I LOVE freedom… until I disagree with it

75 Comments

An interesting issue arose recently when Sarah A. Hoyt linked to my “Unintended Consequences” essay on Instapundit. A commenter with the moniker “Billy Boy” decided to petulantly request that my blog no longer be linked on Insty. Why? Because I’m apparently “crass,” and he’s upset about my language. Apparently, when he ambled over here (not sure when) to complain about what I write on my site, I failed to kiss his lily-white ass and acknowledge his superiority on matters of what should be posted on my site and how.

Please stop referencing this woman. (emphasis mine)

Even if she is correct (sometimes), her rantings are filled with rhetorical fallacies, taking ad hominem to the stratospheric heights. If you can’t make your point without profanity laced screed, then just shut up. (emphasis mine)

I posted a small side objection on her website and was met with derision and vitriol. She is a crass boor and most certainly is not interested in free and open discussion. (emphasis mine) Definitely not worthy of instapundit readers’ time.

Let’s take this apart a bit.

“Please stop referencing this woman” — Instapundit is a site that provides free content to its readers, as well as an ability to comment. Billy Boy feels himself entitled to demand that a site for which he does not pay and that does not belong to him tailor content to his likes and dislikes.

“If you can’t make your point without profanity laced screed, then just shut up.” — Never mind I make points without using profanity all the time. But aside from that little matter… just shut up? So, if Billy Boy doesn’t like your language you should just not speak out? My, my… how interesting and SJWish!

“I posted a small side objection on her website and was met with derision and vitriol. She is a crass boor and most certainly is not interested in free and open discussion.  Definitely not worthy of instapundit readers’ time.” — So Billy Boy came over here to admonish me about my language (note, I have no idea who this pedantic fucknugget is or to which comment he’s referring). On a site for which I pay. On a site that is mine. And apparently, he’s butthurt, because he was ridiculed for his entitled attitude in telling another person how they should communicate on their own site. This, of course, in his puny little mind translates to not being “interested in free and open discussion.” Let’s remember, he was not in any way moderated or prevented from making his arrogant comments. His comment was not edited (I don’t do that, and I only screen for spam and overt threats). But apparently ridiculing him for attempting to arrogantly demand that I alter my site and my language, when it is pretty clearly stated that I have no interest in making converts or conforming to anyone else’s standards but my own, to fit his ideal of a website is somehow equivalent to suppressing his ability to hold a free and open discussion. How SJWish of him!

Additionally, this presumptuous bag of hubris has apparently also made himself the arbiter of what is appropriate and what is not on Insty.

To link this screed generator from the instapundit site is far below the dignity of Professor Reynolds.

Go read some of Professor Reynolds many essays which are carried by USA Today and get back with us if you can spot the difference.

VagisilDear Billy Boy – would you like a little Vagisil for that itch?

A related issue was addressed by my friend Amanda on her blog yesterday.

Let me make this perfectly clear. I have had enough. If you want to talk about how you believe in freedom of speech, then you’d better put your money where your mouth is. Freedom of speech isn’t trying to shut down speech you don’t like or agree with. Freedom of speech isn’t trying to cost people their jobs when you don’t like what they say. Yes, they can be the biggest fucking douche-wad there is but as long as their speech doesn’t violate the First Amendment, shut the fuck up about silencing them.

Amanda made a great point earlier. Social Justice Warrior Howler Monkeys love freedom only on their terms. These same people claimed they were expanding science fiction when, in fact, they worked to silence voices that did not agree with their views. These are the same people who tried to force Baen Publishing to pressure Brad Torgersen and others supporting Sad Puppies 3 to shut up or they would be cut loose from the house. How is silencing one group of fans, because they do not agree with your point of view, “expanding” anything?

Here’s a clue. It isn’t.

Silencing your opposition is not the same as promoting your point of view.

It’s the sign of a miserable mediocrity trying to get ahead – not by producing superior writing or advancing a superior argument, but by trying to cripple its opponent a la Tanya Harding.

Demanding that others conform to your standards, and if not, that they should be silenced makes you a petty little despot wannabe, but certainly not anyone who actually loves and respects freedom, no matter how much you screech to the contrary! (And yes, I fully realize the First Amendment protects you from government prosecution if you dare speak out. However, demanding that someone whose speech you don’t like be silenced by anyone, be it an employer or a news aggregator, still makes you a petty little tyrannical fuck.)

