony admitting that she had used the service without paying for it, the city decided to cap the sewer line.

Ohhhh, the city is stopping her from using the sewer because she hasn't been paying her goddamnded sewer bills! well, I'm sure this was just an innocent oversight on her part, she'll probably be making arrangements to pay what she owes, and. . .

 Connie Barron, Cape Coral spokesperson told The News-Press, “She also gave clear indications she does not intend to pay for this service but intends to continue to use the system. We really had no choice but to cap the sewer.”

Damn! Someone get the Pulitzer Prize Committee on the phone, I think we have a winner! A story about a freeloader finally having her services cut off for lack of payment turned into a tale of a poor innocent victim of a "pure Evil" local government? This story will be taught in Journalism classes for decades!

Oh, and here's another little tidbit about Ms Speronis hidden down at the bottom of the story:

Speronis’ time living on the grid hasn’t gone so well for her either. As reported by the Cape Coral Daily Breeze , in June 2011, she plead no content to larceny, and was sentenced to 10 years of state probation and ordered to pay $32,000 in restitution. In January 2012, she had her real estate license revoked following a second complaint that she had not returned a $3,500 deposit following a failed condo sale.

Religious Lunatics in Positions of Responsibility

These guys were both very recently in positions of serious responsibility.

First up: Tom DeLay




Tom Delay apparently actually thinks that God himself took pen in hand and actually wrote the Constitution. Not the Bible, the Constitution.
Tom DeLay really seems to believe that the United States of America was founded, not by George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, etc. but by God. And that at some point in our history, the United States did not have a secular government

 

Pictured: The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost

(apparently)

I mean, I know right-wing religious fanatics are always claiming that the Constitution is based on the Bible, or Christian principles, even though a cursory reading of the document would actually disabuse one of that notion pretty quickly, but I don't think I've ever heard anyone actually claim that God actually wrote the damn thing.

And this man was the House majority leader. He was in a position of serious responsibility, one of the main forces setting our nation's legislative agenda. And he used his position to seal off the capitol rotunda? Is he even allowed to do that? And his plan to improve the nation was to have a bunch of Congressmen falling to their knees in the rotunda so that God would "heal our land?" Honestly, you could do that at home, you don't need to be a fucking Congressman to "seek the face of God." Wouldn't it make more sense to just stay home and kneel and pray and leave being a Congressman to those who would solve problems by legislating?



Next up: Gen Jerry Boykin (Ret)





Here's what General Boykin had to say recently about the second coming

The Lord is a warrior and in Revelation 19 is says when he comes back, he’s coming back as what? A warrior. A mighty warrior leading a mighty army, riding a white horse with a blood-stained white robe…. I believe that blood on that robe is the blood of his enemies ‘cause he’s coming back as a warrior carrying a sword.

Um, first of all, have you ever actually read that fever-dream of a book, Revelations? It's like William Burroughs without all the buttsex. (which admittedly doesn't leave all that much) It's fucking nuts. You're really going to take that book seriously? 
I was raised pretty fundamentalist, and even we were taught that Revelations is all symbolism. (I think the prevailing scholarly opinion is that all the bad things in Revelations, the dragons and monsters and what-not, are all cleverly-disguised allusions to the Roman Empire)

Secondly, Jesus wears a blood-stained robe? Why would you assume that's the blood of his enemies? Might it not have to do with his hands and feet having nails driven through them? And thorns sticking into his head?

The Lord is a warrior and in Revelation 19 is says when he comes back, he's coming back as what? A warrior. A might warrior leading a mighty army, riding a white horse with a blood-stained white robe ... I believe that blood on that robe is the blood of his enemies 'cause he's coming back as a warrior carrying a sword.  - See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/boykin-when-jesus-comes-back-hell-be-carrying-ar-15-assault-rifle#sthash.M0bMjk2R.dpuf

The Lord is a warrior and in Revelation 19 is says when he comes back, he's coming back as what? A warrior. A might warrior leading a mighty army, riding a white horse with a blood-stained white robe ... I believe that blood on that robe is the blood of his enemies 'cause he's coming back as a warrior carrying a sword.  - See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/boykin-when-jesus-comes-back-hell-be-carrying-ar-15-assault-rifle#sthash.M0bMjk2R.dpuf

