Ass Resistance

Tenacity in the face of utter futility is not a virtue. At some point, a rational person gives up. But anti-gay bigots are not rational people. So even in the state of Massachusetts, the first state to legalize gay marriage and arguably the most tolerant state in the union, some numbskulls continue to fight for the cause of dumbassery despite all hope of succeeding having vanished long ago. The group Mass Resistance (get it?) continues to fight against the tide of history, like a pathetic little fish flopping on a dry beach trying to reach an ocean that left it behind long ago. And they’ve got a parade of horribles to let the world know just how much suffering they’ve endured in Massachusetts ever since those evil gays were allowed to behave as if they were human.

What same-sex “marriage” has done to Massachusetts

It’s far worse than most people realize

Little old ladies are being assaulted by bears in speedos! Rampant cocksucking has spilled into the living room of every household in the state! Lesbians have devoured every fiber of carpet! Lady Gaga is more popular than ever!

Anyone who thinks that same-sex “marriage” is a benign eccentricity which won’t affect the average person should consider what it has done to Massachusetts since 2004. It’s become a hammer to force the acceptance and normalization of homosexuality on everyone. The slippery slope is real. New radical demands never cease. What has happened in the last several years is truly frightening.

Get used to the scare quotes. The barely-literate author of this farce “loves” them.

But please, Mr. Bigot, let us know what’s so frightening about gays marrying each other.

At my own children’s high school there was a school-wide assembly to celebrate same-sex “marriage” in early December 2003. It featured an array of speakers, including teachers at the school who announced that they would be “marrying” their same-sex partners and starting families, either through adoption or artificial insemination. Literature on same-sex marriage – how it is now a normal part of society – was handed out to the students.

Aaaaaaaahhhhh! It’s terrifying!  Children were made aware that gays exist! This is frightening, because I want my children to be very, very stupid.

Within months it was brought into the middle schools. In September 2004, an 8th-grade teacher in Brookline, Mass., told National Public Radio that the marriage ruling had opened up the door for teaching homosexuality. “In my mind, I know that, ‘OK, this is legal now.’ If somebody wants to challenge me, I’ll say, ‘Give me a break. It’s legal now,'” she told NPR. She added that she now discusses gay sex with her students as explicitly as she desires. For example, she said she tells the kids that lesbians can have vaginal intercourse using sex toys.

These kinds of stories are usually exaggerated, but even if this were 100% true, what’s so bad about it? It’s better for kids to learn about sex from trained educator than whatever random shit they find on the internet…unless you want your daughters experimenting with 2 Girls, 1 Cup.

  • By the following year it was in elementary school curricula – with hostility toward parents who disagreed. Kindergartners in Lexington, Mass. were given copies of a picture book, Who’s in a Family?, telling them that same-sex couples are just another kind of family, just like their own parents. When David Parker – parent of a kindergartner – calmly refused to leave a school meeting unless officials agreed to notify him when discussing homosexuality or transgenderism with his son, the school had him arrested and jailed overnight.
  • The next year, second graders at the same school were read a book, King & King, about two men who fall in love and marry each other, ending with a picture of them kissing. When parents Robb and Robin Wirthlin complained, they were told that the school had no obligation to notify them or allow them to opt their child out.

I think I’m noticing a pattern here. Mass Resistance is resisting the de-stupidification of America.

Think about that: Because same-sex marriage is “legal,” federal judges have ruled that the schools now have a duty to portray homosexual relationships as normal to children, despite what parents think or believe!

I feel so sorry for your kids. I just hope that they’re smarter than you are. My parents tried this same dogshit on me–controlling information in an attempt to shape my beliefs to be just like their stupid, ignorant beliefs. The problem is, I was smarter than they thought I was and easily found all the things they tried to hide from me. It wasn’t even that hard.

It has become commonplace in Massachusetts schools for teachers to display photos of their same-sex “spouses” and occasionally bring their “spouses” to school functions. At one point, both high schools in my own town had principals who were “married” to their same-sex partners who came to school and were introduced to the students.

If any bigot ever tells you that he’s not a bigot, that he doesn’t hate gays, that opposing gay marriage is not about discrimination, just shove the above paragraph up his ass. These Mass Resistance assholes hate gays so much that they consider a gay person merely taking his partner to a public function to be destructive to society.

And keep in mind, all of these bullet points are under the heading of “It’s worse than people realize” and “truly frightening.” Opposition to gay marriage has nothing to do with family values or preserving traditional marriage. It is about–and has always been about–hatred and fear. Mass Resistance is so deathly afraid of gays that even merely seeing a picture of one with his partner is “truly frightening”, or encountering a gay couple at a school function is “worse than people realize.” Pathetic, childish, hateful, ignorant, shameful, bigoted, imbecilic, prejudiced, intolerant, superstitious, shallow, sheltered, quasi-fascist, arrogant, selfish, bullying, fucktarded, shit-for-brains, and completely fucking bug-fuck insane doesn’t even begin to describe these horrible excuses for human trash.  Reading the quoted paragraph makes me very, very angry, as you might have noticed. But it also makes me very, very happy that Mass Resistance and all the other bigoted cuntburgers out there are slowly but surely losing this fight, and America will look back in shame on them.

