Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Antonin Scalia is somewhat similar to a pig-fucking imbecile.



Scalia: It’s ‘effective’ to compare homosexuality to bestiality and murder

Scalia was explaining to a question by a gay student, Duncan Hosie, who asked the conservative judge why he considers it necessary to draw parallels between laws banning LGBT sex and laws banning bestiality and murder.
“I don’t think it’s necessary, but I think it’s effective,” Scalia replied,


Yes, it is effective. Just like robbing folks is an effective way to get monies. But robbing is still considered a pretty shitty thing to do.

It might also be "effective" to compare Antonin Scalia to a pig-fucking imbecile. I'm not saying that Antonin Scalia is the same thing as a pig-fucking imbecile, it's just a rhetorical device. I'm just saying that Antonin Scalia is analogous to a pig-fucking imbecile.

What the hell is it going to take to get this pig-fucking imbecile off of the bench?

Monday, December 10, 2012

So What Did I Miss?

We're back in the good ol' U.S. of A, did I miss anything interesting while I was gone?

Oh, let's see. . .


God damn it, Wanda Jackson played Atlanta's Terminal West while we were in Mexico! Fucking figures!

What else?

Jim DeMint is resigning? I have to assume he's being investigated for something, no way he just gives up his Senate seat for, what, a change of scenery?

 

 “I’m leaving the Senate now, but I’m not leaving the fight. I’ve decided to join The Heritage Foundation at a time when the conservative movement needs strong leadership in the battle of ideas,” DeMint said in a statement.

So, sure he's going on wingnut welfare, but he could have done that any time. Something's gotta be coming down the pipeline.

 also. . .

Tucker Carlson's egregious vanity project the "Daily Caller" does super-serious journalism slut-shames Taylor Swift.

Wow, Taylor Swift really gets around

 

  After a summer of stalking the Kennedy family by holding hands with high schooler Conor Kennedy, country singer Taylor Swift, 22, reportedly fell very swiftly (get it?) into the arms of One Direction’s Harry Styles, 18, when things ended with the Deerfield Academy junior in October. 

For a woman-child who paints a picture of innocence in all her A-line dresses, high necklines, blonde bangs and saccharine-sweet lyrics, Swift really gets around.

Here is a roundup of Swift’s (alleged) boyfriends over the past few years, ranging from the barely legal pool to much older and more disgusting  – (cough) John Mayer (cough).

Why is it anyone's business whom she dates? No explanation is forthcoming from the sad gossip-mongers at the Daily Caller.

 Swift was then linked to Taylor Lautner, who is the target of many a gay rumor since he just sort of gives off that vibe, and Cory Monteith, who is also the victim of many a gay rumor since he stars on “Glee.” (He now dates “Glee” costar Lea Michelle.)

Because what goes better with slut-shaming than a side of homophobia?


Then there were the Jake Gyllenhaal photo-ops of 2010, when Swift and the older actor were seen holding hands a lot and drinking coffee

Holding hands AND drinking coffee? What a scandal! 
In Salt Lake City.
In 1952.

“We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together” is allegedly about Gyllenhaal, because apparently he did not want to simply “hit it and quit it” (as the kids say) and kept trying to get back together with her even though he didn’t like her lousy music. (Again, can you really blame the guy?)

First of all, no the kids do not say "hit it and quit it." Secondly, what did this girl ever do to you? This really feels like a personal grudge.

Honestly, how is Taylor Swift's love life more of a scandal than the fact that she appears to be made of something other than human flesh.

 
Japanese sex robot?
 
And speaking of ridiculous non-scandals, the Republicans are still trying to manufacture a scandal out of the thin air of Benghazi. 

Apparently, they've decided to narrow the focus of their war on women to a war on one particular woman, Susan Rice.

 
In the movie version, she'll be played by Maya Rudolph
 
If I understand correctly, the "scandal" is that Ms Rice said something which may have not been exactly true in an interview, which had the consequences of , um. . . hmm! I don't know what bad things are supposed to have happened as a result of Ms Rice's repeating what the CIA told her to say. 

But why let that stand in the way of a good smear campaign? Usually when you hurl accusations at someone, it's at least clear what it is she's being accused of, but whatever! 

And in a stunning display of shamelessness, Dan Senor surfaced to criticize Susan Rice on the Sunday bull session:

Dan Senor, the former spokesman for the Provisional Coalition Authority, or whatever it was called. The face of the Iraq debacle, Dan Senor. Questioning someone's credibility. Wow!

What else?

