Posted on | May 5, 2014 | 32 Comments
Tick-tock: Journalism jargon for a story that recounts events in chronological order, as if accompanied by the soundtrack of a ticking clock.
Last summer, at the request of American Spectator editor R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr., I spent several days trying to get the White House Press Office to answer a simple question:
The President of the United States is not only the most powerful man in the world, but also the most public, his daily life chronicled to the minute by the national press, his every word and action reported and analyzed by journalists and commentators. What the American president says and does is always automatically newsworthy and therefore it is profoundly mysterious that a hushed silence surrounds one of the most disturbing events of Barack Obama’s presidency, the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.
Where was the president? This is a simple question, one to which the American people might reasonably expect an answer, but more than nine months after that deadly night, we still have not gotten a detailed answer and most in the media seem to have lost all interest in the question. . . .
You can read the rest. The point was, and is, that we never got the “tick-tock” version of the White House’s Benghazi story — we don’t have a timeline of where Obama was and what he was doing, during the tragic events of Sept. 11, 2012. Here we are, nearly a year later, and journalists still haven’t gotten the tick-tock. Patterico did some poking around over the weekend:
Here is an interesting tidbit from the White House Visitor Logs for 9/11/12: Obama met with three people, at an unknown time, for “debate prep.” . . .
Obama appears [from the official White House schedule] to have been gone from the White House for much of the early part of the day. He observed a moment of silence on the South Lawn; visited the Pentagon Memorial; visited veterans at Walter Reed in Bethesda; returned to the White House; and met with Leon Panetta at 5 p.m. There are not too many holes in his schedule during the day — increasing the chances that the “debate prep” took place in the evening, after the meeting with Panetta . . . in other words, when the Benghazi attack was unfolding.
Patterico makes clear we don’t know when that happened, because we never got that tick-tock, and thus the question:
It makes a difference because everybody — including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the likely 2016 Democrat presidential nominee — spent weeks lying about what happened.
When the truth began to trickle out, the White House press corps was negligent in its duty, and let the Benghazi lies go unexamined during the weeks while President Obama got himself re-elected.
We still don’t have the whole truth, but Democrats are calling for a “boycott” of a congressional investigation trying to get the truth, many in the media are dismissive of the investigation, and thus actively participating in this partisan cover-up!
The questions must be answered, and those who participated in the cover-up — including the media — must be held to account.
Posted on | May 5, 2014 | 2 Comments
— compiled by Wombat-socho
67 prisoners freed by rebels
Sinn Fein’s Gerry Adams Urges Calm After Release
No charges against Adams in McConville murder case
Portugal To Make Clean Exit From Bailout
Buoyed by exports and benefiting from austerity budgets
Tillis is favored by Washington insiders, but can he really beat Brannon and Grant before taking on Kay Hagan?
THE ECONOMY, STUPID
Asian Crude Mixed On Ukraine Tension: NYMEX $99.82, Brent $108.46
Asia Stocks Slip As PRC Manufacturing Slips
Powerade Drops Controversial Ingredient
SAP CTO Vishall Sikka Steps Down In Cloud Overhaul
PayPal Exec Leaves Company After “Inappropriate” Tweets
SEC Probing Hedge Funds’ Bets On Herbalife
Foursquare Creates Swarm
Twitter May Soon Allow Users To Mute Annoying Friends
Comcast Nears Deal To Stream EA Games To TVs
Apple, Facebook And Google To Expand Transparency On Government Data
Amazon Discounts Samsung Pro Tablets
Letang, Fleury do the damage for the Penguins
FAMOUS FOR BEING FAMOUS
Lindsay Lohan Cites Miscarriage In Apology To Judge