There are several more bullet points in their list under Public Schools, but they’re all the same. The “damage” done by gay marriage boils down to the “horrors” of having to acknowledge that gay people exist and treat them them like everyone else.

And the “damages” listed in other areas by Mass Resistance aren’t any more convincing. There’s the typical wild accusations about AIDS (without any acknowledgement that study after study has shown that it’s actually abstinence only education that’s exacerbating this problem). There’s the complaint that insurance companies have to cover gay spouses like straight spouses (Equality! How horrifying!).  There’s a weird complaint about how now lawyers have to learn about gay marriage cases (Lawyers are required to do their job? Inconceivable!).

It just goes on and on, but not a single point anywhere on the list even remotely demonstrates that any harm has been done. Most of them can be summed up by the following:

  • Now gay people are visible in public. I’m horrified.
  • Gay people are being treated like they’re not my inferiors. I’m outraged.
  • Bigots like me are made fun of in the media. I’m a victim.
  • My right to take away other people’s rights has been violated. I’m oppressed.
  • Lawyers, town clerks, and doctors are required to do their jobs, even when gays are around. I’m being persecuted.

Blah blah blah. Heard it all before. The only difference between Mass Resistance and every other pathetic attempt to claim treating gays like humans is harmful is just how interminably long their list of non-evidence is.

Keep floppin’, assholes. I’m sure that tide of history will come back and wash you away someday. But by then you’ll be a dry, pitiful husk of what you once were, and no one anywhere will give a damn.

Advertisements

Maybe the problem is you…

I saw over at Ed Brayton’s blog this story about a restaurant owner named Ed McGovern in North Carolina who handed a proselytizing letter to a gay couple who ate at his restaurant (after they paid for their meal, of course). Apparently he objected to their brazen act of simultaneously 1) being gay and 2) breathing the same air as himself, so he felt the need to let them know that he hates them Jeebus loves them. In the body of the news article they reproduce the letter, but in an obviously cleaned up, grammatical version.  They also have a photo of the actual handwritten letter, and here is my word-for-word, letter-for-letter transcription of it. Everything below is [sic]:

LESBIAN-NOTE-1-jpg

God said in the Last days that man and women, would be Lover of self, morethen the Lover of God.

That man and women would have unnataurl effection for one another. Then the comnig of the son of man who is Jesus. So please Look at your life see how it hurt every one around your. and aske the Lord to open your eye. before it to late.

The Love of Christ

P.S. my dauaghte also was gay

it destroy her life

and my grandson.

I object to the fact that the original news report didn’t reproduce the letter exactly as written. Show these illiterate dumbfucks for who they really are.

But the real point I want to make is why I object to correcting the letter. It’s more than just “make the other side look stupid.” Of course this guy is stupid. There are 4th graders out there who can write more grammatically, more clearly and more eloquently than this. This is a very disordered, confused mind responding to an unfamiliar stimulus with something akin to “hurble burble nobble gobble Jesus says fags will ruin Christmas!” But this goes beyond just portraying him as stupid. This matters. No, fucking seriously, it does.

I’ve long thought that disorganized speech and writing reflect disorganized thinking. Someone who cannot string together a sentence or paragraph with proper grammar and spelling is someone who does not have the cognitive power to process complex or unfamiliar sensory input. Thinking about something that’s complicated or different from what one is used to requires one have the ability to organize one’s thoughts, contextualize incoming information, and follow premises to their logical conclusion. It also requires a bit of metacognitive awareness–at the very least, the ability to critique one’s own written or spoken words.

If someone’s thinking is disorganized, then they likely won’t be able to go much beyond familiar and comfortable cognitive shortcuts when confronting a situation. It’s not so much that they’re unwilling to think about how gays feel or how homosexuality fits into the grand scheme of things. It’s more that they simply lack the tools to do this. Try explaining why social mores opposed to homosexuality are arbitrary and antiquated in language that the author of the above letter would be able to comprehend. I’m not sure if it could be done, and this is why I disagree with Ed Brayton’s proposed response:

Here’s what I think should be done here. Every gay couple in the area should go there at the same time, sit down and order something really small, like an order of french fries. Then when they leave they should each give him a letter telling him that he should go to college and get an education, which might free him from the bigoted views of his false religion.

I don’t think this would have any effect. Even if he read these letters, what makes you think he’d understand them? This is a guy who thinks merely saying “Jesus says” to someone should be enough to change their sexual orientation. Clearly he has little comprehension of how humans other than himself think. And his inability to grasp how others think probably stems from his inattention to his own thinking. If gay couples did take Ed’s advice, my guess is that each couple that did it would receive in response another letter from him much like the one reproduced above. It would be like trying to have a conversation with the machine at the entrance to the parking garage. No matter what you say, it’s just gonna spit out another parking voucher, because that’s all it knows how to do.

This is just not a situation where a conversation can take place. This guy’s lost. The best bet would be to boycott his restaurant and hope he goes out of business, or publicly shame him to the point where he stops handing out such letters out of self-preservation. But patronizing his business to give him pro-gay letters will only give him more money and more opportunities to write anti-gay letters. And the fact that giving him pro-gay letters won’t work is pretty obvious when you see what he wrote. He simply wouldn’t understand them.

This is illustrated most poignantly in the postscript to McGovern’s dumbass letter. When you see just how badly written the letter is, and thereby just how minimal his understanding of the nature of the problem is, it becomes pretty obvious that it wasn’t homosexuality that destroyed his daughter’s life. More likely it was his reaction to her homosexuality that destroyed her life, as the letter shows that this is clearly not a guy who reacts to homosexuality in anything like a mature or rational manner. If this is a guy who can’t distinguish between the results of homosexuality and the results of his own reaction to homosexuality, then there is little hope of convincing him to behave otherwise with letters extolling the virtues of education. He needed that education years ago.  That ship set sail long ago. By this point, he’s a lost cause. Fuck ‘im.

I say all this because I object to correcting the letter not just because I want the restaurant owner to look like the stupid bigot that he surely is. I also want people to see the juxtaposition between ignorant views and the lack of cognitive ability that is often (but not necessarily always) associated with them. Let people see what the real problem is here: A man who cannot even write 4th grade level English is harassing gays for existing in his vicinity. Ed McGovern doesn’t realize it, but his real complaint is that the existence of lesbians makes the world too complicated for him to process. Unable to blame his own stupidity for this dilemma, he decides it must be the fault of other people who don’t fit into his tiny, comfortable worldview. His inability to comprehend becomes the lesbians’ problem, and the only way his tiny reptile brain can express this is by babbling about Jesus for a little bit.

What I hope people would see is not just that bigots are stupid. It’s also important to be able to recognize the importance of linguistic proficiency, and how failing to educate someone in how to express themselves clearly and coherently increases the likelihood that they will hold bigoted opinions. I’m not saying that there has never been an eloquent bigot, but they certainly aren’t common. It’s this causal connection that’s important–it’s why some kinds of ignorance are associated with some kinds of attitudes towards others. Organizing one’s thought is important, and a news story like this could be a good object lesson. This is what disorganized thought looks like. And the result of a mind untrained to organize itself is often bigotry: people thinking that their own inability to comprehend others is actually harm being done to them by others.

You can’t really get through to these people, because they can’t comprehend language well enough to understand what you’re saying. It’s this whole attitude of “I’m too dumb to understand it, so it’s evil,” that we need to be combating. If they’re too old for there to be any hope of actually teaching them how to communicate clearly, then often the only way to counteract their actions is to mock them. I’m more than willing to have a civil conversation with someone who at least shows that they can communicate in grammatical English. But if someone shows they can’t even do that, attempts at communication are pointless. Just point at them and laugh til they shut the fuck up.

Gun Glurge

CNN has been making a big deal about an open letter from a former Marine to Sen. Dianne Feinstein about the evils of gun control. So I bet this letter has some kind of groundbreaking new argument, some refreshing insight into the subtleties of gun violence in America that makes it worthy of getting a headline on the front page.

Oh, wait, no, it’s just a bunch of glurgy crap regurgitating the same tired pro-gun claptrap we all grew sick of hearing 20 years ago. I hope no one reads this and is surprised that CNN is spreading around crap so trite and thoughtlessness-provoking that it could be a chain letter forwarded around by Granny’s women’s group at the local Baptist church. It’s pretty sadly typical of the quality of “journalism” one often finds at CNN.

Senator Dianne Feinstein,

I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government’s right to know what I own.

Doesn’t matter what you believe, Gomer. It matters what’s the law and what ain’t. And the government already requires you to register things you own. For instance, just the other day I renewed the tags on my car. So the government knows the make, model, year, and color of my car. And if I didn’t register it and get a tag, I could get pulled over and have my license revoked.

The thing is, you currently aren’t required to register your guns. But maybe someday in the future you will be. That’s really all there is to it, and you’ll comply just like every other law abiding citizen, no matter what kind of empty bravado you sputter in your iReport letter.

Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime.

They’s gonna take our guns, y’all!

No, dumbshit. Nobody in Congress is trying to take away your precious penis substitutes. Pull your paranoid head out of your ass and look at the facts. If you register your gun, it’s still your gun. The purpose of registration is that guns, like cars, are dangerous, and it’s helpful to law enforcement if they have a database to work with when a crime happens. So long as you don’t murder anybody, you should be alright.

You ma’am have overstepped a line that is not your domain.

She’s a fucking Senator. This is exactly her domain. She gets elected. She makes laws. That’s how it works. The Senate’s constitutional power to legislate doesn’t magically disappear the moment they consider legislating something that might affect you.

I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.

You ever think that all the crazy gun nuts writing whacked out shit to her on a daily basis might be part of why Sen. Feinstein feels the need to own a gun?