Oh, Newt Gingrich has found a new grift:

It had to happen: A start-up company is offering rides to the moon. Book your seat now — though it’s going to set you back $750 million (it’s unclear if that includes baggage fees).
Everything will be automated and controlled from Earth. It’ll be like taking a train, the company said.
The company’s board of advisers includes former speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, who during the Republican primaries early this year said that as president he’d establish a permanent moon base by 2021.

Gingrich has to be smart enough to see what a dumbfuck business model this is, a moon-tourism company? Selling $750 million tickets? Ridiculous zillionaires can already buy their way on to a Russian space ship, but sure, there's probably a whole bunch of potential customers who haven't yet done it. This business should be belly-up within the year, but Newt will have lined his pockets with "advisory fees" and God knows he isn't putting up any of his own money.



Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Fleeing the Country

We're gonna flee like McAfee!

Yes, Team Chaos will be temporarily relocating to the sunny shores of an undisclosed location South of the Border. (hint: it rhymes with Schmexico).

We'll be back as soon as the heat dies down, or Monday. Whichever comes first.

Meanwhile, please enjoy los gatos en los sombreros:

 







Viva Mexicats!

Republicans Continue to Be Presidents of Fantasyland




Via PPP:

49% of GOP voters nationally say they think that ACORN stole the election for President Obama. We found that 52% of Republicans thought that ACORN stole the 2008 election for Obama, so this is a modest decline, but perhaps smaller than might have been expected given that ACORN doesn't exist anymore.

 (emphasis added)

49%! Pretty much HALF of all Republican voters in the nation believe in the paranoid fantasy dreamed up by the McCain campaign even though the scenario is now literally impossible. This is why Republicans can not be reasoned with. They are not reasonable people. They are delusional paranoid fools who live in a virtual reality of their own making. They live in a world where the fact that the average temperature increases every year is no reason to think that global warming isn't a dastardly hoax being played by evil liberal scientists. They inhabit a reality in which the most ineffectual organization on the planet, the UN, is on the verge of flying their secret black helicopters into every city in the world to whisk people off to FEMA camps in the desert. They exist in a universe where you can balance the budget by bringing in less revenue. They believe that America is the greatest, most powerful country in the history of the world, but if we cut one fucking dime from the military budget, we will be utterly defenseless against the scary Muslims.
These folks are crazy, and the sooner the President realizes that he can not reason with lunatics, the better.

Monday, December 3, 2012

Bad advice from awful women

First up: marriage advice from Michelle Duggar, because when I think of the term "happy marriage," I immediately think of an empty-headed baby factory whose husband is so gay that he makes sure to impregnate her every time they mate so that he doesn't have to do that again for at least 9 months!

Michelle Duggars Tips For A Happy Marriage: Husbands Are Commanded To Govern Their Wives


 
Is it just me or do they look an awful lot alike?


So, yeah, her advice is pretty much as creepy as you might expect:

A Husband Needs A Wife Who Accepts Him As A Leader And Believes In His God-Given Responsibilities”: Husbands are commanded to govern their wives; God works through a man’s decisions — good or bad; Bad decisions reveal his needs and allow the wife to appeal and demonstrate Godly character; The more a wife trusts her husband, the more careful he will be in giving her direction; Never ask others for counsel without your husband’s approval; reassure your husband that you understand and believe that he is your God-given leader.


 She even has some sort of a workbook with fill-in-the-blank questions about being a good Stepford wife:


I. A HUSBAND NEEDS A WIFE WHO RESPECTS HIM AS A MAN.
A MAN WANTS TO PROVE HIS MANLINESS.
HOW DOES A WIFE DESTROY HER HUSBAND'S MANLINESS?

Although, one might amend  that to read "A painfully insecure man wants to prove his manliness.

HOW DOES A WIFE DESTROY HER HUSBAND'S MANLINESS?

A._____________________________
1. Physical
2. Spiritual
3. Mental
4. Emotional


And some are just weird:


B._____________________
1. ____________________is killed by self-sufficiency.
2. Whoever controls the _______________controls the ______________ . 

(insert your own filthy sex joke here)


 And some area little frightening:


A wife may avoid temporary consequences by taking matters into her own hands, but doing so will ultimately cause destruction (Proverbs 14:1).

DESTRUCTION!!!!!
Okay, I'll bite, what does Proverbs 14:1 say?



Every wise woman buildeth her house: but the foolish plucketh it down with her hands.

Huh?

Reading this passage from a sane perspective, as I am wont to do, it seems to be saying that women should try to be, you know, wise. And not foolish. Which seems like good advice for women or men.  I don't see anything here about not taking matters into one's own hands. In fact, I would venture to say that based on this passage, a wise woman should take things into her own hands, but a foolish one should probably not.


And then some is just sad:

A husband needs a wife who will continue to develop inward and outward beauty: How can you become more of the wife of your husband’s dreams?; discover and  conform to your husband’s real wishes; explain your hairstyle to others on the basis of your submission to your authority

 

Of course, if this was my hairstyle, I'd try to blame it on my husband too.


So, yeah. Discover and conform to your husband's real wishes. Because why be who you are? Why have a personality of your own, when you can just be some sort of sad puppet?

If you have a strong stomach, you can read the whole thing here: http://www.radaronline.com/sites/radaronline.com/files/Seven%20Basic%20Needs%20Of%20A%20Husband.pdf



Then there's Suzanne Venker, the author of How to Choose a Husband and Make Peace With Marriage, which is an odd title, since someone who is looking to choose a husband has probably already made her peace with marriage, or else why the search for the husband?



Suzanne describes herself thusly:

I am a wife and mother who writes. A lot. I’ve spent the past thirteen years, while at home with my children, examining the culture and its social agendas as it pertains to sex, marriage, gender roles, and the work and family dilemma.
 
Because the best possible place to do this kind of sociological research is at home with a bunch of dumb kids!
 And who knows more about the "work and family dilemma" than a stay-at-home mom? 
The purpose of my work is to offer a perspective I believe is commensurate with the way most women think and feel about their lives

com·men·su·rate

[kuh-men-ser-it, -sher-] 
adjective
1. having the same measure; of equal extent or duration.
2. corresponding in amount, magnitude, or degree: Your paycheck should be commensurate with the amount of time worked.

Before I became a writer, I was a teacher. I was so shocked by what I witnessed in public schools that I quit and wrote my first book, or started to anyway (my first marriage was falling apart at the time, so the project fell by the wayside),
That marriage and motherhood has been so devalued in this country is the reason I took to the computer once again. All of my books examine the demise of the American family since the 1960s
 
So, your marriage failed. So obviously it's society's fault for de-valuing marriage and allowing the demise of the American family. 

So you may be wondering by now "is this a book that I really need? Well, thankfully Suzanne has a handy quiz to help you determine just that. If you answer "yes" to 5 or more of these questions, damn right you need her stupid book!

1. Deep down, do you feel superior to men?
2. Are you nicer to your girlfriends than you are to your husband or boyfriend? (Another way to answer: Is your behavior and demeanor the same with your guy as it is when you’re with your girlfriends?)

So, if you're a rude, arrogant lady you're already 2 for 2 in the needing the book score.


 4. Do you secretly believe you deserve to be married to Brad Pitt? And that if you were, your life would be better?
Suzanne's book is ideal for the extremely delusional!
 6. Do you have sex very quickly when you’re in a relationship? Or when you’re not in a relationship at all?
Buy my book, you whore! Otherwise you'll just keep on enjoying your sexuality all over the place and won't have time to read awful self-help books.
9. Be honest: Are you looking for tall, dark, and handsome as opposed to smart, stable, and kind? Or perhaps all of the above?
Do you have standards? Are you not eager to settle for short, pale, and ugly? Because that's the only man you deserve, not one that you're attracted to! Because as we've already established, you're a rude, arrogant whore!
10. Are you open to the idea of living with a man?
Whore!
 
 If you're still not sure whether this book is right for you, just click on the "read an excerpt" link

 

Which takes you to this gem:

Read an Excerpt From How to Choose a Husband

Coming Soon

 

Sure, she's already all over FOX promoting this book, but it still seems like it might be a bit too early to post an excerpt.

 

Finally, here is the book description from Amazon.com presented without further comment:


It's been forty years since the sexual revolution, and the women of America have everything they want. Everything, that is, except a husband. Women may be schooled in the art of sex, but they have failed in the art of love.

That isn't surprising. The modern generation is living in a culture that isn't the least bit interested in helping them get hitched. For decades women have been taught to sleep around indiscriminately, to pursue an education and career at all costs, and to never depend on a man. As a result, women delay marriage indefinitely or ignore it altogether -- as though marriage has no bearing on their happiness. As though it were a nice idea, or nice accompaniment, to an otherwise satisfying life.

This is an unprecedented worldview. Until recently, women have always mapped out their lives according to what they considered their most important role: wife and mother. Today, women plan their entire futures around big careers. Husband and children come last.

In How to Choose a Husband, social critic and bestselling author Suzanne Venker says American women need a detox. If they want to be happy, or just plain satisfied, they must do a 180 when it comes to their attitude toward sex, courtship, and married life.

If they do, marriageable men will reappear -- and women will find the love that eludes them.