Seeking reinstatement in lawsuit over demise of her 6126 clothes brand
Panama’s VP Varela Pulls Off Upset To Win Presidential Election
Big Quake Rattles Tokyo, But No Tsunami
Nigerian President Bows To Pressure, Vows Rescue Of Kidnapped Girls
Three Killed, Sixty Injured In Kenya Bus Blasts
Libya Parliament Speaker Voids PM Vote
Passenger Train Derails In India, At Least 19 Dead
Death Toll From ROK Ferry Hits 259; President Park Visits Families Of The Missing
Hundreds Of Mourners Gather At Western Wall On Eve Of Remembrance Day
Pedophile Max Clifford Kept Damaging Evidence About Clients In His “Little Brown Book”
BLOGS & STUFF
American Power: #LiberalRacism – Condoleeza Rice Bullied Out Of Rutgers Commencement
American Thinker: The Suffocating Neo-Puritanism Of “Progressive” America
Blackfive: Come Run, Walk, Roll
Conservatives4Palin: Sarah Palin – Evil Reigns When Good Men Do Nothing
Don Surber: How Republicans Will Blow The Election In 2014
Jammie Wearing Fools: Trey Gowdy To Head House Select Committee Investigating Obama’s Benghazi Coverup
Joe For America: Mayweather Drops Fiance – “She Killed Our Twin Babies”
JustOneMinute: Tax Cut Denialism, With A Freudian Slip
Pat Dollard: Gwen Ifill – Benghazi A Distraction From Nigerian Girls School Kidnapping
Protein Wisdom: Democrats Make It Clear – Obama’s Political Reputation More Important Than American Lives
Shot In The Dark: Kill National Popular Vote With Greasy Fire Part II – An Experiment
STUMP: Public Pension Watch – The Fragility Of “Can’t Fail” Thinking
The Jawa Report: Blah, Blah, Blah
The Lonely Conservative: Pelosi Claims Dems Lost In 2010 Because Of Citizens United, Not Obamacare
This Ain’t Hell: The War Against Veterans
Megan McArdle: A Good Step Forward In A Long Recovery
Posted on | May 4, 2014 | 70 Comments
Feminism is, among other things, a totalitarian attempt to tell us what to think by controlling what we are allowed to say. For example, we cannot be permitted to disapprove of promiscuous women, and so the language of disapproval must be suppressed.
The “walk of shame” is a slang term that usually describes a person, usually a woman, who is making her way home from spending the night at someone else’s house for a sexual encounter.
The iconic image of a woman doing the walk of shame is disheveled hair and party-ready clothes that look sadly comical in the cold light of day. But it’s not her appearance that makes her trot home one of “shame.” No, as far as most people who use the phrase, her “shame” is that her appearance lets everyone know that she probably had sex, and for some reason, she is supposed to be ashamed of that.
“Walk of shame” is a phrase that’s widely understood to have originated on college campuses, since people who spent the night at a lover’s place often do have to walk on foot home to their own place, and usually in front of other people who recognize them and might recognize that their clubbing clothes don’t exactlymatch the casual wear that’s more common for mornings on campus. It’s expanded since then to encompass urban dwellers who often travel on foot or by public transportation and, in fact, has become so ubiquitous that you’ll often hear people who get to drive home say they were taking the walk of shame. (Drive of shame?)
But while the “walk” part of the phrase is understood flexibly, in many ways the “shame” part isn’t. . . .
You can read the whole absurdly censorious thing. Here we are, on the eve of sixth annual National Offend a Feminist Week, and Amanda Marcotte decides to give us a lecture on the need to remove “shame” from the dictionary insofar as it refers to sluts, tramps, hussies, floozies, man-traps, wenches, trollops and Women of Dubious Virtue?
Are we not to describe such women as “easy,” “cheap” or “loose”? Do the Enlightened Arbiters of Acceptable Discourse mean to banish from our lexicon every possible synonym for “promiscuous”? Can we no longer be allowed to remark that the dolled-up bimbo making goo-goo eyes at every man in the bar is hot to trot, on the prowl, looking for some quick action and down to fuck?
Well, it’s still more than four hours before midnight EDT, but I can wait no more: National Offend a Feminist Week begins early!
Take that, you dirty lowdown harlots!
Posted on | May 4, 2014 | 11 Comments
— compiled by Wombat-socho
Welcome back once again to the weekly collection of links that provide welcome relief from the daily barrage of sickness, politics (but I repeat myself) and just plain weirdness that provides the bulk of our content here. As usual, some links are NSFW, so you should exercise some discretion in when and where you click.
Goodstuff leads off this week with Mary Anne and Ginger (also, Retro Madonna!), followed by Randy’s Roundtable with Katrina Bowden (also, Genevieve Morton helping celebrate his 5th blogiversary!), Fishersville Mike with some Big Bang Theory, and Ninety Miles From Tyranny featuring Morning Mistress, Hot Pick of the Late Night, Is This G-String Too Small?, Hot Cameltoe Pick, and Girls With Guns (encore!). Animal Magnetism chips in with Rule Five Friday (encore!), an Asian Invasion, and the Saturday Gingermageddon, Blackmailers Don’t Shoot serves up more Jennifer Lawrence, and First Street Journal brings the military-grade hotness From Norway. Subject To Change provides a view from the top, and The Dividist debuts with CNBC anchor Amanda Drury.
EBL as usual has a herd of links, this time including Sheryl Attkisson, corsets, Kirsten Dunst, Game of Thrones, Lesbian Big Love, Vintage Retro Playboy Bunny Costumes (via Instapundit), Postmodern Jukebox, Harsh Conditions/Pretty Faces, Baristas, Asa Akira, and Lesbian Pulp Fiction.
Soylent Siberia submits the weekly coffee creamer, more whining about the lack of football, Overnighty Osmary, Mystery Monday Motivationer, Tuesday Titillation In Scarlet, Bodypaint Awesome, the Coxswain’s Report, Humpday Hawtness Elvish Magic, Evening Awesome Aglow, Falcosword Fursday Keisha, Fursday Overnighty Mariana, Corset Conflagration, T-GIF Friday, Weekender Mia, Header For Irish, and Bath Night. In Week 2, it was seconds on the coffee creamer, an Overnighty Auburn Awesome, Monday Motivationer Dani, Tuesday Titillation: Nice Beads!, Humpday Hawtness Luci, Fursday Super Hero Edition, Today In Fursday Furnishings, Corset Caliente, Happy Hour Hawtness, and Weekender Keisha Grey.
A View From The Beach contributes Caprice – Not Your Mommy’s Chevy, Context is Everything, Why Can’t We Go On as Three?, Bad Rap From the Russians, Special IRS Issue, It’s Not Porn!, It’s HBO!, About That “New Earth” (with space girls), Happy Easter!, Vida Guerra, Gratuitous Kate Upton, Giant Tsunami Destroyed Europe’s Lost Land (cave girls), Why Good People Should Have Guns, “Idiocracy” Turns History (cave girls), Cheerleading for the Minimum Wage, Best Campaign Ad Ever, My Eyes Are Up Here!, “Let it Out”, and Avril Puts Her Foot In It.
Proof Positive’s Friday Night Babe is Toni Garrn, his vintage babe is Vivian Austin, and the Sex in Advertising feature provides some uplifting reading about Wonderbra. Also, Jenny McCarthy, Colleen Townsend, and more Sex In Advertising. At Dustbury, it’s Gretchen Wyler, Tammi Terrell, Christina Hendricks, and Rihanna, while at The Camp of the Saints, it’s Sara Willis, the Rule 5 News, and Sarah McDonald.
The DaleyGator’s DaleyBabes included Emmanuelle Vaugier, Reika Miki, Fibi Love, Tia Carrere, Cyneitra Copeland, Nichelle D, Beverly Sade,
Vanessa Nina, Vanna Black, Baje Fletcher, Rachel Mullins, Jessica Marais, Rosemarie Calloway, Marina Victoria, Keiko Agena, Viantha Foxx, Wendy Calio, Dishad Vasaria; also, Ebony Hotness and
Babe in Bikini gets tasered for charity.
Thanks to everyone for their linkagery! Deadline to submit links to the Rule 5 Wombat mailbox is Saturday, May 10.
Posted on | May 3, 2014 | 9 Comments
— compiled by Wombat-socho
Top linkers this week:
- Batshit Crazy News (11)
- Regular Right Guy (6)
Thanks to everyone for their linkagery! Deadline to submit links for next week’s FMJRA is noon on Saturday, May 10.
Posted on | May 3, 2014 | 57 Comments
Scarcely a day goes by that we don’t hear some report of the increasing turn toward totalitarianism by the campus Left. Progressive hegemony on university faculties, a humanities curriculum heavily influenced by crypto-Marxist “theory,” and the radicalization of students through an identity-group Culture of Grievance, all contribute to this growing climate of intolerance. Administrators, when not actually in sympathy with the radicals, abdicate authority in the face of intimidation tactics employed by the militant Left at universities and colleges.
We are therefore not surprised that left-wing smears of Condoleezza Rice as a “war criminal” have led the former Secretary of State — arguably the most powerful black woman in American history — to withdraw as commencement speaker at Rutgers University:
In a statement to be released this morning, Rice says,
Commencement should be a time of joyous celebration for the graduates and their families. Rutgers’ invitation to me to speak has become a distraction for the university community at this very special time.
I am honored to have served my country. I have defended America’s belief in free speech and the exchange of ideas. These values are essential to the health of our democracy. But that is not what is at issue here. As a Professor for thirty years at Stanford University and as it’s former Provost and Chief academic officer, I understand and embrace the purpose of the commencement ceremony and I am simply unwilling to detract from it in any way.
Good luck to the graduates and congratulations to the families, friends and loved ones who will gather to honor them.
Opposition to Rice had focused on her support for the Iraq War and Bush policies in the War on Terror. Rutgers faculty at the New Brunswick campus approved a resolution calling for Rice to be disinvited, citing her role in the Bush administration’s alleged “effort to mislead the American people about the presence of weapons of mass destruction.”
Insofar as this is not simply a reflection of raw partisanship — studies have shown university faculties to be dominated by Democrats by at least a 4-to-1 margin over Republicans — it is further proof (as if more proof were needed) of the profound, poisonous and pervasive spirit of anti-Americanism now prevalent in academia.
College campuses essentially operate on mob rule at this point. http://t.co/CxGXKG3XcR
— Sonny Bunch (@SonnyBunch) May 3, 2014
— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) May 3, 2014
@EricBoehlert Does that apply to Hillary?
— Legal Insurrection (@LegInsurrection) May 3, 2014
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) May 3, 2014
The University of Oceania has decided that having Emmanuel Goldstein as commencement speaker was a bad idea.
— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) May 3, 2014
Posted on | May 3, 2014 | 81 Comments
“Allison eased herself carefully across the slippery sheets to the edge of the bed. Her feet dangling off the edge, she groped for the floor. She felt the slick, fur-like material of the rug between her toes. For a moment she played with it, enjoying the sensual tickling sensation on her barefoot. Then she sat up slowly, careful not to wake the girl sleeping on the other side of the bed.”
— first paragraph of Unnatural, by Sloan Britton (1960)
“One of the fundamental tenets of postmodern theory is that all identities are socially constructed, and that, throughout history, dominant groups have had the power not only to construct their own identities, which they disguise as ‘innate’ or ‘natural’ rather than created, but also to construct the identities of groups the dominant group has a vested interest in marginalizing. The appeal of postmodern theory lies in its method of ‘deconstructing’ the power relationships inherent in constructions of identity so that it becomes possible to articulate a counter-ideology which has as its aim the liberation and de-objectification of marginalized groups. The irony in this is that those most often attracted to and who are in a position to utilize postmodern methodology are themselves members of a dominant group, even if only in terms of level of education, and in the attempt to give voice to those who have been historically silenced and oppressed, they frequently run the risk of further marginalizing some members of these groups.”
— first paragraph of “Lesbian Identity and the Politics of Butch-Femme,” by Amy Goodloe (1993)
It is probably unnecessary to say that, given the choice between a lurid pulp novel about lesbianism and an academic treatise about lesbianism, most of us would choose the novel. Academia is overcrowded with bad writers, so it may be unfair to single out the field of Women’s Studies, and even more unfair to pick on the University of Colorado’s Amy Goodloe, simply because hers was one of the first articles that turned up on a Google search: “lesbian + feminist + butch + gender + role.”
(This was utterly random, Ms. Goodloe, and my apologies at your shock to discover your 1993 paper made the subject of online mockery, compared unfavorably to a steamy 1960 pulp novel. After writing about the butch “gender role” thing on Friday, I had in mind to do a follow-up, and you drew the short straw, so to speak.)
Goodloe is clear that her “postmodern” critique is about power. Because “all identities are socially constructed, and . . . dominant groups” possess the power to construct not only their identities but also “those who have been historically silenced and oppressed,” therefore the “method of ‘deconstructing’ the power relationships” aims “to articulate a counter-ideology which has as its aim the liberation and de-objectification of marginalized groups.”
This is less interesting than the plight of Allison, the good-girl-gone-wrong protagonist of Sloan Britton’s 1960 novel Unnatural. Her story — as tacky, vulgar and stereotypical as it may be — is about human emotion. Goodloe’s treatise is about political power:
For the past two decades [i.e., 1973-93 ], the dominant form of feminist discourse has, in attempting to “liberate” lesbian identity from patriarchal control, instead imposed its own identity politics on the lesbian community, with the result that those lesbians whose behaviors or “styles” do not conform to the feminist agenda have been doubly-oppressed — once by the dominant patriarchal culture, and again by the movement that claimed to seek the liberation of all women. This is perhaps most obvious in the feminist critique of role playing among lesbians, which is considered by the dominant feminist discourse to be a barrier to one’s “true” identity as a woman (assuming that there is such a thing). . . .
(Again, this is about who is “dominant” — not in the sexy sense of “dominant,” but in the less interesting political way.)
[I]f theorists make the whole notion of lesbian identity so problematic as to suggest that there can be no such thing, on what grounds then are lesbians to come together in the fight against oppression and homophobia? Deconstructing lesbian identity in such a way perpetuates the “divide and conquer” strategy of the dominant ideology, which has historically been used to deprive oppressed groups of the unity needed for power, by failing to recognize the agency of lesbians in resisting dominant constructions of their identity in favor of ones that more accurately reflect their lived experience.
It is the task of lesbian theory, then, Wolfe and Penelope argue, to both resist a kind of deconstruction that would render lesbians even more invisible, and to work towards the (re)construction of a lesbian identity as it is “experienced through a collective history and culture” . . .
(Checking Goodloe’s curriculum vitae, I don’t see any awards for “Most Boring Thing Ever Written About Lesbianism,” but . . .)
One of the problems with the construction of lesbian identity that is often noted by theorists is that it most often takes place within the terms of the dominant discourse, which has established heterosexuality as the “natural” or normative expression of human sexuality against which all other expressions are considered deviant and deficient. One of the first academics to challenge the naturalization of heterosexuality was Adrienne Rich, in an important and controversial essay entitled “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence” (1980). Rich’s main argument is that heterosexuality is not only not natural or innate, it is in fact an institution designed to perpetuate male social and economic privilege, which means that the ideology of difference as the natural basis for sexual attraction is, in fact, a construction. . . . Rich goes on to argue that it is the primary bonding between women that is, in fact, natural, but which is disrupted by the imposition of compulsory heterosexuality in all women’s lives — or rather, in all but those few who resist heterosexuality in favor of the more “natural” state of woman-identification, which is the broader definition Rich gives to lesbianism. . . .
The critique most often leveled against role-playing in the lesbian community comes, as we have just seen, from the feminist belief that all role-playing replicates the very (hetero)sexual structure from which lesbians are supposedly free. The idea that one’s sexual identity might depend on or evolve from such role-playing is considered “unenlightened,” and a sign of one’s successful socialization into the dominant ideology. But there is also a growing body of lesbian-feminist scholarship that attempts to shed new light on our understanding of the function of role-playing within the lesbian community, arguing that lesbian roles not only challenge the constructed nature of heterosexual roles but are, in fact, subversive of the sex/gender system as a whole. . . .
(Here we are getting to the core of why feminism ultimately requires lesbianism. Feminist theory holds that it is “the sex/gender system” which is the source of women’s oppression under patriarchy. If, as Goodloe says in summarizing Rich, “heterosexuality is not only not natural or innate, it is in fact an institution designed to perpetuate male social and economic privilege,” then this “dominant ideology” of heterosexuality is key to women’s oppression. That which is “subversive” of the system — i.e., lesbianism — is therefore liberating.)
According to [feminist Esther] Newton, in “The Mythic Mannish Lesbian: Radclyffe Hall and the New Woman” (1984), the figure of Stephen Gordon [in Hall’s novel, The Well of Loneliness] “was and remains an important symbol of rebellion against male hegemony” . . . because of the way she challenges the “natural” relationship between sex and gender. . . . According to Newton . . . the character of Stephen Gordon is not “mannish” because she wants to be a man, but for the more complicated reasons of resistance to the dominant construction of “femaleness,” and decision to publicly announce and act on her desire for other women — which, in a phallocentric culture, means appropriating the male role.
The claim Newton is making for Hall’s character is that, rather than capitulating to the dominant construction of lesbian identity as a defect of nature, she instead destabilizes gender categories by exposing them as roles that can be assumed by either sex. Masculinity then becomes nothing but a social role, albeit one accorded power and dominance in the culture, and therefore women who reject the prohibitive and dehumanizing role of “femininity” symbolize this rejection by “cross-dressing,” appropriating the codes and symbols of masculinity while remaining fully female. Role-playing then becomes, at least for the “butch” woman, a challenge to heterosexuality rather than a replication of it. . . .
OK, enough with the italic interpolations. You can go read the whole thing. Where you see Goodloe’s article going — and the destination was clear from the start — is toward justifying butch-femme roles among lesbians as an attack on male “power and dominance.” Women who exercise “power and dominance” in their relationships with other women, however, are OK because they’re women, and if femininity is “prohibitive and dehumanizing” for heterosexual women, somehow being submissive toward a butch lesbian is also OK, because it “destabilizes gender categories.” Amid the academic jargon, Goodloe makes this pretty clear:
Because it is butch women who visibly disrupt the dominant ideology of gender roles with their seeming appropriation of masculinity, scholarly attention tends to focus on “butchness” when addressing issues of lesbian identity. The equally important role of femme women in the construction of lesbian identity is ignored, often because of the misconception that femme women are attempting to disguise their homosexuality by “passing” as straight — which is to say, by buying into rather than rejecting the dominant culture’s construct of “femininity.” What [feminist Joan] Nestle suggests, however, is that the femme role is just as threatening to the institution of heterosexuality because of the way it co-opts the conventional female role in order to signal desire for other women, which of course runs counter the very purpose behind the social construction of femininity. What the femme role makes perhaps even clearer than the butch is the performative nature of all roles, which makes it possible for a biological female to “play at” being a woman by exaggerating what the culture has defined as “womaness.”
Does this involve a strap-on dildo by any chance, Ms. Goodloe? Because we’re all tired of theory about butch-femme roles, which we are certain must be less interesting than the reality. But the same is true, actually, when feminists write about heterosexuals — all they see is male patriarchal hegemony and the presumed victimhood inherent in “the conventional female role.”
Has no feminist ever considered the possibility that not all heterosexual women are clueless? Are there no happily heterosexual women who are as aware as any feminist of “the performative nature of all roles,” and who take an unembarrassed pleasure in performing “the conventional female role” with conventionally masculine men?
Once you discard the power-obsessed collectivist ideology of feminism, what purpose is served by this demonization of men and this contemptuous disdain for “conventional” women?
Feminism’s critique of gender roles (“all identities are socially constructed”) is fundamentally an ideology of selfishness, embraced by perpetually disgruntled women whose inability to find happiness in traditional relationships is turned into a “sour-grapes” rationalization — the argument that traditional relationships are inherently bad. And to hell with Goodloe’s claim that “the dominant discourse” is what “has established heterosexuality as the ‘natural’ or normative expression of human sexuality.” If heterosexuality is not natural, why are there more than 6 billion people on the planet? Maybe Ms. Goodloe wasn’t paying attention in biology class when mammalian reproduction was explained, but her ignorance of the procreative process is not our fault.
Meanwhile, back in Sloan Britton’s 1960 world . . .
She had often thought of leaving. There were too many times when Lydia made life hell for her. Nothing was worth those hours and days of anguish and despair. Lydia was a sadistic bitch who delighted in tormenting Allison.
But Allison would never leave her.
Allison loved Lydia.
She loved her so much that sometimes she thought it was wrong. Human beings weren’t supposed to love each other so much. There must be something sinful about a love so strong it blotted out everything else, including decency and self-respect.
Yeah, that’s hot — and I haven’t even gotten to the good part yet!
Oh: Sixth annual National Offend a Feminist Week begins Monday and continues through May 11 — Mother’s Day, because where would the heteronormative patriarchy be without dear old Mom?
Posted on | May 2, 2014 | 74 Comments
Having previously noted a guy who got fired — fired! — for a Tweet — a Tweet! — now we can report that a black Christian minister may lose his day job in California because of his sermons:
Pasadena city officials placed Public Health Director Eric Walsh on temporary paid administrative leave Thursday after they learned of controversial statements he had made about homosexuality and evolution in online videos and audio clips.
In sermons uploaded to various websites, Walsh, a Seventh-day Adventist preacher, calls evolution “a religion created by Satan,” compares Disney to a “dark empire” of superstition and witchcraft, and criticizes homosexuality.
Walsh’s comments came to the city’s attention after he replaced Oscar-winning screenwriter Dustin Lance Black as Pasadena City College’s commencement speaker, said city spokesman William Boyer.
College officials said they replaced Black because they found stolen photographs of him and an ex-boyfriend engaged in sexual acts on Internet gossip sites, according to the school newspaper, the PCC Courier.
“With the porno professor and the sex scandals we’ve had on campus this last year, it just didn’t seem like the right time for Mr. Black to be the speaker,” PCC Board of Trustees President Anthony Fellow told the Courier.
Fellow was referring to former professor Hugo Schwyzer, who invited adult film stars to speak in a class on pornography and admitted to affairs with his students.
In a letter to the school newspaper, Black accused college administrators of attempting to shame him for his sexuality. He urged students to speak out, and soon a member of the group Students for Social Justice found some of Walsh’s videos online.
“We very quickly realized that there were a lot of communities that would be offended by Dr. Walsh,” said Sarah Belknap, a fourth-year student and member of Students for Social Justice.
The group compiled a list of Walsh’s controversial public statements, then published excerpts on Facebook and emailed them to media outlets.
“We were just so shocked that he was saying these things,” said Kelly Camacho, another student in the group. “This was even worse, to have this person as [Black’s] replacement, of all people.”
“Of all people”! In case you don’t know, Dustin Lance Black’s name has been mentioned in connection with the Hollywood pedophile scandal swirling around X-Men director Bryan Singer. Just “mentioned,” I say, and any suspicion of criminal activity is only a matter of allegations at this point. However, a notorious fondness for gay sex with teenage boys is less controversial in California now than, say, being a Christian who believes that homosexuality is a sin.
Obviously, “Students for Social Justice” prefers the boy-banging Hollywood guy to the black Christian preacher and, in raising a ruckus about it, managed to get the black guy suspended from his job — yeah, that’s a big win for “Social Justice” there.
(Hat-tip: Evil Blogger Lady.)
« go back — keep looking »