And, again, when did Sen. Feinstein say you couldn’t have a gun? Unless presented with evidence to the contrary, I’m going to assume that we aren’t talking about real-world Feinstein right now. Instead, we’re speaking of Right Wing La La Land Feinstein, who wants to steal the precious, precious guns from noble Troops and melt them in the fires of Mordor.

I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free.

“I am also apparently rather lacking in humility.”

I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve.

Well, she’s the bitch who pays your salary, so you might wanna be a little more respectful, or those proposed military cuts might go just a little deeper.

I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.

This is what happens when Gomer buys his own hype. I presume he wrote this with a straight face (I could never do that). I presume he has that special right wing lack of self-awareness that prevents him from seeing how arrogant, stupid, and childish he sounds. You know, that part of the conservative’s brain that allows him/her to think that he/she speaks for all “true” Americans, and that everyone else in the universe is just as deeply concerned with his/her petty, imaginary “issues” as he/she is? Yeah, that part. The dumb part.

The dumb part of the conservative brain also filters out the meaning of words. Take “peasant”, for instance. A peasant is an impoverished laborer whose hard work enriches the wealthy aristocrats who own the property on which he/she labors. We do have peasants in our society. We call them “poor people”. We don’t call them “paranoid, white, middle class gun owners”. The word for that is “privileged”.

I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned.

Learned what? How to write stilted prose and create imaginary problems to solve through self-aggrandizement? You don’t need 8 years in the military to learn how to do that. Just watch FOX News for a few minutes.

I am an American.

So is Sen. Feinstein. You ever think of that?

You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.

But killing thousands in Afghanistan because of the actions of some evil man, that’s fine. Hoo – rah! Semper fi!

I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.

No one’s disarming you, you ignorant, simpering little fuck. Banning high capacity magazines or requiring registration will not disarm you. You’ll still have your stupid fucking guns and your stupid fucking smug attitude.

We, the people, deserve better than you.

Respectfully Submitted,
Joshua Boston

Joshua Boston, you are a whiny, ignorant, self-absorbed nincompoop.

Respectfully submitted,

Riffing Religion.

Here’s the thing. Not only is this guy going to be able to keep his guns (regardless of whether Sen. Feinstein passes a bill or not), but I wouldn’t want to take them from him anyway. I don’t oppose responsible personal gun ownership. This is actually an area where I find myself in disagreement both with those on the left and on the right (but more with those on the right).  Here’s the text of the Second Amendment:

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.

Now, many on the left frequently home in on the “militia” clause and say something stupid like, “The amendment just says the state can have a government-run militia. That doesn’t mean private citizens get guns too! Durrr, I’m a constitutional scholar!”

What they’re ignoring is the later clause, which uses the phrase, “right of the people.” Here’s another amendment that uses the phrase “right of the people”:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I’m pretty sure no one in their right mind would want to argue that this amendment doesn’t apply to private citizens, but only to those who work for some government-run outfit. But that’s why we need to respect the places where the constitution says “right of the people.” The phrase should not be taken lightly, and definitely should not be taken to refer only to people working for the government. If the constitution says “right of the people”, it means private citizens. So we should interpret the second amendment as guaranteeing the right to bear arms to private citizens, and the Supreme Court has said as such in the past. Simply put, as long as the Second Amendment is in place (and I don’t see it being repealed any time soon), Joshua Boston and the other frothing-at-the-mouth gun nuts have nothing to worry about. The government can’t take their guns.

That’s where the liberals tend to be stupid. But the conservatives can be quite dumb also, and this is no exception. Conservatives like Joshua Boston above insist that the government has no right to regulate their firearms. But this is obvious bullshit, as the Second Amendment explicitly states that the purpose of its existence is the necessity of a “well regulated Militia.” I mean, the word “regulated” occurs right there in the text of the amendment, so any claim that regulating guns is unconstitutional contradicts the very text of the amendment itself.

Congress (and the states) have the power to regulate guns all they want. They just can’t ban private citizens from owning them. So long as it’s still possible for a private citizen to purchase and own a gun, the constitution has not been violated. I have a few ideas for regulation that might actually be effective, which means, of course, that none of these ideas will ever actually be put in place. But I’ll share them anyways, because what’s the point of blogging if not to come up with futile, pointless ideas that few will read and no one will ever implement? Here goes:

  • Keep guns legal, but ban high-capacity magazines. Both the Arizona shooting and the Connecticut shooting involved a gunman using clips that held 30 rounds. I can’t conceive of a legitimate usage for a high capacity magazine. They seem to be specifically designed for murdering large numbers of people in a short period of time. There is absolutely no reason a law abiding, private citizen should ever need such a thing.
  • If anyone is convicted of a felony, any guns found on his/her property are seized and destroyed, and the person convicted is barred from owning a firearm for life unless he/she specifically appeals to a judge to have the prohibition overturned. This would do a lot to reduce the number of guns in circulation. The important part is that the guns be melted down, not merely seized and then put back into circulation at a later point in time.
  • Start a gun buy-back program, similar to Obama’s “Cash for Clunkers” program. Offer to buy people’s guns at above market value if and only if they sign a pledge not to purchase another gun for at least five years. All guns acquired by the program are destroyed.
  • Limit the amount of ammunition a person can buy in a short period of time. The killer in Arizona bought thousands of rounds in the months leading up to his shooting spree. This shouldn’t be that hard to prevent. If we can restrict the amount of pseudephedrin people buy, it shouldn’t be that hard to do the same with bullets.
  • Tax guns and bullets more heavily. This will force up the prices and make people think twice about buying them. It worked for cigarettes, as smoking rates have declined as prices have gone up. People said this would inevitably lead to a “black market”, but that never happened with cigarettes. As long as prices don’t go up too high, that shouldn’t be a problem.
  • Require a background check for any gun purchase. The goal here should be obvious.
  • Require a license to own a gun, and require a psychiatric test for anyone applying for a license. Again, the purpose should be obvious.
  • Require a multi-day gun-safety training course for a license. Again, obvious.
  • Make it a felony to provide a gun to anyone who fails the above requirements. If you provide a gun to an unqualified individual and they commit a felony with that gun, you are complicit.
  • Make it a felony to store guns unsafely. A person caught storing guns unsafely loses his/her license to own them at the very least, and must file an appeal to get it back.
  • Institute frequent and thorough surprise inspections of gun stores, gun shows, and anywhere else guns might be sold, to ensure that they are following the rules.
  • Reward private businesses that ban all guns on their property.
  • Increase the number of public outreach programs to educate people about the dangers of gun violence and how to avoid it.
  • Require insurance companies to cover psychiatric care and to share information about at-risk individuals (in cases where it would not violate their privacy).
  • If someone is involved in any kind of gun-related accident, their license is suspended and they must go through the above rigamarole to get it back
  • Make courses about the dangers of gun violence available in public schools and universities.

Now, a gun nut would interrupt to inform me that even if all these ideas were in place, it wouldn’t completely end gun violence. Well, of course not! I have no delusions about making violence go away forever, but we can at least reduce the amount of violence in our country, and I think these regulations would be a good step towards achieving that.

Or maybe I’m just trying to take your precious guns away. I’m sure that’s what at least a few tiny brains out there might take away from all this. We should just require our under-paid and unappreciated public school teachers to carry guns so they can shoot crazy people and turn schools into the showdown at the OK corral. That oughta solve the problem! And I’m sure the teachers would love having even more responsibilities foisted on their shoulders while the kooky right wing cuts their pay and benefits again.

Just don’t call him the first BLACK president…

Exactly what constitutes a “story” differs from person to person. What counts as a significant development depends on what you consider to be significant in the first place. I thought the events of Amazing Spider-Man #700 were significant (and supremely stupid),* but people who aren’t like me and haven’t been reading comic books since 1990 probably don’t give a shit about it. This past week I borrowed my dad’s car while mine was in the shop, and couldn’t figure out how to change the satellite radio station off the Golf Channel. So I had to listen to big stories about whether Tiger or Rory would win a major in 2013, or which major course is getting a re-design. Couldn’t care less. Call me when the NBA playoffs start.

This means that what a news outlet considers to be a “story” reflects quite a bit on what they think their readership finds important, which brings us to this headline from WingNutDaily:

WHISTLEBLOWER MAGAZINE

THE FIRST MUSLIM PRESIDENT

The 1 honorary title Barack Obama doesn’t want – but definitely deserves

It’s not so much an article as it is an advertisement disguised as an article, hoping to entice their readership to buy shit from them. WND does this a lot, and apparently they know their readership quite well. Kinda like how a good hog farmer knows just the right kind of shit that his pigs like to roll around in.

It’s a bit presumptuous to call it “the 1 honorary title” Obama wouldn’t want. It would be pretty easy to come up with other even less palatable soubriquets. I seriously doubt anyone would want to be The First Child Molester President, or the President of the Anal Fissures, or CEO of CNN. Hell, Speaker of the House doesn’t sound too appetizing right about now either. But what matters is not whether it makes any sense to single out this one particular imaginary title as the WORST EVER. What matters is whether the reptilian brain stems of the target audience think it’s the WORST EVER and will shell out money proportionately to the stimulation it creates in them. The point is to provoke a Pavlovian response and get them drooling cash into your coffers as soon as possible.

It started when Bill Clinton was famously called “the first black president” – not because of his skin color, of course, but because he supposedly exemplified so many “black” qualities and attitudes.

This article is off to a great start!

Since Barack Obama has been president, he’s been showered with many such accolades – most recently when Newsweek crowned him “The First Gay President” for his election-year abandonment of his opposition to same-sex marriage.

Newsweek also called M. Night Shyamalan “The Next Spielberg”, so let’s not start stroking our balls over this title just yet. In fact, given their history, if Newsweek is calling him The First Gay President, then it follows with almost certainty that Obama has a literal dick allergy and breaks out into hives whenever dick shares the same air space with him, but needs pussy every two hours in order to keep his heart from collapsing.

