Digging Way, WAY Down In the Barrel

The witch hunt being conducted by the Senate Judiciary Committee has gotten to the level of being, not just ridiculous, but downright hilarious.

But Ty Clevenger, a former Justice Department employee, said Schlozman ordered him to remove information identifying him as a Republican from his paperwork when he applied for a job.

Gee, just as we ask people to remove marital status, age, and anything else that is not relevant to the hiring process from their applications. Does that mean I'm trying to hire only older, single men with a thing for redheads?

Among those raising concerns is Joseph Rich, a 36-year veteran of the department, who left in 2005 after serving as head of the Civil Rights Division's section that deals with voting rights.

"The whole hiring process had been changed to put the decision-making in political appointees' hands, and it was clear it was being politicized in that manner," Rich told CNN......

Rich now works for the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights, a nonprofit organization that held a March forum on what it called the politicization of the Justice Department. He said he never saw Schlozman make decisions based on partisan factors -- but he said hiring was increasingly concentrated in the hands of political appointees.

So, in other words, Democrats believe that no one who is a political appointee should be allowed to hire Federal employees, since it would be "politicization".

That means every single Cabinet secretary, the Attorney General, the entire diplomatic corps of ambassadors, the various undersecretaries and Department leaders, and anyone else in the Federal government who was chosen by an elected official to serve in their position is not allowed any input into who works for them.

And finally, this is my favorite:

But leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday asked Schlozman to answer questions about his handling of voter-fraud cases, including a lawsuit he pursued after his predecessor refused to support it. The committee's chairman, Vermont Democrat Patrick Leahy, and ranking Republican, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, said the case was dismissed by a federal judge who found "no evidence" to support it.

"We believe the committee would benefit from hearing directly from you in order to gain a better understanding of the role voter fraud may have played in the administration's decisions to retain or remove certain U.S. attorneys," they wrote.

Yes, because heaven forbid that US attorneys actually consider investigating voter fraud; that's too "politicized". They should be spending their time investigating "hate crimes" against privileged minorities, rather than looking at minor Federal issues like faking voter registrations.

News We Can Use....For Our Own Purposes

Interestingly enough, given the ongoing debate over hate-crimes legislation, this article popped up on CNN and other sources today.

Hits all the right buttons, doesn't it? Red state, "cowboy town", "effeminate" professor, allegedly found "burned and bound", and so forth. Just what is needed to convince everyone that, by gum, we need to codify into law that local law enforcement is too underfunded, incompetent, and bigoted to do their jobs properly, and we need the Feds to step in and nail those homophobic bumpkins.

Problem is this.....the case has been open for a while. Since December, actually -- and people have been speculating on it for months.

Now, on some levels, I do understand why this tripped the wire; there is a press conference scheduled today on the case whose announcement doubtless caught someone's eye, somewhere (and yes, we will carry the news as we receive it).

But the simple fact of the matter is that this was going way under the radar of anyone caring about it until someone had the bright idea, in my opinion, that it would help explain why hate-crimes laws are allegedly needed. The fact that a man had vanished and died under suspicious circumstances concerned no one nationally for months, appearing only at a time when it provided convenient "proof" for what Democrats and the minorities to which they pander wanted.

To me, that explains the whole purpose of this proposed legislation: ideology.

If the point is to expand resources available to local law enforcement and to allow the Feds to step in when necessary, that should be done based on the crime, not on whether or not it was the result of a specific motivation.

But that doesn't make sexual orientation special, does it?

UPDATE: Weird, very weird.

JV Democrat Antics

I love how Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, like a good little Democrat minion, tries to blame President Bush for the devastation caused by a massive tornado over the weekend.

A shortage of trucks, helicopters and other equipment -- all sent to the war in Iraq -- has hampered recovery in a U.S. town obliterated by a tornado, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius said on Monday.

"There is no doubt at all that this will slow down and hamper the recovery," Sebelius, a Democrat, told Reuters in Kansas, where officials said the statewide death toll had risen to 12 on Monday.

"Not having this equipment in place all over the state is a huge handicap," Sebelius said.......

The governor said Kansas lacks about half the large equipment it could use for recovery efforts and debris removal, including dump trucks and front loaders.

While this is an amusing attempt by someone who is obviously aspiring for higher office, it forgets one thing; those of us who grew up in Kansas are more than aware of the fact that, spread across the numerous hills, dales, and road systems of the Sunflower State are a series of large Quonset huts, usually distinguished by a large pile of gravel or salt nearby.

They're called KDOT spots -- Kansas Department of Transportation storage points. They have, at minimum, dump trucks and front-end loaders, both of which are used in the process of maintaining roads and, in winter, putting down traction-enhancing materials.

None of them have been sent to Iraq.

All of them are under the governor's control, and can be deployed immediately as she needs them. Indeed, the major KDOT locations in Wichita and Hutchinson, which are stuffed to the gills with equipment, are barely two hours away.

Does she really think we're this dumb? Or does she, like all Democrats, really believe that she can lie, spin, and pander with impunity because it helps her own ambitions?

Today's Bit of Hilarious Irony

Jerry Maneker, who is supposedly a "supporter" of LGBT rights, is today upset concerning the fact that so many people associate being gay with sex, which he rebuts in these ringing words:

We are not defined by the sexual dimension of our lives but, rather, our sexuality is but one part of a whole complex of who we are as human beings.

And yet, when a few gay people actually have the temerity to suggest that their sex lives are NOT the primary drivers of their existence, he condemns that in even harsher terms:

As I posted on my own blog today, "As far as I'm concerned, these people are either ignorant and/or mendacious and/or traitorous. In any case, they're pitiable!" Log Cabin Republicans betray the movement for full and equal civil rights for LGBT people and their families.

So the fact that people associate gays with sex is hurting the gay-rights movement....but gays who make it clear that they're about more than sex are pitiable traitors who are betraying the cause.

Warning to All Gay Conservatives and Republicans

Express your opinion like this......

David Keeton, a small-business owner in Dallas, and his partner, Rob Schlein, said they supported Giuliani because of his record as New York mayor and his response to the Sept. 11 terror attacks.

"I'm an American first, then a Republican second, and gay falls in third or fourth," said Keeton, who wore a Ronald Reagan pin on his lapel.

and expect a wonderful and loving response from the community which you supposedly belong and forever are encouraged to support, regardless of their opinions, because you share their sexual orientation.

Not that this is in any way unexpected; it's just a good reminder of the fact.

Welfare FOR, Not TO, Work

Fellow blogger V the K pointed me to this interesting piece discussing, interestingly enough, the high correlation between economic freedom and happiness -- or, more interestingly, that less economic uncertainty tends to create more unhappiness.

At first blush, this would seem rather odd. We Americans are taught, especially by the French, that we are soulless workaholics, slaves to the machine, helpless drones who take no time to enjoy life, smell the roses, etc. As cited in the article, Segolene Royal, potential new President of France, was seemingly mystified by the fact that writer James Traub was not guaranteed continued employment. When I talk to European acquaintances, they seem to be mildly appalled to the fact that my offer letter specifically states that it is the company's prerogative to discontinue my employment wherever and whenever it chooses; they wonder how one can possibly function with this sword of Damocles hanging ever overhead.

However, an insight into the why can be found (of course) in the blogosphere -- in the writings of fellow blogger Chad over at Cake or Death? discussing his recent relocation and subsequent events:

The move itself went well, aside from the couple snow squalls we had to drive through. The subsequent month and a half of unemployment, however, was not quite as entertaining. It plays havoc with ones psyche. You start getting depressed. You drink the previous tenant's (who also happens to be the landlord) stash of liquor. Sleep a lot. It's hard. After learning the recent criteria for "life-scarring", I'm confident in saying that the entire ordeal of being without a job has indeed scarred me for life.

Unemployment or underemployment is devastating. As I can tell you from personal experience, there is nothing worse than walking outside in the morning to pick up the paper, seeing everyone freshly-scrubbed and shaved, headed for work -- and know that you aren't.

Really, I wasn't technically unemployed; I was stitching together temporary gigs here, contracts there, and DJ'ing at night. I was making enough to cover necessities and the occasional luxury here and there; it was tight, yes, but really, I had all I needed and a decent chunk of what I wanted as well, including extra time at home and to go out and do things (let your mind wander at this point).

