Tag Archives: Hypocrisy

When “Rights” Just Cover Prejudice and Cowardice

Posted on by
Reply

A Michigan assistant attorney general, a man who is charged with enforcing the laws of the State of Michigan, is waging a vicious, cyber-war against a gay college student.

Ok, let’s take a moment and feel sorry for this assistant AG who has unresolved issues about his own sexual orientation and a big dose of self-loathing.  Now, that moment is over.

Time to rant about him and his employer the Attorney General of the State of Michigan, defends his assistant AG even though he calls him a bully.

The AG hides behind the “free speech” argument.  Let’s assume it is applicable here.  There are limits to one’s right to free speech. The classic example is “you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater” [unless there is, in fact, a fire].  The government can prosecute you if what you are saying is calculated to incite violence and does, in fact, incite violence.

Here are the rules of thumb for free speech:

Free speech is limited to reasonable time, reasonable place and reasonable manner. (That’s why there are limits to where you can hold rallies and when your neighbor can do heavy construction on his property.)

Free speech doesn’t protect you from the consequences of that speech.

Do you really think that if this Michigan assistant AG were harassing say, a co-worker, a female student or another civil servant, that the AG would feel the same way and hide behind “free speech”?  Really?

No, the AG doesn’t want to take the side of a gay college kid.

Because that would be unpopular and require that he take a stand against his conservative constituency.

So, the head legal officer of the State of Michigan in the United States of America in the year 2010 will call a subordinate a bully, but won’t stand up to him??

Don’t you think that bullying has caused too many young people to be emotionally scarred or so despondent as to be suicidal?  If the recent suicide of a Rutgers student doesn’t make law enforcement, law enforcement, stand up to bullying, what will become of our society?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Michigan attorney general defends employee’s right to blog

http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/US/09/30/michigan.justice.blog/story.shirvell.cnn.jpg

September 30, 2010|By the CNN Wire Staff *

Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox defended an assistant’s constitutional right to wage an Internet campaign against an openly gay college student, even though he considers that employee a “bully.” “Here in America, we have this thing called the First Amendment, which allows people to express what they think and engage in political and social speech,” Cox told Anderson Cooper on CNN’s “AC 360” on Wednesday night. “He’s clearly a bully … but is that protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution? Yes.”

Share

What is France thinking?

Posted on by
Reply

Never known for its warm and welcoming manner, France has outdone itself.

First, it has deported Gypsies, an act condemned by the European Union.  But no sanctions were levied.

Now the legislature has banned burqas — the Muslim full-on veil.  Maybe people — me included — think that it is a little imprisoning to be totally covered at all times.  But the government of a politically democratic (and culturally snobby) country outlawing an outward sign of piety?  What if France wanted to outlaw the kipah (the beanie worn by religious Jewish men and cardinals and popes) or the sheitl (wig worn by religious Jewish women), would there be an outcry??  I think the answer is clearly yes.

Deportations . . . singling out customs of a religious minority . . . hmmm. . . . Is it Germany 1933?  Sad, but true, it is France 2010.

And don’t think this is an aberration.  Belgium and Spain are considering a burqa ban, too.

Lest we forget . . .

First, they came for the Jews.  But I was not a Jew, so I did not speak up.
 Then they came for the communists.  But I was not a communist, so I did not speak up.
Then they came for the trade unionists.  But I was not a trade unionist, so I did not speak up.
And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.

(Attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984))

Share

If only it were an SNL skit and she were Tina Fey

Posted on by
Reply

Sarah Palin thinks President Obama is in over his head and cannot handle running this country (see article excerpts below).

Is it because:

  • the President can’t see Russia from his home either? [but he’s been there, at least] 
  • the President knows “refudiate” is not a word? 
  • the President isn’t all maverick-y and changin’ his views on immigration reform like John McCain?
  • the President prefers golf  to huntin’ wolves from helicopters with automatic rifles?
  • the President doesn’t quit his job when the goin’ gets tough (umm, ex-Governor Sarah)?
  • the President knows more about any topic of national importance than you know on all such topics COMBINED?
  • the President pronounces the “g” at the end of a gerund?

If only this were a joke and after her comment, she said:

“LIVE .  .  .  from New York .  .  . it’s Saturday Niiiiiiight!!!” 

But she didn’t.  All the more to pity.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The DNC's response to former Gov. Palin Thurssday was reminiscent of questions about her background that were raised immediately after she debuted as Sen. McCain's running mate in 2008.
Washington (CNN) – From
[EXCERPTS ONLY]

In an appearance on Fox News Wednesday night, Palin essentially said Obama is not up to the task of holding the nation’s highest office.

“I think he’s quite complacent,” the former Republican vice presidential hopeful said. “And I think he’s in over his head. And I think he has poor advisers around him. And I think he’s really in flux kind of when it comes to what his governing philosophy actually is. Some of this though is a result of he not having much experience and then a complicit media and maybe some voters who chose to not to allow him to be vetted very closely.”

Share

As long as we are rethinking who can be a citizen of the United States . . . .

Posted on by
Reply

Let’s start with those who are afflicted with criminal stupidity or arrogance.  Like the guy whose wedding pictures are on Facebook.  Except that his wife wasn’t the bride.  (see below the jump.)

So, this guy who was born here  and pushes our civilization further down the drain (can you hear the flushing noises) is a citizen of the United States of America as a “birthright“.

Makes a person not want to join this club, huh? 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

By MEGHAN BARR, Associated Press Writer Meghan Barr, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 43 mins ago

CLEVELAND – Dread of the unknown hung in the air as Lynn France typed two words into the search box on Facebook: the name of the woman with whom she believed her husband was having an affair.

Click. And there it was, the stuff of nightmares for any spouse, cuckolded or not. Wedding photos. At Walt Disney World, no less, featuring her husband literally dressed as Prince Charming. His new wife, a pretty blonde, was a glowing Sleeping Beauty, surrounded by footmen.

“I was numb with shock, to tell you the truth,” says France, an occupational therapist from Westlake, a Cleveland suburb. “There was like an album of 200 pictures on there. Their whole wedding.”

The husband claimed Thursday that his marriage to Lynn France was never valid. He said she knew earlier about the other marriage and was making the Facebook claim as a publicity ploy.

Share

Crazy is as crazy thinks

Posted on by
Reply

According to CNN, 1 in 4 polled STILL believe that President Obama was not born in this country and therefore not the legitimate head of state.  Here is the published birth certificate, certified by the Republican governor of Hawaii.

Even Lou Dobbs conceded the point. 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From CNN

“Washington (CNN) – It’s surely not what the leader of the free world wants for his birthday. But, for a stubborn group of Americans, conspiracy theories about President Obama’s birthplace are the gifts that keep on giving.

The president celebrates his 49th birthday Wednesday. On the same day, a new national poll indicates some Americans continue to doubt the president was born in the United States. According to a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey, more than a quarter of the public have doubts about Obama’s citizenship, with 11 percent saying Obama was definitely not born in the United States and another 16 percent saying the president was probably not born in the country.”

Share

What, REALLY?

Posted on by
Reply

Mitch McConnell,

the most recent face of resident evil since Dick Cheney left office, wants to have hearings on the meaning of “born” in the 14th amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. 

(See article http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gqnOBf_QRibbHZe0ieJDDRnvWxRgD9HC9ESG2).

Ok, my head is spinning.  Here’s a guy who says he thinks that the Constitution is sacrosanct.  Now he thinks we ought to INTERPRET this document? Ahhh, it is sacrosanct . . . . until it’s not.

WAIT, I get it.  The Constitution is crystal clear about an individual’s right to bear arms (see the muddy Second Amendment)

“Amendment II —  A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Um, wait, doesn’t the Second Amendment mean that you can bear arms as part of a well regulated militia (i.e., sanctioned by a governmental entity)?

BUT Resident Evil finds it very confusing when it comes to the meaning of “born“:

“Amendment 14 Section 1: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.  No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Hmmm.  What is the plain meaning of this?  If you are born here, you are a citizen whose rights of citizenship may not be infringed upon.

Ok, this Amendment was not written by our Founding Fathers.  It was written in the aftermath of Civil War as a nation needed to heal and learn to be citizens of one nation for the common good and to protect the children of newly emancipated slaves.

So, we have to have hearings on what “born in the United States” means.  If McConnell and his ilk weren’t talking  about people’s lives and the very meaning of a free and open society, it would almost be a humorous riff on Bill Clinton’s “depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is”. 

