Mike's Blog Round Up
By Nicole Belle Sunday Nov 11, 2007 11:00amGood morning, scamps and scoundrels. I’m your round-up guest host for the week, Melissa McEwan, otherwise known as Shakespeare’s Sister (that’s a Smiths’ and Woolf reference, not an egregious bit of braggadocio, cheeky gits!), the bare-knuckled proprietress of Shakesville—a group blog absolutely chock-a-block with shameless purveyors of libertine feminism and the radical gay agenda. Buckle up; off we go…
Egalia over at Tennessee Guerilla Women knows she not the only dummy who expected the Dems to act like an opposition party.
The Heretik helpfully suggests they could try actually opposing something.
Peter at Right Wing Watch finds that professional a**hole Randall Terry is heartbroken by Pat Robertson's endorsement of Giuliani and his "hypocritical and seductive evil."
Amy at Incertus puts on her science geek cap to take a look at what brains are saying about the candidates.
Eric Hopp raises his voice once again in support of universal healthcare, in the wake of the news that the US is among the worst in the world for infant deaths.
Dave Neiwert provides space for Trefayne to take a stroll down Memory Lane and spend some time with Ron Paul's Congressional record.
Amanda finds one more reason for people in the Reality-Based Community to avoid seeing Bee Movie, if anyone still needed one.
And over at WIMN's Voices, the lovely Echidne takes a look at the alarming allegation that feminism killed the Neanderthals. We're so powerful, evidently, we can retroactively kill entire species! Mwah ha ha ha!
That’s all for today. Seeya tomorrow! If you’ve got any hot tips, email me at shakespeares_sister at comcast dot net.
Login or Register to post comments.
Catholic church still chasing after ya?
Right Wing Watch is a great site. Kudos to Peter
No a blog, but still.
I guess I was one of the lucky ones who chose some middle class parents in a city where the middle class has left.
Who will fix this???
Infant mortality rate in poor sections of Memphis worse than some third world countries.
Re: Feminism kills Neanderthals
The original anthropologist study suggested no such thing, and was something made up by the media because they tried to dumb it down for their audience (as usual).
First of all, it's absurd to even think that the Neanderthals and early humans even had concepts of feminism... after all, feminism was to counter-act gender roles, which apparently were invented by Cro Magnon humans. So how could Neanderthals create a concept retro-actively? This is like saying that the alphabet preceded spoken language.
Second of all, the study shows the importance of specialized labor in the evolution of humans. Just like you have certain people doing construction work, certain people doing engineering, and certain people doing art... if everybody did all those simultaneously, they couldn't let their talents for a specific task reach mastery.
All the study said was that the first major division of labor in human evolution occurred with the Cro Magnon, and it just happened to be split between the sexes. And because the Neanderthals didn't have this specialized labor, they were less equipped to survive.
There it is.
Why Ron Paul should not be supported just because he is right on one single issue.
Eric Almighty @ 3:
Another reason why we need to kill the S-CHIP program!
Unfrikkenbelievable that this shit goes on in supposedly the "world's wealthiest nation". >:-(
Thanks a ton for the link!
Blue Buddha @ 6:
That first line was sarcasm, BTW.
That article about Ron Paul should cause some people to reconsider their support for him. If I was a supporter of his, which I am not, I sure would.
This is off topic, but I love your spotlight feature, although I don't use it as much as I should. I have been getting "mail box is full" messages consistently now when I try to call Reid, Hoyer, or Pelosi and I am beginning to think they are leaving them full to discourage callers. I know they don't accept email from people outside their states but I feel that in their position as leaders we should be able to contact them.
Could you set up a Fax Congress Spotlight?
You guys hold him down while I kick Ron Paul, too!
The bee movie? I thought it went straight to video after their last little 'faux pas' with rape humor, if you can call it that. If it's not already bargain bin material it will be.
Great article on something I wondered about myself. Why are all the majority of characters in these movies male? [good comment about the male cow with udders in the barnyard movie too]
You Ron Paul haters win.
We all changed our minds and decided to abandon the troops and our civil liberties to sign up with Hillary -or- Obama.
What's the point in fighting for personal freedoms anyway? I'm sure a democrat will just legislate them back to us eventually. It's not like they're god given or anything.
Does the bee in Bee Movie spend most of his off time polishing his barb?
MargeAggedon @ 12:
Yeah, seeing that in the trailer of the Barnyard movie was disturbing.
It seems there is something wrong with the Heretic link.
Johnny Zito @ 13:
Where's my hanky? Wah!
MargeAggedon @ 17:
The state took it from you and redistributed it to a welfare dependent individuals with no hanky of their own.
:)
Johnny Zito @ 13:
I think the funniest thing about this post is that Johnny Zito didn't even understand that Paul's record shows he cares about as much for civil liberties as King George the Lesser does, which is to say, not at all.
Incertus (Brian) @ 19:
I understand that Ron Paul knows the easiest way for the govt to curtail your freedoms is to write a law that allows them to tinker with your freedoms at all.
His efforts to take apart federal legislation is an attempt to get all federal finger prints off of your freedoms.
Great investigation man. I guess if you follow the constitution and value individuals/states rights over the ever growing federal goverment that automatically means you are anti-pro-choice. Sure security is broken but I'm sure pumping more money into it, instead of private retirement accounts will make it much better. We all know government is very efficient even though they are not incentivized to do so. It doesn't matter whether or not you personally agree with abortion or the circumstances in which you agree with it, the federal government should be allowed to tax you under threat of imprisonment to pay for people to have abortions. And we should keep bringing up the minimum wage. After all supply and demand should have nothing to do with the market. The government should keep things artificially propped up even though it has no constitutional right to do so. I'm sure this will lead to more production in the U.S. and not increase imports from China. Great work guys.
Johnny Zito @ 20:
The quickest way for government to curtail your freedoms would be to get rid of its Constitutionally mandated oversight authority over Commerce and the like. I don't want to live in a country run by corporations--we're too close to that as it is, and corporations are far worse about meddling in your life than this government could possibly be.
Incertus (Brian) @ 22:
When I don't like the practices of an industry or corporation I refrain from supporting them. For instance I recently stopped buying bottle water because I came to the conclusion it was wasteful. The business will either change it's practices of find itself bankrupt.
The govt doesn't give me the option to spend my dollar elsewhere. In fact, they take it from me before I even get my pay check.
Good Gravy!!! Ah, an uproar about the Bee sexes during a cartoon. If you think that some people may not be taking Amanda seriously, well conversations like this could be why.
Seriously. Okay- I understand being upset about Bulls with udders. But Bees? Who the Fk cares? (Although maybe the whole udders thang was a biting inside protest that was actually aimed at the matriarchy within the sexist Cartoon Producers.) NOT.
Come on, now.
Johnny Zito @ 23:
Well, you know what? Under Paul-style economics, you won't be able to refrain from supporting the industries you don't like because they'll create massive monopolies. Then you'll have absolutely no choice. That's what happened before the passage of the anti-trust laws Paul hates so much, and it is already starting to happen now what with the Fed's refusal under both Clinton and Bush to actually reign in these rogue corporations.
When it comes to protecting personal rights, government has a much better track record than industry.
Johnny Zito @ 23:
And when was the last time you got to vote on the internal decisions of a corporation, or even got to vote for who the leaders of said corporation were? You can hope for a society run by super-monopolies who aren't beholden to you in the slightest if you wish--I'll be on the other side trying to convince people that even a small measure of control over a government is better than a complete loss of control to industrial power. Pick your poison.
That blog post is a complete crock. It's written like a creationist "debunking" evolution. Take a bad (if not completely made-up) source and project it onto all science. Then chuckle smugly at how your fallacious strawman argument allegedly demolishes science as a whole.
Shade Tail @ 25:
The super monopolies you're referring too are created, in part, thanks to govt bail outs of failed industries.
For instance the continual subsidization of banks, credit and airline companies only serve to strengthen a broken system.
Under Paul's run your tax dollars can no longer be used to prop up these monopolies. Simply stop using a service you dislike and watch it atrophy and be replaced with a more successful service as determined by the free market.
Johnny Zito @ 28:
History gives a very different story than does your rosey deification of free-market economics.
Santayana: Those who do not remember history are condemned to repeat it.
And if you and Paul have your way, even those of us who do remember it will be condemned to repeat it.
Shade Tail @ 29:
Clarify your meaning of monopoly (since most people don't mean the formal definition of single supplier) and then name one monopoly which was not fostered as such by government legislation.
Shade Tail @ 29:
I recall a history in which the citizen is his own best regulator and individuals like Upton Sinclair bring attention and change to corruption.
I also remember how poorly government control of the economy and business worked in Russia, Germany and China too.
This is moot, since most of Paul's policies advocate a more Mixed Market System; free at the base (consumer), but with government oversight to control social problems (fraud).
Also as the President; Paul would have very little power over regulation. That's a task that falls to the Democratic controlled Congress, who don't seem to prescribe to your theories either. They can't seem to step in and regulate on tele-com immunity, habeas corpus or corruption.
Shade Tail @ 29:
History gives a very different story than does your rosey deification of free-market economics.
Please do enlighten us with a history lesson.
Here is CNN International's coverage of the killings in Palestine.
VIDEO
http://test.redlasso.com/service/svc/clip/playClip?fid=27bdbb6d-cf86-46c...
I'm looking forward to testing my own foods and drugs if Ron Paul becomes president. Got my own beef-testing lab in the garage, and I'm building a full-scale pharmaceutical-testing lab in my spare bathroom. I'll do my own trust-busting with the buying decisions I make with the money I save not supporting the local schools.
It will be Utopia.
Rusty Shackleford @ 34:
The key idea to remember is choice. If there is a market need for Food and Drug testing, I'm sure many entrepreneurs will rise to the challenge. Just because you might not be so inclined doesn't mean no one else in society will want to do it. Manufacturers can choose to use the tester of their choice and even display the some stamp of approval. I'd even go on a limb and say the quality will improve compared to the crap the FDA lets companies get away with. If you don't support local schools, then you obviously don't care about local schools. People who care will voluntarily support them. With the money they save but not having to pay taxes for wasteful public school programs. More people will be willing to send their kids to private school, religious or otherwise. With more kids attending these schools the tuitions will come down. Supply and demand.
shameless purveyors of libertine feminism and the radical gay agenda
COOL!! Bring it on baby. I start from the most radical fringe and then move inward. That's the only way to keep perspective.
Johnny Zito @ 18:
And the difference with a repug in charge would be... oh WAIT! There already IS a repug in charge.
MargeAggedon @ 37:
Johnny Zito claims to be 25. His blog is called "The Informed Nonsense of Johnny Zito." Nonsensical, he is, informed, he is not. At least not in a well-rounded sense of the word. And he obviously is a stranger to empathy and/or sympathy.
The other day, here on C&L, someone brought up this phenomenon of kids this age supporting the "I got mine so fuck y'all" philosophy of Lyndon LaRouche, Ayn Rand and Ron Paul. It's what they were brought up with; it's all they know.
Sad. And a formula for big losers.
miss_kitty @ 38:
Ah yes.. ad hominem attacks... the last refuge of a weak argument. BTW Objectivists while similar, are not the same as Libertarians.
Ah yes. Pointing out some readily available home truths about the poster (supplied by his own links) classified as ad hominem attacks...truly the last refuge of a weak argument.
paulitician @ 35:
And I suppose your family can sue the company that sold you the meat that killed you. That's comforting. Of course, since the courts will basically be ruling on who has the most money, you'll be screwed, but at least you'll be screwed by your own system, which might make you feel better. If it's any comfort to you, if someone like Paul were elected and he were allowed to put his batshit insane ideas into practice, I wouldn't hang around to watch the collapse.
in response to the ron paul article:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/11/12/paul/index.html
MargeAggedon @ 37:
Abandon party loyalties before they bring you down with them.
Incertus (Brian) @ 41:
Name calling. Cool.
What's bat shit insane about saying that you know what's best for you - Or - you're only as free as the people standing next to you.
You can't write a law and solve a problem. It takes consistent resolve and watch-dogging to maintain. There are citizen's groups and consumer organizations that watch out and warn for all the dangers a govt organization would. You don't need some authoritarian to make the "best" choice for you because one answer is never the only answer.
When you start putting laws in front of congress you give 434 people who DON'T represent you a chance to tell you what to do and how to live. They don't pass clean laws, they pass laws full of pork and unrelated amendments.
I don't feel any safer for the FDA. They prevent life saving medicines from coming into the country.
Consumer Reports warned me off SUVs because they don't do well in the off-set crash test. The didn't outlaw them, they just provided the relevant information and let me make my own choice. The one that was right for me.
Incertus (Brian) @ 41:
There's nothing stopping e-coli in foods with the FDA in charge. My family can not only sue but they can spread the word. The company can be ostracized at many levels. Stores will eventually resort to not carrying goods from that company. This will force the company to either get its act straight or go out of business. I have no idea what you mean by courts ruling in favor of money. If people don't believe in the court system why don't they vote to abolish them. As far as leaving the country... this country will ultimately get the government it deserves. When it'll get to breadlines and burning overinflated paper money to stay warm, you can bet I'm out of here.
The Real Cost of Iraq is on the order of our national debt.
Login or Register to post comments.