Thirdly, Why would God need a sword? He's God. From what we've learned from the preceding books of the Bible, he can conjure up fire, floods, famine, pestilence. He can have all the first-born killed. He can heal the sick, raise the dead, and make the little girls talk out of their heads.
(wait, that last bit was Johnny Rivers)
Anyway, why would he need a sword when he could kill anyone he wants to by saying the word?
And if you're really taking all this Revelations stuff literally, then this next bit doesn't quite fit:

And I believe now – I’ve checked this out – I believe that sword he’ll be carrying when he comes back is an AR-15…. The sword today is an AR-15

 So, if you're taking this all literally, why isn't a sword a sword? You say God is literally coming back on a literal horse in a literal blood-stained robe, but when he says "sword," he probably means that as a metaphor for an AR-15? And why so specific? Couldn't God conjure up some sort of super Star Wars gun that no one had ever seen before? Why would he use a gun that any nut can get at any gun show?






And now, Boykin goes for some sort of wingnut gold medal by being perhaps the first lunatic to sombine the second coming with the second amendment.

Now I want you to think about this: where did the Second Amendment come from? ... From the Founding Fathers, it's in the Constitution. Well, yeah, I know that. But where did the whole concept come from? It came from Jesus when he said to his disciples 'now, if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.' 

I know, everybody says that was a metaphor.  IT WAS NOT A METAPHOR! He was saying in building my kingdom, you're going to have to fight at times. You won't build my kingdom with a sword, but you're going to have to defend yourself.  And that was the beginning of the Second Amendment, that's where the whole thing came from. I can't prove that historically and David will counsel me when this is over, but I know that's where it came from.

Holy shit! There's one I've never heard before. Where in the hell does he come up with that? Has any historian ever found any shred of evidence that any of the founders were thinking of that Bible verse when they wrote the second amendment? (And David Barton doesn't count?) 

This man was fucking United States Army general! I had no idea he was this insane. I know he got drummed out of the Army because even the Bush administration found his anti-Muslim rhetoric embarrassing, but holy fuck, he's a loony!
It's terrifying to think that this man once commanded an Army! It's a miracle that this nut never invaded Saudi Arabia, or Dearborn, MI!

A Reminder to Republicans

Just a Reminder to any Republicans out there.

  This is your guy.

This is the face of your once-proud party:
 



This is what you've become. You are now the party of a guy who refers to the President of the United States as a "sub-human mongrel."

You are now the party of a man who waves around machine guns while threatening members of Congress.


Because this scumbag, this nasty, vile little shitbag, has been given the approval of your party again and again and again.


I don't know why he has suddenly become an issue, campaigning with Greg Abbot for Governor of Texas, but Nugent has had his ring kissed by the leading lights of the right for some time now.

Remember this?


Your standard-bearer in the last election went to Nugent to ask for his endorsement.
Did anyone in your party object?
  Did anyone even point out that it was, let's ay "unseemly" for a man who wants to be the President to associate himself with a man who threatened the life of the current one? A man who called the Secretary of State a "worthless bitch" and suggested she ride his machine gun out of town?


And of course, it's not just him.




Remember this once and future presidential candidate jamming with Uncle Ted, doing a song about fucking underage groupies?

 Family Values!









And did anyone in your party object when one of your asshole teabagging Congressmen invited this scumbag to the State of the Goddamm Union Address?  Did any of the leaders of your pathetic little party have the balls to stand up and say "no, Steve Stockamn, you can not invite this 'man' to the SOTU. You can not bring a man who has threatened the life of the President in to a room in which the President will be speaking, have some goddamm common decency!"

No, no one in your party mad a fucking peep.
And no one said a word when the Congressman called Nugent a Great American or Patriot or whatever the fuck he said about him. You were all fine with having this scumbag in the halls of Congress as long as it was a thumb in the eye of President Obama!

So, just a reminder of how things work.

You get the Nuge.












We get the Boss   














We get Janeane Garofalo


 You get Victoria Jackson


we get Matt Damon and Ben Affleck 




You get Jon Voigt, Frazier, and Cliff from Cheers.

 

 

We get Tina Fey, You get Sarah Palin

You're done. It's over. We win.