Are you serious? – Page 149

Could Fox News Go Any Lower?

It’s not entirely surprising that professional funeral-picketing bigot Fred Phelps has decided to picket the funerals of the Amish girls killed by a gunman earlier this week. His daughter explains:

Those Amish people, everyone is sitting around talking about those poor little girls — blah, blah, blah — they brought the wrath upon themselves,” Phelps-Roper said, adding that the Amish “don’t serve God, they serve themselves.”

Ok. But the Phelps’ hijinks are hardly shocking at this point. They’re attention-whores to the max, and most people, I think, have figured out that the best strategy is to just ignore them.

Fox News isn’t going that route — instead, they’re offering Phelps and his crew an hour of airtime on Mike Gallagher’s radio show.

Shorter Dawn Eden: Chill out, ladies, you’ve got all the silly rights you need!

This week, Dawn Eden takes on feminism. And it’s… special.

First, she lauds the word of Feminists for Life, a group which she says “walk[s] the talk” when it comes to “pro-life” activism, which basically means that they actually try to help poor women and college women when they get pregnant. Now, I can certainly support pro-life groups which seek to help pregnant women and which aim to give women more options. But Feminists for Life, despite their support of a handful of pro-choice and progressive bills which actually help women, are nearly as ass-backwards as Dawn and her ilk when it comes to the basics of preventing abortions.

According to FFL,

Since the Washington, D.C., office opened in 1994 and a new executive director (now president) Serrin Foster was hired to lead Feminists for Life, FFL has successfully and uniquely worked to address the root causes that drive women to abortion.

Basic question time: What is the root case that drives women to abortion?
Basic answer: Unintended/unwanted pregnancy.

The Hits Just Keep Coming

In another parallel to the Church sex abuse coverup scandal, it’s time to blame the “16 and 17 year old beasts” who “egged” Foley on.

“Only a girl”

Michael Savage: Supporting “better” child molesters everywhere.

On the September 27 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Michael Savage asserted that an employee of The Washington Times charged with soliciting a 13 year-old girl for sex over the Internet “should get a reward that it wasn’t a boy. I actually was thrilled to see it was only a girl.”

Because attraction to young girls is a “normal” perversion, whereas molesting or raping a 13-year-old boy would just be wrong. Heck, let’s reward him!

SAVAGE: Washington Times employee arrested in sting, just popped up. Metropolitan police today charged the director of human resources [chuckle] at The Washington Times with one count of trying to entice a minor on the Internet. Randall Casseday, 53, was arrested at 9:45 p.m. yesterday with where police said he had arranged to meet a 13-year-old girl. He had actually exchanged Internet messages and photographs with a male police officer posing as a girl. Well, OK, great. I actually think he should get a reward that it wasn’t with a boy. I actually was thrilled to see it was only a girl. I’m not saying it was good that he did it. But don’t get me wrong, I was stunned that it was with a girl. I mean, there is still a normal pervert out there. It’s hard to believe. There are still normal perverts? It’s shocking.

I mean, raping little girls is one thing, but raping little boys? Now that’s just un-American.

And we musn’t forget that somehow, those Muslims are to blame:

SAVAGE: I think it’s a very dangerous trend. Not only the obsession with child molestation, which is an obsession, by the way, with the American media right now because they don’t have the guts to take on radical Islam so they make a big deal out of child molestation. It’s like a new hysteria. It’s the new witch hunt. Going after child molesters today is the equivalent of witch hunts in Pilgrim times. Everyone is suspected of being a witch or a child molester because — well, many different reasons.

He’s right. This is clearly a witch hunt, and when this man was online trying to track down girls to sexually assault and got caught. Let’s go kill some more brown people to prove that we take Radical Islam seriously.

Thanks to Una for the link.

Movie I Must See

Just watch the trailer. It looks… intense. The Johnny Cash song? Wow. I will definitely post a review as soon as it hits New York.

Trigger warning: About the Catholic Church pedophilia scandal.

Carnage

Oh, you bet she looks guilty.

Why? Well:

Never mind the retrograde “women need to be loved to orgasm” story, just when the hell did Jenny McCarthy become a sex expert?

From Amanda comes this lovely little “wimmins are such complicated, needy and inscrutable creatures and men are grunting primitives” item from our friends at ABC News.

No animal has to commit to a relationship to lure the female of the species into the nest.

We humans are much more complicated. Women need to be in the mood, which many men don’t seem to understand.

God, it’s such a trial, this having be social animals and form relationships and shit. And then to have to deal with waiting until the woman’s in the mood, on top of it! Why can’t we just rape the bitches if they’re not in the mood?

Ahem. I can just tell this thing is getting off to a extra-special start, with the assumption that women a) need to bribed with relationships to agree to have sex; b) need to be in a relationship to be in the mood for sex; and c) that pesky consent thing is just one more roadblock those fickle wimmins put in the path of men who want sex, want it all the time, and want it NOW!

Ugh. Actually, what I’m not in the mood for is rebutting yet another piece uncritically presenting lazy sexist assumptions as fact. And offering someone whose sole qualification is posing for Playboy as a sex expert:

“I think that most men, and I have to underline the word ‘most,’ just don’t get it,” said Jenny McCarthy, an actress, former Playmate of the Year, and best-selling author of “Life Laughs: The Naked Truth about Motherhood, Marriage, and Moving On.”

She laments that our differences — the ones that can make sex so much fun — can also get in the way.

“It’s amazing to me how much brain work it takes for a girl to have an orgasm,” McCarthy said. “Guys just need to look at a nipple, and they lose it. God, I wish it was that easy for us!”

I thought they only lost it at the sight of a nipple when they were about 13. Most adult men require a little more in the way of friction.

Adding insult to injury, the article, entitled “When It Comes to Orgasm, Women Work Harder” (original title, according to Jessica: “Do Women Really Need Orgasm?” Answer: Duh), has a little sidebar, “Do Women Think Too Much To Enjoy Sex?” which offers the following survey:

The Impact of Gender on Your Sex Life

Can a Woman Have Sex Like a Man?

No, a woman thinks too much to ever enjoy sex like a man. (1,725)

Yes, a woman can detach emotionally and be purely physical. (1,583)

Total Vote: 3,308
Not a scientific survey.

And just like they had an article on discrimination against people with identifiably-black names that didn’t mention racism, they have an article on how gender affects sex in which they never question the basic assumption that women can or should have sex “like a man.”

What’s In A Name?

Shark-Fu of AngryBlackBitch and A White Bear of Is There No Sin In It? have must-read posts today about this misbegotten article from John “Who needs the FDA to ensure drug safety when the market will do it just fine?” Stossel and Kristina Kendall of ABC news, which discusses the fact that people with identifiably “black” names are routinely passed over when submitting job applications even with equal qualifications to someone with a “neutral” (read: whitebread American) name, and that they’re often considered less smart or less capable, based solely on name.

And somehow, the article never draws the obvious conclusion that racism is to blame. Nope — the prescription is for black parents to name their kids more white-sounding names.

But, as Shark-Fu (talk about your great names) points out, changing a name doesn’t make a bit of difference in the end, because it doesn’t change the rules of the game.

IWF: Dear God, Not Boobies!

If I had some extra money, I’d buy Charlotte Allen a course in Logic 101. Because as it stands, she has somehow managed to see a picture of Bill Clinton with a group of male and female (!) bloggers, see that Feministing has an ironic feminist logo featuring a woman’s (!) silhouette and advertises women’s tank tops by posting a picture of a woman (!) wearing said tank top, couple that with the fact that Hillary Clinton may possibly be running for president, and shit this out:

Do we really want as our first female president a woman whose husband hosts parties attended by inappropriately attired young women who run websites featuring naked gals with large racks making obscene gestures? If we’re on the left, the answer is: Yes, we do.

All this, and she’s like two weeks late to Boobiegate. Plus she got Jessica’s name wrong (although poor Jessica Lindstrom out there is gonna get quite a reputation). Oh Char, you’re so pretty…

But really, the personal attacks on Jessica have got to stop. If you’re as sick of this as I am, consider writing a letter to the board of directors of the organizations that serve as IWF’s major funders. They are:

Sarah Scaife Foundation, $1.2 million
Olin Foundation $700,000
Bradley Foundation, $420,000
Carthage Foundation, $300,000
Castle Rock Foundation, $100,000

Let them know what their money is being used to promote.

Video on South Dakota Abortion Ban

A must-watch video, featuring the famous Bill Napoli quote in which he explains which women are pure enough to be allowed abortion. In case there was any doubt, I do not qualify.

via Feministing.