The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

LGBT Activist Declares: ‘We Need to Start Making Their Lives a Living Hell’

Posted on | February 23, 2014 | 98 Comments

Have you ever heard of Dr. Scott Lively? Me neither, but he’s a conservative Christian who leads a group called Defend the Family International. Dr. Lively has been branded a hatemonger by the Southern Poverty Law Center, so I figure he must be a Great American.

Friday, Dr. Lively and others held a press conference at the National Press Club in D.C. to announce the formation of the Coalition for Family Values, where they issued a press release “praising the Russian Federation for passing pro-family laws and encouraging other nations to follow suit.” Needless to say, gay-rights groups were not happy about this, and the press conference was interrupted by hecklers.

When video of the press conference made the rounds, an LGBT activist named Chloe Nelson posted this comment on Facebook:

It’s time that the LGBT community forms a new organization that targets homophobes, bigots, religious zealots, religious fanatics, and all other assholes who are against equality, and human and civil rights for all people.
By targeting these bigots, and publishing every little detail of their sex lives, or personal lives, taking pictures through their windows, and getting the pics out on the internet, showing every little thing that they do, including how they wipe their asses when in the bathroom, or for that matter if they’re wiping their asses in the kitchen — we’ve got to catch it on camera.
The time to just sit back and take it, are over with for the LGBT community. We need to get rid of bigots like these homophobic religious assholes, and if it means exposing every little thing about them, then that’s what we need to do.
We need to start making their lives a living hell by constant observation and publishing pics and articles every time they fart, or spit, or even look cross-eyed. It’s obvious these bigots only understand one thing, and that is persecution, discrimination and bigotry.
Here come the LGBT bigots, gonna prey on the religious zealots, fanatics, and bigots who think their shit don’t stink, and think they can control everyone else’s life.
LET’S GET RID OF THESE BASTARDS ONCE AND FOR ALL!!!!

“Eliminationist rhetoric,” as Professor Reynolds would say. And what’s the deal with disrupting a press conference?

The conference was briefly disrupted when three LGBT activists (one of them a non-English-speaking Russian) stood up to try to read a statement. We did not allow them to control the room, and asked the National Press Club security to remove them, which they did. Upon realizing that they would not be allowed to stay, the leader of the trio, Ellen Sturtz (self-described as an“Angry Old Lesbian“ on her business card) began screaming “I’m a Homo-Fascist!” and tossed a wad of leaflets in the air. They turned out to be flyers with the title “Lively is Deadly” attempting to convey the message that I am a dangerous person who wants to harm homosexuals around the world.

There are multiple layers of irony here: Dr. Lively was supporting the suppression of pro-gay speech in Russia, while the protesters were suppressing anti-gay speech in America. My dangerous extremist idea? Let’s stop suppressing speech.

But the totalitarians now march beneath the Rainbow Flag:

When the activist insists on speaking, Dr. Lively says, “this is what I would like to bring to the attention of everyone in this room — this is what we call ‘homo-fascism.’”
“‘Homo-fascism,’” he continues, “is a hard-left, totalitarian mindset that attempts to suppress all perspectives on the homosexual issue except those that favor their positions.”
“Every time the pro-family people try to tell the truth about homosexuality,” Dr. Lively says, “we are interrupted by homo-fascists. Now, I would like to ask if there is security here . . . because I would like to ask you to remove these two people from the press conference.”

Remember when what’s-her-name, the actress, “came out” as lesbian at a conference last week? Did conservative Christians heckle her or disrupt her speech? I think not.

By the way, someone should tell Dr. Lively to stop calling these goons “homo-fascists.” They’re actually homo-Marxists.

(Hat-tip: Jeanette Runyon on Twitter.)

 

Category: Gays

Even A River Of Lies Cannot Flow Uphill

Posted on | February 22, 2014 | 10 Comments

by Smitty

Look: Progress is dead. The final piece of FDR’s Second Bill of Rights arrived, and it was a river of lies, with headwaters in hell.

It’s the law of the land, they tell us, passed fair and square by both houses of Congress, crowned as constitutional by the highest court of the country, and ratified by the people in Obama’s reelection. They note that other historic reforms—Medicare, Social Security—had troubled beginnings and then were embraced by the nation, and that even the Civil Rights Act of 1964, preceded by outbreaks of terrible violence, was accepted quite quickly once passed.

