Today I'm feeling particularly angry and fucked over. It started last night when I heard that the Obama administration made it mandatory for terror suspects captured in Afghanistan to be read Miranda Rights. You know the ones, '... right to remain silent...court of law...right to an attorney...if you can't afford one, one will be provided for you.' Instead of smacking them on the bridge of their nose with the ass end of an AK-47 to convince them they need to give up information, we're telling them that they have the right not to say a fucking thing. We're also telling them (just a reminder, when I say 'them,' I'm referring to Muslim terrorists that want to murder everyone in the Western world. Not just men, women and children too. And puppies) that if they don't have enough rupees or whatever the fuck they use, we (and by 'we' I mean the tax-paying citizens of the United States of America. You know, the hard working people that terrorists want to murder)will provide them with a lawyer at our expense. What in the sweet shit is wrong with this man? He has to be the dumbest or the most naive person on the planet. It's cute when 5th graders say that there should be no more wars, everyone should get rid of their nuclear weapons and live in peace and harmony with their fellow man or that we should treat those people over there in Afghanistan nicely. It's fucking dangerous when the President of the U.S.A. says the same shit.
Disclaimer: This next bit starts off sorta liberal douche-esque. You've been warned.
In countless cities, especially big cities, there is a portion of the police force that beats the shit out of people. I'm well aware that this isn't something all cops do and I'm also aware that there are some places where this is more prevalent than other. And don't get me wrong, if a police officer is strolling down the street and happens to see a mugger steal an old woman's purse or punt a baby down an alley, you wouldn't hear word one from me if the cop whacked the guy in the head with his big cop flashlight. But if they hear on their police scanner that there has been a robbery in the city of Chicago and the suspect is a carbon-based life form, between 4'1'' and 7'2'', is wearing clothing and needs food and water for survival, can we try to narrow it down a bit before we start clubbing people over the head?
Anyhow, I got off topic there. What I'm getting at is that one of the most notorious cities for police brutality is Chicago. There is always a story about the police here beating people up. Suspects, people who know suspects, people who might have played a game of pick-up basketball with a suspect in 1993. As it happens, our president was a senator in Illinois and lived Chicago. He didn't do one fucking thing to stop it. Weird, right? He told the people here to go fuck themselves and hightailed it right out of the shithole that is Chicago to go to D.C. and make sure we don't beat terrorist murderers like we do teenagers who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. What is most enraging about this is that, if you have any brain cells at all, you know many of the innocent people getting their heads smashed in are minorities. This man has been touted as the best thing to happen to the black community since The Emancipation Proclamation. Schools are named after him for fuck's sake. Yet, he flipped the bird to every 15-year-old kid who was within a 40 mile radius of a crime scene and caught a cop's size 10 to his head, opting instead to make sure terrorists in a war zone know that they don't have to tell us shit if they don't feel like it. Why aren't minority groups outraged by this? Why don't I see anyone throwing a fit because Obama is putting in more effort to protect terrorists than he did to protect innocent American civilians? Not surprising, everyone is a fucking hypocrite and damn near everyone is dumber than a rock with no interest in changing it. Caring is a burden.
The other thing that bugged me today was a story on Drudge about the gay community's reaction to Borat 2: Electric Boogaloo. Apparently, Sacha Baron Cohen is coming out with a movie about one of the characters he does called Bruno. Bruno is flamboyantly gay and the movie is meant to be a satire about homophobia and its many irrational worries. Seems kinda cool right? A sort of throwback to the 17th and 18th century political satires for which Jonathan Swift is so famous. Wrong. It seems that we're too stupid to understand satire. Some guy from Human Rights Campaign said, 'We strongly feel that Sacha Baron Cohen and Universal Pictures have a responsibility to remind the viewing public right there in the theater that this is intended to expose homophobia.' That's a perfect way to convince the general public to get behind gays (pun completely intended), tell them you think they're all inbred retards who would think a movie depicting a comedic character having sex with another dude in front of a baby was a documentary. The other thing about this that really pissed me off was some GLAD spokesfruit saying, 'Some people in our community may like this movie, but many are not going to be OK with it.' So fucking what? Some people in your community will go see it, some people won't. Do movies have to be 'OK' with every member of the gay community in order to be made? I'm not OK with M. Night Shyamalan being allowed to own any type of recording device, but he continues to make those things he inaccurately refers to as movies. You know what else, I'm not OK with cancer, headaches or stubbed toes. It doesn't fucking matter though does it? Shit you don't like will always be around and there is not a single thing you can do about it. How about you get as organized and outraged about the fact that you're not allowed to get married as you do about a silly movie by some weird English Arab Jew? Put as much effort into gay rights as you do into crying like girls about a movie that is actually on your fucking side. It's mind boggling. The fact that this is something I'm even thinking about hurts my soul. Ugh.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Friday, June 5, 2009
My Take on Shit that Happened Days Ago...
I was far too angered to really address this the past few days, but I guess I'll talk about it now. We all know that President Obama can't stand the thought of someone not liking him. He's the leader of the free world and a fat high school girl all rolled into one. Obama to American voters: 'I'm NOT a Muslim! I'm a Christian!! Lookit meeee, I went to this church for like two decades. Oh, shit, nevermind, that church stinks since you don't like it. That guy's a nut! I'll have to find a new Christian church for my Christian morals and values!' Obama to Middle East: 'Asalamulakum, did you know my middle name is Hussein? Did you know my daddy was a Muslim! All his family were too! Lookit, me and you having so much in common! Pleaseeee love me!'
Ugh. Then, in his HOUR LONG speech in Cairo, he boasted about how this country has brought cases to court in favor of letting Muslim women wear their head-scarves and anyone who doesn't think they should be able to is a jerk-face. It's ok for them to wear their head-scarves but it's not ok for them to be unequal. Why, oh brilliant man with Muslim background, do they wear the head scarf? Did they all just get a permanent? Do they all have cancer? No, dummy, it's because they're viewed as unequal. In the Islamic world they wear it because if they don't they're breaking the law, in the Western world they wear it because they'll likely have cinder blocks throw at them when they get home if they're wearing a nice Lacoste polo instead of a burlap bag. Yes, it's part of their culture and their religion, but so is murdering women who claim to be raped and stoning gays to death. Do we have to indiscriminately allow all cultural rituals just because they're cultural rituals? Guess what, in my culture we run around naked humping inanimate objects (including people who are sleeping and only appear to be inanimate). Is that ok? Fuck no it's not. The historical rituals of some cultures fall out of favor for a reason. We don't have slaves anymore. That was something we always had. Women can vote now (might not have been the best idea. I think I'd forfeit my right to vote if all the piggish soccer moms who vote solely on the candidate's hairline and whether or not his wife dresses pretty would also be disallowed). The point is, just because a large group of people practice a certain behavior, doesn't mean it's acceptable (or safe) for society as a whole. When some Muslim woman's husband shoves a homemade bomb in her box and sends her to the supermarket, I'd kinda like her face to be captured on the surveillance camera. I know it's probably arrogant of me to say this, but do you really think that these women want to cover every inch of their femininity? Or do you think that they do it because that is how they were raised and they know the consequences if they don't do it. It's not a fashionable thing, it's a self-preservation thing. They either don't know it's not OK to view women as less than men, or they know it but are too afraid of what will happen to them if they speak out. I guess what I'm trying to say is that Obama really is a sheltered, self-important ass if he thinks that this practice does anything other than grand inequality to women.
The second thing, which is relatively new, is the 'Special Master of Compensation' that Obama is about to appoint. It sounds exactly like something out of 1984, I know. The point of the position is to enforce rules on companies that received bailout money. The rules will be about silly little things like how much a company is allowed to pay its employees. You know, insignificant things like that. It's said that Kenneth Feinberg is going to take this post and that he will report to Tim Geithner but will have 'wide discretion on how the rules should be interpreted'. So, he won't make the rules, Congress will write some vague cluster fuck of a rulebook and Feinberg will have carte blanche as to how he thinks it should be interpreted. So the government says to companies, 'we're offering you this money, if you don't want it, you're competitors will and you'll lose business. Not to mention the IRS auditors that will be knocking on your door. Oh, and one more thing, you're not allowed to pay us back when you want to and we're going to tell you how much you're allowed to pay your employees'. This is fucking nuts, it's getting worse every day and none of the disgusting mouth-breathers in this country will say a word. I can't wait until all the Obama voters actually see what they've done, I'm just worried about how much it will actually take to show them.
