Archive for May, 2010|Monthly archive page
Meet Wendy, who can’t control her bratty 10 year-old fat ass Noah.
Listen as they discuss an altercation on an airplane. The basic rundown: kid wants mother to turn down volume of little TV thing and jabs her with elbow. Mother jabs back. Kid causes incident on airplane. Some of the details are lacking.
If my 10 year-old son had the gall to elbow me (or his mother) about the volume on the screen, I wouldn’t have elbowed him back, I would have grabbed offending elbow and dug my fingernails into his arm and held it there, demonstrating my superior strength, preventing him from moving – the more he struggled, the harder I would squeeze. I would have calmly explained that one does not jab one’s elbow into parents to get their attention and then released him. If that didn’t work, well… there’s no point in continuing because it would have worked. My 10 year-old would have had 10 long years of growing up in the presence of the terrible & mighty father whose deep voice, imposing figure, and powerful corporeal punishment techniques have kept said 10 year-old in line all these years.
Listen to the way fatty Noah talks to his mother and listen to the way she talks to him. She tries to reason with him, she tries to come to some kind of polite accord. Typical diplomatic bullshit.
My conversation would have been much shorter. “If you physically assault me, you’re picking a fight with me. Look at me. Look at you. Who do you think is going to win that fight?” If he needs proof, he’ll get it.
At one point it is mentioned that Noah called CPS and claimed his mother was abusing him. Since children reach the conclusion that CPS is an authority greater than the parent, sometimes they foolishly believe that lying about abuse to CPS is a way to exercise authority over their parents. I ran that by my dad once when I was a kid. He called my bluff and said go ahead. I didn’t, because he explained what would happen.
“Even if you succeed in convincing these people that we did in fact abuse you – and good luck with that – what will be the result? In the worst possible case scenario for me I’d go to jail, but what do you suppose will happen to you? Foster care? Is that what you want? Will that be better than here?”
If you want to see what happens when women attempt to raise boys, this is a prime example. This grown adult woman lets a 10 year old brat walk all over her. Is it because he has a penis? Is it because she’s his son and she loves him? Either way, it’s retarded. That shit would never fly in a household with a father present because the boy would not challenge his father the way he’ll challenge his mother.
Women: please stop trying to raise boys. You can’t. You are doing a disservice to yourself, your son, and to all of us with your ineptitutde.
I spent Mother’s Day with my wife’s family. My wife’s sister is bisexual and consorts with a variety of sketchy characters. Despite the fact that her entire family – both parents, my wife, me – essentially everyone who was present is conservative and very much against gay marriage, she just had to bring it up. I’d like to say hiliarity ensued but it was rather more sad than anything.
I’ve made the argument on this blog a number of times that to support gay marriage you must necessarily support polygamy, and to this day nobody has ever produced a valid argument against that assertion. My father-in-law independently came up with this same assertion and proposed it to his daughter, whose argument was: it’s about consent.
What? The example she gave was not polygamy but rather bigamy – in which a man marries a woman, leaves her without legally divorcing, and then marries another woman (who does not know that the man is still legally married). That’s not what we were talking about but no matter how we proposed this she could not grasp or would not admit that she understood the difference. Even after I explained in lucid detail the arrangement: two women both married to the same man living together as a 3 adult family in the same house in which everybody knows about the arrangement and consents to it, she still was baffled about how this would work or how it was even relevant.
She tried to take control of the argument by running the oldest play in the book: who are you to deny two people happiness?
She refused to accept the fact that gay marriage would be detrimental to our culture despite all the reasons I gave, not the least of which is that it projects the notion that men and women are interchangeable. Not just equal, but the same. I had to explain how “equal” and “the same” are not the same concept.
Of course, this girl has been quoted as parroting that tired nonsense about how gender is a social construct. I told her that if she liked we could both get naked and I could demonstrate the biological constructs that make me a man and her a woman and then she could point out the social construct that makes me a man. She abandoned this line of argument since I made it quite clear that I thought the concept that gender is anything but binary and biologically determined was absurd.
She came back to the happiness angle and tried to claim that if she married a woman it would not weaken my marriage, to which I responded by informing her that such a result was not one I thought would occur. Instead I reminded her of the damage that unashamed exposure to gay ideas at the national level had already done to her, rendering her unable to recognize even the simplest facts of life such as half of the species are males and half of the species are females.
She did make one argument that caught me a little offguard as it actually made some sense. At some point I must have mentioned offhand that in all likelihood gay marriage’s legality or illegality affects less than 1% of people in this country (gays who intend on marriage). She challenged this by saying, “well, if there are 300 million people in this country, 1% is 3 million. Isn’t that a lot of people to be denying happiness to?”
While I countered by asking her how many pedos we deny the happiness of sex with children to on a yearly basis or how many cannibals can’t have their meals because we have decided it’s wrong. The magic bullet “consent” counter does legitimately apply in these cases but I followed up by asking her at which point does a small minority’s minority status become irrelevant due to actual numbers? 3 million? 500,000? It’s still 1%. The 99% majority tends to win in all forms of government, not just democracy. Not always, but most of the time. Of course she was unable to produce any intelligent response.
At this point she became defensive and resorted to ad hominems, suggesting that, as she must have heard from my wife, I may have slightly undersanded a recent drywal repair job (with less than stellar results) and that I play too much World of Warcraft.
Now, so that you have some context, I am a little more than six years older than this girl, I own my own home, I have a steady job, I am married to her sister, and her sister is pregnant with my child. I haven’t cured cancer and there’s certainly a lot more room for success in my life but overall upon the checklst of “American dream” my marks are all there.
She, on the other hand, has alienated herself from my family by failing out of school (the same one from which I have a degree, I might add), instigating a fake marriage to an illegal immigrant in exchange for spousal benefits while he serves in the Air Force, and engaging in fetish prostitution for spend money as she has no other employment. Her “husband’”s parents pay the rent on the apartment she lives in and it is highly probable that somewhere on the internet her nudes can be found.
Yet she decided to comment on a home improvement job I took upon myself to do to my own home which I own rather than pay someone else to do it that did not come out quite perfectly? Wow.
My response to this was simple: “Girl, only because your parents are present will I refrain from enumrating all of the ways in which I have succeeded and all of the ways in which you have not.”
At this point she became flustered, made a comment like, “You’re right, I’m just a giant failure.” She proceeded to storm off and not speak to anyone for the remainder of the evening. As I was her ride back to “her” apartment she resorted to calling one her leghumping male friends who she compels into servitude by flirting and possibly outright sexual favors to come pick her up because, after a relatively mild insult brought about by her own poor debate tactics, she was unable to show her face.
Why is that, do you suppose?
Needless to say, these are the kind of intellectual giants who support gay marriage. I’m not defending ad hominems here in the slightest. I’ll listen to anyone who makes a good argument no matter who they are. But when it’s overwhelmingly people like my sister in law who are in favor of gay marriage (and other “progressive” social crusades which I starkly oppose) and it’s overwhelmingly people like me – you know, the foundation upon which our prosperity is built – who oppose it, I’m left with little doubt that I’m probably right on this.
In this clip, Tim Wise tries to make the argument that … well, okay, I’m not actually sure what argument he’s trying to make.
His basic assertion is that poor black people and poor white people have more in common with each other than rich black people and poor black people or rich white people and poor white people. In short, societal class trumps race when it comes to affiliation.
No, it’s not race or class, it’s culture, which is an amalgamation of race, class, circumstance, history, religion, and so on.
Think about, for example, a famous rapper, like Dr. Dre or Snoop. You can take the gangster out of Compton but you can’t take Compton out of the gangster. These guys came from a poor black culture and even though they are now richer than the vast majority of the population I have no doubt that they feel quite at home in the hood, so to speak, because it’s who they are. Snoop is not going to invite a stuffy white CEO to his barbecue because they both make a lot of money. That’s absurd.
I’m not sure how any of what this guy is saying has to do with white privilege. He’s trying to insinuate that racism was a tool for wealthy elites to keep everybody else down but I think that’s just nonsense. If you’re a wealthy person you already have all the tools you need to keep everybody else down. In fact you have one tool and it’s called money.
Unregulated, the natural progression of a money-based economy is that the divide between rich and poor ultimately becomes very large to the point where a very small number of very rich people control everything and the very poor are their servants. The rich have the capital to, for example, maintain monopolies and charge whatever they want. In a market economy, that’s enough. You don’t need to create a race war to maintain your status.
Most of our economic regulations are designed with this in mind. Anti-trust laws are one way we keep the super rich from wielding the market like a weapon. Another is the estate tax. I am not a fan of paying tax again on post-tax dollars when I inherit money, but discouraging multi-generational wealth hoarding has a positive effect on the creation and sustenance of a middle class.
So, “white privliege” is a cute idea but “wealth priviliege” is the reality of the world, and that’s not really worth discussing because everybody knows what that means without requiring a 60 minute talk about it.
Next, see how a stupid liberal views this:
At 1:22, he quotes the same asshole, Tim Wise, saying this:
“White privilege is when a girl can get pregnant at 17 like Bristol Palin and everybody quickly insists that your life and your family is a personal matter and nobody has the right to judge you or your family because every family has challenges, even as black and latino families with similiar challenges are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological, and arbiters of social decay.”
First, the idea that white people across the country in response to the news of Bristol’s family way did not interpret her result as irresponsible is a big stretch. I judge every unwed teenage mother the same way regardless of skin color.
But here’s where the numbers come in and this is the part that liberals refuse to understand because their mindset is so stalwartly against the concept of “stereotyping” – e.g., using probability and statistics to make educated guesses or recognize trends – that the argument I’m about to present simply will not compute in the mind of a liberal.
The figures I have are for single parent households, not necessarly teenage pregnancies. While teenage parents are not ideal, I’d rather two 17 year olds raise a child together than a single 27 year old woman.
In 2003, according to the U.S. census, out of 30,638,000 white families, 22,409,000 were 2 parent househoulds and 8,229,000 were single parent households. As a matter of percent, that means about 73.4% of white families were 2 parent households. In 1970, out of 26,115,000 white households, only 2,638,000 were single parent househoulds, meaning about 89.9% were 2 parent households. Note the trend.
In 2003, over 62% of black households were single parent. In 1970, only 35% of black households were single parent.
The reason that a word like “social decay” would be applied to the rapidly growing trend of single parenthood among blacks and not to Bristol Palin, and the reason that one might look at a young unwed black mother and conclude, “well, what can you expect” might be because for any arbitrary black mother there’s a 62% chance that she does not have a husband wheres there is only a 26.6% chance that a white mother does not.
I really pity someone who wouldn’t bet on 62% odds, or would bet equally on 26.6% odds as 62% odds, or wouldn’t bet at all. If I bet money on 62% odds indefinitely I’d rapidly become the richest person alive.
That’s the point. If you consider a single parent household to be a symptom of societal decay then you are not unreasonable when you point to blacks in general as the predominant agent of that decay… sort of. The reality is that there are still considerably more white single parents in total numbers than blacks – 8,229,000 whites compared to only 3,477,000 for blacks. So while it still might be fair to say that to call a black mother a single black mother you’d be right 62% of the time, there are more white single mothers than black single mothers so if single motherhood is a blight on society then you’d want to start on white women.
(In case you were wondering, Hispanic families have slightly higher single parenting rates than whites but significantly lower than blacks, at less than 30%).
In the video at 2:30, I agree with him entirely. If Barack Obama’s daughters had been impregnated by a black kid who wrote on his facebook wall that he’d shoot anyone who fucks with him and that he’s proud to be a gangsta, the right wing media would not have let it go.
However, again, at the same token, the majority of homicides in this country are performed by young black men, not young white men. It is not unreasonable to say that when a black kid says he likes to shoot people he is vastly more likely to actually do it than when a white kid says he likes to shoot people, and therefore there is some legitimacy to the faux outrage that would certainly ensue on all conservative talking points. Ultimately, though, any thinking person who saw a reasonably intelligent young college-age kid – black or white – with enough stature to consentually sleep with the daughter of a major political figure bragging about shooting things on Facebook would simply chalk it up to teenaged male bravado and probably not give it a second thought. Unless the kid owned assualt weapons and/or had a criminal record.
While Cenk, The Young Turks host makes a big point about how the “white” media made a big effort to sanitize the Bristol Palin thing and made a big deal about the hypothetical outrage if this had happened to Barack Obama he didn’t make any mention of how the liberal media would have santized it on The One’s behalf, just like every political scandal is santizied, e.g., Jeremiah Wright. This is how poltiics is done. Of course supporters of a politician are going to do damage control on situations like this, regardless of affiliation. I find it amusing how quickly both parties become sanctimonious about things like this. “Look at how my political opponents are responding to this! Where’s the honesty and integrity?!” Meanwhile, a week later, they react exactly the same way to the egg on their own faces. This is how politics is done.
At 4:55, after discussing the whole Michelle Obama vs. Todd Palin patriotism thing, Cenk boldly states that Todd Palin got a pass on his Alaska First nonsense and Michelle Obama didn’t on her “proud of America” soundbite is because Todd Palin is white.
Not at all, Cenk. If Todd Palin’s secessionist nonsense was a non-issue then why do we even know about it to begin with? No, Cenk, liberals did make it an issue, as big of an issue as conservatives made that Michelle Obama had the audacity to only feel proud of her country now that her husband is running for president. Ultimately, both of these people got passes – white man and black woman – because nobody cared. We weren’t electing Todd Palin or Michelle Obama, and not only that but Todd Palin’s the spouse of the vice presidential candidate. I couldn’t even tell you what Joe Biden’s wife’s name is, nor do I care. This just goes to show that the liberals were digging even deeper to find reasons not to vote for John McCain than the conservatives were. The first lady is somewhat of a figurehead. The male spouse of the vice president is a non-entity, whose name we only know because liberals were flinging any mud they possibly could at Palin.
If white privilege were a real thing then how, pray tell, did a black man win the primaries and the general election? Why, pray tell, did Todd Palin supposedly get a pass on his seccesionist views when it was in fact mostly white liberals who tried to burn him for it in the first place? If white privilege were a real concept then white conservatives and white liberals would have both jumped on Michelle Obama and neither would have jumped on Todd Palin, right? Race unites?
No. As usual, white privilege is just a liberal talking point. And I really hoped that it would die with the election of Barack Obama and that its death would be the one silver lining on this great stormcloud that is The One’s presidency, but I guess not.
Haven’t we reached the point where we can stop caring who’s gay?
I don’t support gay marriage and I certainly don’t support gay parenting.
But I’m really sick and tired of seeing headlines about famous people announcing that they’re gay, as if it’s earth-shattering much less news worthy. I don’t care who you screw. Nobody cares. Can we all please agree to stop making it such a big goddamned deal?
I feel like 90% of the time, the announcement comes as a ploy to keep the spotlight on some has-been who’s rapidly fading from national memory and is desperate to stay somehow culturally relevant. And like suckers the media buys it every time. Big news everybody, so-and-so has sex with other women!
Yup. I bet she pinched a loaf in the last 36 hours too. Stop the presses!
“Coming out was such an incredible feeling!” Boring. Get over yourself. You weren’t interesting while in the closet. What makes you think you’d be interesting now that you’re out? Go find something better to talk about. Go find some other reason for people to notice you. Your sexual identity is totally unimportant and the louder you draw attention to it, the more uninteresting and unoriginal a human being you’re likely to be, and frankly, you’re not worth my time. Go die please.