But I was, on several levels, miserable. Just like Chad describes. You start to doubt yourself so much; after all, everyone else has a job. Every day you don't get an offer, every day the phone doesn't ring, every day the diplomas and certifications in their tidy frames stare back at you when you have nothing to show them, makes you question whether you're worth the oxygen you're consuming. After one month, you understand far more fully why so many people drop dead so quickly after retiring.

Liberal policymakers and politicians are under the impression that what makes unemployment hideous is financial strain; hence, they believe, by simply upping the unemployment benefit and the welfare payments, you can solve the problem. But what that ignores is a crucial fact that employers have known for years; employees quit most often, not because they're underpaid, but because they're under-appreciated and under-purposed. In Silicon Valley, everyone overpays; the lure for skilled engineers and staff is not cash on the barrelhead, but the chance to contribute, for their work to have a purpose, to have a reason to get up in the morning. My friends in San Francisco who work for nonprofits make pennies compared to what they could get in the "real world"; however, the sense of value they get from contributing, from seeing what they do affect other people, is what they care about the most.

France, Democrats, et al. think that by surrounding people with welfare bubble-wrap and removing all uncertainty from their lives, you can buy them into happiness, just as indulgent parents think that this toy, this Disneyland vacation, this designer bedroom furniture will ensure their cherubs' idyllic childhood. But what they seem to have forgotten is that, if money and never having to worry about it bought you happiness, Us and People would fold overnight. The need for purpose -- and the need to take risk to achieve it -- is as imimical to the completeness of the human psyche as is the love and the acceptance of others. A life without danger or a reason for existence is a life unsatisfying, no matter how much one has financially.

One of the ironies of the Democrat Party to me is that, even though they started it, they've completely forgotten the lesson of the New Deal; namely, that government CAN ask for something in exchange for its checks, and in the process, vastly and extraordinarily improve things for everyone. The beautiful frescoes at Coit Tower here in San Francisco, the Cotton Bowl and the State Fair buildings in Dallas, the country roads I used to drive on across the Midwest -- all of those were built with WPA labor and funding. The government put the unemployed to work, gave them a purpose, taught them new skills -- and in doing so, improved our infrastructure immensely and completely restarted the country's main economic engines.

In contrast, had they simply mailed out welfare checks, it is almost a certainty that the United States would have been unable to mobilize in sufficient time to prevent World War II attacks on its own shores -- and would likely not have had the capacity necessary to supply Great Britain with the planes and materiel she needed to fight off Hitler. The infrastructure and economic improvements garnered from the massive public works projects of the WPA period made all of those possible -- and in the process, quite likely saved the world from global fascism.

Something to keep in mind, n'est ce pas?

Why The "Hate Crimes" Bill Should Be Vetoed

Because this doesn't qualify as one.

Sorry, but if you walk onto a school bus with a knife intending to stab someone, then go ahead and do it nineteen times, there's a significant amount of hate involved there somewhere.

The "hate crimes" bill is claimed by Democrats and leftist gays to be necessary because we are at the mercy of a system of law enforcement, judges, and juries that Democrats and leftist gays claim is so underfunded, incompetent, and prejudiced that it cannot render verdicts correctly.

Therefore, the Federal government should fund investigations, the Feds should prosecute these cases, the Feds should demand minimum sentences, and the Feds should, at their discretion, re-prosecute a case if they think the first verdict or sentence wasn't good enough -- or, to use language directly from the bill, "left demonstratively unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence."

Except in this kid's case, where he gets none of those -- because he's not a member of a protected class.

I don't think it's going to cost Pemiscot County any less to prosecute this because he's not. I don't think it's fair that his lack of membership in a protected class means there's no guarantee of a minimum sentence, or that the Feds won't intervene if the sentence or investigation isn't up to snuff.

And I especially don't think it's in any way fair that the Federal government has an interest in eradicating violence against members of protected classes....but not against him.

Exploiters Of The World, Unite!

And here we go again.

“The first thing I thought of was the children,” Mr. Mancía, who is fighting his own deportation order, told the visitors gathered in his second floor walkup apartment in New Bedford a couple of weeks ago. “The future we imagined for them, it all collapsed.”

Well, at least that's more subtle than what's going on today in Fresno:

In Fresno, organizers planned a rally focusing on children whose parents had been deported.

As I mentioned a month ago, this falls well outside "humanitarian" and well into "crass exploitation".

And of course, the usual suspects are all for it.

The reason why is simple; illegal immigrants are a large, easily-exploited group that can be tapped for under-the-table cash and workers. This is an election year for Newsom, and Migden and Leno are poised for a knock-down-drag-out fight for voters for next year's California Senate elections.

Of course, the fact that it screws the rest of us who do pay taxes, are here legally, and are getting rather tired of providing billions in freebies to people who are not paying taxes, who are forging official documents to get employment when they do pay taxes, and who are knowingly breaking the law and doing the equivalent of holding their children up to the camera with a knife to their throat to keep us from enforcing it, concerns none of them.

An Oily Mess

Well, this is interesting.

Peculiar, even.

That's all I'll say for now. But believe me, the temptation to indulge in all sorts of nasty puns related to petroleum distillates and what "BP" really stands for is immense.

Tastes Like Crow

Remember physics and metallurgy as taught by Rosie O'Donnell a few weeks ago?

"I do believe that it was the first time in history that fire has ever melted steel," O'Donnell said when questioned on whether she thought the government was behind the collapse of WTC 7. "I do believe that it defies physics for the World Trade Center tower 7, which collapsed in on itself -- it is impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved. Miraculously, the first time in history steel was melted by fire," she said.

We are quite amused.

Or repelled, when one thinks about the fact that this nitwit is held up as a shining example of our community.

Sanity Rules Once Again

I could get used to this Supreme Court.

Perhaps it's because I have a sibling who's an officer, perhaps it's because I live in a city that demonstrates daily what happens to the crime rate and SFPD morale when so-called "progressives" do everything in their power to handicap and hinder the police department, but I always love it when people say, "You're a trained law enforcement agent. We trust you to use your judgment and do what's best to keep us safe."

Misplaced (Or Manipulated) Outrage

Jamie over at I Must Be Dreaming linked this morning to John Aravosis's most recent sh*t fit, allegedly over Rush Limbaugh playing a song called "Barack, The Magic Negro".

It always amazes me that gays who claim to be technologically-savvy believe the rest of us don't know how to use search engines -- and find sources.

Of course, when one considers that the author of said source is a prominent gay Democrat leftist and commentor who Aravosis himself has often linked, you can understand why he forgot to be outraged over it when it was published over a month ago.

What is really entertaining is that so many people didn't even bother to look this up; they just took for granted that Aravosis was telling the whole truth and was not engaging in outright hypocrisy.

Bad assumption.

But again, this is the mentality in our community that lets our "leaders" and "pundits" get away with outright lying and misrepresenting the position of gays; there are just so many of us who WANT to believe they're right that we make easy prey for amoral individuals like Aravosis.

Today's Ironic Headline

Democrats: "U.S. Has Lost Global Standing"

Which, after six years of their running around the world screaming to anyone who will listen about how awful we are and how awful the things we do are, should be a surprise to....no one.

I can see their next breakthrough already: "Cutting Yourself Causes Bleeding".

Yes, They DO Do Some Things Right Some of the Time

Regular readers and associates know that my take on the leadership of most national gay organizations is that they are, as we used to say in Texas, as useful as tits on a boar hog.

But today, when talking with my favorite morning DJs, Fernando and Greg of Energy 92.7, Neil Giuliano, the executive director of GLAAD, did a particularly fine job (read: held his own) of explaining GLAAD's mission, goals, and in particular, why the TV series Gray's Anatomy received a GLAAD Media Award despite the Isaiah Washington flap

Answer: the award was for Outstanding Individual Episode, not for the show at large, the January incident happened after the voting had already been done, and GLAAD didn't think it made sense to penalize everyone for Isaiah Washington's stupidity.

Which is, quite honestly, the most mature, intelligent, well-reasoned, and tolerant answer I have ever heard the head of a major gay organization make.

I hope this is a trend. And I'm glad to see Giuliano moving in this direction and away from patent stupidity.

Another Gay "Hero"

Now, the latest from the idol of the gay left, the man who HRC has publicly fawned over and declared "courageous", and a card-carrying proud gay Democrat and leftist.

The estranged wife of former New Jersey governor James E. McGreevey knew he was gay before they married, he claimed in court papers filed Monday.

McGreevey wrote that Dina Matos McGreevey "knew of my sexual orientation before our marriage[;] she chose to either ignore it or block it out of her mind, even when questioned by her friends."

The former governor does not detail how she knew he was gay but objects to his wife's contention in recent court papers that he is bisexual.

"On the offhand chance she wasn't paying attention, I AM A GAY AMERICAN," he wrote, referencing the term he used to describe himself when he announced his resignation as governor in August 2004. "She is in deep denial."

Or she's simply thinking about the fact that the baby she carried around for nine months didn't get there as a result of playing Parcheesi.

Thanks once again to HRC, NGLTF, and the other gay organizations who were so eager to lick this man's balls and hold him up as a fine example of an "honest and straightforward" gay person.

(h/t GayOrbit)

UPDATE: And, if that were even possible, it gets better. MUCH better.

Is the point there the same as hiring a burglar to do security systems?

(h/t GayPatriot)

Here, Overdose on Cute

Thanks to various posts in other locations, I was reminded that the NDT Mascot has been shamefully absent from these pages as of late. Furthermore, since his 10th birthday is the approaching Cinco de Mayo, I am going to continue my habit of forgetting to post on the actual date and doing it on another day -- this time, in advance.

So here you go. Eat your heart out.



That was before the husbear bought him the more "butch" leather collar. But the red one did match his leash.



This is demonstrating his complete mastery of using passive aggressive techniques to get what you have and he wants (food, attention, legs to take him to the dog park).

UPDATE: And, because I just found it.....



His Serene Highness, the Prince Imperial. All he needs is a crown, scepter, and little red robe trimmed in ermine (or the innumerable hairballs he is making in this shedding season).

Pity, Pity

It seems that programs based on punishing business and pandering to special interest groups are money sinks.

Don't Mess With Mama

I love this country.

Take this as an opportunity to check out the "Talented, Sexy, and Beautiful Straight Women Who Blog" on my sidebar -- all of whom have (I believe) the shooting prowess required of a Miss America as well!

Repent, For You Have Been Saved!

Take heed, coastal Americas.

For months and weeks, you have been threatened by something more awful, more vile, more dangerous to Mother Gaia than terrorism, human-induced climactic change, and a John Edwards bad tresses day combined.....the possibility that Sanjaya could win American Idol.

Many of you have begged, have pleaded, that this hair-borne creature, obviously the love child of the Prince of Darkness and Nicole Richie, be sent away, far, far away, lest our civilization collapse and we become the target of UN sanctions to punish us for encouraging musicide.

Star after star after star sallied forth, trying to cut down this raging monster. Not even the dulcet tones of Tony Bennett could soothe it. Not even the ass of Jennifer Lopez could draw it off the stage. Not even the hairstyles of Gwen Stefani could terrify the horrid creature, which week after week after week made little children cry and otherwise-rational adults stare and cry out in horror at the ongoing lyrical train wreck.

But then....an angel appeared. Saint Martina.....a mother...a native of the homeland....a pure and blinding light that overcame the darkness, that banished the beast to the hellish abyss of pay-per-view television where it belongs. With the sword of gleaming tone, with the shield of correct intonation, and with the cleansing power borne of wholesome Middle American music and values....we were once again made whole. Healed. Fresh and beautiful once again, the mark of the Sanjaya beast purged from our foreheads and global apocalypse averted.

Take heed, America. Turn from your wicked, pop-loving ways and worship that which is good and uniquely ours. Change your buttons, reset your iTunes, and follow.

For if you do not......it may return.

For Discussion

It is as faithless and blasphemous to for a person to say that s/he can prove the existence of God than it is for a person to say that s/he can prove that God does not exist.

Discuss.

And, In Other News.....

...it seems we may not be as far from Themyscira as we think.

(h/t GayOrbit)

"Avant Garde" Is French for "NOTICE ME!"

It seems another avant-garde artist has decided that ridiculing Christianity is the way to make their mark in the world.

Believe it or not, I generally try to let these things go, if for no other reason than protesting them is throwing good attention after bad provocation. But I do love Michelle Malkin's suggestion for the artist:

You want edgy? Go ahead and create "Mohammed Killa." Replace the Homicidal Jesus Christs with Homicidal Mohammeds mumbling cliched messages of peace from the Koran. Fill the "game landscape" with Googled images of Muslim propaganda and sacred mosques while the Homicial Mohammeds blow themselves up in crowded schools, restaurants, buses, and markets.

Put that on exhibit. Go ahead. Be a maaaverick "artist." Show us how brave you are at offending all people of faith.

And, if I ever hear shrieks of "theocracy" applied to the United States again, I will simply re-cite this -- and ask how long the artist would survive if it were the Prophet and this exhibit was in Iran.

Keep a Bucket Handy....

because after reading this, you'll want to throw up.

I mean, where do you start? Even in the first paragraph, the guy insinuates that there was nothing wrong with his evidence -- it was "additional evidence" that the Attorney General's office found in twelve weeks that led them to dismiss charges.

Not just the fact that, according to virtually everyone else out there, he screwed up. Big time. And he did so deliberately so that he could appeal to black racists and win re-election.

Oy.

Gay Press Releases

A particular piece over on GayOrbit today made me think of the typical press releases from gay leftist groups for information such as this.

You can practically write them from a template.

"We at the (insert your advocacy group name here) are shocked by the recent discovery that studies indicate that gay men (list bad behavior) at a rate (insert amount) many times greater than the population average, that nearly (insert number of) gay men (insert related bad behavior here) at least once, and that gays who (another bad behavior) are far more likely to test positive for HIV.

Drastic measures must be taken. The (insert your advocacy group name here) cannot stand back and allow these destructive patterns to continue in the gay community. We are in a fight for our very existence, and quick action is necessitated.

The crystal meth epidemic among gays is obviously an attempt by (list Republican politician), (list prominent religious figure), and (insert villain of the week) to destroy the gay community. They and their cronies at (insert drug company name) have joined together to eliminate us while fattening Big Pharma's profits. Please send us all your money so that we can file a lawsuit to stop (insert other drug company name) from forcing gays to (list bad behavior) through their advertising for (insert erectile-dysfunction drug name) and their collusion to raise the prices on (insert HIV drug name) and so that we can give freely to (insert homophobic Democrat politician) in support of our right to (insert right-of-the-week).

Join us today. Send your donation to (insert your group's address here)."

One would think that, after the innumerable epidemics, waves, outbreaks, scourges, and whatnot that the gay community has suffered for decades, we would have figured out by that many of the causes of these are the result of choices made by the individual whose hair you are looking at in the mirror each day -- and focused our efforts on dealing with that.

Of course, one who would think that underestimates the power of the human mind to ascribe blame to someone else for their problems.

It's a Bad Day for Race-Baiting

-- Michelle Malkin illuminates the hypocrisy of those screaming for Don Imus's head by merely reprinting the lyrics for the top-ranked rap songs for the week.

-- Sources say that all charges against the Duke lacrosse players whose lives were ruined by race-baiters and corrupt Democrat district attorneys will be dropped today.

And I hope the Duke players sue the district attorney, the school, the leftist student organizations that demanded their heads, and everyone else in the process.

Wrecked Compact

Just as last year, I don't understand the point of these compacts about states disregarding their own results and giving their electoral votes for President to the winner of the national popular vote.

On second thought, I do; Dems like O'Malley are still trying to win the 2000 election.

The more-logical thing to do is to simply choose electors proportionately; that is, if half the vote goes for Dems, half the electors are Dems, and vice versa.

But the reason Dems will fight that tooth and nail is that it means they actually would have to work for the votes in states like California and New York, rather than simply sitting back and using them as ATMs.

The Democrats Abroad

This is almost too incredibly perfect as far as a display of Democrat foreign policy.

Or, in other words, letting foreign regimes lead you around on a leash and use you as their propaganda tool against the United States.

I thought the shot of Pelosi smiling and making nice with Hizbollah leaders was bad enough, but this really takes the cake.

Pay Here, Your Sins Are Forgiven

Meanwhile, to the bigger issue brought up in Matt's aforementioned post, as well as the various torments being inflicted on the person mentioned therein, I can't help but think I've seen this before somewhere.

Oh, that's right.....medieval Catholicism and indulgences.

Seriously, can we just skip a few steps? Imus has issued an apology. Just sign the check, money order, bag of cash, or PayPal credit over to Reverend Al or Jesse and be done with it.

If Sharpton or Jackson were serious about getting the words Imus said off the airwaves, they'd be lambasting the DJs and picketing the towers of their nearby hip-hop and rap stations that play music which, in the immortal words of Marge Simpson, "encourages punching, boastfulness, and rudeness to 'hos". But that carries neither the financial potential or the appeal to the "whites are all racists" mentality required to support their parasitic existence.

And, if Imus weren't looking at a significant ratings abyss, I don't think he'd be nearly as likely to use words that he should damn well know better than to use and which he deserves every bit of the tongue-lashings he's gotten. I also think it's going to be a hell of a wakeup call for him to meet with the Rutgers team he so flippantly insulted.

But again, let's be done with it. Apologize, sign the paper, hand the cash over, and move along -- Imus to hopefully learning something, and the Brotherhood of Lampreys Jackson and Sharpton to another unwitting host.

Minor Housekeeping First

As my mother says, always make the beds first.

In that spirit, it would be remiss of me not to respond to this missive from Matt of The Malcontent.

ToBe, the only time I have censored a specific comment for content (aside from my blanket ban of people like North Dallas Thirty, who will inevitably use this as yet another opportunity to decry our supposed hypocrisy) was when someone was advocating the killing of gay people.

Perhaps if I could understand about what exactly the two of them were arguing, I might.

But, when one has far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far better examples than that.....why bother?

A Bit of Monday Happiness

Monday, especially after a holiday, can be dull and boring for everyone.....so to liven it up, I suggest heading over to this.

The Democrats and lefties who visit this site can leave their own orgasmic comments about how wonderful it would have been.

Everyone else can alternate between being amused and appalled that people actually would celebrate such a thing.

And start to worry....there are more of them.

A Rare Glimmer of Sanity.....

...in a most unexpected place.

Best lines:

Finally, what depresses me, and makes me despise so much war criticism even when I agree with it, is that so many of those positing it seem so happy about what's gone wrong. They seem to relish the probability that Iraq will get worse and worse so that they can be righter and righter.

And if it doesn't, they'll do what they can -- like draining funding, yanking troops, and offering their support to terrorist-based regimes like Syria.

Images For Your Easter

My husbear just ran through yelling, "The pond! The pond!" at high volume.

Dripping wet from the shower.

Naked.

It's going to be a good day.

Now, Really..........

...does this surprise anyone?

Blast From the Past

People reappear in your life at peculiar moments, and this is one of them.

Jack Malebranche used to be a semi-regular commentor here; however, for various reasons, he and I haven't seen much of each other lately.

But today he materializes in my comments.....and tonight, while reading the Bay Area Reporter, a letter to the editor criticizing the fact that A Different Light, the famous local gay bookstore, refuses to carry his new book, claiming it's "anti-gay".

Now that's the Jack I remember and love. And given the spluttering response to Androphilia, I have a feeling I'll like it.

Please, We're Not Really Like That.....

A thoughtful piece on Rosie O'Donnell's descent into terminal moonbattery.

I find it amusing that the gay organizations demand that people be outed and that celebrities, gay or not, "come out" because the world needs to see that gays are "normal people" and gay kids need role models.....but say nothing when the world's most visible lesbian makes a strong case for "gay" being synonymous with "insane loudmouth".

What In the HELL?

As most people know, this blog is no fan of so-called "gay activist" Mike Rogers.

From reading through other blogs and musings, one would get the idea that several other people feel that way as well -- like Michael at GayOrbit.

You spend your life terrorizing and intimidating people into doing what you want, and you wonder why someone calls you a terrorist?

Mike Rogers is a petty man, and I am glad to see how much he is being called out by some of the larger blogs for this act of complete immaturity.

Or Matt at The Malcontent.

Fair-minded individuals such as me are still waiting for him to quit shilling for anti-gay Democrats. Then perhaps we will look harder for any shred of redeeming value in his "outings." (He's probably more afraid of the fact that Berkowitz and the GOP are making inroads among Jewish Americans, which would explain why a rabid partisan would "expose" a gay Republican for the flimsiest of reasons.)

Until then, his website, which regularly toadies for the Dems and deletes many non-sycophantic comments, should be rechristened as "Blog Redactive."

Or Robbie at The Malcontent.

Enforced racial, sexual, or gendered loyalty to one political party is a form of ideological slavery. People like Mike Rogers are the bounty hunters intended to use whips of gossip and privacy invasion to lash those errant thinkers back onto the plantation of partisan Democratic thought. Do not wander too far, lest you get the beating that is coming to you courtesy of Overseer Mike.

Or Chris Crain of Citizen Crain.

But it is not the role of the media, and should not be the role of the media — or activists, bloggers, or activists masquerading as journalists — to dig into the private sex lives of others, no matter how much the policies they advocate impact the sex lives of gay people. To quote some apt clichés, two wrongs do not make a right and the end does not justify the means.

Or Boi from Troy.

I have no empirical knowledge of what is a fact in this matter… In addition, Rogers attributes comments made in this post to me, specifically about what may or may not be known “in his District”…if that is what he calls “evidence” then Ed Schrock is owed an apology. I only know what people say…and do not appreciate Mike’s misrepresentation of this as an “outing”.

Well, it turns out that appearances are deceiving.

What do BlogActive and PageOneQ, unabashedly liberal sites, have in common with GOP bloggers like BoiFromTroy and The Malcontent? Gay Politics BlogAds, that's what! Realizing that many folks want to reach the politically aware LGBT set, I created the network at BlogAds to do just that.

I am especially proud of this project because I am focusing on recruiting new blogs to BlogAds. And the network is about a lot more than the usual set of bloggers you see listed around the web. While the list of members includes some of the community's best know blogs (Pam's House Blend and Good As You), I am just as excited that new bloggers are with us.

Of course, if you head over to the referenced link, you can see much more than that, including the list of bloggers, the lovely "We Would Like To Invite You" letter, and the order form, with prices listed that show you just how much each blogger is charging (with them receiving 70% of the take) for the ads.

Most importantly, why Rogers is so eager to push this and recruit new blogs is beautifully spelled out on a buried portion of Blogads.

Blogads works by invitation only. You will earn 5% of the ad revenue sold by bloggers you sponsored.

So what it seems we have here are bloggers who affect to loathe and condemn Rogers and his tactics, but seemingly have no problem funding him -- as long as they're making a few bucks in the process. And with prices upwards of $500 per week for ads, that 5% kickback adds up in a hurry -- guaranteeing Rogers a sizeable income while he carries out the kind of attacks and harassments that these bloggers are supposedly against.

It astounds me that Michael Demmons can seemingly go to a Log Cabin gathering while providing income to someone who tries to get Republican gays fired from their jobs. It astonishes me that Boi from Troy can represent gays at conservative gatherings while generating money for someone who accuses conservatives of building concentration camps for gays. It is beyond my comprehension that Matt and Robbie can hold themselves up as examples of right-of-center gays while giving money to someone who thinks gays who don't toe the Democrat party line should be hunted down and harassed. It blows my mind that Chris Crain can be giving Mike Rogers money on one hand while condemning his actions as counterproductive on the other.

And words frankly fail me beyond that.

There Is a Word For This......

"exploitation".

Before their meetings with lawmakers, Lozano gathered the children in a church to practice recounting their stories.

"OK, so why are you here?" Lozano asked Juan.

"Because I'm trying to get my Dad and my Mom papers," the boy answered confidently in English.

"And what are they trying to do to your Mom and Dad?" Lozana prompted.

"They're trying to take them to Mexico," he said, his voice suddenly becoming smaller.

"And what's going to happen to you if that happens?"

"I'm going to be left all alone!" he said, bursting into sobs.

Of course, why is this taking place?

Immigrant advocates, however, are increasingly putting such children at the forefront of their lobbying efforts, convinced that they offer the most compelling argument for granting illegal immigrants opportunities to legalize.

"Once the average American citizen learns the facts, they are not going to want these families to be separated. This is about the family values our country holds most dear," said Emma Lozano, co-founder of Familia Latina Unida in Chicago, one of several groups that have coalesced around the issue across the country.

But the problem is that they don't HAVE to be separated. The children are perfectly free to travel back to their home countries with their parents.

It's just that the parents don't want to go -- so they're having and using children as a propaganda tool to prevent the enforcement of laws they knew they were breaking well before they even got here. Worse, they're telling us lies about how they'll be "separated from their children" when, in fact, it would be only by THEIR choice that their children would be kept here rather than by going back with them.

Why, exactly, should we even be giving this the time of day?

With Wealth (Should) Comes Responsibility

This is one of the most powerful -- and disturbing -- things I have ever seen.

At first blush, it seems kind of fun, and if you are anywhere near an average American, it is rather exciting to see how much better off you are than others.

But then reality sinks in and you realize that, in order for you to be so high.....imagine how much lower others must be.

From the website:

We are obsessed with wealth. But we gauge how rich we are by looking upwards at those who have more than us. This makes us feel poor.

We wanted to do something which would help people understand, in real terms, where they stand globally. And make us realise that in fact most of us (who are able to view this web page) are in the privileged minority.

Well done. And well-spoken.

As the old saying goes, "I felt bad because I had no shoes, until I saw a man that had no feet."

As we head into one of the holiest of both Christian and Jewish holidays, consider that fact.....and that God tells us, not to demand that the government or others take care of the poor, the friendless, and the sick......but that we do it ourselves.

Using Voting Fraud for Good

Hmmmm....this seems ripe for pulling a Sanjaya.

And given GM's complete and utter lack of automotive fashion sense, it seems entirely appropriate.

(thank you, Malcontent!)

Why Pandering to Europe is Pointless

Read this article.

Then review the comments.

Simply put, the article points out why the Iranian kidnapping of British sailors was flat wrong and against international and UN mandate; the commentors explain why it's all right for Iran to break the rules, and why the British deserved it anyway.

Realize that these commentors are the people who the Democrat Party constantly babbles need to be brought back to liking us.

There's very little else that can be said.

Madame Potemkin

This just in, concerning the Democrats' self-promotion of their congressional record.

Democratic leaders point to increased productivity in the House of Representatives -- more than twice as many recorded votes (189) as Republicans held in recent years when they were in the majority; almost twice as many days in session (48); and more than double the number of bills passed (24)......

However, Senate Democrats have only succeeded in pushing through three of these measures in slightly different versions, and none of them has become law.....

When pressed about touting as achievements bills that have not passed, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Maryland, insisted Democrats had met their responsibility -- and suggested Republicans should stop gumming up the legislative machinery over on the Senate side of the Capitol.

Or, in other words, you only have to propose it, not follow through on it.

That makes their habit of making flowery fundraising speeches about gays, only to contradict them later, almost comprehensible.

(and just in case you didn't know, this is what "Potemkin" references)

So Much For Bargain Fashion

Well, this is just ducky.

I wonder though......if you're going to commit a crime, why would you bother robbing discount shoppers, rather than these?

Playing for Our Team

Radar Magazine (which is, according to fellow blogger Aatom, "essentially the print version of Gawker, or Jossip, or on a bad day, PerezHilton.com") recently featured an interview with three out former professional athletes -- football Esera Tuaolo, basketball player John Amaechi, and baseball player Billy Bean.

Most clueless quote, courtesy of Tuaolo:

And then, when Tim Hardaway lashed out against John—I couldn't understand. I could see maybe from a Caucasian person, but for an African-American person to have such hateful words ...

Esera, meet Louis Farrakhan.

That may jar some of the gay leftist brainwashing loose.

Most on-target quote, courtesy of Bean:

I was actually once asked if I was a top or a bottom on a radio show, and that was the first time that I think I was embarrassed in public. When you become public, when you "come out," when you invite the public into your private life, there is a sense that you deserve to be asked that question......

Why did you think that question was important? To make fun of Ted (Haggard) or to make fun of bottoms? That's what I mean about self-mutilation. I think that's what holds us back. Do you ask a woman if she's a top or a bottom? Not to get off track, but I just think we're making fun of ourselves.

I'm just asking, "Why do we have to be defined into such little cubicles?" As gay people, it seems like our sex lives are on a trophy display, and I think that's what keeps us divided from the mainstream.

Finally, someone recognizes the contradiction of a community that obsesses over and publicizes sex, but then asks everyone else to ignore it.

Read the article. Worth it.

(hat tip to Boi from Troy)

Environmental Practice for Fun and Profit

President Bush met today with leaders from the Big Three domestic auto manufacturers, during which these industry folk promised that they would make half their companies' annual vehicle production "flex-fuel" -- that is, able to run on E85 (85% ethanol, 15% gas) by 2012.

Color me unimpressed.

People, when we reference Wikipedia, we notice something; Detroit was producing FFV vehicles by the hundreds of thousands over ten years ago.

Furthermore, as this article cites, in our neighbor to the south, Brazil, fully 73% of the cars sold are flex-fuel, with over 40% of the fuel consumed in the country being ethanol.

Granted, Brazil has a few advantages; they have fewer drivers, a better climate for growing the best current source of ethanol (sugarcane), and a fairly-good infrastructure for distribution. But, as the article also discusses, we are more than capable of making a sizeable quantity of ethanol through cellulosic breakdown, and we already have a significant production of it from corn. There's no reason we can't be generating an enormous amount of our transportation energy from ethanol, versus from oil -- and the economic, national security, and environmental benefits thereof are fairly obvious.

If you asked me to solve this problem, the first thing I'd do would be carrot-and-stick; I would raise the required Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) for auto manufacturers, but with a twist -- every flex-fuel vehicle they made would count as double credit.

Next up, I'd be pumping some serious government development dough to ethanol production, both using current methods and cellulosic methods -- likely by tapping and diverting farm subsidies. Why? Because if we start buying all the corn and sugarcane we can to make ethanol.....trust me, income supports for either will be rendered quite unnecessary in a hurry. It's called "the effect of supply and demand on price".

Finally, I'd be after the oil companies with a simple proposition; for every bit you make your infrastructure ethanol-compatible, we'll make your tax lives simpler. Easy as that.

Taken together, these measures should make ethanol a) useful, b) abundant, and c) available -- which will likely translate into d) cheap.

And in the process, we'll be kicking the oil terrorists like Iran squarely in the crown jewels.

What's not to like?

What Do We Want?

It is often said that there is no such thing as an orderly revolution, and the recent coalescence of a series of glbt blogs seeking one in the dysfunctional way in which the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) is doing business is no exception.

Andrew Sullivan and The Malcontent are locked in a battle of mutual recriminations.

Chris Crain is being dive-bombed by harpies the gay press, who apparently are making up for lost time from when he was one of them.

And Mike Petrelis is being told, in no uncertain terms, that he is not welcome at HRC gatherings, especially with a video camera.

Meanwhile, with the notable exception of Bay Windows, the rest of the gay press is repeating the usual, "Well, sure, HRC could stand some improvement, but they've probably got a good excuse, and besides, Republicans are evil."

The last demonstrates the biggest impediment, by far, to anything changing; unless the attitudes of "mainstream gays" change, HRC will never have to actually DO anything about their problems.

For example, Kevin Naff, in his cited post from the Washington Blade's blog, notes that the question about HRC's actual membership is one that the Blade was reported about two years ago, insinuating that bloggers who notice this now are "piling on."

However, the question that immediately comes to mind is simple; if it was two years ago, why hasn't anything been done about it? The Blade, for one, was also reporting on HRC's lack of bipartisanship two years ago, yet HRC still feels free to publicly state and avow that their goal is, as the Boston Globe put it, "to become a steady source of funds and grass-roots support for Democrats -- more akin to a labor union than a single-issue activist group."

The issue is not recognizing the problem. It's the fact that the problem HAS been recognized and not a damn thing has been done about it.

Taking that farther, Naff bashes Rudy Giuliani and John McCain for not coming and speaking to HRC -- but never bothers to explain why two Republican candidates should come and speak to an organization that one, has a history of public excoriation and blaming of Republicans for every problem in the gay community, and two, has stated specifically that it only wants to support Democrats.

As people were correctly recognizing almost three years ago, HRC is never going to get anywhere with Republicans if all it can do is spit at them -- and even more so, if it makes it clear that its primary qualification for support has nothing to do with gay issues and everything to do with party affiliation.

In short, as I talked about previously, there are structural and policy changes that HRC could make to rectify these matters. But what I am seeing more and more in the reaction to people suggesting these sort of things is that the major impediment to HRC being more effective is a refusal to demand action of it out of partisan hatreds and intra-gay rivalries.

HRC is simply taking advantage of the fact and doing as its primary movers wish, which is to ingratiate themselves with the Democrat Party and protect their six-figure lobbying incomes, their expensive headquarters, and their lavish parties, all at gay expense.

Is that what we really want?

Or are we willing to set these aside and demand that HRC pay more than lip service and drop its arrogance, its lack of transparency, its self-aggrandizement, and its complete partisanship and intolerance?

Ironic Statement of the Day -- Friday, March 23rd Version

These sort of events are almost reaching the level of astrophysical regularity these days.

Far be it from us to countenance the horrific practice of blacklisting. My co-blogger and I thoroughly condemn the activity. We certainly share Sullivan’s opinion that such petty behavior is unbecoming of those who wish to be taken seriously as promoters of vigorous, thorough debate.

Um....yeah, sure.

Meanwhile, I'm just commenting elsewhere, getting straight people to come around to the idea that, yeah, gays could use some relationship protections and it's silly not to give it to them.

"Dangerous", I tell ya. I am SO dangerous to the interests of gay people.

Starting Out with a Bang

It was a bit surprising to find that North Dallas Thirty had been included in Malcontent's March Gayness 2007 blog tournament extravaganza -- although it did make more sense upon explanation.

Anyway, however we got there, we're in there -- so I felt the need to make the obligatory plea for votes because, you know, putting out effort and winning means something, even if, given the history between Matt and me, it is on the order of paying $5 for a chance to win an all-expenses paid Exodus International weekend getaway.

Our first round competition is against The Pen15 Club, a blog whose primary strength versus North Dallas Thirty can be seen by comparing their exhaustive and well-documented Academy Award coverage to my post on Helen Mirren and Jennifer Hudson titled, "When Good Women Get Bad Cleavage-Displaying Advice" (which is still in draft form and may see the light of day sometime before Christmas....of 2008).

But I do have charms of my own, as it were, and will now unleash my ultimate and battle-proven blog-war weapon -- somewhat-smutty pictures (as in, NOT safe for work):

Fire one!

Fire two!

And I promise.....if I win, and keep winning, there's more where that came from....much MUCH more....

Public Service Announcement

At North Dallas Thirty, we stress the fact that we are inclusive in our programming and provide cultural and educational enlightenment to both those who love the 'mos -- and those who would love the 'mos to be somewhere else.

In response to a clear need of the latter group, we have noticed that there seems to be some confusion over the correct spelling of antigay insults. Since activity in this area seems to be in the public eye of late, we want to be certain that you avoid embarrassing mistakes, such as the ones outlined here, that make your wisdom sound even more ridiculous.

To be clear, "fagot" refers to a bundle of some sort, usually of sticks or wood, which are tied together. "Faggot" is the correct spelling for your desired insult against homosexuals designed to leave us as powerless and quivering as Jerry Falwell's jowls in a windstorm.

The correct use of the two in a sentence is as follows: "Ann, Sam, and Peter gathered a fagot of sticks to burn the faggots."

Next time, we'll answer the question a few of you have had concerning why people mistake your racial epithet for an African country.

A Friday Morning Funny

Read title of article.

Look at picture included with article.

Clean up combination of coffee and nose splooge.

Ironic Statement of the Day -- Pre-St. Paddy's Day Version

Here we go again:

Now I say this, in all sincere honesty, not because I care about the attention or reader traffic we get; I haven't checked our stats in months. But blogging is all about criticism and opinion. The Daily Dish is quite adept at "dishing" it out but completely incapable of taking it.

Blogging also entails a certain etiquette that Sullivan lacks. We can knock each other about, but at the end of the day, it doesn't hurt to give the occasional 'attaboy when it's warranted, because we're all trying to row the boat in the same general direction anyway.

I couldn't agree more, more, more.....you get the idea.

(smiles)

Gay For Pay

The gay lefty blogosphere is stroking themselves into a frenzy over the participation of ex-New Jersey Governor and current queer-as-needed Jim McGreevey at today's ACT UP circle jerk rally in New York -- as well as for his appearance the previous night at Larry Kramer's canonization.

Everyone seems to be wondering WHY McGreevey is suddenly interested in gay activism again.

Let us put it this way; we find it incredibly amusing that McGreevey shows up at a rally to rail against calling gays "immoral" the same week he filed a lawsuit for custody and child support against his cuckolded ex-wife.

The absence of that fact on the aforementioned blogs is rather interesting.....

More Action, Less Talk

Thanks to activity and continued pressure on the part of Andrew Sullivan and other bloggers like Chris Crain, HRC is apparently starting to feel some heat -- a fact which seems to have caught the attention of more-conventional gay media in the West and (apparently) the East.

While all this attention on the problem is nice, what should be remembered is that this isn't the first time that HRC has felt pressure over their hyper-partisanship and sketchy membership and administrative practices -- and given the result of the last time it happened, it would explain HRC Executive Director Joe Solmonese's recent fit of pique.

While it might be tempting on several levels to use the Executive Director du jour as a sacrificial lamb, one should remember that HRC's Executive Board are the people who hired him in the first place; canning him just allows them to hire, as they did with Solmonese, someone who is even more hopelessly partisan and haplessly clueless than the person they just fired. Unless real, proactive change is made to (or forced on) the Board itself and the organization, the same dysfunctional pattern will repeat itself ad nauseum -- and gay rights will continue to take a back seat to pandering.

For real change, here are a few suggested priorities -- and means of implementing them.

1. The HRC Executive Board should represent gays first, not parties.

To do this, there should be two limits on eligibility for Board membership; one, you may not have been employed in any capacity by a campaign for elected office or by a state or national party apparatus within the past two years, and two, you may not be a registered lobbyist.

Doubtless there would be immediate howls of protest over how much "experience" and "access" the Board would be losing. The return response should be simple; you are welcome to volunteer your services for HRC's use, but the Board, not your billing or cocktail-party invitation needs, will determine where and on what those services are wanted.

2. HRC should walk the walk when it comes to non-partisanship.

Even with the removal of paid politicos from HRC's board, the potential still exists for partisan abuse of HRC's funds. Thus, to meet this goal, a 50% rule seems wise; that is, HRC and its PAC are allowed to give up to 50% of its predetermined budget for endorsements and support to candidates, organizations, and 529 groups that are aligned with or predominantly support (as in over 50% of their contributions) a specific party.

In short, HRC can only give half of its budget to Democrats. The rest doesn't have to go to Republicans, but it can't be spent on anything else partisan.

Finally, and most importantly,

3. HRC revenues, expenditures, and endorsements should be absolutely transparent.

The main reason HRC tells so little about its finances now, in the opinion of most, has primarily to do with how people would react to on what they are spending the millions of dollars they receive annually. Until HRC makes a thorough and clean accounting, its activities will constantly be suspect; that is an inescapable reality.

Taken together, I believe these three points can improve HRC's standing both inside and outside the gay community by encouraging sound business practice, limiting partisan overspending, and refocusing the organization on the issues of gays, rather than the issues of the Beltway elite and those who would profit by their association and influence with HRC.

Which means they may not have a snowball's chance in hell of getting implemented. But you never know until you ask.......

Yes Ma'am, Whatever You Say, Ma'am

Sometimes I wonder if Democrats think the rest of us are just really that stupid.

Case in point: Hillary Clinton's recent remarks over the firing of eight US attorneys.

"I'm deeply disturbed by what we have learned thus far," Clinton said, "and I join those who are calling for a full and thorough investigation to try to get to the bottom of these very political decisions that interfere with prosecutorial responsibility by U.S. attorneys, and I think that the attorney general should resign."

Clinton said the evidence so far pointed to "direct interference with the way U.S. attorneys are supposed to operate — to be impartial. There's evidence of political interference and political pressure being put on them to engage in partisan political activities." Clinton added there were "so many examples of an abuse of power, of going in and removing people not on the basis of performance but, in fact, because they were performing well, they were fulfilling their responsibilities as a U.S. attorney, and that wasn't within the political agenda of the administration."

Sounds good so far, right?

But then, as so often happens, the foot goes in with the second statement:

When Clinton's husband took office in 1993, one of the first actions his attorney general took was to remove every U.S. attorney. Clinton was asked how this was different from the termination of eight U.S. attorneys last December.

"There is a great difference," Clinton said. "When a new president comes in, a new president gets to clean house. It's not done on a case-by-case basis where you didn't do what some senator or member of Congress told you to do in terms of investigations into your opponents. It is 'Let's start afresh' and every president has done that."

So to be clear, Hillary Clinton thinks everyone should be evaluated on the basis of their performance and how well they were doing their job, not on the political agenda of the current administration, and that it's wrong to hire and fire US attorneys based on their alignment with the administration's political agenda.

Except that canning every single US attorney without reviewing their individual performance, just the fact that they were put in by the previous administration, then selecting new ones based on your own political agenda, is OK.

In short, everyone else has to play by my rules except for me.

Patterico has a great outline of this whole situation -- and why it's so mind-blowingly silly on so many levels.

Today's HRC Action Alert

Mark my words, this will be their next crusade against "oppression of a gay American".

No, WE'RE The Bigger Bullies!

An interesting piece about the newspapers who previously ran and who are continuing to run Ann Coulter columns after last week's "faggot" remark.....which is over 90% of them.

What is interesting is what happens when Democrat shills, raised on the theory that if they bombard someone with complaints, they get their way, collide with more solid and pragmatic-valued publishers.

The Casper Star-Tribune also plans to continue publishing Coulter. "I don't like Ann Coulter, but many of my readers do," said Clark Walworth, editor of the Wyoming daily. "And I resent being lectured to by people who don't even subscribe to my paper.".....

The Associated Press reported that another Coulter client, the Elko (Nev.) Daily Free Press, decided Friday to keep the columnist after soliciting the opinions of readers.

On Thursday, the Free Press had posted a note reporting that it received thousands of e-mails generated by the HRC campaign, but said none of the e-mails were local. So the paper asked local readers to weigh in.

"As of this morning we had received nearly 60 phone calls or faxes, and about nine out of 10 wanted us to keep running Ann Coulter," said Free Press Managing Editor Jeff Mullins, as quoted in a Friday story in his paper.

Mullins added: "Many callers said they thought Ann Coulter had a right to express herself, and they did not want us to be swayed by those seeking her removal."

Food for thought.....people didn't like what Coulter said, but they liked being bullied by self-righteous gay leftist thought police, who hadn't a clue about those they were criticizing, even less.

Gee, think it might be time for a tactics shift?

Ironic Statement of the Day -- Friday, March 9th Version

Just read it.

Did I mention that I'm proud to have a blog where NDT's comments are actually welcome?

Then remember this.

NDT has finally joined the long, proud list of Malcontent bannees. Like Mike Rogers and company, he is a gay person whom ironically I believe to be dangerous to the interests of gay people.

Then guffaw. :)

Regular commentor and all-around good guy Pat stated in the comments to the first version of this post, "Times change, don't they?"

Actually, I don't think I changed at all; it's just that Matt and Robbie ultimately figured out that I wasn't going to cut their counterproductive and hateful behavior on the occasions they practiced it any more slack than I did Mike Rogers's. I have the utmost respect for both GayPatriot and Boi from Troy, but that doesn't stop me from calling them out in similar situations.

Gays, at least in my opinion, put a higher value on belonging and unity than most. This is understandable, since the great majority of us have been to some degree separated from the places in society that would ordinarily support that, like churches, families, organizations, and such; we want what we haven't had or have been denied. But the danger in wanting to belong too much, to be popular, as shown to us in innumerable after-school specials, is that you put belonging ahead of thinking and keep making excuses about how you have to do this, or people will stop liking you. H.G Bissinger's Friday Night Lights (a great book that became an average movie and turned into a lousy TV show), about the hero worship of high school football in a West Texas oil town, has a powerful and sad example of the lengths to which people went to be associated with the players.

Then there was the girl who had been dubbed the “book bitch”. So desperate was she to ingratiate herself with the football players that she bought one of them a brand-new backpack and then offered him fifty dollars to sleep with her. When that didn’t work, she offered to bring the books of several of them to class. Dutifully, she waited in the hallway, whereupon Don and some others loaded her down with books so she could trudge off to class with them with a slightly chagrined smile on her face, as if she knew that what she was doing was the price you paid for trying to gain the acceptance of the football players when you had blemishes on your face and didn’t look like Farrah Fawcett.

Sounds like Elizabeth Birch at a Clinton campaign rally.

But what's worse in the gay community is that, once we've been "accepted" by other gays -- that is, once our book-bitching actually works -- we have an adamantine resistance to doing anything that might jeopardize that acceptance.

Again, understandable; having been rejected more than most, gays are hypersensitive about avoiding the pain that comes with that, and will thus want to tend towards compromise, accomodation, or saying nothing. But what this means is that, more often than not, gays are faced with a Hobson's choice: go along with something with which you disagree in the name of unity and protecting your position as accepted, or hold to your principles and risk an avalanche of insult.

The reason I do the latter more often than not is simple; the most intrepid revolutionary is one who has a fear greater than anyone can inflict on him. Because of what I have been through in my life and experience, I know full well that letting yourself down is worse than any taunt, insult, or pain another person can bring against you.

And that is what ultimately matters most.

Why Gays Will Never See Progress

Because we allow bullshit statements to stand.

In my job, I deal regularly with salespeople, and it's interesting how, when you call them in to discuss why they didn't make their quarterly quota targets, you can divide them into two groups based on their answer: "It was my fault, I need to improve my skills and techniques, what can I do?" or, "Well, sure this quarter was bad, but the trend is upward, I've got a lot in the pipeline, I'm going to close some big deals and make it up, it all works out in the big picture".

One of those answers reminds me a lot of the responses one gets from gay Democrats and leftists when confronted with examples of Democrat homophobia.

But you can’t cite outliers to the trend, and then ignore the fact that there is a trend.

Or, on a more-national level, in response to the endorsement of an FMA-supporting Democrat by current HRC leader Joe Solmonese:

Solmonese, who is also gay, contends that activists critical of the Tenenbaum endorsement are missing the “bigger picture.”

Interestingly enough, what I've found is that the salespeople who cite "trends", who make promises based on their "pipeline", and ask me to take a look at the "bigger picture" rather than their current history are the ones who end up in my office, quarter after quarter, until they either change answers or they cross the sales director's pain threshold for money loss.

Why? Because all they're doing is avoiding the problem. Like people who buy more house than they can afford on the grounds that it will appreciate, they are using the future as an excuse not to change in the present.

In the same fashion, gay leftists and Democrats, despite overwhelming and detailed evidence that their spending tens of millions of dollars in cash, time, and self-respect on Democrats over the course of decades in attempts to win support is in fact reaping the opposite, continue to insist that we're missing the "bigger picture", that we should focus on the "trend", and so forth.

With my salespeople who try that, I say this: banks, the power company, our suppliers, and other employees will not accept checks written on the basis of "future results", "pipeline", or "trends". They want to see action and cash in hand -- and it is your job to provide them. We will do what it takes to help you improve your skills to do so but, unless you acknowledge the issue first and make a firm commitment to fix it, you will not see improvement -- and, if that is the case, you will no longer be employed here.

As we see elsewhere, the tendency among gays is to, in the name of "moderation" and "tolerance", facilitate that avoidance.

But as long as avoidance is rewarded.....it sees no reason to change.

An Open Letter to CPAC Sponsors and Organizers Regarding Ann Coulter

(as per James Joyner at Outside the Beltway)

Conservatism treats humans as they are, as moral creatures possessing rational minds and capable of discerning right from wrong. There comes a time when we must speak out in the defense of the conservative movement, and make a stand for political civility. This is one of those times.

Ann Coulter used to serve the movement well. She was telegenic, intelligent, and witty. She was also fearless: saying provocative things to inspire deeper thought and cutting through the haze of competing information has its uses. But Coulter’s fearlessness has become an addiction to shock value. She draws attention to herself, rather than placing the spotlight on conservative ideas.

At the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2006, Coulter referred to Iranians as “ragheads.” She is one of the most prominent women in the conservative movement; for her to employ such reckless language reinforces the stereotype that conservatives are racists.

At CPAC 2007 Coulter decided to turn up the volume by referring to John Edwards, a former U.S. Senator and current Presidential candidate, as a “faggot.” Such offensive language–and the cavalier attitude that lies behind it–is intolerable to us. It may be tolerated on liberal websites but not at the nation’s premier conservative gathering.

The legendary conservative thinker Richard Weaver wrote a book entitled Ideas Have Consequences. Rush Limbaugh has said again and again that “words mean things.” Both phrases apply to Coulter’s awful remarks.

Coulter’s vicious word choice tells the world she care little about the feelings of a large group that often feels marginalized and despised. Her word choice forces conservatives to waste time defending themselves against charges of homophobia rather than advancing conservative ideas.

Within a day of Coulter’s remark John Edwards sent out a fundraising email that used Coulter’s words to raise money for his faltering campaign. She is helping those she claims to oppose. How does that advance any of the causes we hold dear?

Denouncing Coulter is not enough. After her “raghead” remark in 2006 she took some heat. Yet she did not grow and learn. We should have been more forceful. This year she used a gay slur. What is next? If Senator Barack Obama is the de facto Democratic Presidential nominee next year will Coulter feel free to use a racial slur? How does that help conservatism?

One of the points of CPAC is the opportunity it gives college students to meet other young conservatives and learn from our leaders. Unlike on their campuses—where they often feel alone—at CPAC they know they are part of a vibrant political movement. What example is set when one highlight of the conference is finding out what shocking phrase will emerge from Ann Coulter’s mouth? How can we teach young conservatives to fight for their principles with civility and respect when Ann Coulter is allowed to address the conference? Coulter’s invective is a sign of weak thinking and unprincipled politicking.

CPAC sponsors, the Age of Ann has passed. We, the undersigned, request that CPAC speaking invitations no longer be extended to Ann Coulter. Her words and attitude simply do too much damage.

Credentialed CPAC 2007 Bloggers

Sean Hackbarth, The American Mind
James Joyner, Outside the Beltway
BoiFromTroy, Boi From Troy
Joy McCann, Little Miss Attila
Kevin McCullough, Musclehead Revolution
Fausta Werz, Fausta’s blog
Patrick Hynes, Ankle Biting Pundits
Ed Morrissey, Captain’s Quarters
Jane Stewart, See Jane Mom
Alexander Brunk, Save the GOP

Other Right-of-Center Bloggers

Owen Robinson, Boots and Sabres
N.Z. Bear, The Truth Laid Bear
Michael Demmons, Gay Orbit
Mark Coffey, Decision ‘08
Russell Newquist, The Philosopher’s Stone
Marshall Manson, On Tap
Rob Port, Say Anything
Matthew Johnston, Going to the Mat
Timmer, The Daily Brief
Rick Moran, Right Wing Nuthouse
Dustin Gawrylow - Free Republicans

And of course, North Dallas Thirty.

Reality Is Such a Drag

(Cross posted on Malcontent....assuming it survives there........in response to this comment.)

Noah:

It is always fun to watch denialism in action.

For example, you criticize the RNC head, but insist that the DNC head getting up in front of an audience of voters to which the Dems are trying to reach out and telling them point-blank that the Democrat platform and Democrat Party specifically supports, as you put it, making gays second-class citizens.

And this is even funnier:

Again, Ken Mehlman and other powerful gay leaders of the Republican Party were happy to enshrine in laws that reduce GLBTs in to second class citizens. They did this for their personal gain.

Really?

What about those gays that frankly littered the Kerry campaign -- as Kerry publicly supported banning gay marriage in Massachusetts, publicly supported state constitutional amendments stripping gays of rights, and bragged publicly that he had the "same position" as President Bush?

And unlike Ken Mehlman, they actually were gay, not just people who are accused by Democrat-funded smear artists who alternate between attempts at "outing" people who aren't gay and insistence that Republicans are building concentration camps for gays in the Pacific Northwest.

Not to mention the tens of millions of dollars and unquestioning support given by HRC, a group dominated by Democrat lobbyists to Democrats like Kerry and Bill Clinton, both of whom touted their support of laws rendering gays "second-class citizens'?

And, as Instapundit pointed out, the DNC poured enormous sums of money towards candidates like Harold Ford, Jim Webb, Heath Shuler, and others who were more than happy to express their belief that gays should be "second-class citizens" on the stump in hopes of garnering votes.

So we have the DNC head, the Democrat Presidential candidates, the DNC-supported candidates for Congress, and others all running around doing this.

But you insist that the Democrats "as a party" aren't doing this.

Craig, get the real-estate prospectus.....we got us a live one.

UPDATE: Erased from Malcontent in two hours. I can't decide whether that's progress or not.

Paging Cotton Mather

One would think we modern folk gave up the idea of blaming our problems on witches years ago.

Not so, it seems -- or at least when pointing fingers for the failure of the Sonoma County gay newspaper We the People.

Hal Campbell, a former We the People staffer, said there were many factors that led to the newspaper's demise, including loss of advertisers and distribution locations; rising costs and shrinking revenues; and the resignation of all the parent company's board members.

"Despite Bush's so-called 'booming economy,' many mom-and-mom and pop-and-pop businesses went belly up and never paid us for what they owed us," he said.


Yes, of course, because we know it's Bush's fault. Despite studies that indicate 33% of small businesses fail within the first two years, half by four, and over 60% by six years, the reason that gay-owned businesses do so is because they were hexed by Bush.

According to psychologists and folks in the know, accusing people of witchcraft back in Salem days served two useful functions -- smearing people you didn't like and, most importantly, avoiding the notion that your actions might in any way be responsible for your problems.

I guess it's easier to blame Bush than to change your business plan.

Why Think When You Can Ban?

These people really need lives.

Or a spine.

The logic used by these groups is that banning advertising to children will reduce pressure on parents by reducing the number of requests/nagging/demands that children have for advertised products -- in short, if they don't know about it, they can't ask for it or throw a temper tantrum over not getting it.

The simple act of saying "No" and sticking to it seems to be quite beyond the capacity of these groups to understand.

What groups like these are doing is trying to make life easier for parents by abdicating responsibility for raising their children. Instead of having parents hold responsibility for what their children eat, ban junk food. Instead of having parents have to refuse their childrens' requests, hide information from the children so they can't make the request in the first place.

Children learn by experience. Instead of trying to get banned programs like Book It! that obviously do help children, these advocacy groups could provide resources to educate parents about how to explain product placement and good consumerism to their kids.

But that would require work, not sexy public ranting that gets you on TV.

Karma Chameleonic

OK, people, I get the points made about letting certain things go or being too melodramatic about past slights.

But can I at least laugh at the irony of this, especially when one considers the history involved?

Willfully or Completely Naive

There are two possible explanations for this article.

1. The Washington Post has been living in a cave for twenty years.

2. The Washington Post finds it more politically correct to comment on the behavior patterns of people in Africa than it does to discuss identical ones in America.

Message in Futility

"Your message expressing your opposition to H.R. 800, the Employee Free Choice Act (which would remove the requirement of a secret ballot election for employees to choose whether or not to unionize, but includes no prohibitions against the use of threats and intimidation by union organizers to force employees who don't want to to accept a union - ed) and asking your representatives to vote against it has been sent to the following recipients:

-- U.S. Congressman Tom Lantos (D-CA-12)
-- U.S. Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA-08) Speaker of the House"