But it is not funny at all.

Share

Uproar over a mosque? Really?

Posted on by
Reply

Why not a mosque near Ground Zero?

If we cannot separate out bad actors from an entire religion, then we are the evil bigots in the propaganda.

AND, we have to look in our collective mirror and see that we are not the people or nation of freedom and “ill-will-toward-none” that we would like to believe (and have others believe) we are.

Ok, so no mosque at Ground Zero.  Then what logically flows from that statement are:

  • All Oklahomans should be barred from national monuments because Timothy McVeigh, our HOMEGROWN terrorist, was from Oklahoma.  In fact, Oklahoma is so close to those other states (help me out here) that they may harbor terrorists or may have recruitment camps.  So, let’s ban them (once I look at a map and figure out who they are).  Also, are they practicing Methodists, Baptists, Unitarians or some other Protestant sect?  If so, then none of those churches can be erected near national monuments.  No, sirreeee.   [It would be kind of funny if only ashrams, synagogues, Sikh temples, Hindu temples and Buddhist temples could be built on Ground Zero.]
  • The good ol’ USA is a rogue nation.  We are the only country that has used nuclear weapons.  We have not renounced them (like New Zealand — ok, not a newsmaker, but a start).  And bombing Nagasaki after we obliterated Hiroshima makes Kim Jong Il seem like just another weird guy with a bad haircut, wearing woman’s sunglasses.
  • Lady Liberty,  the welcoming beacon in our Harbor, has to be renovated so she can raise one hand with a sign or she can fling people back out to sea (see video, too crazy:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BE6GyHcASE&feature=related) because we forget that EXCEPT for the Native Americans, whom we decimated under the theory of “Manifest Destiny” (oh, yeah, add GENOCIDE to our nuclear bad acts), we all descend from immigrants.

I am glad my grandparents and my mother never lived to see this day.  Their America was the beacon of hope and the fulfillment of their dreams.  To them, this was a great country where whoever you are and from wherever you came, you could make a life for your family.  Maybe people didn’t like them because they were Jews but people left them alone.

That was America.  This, this, this is a place I don’t know or understand.

Share

The Kids Are All Right but the Moms need some help, big time.

Posted on by
1

POB (partner of blogger) and I went to see the movie, “The Kids Are All Right,” about a lesbian couple and their two kids and the sperm donor who is invited into their lives by the elder child (who turned 18 and can get the information).

It got great reviews.   After seeing it, I realize that these reviewers are straight.

Based on the (straight people) reviews, I was looking forward to seeing how my life turns out (not really, but sort of really).  Two happily married lesbians raising their kids.  Sounded like a Utopian fantasy come to major motion picture.

Of course, I have my own issues — I am not a biological parent.  At least, each of these moms was biologically related to a child.  That is firmer ground than that which I will stand when coming face to  face with FOS (the face of sperm man), should it happen.  (OF COURSE, it will happen, but I intend to be in a state of dementia at that point.)

Back to the movie.  The hetero sex scenes were more enthralling than the one (count it, ONE) quasi-I-didn’t-understand-what-the-f$%^-was-going-on scene with the women.  Gay male porn and one woman under the covers while that other woman is watching man-on-man and showing no signs of arousal?  Ok, ok, ok.  I went to EVERY class on lesbian indoctrination given by the proponents of the gay agenda.  NO WHERE DID I SEE THIS.  This is NOT how any couple I KNOW gets romantic or has sex (yes, they can be mutually exclusive).

(While being indoctrinated all those many years ago, I did read about some things I decided were safer NOT to try at home, but in a passive-aggressive moment, I left those pamphlets for my mother to read and weep about.  I still feel a little bad but by the end of my mother’s life, she was not focused on fisting one’s partner.) 

I am going to have t-shirts made up that say: 

WE DO IT BUT NOT LIKE NIC AND JULES.

So, in this movie, child is parent to the mothers.  A usual Hollywood turn of events.

And the sexual excitement was spent on one of the mother’s extra-marital affair with Sperm Donor Man.  It was enticing, even though Mark Ruffalo has too much hair.  Also, what is with THAT?

If a lesbian has an affair (I am told) it is often with a woman and, if not a woman, a co-worker or client.  (Well, he was in fact a client at some point in the movie.)

