Two of my favorite quotes from a brilliant writer:
As societies grow decadent, the language grows decadent, too. Words are used to disguise, not to illuminate, action: you liberate a city by destroying it. Words are to confuse, so that at election time people will solemnly vote against their own interests.
All in all, I would not have missed this century for the world.
Real creative name, bro. I’m sick of this “wahhh misandry” shit. His whole post is asking about why I exclude men’s rights from my postings.
If you think misandry is the biggest problem facing society today, I hereby rechristen your reproductive organs, since you already claim we women have your collective balls in a jar, anon. For starters, if we had your balls in a jar, there would be no wage gap.
A conflict over the appropriate level of scrutiny which leads to a circuit split is one reason the Court took EPC cases in the past: resolving circuit splits is one of their most common reasons to grant certiorari.
Exactly. This is a big reason why I’m excited to see these cases progress. Besides the whole, you know, equality angle. I’m a legal nerd, too.
A Mitt Romney spokesman reprimanded reporters traveling with the candidate on his six-day foreign trip this morning, telling them to “kiss my ass” after they shouted questions from behind a rope line.
As Romney left the site of the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Warsaw and walked toward his motorcade parked in Pilsudski Square, reporters began shouting questions from the line where campaign staffers had told them to stay behind, prompting traveling press secretary Rick Gorka to tell a group of reporters to “kiss my a**” and “shove it.”
He later apologized.
It’s the trifecta, guys. He pissed people off in the UK, Israel, and now Poland. I imagine this is now his default expression:
U.S. District Court Judge Vanessa L. Bryant today held in a federal case in Connecticut that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act — the federal definition of marriage — is unconstitutional… Federal judges in Massachusetts, California and New York also have found DOMA’s provision defining “marriage” and “spouse” as only being unions of one man and one woman in all federal laws unconstitutional.
Bryant — appointed to the bench by President George W, Bush on April 2, 2007 — found that laws that classify people based on sexual orientation should be subject to heightened scrutiny by courts — as the Department of Justice and plaintiffs argued in the case — but found the provision of the 1996 law unconstitutional “even under the most deferential level of judicial scrutiny.”
In her decision in the case, Pedersen v. Office of Personnel Management, Bryant found:
In sum, having considered the purported rational bases proffered by both BLAG and Congress and concluded that such objectives bear no rational relationship to Section 3 of DOMA as a legislative scheme, the Court finds that no conceivable rational basis exists for the provision. The provision therefore violates the equal protection principles incorporated in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
This is a big deal, y’all. With several pressing cases in different Federal Court Districts, the chances of the Supreme Court reviewing DOMA goes up — the only hitch is that there hasn’t been much conflicts in the circuits, except regarding levels of scrutiny. Here’s why that’s important.
“…we blame our economic ills on organized labor. We gut social programs so we can give tax breaks to billionaires. We do nothing, as the planet burns. We gut our public schools and state universities at the behest of the elite, who send their kids to private schools the rest of us can’t afford. We numb our pain watching sports on TV, while we inhale processed food and guzzle soft drinks that are poisoning us. And we arm ourselves to the teeth, bring our guns to the bar, lash out at those who seek to limit the carnage, and, yes, lionize the shooter of an unarmed kid who wore a hoody and “looked suspicious.”—
I can’t tell if by “committed” Fox means rearrested or actually found guilty of additional charges, but either way that’s significantly lower than the 67.5% of parolees in 1994 who were rearrested within three years of their release, or the 46.9% of the same parolees who were reconvicted.
It’s almost like undocumented people are less likely to commit crimes than citizens and residents.
“I am telling women to not be afraid to go out wearing their veils. And by paying the fines, I am neutering the law, rendering it inefficient and pointless, showing that it doesn’t work. It is a humiliation for the politicians.”—
Rachid Nekkaz has set up a million euro fund to pay fines for women who choose to wear the full Islamic veil in countries, like France, where it is against the law to do so in public.
“Oh yes, this will REALLY get her. I will follow this clearly feminist-oriented blog, then click ‘unfollow,’ then, THEN, I will let her know that I unfollowed her and call her a bitch. And I will do it anonymously, because I’m so clever and stealthy”
YE GODS! You’ve uncovered the anon master plan. Nothing will ever be the same!
Meg, I don't know how you do it. I just don't know how you keep your sanity when you get all these mind-boggling anons. If I were you, I would have catapulted myself into the sun a long time ago. I just have all the respect for you. You're consistently witty and very educated with your answers. So just all the kudos to you. Here, just have them all!
Caffeine, nicotine, boxed wine, and rage are all helpful. I feel like it’s a public service to respond to them. Usually.
And thank you so much! I love nice anons. Y’all can come over and play any time you want!
Blackface is a fucking joke and everyone needs to relax about it. It's a fucking favor to those lil niggas that anyone even wants to look like them for a while. Sorry babe, it's the truth. Get off the internet and back to being a house-wife or something.
I mean, here's the thing for me - even if this girl wasn't *trying* to be offensive (which I'm still not entirely convinced is something she cared about), once she realized that it ended up being such, why aggravate the situation further by, A.) making excuses, and B.) trying to make it more about her? I'm just so genuinely confused by the whole situation and saddened that anything of this nature is still an occurrence.
This anon gets it. I don’t think she cared until people actually started retweeting and reblogging.
im a friend of this whole thing and literally you guys are taking this to a new extreme. ive asked around to even the HIGHSCHOOLERS and their PARENTS and they have never heard of the "black face" so to take this and exaggerate it is really stupid. and no one even mentioned that it was racist until an hour later. so you can stop now because she is the most innocent person and didn't know that it would be taken offensively
Wait wait wait…
Never heard of the “black face”?!
I like how you’re putting this in quotes as if it doesn’t exist…
You’re trolling, right? You asked all their PARENTS with a capital “OMG!” and no one knew?
Sigh… We’re not exaggerating, pardner. Truly. Calling out racism is becoming a regular public service around these parts. And by these parts, I mean the internets.
There are some really unintelligent people on the Amazon forums tonight.
I just imagined an Internet Weather Reporter standing in front of a map of online communities and pointing to it while saying this, followed by “Meanwhile, the snark index on Tumblr is forecasted to remain at moderate levels through tomorrow afternoon.”
I kinda have to agree with the Anon this time. I googled crying black girl and that was the third result image in google images.
But then why use “crying black girl” at all? Especially to represent my white, over-privileged teenage disappointment over wasted ice cream. Maybe I’m overthinking this, or I’m not getting it in some way. But my first thought would NEVER be to use something like that, especially if I were trying be funny. I use reaction pics and gifs all the time…
But then again, I’m not @katieisperfect.
Charge of ridiculous offensiveness still stands with the other tweets, the court takes these further motions under advisement.
I don't think the tweet about ice cream was malicious. In all probability that girl does not read The Washington Times and did not know where the pic came from. If I saw the pic around, I'd think it was a normal reaction pic or something. I'm not defending the girl's actions or tweets, but I really think that tweet was harmless. Not appropriate now that the source is known, but still. Who honestly looks up the source for every reaction pic to make sure it's PC?
It may not be malicious, but it’s deliberately obtuse. If she didn’t know she was being racist, then why retweet all the bullshit about reverse racism?
And that’s not really a reaction pic — I suppose this is subjective, but I look at that picture, and I see a young child in genuine emotional pain. I’m curious how she would stumble on that pic as well, if it WASN’T on a story about human trafficking. Here’s what it’s connected to via image search.
I honestly think she’s one of these folks that believes race doesn’t matter any longer, so if she appropriates a crying black child to represent her disappointment, that’s okay.
It’s all in the username. “Katieisperfect”. You nailed it…she’s probably been taught from day 1 that she’s a precious and unique snowflake, and can do no wrong. How *dare* you shake up her worldview by calling her out on her actions, and expecting her to take responsibility for herself? Don’t you KNOW who she IS? :sigh:
It’s “adorable” how she acts like she’s the only white person who has ever been on the receiving end of some slurs. Once again, precious and unique snowflake.
As for why we’re “wasting time” on her…her age is irrelevant. People need to learn accountability sometime, and if you ask me, she’s old enough to know better. I don’t condone the threats and vile insults, but there’s nothing wrong with holding a person responsible for their actions / statements, especially when you post them publicly on the Internet.
In other words, if you’re being dumb on the internet, don’t be shocked when others call you out. Anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of public opinion, right or wrong, especially if you insist on defending something that is obviously, terribly wrong.
I love puppies. The point was simply that puppies, lima beans, and Romney would all be equally as effective as presidents. Well, actually, a puppy would probably be better than Romney. Would make voters happier.
Plus, we can tell a puppy to be quiet and if trained properly, it obeys.
Please don’t compare Romney to lima beans. I love lima beans and they are pretty good for you (maybe? I’m actually not sure.) Romney on the other hand…. well he just sucks. I think lima beans would be quite offended at the comparison :)
Okay, so I apologize to the sentient lima beans. You’re right.
Okay it's obvious you don't like Romney but you could give him a chance. Duh. Obama already got to be president and failed.
Obama got to be president because people voted for him and he was awarded Electoral College votes, and both of his numbers exceeded John McCain’s totals. It wasn’t like there’s some lottery or musical chairs. If the best Mittens’ supporters can do is just “C’mon, give the guy a chance!” — well, then Mittens is boned.
Mitt Romney seems to be laboring under the impression that whatever he says in a foreign country will—like a weekend in Las Vegas—somehow stay in that foreign country.
Either that or he figures nobody back home is paying any attention. Speaking today to a small group of Israeli contributors to his campaign, the GOP presidential candidate—and supposed sworn enemy of government controlled healthcare—had kind words for the success of Israel’s healthcare system:
"When our health care costs are completely out of control. Do you realize what health care spending is as a percentage of the GDP in Israel? 8 percent. You spend 8 percent of GDP on health care. And you’re a pretty healthy nation"
Does he listen to himself talk? Or does he just say words? I am 100% convinced his staff and advisers hate him or something. It’s like An Idiot Abroad: When Mittens Attacks.
I mean, if he wants to campaign on socialized medicine, that’s cool too… But I’m pretty sure he just figured what happens in Israel, stays in Israel. Except internets, Mitt. There’s always the internet.
Basically a typical White person’s one-dimensional take on race and racism.
Here’s a mini-rundown of everything that’s wrong with that note. I’m doing this so you don’t have to.
The bitch put blackface in quotes like the shit doesn’t exist.
She used the “don’t judge a book by it’s cover” argument. (Pretty sure I can judge the shit out of your book when you put a white girl in BLACKFACE on the damn cover.)
She said, and I quote, “the premise is all too believable in the face of extreme global warming.” … The fuck?
Her explanation for the above statement: “If global warming results in a meltdown of the ozone layer many things would change, including the inability of those with little melanin in their skin to survive the blistering effects of increased deadly solar radiation. […] In Revealing Eden, “The Heat” (basically, skin cancer) wipes out the majority of people with light skin. Then people with dark skin are in the majority. In this future world, because those with fairer skin suffer a debilitating, perhaps fatal condition, they are considered second-rate.” …So white people will be oppressed because they get skin cancer. Right…
She also mentions that if the main character (the white bitch on the cover in blackface) doesn’t fine a “mate” by 18 she’ll be killed. Why will she be killed you ask? The fuck if I know! That shit doesn’t get explained.
She honestly believes that because her main character uses blackface because she “wishes” she was black and not to make fun of black people, that makes it a-ok. (Is you serious right now? You can’t wash away decades upon decades of historical context just because you wished really hard.)
She uses the term “blacks” instead of black people. (I AM NOT A GOD DAMN ADJECTIVE!)
Her explanation for the coals and pearls bs? “Imagine a gritty, post-apocalyptic world where all that matters is survival. What good will a pearl do you when luxury items have no use? Coal has energy, fire, and real value. It is durable and strong, not easily crushed like a pearl. Pearl is a pejorative term here. Coals are admired.” Once again, historical context homie! You can’t make that shit disappear just because you want it to.
She admits to turning the black love interest of her blackface wearing main character into “the first hybrid man-beast.” (Say it with me now kids: HISTORICAL CONTEXT! I mean shit, it’s not like black folks, more specifically black men, have been historically compared to and used like pack animals! FUCKING REALLY!)
In book two (yes there’s a god damn book two) she wants the blackface wearing bitch and her half-human/half-animal, walking stereotype of a black man to “restart the human race like Adam and Eve.”
She professes that she “abhors racism” and wished to “turn racism on its head in order to portray its horrors and its inevitable road to violence.” (…And you couldn’t do that without the blackface and stereotypes?)
She then goes on to gush about all the awards she’s won. (Those plaques on your wall don’t mean shit boo boo.)
She ends this clusterfuck with a quote from Emily Dickinson.
There you have it. Victoria Foyts bullshit all summed up in 13 points. I read it so you didn’t have to.