Not so with Obamacare, to which resistance over time has only grown stronger. “Current and former administration officials .??.??. have been surprised at how steadfast the opposition has remained,” the Washington Post reported last summer, quoting MIT economist Jonathan Gruber saying, “It used to be you had a fight and it was over, and you moved on.” But few have moved on, for reasons which are not all that hard to tease out: It’s not working out, in fact it’s a disaster; it’s blowing holes in the federal budget; the win-to-lose balance is way out of kilter, as many more people are hurt than helped by it. Obamacare may collapse on its own for practical reasons, but there is a fourth strike against it that adds a dimension of weakness no comparable measure has faced: Much of the country believes it’s a fraud, passed dishonestly, and not deserving of moral authority. In short, they find it nearly illegal, highly immoral, and possibly fattening. And their minds won’t be changed.

Read the whole thing. The notion of there being a “law of the land”, itself, is being destroyed by this evil. As ancient commenter Madison noted:

It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?

Not that Madison was a prophet, or anything. He merely had more common sense than Princess Pelosi and Harry “the Cadaver” Reid combined.

via Hot Air

Category: Health Care

Spewing Forth The Lukewarm GOP

Posted on | February 22, 2014 | 53 Comments

by Smitty

We don’t really have explicit proof that John McCain threw the 2008 election, like Butch Coolidge was supposed to do in Pulp Fiction. I’m sure McCain must’ve felt a little sting at some point, but the old chap is far beyond pride.

The 2010 Tea Party uprising seems to have caught the GOP by surprise. The GOP leadership’s body language to the base seems to be: “Shut up and get back to manning the oars; navigation input from the rowers is neither necessary, nor desired.”

Thus we saw no significant rallies in 2011, and 2012 was a reversion to McCain form. Again, I’ll fall short of explicitly saying that Mitt Romney himself deliberately wasted everyone’s time. But if BHO gets to own the demise of Ambassador Stevens, then Mitt owns the failure of his campaign. Why might these failures be occurring?

For starters, Daily Pundit chides Stephen Green over being willing to vote for Zombie Nixon over Udall, pointing out that, on the issues, the two are about as distinguishable as chicken-fried steak and schnitzel:

Sure, some elections matter, but what matters even more is why we are electing people, and what they do after we elect them. If, as is the case with Udall and Nixon, the party label is a distinction without a difference, then advising people to crawl over broken glass to vote for one or the other may result in a lot of eviscerated voters, but no material changes.

On a related note, we have Joan of Argghh’s feedback to Sowell on Ted Cruz, where the normally awesome Thomas “expresses concern” over Cruz’s popularity, and Joan responds:

As if we on the Right are no better at evaluating an ideal from reality than the mascots of the Left. I take strong exception to that aspersion. I’m listening to Ted Cruz and find him interesting in that he seems to know what it will take to grab attention in a Media stronghold, not that his ideas leave me breathless. He has moxie and he has solid values and he’s unafraid. Will he be a good leader if given the chance? Ah, there’s the rub.

Now, I’m as reasonable as the next person, even willing to be shown a better way, but if Mr. Sowell is asking me to seriously consider the possibility that Ted Cruz is promising me things that appeal to the same crass envy that Obama gleefully cultivates in his own followers I must scratch my head and wonder if his disconnect with his own supporters can be so vast. It may simply be an emotional ploy, wrought by an old man’s fears. If so, I share them and sympathize. But either way, it’s obvious that the GOP hit squad is starting early with the Palinization of Ted Cruz. Instead of being cast as an air-head, they’ll demonize him as dangerous to their plans. Those “plans” that will work this time, they swear!

Over here at the navigation plot, I can tell you that our current Progressive course is breeding collapse. Herbert Stein is kicking in. If the Vichy GOP have some kind of reform plan, they need to circulate it STAT!

Karl Rove and the High Priests of Progress are already trying to circulate dead fish such as Chris Christie and Jeb Bush. If the goal is to serve up a third un-inspirational piece of work, to complete some sort of Tri-f**kta of Fail, then we need only listen to what the Really Smart Guys and the codpiece media are saying.

And I’m not trying to sound like some kind of Cruz sycophant. It is entirely possible that, for all he seems a guy sticking to his principles, his soul could be devoured by Cthulhu. Truly, we need adherence to principles, not hero worship. It is not enough that Ted be Cruz; we all need to be our own variations on Ted Cruz.

But the broader point here isn’t about Ted Cruz. Rather, that the vacuum left at the top of the GOP by the lack of leadership like that of Cruz is truly devastating. You can love or hate McConnell and Boehner all day long, but if you took them both to court, you could not convict them of having any vision. They’re both just caretakers of the Progressive regulatory State, here to make sure that we’re only buried in 9,000 pages of new regulations, instead of the Democrat’s full 10,000.

Dump that noise. It’s high time for reform.

Update: Hot Air’s quotes of the day post is timely:

Notwithstanding the Republican establishment’s campaign to marginalize them as what the Journal obligingly labels a “rump kamikaze caucus,” their ranks are swelling. Without them, the Republicans would not have recaptured the House in 2010. Increasingly, they mount primary challenges against Beltway relics. They don’t win all the time, but they win quite a few — like long-shot Ted Cruz’s stunning primary rout over the party’s preferred candidate. And there is a more serious danger for GOP leadership: The conservative base increasingly wears the establishment’s disdain as a badge of honor.

Beltway Republicans do not seem to grasp how ominous this is.

We’ve trusted the GOP’s words, and will now set about using those words on the GOP elite as a suppository.

So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

Category: GOP

The World’s Youngest Blogger: Is BHO A Reference To Dilbert’s Colleague Wally?

Posted on | February 22, 2014 | 4 Comments

by Smitty

Category: World's Youngest Blogger

Tennessee Worker Liberty Offends UAW; NLRB Appeal Ensues

Posted on | February 22, 2014 | 18 Comments

by Smitty

We’ve been getting our schadenfreude on over the Volunteers not volunteering for UAW’s auto-economic asphyxiation. But, as Ted Kennedy’s career demonstrated, evil doesn’t die easily. The NYT:

The United Automobile Workers asked the National Labor Relations Board on Friday to order a new unionization election at the Volkswagen plant in Chattanooga, Tenn., asserting that the union’s loss last week was because of improper interference by the state’s lawmakers.

The complaint filed with the labor board asserts that statements made by Senator Bob Corker and some state lawmakers amounted to “threats” that swayed the VW workers to vote against the U.A.W. In a stinging defeat for the union, workers at the Chattanooga plant voted 712 to 626 against joining the U.A.W., even though the company did not oppose the unionization effort.

You see, disagreement with your organized crime overlords is always “improper interference”. Whatever the Union does to enforce control must be the proper sort of interference, one supposes.

The bad news here is that the NLRB is pretty much a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party. Just how far they’re willing to go to push a Senator remains to be seen, and should be interesting.

via Hot Air

Category: Labor Unions, Tennessee, Unions

Because @kmcdonovgh Knows You’re a Victim of Heteronormative Patriarchy

Posted on | February 22, 2014 | 77 Comments

Salon.com assistant editor Katie McDonough:

Evangelical Christianity makes visible — through purity pledges and doctrine assigning women the role of man’s “helpmate” — the norms and expectations about female virginity and subservience that so often remain hidden in the secular world. While it may be tempting to draw a red line around Christian fundamentalist views on gender and sexuality to distinguish them from supposedly evolved “secular” culture, there is considerable, uncomfortable overlap between the two. . . .

(Watch out! Heteronormative patriarchy is comin’ to get ya!)

Susan Patton is a joke, but she’s not the only person arguing in mainstream publications that women who have sex outside of marriage are setting themselves up for disaster and heartbreak. (Hi, Ross Douthat!)
In an opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal last week, Patton warned single women, “The grandmotherly message of yesterday is still true today: Men won’t buy the cow if the milk is free.”
This is purity culture passed off as “commonsense” wisdom, which was published in a “serious” and secular paper.

Well, she goes on from there, all of it inspired by an article by Kiera Feldman in The New Republic, about which I’d written a few hundred words that got gobbled up by a computer glitch, and I don’t feel like re-writing it. Basically, if you don’t want to travel The Strait and Narrow Way, there are many on-ramps for the Highway to Hell. The idea that somebody is forcing women to adhere to a Christian moral code is one of those persecution fantasies that feminists cherish as justifying their eternal vigilance for “choice.”

Matt Barber takes a whack at the feminist piñata:

In what amounts to little more than an anti-Christian hit piece on Patrick Henry College . . . Ms. McDonough says that it’s time for American women to reject all those biblically imposed “gender complementarian” norms and do away with our “toxic purity culture” once and for all.

Nobody is trying to stop Katie McDonough from whoring around, so why does she feel threatened by “purity culture”? Why do feminists reject moral criticism of fornication — that’s “slut-shaming”! — but accept criticism of fornication by radical lesbian feminists who denounce heterosexual PIV (penis-in-vagina) as “always rape“?

If you study feminist writing carefully, you discover that the ideology presents young women with two alternatives:

  1. Have sex with lots of men, because that’s “empowering”!
    or
  2. Be a lesbian, which is even more “empowering”!

The one option feminism emphatically condemns is traditional Judeo-Christian moral teaching about pre-marital chastity.

“[T]he idea of ‘virginity’ in our culture . . . [is] an extremely problematic concept, bolstering up a highly heteronormative hierarchy of what is and isn’t defined as sex.”
— Jess McCabe, “‘Virginity’ is an outdated concept”

“Even the way we see sexual intercourse is male-defined! . . . What we understand about this concept of virginity, in a sense, invalidates queer sex. . . .
“Society has embedded within our minds that when a woman loses her virginity, she loses something . . . All of this isn’t such a surprise of course when we remember that for centuries, women have been seen as property and not individual human beings. The concept of virginity reinforces this idea, that a woman’s worth is intrinsically linked to her sexuality.”
— Hew Li-Sha, “A Feminist Interpretation of the First Time”

“The idea of your first penis-in-vagina sexual encounter being something significant and life altering (well, for women anyway) has origins in women being considered property.
“That is to say, virginity is a social construction that came about because of the commodification of women. . . .
“Virginity is heteronormative.
“Virginity assumes that penis-in-vagina sex is somehow a special type of sex that is different from all others.
“This means that there is an assumption that engaging in heterosexual vaginal sex is the standard (and should be) for your sexual activities.
“Heterosexuality is the norm, and virginity just works as reinforcement to this.”
— Erin McKelle, “Losing Virginity for Good”

Take notes — this will be on the final exam. The basic feminist idea is that if you have moral objections to screwing around, you’re not only a victim of the patriarchy, you’re a gay-bashing hater, too. You’re invalidating “queer sex” and “bolstering up a highly heteronormative hierarchy.”

Is it a coincidence that this rhetoric sounds like it belongs in a book, Lesbian Pick-Up Lines for Women’s Studies Majors?

 

Category: Feminism

Republican Party Staring Victory Right In The Face, Wetting Itself

Posted on | February 22, 2014 | 25 Comments

by Smitty

It isn’t really that difficult to summarize, people. The country is on the wrong course. Technology is being used to enslave, not liberate. You want liberty, and Progressivism is producing legislation/regulation combinations that look like this, printed out: Once more, with feeling: “managed” liberty is not liberty. So, the GOP is all over liberating us from the clutches of homo bureaucratus, right? No’ so fast. The GOP is also of that ilk, and strangely incapable of putting its leadership where its rhetoric has been. Thus, we see VodkaPundit pointing out that the cause of Statism is far from a lost one this November:

It’s almost enough to make a conservative weep. While Tom rates the chances of a GOP takeover at about 55.4% (with 18 seats in play, compared to Sean’s 17), that’s still within the Democrats’ ability to hold on. Five likely or leaning R races is not a comfortable place to be, even this early on.

But it gets worse.

AK, AR, CO, VA — these should be fairly easy pickings for the Grand Old Party, but the best of them are all tossups at this stage, and Udall as previously mentioned seems likely to win in CO. Cook and Rothenberg each have only four likely or leaning R races, not enough to win control. Sabato is the outlier at six.

The IRS was used to localize and strike a blow at Tea Party leadership, and, well, the voters seem to be accepting it. The GOP elite, more interested in power than actually backing up the party platform, seems strangely comfortable with all of this. Managing a diminishing piece of the pie seems easier than expanding the pie to include those not read in to the overall Statist plan.

I’ve typically fallen on the side of those advocating working to reform the GOP from within, but perhaps a re-assessment is in order.

via Instapundit

Category: Election, Republicans

Bad to Worse for Brett Kimberlin

Posted on | February 22, 2014 | 14 Comments

Brett Kimberlin got bad news with this past week’s decision by Public Citizen attorney Paul Alan Levy (and also the Maryland chapter of the ACLU) to defend Ace of Spades in the federal lawsuit that John Hoge calls Kimberlin v. the Universe, et al.

Kimberlin got worse news, perhaps, on Friday when attorney Mark Bailen filed his motion to dismiss on behalf of the defendants Erick Erickson, Red State, James O’Keefe and Simon & Shuster. Bailen does an excellent job of documenting key aspects of the case, notably (a) Kimberlin’s status as a public figure with a notorious reputation, and (b) the lack of specificity in Kimberlin’s allegations.

The vague nature of Kimberlin’s allegations with regard to his claims of defamation is an aspect of the case that you probably have to be a First Amendment fetishist to understand. Winning a libel suit in this country is very difficult, because the First Amendment has been interpreted by courts to grant very wide latitude when it comes to reporting and commenting about public figures. This is the bottom-line explanation for why Brett Kimberlin’s lawsuits, both the federal RICO suit and the Maryland lawsuit Kimberlin v. Walker, et al., were filed pro se — any competent attorney would have advised him he doesn’t have a case.

Having once consulted an attorney myself in 2007 regarding one particular lying son of a bitch, I remember my buddy Bert the Samoan Lawyer explaining to me that I was a public figure under the Sullivan precedent, and this would make it practically impossible for me to win a libel judgment. This is just the way the law is — lying sons of bitches are usually in the clear, if the target of their lies is a public figure per the Sullivan precedent. (Sarah Palin could tell you all about it.)

If the law protects lying sons of bitches, certainly it must protect people who tell the truth about lying sons of bitches.

“The Wizard of Odd,” as Time magazine called Brett Kimberlin, is not only a liar, but also a public figure, and so therefore any competent attorney looking at this situation would have declined to take his case. In fact, Paul Alan Levy indicates Kimberlin tried to get him to help with the RICO suit and Levy told Kimberlin “that his campaign to suppress criticism though litigation had rather gone overboard” — which was our basic point to begin with, to say nothing of the other forms of harassment Kimberlin’s critics have endured.

We cannot forget the threat Kimberlin sent to Patterico in October 2010: “I have filed over a hundred lawsuits and another one will be no sweat for me. On the other hand, it will cost you a lot of time and money.” That could be construed to indicate vexatious intent, i.e., that Kimberlin sues people as a means of harassment and intimidation and, in Mark Bailen’s Friday filing in the RICO case, he included a crucial footnote.

“Kimberlin’s claims … are sufficiently meritless to suggest bad-faith or vexatious conduct, justifying an award of attorneys’ fees as a sanction,” Bailen argues in a footnote on page 31, citing the 2004 award of attorneys’ fees to the defendants in the Byrd v. Hopson case, in accordance with “dismissal of plaintiff’s ‘baseless’ claims, which alleged a ‘wide-ranging conspiracy against her’ that was guilty of civil rights violations, RICO violations, and state law claims, some of which were barred by the statute of limitations.”

Not being familiar with Byrd v. Hopson, I am not in a position to judge the resemblance between the issues in that case and the “meritless” Kimberlin RICO claim, but considering how many defendants there are in this case — some of whom have yet to file their motions to dismiss — what would the total cost of the defendants’ attorneys’ fees be? Many tens of thousands of dollars, for sure, and if the judge were to award  attorneys’ fees to the defendants . . . Well, it would be a lesson that the students of Acme Law School would not be likely to forget any time soon.

 

BOMBER SUES BLOGGERS




 


Category: The Kimberlin Files
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin