by Shaker Praxxus
How dare you suggest such a thing! Kelly Newcom of Ash Flat, AR is not racist! Just because he printed up a t-shirt called "Happy Hussein" featuring Curious George an unidentified monkey holding up a sign reading "A truth we can Believe in '08" on the front, then the list of several black organizations, some Hispanic organizations, and the KKK on the back and mailed them to The Congressional Black Caucus Foundation and other organizations listed on his non-racist shirt the day after Obama claimed the Democratic Party's nomination? You obviously have no idea what you're talking about!
"It's not a racial thing," Newcom told The Washington Post's The Sleuth. "I was extremely vexed over the fact that individuals who have no idea who I am and no idea what my motives were to sit and accuse me of being a racist," Newcom said in an e-mail, adding, "I am far from it and I care not what race, sex, or religion a person is."
To prove his point, Newcom—a proclaimed McCain supporter—then went on to complain about the "preferred treatment" minority groups receive:Newcom, who makes t-shirts for Spring River Tees, said in a subsequent telephone interview that he also sent four of the shirts in question to Barack Obama's former church, the United Church of Christ in Chicago. He also said he plans to vote for John McCain this fall.
Sure Kelly. Not a racist at all.
Newcom made the shirts, he says, to protest what he sees as a disparity between minority organizations and white groups. "Why are the minority groups allowed to have these organizations? Just let a white organization be formed and it causes an uproar. Just try finding a white one on the net, listen to the crickets chirp."
Newcom also said the monkey, which looks identical to Curious George, has a bag over his head "hiding his face so as not to get confused with some other form of artwork which he may or may not resemble." He said the bag is "not some lynching bag or any other crazy idea that once again, people who want to be offended, will read into it."
Here's some advice, pal: If you're concerned about people who don't know you or your motives accusing you of being racist, maybe next time you shouldn't use such a … well … racist greeting card to introduce yourself! Jackass.
Full Disclosure: Praxxus originally hails from very near Ash Flat, AR, but has no affiliation with the odious Mr. Newcom nor Spring River Tees. He does, however, know that Spring River Tees would like to hear from you.
(Cross-posted.)
Kelly Newcom is NOT a racist!
Too Late
From the Times of London:
President Bush has admitted to The Times that his gun-slinging rhetoric made the world believe that he was a “guy really anxious for war” in Iraq. He said that his aim now was to leave his successor a legacy of international diplomacy for tackling Iran.Well, yeah; that and the propaganda campaign, the manipulation of intelligence, and the demonization of anyone who expressed opposition to invading a country that had nothing to do with the attacks of September 11, 2001 might have something to do with it as well.
In an exclusive interview, he expressed regret at the bitter divisions over the war and said that he was troubled about how his country had been misunderstood. “I think that in retrospect I could have used a different tone, a different rhetoric.”
Phrases such as “bring them on” or “dead or alive”, he said, “indicated to people that I was, you know, not a man of peace”.
What you have here is a man who is suddenly realizing that his administration is going down in history as the worst in American history, and like the kid trying to frantically write a ten-page book report on the school bus, he knows he's screwed. If it wasn't so tragic, it would be laughingly pathetic.
(Cross-posted.)
Question of the Day
More than a few commentors related their unconventional marriage stories in the Jay Leno Is A Douche thread earlier today. Here's mine:
It was a cool November evening as we walked down Hollywood Boulevard, T. sporadically holding my hand. We had walked from our hotel up to the corner of Hollywood and Vine, past the Pantages and the Frolic Room, then to Mann's Chinese and back. Along the way we stopped in at a place called the Hollyfood Bistro, ordered some beers and a couple gyros. About halfway through the meal, very matter-of-factly T. asked "Joey, will you marry me?" I smiled. "Of course." A short while later, somewhere near the Scientology Building, T. bought me a rose from a street vendor and that pretty much sealed the deal.
And that was that. From that point on we considered ourselves married. There was no legal option available to us, we couldn't go down to city hall, we couldn't run off to Vegas, but we both knew we were a committed, loving, married couple, even if the law did not.
So, married folks, committed folks, engaged folks, hopeless romantics, (hell, even now-divorced folks) here's your question of the day: What kind of ceremony did you have/do you want to have?
Reframing
by Shaker Ms. Poinsettia, a feminist blogger from New Zealand.
Over the years I've unfortunately had numerous conversations with men who bang on at me about how 'facile', 'shallow', 'juvenile' and even 'sexist' Sex and the City is and how 'horrible', 'selfish' and 'ugly' the characters are, often with said men even exhorting that I should 'know better' than to watch it. I've always found this reaction a little baffling—I saw the kneejerk sexism but couldn't satisfactorily articulate why the show elicited such over-the-top reactions. Until, that is, I saw coverage of the Sex and the City movie in this weekend's edition of the Christchurch Press and finally saw the sexism swirling around media coverage of Sex and the City within a larger context.
The front page banner 'Sexy Sarah? Or Is It Horsey-Face' alongside a picture of Sarah Jessica Parker made me frown, most unattractively probably, but my frown was slightly turned upside down by reading the corresponding article. The author pointed out how if Sarah Jessica Parker was playing some dude's wife in a sitcom it's unlikely anyone would be prattling on about how goddam ugly she is, suggesting criticisms of Sarah Jessica Parker's attractiveness are actually sublimated criticisms of her character Carrie Bradshaw.
Given the gist of the article, why such a nasty headline? Because sadly editors not authors generally choose headlines, and an editor's focus is often on the bottom line, not journalistic intent. And nothing draws the punters in like a bit of focusing on whether a woman makes this season's intangible grade of beauty or not. And why does Sarah Jessica Parker's appearance matter?
Because talking about Sarah Jessica Parker's actual reason for being everywhere in the media at the moment necessitates talking about a movie in which men's desires, opinions, and importance are only peripheral and women's are primary. The fact that so many women loved the Sex and the City TV show points to how fucking amazing it was to see female characters who, while in some ways were so one-dimensional (Where are their families? Why an almost myopic focus on their romantic lives? etc), were in other ways thrillingly three-dimensional.
The standard dramatic portrayal of women involves female characters who largely accept traditional gender roles. They may work/have careers but they are primarily male-focused—they want weddings, babies, and to emotionally support their husbands; they are conventionally attractive; their sexual focus is on pleasing their men rather than pursuing their own pleasure (their libido is helpfully always identical to that of the man they are dating/married to). Female characters who don't conform to gender conventions are often cast as unfeminine abberrations, as women who are unattractive, unsatisfied, too serious, unloving, shrill and so on...
So to see female characters on TV who weren't automatically satisfied by any guy who gave them the time of day and weren't afraid to keep looking, who weren't sure they wanted to get married, and who weren't sure they wanted to have babies—in short to find characters who think like many women actually think about relationships, marriage and babies—was immensely appealing to many women. And what was even more appealing was that despite their equivocation about traditional gender roles they were still into 'girly stuff'—the shoes, fashion, gossip, relationships—a charactersiation which disrupts the pervasive cultural casting of women as either feminine self-effacing manlovers or unfeminine selfish manhaters. Sex and the City highlights the fact that straight women can actually value their own sense of self and love men—all at once!
And how does the male-dominated media respond to this depiction of femininity as a continuum rather than an either/or? The media reframes the discussion so that what's really important is not the themes of this TV show and movie that women love, but the attractiveness of the starring actress and, by association, the show's fans.
I think this can be seen in Maxim's juvenile rating of her as #1 in their list of unsexiest women. What is with making a list of the unsexiest women? In ways seemingly intangible to many people, the sexiest lists are just as nasty but a list of the unsexiest is also unnecessarily mean and petty. However, it does helpfully make the point of 'sexiest' lists completely tangible: they exist to put women in their place—either sexy and therefore useful, or unsexy and not only unworthy of attention, but an affront to male sensibilities.
The implicit message in critiquing her appearance is 'Women might like her, but do men?' Any sense women may garner from this film that their desires are valuable is undermined by bringing women back to this culture's bottom line: it is a woman's role to meet men's desires, not the other way round.
