You are viewing azzy23

Mlle. Bébé Gottbach, Ph.D
.:.:::.:. .::: .:...
Back Viewing 0 - 30  

We're still getting all the photos uploaded, but here's a small taste of the Christmas wedding extravaganza!

Pictures!Collapse )


I was about to head to bed and thought... why not? :)

How is everyone? I hope you're all well, you gorgeous flying monkeys.

I'm fabulous. The wedding is planned and paid for, and it isn't even December yet. The dress should arrive in the middle of next month, but I've still got to make my veil. I made the daleks for the top of the cake, so I'm pretty pleased with that:

 photo daleks.jpg

Mostly I'm just pleased it's paid for. Not having debt rocks, and I highly suggest you all give it a go.

Hmm... let's see. Had cancer (again), but I got better (again). Dogs are great, house is great, not living in Texas during the Summer is TOTALLY great, the fella is extra great, everything is pretty much great.

Did have one funny thing happen. I had a painful lump in my left armpit, so I told my doc. Of course everyone freaked out (which is good, because that means I *can't* freak out). I had all the tests and stuff done. During the Ultrasound of the armpit, the radiologist says she needs to bring in a doc. Now I'm a little worried. Doc looks at it for a minute, then moves the wand to my arm a bit and asks me to flex my biceps. I do, and he says (in this very appreciative tone) "Wow, check that out! Been lifting weights, huh?"

I have, and I'm pleased with myself, so I preened a bit and said, "Why yes, I have, just a bit."

He says, "Yeah, I know. You've torn your pec major." The "dumbass" was very loud, despite being unspoken. So yes, I have been lifting weights. And it turns out, I'm freakishly strong, but only in short bursts. And until I tear a major muscle and don't even realize it. So yeah, no heavy lifting for at least a month. Well done, asshat. :)

I'm off to bed now. Tomorrow is massage day! (We've got about 9 massages each to use up before they expire)

I read something the other day about how the media coverage of tragedies is sexist.

At first, I thought... oh come on, are we just looking to be offended here? This is a tragedy, it's not about the ladies (unless it's actually about the ladies, right?).

But then I went about my business... and I started thinking about Nancy Lanza. I've been thinking one thing about Nancy Lanza for a couple hours now.

What was the last thought she had?

Read more...Collapse )

I want a ball
I want a party
Pink macaroons and a million balloons
And performing baboons and ...
Give it to me
Rrhh rhhh

I want the world
I want the whole world
I want to lock it all up in my pocket
It's my bar of chocolate
Give it to me

I want today
I want tomorrow
I want to wear 'em like braids in my hair
And I don't want to share 'em

I want a party with room fulls of laughter
Ten thousand tons of ice cream
And if I don't get the things I am after
I'm going to scream!

I want the works
I want the whole works
Presents and prizes and sweets and surprises
Of all shapes and sizes
And now
Don't care how
I want it now

Current Mood: amusedamused


I get what she's saying, I do. I don't understand why she still frames it in a zero-sum paradigm though.

Her son being excluded from "girly" things isn't the fault of positive messaging for girls. Rather, all this consumable content is gendered, and usually favoring boys, so positive content for girls tends to be aimed directly at girls. Boy stuff is just that way by default. Which is sort of the definition of living in a patriarchy.

Here's the thing. Instead of making the statement that pro-girl content is necessarily anti-boy (some of it is, won't lie) and feeling sad that your wee enlightened boy (that kid is gonna need SOOOO much therapy y'all) feels excluded from Girltown, I posit the following:

1) In the country of men, can there never ever be a Girlstown? Just a single square inch that really is just for girls?
2) When the majority of metaphoric doo-dads is created directly for boys, and girls have to fight just to be a part of it... why are we somehow expected to design our measly 2 doo-dads to be boy friendly? That courtesy is never extended to us.
3) Why can't you find some programming that isn't gendered and let your kid watch that? I mean... isn't part of parenting sort of purposely choosing content which delivers messages you want your child to learn?
4) If your child comes to you and says that all boys are bad, maybe you should have a sit down and 'splain to him... and I'm just tossing this out, right? "All boys are NOT bad. Just that boy in that show. Everyone is different, and some people are good, and some are bad, and some are girls and some are boys."
5) The whole part where she talks about her SHOCK about having a boy, and her ideas that he'll be super-aggressive because blah blah booshit booshit booshit. Lady? That ain't Feminism.

Pro tip: Feminism isn't about men or boys. It's about women and girls. Feminism only extends to men and boys when men and boys participate in, and positively support, patriarchy.

Are there some Feminists that hate men? Sure! Just like there are religious people who molest children, and mothers who shouldn't have custody of their kids, and exceptions to every rule. By and large, however, mainstream Feminism is about one thing only: Ensuring the legal and social equality of women.

Oh, and FYI? Princess culture screws up girls, too.

I have to setup a LinkedIn profile this weekend. SIGH.

I'm not looking for a job, I mean, not outside of my own current department anyway. No, I've just been told TOO MANY TIMES lately that at this point in my career it's pathetic that I haven't done this yet. And it's true, it is. SIGH.

Indiana Republicans have introduced a bill that would require women seeking a medicinal abortion (IE: NOT a surgical procedure), they type of abortion that women less than 10 weeks pregnant get, have an ultrasound before AND after the procedure, and be forced to view and hear a fetal heartbeat.

Aside from this being YET ANOTHER bill that assumes women are too stupid to know what a fetus is, and yet somehow smart enough to raise a child, it's punitive rape. See, in order to find a fetal heartbeat before 10 weeks, you'd have to have a probe shoved inside your vagina. This is nothing more than a punishment, and as far as I can tell there is no exception for women who are pregnant as a result of being raped.

But really, here's the capper. This quote right here:
"Sue Swayze, the legislative director of Indiana Right to Life, [...] said she does not understand why it would be a problem to mandate transvaginal ultrasounds.

“I got pregnant vaginally," she said. "Something else could come in my vagina for a medical test that wouldn’t be that intrusive to me. So I find that argument a little ridiculous.”"

Got that? "Obviously you've put something up your vagina already, so why should it bother you to put other things up there?"

Well gosh Sue. Maybe I can answer that.Read more...Collapse )


I've been having the most *ridiculous* discussion today about gun laws.

After I remove all the factual inaccuracies (no, dear, the semi-automatic rifle did not exist before the Bill of Rights. There was a prototype of a predecessor in AUSTRIA, but even that was nothing like an AR 15), we get down to this question:

Why am I not legally allowed to own a nuclear bomb? Why is there no outrage from the pro-gun side of the fence about me not being allowed to own a nuclear bomb?

For what it's worth, I don't *want* to own a nuclear bomb, but my point here is... some weapons are not legally allowed to be owned by civilians, and nobody has a problem with that. Why?

And why can't the gun discussion also include a discussion of PURPOSE? Why can't we discuss various types of guns and what their realistic purpose is? For example, an AR 15 is a shitty gun for home protection. It's not that accurate for the average layman, and if you're a single woman living with her kids in an apartment, those bullets will go through the walls. For that scenario, a shotgun is obviously the more effective and correct gun. Why can't we talk about that?

Do people still use this?

Blah blah, getting married, blah blah, made it through a 2nd round of cancer, blah blah everyone in my family has died except my mom and sister, blah blah, work is awesome.

Yeah, that's pretty much it. :)

"We see in GLBT homicide, it's common to see overkill. Overkill is excessive wounding, more injury than what is necessary to cause the death. Or second, multiple types of wounds." - Dallas Drake, principal research at Center for Homicide Research

This quote comes specifically from some of the news coverage of the murder of Chrissie Bates, a transgender woman who was killed in Minneapolis in January. I wanted to post that quote, because I think it's important to know that hate crimes are generally excessively violent crimes, and those done to GLBT people are frankly some of the most excessively violent. Whether you support equality for GLBT people or not, surely nobody deserves to die like this?

"Complex homicidal violence generally means just that --not a single type of injury." These crimes aren't just murders, they are acts of violent hatred, the intent of which isn't just to snuff out a life but to utterly obliterate the victim, utterly remove their humanity and leave them a destroyed object.

Chrissie Bates is on my mind today. I didn't know her, but she's really on my mind. Her murderer was found guilty, but of 2nd degree murder. The "gay panic" defense got this violent killer a lesser sentence. At least he was still found guilty, so I guess that's progress.

I never really thought about supporting or not supporting GLBT rights. One of my 2 best friends all through childhood is a lesbian. One of my very closest friends through most of my adulthood is also a lesbian. I've had many friends that fall somewhere in the GLBT spectrum. We all have, whether we knew it or not. But all these people I love aren't the reason I support equality. It's the belief in the foundations of me that *nobody* deserves to die like that. No matter what they've done, and certainly not because of what they are. Bias, prejudice, racism, bigotry... they're not on or off, they exist in a spectrum. You might think you're ok because you only just have this tiny dislike of, I dunno, Chinese people. No biggie, it's not like you do or say anything, right? But you're keeping company with the people who do. You're chilling in their spectrum. And at the end of the day, it's the spectrum that needs to be destroyed.

Tags: ,
Current Mood: contemplativecontemplative

The gist: A woman is in court with a sick baby. The baby needs to eat, so she feeds it. She does this completely covered, but someone notices what she's doing under that blanket and sends a note to the judge. The judge calls her out, humiliates her, then ejects her from the courtroom despite the FACT that she was doing NOTHING ILLEGAL.


Seriously, I hope you all like boobs a lot, cause when I have a kid, I'm whipping these pups out whenever my kid needs to eat, and fuck the lot of ya.

Women's bodies are so objectified that it causes REAL danger. Breastfeeding is enjoying some popular resurgence right now, but back in my mom's day, women frequently didn't do it simply because it was gross or unladylike, and look at the adults walking around now? How many of them are sick? How many are constantly struggling with obesity? Not only is our body image fucked up, but our bodies themselves are too!

It's ok to enjoy breasts, but we need to reintroduce the enjoyment of their purpose. Yes, they feel good to touch, they look good to the eye, but they also feed our young, and that's pretty fucking gorgeous. If you've ever had a sister, wife, or dear friend who gave birth, and who sat down to feed her baby in front of you... it's breathtaking. There just isn't a moment, in my personal opinion, when a woman's beauty can outshine that moment. Her body creates, nurtures, and feeds a new life.

Respect the breast folks. Enjoy it for its fun reasons, but enjoy it for its potential too.

The gist: Four Georgia men who were part of a fringe militia group were arrested on Tuesday in what the Justice Department described as a plot to use guns, bombs and the toxin ricin to kill federal and state officials and spread terror.

What very few of the surprisingly few articles covering this DON'T mention? These would-be terrorists were inspired by a book written by a frequent Fox News "expert" called 'Absolved', which tells the sad tale of some 'patriots' who commit acts of terror to 'save' their country.

"There is no way for us, as militiamen, to save this country, to save Georgia, without doing something that’s highly, highly illegal: murder." That's what one of these bastards told an informant, which was recorded.

So yes, Virginia. White conservative guys *can* be terrorists.

Remember way back in the way back machine when everyone was all "zOMg Obama I LOVES YOU!!!" fanboy, and I was all "Yeah, he's cool, but I have these concerns!" And then I had that post with 719 REPLIES (!!!) because I called Mr. Foxy out on something sexist he said and like, 90% of the people on my flist shat themselves?

So yeah, he did some good stuff, true. But frequently that good stuff got done by trading the ladies (soooorry ladies, sorry about that total ban on abortive care in the affordable care act, which actually REMOVES a level of healthcare you previously had, but hey kiddo, buck up! We'll go to the mat for you next time, I totes promise...)

So the great non-white hope won, despite my *irrational* fears that he wouldn't stand with women, and look around. Across America, a woman's right to decide what happens to her own body is being stripped away. There is actually a bill up (in 3 states and at the federal level) to allow the "conscience clause" to extend to emergency care. Meaning a hospital can DENY life-saving emergency care to a women if it would cause harm to or terminate her pregnancy. So the gist is, Obama and the majority of the left, didn't stand with women. It appears we're standing all alone. And possibly dying.

To all the cynical types who say, "Sometimes a pet issue must be traded for the greater good!" I say, "Give me your fucking thyroid NOW!!!" Or maybe a kidney. GIVE ME A PIECE OF YOUR BODY, because you have no more right to it than *I* do. Let's trade your fucking organs, risk your life, see how you feel about that greater good.

And to all the haters... *tttthhhpppbbbttt* I fucking told you so, retards.

So I wanted to make something delicious and I decided to throw some mulled wine together with whatever I happened to have and see how it turned out.

Into a stock pot went:

1/2 a bottle of $3 merlot (Turning Oak)
1 bottle of $3 cab (also Turning Oak)
1 bottle of cheap sweet red
1/3 cup of sugar
1 tablespoon vanilla
3 large cinnamon sticks
2 tablespoons whole cloves
2 star anise pods (from when I make Bo Kho!)

I brought it all to a simmer, then turned it down just enough that it would stay warm. It's totally wrong, but it has got to be the best mulled wine I've had since the last time I went to Camden. My goal for the night so far has been to see how much of it I can drink!

Well. A lot has happened in the last year... The high points, I'm engaged (weird, huh?) and life is fantastic. Really really great. I'm 35 (yikes!) and it turns out everything worked out ok. *grin*

Everything else is just details.

There is a tiny possibility that, until my actual blog goes live... I might be back.

And while I do apologize for the ads, gentle readers, I haven't decided if I'm interested in paying and coming back full time yet. We shall see.

That said... I've got a lot to talk about tonight. I might just be making LJ cool again.

Get your reading glasses.

So it's looking like the Dems will hold the Senate, and the Reps will take the house. Strangely, I'm ok with this. Maybe because I kind of already figured it would happen, but I dunno. Part of me thinks... maybe these new guys WILL change some things? And change is what I voted for in 2008. To put it bluntly, I'm less concerned about who's directing the circus, and more concerned about the clowncar that is America getting to the center ring intact. So yeah, you guys in the House, it's your turn. Show me something good. Do something different. Make something better. And good luck with your base, because the Dems can tell you first hand how bad an idea it is to piss off your base. ;)

On the other side of things, I was really pleased to see Jerry Brown win in California. I think he was the best choice, honestly. I'm also really pleased to see that the citizens of California voted to keep their clean energy bill despite a disgusting amount of out of state money (predominantly from 2 Texas oil companies) to try and kill it. Whether you buy into global warming or not, oil is a finite resource that pollutes the air we breathe and the water we drink. It's very simple. We need air and water to survive. We do not need oil for that purpose.

While I'm not a big cheerleader for Reid, I was really pleased to see Angle get shut down. In fact, I was pleased to see that 4 of the 5 Tea Party wackadoos going for the Senate don't appear to have won (Buck vs. Bennett still hasn't announced, but they're predicting it for Bennett). I was glad to see that Alvin Greene did not win. Though I detest DeMint (seriously, what a douche-nozzle guys), I did not feel that Greene was ready for prime time. I admire the hell out of him, but I hated the way nobody took him seriously, and thought that trend would only continue.

I'm really glad O'Donnell lost, though I'm not looking forward to the inevitable contract she'll get from Fox News and the endless Palin-esque glorification of her dumbtardliness. Come on America, a turd is still a turd, no matter how much sugar you roll it in.

I figured Rand Paul would win, but it still turned my stomach a little. The guy's a phony and a self-serving liar. And he just ain't his daddy, folks. I didn't always agree with Ron Paul, but I respect a lot of things about him.

Cuomo beat Paladino (henceforth referred to as Palamino.... if you followed the race, you'll get it). The guy was a joke and a thug. So Cuomo, go do something already. Plskthx.

Overall, I think this race has been highly misinterpreted. It's not anti-incumbent sentiment. It's anti-Republican incumbent sentiment. In several races we saw incumbent Republicans (I'm looking at you, Crist) lose their seats to Tea Party candidates, some of whom were complete batshit. I'm sorry Greg, but thinking Fluoride in the water is for mind control is just batshit. =) Just like I think anyone who wants to make abortion illegal, even in cases of rape and incest, is not only batshit, but also hateful toward women. But many times we saw those same Tea Party candidates that won against an incumbent Republican lost against the Democrat contender.

What's happening here is party shift, and don't let anyone fool you. The Republican party stopped being conservative about 15 years ago, and just flopped right into a big government money-orgy about 7 years ago (about the time I decided I was a Democrat... coincidence?). THAT is what the people are pissed about, not Democrats. The American people spoke, and what they said was "Do what you said you will do." The right said this by kicking a bunch of fairly moderate Republicans out and replacing them with hardliners who promise to... I dunno, shoot up the place or something in the name of reform. Really, you got me on that one. And what I think the left said to the Democrats was "Dude... you can't get off your ass to give us what you promised... why should we get off our asses and vote for you?"

And don't let MSNBC tell you this is just that the Tea Party hates people of color. There is definitely some of that "Holy crap, those brown/black/muslim 'others' are coming to take my medicare and/or white daughter!!" Give that another generation, guys. Even generational racism eventually fades. And don't let nobody on Fox tell you this is all about the Democrats, because it isn't. This is straight up about fear.

Fear of outsiders, fear of poverty, fear of joblessness. FEAR. 2008 was the year of Hope, and 2010 is the year of Fear. And that's cool. Everyone gets afraid, from birth to death, you're going to be afraid of something... and sometimes, you're going to fail as a person and allow your fear of whatever to choose for you. That's ok. That doesn't mean things can't get better, and it doesn't mean fear will always run the show.

What needs to happen now is compromise. And by compromise, I don't mean "We will only compromise if the Dems do precisely what we tell them... and then we'll compromise by voting yes on that thing we demanded." This is not compromise, this is a 3 year old throwing a tantrum. So you guys on the right, please get back to business of governing. And you guys on the left, please grow some spine and negotiate with some backbone.

So here's what's coming, if these guys actually do what they say. Spending cuts. Extension of the tax cuts, even for the ridiculously wealthy (well done there, Koch bros), economic stalling, and massive new job losses. Right now, our stalled economy is being almost entirely propped up by public sector spending. If you cut that off while the private sector is still busy clutching it's pearls at being unable to slip us the unlubed shaft whenever it wants to, the wheel stops turning (even at the iceberg-esque pace it currently turns... what? Oh, an iceberg is a giant mountain made of ice. We used to have those, it's where those polar bears lived. Huh? Oh. Those were these big white bears that... oh nevermind). So here's hoping they find a way to get things going without sending government issued cat food to our seniors and dramatically expanding the number of soup kitchens run by charities. :) Ball's in your court, do-gooders. Have fun!

No really. You need to read this.

Written in 2004, this is a breakdown on how the Bush tax cuts are completely and utterly fucking everyone except the very very VERY wealthy. They're raking it in while we eat our cake.

And now I'll say it. We should have elected Clinton.

Where to begin? At the beginning I suppose.

Here's a transcript of Dr. Laura's now famous, N-bomb laden rant. And really, when a white woman repeatedly using the word to a woman of color is like... the least racist thing you said? You got some problems.

It's pretty simple to break this down, and it's been done to death probably at this point, but it occurs to me that some people (I've talked to a few of them) don't GET it. What on earth did Dr. Laura do wrong?

First off, she did NOT call anyone that most hated epithet. She just said it over and over again. I don't think it's fair to even try to ding her on name calling, but whooeee... she made up for it:

1. Hey white people. You will never ever be able to use the n-word. People of color using it has a completely different meaning than when whites use it. FACT. Suggestion: Just STOP. Don't use it. Find another word, and get over yourself.

2. No white person ever has the right (or is right to) tell a person of color how to be black or brown. How to appropriately represent other POC. Dr. Laura's mistake here was in feigning innocence when making the "point" that those black people get to say the n-word, so why is it not ok for whites? Come the fuck on. Either you're stupid, or you're trying to justify your fucking racism.

3. Just because you know a black person, and they think you're okay, does NOT mean you're not a racist. There are still people who think the earth is flat. We call those people "morons."

4. Do. Not. Ever. EVER. Call someone hypersensitive or humorless. How dare you. How dare you, you rich old white lady, tell a black woman (or ANY person of color for that matter) how offended they're allowed to be when someone treats them this way. Seriously? Fuck you. You go see what it's like to go through what those people have gone through... for hundreds of years! Until you've done it, shut the ever-lovin' fuck up.

5. Just because 1 black dude gets to the top doesn't mean ALL black people are there. And for that matter, look at how racism has TOTES disappeared because of that one guy! Why, we've got essentially a new political party taking over the Republican party founded on "Holy shit, we hired a Black Dude?! ZOMG FREAK OUT!!!"

But this is 2010, right? The appropriate response for Dr. Laura? The apology. Promptly delivered, well done you, let's all pretend it... WHAT?

Dr. Laura goes on Larry King and cries about her 1rst amendment rights being taken away, so she's quitting her show and blah blah blah... y'know what Dr. Laura? Go find some wood, make a cross, and nail yourself to it. Seriously. And check it! Sarah "Refudiate" Palin has dropped in her 2 cents (I'd like some change, please):

Dr.Laura:don't retreat...reload! (Steps aside bc her 1st Amend.rights ceased 2exist thx 2activists trying 2silence"isn't American,not fair")

and then:

Dr.Laura=even more powerful & effective w/out the shackles, so watch out Constitutional obstructionists. And b thankful 4 her voice,America!

Hey Sarah? SHUT THE FUCK UP, MORON. You pathetic reality TV political HACK. Let me make this REALLY SIMPLE, for all the dumbshits. The 1rst Amendment does indeed guarantee your right to say STUPID RACIST SHIT. It does NOT, however, protect you from being called a dumbass racist because of what you said! One might argue that Poor Dr. Laura would be put out of business because of the racist uproar... but that sounds like the free market at work to me, y'know? Here's the breakdown on how the 1rst Amendment works: You have the right to say stupid, racist shit. And everyone else has the right to say, "Golly, what a stupid racist." HOORAY FREEDOM!

As for whitey and race....

I'd like to take a moment to discuss race from whitey's perspective, FOR whitey. And I think this is important, the point I'm about to make:

Some people really don't realize they're racist, or even prejudiced.

They really don't. I'm sure all of you know that usually older white man or woman who donates to charities that primarily help people of color in places like Haiti, they hire people of color, work with them, think highly of them as individuals... but as a mass, they think of them as unfortunately lower. They pity them for their blackness, and all the institutionalized myths blackness entails.

These white people confuse their pity with acceptance, and are shocked... SHOCKED when someone calls it racism. They're not RACIST!!! But it never occurs to them that it's either/or in their worldview. Either yes, you are a little racist... or no, you're NOT a little racist, and all black guys really do want to sleep with blonde women with white skin. And beat their over-sexualized wives. And abandon their families. And blacks are lazy. And greedy. And stupid. And are etc etc etc. See that? That's racism there.

People of color are individuals, you see. This means that JUST LIKE WHITES, Blacks might want to cheat, or not. They might be abusers, or not. They might be stupid, lazy, and greedy.... or they might be all things opposite. Or to simplify it... instead of thinking all people of color are possibly NOT drug-dealing gang-bangers, modern conservatives appear to simply accept that drug-dealing and gang-banging is a condition of blackness.

Letting go of racism, for real, means letting go of the idea that you UNDERSTAND the meaning of blackness. Because you don't. You can't. YOU NEVER EVER CAN. Instead, what you CAN do, is know history and know people. INDIVIDUAL people. Accept that JUST MAYBE someone else's experience of America is radically different from yours. Oh, and personal advice? Shut your pie hole before more stupid falls out.

Post bailout, American car makers are posting profits for the first time in like... six million years.

So yeah. Um.

Suck it. *shrug*

You may recall this post:

Well, I'm having another go-round with the same dude, and thought I'd share. Both because it illustrates my point, that most Libertarians don't really know what's what, and also because it makes me look like a stone cold genius.

Mostly that last one.

snip snip!Collapse )

Now I'm sure this will go on and on, but that's all I wanted to post at the moment. :)

I saw this on the way home from the Dr.'s office today.

In case you can't read it, the side says:

"WE'RE TAKING "OUR" AMERICA BACK" (not sure which one is "Theirs")

The back says several things, here's a list: (caps and punctuation original)

Obama is a Muslim 1st! American 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th,6th, 7th...? Whatever
In Kenya or Indonesia a village is missing their idiot.

Guess what color the dude driving was?

Hint: He was not an under 50's person of color.

So the debt! The debt! zOmG! The debt!! We've got to cut spending somewhere, but where?!?!?!?!?!?

Oh... should we cut the 1 trillion going to failed nation building experiments?


I know, let's make rich people pay their fair share of the tax burden!

Naaaaah. Let's not.

No... let's cut food stamps. In the worst economic downturn in 50 years, let's cut food stamps. In a time where we have double digit unemployment, and record unemployment lengths, and 5 applicants for every shit job out there... let's cut food stamps.


You know what's worse than being in the position to say "I don't want to say I told you so, but...."...?

Not even having to say it. Not having to say anything, because there's just nothing to say.

To cure the depression the idea of YOUR PEOPLE being forced into a fucking soup line, check this out:

I'm going to make a suggestion for Sarah Palin. Either she stops being so incredibly stupid, or she admits she has a firm grasp of situational irony.

I'll pause while she looks up "irony."

From her twitter (which I read JUST so you didn't have to):

Forget freedom of speech and freedom of the press if these yahoos ever get their way in America. It seems...
8:20 AM Jul 21st via Facebook

That link goes to a story about the never-ending Journolist dust up, and how some of the members of that (btw PRIVATE) listserv wished for the government to shut down Fox News. Oh, and for Rush Limbaugh to die of a heart attack.*

Here's the very NEXT tweet from her account:

RT @marklevinshow: The list of known members of the left-wing now-defunct JournoList listserv

That link goes to a Facebook note from one Mark Levin, Free Republic conservative shill, and is a list of all the members of the PRIVATE listserv. These are jounalists who, admittedly, despise a lot of the idiots they interview... and yet, somehow, they still do those interviews, which still get published without their personal opinions being the headline. Naming and shaming is the tactic, unemployment is the endgame. We've seen this tactic a lot... Acorn, Van Jones, and most recently Shirley Sherrod. It's not enough that you repeat their inane talking points and bullshit public interest screeds... you have to march in lockstep. You have to AGREE with them.

Apparently Mrs. Palin doesn't understand that the press is made up of PEOPLE. Many of whom are far more intelligent and educated than herself certainly, and quite a few of the people on EITHER side of the aisle which they are tasked to interview. Those people don't have to like you Sarah. And them disliking you is not a vindication of your inability to form a coherent sentence or cogent argument in an interview or debate. What publications do you read? Gosh, I don't read. That's YOUR fault sweetheart, not some (zOMG apparently they're all JEWS TOO) journalist. Even Glen Beck was less than impressed by you, and stupidity is his stock in trade.

So while you're whinging about freedom of the press (to completely make shit up and publish it) being so sacred, and you and your cronies are publishing the names of people you don't like, you're removing their right to privacy in a private listserv.

Well done, dumbass.

* In the interest of full disclosure, I'd also enjoy watching Rush Limbaugh die of a heart attack. The visual image of his red, puffy face turning purple while his eyes bug out actually gives me a small tingle of pleasure. But I'd rather see him lit on fire. Personal preference.

Facts sting.

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

There's a good reason to NOT vote for Republicans.

And there's a good laugh.

And if you happen to, for some insane reason, think it's wrong that BP had to pony up 20B... the minute they did, their stock shot up, gaining them 13.63B. And they made something like 5.6B in profits in Q1 2010 alone.

This is the first time I've heard an elected politician refer to abortion/women's clinic violence CORRECTLY as terrorism!

Reid Floor Statement On One Year Anniversary Of The Murder Of Dr. George Tiller

Washington, DC— Nevada Senator Harry Reid made the following statement on the Senate floor this morning on the one year anniversary of the murder of Dr. George Tiller. Below are his remarks as prepared for delivery:

“A community in Kansas still shakes one year after the brazen murder of one of its own. This weekend will mark the first anniversary of Dr. George Tiller’s death. He was gunned down in front of his Wichita church the day before last Memorial Day.

“Dr. Tiller was killed at point-blank range, at his place of worship, in the middle of a Sunday morning, while his wife sang in the church choir just yards away.

“He was murdered by an unrepentant assassin who took a life in the name of protecting life. It was an indefensible crime and an incomprehensible excuse.

“Just as despicable as Dr. Tiller’s death was the fact that his murder wasn’t an isolated incident. It wasn’t even the first time someone tried to kill him. His clinic was bombed in 1985. He was shot twice in 1993. And over the next 16 years, seven clinic workers would be killed before Dr. Tiller would become the eighth. More than 6,000 other acts of violence have been launched at clinics and their workers – bombings, arsons, assaults and other attacks.

“The last doctor killed before Dr. Tiller was a husband and father from Buffalo named Barnett Slepian. He was an OB/GYN who also helped poor women access safe, legal abortions. Because of that, he was murdered in his home. I didn’t know Dr. Selpian, but I knew his niece. She came from Reno, Nevada, and she once worked in my office.

“The tragedy of Dr. Tiller’s death, and of Dr. Slepian’s death – and of every atrocity like it – is independent of the issue of abortion. It’s not about the legality of abortion or funding of abortion. These are emotional debates, and ones on which people of good faith can disagree.

“What so shook that Kansas town was rather an act of terrorism. What reverberated out to our borders and coasts from the center of our country was the violation of our founding principle: that we are a nation of laws, not of men.

“Everyone in America has the right to disagree with its laws. Everyone has the right to dispute and protest its laws. But no American has the right to disobey them.

“Not all of us would choose Dr. Tiller’s profession. Not all of us would seek his services or agree with his philosophy. But it is the responsibility of every American to respect another’s right to practice his profession legally.

“Those who believe in the sanctity of life cannot be selective. We must value every life – not just those with which we agree.”

Back Viewing 0 - 30