The Christie scandal is an odd thing. Outside the peculiar context of Christie’s presidential ambitions, the idea that this should be front-page news across the country is somewhat baffling. Quick: Show of hands. Who is surprised that New Jersey politicians play hardball with other New Jersey politicians at the expense of voters and taxpayers?
The kewler kids – the ones that Jonah would be pals with, Orange Whip? Orange Whip? – trapped in their cars, hour after hopeless hour, were thinking: “The rascals!” Like that 91 year-old lady who collapsed and passed away before a traffic-snarled ambulance could help. Couldn’t stop chuckling about the timing. “I’m dying but I know a good one when I see it – Fort Lee getting the ole fungoo…” Hunhh, plop. America! And: Jonah Goldberg.
Are you also shocked that bears use our national forests for toilets? Are you shocked that dogs lick their nether regions without much concern about who might be watching? Does it blow your mind that the pope is Catholic?
*wheeeze* LORDY JONAH I BEG OF YOU. A word about airplane food and the milk will sploosh from my nose.
…come on! You have to wonder how some of the folks in the media can look at themselves in the mirror. The three network news shows have devoted orders of magnitude more coverage to a story about closed lanes on the George Washington Bridge than they have to the IRS scandal. I know this is not a new insight, but WHAT THE HELL!?
Right, because these little things are silly. Banal. Cliche. Right? Trivial.
The IRS scandal is a cancer because if you can’t trust Obama to keep that agency from being politicized, you can’t trust him to keep anything immune from politics — including healthcare and, more relevant, the National Security Agency.
Ominous. Cancerous. Confusing. Especially because so many people are wondering about Chris Christie, in the same way. The Goldberg way. Right now. This instant.
Rich Lowry, you’re Jonah’s boss. Anything to add?
Because there is no such thing as an irrelevant abuse of power, the media’s keen interest in the Governor Chris Christie drama has been necessary and welcome.
Right. So Jonah Goldberg is a useless no-good idiot. Imbecile. Jerk. Politicians using their powers to punish civilians is not a thing to be tossed off as hilarious. It’s a brutish thing. Scabrous. Not typical. Not trivial. Jonah?
Obama’s whole shtick is to pretend that he’s above politics while being rankly political about everything, including his stated desire to “punish our enemies.” By comparison, Chris Christie looks like Diogenes and Cincinnatus rolled into one. From inauguration day forward, this whole crew has behaved like Chicago goons dressed in Olympian garb, and the press has fallen for it.
Jump cut. Shoulder to shoulder in the White House press room, two reporters, from the AP and Reuters:
“Like gangsters in togas?”
“Yup, at first. That’s what I thought.”
“I know. I completely fell for it.”
The era of Gesture Liberalism is at hand.
It occurs to George Will. We are full of shit. Never before in all his 72 years have the hippies protested anything or held a demonstration.
It may be more amusing than consequential.
We could carve that on his tombstone. Burnish it in the peach fuzz on his ass. This maybe, too: “Helluva Bow Tie There, Caligula.”
Americans who exercise consumer sovereignty wherever Barack Obama still tolerates it are constantly disappointing him. For generations they persisted in buying what he calls “substandard” policies from what he calls “bad apple” health insurers. They stopped only when he forced them to stop — when he rescued them from their ignorance by banning their benighted preferences.
Last year all you could afford was a $10,000-deductible insurance policy. When you bought it, that was an expression of your “sovereignty.” Freedumb! This year, for the same price, a $1500-deductible policy became available. And this was your undoing, I take it. The second policy equals bad, somehow. Or is George Will a blockhead?
Have consumers thanked him for trying to wean them from their desire to drive large, useful, comfortable, safe vehicles that he thinks threaten their habitat, Earth?
Their habitat. We’re a bunch of zoo animals.
Christ, what an asshole.
The 2013 numbers tell the tale of their ingratitude. In 2013, for the 32nd consecutive year, the best-selling vehicle was Ford’s F-Series pickups.
That’s what your mom wants to drive, right? A truck. Perfect for commuting, Sunday drives and picnics. It’s summertime, and we’re going upstate with the dogs lashed down in the bed. There goes Snowball.
But let us play George’s silly game, shall we? You Stoopid Hippies, The Market Is What Decides:
Even with SUV and crossover utility vehicles sales surging, the average fuel efficiency of new vehicles sold in August set a new high for the U.S., according to a new report…
“I am not surprised that overall fuel economy is improving,” says Sivak, who has been tracking fuel efficiency for the last six years. “Buyers are selecting more fuel-efficient vehicles within each class of vehicles.”
In case snotface can’t read:
Fuel efficiency is a decades-long buying trend. A market behemoth. If you want to make a mint, offer the American consumer an economical car. Couldn’t be any clearer. And only a mothballed Ford F-150 would be considered a “comfortable, safe vehicle.” Friends, thinking about maybe getting your head torn off in an automobile accident? Well, then, you should think about getting yourself a CO2-brapping pile of steel:
Take a vehicle’s Insurance Institute for Highway Safety score, throw it into a data pot that includes Consumer Reports ratings, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration crash safety results and J.D. Power’s Initial Quality Study numbers, mix thoroughly, then pour out the most dangerous vehicle on the road today: The Ram pickup truck.
The website 24/7 Wall St. created this analysis to reveal the models with consistent quality problems and poor safety scores. All of the vehicles scored poorly in one area or another in crash testing, typically side or rear impact tests. They all scored badly in rollover testing, except the Jeep Wrangler.
In order, the best of the worst are:
1. Dodge Ram
2. Chevrolet Colorado Super Cab
3. Mazda CX-7
4. Mazda CX-9
5. Nissan Pathfinder
6. Jeep Wrangler
7. Suzuki SX4
Mobile coffins. A truck, a bigger truck, an SUV, a bigger SUV, a huge SUV, a Suzuki, and a Jeep. George Will is brilliant. And if that isn’t the best of all possible worlds.
Liberals try to gag the pundit with their Hyundai Utopias, but he isn’t swallowing. American glory will not be satisfied with such sexless, academic petitions. The shrunken Prius, the flaccid Tesla. A clitoral Fiat. Hear him: NO! The trucking brute! Vrooom! Smelly and Manly! Overlarge, overpriced, to beat you at the gas pump and put you in the hospital. ‘Tis George Will! Wishing.
If ‘The Surge’ in Iraq had gone a little less (cough) gloriously, or if Lehman Brothers had shit the bed a few months after September 2008, this man could be your president today.
Fox News host Mike Huckabee on Saturday warned that a California girl who was declared brain dead after tonsil surgery last month could lead to situations like Nazi death camps and forced abortions in China if the hospital took her off life support.
It’s worthwhile to note that there are about 6,000 hospitals in America. You have choices.
The former Arkansas governor and ordained pastor began his Fox News show by admitting that he did not have the medical experience necessary to understand 13-year-old Jahi McMath’s condition but he encouraged her family to fight against any attempts to remove her from life support even though doctors said she technically “died several weeks ago.”
I have to do it: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I’m just a caveman. I fell on some ice and later got thawed out by some of your scientists. Your world frightens and confuses me…
“Every life has value and worth,” Huckabee told his viewers on Saturday. “There is no such person who is disposable, one whose life has been deemed by others to be less than others and therefore expendable, I can’t share that.”
Are patients lives ‘disposable’ because doctors are homicidal, Mike? Are they terrifyingly lazy? Horribly thrill-seeking? Or are we all extras in the sequel to Coma? How did you figure it all out? In any case, the Gov thinks doctors are the sorts of butchers that Charlie Manson might take a few pointers from. But there’s Obamacare bashing to be done:
“People from all over the world come here for health care,” he observed. “Why? Because we have an incredibly good health care system.”
And the medicine spooks are really angels. Gawd bless ‘em. More ranting? Sure:
“It’s also that culture that allowed the Nazis to to hideously justify the savage slaughter of millions of Jews, disabled people, old people and those with mental illness,” Huckabee said. “Let’s hope and pray that the courts continue to do what every court should do, respect parents over government, family over hospitals and, above all, protect Jahi from them all.”
I suppose it’s possible that Second-to-McCain has never heard of the term “brain dead.” He hasn’t any clue what it might mean. To his ears it’s a mystical phrase, like the strange patter he heard Ken Burns’ jazzmen bandy about after partaking of their urban cigarettes. Bray-in what? Dead, was it? If that don’t beat all. Mother, stop this crazy thing.
I doubt I could ever recall all the poor TV dramas I’ve seen where one character or another ends up “brain dead.” It’s an older and more personally relevant concept than “bandwidth” or “Facebook.” It even occupied an entire episode of Kramer’s life. And, yet, there are people who have no idea what it is.
A quick reminder. This…
…is meant to elicit this response:
And the occasional posting of a video like this:
The wingnuts are pissed at the New York Times.
Down the Times’ Bengahzi Rabbit Hole
Nitpicking over which jihadists did what lets the Obama administration evade the real questions.
By Andrew C. McCarthy | National Review | January 4, 2014
So Andrew McCarthy takes another crack at BENGHAZI!!1!! The Republican obsession is harder to kill than a vampire, although David Kirkpatrick’s in depth reporting comes close to driving the stake. Months of investigation in Benghazi revealed the violence came about spontaneously, as much a response to the Innocence of Muslims video as anything else. Dozens of young men from a number of militias participated in it. In short, it was a street riot, with armaments. But that sort of thing doesn’t really stoke the fear of mastermind Musselmen in America’s quaking hearts, does it? So McCarthy will do what he can to revive the menace of it all.
Of course, if it had happened in Chicago that would have been alright too. Andy would have called for better Stand Your Ground laws and the rollback of affirmative action. But since it all went down in Libya he’s got to work a different angle. Try a little something else. Anti-Americanism. Mass murder. Conspiracy. Jihad.
What was the commander-in-chief of the United States armed forces doing through the night of September 11, 2012, while he knew Americans were under jihadist siege in Libya?
Then he calls aloud: Hillary Clinton! And Vince Foster rolls over in his grave.
The Times report is a labor of love in the service of President Obama and, in particular, the Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign ramp-up. Former secretary of state Clinton, of course, was a key architect of Obama’s Libya policy.
Also Muslims. And terrorists.
She was also chiefly responsible for the protection of American personnel in that country, including our murdered ambassador, J. Christopher Stevens, and the three other Americans killed by Muslim terrorists…
It’s a horror film that sells itself. The only thing missing is the buttered popcorn. Well, a little popcorn and the slightest bit of anything that refutes Kirkpatrick’s reporting…
…why do I say, “Mission Accomplished”? Because the objective of Kirkpatrick’s novella is not to persuade; it is to shrink the parameters of newsworthy inquiry to a punctilious debate over nonsense: The cockamamie trailer and the dizzying jihadist org chart.
Cocklefish and bodskins! You’re screwing it up! I laughed so hard at this paragraph, then I stopped reading. I wonder why he didn’t just yell poopyhead.
Back in 2012 Hanna Rosin wrote:
The world today brings news that Jan Berenstain, co-author with her husband Stan of the 45 years and running Berenstain Bears series for children, has passed on to a better world. As any right-thinking mother will agree, good riddance.
As Slate introductions go it was pretty typical. Their authors rarely miss an opportunity to come off as a mix of gimlet-eyed and flip. As if anything like academic whimsy were a product of wits more than the search for self-satisfaction.
It’s a potent mix that Time magazine apparently can no longer resist. Today they featured Rosin with a keen new essay.
Men Are Obsolete
Five reasons we are definitely witnessing the end of men
By Hanna Rosin | Jan. 02, 2014 | 447 Comments
We’re less witnessing the death of men than the birth of the Time-pitch. As in Are Men Useless? That Slate is mocked for this habit of 25-Watt contrarianism is nothing to worry about because traffic is traffic, I’m betting. The first clue comes as the editors have slotted this piece for ‘Feminism,’ as opposed to ‘Opinion,’ or ‘Drollery.’
The second clue would be Rosin’s essential grasp of ‘men.’
How do I know men are finished? I’ll read you a quote that says it all: “Yes. There have been times when I’ve been in a drunken stupor.” Toronto’s mayor, a shining example of modern manhood is what I would call the canary in the coal mine, only he’s not quite as delicate as the canary.
Next week’s crack-fueled heart attack is a shining example of modern manhood. Soon to be extinct, we’re to take it, or at least lying unconscious in a cell. Is it the ‘we’re all toking cocaine’ or the ‘we’re all dangerously psychotic’ part that counts for hard evidence? It couldn’t be because ‘we run things and are full of ourselves’ as that’s been our gig forever, and how very boring.
Are men literally obsolete? Of course not, and if we had to prove that we could never win. For one thing, we haven’t figured out a way to harvest sperm without them being, you know, alive.
Rosin’s argument has at least begun. Why should we even have men? Because women need viable sperm and nobody’s figured how to extract it after we’re dead. Maybe we’re otherwise worthless but we should at least be kept alive. Oh I agree.
But in order to win this debate we have to prove that men, quote unquote, as we’ve historically come to define them — entitled to power, destined for leadership, arrogant, confused by anything that isn’t them.
To win this debate: Men Are Obsolete. Hanna has to prove . . hmm. Prove what? Well, men. As we’ve come to define them, The End. Are they perhaps no longer those things? Pray tell, have complete thoughts become obsolete too? This is not going well.
As in: “I don’t understand. Is it a guy dressed up like a girl? Or a girl dressed up like a guy?” They are obsolete.
And there you have it. I’m not sure the argument could be made any clearer. As in: Is a man not something that is? Or is he something he’s not? What the hell is Boy George anyway? See? Men Are Obsolete.
If you’re going to act glib and conceited, you’ve got to be far smarter than the subject you’re alternately serving and abusing. Hanna is not that writer. I’m very much tempted to stop here but you should at least see a bit of how she plays out the disaster. You know, just in case we’re really done for:
ONE: It’s the end of men because men are failing in the workplace.
Over the last few decades men’s incomes have been slowly declining and women’s have been rising. Last year one in five men were not working, something economists call the biggest social crisis we will face . . In 2009 they [women] became the majority of the American workforce for the first time ever. Now in every part of America young single women under 30 have a higher median income than young men, which is really important because that’s the phase of life when people imagine what their future will look like. As one sorority girl put it to me — remember, I said sorority, not someone from the women’s study center — “Men are the new ball and chain.”
This might be a more devastating observation if women hadn’t been shut out of the workplace for so long. There are yet plenty of gains to be made on their behalf, so whatever balance is still to be had can hardly be considered tragic. Throw in a recession economy that thrives on drudgery and I’m not at all convinced that men, for whatever reasons, can no longer compete.
TWO: It’s the end of men because the traditional household, propped up by the male breadwinner, is vanishing.
For the first time in history women all over the world are marrying down, meaning marrying men with worse prospects than they have. We have a new global type, for example, called the alpha wife, a woman who makes more money than her husband or boyfriend. Not that long ago she was exceedingly rare. Now she’s part of about 40 percent of couples in the US. And that does not count the growing number of single moms who head their own families.
Hanna gives her self away. If a woman makes more than her male partner does, she’s ‘marrying down.’ Men have been marrying down for centuries, but you don’t see us complaining. She mistakes positive developments across society for a hurricane of male impotence, soon to become fated-death itself. She’s what you might call very old-fashioned. A fuddy-duddy. Being startled by the way women are now getting educations and careers and everything(!), Hanna’s just given up trying to figure the world out. She appears to be dismissive of men because of that confusion, finding little more than our contribution of sperm to be concerned with. How silly. Read her embarrassment here.
The more we find out about Phil Robertson the more familiar he becomes. As more of his pulpit videos are being dug up he’s becoming practically indistinguishable from much of America, sadly. The Duck dynast and reality television star appears to be less a paragon of wholesome Americanism than your typical xenophobic Freeper:
The controversy surrounding Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson has now taken a step beyond his comments about homosexuality and bestiality, along with his assertion that black people in the Jim Crow South were happier and equating Muslims with Nazis.
Now with yet another video that’s surfaced, we’re once again reminded that this is nothing new for Robertson, who explained to an Arkansas congregation in 2008 what would “do in the Muslims,” as well as “the Chinese,” and that Muslims are “famous for murder.”
Over 3 billion people are evil and should be done-in. You haven’t even cracked the halfway point for Earth, pal.
“That’s why they run jet aircraft into buildings, because they’re under control of the evil one, that’s why they rob and kidnap and rape and pillage, because they’re under control of the evil one. That’s why they murder, from the Nazis, to the Shintoists, to the communists to this latest crop!”
Oh good the entire country of Japan, there’s another 130 million or so satanic characters. Why do we have military bases up and down the Land of the Rising Mephistos again? Why are we over there amongst the thieves, who worship trees? The rapists bowing at the foot of Mount Fuji? The psychos who bathe in sacred mountain streams? Or does the question answer itself?
“Because all of them, those four groups, 80 years of history, they all want to conquer the world, they all rejected Jesus, and they’re all famous for murder. Nazis, Shintoists, communists, and the Muhammadists.”
They’re famous for worshipping sticks and rocks. And then throwing them at God. It’s part of their national identity. Is it too late to remind everybody that Pajama Boy wasn’t a racist?
SO. The New York Times sends David Kirkpatrick to Benghazi for a very long time to investigate what really happened in the September eleventh embassy attacks. It’s about time. The president’s political opposition have threatened to impeach him over it for more than a year. We might like to know some facts about the tragedy. Any facts. Journalism, please? For example the truth about the Beirut bombing of 1983 was that terrorists blew up one of our barracks, killing 200 Marines. That’s why everybody felt real bad for Ronald Reagan, poor guy. It wasn’t his fault, he’s a moron.
After months of talking to the Benghazi locals what Kirkpatrick concluded was that the violence was a product of a number of things. Long simmering hatred of the West. Angry young men who join militias. The Innocence of Muslims video that ignited the Arab world. An opportunistic proto-warlord named Ahmed Abu Khattala. Read the piece here, it’s great reporting. It’s what we expect the New York Times to do (finally).
The wingnuts at first didn’t know how to respond. The piece was a bombshell. It softened every hardline allegation they offered about Obama being unprepared, being weak, being a liar, being a secret Muslim. The ‘heads’ of their intelligence committees, et. al., basically responded by saying ‘Is too!’
But then The Daily Beast weighed in with the worst blog of the year. I don’t know who Eli Lake is or why he calls himself a “senior national-security correspondent” when he really prefers to write about how kewl Grand Theft Auto is, and that’s not quite a national-security issue, is it? Also why the-dashes, douche?
But Eli Lake has today given the compass-less Impeach! crowd wandering the desert a cool drink of water. Because he thinks all of Kirkpatrick’s work, staying in Benghazi all that time, interviewing hundreds of people, including the militia leaders, and the people who participated in the attack, and then not finding anyone with any Al Qaeda affiliations, the whole thing can be debunked by just sitting at a computer. And doing a little routine typing.
Yes, There IS Evidence Linking al Qaeda to Benghazi
By Eli Lake December 29th 20133:27 pm The Daily Beast
But there IS evidence. Al Qaeda MAYBE killed your ambassador. You BETTER read this.
Libyan militants tell the New York Times that al Qaeda is not behind the 2012 Benghazi attack. Some members of Congress have intelligence that says otherwise.
This is journalism? Before even reading the piece, friends, did you think Kirkpatrick claimed that no one in congress said they had ‘evidence’ Al Qaeda was behind the killings? Haven’t the impeachers been using this ‘evidence’ to beat the president like a junkyard dog? For months? Didn’t we just have Christmas a couple days ago? Wouldn’t the allegations provide reasons to do some reporting and check the claims? Thank God Eli is here to deliver the shattering news that Republicans still think Al Qaeda could have, maybe, been behind the Benghazi attacks.
AND HE HAS FOUR POINTS. Four devastating acts of investigative journalism. Four brickbats that destroy any pretension that Kirkpatrick had of having any clue to what really happened. Let’s look at Lake’s startling investigation, shall we? NUMBER ONE:
Abu Khattala: The Times focuses its reporting on Ahmed Abu Khattala, a militia leader who spoke to reporter David Kirkpatrick, last year and claimed to be at the scene of the Benghazi assault with no apparent worry that he would be abducted or killed by U.S. authorities. In his piece Sunday, Kirkpatrick fills in the rest of Abu Khattala’s story, revealing that he was a part-time construction worker who was publicly associated with the abduction and murder of a rival militia commander supported by NATO. In interviews with the Times, Abu Khattala denies any connection to al Qaeda. He does however say he admires the group’s vision. The Times also discloses that Abu Khattala was close to a leader of the militia the U.S. had entrusted to protect its facilities in Benghazi in light of an attack. But Abu Khattala was by no means the only person who participated in the attack.
Abu Khattala was the man who Kirkpatrick found. The CIA missed him. The after-incident reports missed him. Lake takes a long look at him and concludes: “Abu Khattala was by no means the only person who participated in the attack.” Yes, there were hundreds of people involved in the attacks. Kirkpatrick will not dispute this. Boom. TWO:
The Jamal network: Some fighters who attacked the U.S. diplomatic compound and CIA annex in Benghazi are believed to be from a group headed by a former top lieutenant to Ayman al-Zawahiri, the current leader of al Qaeda. When Egyptian authorities raided the home of Mohammed al-Jamal, who was an operational commander under al-Zawahiri’s terrorist group in the 1990s known as Egyptian Islamic Jihad, it found messages to al Qaeda leadership asking for support and plans to establish training camps and cells in the Sinai, creating a group now known as the Jamal Network. In October, the State Department designated Jamal Network as a terrorist group tied to al Qaeda. The Wall Street Journal was the first to report the participation of the network in the Benghazi attacks, and the group’s participation in the attacks has also been acknowledged in the Times. The New York Times Benghazi investigation makes no mention of the Jamal Network in their piece.
Kirkpatrick’s reporting makes clear that the attack was more like a riot, or melee. The participants were young men from a number of militias. These people are usually jobless, angry at the West and prone to violence. The ‘Innocence of Muslims’ video, tinged with rumors of ‘protesters’ being shot by American security forces, sparked a deadly rampage. But The Jamal Network was run by a guy who hung out with Ayman al-Zawahiri back when The Cosby Show was a big deal! And they wanted to be pals with Al Qaeda! That by no means proves they are Al Qaeda. No one claims that this network planned or carried out the attacks any more than Ansar Al Shariah did, because Kirkpatrick’s reporting finds no evidence of the attack being planned or carried out. It was more like spontaneous violence sparked by the video and then exploited and inflamed by Khattal. Nonetheless, like all Republicans, Lake believes the sound of ‘Al Qaeda’ is enough to buoy both a rigorous investigation and proof of conspiracy. THREE:
What militants say when they think no one is listening. On Fox News Sunday, Schiff, a Democratic member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said the intelligence indicated that al Qaeda did play a role in the attack. The intelligence community knows this, he said, from insights gleaned from eavesdropping on the night of the attack. Speaking of the Times report, Schiff said “they did not have the same access to people who were not aware they were being listened to. They were heavily reliant obviously on people they interviewed who had a reason to provide the story they did.” But Schiff also said sometimes eavesdropping has its limits as well. “Sometimes though the intelligence which has the advantage of hearing to people when they don’t know they are being listening to, that can be misleading as well, when people make claims, they boast of things they were not involved in for various purposes,” he said. The Daily Beast first reported that an intercepted phone conversation from one of the attackers to a person connected to al Qaeda’s north Africa affiliates boasting of the attack. The Times says this intercept was the “only intelligence connecting al Qaeda to the attack,” a claim disputed this weekend by two U.S. intelligence officials. The Times reports the phone call showed the person connected to al Qaeda sounded “astonished,” suggesting he had no prior knowledge of the assault.
The smoking-gun phone call, a feature of Kirkpatrick’s reporting:
But the Republican arguments appear to conflate purely local extremist organizations like Ansar al-Shariah with Al Qaeda’s international terrorist network. The only intelligence connecting Al Qaeda to the attack was an intercepted phone call that night from a participant in the first wave of the attack to a friend in another African country who had ties to members of Al Qaeda, according to several officials briefed on the call. But when the friend heard the attacker’s boasts, he sounded astonished, the officials said, suggesting he had no prior knowledge of the assault.
Lake’s rebuttal? Adam Schiff knows about a phone call on the night of the attack. The type of call where neither of the two people knows they’re being listened to. Somebody said something that was suspicious. But, to be honest, it’s a call that just maybe could have been misleading. The key to the argument here is “What militants say when they think no one is listening,” though Schiff deflates that a bit. Why didn’t the Times report any of that? I don’t know, did you bother with the part below the headline? Yes, lots and lots of words, I know. FOUR:
Ansar al-Sharia: No one has disputed the participation of a local Islamist militia known as Ansar al-Sharia. The Times describes Ansar al-Sharia in Libya as a group formed in 2012 to protest the support other militias had for elections but an organization separate and distinct from al Qaeda. An August 2012 report commissioned by a Pentagon terrorism research organization found that Ansar al-Sharia “has increasingly embodied al Qaeda’s presence in Libya, as indicated by its active social-media propaganda, extremist discourse, and hatred of the West, especially the United States.” Not everyone however agreed. As The Daily Beast reported last year, Ansar al-Sharia was not a priority for U.S. intelligence collection in Libya [sic] The Times also drew a distinction between the Benghazi branch of Ansar al-Sharia and the Dernaa branch of the group that was led by a former Guantanamo detainee Sufian Ben Qhumu. Others however see Ansar al-Sharia’s activities in Libya more coordinated with al-Qaeda’s regional affiliates. In October, Tunisia’s Prime Minister told Reuters that “there is a relation between leaders of Ansar al-Sharia, al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and Ansar al-Sharia in Libya.” The Times also states, “the Republican arguments appear to conflate purely local extremist organizations like Ansar al-Shariah with al Qaeda’s international terrorist network.” On Fox News Sunday Rogers stuck to his guns. “Do they have differences of opinions with al Qaeda core? Yes,” he said. “Do they have affiliations with al Qaeda core? Definitely.”
This paragraph? The Times says Ansar al-Shariah is not Al Qaeda. The Daily Beast agrees. Mike Rogers disagrees. This has been Eli Lake, for The Daily Beast.
Journalism? The entire American right-wing stands atop this ‘report’ and screams at the political world about the vicious lying of David Kirkpatrick and the New York Times. There are no retractions or apologies, now will there be. In a less sophisticated America Lake would get run out of town on a rail.
Are you still asleep, America?
…Robertson shared that he was merely quoting Bible scripture and confirmed what many Before It’s News readers already know: “Everything is blurred on what’s right and what’s wrong.” Living in this Orwellian world that we live in where war is peace and corporations are people, Phil Robertson for President signs are popping up across the country and Americans are speaking out about the 1st Amendment across the country in a mass awakening.
Or have you jumped aboard the Phil Robertson express?
“Phil Robertson and his family are great citizens of the State of Louisiana.”
Quote Bobby Jindal. Sarah Palin:
“Those ‘intolerants’ hatin’ and taking on the Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing his personal opinion are taking on all of us.”
And all of us:
You got it. Please kindly welcome the candidate for President of the United States in 2016 from the great state of Louisiana Phil Robertson.
Make sure that she can cook a meal, you need to eat some meals that she cooks, check that out. Make sure she carries her Bible. That’ll save you a lot of trouble down the road. And if she picks your ducks, now, that’s a woman.
Got that, boys? Nuthin’ beats a wimmenfolk what carries her a Bible and churns yer butter. Warsh a cloth stink outta yer vestments on they beeg rock, in they
van ditch down by the river tar pits.
…these boys are waiting until they get to be about 20 years old before they marry ‘em. Look, you wait until they get to be 20 years old, the only picking that’s going to take place is your pocket. You got to marry these girls when they are about 15 or 16, they’ll pick your ducks.
Before they gets hair down n’ere. Hat’s when they’s fun.
All appreciate Vox Day. Hail! The great Science Fiction writer and destroyer of atheistic conceits doesn’t mince any of his syllables because fags, lame. On his gnashing blog ‘Vox Popoli’ he grurr – wait Vox Popoli? Popoli, really? Domino’s makes ‘em with a popoli crust now, does it? Right let’s see populace, population, vox populi. Vox Popoli? Ha ha genius words are your bested friends. Fine well yes that’s all perfectly settled as it should be, assbrain. Anyway the man is one mondo bigot, straight away.
And friends just why do the trolls cram their sizable racism in the pockets of other goodly words? What’s the why? The deal is, hmm? Vibrant beats the providential crap out of nigger? I don’t think so. Nigger is a helluva word, don’t you think?
Saturday, December 28, 2013
Enjoy the vibrancy
There have been few recipients of interactive discourse with the vibrant youth more deserving than Mark Andrew, former DFL party leader and Minneapolis mayoral candidate:
‘The runner-up in the Minneapolis mayoral election is recovering after being robbed and brutally beaten Thursday night at the Mall of America. Mark Andrew, 63, was at a Starbucks inside the mall at around 7 p.m. Thursday when a man grabbed his phone off his table and ran off.’
‘When Andrew went after him, he was tackled by two teenage girls – aged 18 and 17 — one of which began beating him with a billy club. During the attack, they told Andrew, “We’re going to kill you,” police say. Andrew was left with a large gash on his head that required nine stitches.’
Owning a phone, being a Democrat and going to Starbucks. Original post title: A Fitting Reward. It’s a pity the loser didn’t develop a cerebral clot then seize for a few hours and die. If Mark had shit himself in the hearse Vox would have gone exactly the same way. Did I mention he bills himself as, and I’m quoting here, the “Internet Superintelligence”? Hold on fellas it’s time for some Superdiscourse:
In Minnesota, the DFL is the party that loves, loves, loves the vibrants, especially the Somali immigrants, and is constantly advocating for more of them. It’s simply fabulous that one of their leaders should become the beneficiary of the sort of treatment to which they have subjected so many of the people of Minnesota. And the fact that the DFLer was beaten up by female vibrants only makes the story that much more amusing.
Beaten by black women? Black women? This could not be any more entertaining. That fact will not deter Vox from Supertrying:
It appears the Mall of America isn’t the only mall in America that is currently enjoying the manifold benefits of vibrancy. This, too, is an aspect of America’s ongoing societal suicide. You wanted desegregation, you got it, baby. But isn’t it ironic how so many of those who champion desegregation suddenly want to move in with the segregationists as soon as their neighborhood actually desegregates?
Enjoy the vibrancy.
Labels: Vibrancy is our strength
The cons visit this mahatma more than 12,000 times a day. In the same time a blogger like Thers at Whiskey Fire gets maybe 3,000 hits. The world is too ugly to fathom.
Considering all the blahblah over Phil Robertson, the mudcaked millionaire-dealer of birdkill paraphernalia, and Pajama Boy, the surprisingly well-endowed homosexual opportunist biding time in your son’s freshman dorm room, one thing has become perfectly clear (funny what a difference a few days make). Though we may not have known either of these people a week ago, we know each of them now as archetypes.
One of them is rough and rugged, and the other is foofy and fay. One of them came to fame and fortune by way of hard-work and ingenuity, the other by way of ranging institutional propaganda. One of them is God-fearing, which is proper, and the other fears disease and the cold of night, which is laughable. Or to put all of this more generally and universally, one of them is really them. And the other one is you.
Get it? Hint: You’re not the one with the 1000-yard stare.
There you are again, but on the right. I see you put whip cream on your cocoa. And he put an asswhipping on Adolf and the rest of the boys from Berlin, all the while wearing Phil Silvers’ grin. Later: He ferrets all the Mengeles out of Brazil and Argentina, wins a Nugent Medal of Honor.
Of course there were perhaps hundreds of Photoshops of the two partisan heroes side-by-side, but that was a lot like bloggers re-telling their favorite scenes from the Schwarzenegger/DeVito documentary Twins. It took the more ambitious and Christian among them to employ the Robertson comparisons to greater effect:
And you’re Louis Farrakhan. Or you wish you had that sort of “courage,” and were as well that sort of “hero” to the President notwithstanding his stance on anti-Semitic demagogues. Anyway you’re certainly no sort of Phil Robertson as you’re probably a Muslim. Or you don’t particularly mind them, which may be worse frankly.
And you’re this Arab fellow too. Who hates homosexuals more than you do? What, wait, he’s Persian? Who the hell even knows crap like that? Quote Erotic Nostradamus.
Of course you don’t even need the full side-by-side treatment to make a devastating point. Not with queer bait as candy-musky as Pajama Boy. Anything that looks remotely like him is instantly insulted, perhaps irrevocably. I mean:
She has a television show ferchrissakes! Or she used to, before she resigned after seeing her face on the internet. Eventually they just went after the source of the trouble – all trouble – and they animated him, as Pajama Boy: Continue Reading »
Continue Reading »