Blog Note: Shakesville Comment Search
If you haven't already noticed, there's a great new feature on the sidebar for all of you cool hep-cats: The Shakesville Comment Search!
See, the Queen Cunt of Fuck Mountain requested such a feature. When the Queen wants, the Queen gets. It's a proprietary Shakesville comment search. But wait, there's more! It even has its own theme song to get you motivated enough to use it!
| Theme Song.mp3 |
Ambition-Crazed Harpy Who Will Stop at Nothing to Get the Democratic Nomination, Even If It Means Destroying the Democratic Party. Or Not.
How many times during the primary did we hear that Hillary Clinton was so self-absorbed, so drunk with ambition, so mad with the need for power that she would do anything—anything!!!11!—to get the Democratic nomination? How many times did we hear that from ostensible progressives, even in the comments threads of this very blog? I can't even imagine how many times I read that shit over the past few months.
Clinton Donors Urged To Back Obama: "Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's top national fundraisers convened a series of conference calls today with major donors in various regions around the country to urge them to throw their financial weight behind Sen. Barack Obama—sooner rather than later. The calls were led by Jonathan Mantz, the Clinton campaign's finance director, and were cast as a follow-up on Clinton's appeal for unity during her concession speech over the weekend."
Clinton Asks Pledged Delegates To Support Obama: "Multiple Democratic sources say that Sen. Hillary Clinton, in a series of private conversations and conference calls, continues to urge her pledged delegates to vote for Barack Obama at the Democratic National Convention. Clinton plans a series of calls with superdelegates, interest groups and state delegations over the next few days. (One of them took place last night, according to this report from Iowa's Quad Cities-Globe-Gazette.)"
Et cetera.
Do you think any of the people who went on and on about what a reckless, power-questing, narcissistic, voraciously and dangerously selfish person she is are even the slightest bit ashamed of themselves? Or just fucking embarrassed for being so wrong?
Me, neither.
(I don't guess I need to point out how neatly those charges just happen to fit into existent historical frames used to demonize powerful women, or explain why I find that relevant.)
Attack of the Killer Tomatoes
Well, they won't exactly kill you, but they sure-as-shit will give you TEH WET FRENZEH!! It looks like we've a new food scare among us, and its name is Salmonellosis.
Here's the latest buzz from the FDA on the matter:
The specific type and source of tomatoes are under investigation. However, preliminary data suggest that raw red plum, raw red Roma, or raw round red tomatoes are the cause. At this time, consumers should limit their tomato consumption to tomatoes that have not been implicated in the outbreak. These include cherry tomatoes, grape tomatoes, tomatoes sold with the vine still attached, and tomatoes grown at home.I guess this places bruschetta and BLT's on the endangered species list for the time being until the safe tomato population gets its act together.
More info at the CDC.
I Write Letters
Dear Boston Herald:
With regard to your item about Top Chef contestants Jen Biesty and Zoi Antonitsas visiting Macy's at Downtown Crossing, I would politely like to inform you that lesbian partners are not "galpals."
"Galpals" signifies two women who are friends, not two women who are lovers and life partners (and who may be friends, too, if they're lucky). Portly Dyke and I are galpals; Portly Dyke and her beloved are partners. Please note the difference for future reference.
You see, when you portray a same-sex relationship as the equivalent of just a really good friendship, in a way you would not do to a mixed-sex relationship, you are unavoidably othering same-sex couples. And this straight grrl would like you to take that othering and shove it where it belongs—in the 1950s. Or the GOP platform. But I repeat myself.
Thank you, and have a nice day.
Warmest regards,
Liss
cc. Ann.
Assvertising
[Click to embiggen.]
Part 23 of our now-26 part series on craptacular advertising focused on Svedka Vodka's sexbot ("SVEDKA_grl") campaign—and she's already back, this time taking out a full-page ad on page A11 of The New York Times which offers Hillary Clinton a redeemable coupon for a personal supply of Vodka:
According to a press release about the ad, in which Hillary Clinton's name is misspelled as "Hilary" in one place, Svedka "thanks Hillary for making the Primary season so exciting and encourages her to sit back, relax and have a drink." Yeah, take a load off, little lady! Now that you've lost the primary, your work is done. It's not like you have an important and fulfilling career as a United States Senator to get back to or anything. Just get yourself some bon-bons and some booze and have yourself a little poolside R&R.
Although I'm not sure why Clinton would drink that Swedish stuff when there's a perfectly good Russian vodka that's been designed specifically for the ladies!
The press release also asserts that Svedka has "been trailblazing this platform with their new multi-level marketing campaign called 'Join the Party'. This promotion parodies a traditional election campaign aiming to elect the fembot, SVEDKA_Grl, to the White House. Over the next few months, Svedka will capitalize on the many twists and turns of the Presidential election by celebrating the humor of American politics." Oh, goody.
I can't wait.
(Random Aside: I wonder if the John in the ad is supposed to be John McCain or John Edwards. With no last time, Republicans can read into it that they're non-partisan, and Democrats can read into it that they're thanking the Big Three Dems for a hard-fought primary and are liberals who don't give a crap about McCain. Hmm.)
[Assvertising: Parts One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Nine, Ten, Eleven, Twelve, Thirteen, Fourteen, Fifteen, Sixteen, Seventeen, Eighteen, Nineteen, Twenty, Twenty-One, Twenty-Two, Twenty-Three, Twenty-Four, Twenty-Five.]
Mythbusting: Disability and Fear-Projection
by Shaker Annaham
Greetings, Shakers! I'm Annaham, and I run the somewhat sporadically updated HAM.BLOG. As some of you may know, I have a chronic health condition called fibromyalgia—it is characterized by constant muscle and joint pain of varying degrees, and extreme fatigue. I like to call fibro the bastard child of Rheumatoid Arthritis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. [If you'd like to know more, please refer to the delightfully neutral Wikipedia entry].
Despite the publicity that fibro has been getting lately from the MSM, there are still a ton of misconceptions floating around that, as someone with the condition, I deal with on a somewhat regular basis. In this post, I will address some of these myths. Also, please keep in mind that I am just one individual with this condition, and I do not claim to speak for all people with fibro. Regardless, many of us deal with the disbelief, mockery, and unsolicited advice which are sometimes sprung upon us by "healthy" people; some of these pieces of "advice" are things that I will address here. Before I get started with yet more of my world-famous verbosity and cynicism regarding invisible illness, I want to thank and give an internet high-five Liss for letting me guest post.
Onward!
Myth #1: Fibromyalgia is just a condition that was made up by pharmaceutical companies; therefore, they are trying to profit off of you.
Despite the fact that hating Big Pharma and being suspicious of them—and, to a lesser extent, of anyone who takes prescription medication for bodily issues that they cannot control—is en vogue now, fibromyalgia and conditions like it have actually been around for a long time. The television commercials and public "awareness" may be new, but the condition is not.
Also, whether or not I take my medication usually means the difference between my being able to get on with my day, or my being confined to my couch. I could eschew the medication and suffer, or take it and suffer less. Certainly, there are problems with Big Pharma, but the fact that some medications—gasp—actually improve the quality of life for some of us does not mean that we are "buying into" the promises of the pharmaceutical industry like corporate zombies. For some of us, medication can sometimes mean the difference between a good day and a bad one, and it is not up to others' paranoia to make our decisions for us.
Myth #2: You must have not properly taken care of yourself/had the right attitude/visualized your reality properly, and that's why you have this condition.
Out of all of the myths surrounding fibro, this is the one I've had hurled at me the most; epic irony lies in the fact that this one mostly comes from ostensibly well-meaning, new age "progressives" who are totally into The Secret or other such tripe. Some believe that if they just exercise constantly, are super-vigilant about their health, visualize their "reality," or have the right attitude, they will be protected from bad things ever happening to them. News flash: Bad things will and do happen to all of us.
Illness and disability are not moral issues; the condition of a person's body due to things that they cannot control should not be held against them as some sort of "proof" of a just world, or as proof that bad things only happen if you don't have the right attitude. Whenever someone breaks this chestnut out, I always want to respond with, "That's great that you've never had any major health problems, or that no one close to you has experienced any. I look forward to seeing you when you realize that you are wrong." Unfortunately, I haven't tried this response so far.
I believe that our culture has indoctrinated us into a line of thinking which posits that illness, or disability, is one of the worst things that can happen to a person. One may not hear comments such as "I'd rather be dead than in a wheelchair" anymore, but the attitude that illness and disability are irrevocably horrible dovetails rather nicely with the prevailing myth that anyone can control his or her body, and if they do not (or cannot), they are simply not trying hard enough to get better, and thus, they deserve whatever happens to them.
The idea that a "healthy" state of mind can prevent catastrophic reality from crashing in is not a new one, but, apparently, it is one that gives many people comfort. It is comforting to think, "I'm not like that. It will never happen to me" about a myriad of situations. Those of us who are invisibly disabled or ill—particularly those of us who, on good days, can "pass" as able-bodied or not sick—are a reminder to other folks that illness and disability can happen to them. It's scary, sure, but does it really justify such hatred and fear, masquerading up as concern or advice about the supposed importance of a "positive attitude?"
Myth #3: You can't possibly have a disability! You're young and you can still do stuff. What's so hard about having "pain"?
Here is a partial list of things that I have difficulty doing at times, depending on my pain and fatigue levels (which shift almost daily):
• Sleeping!
• Climbing stairs!
• Standing for more than 20 minutes!
• Exercising!
• Concentrating!
• Doing the dishes!
• Brushing my hair or touching my scalp!
• Reading!
• Walking!
• Carrying heavy or unwieldy objects!
• Cleaning!
• Completing school-related assignments in a timely manner!
• Opening packages, containers, or cans!
• Giving or receiving physical contact of many kinds! (Yes, sometimes a slap on the back or a hug physically hurts.)
One of the most difficult aspects of fibromyalgia is that it does dis-able me at times—that is, it sometimes makes certain things almost impossible (or at least very, very hard) to do. The pain is difficult because, like an unfriendly specter, it is always with you. On a "good" day, it is at the margins of your body—always waiting for an opportunity to remind you that it can take you down in less time than it takes for an able-bodied individual to do any of the things on the above list. On a "bad" day, the pain is there as well, except it has you in its talons, and there is very little that you can do to fight it. The talons digging into every part of your body, every muscle, every joint, might loosen their grip just a bit, just to make you think that you're out of the worst. Without warning, the talons of pain might just release you for a precious few moments before digging back in. It changes from day-to-day for many people with fibromyalgia; one day, I might be fine, the next day, I might be unable to walk. I may be young, but youth, like a number of other things, does not give one a free pass to perfect health.
Myth #4: If you just took this supplement/drank this green stuff made out of lake algae and mold from the inside of a Alpine cave, you'd be cured!
There is no cure for fibromyalgia. Say it with me, folks: There is no cure. There are treatments; certainly, I have benefited from various dietary and exercise-related changes. These things do not, and probably will not, make my condition disappear completely. The changes that I have made may not work for everyone else who has fibro, just like some of the things that other people do might not work for me. If someone tells you there is a "cure" for fibro, it is a sad and unfortunate sign that they probably not a medical doctor, and they are a.) lying; or b.) trying to make you spend hundreds of dollars on milkshakes made out of acai berries and the blood of baby goats or some shit in the hopes that you'll fall for it and make them rich.
Myth #5: You're probably a hypochondriac, or making it up to get attention.
Look, I know we all love to watch or follow salacious and insipid "news" stories about people who make things up to get attention, but such individuals represent a very small portion of the population (this is part of what makes those stories so scandalous). An assertion that I'm "making it up," additionally, does not make a lot of sense. Why would anyone say and act like they have pain and fatigue which are, at times, nearly unbearable, and both of which medication cannot magically cure? Furthermore, I don't get a ton of sympathy for having fibromyalgia—instead, I deal with disbelief, weird looks and stupid comments much of the time.
This sort of comment also perpetuates the stereotype of women (most, though not all, of the people diagnosed with fibromyalgia and other chronic pain-centered syndromes are female) as complainers, desperate for attention, or manipulative bitches who will make things up just to get attention or pity.
Suppose that we don't even want pity? Many human beings want to be listened to and taken seriously. Those of us with invisible disabilities or illnesses, by and large, want the same. We are, in many ways, just like you. Of course, this is a huge part of what makes invisible disability and illness so scary. We walk among you.
Hillary Sexism Watch Part 105
(Though Hillary Clinton is the primary target here, she is not the only target; plenty of room for Michelle Obama and Nancy Pelosi, too!)
Bill Wolfrum posted this awesome video (no sexism during the primary, huh?) awhile ago, but I just had occasion to watch it again, and noticed something that warrants comments as part of this series and just generally. While you're watching, check out the reactions to expressed sexism:
Some of the people reacting, certainly, find the expressions of misogyny amusing, but there are a handful who look really uncomfortable. Still, for the most part, they say nothing. Nervous laughter not withstanding.
And that was one of the things I found most disappointing during the primary—that even many progressive bloggers who didn't join in the sexist attacks on Clinton (and never would do such a thing) didn't make much effort to condemn them either, creating the silence in which reverberating misogyny echoes.
Sometimes men who are trying to be active feminist allies ask me for ideas on what practical steps they can take to make a difference, where they should aim their teaspoon. And the first thing I always tell them is "Say something." Say something when another guy makes a sexist joke or a rape joke. Say something when your boss is crediting you with an idea that's really your female coworker's. Say something when people are talking about why they don't like some female public figure and offer some obvious bit of unexamined sexist framing (e.g. has a terrible voice, has a bad marriage, is ugly). Say something whenever you can, even if it's just to say, "What makes you think I'd find that funny?" or, simply, "That's not fair."
Just say something.
[Hillary Sexism Watch: Parts One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Nine, Ten, Eleven, Twelve, Thirteen, Fourteen, Fifteen, Sixteen, Seventeen, Eighteen, Nineteen, Twenty, Twenty-One, Twenty-Two, Twenty-Three, Twenty-Four, Twenty-Five, Twenty-Six, Twenty-Seven, Twenty-Eight, Twenty-Nine, Thirty, Thirty-One, Thirty-Two, Thirty-Three, Thirty-Four, Thirty-Five, Thirty-Six, Thirty-Seven, Thirty-Eight, Thirty-Nine, Forty, Forty-One, Forty-Two, Forty-Three, Forty-Four, Forty-Five, Forty-Six, Forty-Seven, Forty-Eight, Forty-Nine, Fifty, Fifty-One, Fifty-Two, Fifty-Three, Fifty-Four, Fifty-Five, Fifty-Six, Fifty-Seven, Fifty-Eight, Fifty-Nine, Sixty, Sixty-One, Sixty-Two, Sixty-Three, Sixty-Four, Sixty-Five, Sixty-Six, Sixty-Seven, Sixty-Eight, Sixty-Nine, Seventy, Seventy-One, Seventy-Two, Seventy-Three, Seventy-Four, Seventy-Five, Seventy-Six, Seventy-Seven, Seventy-Eight, Seventy-Nine, Eighty, Eighty-One, Eighty-Two, Eighty-Three, Eighty-Four, Eighty-Five, Eighty Six, Eighty-Seven, Eighty-Eight, Eighty-Nine, Ninety, Ninety-One, Ninety-Two, Ninety-Three, Ninety-Four, Ninety-Five, Ninety-Six, Ninety-Seven, Ninety-Eight, Ninety-Nine, One Hundred, 101, 102, 103, 104.]
Totally Didn't See That Coming
The headline is so perfect; it could be archetypal. Republicans block extra taxes on oil companies
WASHINGTON - Senate Republicans have blocked a Democratic plan to tax the windfall profits of the largest oil companies.Republicans to America: Suck it up, bitchez. Our profits are untouchable.
Democrats on Tuesday failed, 51-43, to get the 60 votes needed to overcome a GOP filibuster of the energy package, and bring the bill up for consideration.
Democrats said the huge profits enjoyed by the largest U.S. oil companies should be reined with motorists paying more than $4 a gallon for gasoline and oil prices soaring well beyond $100 a barrel. But Republican critics said higher taxes on oil companies would increase — not lower — gasoline prices and reduce the incentive for domestic oil exploration and production.
(Edit: For the record, here in Chicago, we're about twenty cents away from $5 gas.)
Obama Racism/Muslim/Unpatriotic/Scary Black Dude Watch Part Frigging Fifty
Matttbastard just sent me a link to this fine piece of journalism by Jim Geraghty at the National Review Online with the note: "Show us your birth certificate, Mohammed!"
And that pretty much sums it up.
Having done some Obama-rumor debunking that got praise from Daily Kos (a sign of the apocalypse, no doubt), perhaps the Obama campaign could return the favor and help debunk a bunch of others with a simple step: Could they release a copy of his birth certificate?What rumors, pray tell, do reporters need to debunk with Obama's birth certificate?
Reporters have asked for it and been denied, and the state of Hawaii does not make such records public.
1. The rumor that he was really born in Kenya—a rumor so widespread and scandalous that I've never heard it! And also would have required "everyone in his family to lie about this in every interview and discussion with those outside the family since young Obama appeared on the scene."
2. The rumor that his real given name is Barry—a rumor also so widespread and scandalous that I've never heard it! And this must be sorted out immediately; I mean, if Barry Obama changed his name to Barack Obama, we could conceivably be living in the United States of Americarack by the end of his first term! And no one wants that.
3. The rumor that his real middle name is not Hussein…but Muhammad!—a rumor so absurdly ludicrous that Geraghty notes: "[I]f you're going to change your middle name from that of the central figure in Islam because you fear controversy, picking the last name of the highest-profile anti-American dictator in the Middle East (Saddam) doesn't seem like a huge improvement." Not that it stops him from treating the rumor as serious enough to need debunking, mind you.
Which pretty much underlines what I fear is the point of this whole exercise—to spread the most xenophobic, racist, and generally idiotic rumors under the pretense of stipulating their need to be debunked.
And, to that end, I think the rumor that John McCain blows goats really ought to be debunked immediately. The ball's in your court, McCain Campaign.
[Obama Racism/Muslim/Unpatriotic/Scary Black Dude Watch: Parts One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Nine, Ten, Eleven, Twelve, Thirteen, Fourteen, Fifteen, Sixteen, Seventeen, Eighteen, Nineteen, Twenty, Twenty-One, Twenty-Two, Twenty-Three, Twenty-Four, Twenty-Five, Twenty-Six, Twenty-Seven, Twenty-Eight, Twenty-Nine, Thirty, Thirty-One, Thirty-Two, Thirty-Three, Thirty-Four, Thirty-Five, Thirty-Six, Thirty-Seven, Thirty-Eight, Thirty-Nine, Forty, Forty-One, Forty-Two, Forty-Three, Forty-Four, Forty-Five, Forty-Six, Forty-Seven, Forty-Eight, Forty-Nine.]
What I hear you saying is…
Crossposted from AngryBlackBitch.com.
A bitch is 35 years old and if I had a dollar for every time someone has told me that they don’t see my blackness I could afford to fill up Ms. Sister Girl Cabrio with premium gas for at least a month (wince).
I know that people think that saying they don’t see color is an enlightened statement, but it strikes me as bullshit. It is also sourced in the school of tolerance this bitch often refers to and has no…ummm, tolerance for.
Shall we?
Ahem.
When someone tells me that they don’t see color what I hear them saying is that their coping mechanism for living in a diverse society is to ‘same’ all people. I imagine this person engaging in a constant mental de-colorization game with every person they encounter who isn't just like them.
By color these people are really speaking about culture and this bitch is too much of a culture junkie to stand for someone saying that they can only deal with me if they overlook or see beyond or ignore my culture.
I’m black (those rumors about a bitch really being the alternate personality of Brother Rob Thurman are false, damn you!).
This bitch happens to be a full figured black woman sporting a medium Afro. If you don’t see me you need help...stat!
Cough.
I’ve always been a culture junkie, but it took me years to embrace and celebrate my culture and the physical presentation of that which is my rather fetching Hershey brown skin (wink). Learning to love and celebrate my natural hair took longer and learning to challenge anyone who dare propose that by not seeing all that is me they are somehow respecting me came shortly thereafter.
The idea that telling a person of color that you do not see their color is a compliment is sourced directly from the school of tolerance. Basically, to tolerate difference a person believes they have to ignore and/or deny difference. Americans can not be defined separate of diversity anymore than a bitch can be understood by attempting to not see my blackness.
Instead of trying to not see difference we should all work to respect it and celebrate it. If I’m proud of my heritage and culture that doesn’t mean I’m dismissing other people's. My background…like most black people who trace their ancestry through slavery…is diverse as a motherfucker and I enjoy the hell out of that.
So please...pretty please...do not attempt the impossible task of not seeing my rather unforgettable black self.
Just think of what you’re not really missing (wink).
Dear Jay Leno: Thanks for reminding straight girls and queers why we're natural allies. Love, Liss
Jay Leno can't stop sticking his foot in it.
In what should have been a nothing-but-positive interview about his admirable pro-same sex marriage position (even if it's less about equality than inevitability; at least it's public support), he's asked about the "gayest look" controversy and undermines his apology yet again by saying the reaction to his asking Ryan Phillippe to pretend the camera was his gay lover and give it his gayest look was "a little over the top" and helpfully explaining to those of us who complained that "there are bigger issues than that. That's a classic case where you're not talking about morality or lifestyle, you're just talking about silly stuff." He might as well just come right out and say, "My apology was just to shut up the hysterics."
Meanwhile, never one to pass up a chance to make fun of women, Leno also noted, while ostensibly praising same-sex marriage:
Well, the nice thing about gay marriage is you have TWO people excited about the wedding. In straight marriages, only one person is excited. Gay marriage, both persons are excited.A "women want to get married; men don't" joke? How big a hack is this guy? Hey, Jay: Take my wife…please!
And I know how Mr. Leno hates humorless bitchez deconstructing his awesome humor and all, since it's just "silly stuff" and shit, but when you make a sexist joke about straight marriage in contradistinction to same sex marriage, it has the inevitable consequence of reinforcing the idea that gay men and women aren't "real" mean and women, that their sexuality stands them outside any common experience of man/womanhood. If Leno's generalization about straight men and women didn't do precisely that, his point wouldn't be that both people in a gay marriage are excited, but that all lesbians want to get married and all gay men don't. Instead, he effectively others gays by implying that they're different, or suggests that gay men are practically women.
Either way, it's a nasty joke—smearing gays even as he purports to support their equality. And let's not forget that was buckshot from the blast he aimed at women. If he hadn't just had to get in that dig at women, he wouldn't have othered gays.
But he did.
[H/T to Shaker Tracey, who hat tips Queers United.]
Kucinich presents impeachment articles
Via Raw Story:
An Ohio Democratic lawmaker and former presidential candidate has presented articles of impeachment against President George W. Bush to Congress.
Thirty-five articles were presented by Rep. Dennis Kucinich to the House of Representatives late Monday evening, airing live on C-SPAN.
"The House is not in order," said Kucinich to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), upon which Pelosi pounded her gavel.
"Resolved," Kucinich then began, "that President George W. Bush be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate. ...
"In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of president of the United States, and to the best of his ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has committed the following abuses of power..."
Many articles referenced Iraq and the "cause" for war. Videos at link; very rough transcript at link as well.
This isn't the first time Kucinich has presented impeachment articles. I'm not confident these will go any further than his previous attempts but at least he's trying. That can't be said for many of his peers.
Snort
Sayeth Shaker Ruth: "Thought I should alert you to another insidious little nugget of irresponsibility by MSNBC. They invite you to choose from 5 options for 'the main reason for the failure of Senator Clinton's campaign.' For the record, I happen to think it's number 2. Pretty damn interesting, though, that MSNBC doesn't see fit to list sexism or media bias among the five options, since those are certainly arguable reasons for her loss. And not surprising that 26% of respondents have chosen a 'none of the above' that can probably be read as 'fuck you'."
I also like, as an aside, how "a combination thereof" isn't an option. Just a friendly reminder that the media doesn't do nuance, in case you'd forgotten.
