Did Comedy Central censor South Park, or did Stone/Parker self-censor for PR? Why does Revolution Muslim hate Triscuits? Where does Ross Douthat get off being an even bigger hypocrite than normal, when Christian belief wound up with state college censorship of a play in Texas and the Dixie Chicks got death threats?
I wasn't originally going to blog about Douthat's inane, even for him, culture-conservative screed, but, have changed my mind.
Let's dive right in, starting with the rhetorical questions after the first two.
Glenn Greenwald rightly notes the steaming mass of hypocrisy, with numerous examples of both Ross Douthat's hypocrisy in previous columns and counter-examples to Douthat's claim that "it's always worse with Muslims."
Beyond that, Revolution Muslim is such a fringe group, especially compared to Douthat's beloved Roman Catholic Church of priest perps and papal protectors that Ross still tries to defend (Greenwald has links) that Douthat has no business talking while he still has the 2x4 in his own eye. Revolution Muslim? It's a tiny fringe outfit headed by a Jewish convert. Oy!
Read teh whole Greenwald column carefully. Because Douthat can be more charming and more coherent than many a nutbar, that's exactly what makes him dangerous.
And, what's Triscuits, what's Triscuits, got to do with it?
According to Revolution Muslim, they're eaten by "Darwinist faggots."
The PR issue? P.Z. Myers, aka Pharyungula, who after chastising South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone for tearing down, not building up (a bit of irony, or more, there!) then wonders whether the duo didn't self-censor again, after their original self-censorship, then blame it on Comedy Central, for PR value.
April 26, 2010
April 25, 2010
The president as comfortor-in-chief
As Barack Obama has wrapped up preaching sweet nothings of consolation to the families of the 29 West Virginia coal miners killed earlier this month, let me say that I just don't "get" the idea of president as comforter pastor/counselor-in-chief. I didn't get it with Reagan, though it irked me less then. I didn't get it Clinton (don't recall Poppy Bush even doing it), didn't get it with W. and don't get it with Obama.
First, let me say this isn't a party/political philosophy thing. I don't "get it" with Republicans or Democrats.
Second, it's not an atheism thing. I didn't "get it" even while I was still in religious transition, or, to the degree I thought about it, before I was too far down that road.
It's simply that I didn't elect a president (though I've not voted for the eventual occupant of the White House since 1992) to be pastor/counselor-in-chief. Nor am I comfortable with the majority of the American public thinking that should be part of his (or her) job description.
Yes, I know, presidents and prime ministers do it elsewhere, too. Unfortunately, like McDonald's, that's one of America's lesser exports, as I assume that's how the custom has taken root elsewhere.
That said, I commented above about Obama preaching sweet nothings of consolation in West Virginia. And, it's true. Until just before the Big Sandy disaster, his administration was letting mountaintop-removal coal mining continue; it had not gotten noticeably tougher with Massey than BushCo; and, contra worries about miners and mine owners alike, Team Obama had not pushed a serious climate change bill that would cause major changes to King Coal.
But, from the specific back to the general.
Other than Bush becoming Hitlerian, and treating 9/11 and al Qaeda like the Reichstag fire and Marinus van der Lubbe, other "comforters in chief," as comforters, have neither said nor done much to address the problems leading to the tragedy.
Clinton neither fully admitted that Janet Reno and even more, the ATF, mucked up Waco. At the same time, he never did get honest with the general public about just how serious an issue the militias problem was, a bill we're paying today with Tea Partier overlap.
Bush? Beyond holding the country's hand for the impending "War on Terror," he did little actual comforting of 9/11 victims' families, nor did he try to.
Obama has a chance to do more. Like push for real jobs retraining for people like West Virginia coal miners. To push for adequate funding and staffing of a variety of federal regulatory agencies. And more.
All while pushing for real climate change legislation, for a cleaner, and often safer, fuel than coal can be.
Will he?
Probably not.
That's not the neoliberal answer.
First, let me say this isn't a party/political philosophy thing. I don't "get it" with Republicans or Democrats.
Second, it's not an atheism thing. I didn't "get it" even while I was still in religious transition, or, to the degree I thought about it, before I was too far down that road.
It's simply that I didn't elect a president (though I've not voted for the eventual occupant of the White House since 1992) to be pastor/counselor-in-chief. Nor am I comfortable with the majority of the American public thinking that should be part of his (or her) job description.
Yes, I know, presidents and prime ministers do it elsewhere, too. Unfortunately, like McDonald's, that's one of America's lesser exports, as I assume that's how the custom has taken root elsewhere.
That said, I commented above about Obama preaching sweet nothings of consolation in West Virginia. And, it's true. Until just before the Big Sandy disaster, his administration was letting mountaintop-removal coal mining continue; it had not gotten noticeably tougher with Massey than BushCo; and, contra worries about miners and mine owners alike, Team Obama had not pushed a serious climate change bill that would cause major changes to King Coal.
But, from the specific back to the general.
Other than Bush becoming Hitlerian, and treating 9/11 and al Qaeda like the Reichstag fire and Marinus van der Lubbe, other "comforters in chief," as comforters, have neither said nor done much to address the problems leading to the tragedy.
Clinton neither fully admitted that Janet Reno and even more, the ATF, mucked up Waco. At the same time, he never did get honest with the general public about just how serious an issue the militias problem was, a bill we're paying today with Tea Partier overlap.
Bush? Beyond holding the country's hand for the impending "War on Terror," he did little actual comforting of 9/11 victims' families, nor did he try to.
Obama has a chance to do more. Like push for real jobs retraining for people like West Virginia coal miners. To push for adequate funding and staffing of a variety of federal regulatory agencies. And more.
All while pushing for real climate change legislation, for a cleaner, and often safer, fuel than coal can be.
Will he?
Probably not.
That's not the neoliberal answer.
Lib Dems continue to creep upward in UK
Between that and Tory leader David Cameron now refusing to rule out electoral reform as part of the price of coalition, I'd set the odds of a hung parliament in Great Britain after the May 8 election at 50-50.
Why does even Sonoma County, Calif. hate gays?
If anti-gay rights actions and government attitudes like this can happen even in a theoretically liberal bastion, it shows that gay relationship rights simply are not safe, fully safe, anywhere in this country that doesn't have gay marriage.
Now, what if this couple hadn't wanted to be married? Nonetheless, if California had gay marriage, I think Sonoma County officials would have had a lawyer hit them over the head — a county lawyer — from the start, telling them that gay long-term live-togethers had the same rights as straights.
Now, what if this couple hadn't wanted to be married? Nonetheless, if California had gay marriage, I think Sonoma County officials would have had a lawyer hit them over the head — a county lawyer — from the start, telling them that gay long-term live-togethers had the same rights as straights.
Catholics attack NY Times
And, its public editor responds. It's clear some of the attacks, from Faux and National Review, are political "chumming" and represent a new low in moral sickness driving faux outrage.
Others? When bishops attack, one is led to wonder ... a BIG cui bono? What are they hiding under their cassocks and surplices?
Others? When bishops attack, one is led to wonder ... a BIG cui bono? What are they hiding under their cassocks and surplices?
Tom Friedman tops himself again!
Just when I thought, less than a week ago, Thomas "My Head is Flat" Friedman couldn't get any dumber, he has, with a truly stupid column suggesting the Tea Partiers go green, even to talking about the Green Tea Party.
From there, he goes into his energy independence shtick, swallows Lindsey Graham hook, line and sinker on his faux indignation over immigration and more.
Further words fail me; read his stupidity for yourself. In fact, I consider it so dumb, I decided to invent a new blog tag, "moronity alert," paralleling my "hypocrisy alert" and "irony alert" tags, for someone who, theoretically at least, is smart enough to know better.
From there, he goes into his energy independence shtick, swallows Lindsey Graham hook, line and sinker on his faux indignation over immigration and more.
Further words fail me; read his stupidity for yourself. In fact, I consider it so dumb, I decided to invent a new blog tag, "moronity alert," paralleling my "hypocrisy alert" and "irony alert" tags, for someone who, theoretically at least, is smart enough to know better.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)