But the elite media, to commemorate other Obama affinities and policy positions, have also dubbed him “The First Hispanic President,” “The First Asian-American President,” “The First Jewish President” – and even “The First Female President.”

Dear Loyal Readers,

Just wanted to remind you that Obama is the First [Something] President. Not quite sure what that “something” is, but how do you feel about Jews and Mexicans and women? Or Bill Clinton for that matter?

Sincerely,

The Totally Serious Journalists at WND.

But there’s one “first” label conspicuously absent from all the media homage paid to the 44th president – perhaps, ironically, because there’s more truth to it than the press is comfortable admitting – and that’s the title Whistleblower confers on Barack Obama in its blockbuster January 2013 issue: “THE FIRST MUSLIM PRESIDENT.

This sentence is a perfect maelstrom of amusing futility and pathetic braggadocio. “Yes, we, the intrepid news team at WingNutDaily, we alone had the courage–courage so lacking in all those fact-based news outlets–to call Obama something really stupid and wholly unoriginal and completely ineffective IN ALL CAPS!!! Buy our shit! We are so fucking groundbreaking rah rah rah!!!” At least some part of their brains must recognize that yet again resurrecting the tired “Obama’s a Muzzie” trope won’t be any more effective than their birther babblings or conspiracy theories about ACORN or any of the other shit they peddle. The conservatives lost the last election and they can’t change it. But they’ll keep retreading the same ground, because it still sells no matter how futile the endeavor might be.

Barack Obama’s relationship with Islam has long been one of the most radioactive questions surrounding his presidency.

Only if we’re talking about a certain type of radioactive.

Before the 2008 election, it was considered impolite in the extreme even to mention publicly Obama’s middle name, “Hussein,” a name given only to Muslim babies.

Can you imagine the embarrassment when Obama’s Catholic mother and atheist father realized they’d accidentally given birth to a Muslim baby? “Well, fuck, honey. Guess my old atheist self better give him my own middle name, seeing as that’s what the law says you do with Muslim babies. By the way, how exactly does a girl baby come to be named ‘Stanley’?”

And despite repeated polls showing a significant percentage of voters – one in three conservative Republicans and almost one in five of all voters – believe the president is currently a Muslim…

Just refer back to what I said earlier about what counts as “significant”.

…those who dare bring up the issue are mercilessly scorned as ignoramuses and bigots.

Can’t imagine why that might be. Obviously a Catholic girl named Stanley would follow non-existent Muslim rules (in Hawaii) about naming your baby Hussein if and only if he’s Muslim. People must be calling me a bigoted ignoramus because there’s something wrong with them. I’m doing just fine.

Yet, there’s a side to Obama’s life, from his Muslim childhood, schooling, Quran studies, mosque attendance and prayer in Indonesia, to his bewilderingly pro-Muslim policies today as president, that has been carefully concealed from the public by the “mainstream media.”

And by “carefully concealed” we mean “vociferously harped on by every right wing political figure on Fox News until it became ineffective because everyone knew it was bullshit, at which point it began its zombie life among the real wingnuts alongside creationism and fluoride conspiracies.”

If you’ve wondered why the current U.S. president seems so supportive of the Muslim Brotherhood – both in the Arab-Muslim Middle East and, in the form of its various front organizations, within America itself – “THE FIRST MUSLIM PRESIDENT” will open your eyes.

Hint: it’s ’cause he’s Muslim.

Highlights of “THE FIRST MUSLIM PRESIDENT” include:

What follows is just a long list of what kinds of articles one will find in the next issue of WhistleBlower. It certainly does involve quite a bit of blowing, but the only whistle involved is dog whistle, since none of it is new in any way, shape or form. It’s just the same warmed over boilerplate they’ve been spewing out for dumbshits to lap up for almost 5 years now, but repackaged to make it look like something you should spend your hard earned money on (if you’re the kind of person who has no idea what to spend your hard earned money on). If you’ve been following the right wing narrative on Obama the Other even casually, you’ve heard it all before. And if you’ve been following it enthusiastically and believing it, it’s exactly what you want–nothing new, nothing challenging, nothing that’s actually different from what you heard before. Just comforting, mind-numbing repetition and reassurance that it’s reality that’s stupid, not you.

Any time one reads a WND article, it’s always nice to take a look at the comments section to see just how stupid their target audience is. So let’s take a moment to browse through a few comments.

Lamar Carnes • 

The man is NOT an American at all by American standards for a citizen. He certainly doesn’t measure up to any criteria which would suggest he knows anything about Ameircan USA issues of purpose and being. He is more of a foreign person similar to people like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, any and all Islamic Muslim dictators and certainly looks like a worn out Socialist!! Still trying to make Socialism the failed policy of the past history of world nations – work for American people! It won’t, it never will and he will eventually leave the office of President with egg all over his face and an emptier suit than he already wears! The man is a total flat failure! A disgrace to our nation and the entyire system of politics and government! A man who has divided us more than any other man ever in our history! Yet, people seem to love it all especially the Press and welfare type people! But, they will eventually cry spilt milk and say they just didn’t really understand it all. yeah, dumb heads keep your heads in the sand!! You stink!!

Well, I was gonna go through a few comments. But then Lamar Carnes had to come along and say everything that any WND commenter will ever say in that thread, all in one comment, and with representative grammar and spelling to boot. Stop hogging all the regurgitated cliches and babble-points, Lamar! Your fellow wingnuts also want to feel reassured by repeating ineffectual nonsense on the internet!

__________________________

* For those who are interested in my opinion, I skipped ASM #700 (and plan to do the same with Superior Spider-Man), and re-read Kraven’s Last Hunt instead. I already know DeMatteis did it better. Call it a hunch.

Thinking it doesn’t make it so

When a publication has the balls to call itself “The American Thinker”, one is entirely warranted to approach its material with certain expectations. Its material should be well written, erudite, and thought provoking. Its claims should be properly cited. It should choose journalists based on their expertise in the field under discussion. An educated person should find the articles contained within challenging and enlightening. It’s The American Thinker, not CNN or Fox News after all. It should rise above.

Nope.

It’s garbage. And let me be clear. There’s a difference between attacking mostly respectable publications for publishing trash, and what I’m doing here. I have earlier disparaged the Chronicle of Higher Education, but The American Thinker (TAT) is on a completely different level. The CHE does sometimes publish good stuff. TAT is just pure bullshit. My attacks on CHE are just for certain shoddy articles by a particular person. TAT is a collection of deluded wingnuts that publishes only garbage. And William L. Gensert is a prime example of what’s wrong.

If anything, the closer we get to Election Day, the more apparent it is that Obama is not only losing, but losing big.  The Obama campaign, and by “campaign” I mean members of the media and polling organizations, is trying to convince prospective Romney voters to believe that all is lost — in which case, they hope, we will stay home.

But just because they say so, that doesn’t make it true.

But when you say so, it does make it true? How exactly are you in a better position to predict an Obama loss than the people who are polling American voters?

Everyone knew from the outset that Obama, with his sad record of continuous failure on almost every front, was going to air out his inner bitterness and envy, and campaign negatively.

Everyone knew that! Everyone knew that the pathetic, horrible Obama would rely on negative campaigning to prop up his awful, terrible, unamerican, evil, communist, freedom-hating administration. Only baby-raping ungodly monsters who fail at life would ever engage in negative campaigning. And if Romney wins, all these negative terms will disappear from my rhetoric, proving that it’s Obama who’s running the negative campaign.

But did anyone suspect that his sole hope for victory would rest on trying to suppress the vote of his opponent with naked media bias and polling — most of which assumes a higher Democrat turnout than in 2008, when the electorate, many Republicans included, swallowed whole Obama’s vision of “hope and change”?

The polls don’t actually assume that. And when it comes to voter suppression, the Republicans pretty much have that covered.

Well, three and a half years later, the digestion of that particular meal has given America and Americans an ulcer — a bleeding ulcer.  I can attest to that — every time I see the man or hear him speak, it makes me sick to my stomach.

America and Americans think you’re an idiot. I can attest to that because I feel sick in my tummy when I hear someone say you’re not an idiot.

Please explain to me why my reasoning differs from yours.

It is ludicrous to maintain that Obama, a curiously small giant of humanity, is ahead anywhere in this nation by 10%.

Ludicrous, I tell you! All the polling organizations have is the polls they conducted with thousands of Americans. That’s nothing–NOTHING!– compared to the icky-poo feelings I have in my tummy when I hear that black guy talk. Case closed! My poopy feelings are what really matter! Now give me a juice box and something shiny to play with!

The recent meme of the inevitability of Barack Obama is merely the delusional desperation of sycophantic minions.  What else do they have?  What else can they say?

They could just insist that their guy will win because thinking otherwise makes them feel gassy and whiny. Just a suggestion.

The polls allege Obama is ahead by 10% in Ohio (or should I use the Hawaiian spelling, “Oiho”) — a mining state — where part of the economy depends on King Coal and the money it brings in.  This is the man who, through his agents at the EPA, has singlehandedly destroyed the coal industry in America.

Obama won Ohio by almost 5% in 2008, despite the fact that his current platform is even less liberal than his 2008 platform. And one thing you’re ignoring–a lot of those coal mine workers are union members.

Regardless, you aren’t offering any contradictory data at all. You’re basically just pointing out the fact that the reality contradicts your ideological presumptions, then concluding that reality must be wrong. I see a bright future in the Republican party for you.

He is said to be ahead by 12% in Pennsylvania — also a mining state, and home of the Marcellus Shale natural gas field.  Yet even the uninformed know that under Barack Obama there will be no drilling for oil, mining coal, or building nuclear power plants.  And probably in a second term, the EPA will shut down fracking, which means no natural gas either.

Yeah…he’s way ahead.

Ha! Stupid pollsters asking real Americans in Pennsylvania what they actually think! They should ask my dumb ass what I think! Obama can’t be leading in PA if my shallow understanding of economics won’t let him!

In Florida, he is leading by 9%.  It is beyond belief that the state, with its large population of seniors and Jews, is going to vote overwhelmingly for the man whose signature legislation, ObamaCare, decimates Medicare and who has marginalized and insulted Israel repeatedly during his entire term.  Remember, he had time for Whoopi, but not for Netanyahu.

But it’s totally believable that elderly Jews in Florida would support Paul Ryan’s plan to gut Medicare over Obama’s plan which actually expands Medicare.

And let’s not forget that Florida is a state with no state income tax.  In fact, many people move there for that reason — how do you think they got Lebron?

They got Lebron through Lebron behaving like a total asshole.

I don’t think Florida wants to be known as the Asshole Magnet of America, but that’s where they’re going if we follow this reasoning.

Yet we are supposed to believe they will vote for the man who gave us 20 new taxes through Obamacare and plans to raise taxes all around?  And if you don’t think his proposed one-year extension for most of the Bush tax cuts, set to expire January 1, 2013, is not a plan to let all tax rates rise a year later, you haven’t been paying attention.

Yeah…he’s going to win big there.

Again, Obama doesn’t fit my childish preconceptions, so of course he can’t win. You seem to be determined to make this case without even the possibility of empirical evidence ever being part of the discussion. Where exactly do you get to the part where I shouldn’t pay attention to the polls? Where do you provide any actual argument for why the polls are flawed? At what point is the title “American Thinker” justified?

The truth is plain to see.  Obama is not going to pick up any new voters with his record of economic destruction and the misery he has foisted upon the electorate.  He will bleed support as his base withers away in the harsh glare of the Obama reality.

“Plain to see” in this case means “Existing entirely within my own feeble mind”.

Take his vote total from 2008 and subtract out some portion of the voters who bought the dream but lived the nightmare.

Then, subtract out some portion of the youth vote, who have discovered that hope means no jobs and student loans they can’t pay, while change means whatever coins they can find underneath the cushions of their mother’s sofa — in whose house they are relegated to live because of poor prospects and lack of opportunity.

Remove the women who don’t agree with abortion on demand and contraceptives for all — free and clear.

Remove the Catholics and other religious “folks” (a favorite Obama term) for the same reason, in addition to his assault on religious freedom, support of same-sex marriage, and antipathy for insulting the prophet of Islam, while accepting any slight on the Judeo-Christian American tradition.

Merely using words like “subtract” and “addition” does not make your unsupported speculation into math.

…Oh my goodness, did I just hurt the feelings of Muslims by not capitalizing “prophet”?  I anxiously await the knock on the door from the Obama secret police.

A visit from the “Obama secret police” is about as likely as a visit from your god.

Remove the sensible, who recognize Obama’s impotence in the face of Iran’s steady march toward acquiring a nuclear weapon.  After all, we have nothing to fear from Iran, a nation whose leaders continuously call for the destruction of Israel and America.

Yeah, it’s the “sensible” who believe that the guy who took out Osama bin Laden and Moammar Gaddafi is soft on terrorism.

In addition, many blacks, who have suffered most under this man’s policies, will not be there for him this time around.  They may not vote against him — racial solidarity, and all that — but many will certainly stay home.

Stupid is so much more annoying when it’s condescending.

With that in mind, can anyone say there is the same level of electoral enthusiasm for the president as there was in 2008?

Of course not. But your guy Romney is a big part of why. How do I know there’s little enthusiasm towards him? Well, one piece of evidence is the fact that in your 1200 word article about how he’s gonna win so easily, you only mention his name a grand total of 3 times. But the name Obama occurs 21 times. In fact, you’re not saying anything about Romney winning. Rather, all you care about is Obama losing. And you’re certainly not the only dingleberry on the right who’s approaching the election this way. And let’s not forget that earlier you accused Obama of running a negative campaign.

The once unstoppable Obama movement has constipated to a halt.  He was once a god, and now he is man — a nasty, unsuccessful man, who blames everyone and everything for his serial failures.

The psychological projection is strong with this one.

Obama is going to lose in a landslide.  And Barack Obama, the media, and the polling organizations will be appropriately shocked.

Shocked, I say!

I say! Appropriately so!

I think I’ve figured out why this publication calls itself The American Thinker. The writers at TAT seem to be under the impression that if they think it, it’s true. Mounds of meticulously collected data from polls don’t mean jack shit if William S. Gensert thinks differently. In his mind, he knows exactly what coal miners in Ohio and Pennsylvania and black people all over the country are thinking and feeling. So there’s no need to actually ask them about it! Women and blacks and blue collar workers won’t support Obama because Gensert won’t, and Romney will win because wishful thinking dictates that it be so. Welcome to Right Wing La La Land.

Might Romney actually win? I dunno, maybe. I hope not, but I also guess it’s not impossible. But you’d have to have your head in the sand to believe that Obama doesn’t have the advantage right now. The truth is that Gensert and his other delusional colleagues on the right are not Thanos wielding the Infinity Gauntlet. They can’t just warp reality to their liking merely by unthinking it. And thank non-existent god for that.