And finally, there’s this little thing called a “mouse,” which you can use to navigate away from sites you don’t like. There are also things called “power buttons,” which you can use to turn off television and radio programs that don’t appeal to you. And, believe it or not, there are other things called “books,” which you can either close or not purchase altogether if you don’t like their content.

Those Special Snowflakes who are too lazy or too pompous to do any of the above, but who insist that others conform to their worldview to save themselves the effort of making a logical argument or opening their minds to new challenges, while demanding a safe space to hide from naughty language as an excuse for said negligence, can go fuck themselves.

Unintended Consequences

74 Comments

I have a buddy who works for a newspaper. Said newspaper has been covering a bit of a dustup in Pittsburg, Kansas, where some cunt-chafed twatmold decided to lodge a complaint about a banner that had graced the side of the Pittsburg Post Office since shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks on America – a banner that boldly proclaimed “God Bless America.” Postal employees who had served their country decided they wanted to put up the banner, and paid for it using money out of their own pockets to commemorate the lives that were lost on that horrifying day. The banner had been displayed there for the past 15 years.

Until recently.

Enter the aforementioned cunt-chafed twatmold. Its poor little eyes apparently began to burn, and its meat curtains got a particularly nasty rash at the word “God,” so it complained.

…the local branch of the post office received a letter from the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), headquartered in Madison, Wisconsin, citing United States Postal Regulations that “prohibit the display of religious materials, other than stamp art, on postal property.”

Madeline Ziegler, a legal fellow for FFRF, said the complaint originated locally.

“We got a complaint from a Pittsburg resident who uses the post office who wanted some help with a religious sign,” Ziegler said, adding the sign violates the separation of church and state.

The FFRF, whose entire mission seems to be to hassle others on behalf of the perpetually butthurt, swung into action. They bitched. They moaned. They wrote letters.

And eventually, the sign came down.

blessingsBut the story doesn’t end there.

The banner was removed and placed safely in storage, but if you think the cunt-chafed twatmold’s sensitive little eyes will now be safe from ever seeing any mention of a deity, you’d be sadly mistaken.

Thursday morning, a very similar banner appeared on the fence next to local business Jayhawk Signs and Graphics, another at CDL Electric Company and social media marketing by Jake’s Fireworks promised more to come.

More have been ordered, and the company is giving the signs away to anyone who wants them, and today, the sign campaign continues. More than a thousand yard signs, saying “God Bless America” and several hundred banners started appearing all over town, according to The Morning Sun newspaper!

Here’s how you get more than you bargained for.

  1. Get irritated labia over a sign that mentions God – not any particular God, mind you, but simply a deity – paid for by private funds and meant to commemorate a horrifying day in our history.
  2. Get rabid atheist assholes to harass local post office until it takes the banner down.
  3. Piss off entire town, which then puts up signs and banners with that particular message all over the area.
  4. Wind up surrounded by the very thing you wanted to abolish.

Look, I am an atheist, so I’m keenly sensitive about church and state issues. That said, this sign in no way established a government-mandated religion, which is what the First Amendment really prohibits. It was paid for by citizens out of their own pockets. It doesn’t even mention any specific religion – merely a deity. No taxpayer money was spent on said sign. Yes, it mentioned a “God,” but so do many songs, including the one whose title mirrors the sign. Should that song never be sung in a public venue?

This is stupid.

This Freedom from Religion Foundation appears to be dedicated not just to ensuring that no religion is imposed on those who don’t want to exercise it, but to demeaning and belittling those who believe in a God.

“Separation of church and state” – a principle this FFRF organization claims to be dedicated to protecting – is a phrase that was coined by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists to assure them they would be protected from the state nosing in their business.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

Basically, Jefferson told the Baptists, “Hey! See that dictate that says the government will not establish a religion and that it won’t prevent you from exercising it how you see fit? Yeah… it’s like a wall between you guys and the government. Ain’t no one going to make you worship a certain way or forbid you from worshiping how you please.”

Yes, that also means the government won’t prohibit you from not worshiping, as religion “lies solely between Man and his God.”

But you know what it doesn’t mean?

It doesn’t mean your fragile sensibilities should be protected from seeing the word “God” in public.

It doesn’t mean others can’t use their own money to hang a simple sign for which no taxpayer dollars were used on a public building.

It doesn’t mean you can force others to not worship or even display their regard for whatever God they want.

The sign was displayed on that post office for 15 years without a shred of controversy, according to the paper. Now, all of a sudden, some Special Snowflake decided to get offended?

Come on! That’s just stupid.

This FFRF organization has done some legitimately good work, including halting public funding of religious studies and other religious activities. Atheists pay their taxes, just like everyone else does, and their tax dollars shouldn’t be used to fund others’ faith.

But this? A banner put up by post office employees at their own expense that does nothing to force anyone to worship in any particular way and doesn’t endorse any kind of specific religion? Maybe it was a violation of the establishment clause. I don’t see how, but I suppose a legal case can be made that it was. But this strikes me as petty – kind of like barring a singer from performing “God Bless America” or the National Anthem, whose last stanza includes the words “In God is our trust” in a public building.

O, thus be it ever when freemen shall stand,
Between their lov’d homes and the war’s desolation;
Blest with vict’ry and peace, may the heav’n-rescued land
Praise the Pow’r that hath made and preserv’d us a nation!
Then conquer we must, when our cause is just,
And this be our motto: “In God is our trust”
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

Personally, I couldn’t care less if there’s a sign saying “God Bless America” on a post office. Just like I couldn’t care less if our money says “In God We Trust.” I don’t, and that’s fine. Seeing that on a penny isn’t going to all of a sudden force me to go to church. I’m secure in my atheism, my lack of faith isn’t threatened by a word on a banner, and my sensibilities are not offended by that word. There’s no right to be offended, no matter what the social justice warrior howler monkeys may try to tell you.

So if the Special Snowflake is truly offended by that sign, by making a petty mountain out of an inconsequential molehill, it’s now going to be seeing that word a lot more than what it bargained for.

The butthurt Snowflake broke a cardinal rule of living in society: don’t be a dickhead. So now, it’ll have to deal with the consequences.

A tale of two Uber riders

6 Comments

This is the tale of two Uber riders.

One is a 30-year-old doctor named Anjali Ramkissoon, who apparently got drunk a few days ago, called an Uber, and after attempting to grab a car ordered by another customer, physically assaulted the driver. The customer who ordered the Uber recorded the altercation, and it was more than damning. In the video, Ramkissoon is seen trying to knee the driver in the groin, cursing at him, getting into his car, tossing stuff out of the window, and screaming at the driver to get into the car.

Embarrassing drunk girl in tight, white shorts and flip-flops, flipping her hair and acting like a spoiled brat.

The second Uber rider is Benjamin Golden. He was a Taco Bell executive, who got shitfaced in California – too wrecked to even give the driver directions – and who upon being instructed to leave the car, attacked the Uber driver. Viciously.

Both videos went viral. Both individuals claim to be really sorry for their actions. Both asked for forgiveness.

Anjali-Ramkissoon-1-1Ramkissoon has been placed on administrative leave after the video went viral. She publicly apologized and paid for the damages. “I’m here to own up to what I did, taking responsibility for it and asking for forgiveness,” she said, and the Uber driver accepted her apology and declined to press charges.

Golden, who was fired from his executive position at Taco Bell after the incident, also issued a tearful apology to the Uber driver whom he attacked, asking for a face-to-face meeting so he could issue the apology in person, but the driver Edward Caban was too scared to meet Golden. And rightly so! Despite the tearful apology, the attack was violent, sudden, and unprovoked, and Caban has filed a claim against Golden for $25,000 for assaulting him.

Well, it doesn’t end there, because after Caban refused to meet him in person, Golden went full douchebag and has filed a $5 million lawsuit against the Uber driver.

You read that right. Five. Million. Dollars.

goldenGolden claimed that Caban illegally recorded him, because in California, it is a crime to record or eavesdrop on any conversation in a private, confidential setting, so he’s suing the driver for $5 million.

This dude passed full retard and drilled directly down to full turnip. The idea that you’re in a “confidential setting” on a public road, in a vehicle with glass windows, with other cars driving by is not just stupid. It’s congealed donkey smegma stupid.

And instead of just paying damages and moving on with his life, this sniveling bucket of monkey spunk, decided to try to bully the guy whom he viciously and violently attacked by suing him for an obscene amount of money!

Because “overwhelming media coverage” of the video has caused “severe emotional distress, humiliation, anxiety, fear, pain and suffering and the loss of his job” chapped meat curtains, bro! I wonder if he’s ever tried NOT being a belligerent hemorrhoid.

The $5 million lawsuit certainly makes his teary apology look a bit… disingenuous, doesn’t it?

No matter what the outcome of this ridiculous waste of court resources, the video is already out there.

No matter what, Golden will probably be relegated to working in a Taco Bell drive-thru, because I can’t imagine any company will hire him after seeing him physically assault another human being in a drunken rage.

Look, these jobs aren’t easy. Whether they’re driving a taxi or an Uber, these guys take the risk every day of some shit canoe going off on them, or worse yet, physically assaulting them. I think a lot of people forget that these guys are human beings and think they’re there as peons – as servants to abuse and berate at will. Is it any wonder Caban carried pepper spray and used it to protect himself against this arrogant, entitled, violent douche? Is it any wonder a Florida Uber driver violated company policy by carrying a firearm and wound up defending his own life with it?

The first Uber rider paid for the damages she caused, apologized, and went on with her life.

The second Uber rider doubled down on the stupid, and will be forever memorialized on the internet as that guy.

Don’t be that guy.

Generation Stupid

37 Comments

Welcome to Generation Stupid. This generation isn’t new, and it’s not based on age, political affiliation, or education level.

No, Generation Stupid is your low information voter.

It’s your Facebook friend who finds a badly researched meme and posts it as fact.

It’s the numbskull who shares an opinion piece published in a biased source as evidence of his contentions.

It’s the dumbass who thinks InfoWars, Mother Jones, Think Progress, RedFlagNews, and Conservative Tribune are real news sources, and not simply inflammatory garbage meant to spoon feed those who are too busy lazy to do their research their daily dose of outrage.

Because it’s much easier to get angry and post a short picture with some words on it expressing your anger than it is to examine the facts and post nuance.

Generation Stupid has forgotten the meaning of “primary sources.”

Generation Stupid has no comprehension of the difference between editorial and actual news.

Generation Stupid doesn’t bother researching the facts that are listed in a meme. They just like the simplicity of a picture with a pithy caption on it, no matter how dubious.

Generation Stupid also doesn’t bother looking at the date of the panic-inducing non-story in the dubious source. The issue could be 5 years old and already resolved, but Generation Stupid needs OUTRAGE, and therefore, it will share these stories as if they’re new or different.

millsGeneration Stupid will share something like this and blame the Obama Administration for allegedly plea bargaining a gun trafficker down to probation and no jail time.

Generation Stupid will not stop to do a search on Dontray Mills.

Generation Stupid will not  read that a judge with a history of making controversial decisions, who was appointed by President George H.W. Bush was the one who gave Mills a slap on the wrist. Because OBAMA! And GUNZ! And DERP!

Generation Stupid will merely share the meme and watch as other members of Generation Stupid share it too, spreading the plague of stupid across social media and the Internet.

Generation Stupid will also share a dumb Occupy Democrats meme about refrigerator safety and disingenuously compare it to gun safety. If you haven’t heard of the Occutards, they’re the spawn of the Occupy *insert entity hated by socialists here* who have decided to infest the mainstream Democratic party. Because NRA! EVIL! And DERP!

Generation Stupid doesn’t have time to check sources. It doesn’t matter of RT is a propaganda arm of the Kremlin, affectionately known as KGB TV.

Generation Stupid doesn’t care that ZeroHedge is written by a bunch of conspiritards, whose goal appears to be to foment financial panic, rather than report objectively. Checking for corroboration is too hard.

Generation Stupid doesn’t care that “Natural News” is filled with anti-science dimwittery, and is not even close to being considered “news” by anyone with an IQ above room temperature.

Generation Stupid doesn’t care that the latest outrage they share is clickbait meant to inflame, not inform. Generation Stupid certainly doesn’t care that the clickbait title is misleading and has nothing to do with truth.

stupidSee, Generation Stupid doesn’t care about facts. Generation Stupid cares about fomenting anger to promote its cause. Generation Stupid loves hyperbole and outright lies. Anything to support its political agenda. That’s when Generation Stupid shares memes such as this. Because comparing your political adversary to the world’s most repugnant terrorist is way more important than actual facts.

Look, I get that none of us are perfect. And sometimes we do fall for clickbait manufactured for outrage. It happens. We’re only human after all. I’m a sucker for puppies.

But I also know that in our society, we want everything quickly. We want the fast food of news. We want the McDonalds of information. News soundbites are getting shorter. News reporters go wide rather than deep. “Tl;dr” (too long;didn’t read) has become a thing, because “ain’t nobody got time for that.” It takes too long to research. It takes too long to understand context. It takes too long to find a corroborative source for something that appears too outrageous to be true.

X-All-The-Y

all the props to Allie for the artwork.

And facts don’t matter to Generation Stupid anyway, whose mascot seems to be this guy. They want one small photo and one short soundbite to describe their political views, which gives them the depth of a teaspoon and the IQ of moldy restaurant leftovers. All they need is the outrage.
Why read, when you can rage?

Why learn, examine, and explore, when you can read a poster?

Why verify? The Internet said so; it must be true!

Well… here it is. The dumbest thing I’ve seen all day.

10 Comments

The following bit of retardery comes to you from a Facebook page called “Occupy Democrats.” This horde of simpleminded halfwits is composed of unwashed hippie imbeciles who strive to create the unholy spawn of the Occupy (bowel) Movement and the Obama Administration. In other words, these dolts are so far left, they lick the desiccated taint of Marx, while pushing the progtard agenda through ignorant memes.

Witness the stooopid.

fridte

At first, I was speechless. I couldn’t believe anyone would take this meme seriously.

Then I thought this HAD to be a troll post, and then I read the comments, which were nearly as stupid as the meme itself.

Then I wondered where this text was to be found in the Bill of Rights: A well fed populace being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear refrigerators shall not be infringed.

Maybe I missed it somewhere, but no… that ain’t it. It’s just not in there.

So apparently, refrigerator ownership is not a constitutionally protected right. Go figure.

Then I read the Refrigerator Safety Act. Yes, there really is such a thing.

Household refrigerators shall be equipped with a device enabling the doors thereof to be opened easily from the inside, either by the application of an outwardly directed force to the inside of the door or by the rotation of a knob similar to a conventional doorknob. The device shall not render the refrigerator unsatisfactory for the preservation of food under any or all normal conditions of use.

Well, gosh! There’s nothing in the Refrigerator Safety Act about limiting who is allowed to purchase a refrigerator, doing background checks on a refrigerator purchase, buying a refrigerator from a licensed refrigerator dealer, trying to ban extra large and cold refrigerators, banning automatic ice makers unless you have a license from the government to own one, or limiting the capacity and functionality of the refrigerator. If that was the case, I’m sure the National Refrigerator Association would have screamed bloody murder!

Most guns already have a device that ensures they can’t be fired when engaged. For the Glock and a few others, it’s your booger hook, but many have what’s called a safety. And Glocks do have an internal safety that makes them drop safe and only fire if the actual trigger is pulled. It does not render the gun unsatisfactory for its normal conditions of use, which a ban or the so-called “smart technology” would.

In 1985 a study published in Public Health Reports looked at the data from California about how many children between 0 and 9 years old died from suffocation in a fridge or freezer. The researchers found that between 1960 and 1981, such deaths fell by half, from just over 1 child per million to less than 0.5 children per million. That’s a little over 20 years of data.

According to the CDC, between 1999 and 2014 (the furthest back I could access that data), accidental firearm deaths of children between 0 and 9 years old were .9 per million. That’s less than one child per million of the same age.

But hey… if you want to pass a law that would require consumers to safely dispose of their guns, go right ahead.

Just leave the rest of my rights alone, filthy hippies!

Meet the new gun control – same as the old gun control, but with more dumb

30 Comments

For those of you worried about new White House Executive Orders on gun control, I have news for you: they’re just as useless, redundant, and ignorant as the gun control regulations already on the books, but the Kabuki is useful for the gun grabbers who are trying to claim that they’re implementing “commonsense” regulations on “gun safety.”

Let me assure you that the new EOs have nothing to do with gun safety. They will do nothing to make you safer. They will do nothing to reduce “gun violence” (as if that specific form of violence is somehow worse than any other form of violence). They will do nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

spn_baboon-e1283142065853As a matter of fact, I’m pretty sure that whoever wrote these EOs, has the reading comprehension skills of a stoned baboon.

The White House uses tough language (and by that, I mean bold text) to tell us that “it doesn’t matter where you conduct your business—from a store, at gun shows, or over the Internet: If you’re in the business of selling firearms, you must get a license and conduct background checks.”

Let’s remember that if you’re in the “business of selling firearms,” you need to have a Federal Firearms License or an FFL. If you’re an FFL, you have to run a background check on anyone wishing to purchase a firearm, regardless of where you sell your wares, including gun shows or stores.

And speaking of which…

Let’s talk about the burning stupid of emphasizing your obligations to do so if you’re selling guns on the Internet. Maybe the White House isn’t aware of this, but one can’t simply buy a gun on the Internet. There’s no GetYourEvilDeathToolHere.com from which you can purchase a firearm. An online purchase from an FFL has to be sent to an FFL in your area, where you will fill out paperwork and receive the prerequisite anal probe to prove that you’re not a criminal or reprobate, and if your background check comes back clean, you will get your gun.

Mike explains further.

Exempt from the “only through a dealer” or “only via common carrier for handgun” are certain collectibles known as Curios and Relics, which ATF keeps a list of, or, are 50 years old an IN THEIR ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION (not with a different stock, shorter barrel, etc).  Any mods reset the 50 year clock for purpose of being a C&R only. There is an FFL, the Type 03, for C&R collectors. If you don’t have a C&R FFL and receive one, you can do as you wish within the law. If you have a C&R FFL, you can receive such items directly by mail or carrier to your home of record, and must keep a log.  If you have logged the weapon as a C&R you MAY NOT modify it with aftermarket stocks, etc, that change its format.

See what I mean when I say “redundant?”

Let’s be honest here. What they really want is to ban private sales. They want to control how you dispose of your property.

Now, I won’t even address the “Dear daddy government – can I please have permission to exercise my basic right? Pretty please? Look, I’ve submitted all my paperwork!” lunacy. I’ve addressed it many times before. Suffice it to say that asking the state permission to exercise a right demeans and destroys the fundamental meaning of that word, but this douchery in the name of “making our communities safe” is so superfluous and transparently lacking any common sense, that it’s tough not to ridicule it.

Speaking of ridicule…

Throwing more money at the ATF to help enforce our voluminous gun laws is laughable, considering this is the same agency that tossed illegally purchased guns over the Mexican border to violent drug cartels. But hey, we need to look like we’re doing something. That’s the important thing!

I do want to address the directive instructing the Departments of Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security to promote the use of so-called “smart gun” technology, because I think it could be an extremely dangerous idea. Imagine, if you would, the following scenario:

You’re a law enforcement officer engaged in a shootout with a drug cartel. Your buddy gets hit, but you’re still in the thick of the fight. You run out of ammo, and your spare mags are empty too, so you reach for your buddy’s gun in order to continue shooting…

Click.

Nothing happens, because your buddy’s gun is only coded to his biometrics.

Now, imagine you’re a Soldier deployed to the Middle East, and you’re engaged in a gun battle with some Islamic terrorist combatants. Same scenario.

Click.

Nothing happens, because you’re buddy’s rifle is coded to accept his fingerprints only.

I assess this is part of the reason why law enforcement agencies have told those pushing “smart guns” to pound sand. Reliability is another issue.

Sensors and fingerprint readers need to work even when covered in sweat, dirt, or blood — and once the weapon is picked up and ready to be fired, it needs to work no matter the situation.

“In a combat situation, a shooting situation, there’s real confusion and chaos. It’s not like TV,” Pasco said. “Often times they’re very close quarters. We want a police officer to be able to take any gun, his partner’s gun, a criminal’s gun, any gun, and use that gun to his advantage. If he is in a scuffle, and he gets a criminal’s weapon and it’s useless to him, we’ve got a safety problem.”

In other words, this isn’t and shouldn’t be a political issue. Petty tyrants in three-piece suits protected by armed men willing to take a bullet for them have no business dictating to the very people who are on the front lines, who risk their lives every day, and who have made a commitment to defend the very Constitution on which said petty tyrants now are dropping an enormous, steaming turd, what tools they should use to do those jobs.

Dana Loesch does a yeoman’s job of fisking the entire pile of droppings here. I won’t duplicate those efforts.

I am, however, predicting an increase in the sales of guns and ammunition coming in 3… 2… 1…

They’ll give a doctorate to anyone nowadays, or adventures in Twitter land

6 Comments

I don’t use Twitter very often. This blog auto-populates to my account, and every once in a while, when the mood strikes me, I’ll engage with the particularly egregious who have the potential to amuse, or who just say something so obtuse, that it cannot go unchallenged. This was my intent when I questioned a particular Twitter user about her contention that the Telnaes cartoon portraying Ted Cruz’s little daughters as organ grinder’s monkeys was funny.

What ensued was a conversation that was so absurd, that at times I couldn’t believe it was real! It started with her claiming that the Univision incident was “criminal.” The response continued with an absurd fashion criticism comparison, and concluded with the claim that the First Lady can’t abuse her power to ensure an “art critic gets cut.” Of course, when a television talk host makes such an ostensibly racist comparison about the First Lady, Mrs. Obama doesn’t have to do anything. Her position alone ensures sufficient outrage that forced the station to fire him and prompted him to write a letter of apology, lest his career swirl the drain. But that Anna Faktorovich doesn’t acknowledge those facts, and the subsequent conversation went something like this (paraphrased, with my commentary in red):

Me (in response to her “fashion criticism” comment): Crack pipe. Put it down.

Anna: I don’t drink alcohol and have never used any illegal substances. You’re the one laughing at people getting fired…

Me (completely flummoxed at that contention): Dafuq? You’re obviously stoned. Where did I laugh at anyone? Идиотка (translation from Russian: idiot)

Anna: WAAAAAAH! You insulted my Russian heritage!

I had looked up this person and discovered that she was born in Moscow and is the owner of some obscure publishing house. I figured speaking to her in Russian was a nice touch. I also repeated my question, because I still couldn’t figure out where in the world she got the idea that I laughed at anyone getting fired, but apparently, Anna doesn’t like to answer questions when she’s caught lying. Instead she decided the best way to prove she wasn’t an idiot wasn’t by defending her position, but rather waving her sheepskin for all to see.

It’s quite obvious they’ll give anyone a Doctorate these days, because this one is… well… not the brightest candle on the menorah.

The next thing Anna tried to do is explain away her “fashion criticism” comparison. I will reconstruct this word spew for you from her Twitter monologue. You’ll love it.

First, you claim that you don’t understand fashion criticism; if so, you should not be attempting to criticize cartoonists or other fashion critics. (I, of course, claimed no such thing. I actually don’t give a rat’s ass about fashion criticism. I merely thought it was inappropriate to the conversation.) 

If you had read even short snippets from red-carpet “best” and “worst” lists, you would notice that, as in the example I provided before, somewhat racial descriptions and insults regarding weight, hair color, and all other imperfections are essential to this linguistic genre. (Thank goodness I actually have real literature to read, instead of wasting my time on “Red Carpet” snark.)

Let’s look at this example from:  A. “pregnant… butterfly-print design still looks more night gown than red carpet gown” (joke about weight of pregnant woman and just mean) B. Mamet: “poorly fitted… on the red carpet!… pink frosted cake…” (classist, joke about weight) C. “slashed in a freak accident?” (joke about potential assault). I could go on, but I really dislike reading these. (And yet, she spent an inordinate amount of time doing so in order to – unsuccessfully – prove her point) 

To sum up, negative “worst-dressed” fashion criticism and political cartoons are supposed to be brutal. It’s at the root of their generic formula; a topic I published a couple of McFarland books about. (Note the immediate reference to her alleged published work in order to bolster faltering credibility.)

Secondly, I stated that could not retaliate because she had power, not because she did not. Humans did not evolve from “apes” but we did evolve in Africa and at some point all humans had black skin before some developed a pigment deformation. The film “Planet of the Apes” is an example of idiotic Hollywood mutations of reality. People cannot devolve into apes in the future because we never evolved from them. If somebody had given this film some brutal criticism in pre-release, maybe they could’ve improved this. (Fiction. I wasn’t sure whether I should inform her that Star Wars wasn’t real either, and that a wookie is not actually a real species. I also wasn’t sure if she understood the concept of humans’ and apes’ common ancestors, but I didn’t want to confuse the poor girl.)

  said that she looked like she was in the “cast” of “Planet of the Apes.” Most of the cast members in that film were white, so why would this be interpreted as a racist joke? (Well, gosh! That’s OK, then!) He wrote a letter of apology stating that his criticism was directed at “the work of the [make up] artist, which left much to be desired…” The “apes” in the “Planet” were in costumes… unless you thought they were real? Obama had so much makeup put on her that Figueroa objected that she looked like she was built up to appear on a show about “apes” of the future. (I wonder if the mental contortions hurt.)

racistIt’s because you fail to read into the details of a story and judge things based on your own inherent racist assumptions that you can find in the first gay man to be featured on Univision. (BUZZZZZ! Typical SJW fallback on racism!) You apparently have not seen Cruz’s ad because his children look whiter than me. So, the monkey symbolism in no way refers to their race but rather to their father’s immoral misuse of their adorable faces for his own political gain. (I also pointed out that politicians use their families in political ads all the time, such as Hillary Clinton’s “abuela” ad with her granddaughter, but Anna refused to acknowledge that fact.)

He threatened that the would lose its funding, which they need because of their dwindling readership if they did not remove the cartoon; that’s why they took it down. (Gee. They employ partisan hacks who attack little children. Wonder why their readership is on the decline!)

If all of that still confuses you, let me know and I’ll write a full article on this topic and will post it on my site.

Yeahno. I’ll pass on the full article, especially if it’s filled with the types of mental contortions present in the above spew. First she claimed that what Univision did was criminal. Then she claimed that racism is not really racism, because political cartoons (much like fashion criticism) are supposed to be mean and awful. Then she ignored the fact that the very office of the First Lady prompts the type of response (whether warranted or not) that will see a medium react to accusations of racism by firing the offender. And THEN, she claimed that Ted Cruz “threatened” the Washington Post, because the already-beleaguered paper relies on his advertising dollars.

This is what is considered a “threat” in the SJW world. If a newspaper runs a cartoon hostile to a candidate’s little children, and the candidate decides to take his ad dollars elsewhere, that’s apparently a threat, because the newspaper NEEDS that money!

Sense of entitlement much?

After I called Anna on her hypocrisy and lack of logical argumentation, her reply was typical. She trolled this site and accused me of lying about my degrees and veteran status, because apparently I don’t have a “single degree” listed on my site! Because that’s what you need on a personal blog – a CV!

At this point, I was convinced she was retarded and got her alleged PhD via some affirmative action program for slow women.

Anna: My credentials prove I’m not “retarded,” if you are is yet to be proven. If you’ve lied about having 2 degrees, you’re also a liar. (Uhhhhh… if you lied about your degrees, then you’re a lying liar who lies… or something.)

Me: Your lack of cognitive ability and comprehension skills do. As for my degrees, you’re welcome to do your research.

Anna: But… but… but… neither you nor Rob give your last names! How am I supposed to do my research, if you won’t spoon feed me information? (Kind of makes you wonder how she got a Doctorate, eh?)

Me: Not my problem, princess. See, princess – SOME of us don’t need to consistently hump our degrees to have thousands of readers. Some of us don’t have a miserable inferiority complex.

Anna: Well, if you check my website (gives URL), you’ll see I have lots of visitors, because I’m educated, and I have credentials. Because CREDENTIALS! Go visit my site! Go! I’ve had 183K visitors so far!

Me: Hmmmm. Yeah… I have 284K this year alone. Try again.

And then, Anna went full turnip.

Why is it that the world’s biggest morons are the ones waving their degrees around?

If this is the type of person Telnaes has defending her honor, or lack thereof, she’s in terrible trouble.

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: