Category Archives: Republicans

The Week of The Whining Womin

Feminism, Gender, Labor, Political Correctness, Republicans, Sex

“The Week of The Whining Womin” is the current column, now on WND. An excerpt:

“The logic is as simple as it is foolproof. An “air-tight free-market argument,” according to WND: “If women with the same skills as men were getting only 78 cents for every dollar a man earns, men as a group would have long-since priced themselves out of the market. That entrepreneurs don’t ditch men en masse for women suggests that different abilities and experience are at work, rather than a conspiracy to suppress women.”

The logic is not, however, female proof.

It’s been the week of the weaker sex: filled with baseless whining. The Week of the Womin culminated with Facebook billionaire Sheryl Sandberg grumbling to Fox News millionaire Megyn Kelly: “I think it’s good that the president took some steps on equal pay, but it’s not enough.”

About women’s work Sandberg holds humdrum feminist views. She learned the hard way, having dared, at first, to share the aggregate reality she had encountered in the workplace: Men were wont to be as driven as demons. Women needed to be driven. For that observation, the Pussy Riot Sisterhood threatened to sandbag Sandberg. Facebook’s chief operating officer quickly corrected course. Ms. Sandberg started mouthing the only acceptable meme: Saddle “society” and the “patriarchy” for any and all female failures and preferences.

As her politically pleasing, mainstream opinion currently has it, society and the patriarchy have conditioned women to be nurturing and to apologize for any male-like, go-getter ambitions they harbor. While men will attribute their success to their own core skills; women “attribute their success to luck and help from other people,” carps Sandberg. The girls are too nice. They don’t take credit for their greatness. They don’t raise their hand enough. They don’t “Lean In”—the trite title of Sandberg’s serialized book. Yes, there’s a follow up for advanced nudniks. …

Read the complete column. “The Week of The Whining Womin” is now on WND.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

Politics And Its Perp-e-traitors

Crime, Government, Politics, Republicans, Taxation, The State

By all means, make former IRS official Lois Lerner do the perp walk, publicly. Please. She’s but one among many state-employed scum, but getting one is better than none. Freedom lovers must get their kicks where they can.

The Republican-dominated House Ways and Means Committee has voted today, Wednesday, to seek a criminal investigation as to whether Lerner misled investigators and released private taxpayer information. The same committee wants to hold this despicable woman in contempt of Congress for her failure to “comply with various subpoenas.”

Filled with bravado, JOHN BOEHNER (R-OHIO) told Megyn Kelly: “… I don’t care who is gonna be fired. I wanna know who is going to jail. The fact is that the IRS — there are specific laws that protect taxpayers and force the IRS to comply with the law. Somebody at the IRS violated the law.”

If it takes place, this unlikely prosecution will punish one perp when there are hundreds (maybe thousands) like Lerner walking around free. It will be late in the game, and it will be “political,” as that stupid saying goes (as if any other considerations are ever made by politicians).

Why “political”? Ask yourself why it is that Republicans have refrained form moving against the Transportation Security Administration attack dogs (TSA) and the National Security Agency (NSA), who violate American bodies and their privacy daily? Because the NSA and TSA are not Republican issues.

Republicans like the pervs of the Surveillance- and Security State; the taxwoman not so much.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

The Christie Innocence Project On Mad TV

Criminal Injustice, Ethics, Government, Media, Republicans

News reporting is obsolete on cable and network TV, for the most. It has given way to The Endless Event Coverage. That, and the ubiquitous dog, cat, baby rescue “human-interest” stories. Today, the big event—literally BIG; it blanketed the screen—was Chris Christie. “A Christie marathon” mocked broadcaster Mark Levin, who was commenting sarcastically about the New Jersey governor’s self-appointed exoneration committee in the matter of his administration’s intentional closing of the George Washington Bridge as political retribution.

I’ll call it the Christie Innocence Project.

It is, however, encouraging to note that no major online newspaper or magazine featured fatso front-and-center. Except for Mad TV, aka MSNBC:

… the internal review conducted by his lawyers, who rather predictably exonerated their client, has clearly given him new mojo. When asked at the presser how so-called Bridgegate might affect the 2016 race, Christie said, “The fact of the matter is that I had nothing to do with this. As I said from the beginning, and this report has supported exactly what I said. And in the long sweep of things, any voters, if they consider this issue at all, in considering my candidacy — if there ever is one at all — I’ve got a feeling it’ll be a small element of it, if any element at all.”
In acknowledging his plummeting poll numbers, Christie added, “But there’s nothing that’s permanent about that. …
…in facing down the press on Friday, Christie was clearly trying to move beyond Bridgegate and regain his stature with a national audience. Indeed, on Thursday, Christie gave his first television interview since the scandal blew up, declaring to ABC News that he doesn’t think the scandal hurt him in Iowa, which holds the important, first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses.
“I think they love me in Iowa, too,” the governor said on World News with Diane Sawyer. “I’ve been there a lot. I think love me there too, especially because of the way I am. Not in spite of, especially because,” Christie added.
In continuing his media blitz, the governor has agreed to be interviewed by Fox News’ Megyn Kelly. The Q&A will air Friday night. ”

Christie is insufferable—his slobbering, verbose style grates.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

UPDATED: Putting Lipstick On The Pigs At NSA*

Constitution, Democrats, Homeland Security, Propaganda, Republicans, Technology, Terrorism

We’re doing the right thing; we’re not doing anything illegal,” said Four-Star General Keith Alexander to Fox News’ Bret Baier. An otherwise good reporter, Baier has been asking some poignant questions of the very clever, dissembling, outgoing director of the National Security Agency’s unconstitutional, naturally illicit and all-round reprehensible spying programs. However, Baier, another bright lad, seems to be merely going through the motion; making sure he does journalistic due diligence without any forceful follow-up. A less than obligatory follow-up would be: “I know that what you do is probably ‘legal,’ but is it ‘moral’?”

The occasion of the interview? Obama’s likely bogus “calls for an end to NSA’s bulk phone data collection.”

“What would you do to Edward Snowden if you were alone in a room with him” was more revealing of Baier’s sympathies. Alexander vaporized about the assorted entrapment operations to which hoovering up trillions of messages have led. (More about “The Dynamics of Entrapment.”)

BAIER: Former President Jimmy Carter saying he writes letters instead of sending e-mails because he’s worried that you’re listen — you’re reading his e-mails.

ALEXANDER: Well, we’re not. So he can now go back to writing e-mails. The reality is, we don’t do that. And if we did, it would be illegal and we’d be found, uh, I think accoun — held accountable and responsible. Look at all the folks that have looked at what we’re doing, from the president’s review group to Congress to the courts to the DNI, DOD, Justice. Everybody reviews what we do to see if anybody is doing anything illegal like you suggest. No one has found anything, zero, except for in 12 cases where people did that and we had already reported those.

* With apologies to pretty pigs.

UPDATE (3/26): The great Glenn Greenwald seems surprised that, much like Republicans, Democrats are opportunistic, lying, bottom-feeders. He notes that “what rational people do, by definition, is” this:

if a political official takes a position you agree with, then you support him, but when he does a 180-degree reversal and takes the exact position that you’ve been disagreeing with, then you oppose him. That’s just basic. Thus, those of us who originally defended Obama’s decision to release the photos turned into critics once he took the opposite position – the one we disagreed with all along – and announced that he would try to suppress the photos.
But that’s not what large numbers of Democrats did. Many of them first sided with Obama when his administration originally announced he’d release the photos. But then, with equal vigor, they also sided with Obama when – a mere two weeks later – he took the exact opposition position, the very anti-transparency view these Democrats had been attacking all along when voiced by Bill Kristol and Liz Cheney.
At least for me, back then, that was astonishing to watch. It’s one thing to strongly suspect that people are simply adopting whatever views their party’s leader takes. But this was like the perfect laboratory experiment to prove that: Obama literally took exact opposition positions in a heated debate within a three week period and many Democrats defended him when he was on one side of the debate and then again when he switched to the other side.

“The Leader is right when he does X, and he’s equally right when he does Not X. That’s the defining attribute of the mindset of a partisan hack, an authoritarian, and the standard MSNBC host. …”

MORE.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

Vagina-Centric, Tax-Sponsored, Monument To Republican Mindlessness

Constitution, Feminism, Gender, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Republicans, Taxation

Forget about upholding the Constitution, Republicans can’t even uphold the interests of their primary constituency. Instead, they insist on stalking and courting identity groups—women, for one—that can’t stand the Grand Old Party.

As deficient as it is, there is no warrant in the Constitution for stealing from taxpayers in order to aggrandize women. But leave it to House Republicans to plot a vote “this year on legislation promoting construction of a National Women’s History Museum.”

Perhaps they’ll get the women’s vote? Forget about it. “Sisters love Uncle Sam,” and while Republicans do too, sisters don’t perceive the GOP to be as statist as they’d like.

… The move lends enormous momentum to the years-long push to establish a memorial to women’s history near the National Mall — a proposal that’s lingered in Congress for nearly two decades without ever reaching the president’s desk.

Congressional supporters from both parties have been working behind the scenes to rally backing and pressure leaders to stage a vote on the bill this year, even as Congress’s shift into campaign mode has left little appetite for most non-essential legislation ahead of November’s midterms.

Cantor spokeswoman Megan Whittemore said the congressman supports the bill and intends to bring it to the floor.

Museum supporters wasted no time praising the announcement, with Rep. Carolyn Maloney — a New York Democrat who’s been working on the proposal since 1998 — saying she’s “thrilled” by Cantor’s move. With top House Democrats already behind the proposal, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.), Maloney predicted it will sail through the lower chamber.

“This is a huge boost to our efforts,” said Maloney, the bill’s lead sponsor. “Leadership from both parties in the House has now come out in favor of this bill, and I’m hopeful we can secure a large, bipartisan vote in favor of its passage. …”

THE HILL.

A society founded on individualism does not promote individuals based on their sexual or racial identity. If private companies wish to promote females purely because they are women, and often at the expense of better males—that’s the prerogative of private property. Sensible sorts can shun these establishments. However, politicians have no right to steal from one group (taxpayers) for the benefit of another (females), in the course of increasing their own sphere of influence.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

Where’s The Equal Division Of Labor Between Liars?

Democrats, Journalism, Left-Liberalism, Media, Republicans

Am I correct to suspect, from perusing its “truth-o-meter statements,” that PolitiFact.com has a preference for certain “truths” over others?

The site is the winner of the prize establishment bores and boors give themselves: The Pulitzer Prize for journalism.

Just look at the Pulitzer winners over the years in the Commentary category. To borrow from a Camile-Paglia description: “catty, third-rate, wannabe sorority queens; empty vessels,” all. One pleasure of reading online is that one never has to see anything written by people like Maureen Dowd, Kathleen Parker, Eugene Robinson, Thomas Friedman and Cynthia Tucker! “I ignore their hypertext like spam for penis extenders.”

Back to PolitFact. I would think that in the Demopublican confederacy of knaves, members of both parties would feature equally as liars, but are lie detectors biased too?

It doesn’t look like it from the latest statements PolitiFact.com has reviewed. I could be wrong, but practically everything bad said about Obamacare is marked as a false statement.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint