Creating a Story to Fit the Narrative.

Hey! Did you know that Republicans hate Women, Blacks, Jews, Hispanics, (insert group of non-old white men here) ?!? What? You didn’t?! Just look at all the evidence!

For those of you who read conservative blogs, you know that accusations of bigotry of all forms is not uncommon for the Repulican party, or conservatives in general.  However, I found this article uniquely offensive and angering and for someone who’s a conservative in a heavily liberal area, that’s hard to do.

But the growing schism between the Republican Party’s ascendant right wing and its shrinking moderate core has clear gender undertones — and Scozzafava’s departure raises fresh questions about the GOP’s ability to recruit, elect and even tolerate the sort of moderate women who used to be part of its ruling mainstream.

Ah yes, gotta love those “undertones” and “raises questions” lines.  Democrats and liberals use these lines when they want to make accusations but don’t have the balls to actually stand behind what they are accusing people of (usually because they know it’s untrue).  Sounds a lot like those racist undertones conservatives had during Obama’s campaign, and throughout the ongoing fight against universal healthcare.  Why, we (conservatives) are only opposing the President because (gasp) he’s black!  Now, we’re only voting against candidates like Scozzafava because (gasp) she’s a woman!  It takes almost the entire first page before we find out that there’s even any possibility of another reason conservatives would oppose her nomination.

Scozzafava’s conservative critics — including former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh — chalked up their opposition to her liberal positions on abortion and gay rights.

It’s not so much that they invoked Palin and Limbaugh as critics (who by far weren’t the only ones) of Scozzafava, but the authors of this pile of crap article only chose to mentin two specific issues; abortion, and gay rights. 

Did you also know that Scozzafava was pro-card-check?  She also supported the porkulus bill that every single GOP House Representative voted against.  She also voted for tax hikes and a $180 million dollar state bank bailout.  However, those couldn’t possibly be reasons for conservative opposition, it MUST be because we’re all RAAAC- er…I mean…SEEEEEEEXXXXIST!!!!

But it doesn’t stop there.  In the very next paragraph, the authors of this crapfest double-down on stupid.

Demand, Supply

Alright, so it’s been a while since I’ve posted.  Although I’m not sure that really matters since it’s going to be a while before anyone realizes I’ve posted something new here anyway.

To get this “new age” of CinC kicked off, I present to you this little diddy that I found via Greg Mankiw’s blog.  Apparently someone found his textbook worthy of writing a little rap song about.  Listen closely to the lyrics, as this is probably the most (or only?) educational rap song I’ve ever heard.

Rythm, Rhyme, Results – Supply, Demand

Maybe This Is Hypocritical But…

I consider myself technologically up-to-date, but this is further than I want to go with my “techno-hipness”.  I’m talking about Twitter.

Now, I’m not going to bother explaining this here, as I feel this video expresses my feelings completely.

Now, I’m only saying this is possibly hypocrtical because as I see it, isn’t blogging similar?  I’m here, typing out my thoughts and feelings on various topics to those of you who read.  Some of you might add this site to your favorites and are therefore “following”  me like you would with Twitter.

I guess really the difference is that I can make much longer posts on a blog, whereas Twitter is limited to 140 characters (I believe).  Furthermore, like the video says, Twitter is mainly used for updating people on your current activities/thoughts, not for writing lengthy political analysis or long angry rants.

Perhaps if I started posting my current thoughts/activities, this site would see a lot more updates.  Then again, I’m trying to reach a larger audience here, and is anyone really that interested in what I’m eating for lunch, or happen to be thinking at any moment in time?  Trust me, you don’t want to get into my head, it’s painfully boring in there.

Andrew Breitbart on How to Combat Pop Culture Liberalism

This past Friday, Andrew Breitbart, a leader in online conservative media, appeared on “Real Time with Bill Maher”.  As anyone who has watched 5 minutes of the show knows, it’s not exactly a welcome place for conservatives.  I watched the first 3 or 4 minutes on YouTube and had to turn it off in disgust from how Maher and his liberal guest were treating Mr. Breitbart (not that I was shocked or suprised by that).

Many people questioned Mr. Breitbart on why he would willingly appear on a show that has a unblemished track record of being hostile to conservatives and advised him to decline the invitation.  Today in the Washington Times, Mr. Breitbart explains why he didn’t heed the advice he recieved. 

Since the salad days of ABC’s “Politically Incorrect,” which minted countless right-wing pundits and best-selling authors, conservatives have rightly assessed the HBO version of the Maher show as R-rated and shockingly hostile to their worldview. So most opt out.

I totally see why. But I think that’s exactly the wrong strategy.

The problem with the withdrawal approach is that it cedes the popular culture debate to the other side. We figure talk radio, a certain cable news network and some independent Internet venues will allow for us to get our ideas out to the masses. Well, those few outlets are greatly outnumbered. They are also isolated and targeted for destruction by the activist left. The sitting president (using taxpayer money) is now leading the charge.

In my neighborhood at least, this strategy of avoiding engagement with the other side isn’t working out so well.

I happen to agree 100% with Mr. Breitbart’s analysis here.  Currently in this country, the default political worldview is that of liberals.  Conservatives and conservative-leaning media sources (FoxNews, talk radio, etc.) are labeled as racist, bigoted, homophobic, facist, and so on and so forth.  If you’ve ever talked to someone about Rush Limbaugh who’s never tuned in to his show, you know what I’m talking about.

My fiance was one of these people.  Not that she was a big left-wing liberal (she wasn’t very politically aware, period), but she had always had this image of Rush of being angry, racist, and hostile to any callers who disagreed with his opinions.  Don’t ask me how I did it, because I don’t remember, but I was able to get her to start listening to some of Rush’s show, and she was literally shocked.  She said to me “he is not at all what I thought”.  She now enjoys Rush’s show, his humor, and his overall personality and demeanor.  She says “he’s got this really pleasant tone and voice, and once you understand his sense of humor, his show is really entertaining”.

I think a lot of people who go out and vote are “default Democrats”.  They are the people who will always claim “I don’t really like politics”, yet are compelled to vote (and rightfully so) out of a sense of duty…and because Matt Damon, MTV, E!, P. Diddy, or whoever is telling them they should.  They don’t follow the issues, heck, as John Ziegler and countless polls have pointed out, most people don’t even know something as simple as which party is in the majority in the House or Senate.  The pop culture in this country is decidedly liberal, and if conservativism is to make a comeback in government, part of the resurgance is going to have to start by combatting this.  But how to go about it?

What Every Conservative Needs to Know About Embryonic Stem Cells

When President Obama lifted President George W. Bush’s ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cells, it has come to my attention that there’s a lot of confusion regarding the process of harvesting these stem cells, the effect of the President’s action, and the differences between embryonic and adult stem cell research.   Hopefully I can hold your attention long enough for this to be valuable to you.  Bear with me, the science may be a little boring for some of you, but this is valuable information you need to have in order to better articulate the conservative position on embryonic stem cell research.  My opinion on the matter will follow.

When talking about embryonic vs. adult stem cells, most people understand the key differences in where these cells come from, but a few misunderstand the process by which embryonic stem cells are harvested.  Let me make this first point clear; Embryonic Stem Cells DO NOT come from aborted fetuses.  I always cringe when I see pro-lifers argue that embryonic stem cell research encourages women to have abortions because those women will feel like they are doing something to contribute to finding new cures and treatments for debilitating diseases.  I think a better argument is to point out that by endorsing and funding this kind of research, the government (and those who support embyronic stem cell research) devalue human life.

Now, the science part…

What are teenagers up to these days?

Apparently, the answer is blackmailing each other into performing homosexual acts.

No really, this is a head-scratcher if I’ve ever heard one.  I graduated High School (in Milwaukee, WI) in 2000, and I don’t consider today’s teenage culture much different than that with which I grew up.  Sure they have even more vapid Hollywood reality show personalities that they worship, and they have greater access to the latest gossip and papparazi photos than I did due to the blogging craze, but all-in-all, I never thought it’s very different.  However, I digress.

Back in November, New Berlin High School and Middle School (in New Berlin, WI) received bomb threats and were forced to close.  During the resulting investigation, Police discovered the following reason why parents should be very, very mindful of just exactly what their kids are doing on Facebook…

New Berlin – Describing a pattern of manipulation and deception using the social networking site Facebook, the Waukesha County district attorney today announced sexual assault charges against a New Berlin Eisenhower student who authorities say coerced male students into sexual encounters.

Anthony R. Stancl, 18, posing as a female on Facebook, persuaded at least 31 boys to send him naked pictures and then blackmailed some of the boys into performing sex acts under the threat that the pictures would be released to the rest of the high school, authorities say.

Shocking to say the least.  This deviant blackmailed his own fellow students into performing sexual acts on him.  The article goes on to reveal that these actions purportedly took place on school grounds, the public library restroom, public parks, and even in the victims’ homes.

Here’s why I don’t get.  Why didn’t these kids just kick his ass?  I mean seriously, is it more humiliating to have nude photos exposed to your high school classmates than it is to be blackmailed into giving another dude a BJ, or worse??  Allright, maybe that’s inappropriate language, even for the moronosphere, but seriously, these kids obviously weren’t ashamed enough to take the nude pictures and send them out in the first place.  Didn’t it occur to them that even if it really was a girl they were talking to, what would prevent her from distrubuting the pictures in the same way?

“My dog is hungry and he’s hungry for buttocks”

That’s supposedly a direct quote from the defendant of a lawsuit filed in Arizona.  I’m not sure if that’s a direct translation (the quote was originally spoken in Spanish) or the newspaper-friendly version, but either way it’s probably one of the more awesome things you’ll ever hear in a courtroom.

The quote is taken from an article that appeared in the Washington Times today about a group of illegals who are suing an Arizona man who held them at gunpoint when he caught them trying to cross his property into the United States.

An Arizona man who has waged a 10-year campaign to stop a flood of illegal immigrants from crossing his property is being sued by 16 Mexican nationals who accuse him of conspiring to violate their civil rights when he stopped them at gunpoint on his ranch on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Roger Barnett, 64, began rounding up illegal immigrants in 1998 and turning them over to the U.S. Border Patrol, he said, after they destroyed his property, killed his calves and broke into his home.

His Cross Rail Ranch near Douglas, Ariz., is known by federal and county law enforcement authorities as “the avenue of choice” for immigrants seeking to enter the United States illegally.

That’s just the beginning few paragraphs of the article giving the basic premise of the situation.  What’s incredible is that these illegal immigrants apparently CAN sue Mr. Barnett since his lawyer’s initial request for a dismissal was denied.   Does anyone else find that shockingly disturbing?  A group of non-citizens apparently have the right to sue a legal citizen.

Blagojevich Impeached

Well, in a nearly unanimous vote of 114-1 (and one “present” vote), the Illinois House has voted to impeach Gov. Rod “my hair is as rock-solid as my ethics” Blagojevich.  The Illinois Senate now holds the trial which is scheduled to begin Jan 26th.

Here’s a little something that I thought I would share with you all.  The new Illinois state liscense plates!!!

 

"Where Our Governors Make Our Liscense Plates!"

 

By the way, here’s a little tidbit on the Representatives who voted “against” (Milton Patterson) and “present” (Elga Jefferies), surprisingly both are Chicago Democrats, whoda thunk?!.

The one lawmaker voting against impeachment was Rep. Milton Patterson, a Chicago Demorcrat who represents the South Side. Rep Elga Jefferies, also a Chicago Democrat, voted present.

Patterson said he wasn’t defending anyone, but that he read the impeachment committee’s report and wasn’t comfortable voting against the governor. “I have no firsthand knowledge of any of the evidence,” he said.

“I went by my own gut feeling, it’s as simple as that,” he said. “I read the report. If the government is going to indict him, let them go ahead and do that. That’s their job and I’m doing my job.

Apparently Rep. Patterson feels that evidence that he was not directly involved in, shouldn’t be considered when making up his mind on which way to vote.  Unless Patterson was a part of those phone calls looking for favors in exchange for a Senate seat, he feels it’s inadmissable as evidence.  Oh, and even if it was included in the evidence, logic and reason have no part in his decision-making process.  He just votes according to “his own gut feeling”.  Hey, I didn’t make this stuff up folks, and you people on the South Side voted for this idiot.  Congradulations, you’ve got a complete buffoon representing you.

Oh, and here marks the end of my Christmas/New Years/Election hangover.

New York Times publishes forged document, but is anyone really suprised?

The error in itself isn’t really that suprising, however, how this forged document even got published in the New York Times is fascinating.

This letter, like most Letters to the Editor these days, arrived by email. It is Times procedure to verify the authenticity of every letter. In this case, our staff sent an edited version of the letter to the sender of the email and did not hear back. At that point, we should have contacted Mr. Delanoë’s office to verify that he had, in fact, written to us.

We did not do that. Without that verification, the letter should never have been printed.

So let me get this straight. The NYT recieves an email containing a letter supposedly written by the mayor of Paris.  The current practice to verify the authenticity of this document is to email back the source of the letter?  Then, if they don’t respond, to go ahead and publish the letter anyway.

Did it not occur to anyone at the Times to contact, you know, the supposed original author of the document directy?  It’s not like the Mayor of Paris is a reclusive citizen tucked away in some remote corner of Manhattan. Furthermore, let’s say they did recieve an email back from the original sender of the letter.  If that response had simply said “Yes, this document is authentic”, would that have been enough for the NYT to go ahead and run with it?  Obviously it would have been seeing that  no response at all apparently serves as authetication.

The more I think about how I would deal with the situation is just making me more and more angry.  This is like asking a guy selling stereos out of his trunk if they are stolen, and taking his reply of “no man, I work for Best Buy” as a satisfactory response.

I’d like to know what the email address of the original sender was as well.  I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the NYT thought Big BeretDaddy@frenchymail.com sounded like a reliable source.

(h/t HotAir)

BREAKING: Iraqi Journalist throws shoes at President Bush

Who throws a shoe? Honestly?

Apparently Iraqi journalists. MSNBC has the video for this, and you can see the President did a nice job of dodging the projectiles. Afterwards, when asked for a comment, Bush just said, “All I know is that they were a size 10″.

Looks like America is having a bigger affect on Iraq than we realized.  Now even their mainstream media is taking after our own.  Although, I would hope our American journalists would be able to hit an unsuspecting target from 12 feet away.