NEVERTHELESS, in our first major motion picture about aging lesbians and their children, couldn’t the producers have made the sex a little steamy?  It isn’t like the L Word didn’t break some ground here.  Couldn’t the producers throw a bone to us true-life lesbians with families?  Keep hope alive for those of us in the midst of parenting and working and dreaming of beautiful sunsets with our partners when the kids are out of the house?

I always thought we were lucky — no Cialis, Viagra, etc. — now I am scared that I have man-on-man porn to look forward to while someone “services” me under covers.  I am soooooo grossed out.

This movie about a “solid” lesbian family is enough to cause therapists to cancel their August recess just to keep up with the demand of freaked out Moms.

Maybe this film touched a nerve (ok, it did) but I have to believe that it needed to please heterosexual America.  And so our lives are casualties.

Paging the L Word.

Share

President Obama’s Speech

Posted on by
Reply

Am I the only one in the country who thought that the speech showed a strong and resolute President? 

Don’t look for passion — that is not his character.  Look for determination and a view toward the future. 

I thought he did a fine job.  Did anyone think that he could speak away the problems?  Did you think the oil was going to go back into the hole in the earth whence it came?

Let’s be real.

Please, please, please, let’s all stop expecting miracles or easy answers.  Let’s be as easy on the President as we are on ourselves.  Because we are soooo good at blaming others and limiting our own culpability in anything and we are so good at complaining but so unwilling to do our part — either through tax dollars or consumption reduction.

We are in the fight of and for our lives and livelihoods. 

PRESIDENT OBAMA IS CLEANING UP DISASTER UPON DISASTER THAT STARTED PERCOLATING SINCE NIXON — HEALTH CARE, OIL DEPENDENCE, AMERICAN COWBOY-ISM AS FOREIGN POLICY.

Anyone else willing to stand up and say that the speech was fine, that speeches won’t fix the Gulf problems and that we are lucky to have a clearheaded and intelligent leader? 

And, the $20 billion fund was a big coup since, under GOP leadership, liability was capped at $75 million. 

Share

Going Nuclear with Dr. Strangelove

Posted on by
Reply

How do you get someone’s mind off a headache? A strong punch to the stomach.

How do you take someone’s mind off the environmental disaster caused by the massive oil leak? Detonate a nuclear warhead.

Really? Detonate a nuclear bomb to melt the ocean floor onto itself to stop the leak?  It is ok to try new things, like shooting debris in the hole to plug it, because what’s a little more pollution when millions of barrels of oil are gushing into the ocean each day. But a nuclear bomb? Yeah, let’s compound one threat to our future with an almost certain apocalyptic coda.

Someone said this nuclear fix is safe.  Someone also said deep water drilling is safe.  Someone said the Russians exploded nuclear bombs to stop pipeline leaks, but they never did it with oil, underwater and one mile down.  Oh, yeah, just like top kill was never tried underwater and one mile down.  Gee, I wish Anyone thought through how to fix something, let’s say an oil pipe, that far down below sea level before the accident.  Boy, I never met this Someone or Anyone, but Someone sure is crazy and Anyone should be fired.

But, this is America, where Ginger Rogers did everything Fred Astaire did, but backwards and in heels.  So, if we look at everything ass backwards and upside down, it should work.  From that perspective, the nuclear option looks like a plan.  How about if all of the BP executives and the government officials who oversaw deep-water drilling put on some of Ginger’s old outfits and then tried to figure out what to do?  No, it wouldn’t add any brain cells (so still a zero sum game) but it would sure provide needed comic relief in the aftermath of the biggest threat to the safety of all living beings since the Ice Age.

Of course, no disaster is complete without the accompanying political grandstanding and fiascoes.  Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal wrote to the President enumerating the number of jobs that will be lost because of the moratorium on off-shore drilling, even as he decries the despoliation of his state’s shorelines and criticizes the administration’s slow response.

Maureen Dowd, who is becoming pathetic, says we got the President we voted for, as if that is a bad thing —  a clear-headed leader who doesn’t lead by his gut.  The President constantly overestimates our intelligence and ability to understand the important things.  And President Obama has to stop what he is doing to go on Larry King so that we are reassured he can feel our pain.  Because we need him to hug us and feel our pain while he is protecting us from our own stupidity.

We deserve to choke on the oil slick.

Share