Ugh. Then, in his HOUR LONG speech in Cairo, he boasted about how this country has brought cases to court in favor of letting Muslim women wear their head-scarves and anyone who doesn't think they should be able to is a jerk-face. It's ok for them to wear their head-scarves but it's not ok for them to be unequal. Why, oh brilliant man with Muslim background, do they wear the head scarf? Did they all just get a permanent? Do they all have cancer? No, dummy, it's because they're viewed as unequal. In the Islamic world they wear it because if they don't they're breaking the law, in the Western world they wear it because they'll likely have cinder blocks throw at them when they get home if they're wearing a nice Lacoste polo instead of a burlap bag. Yes, it's part of their culture and their religion, but so is murdering women who claim to be raped and stoning gays to death. Do we have to indiscriminately allow all cultural rituals just because they're cultural rituals? Guess what, in my culture we run around naked humping inanimate objects (including people who are sleeping and only appear to be inanimate). Is that ok? Fuck no it's not. The historical rituals of some cultures fall out of favor for a reason. We don't have slaves anymore. That was something we always had. Women can vote now (might not have been the best idea. I think I'd forfeit my right to vote if all the piggish soccer moms who vote solely on the candidate's hairline and whether or not his wife dresses pretty would also be disallowed). The point is, just because a large group of people practice a certain behavior, doesn't mean it's acceptable (or safe) for society as a whole. When some Muslim woman's husband shoves a homemade bomb in her box and sends her to the supermarket, I'd kinda like her face to be captured on the surveillance camera. I know it's probably arrogant of me to say this, but do you really think that these women want to cover every inch of their femininity? Or do you think that they do it because that is how they were raised and they know the consequences if they don't do it. It's not a fashionable thing, it's a self-preservation thing. They either don't know it's not OK to view women as less than men, or they know it but are too afraid of what will happen to them if they speak out. I guess what I'm trying to say is that Obama really is a sheltered, self-important ass if he thinks that this practice does anything other than grand inequality to women.
The second thing, which is relatively new, is the 'Special Master of Compensation' that Obama is about to appoint. It sounds exactly like something out of 1984, I know. The point of the position is to enforce rules on companies that received bailout money. The rules will be about silly little things like how much a company is allowed to pay its employees. You know, insignificant things like that. It's said that Kenneth Feinberg is going to take this post and that he will report to Tim Geithner but will have 'wide discretion on how the rules should be interpreted'. So, he won't make the rules, Congress will write some vague cluster fuck of a rulebook and Feinberg will have carte blanche as to how he thinks it should be interpreted. So the government says to companies, 'we're offering you this money, if you don't want it, you're competitors will and you'll lose business. Not to mention the IRS auditors that will be knocking on your door. Oh, and one more thing, you're not allowed to pay us back when you want to and we're going to tell you how much you're allowed to pay your employees'. This is fucking nuts, it's getting worse every day and none of the disgusting mouth-breathers in this country will say a word. I can't wait until all the Obama voters actually see what they've done, I'm just worried about how much it will actually take to show them.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
I'm Still Alive...Barely
I've been gone for quite some time, I'm not dead, I've just been busy. Rest assured I've been no less annoying and imposing with my political views. Especially about this Sotomayor person. Unlike Harry Reid, I decided to read some or her opinions. It's very boring shit and I'm going to attempt to make it slightly less boring shit.
Ricci v. DeStefano is the case everyone is talking about. This is the case in New Haven, Connecticut where a group of firefighters (17 white, one Hispanic) brought a lawsuit against New Haven because of 'reverse discrimination'. (Side bar: What the fuck does reverse discrimination mean anyhow? It's not reverse anything, it's just discrimination. I understand that the majority is the one claiming to be discriminated against, but even though the majority of rapists are men, a female who commits rape isn't called a 'reverse rapist'. That term fucking infuriates me). Anyhow, a group of firefighters took a test to see if they qualified for a promotion. The city claims to use something called 'The Rule of Three' which means that the person chosen for the position will be picked from the top three scorers on the test. Crazy right? The people who did best get the job. That is, of course, unless the people who do best on the test are white. I won't bore you with the numbers, but there were seven openings for captains positions and only one or two Hispanics and no blacks scored high enough to be considered, and out of eight openings for lieutenant, no blacks or Hispanics scored well enough to be considered. Here's where it gets weird, because any sane person would think, 'Oh, I guess there won't be any black captains or lieutenants, and there might be one or two Hispanic captains. Guess they'll try harder for the next exam'. Not so much. The city of New Haven decided to chuck the test results and promote no one because the blacks and Hispanics didn't do as well as the whites. The firefighters who sued would have all been eligible for a promotion had the test results not been thrown out. They lost. They appealed to Sotomayor's court, they lost again. They appealed again to the Supreme Court, where the case is now being heard.
What lesson does that teach? If you're a minority and you don't do as well as a white person, we'll penalize the white person who worked harder than you so you don't get your feelings hurt? How the fuck can a standardized test, created by an independent agency to test firefighters for promotions, be biased? Is it possible that the 68 white people who took the test just did better than the 50 minorities that took the test? Why in the fuck is that so hard to believe? That can never be the case though right? Even if it's true, the minorities might get their feelings hurt and just give up. They wouldn't take that failure and what they've learned from it and apply it to future tests they may take, they'll just quit all together. Apparently, the only time minorities don't do well on tests is when they're being discriminated against. Isn't that what these fucking racists are saying? And this isn't even something that the minorities who did poorly on the test brought about, the city of New Haven threw the scores out because they were afraid someone might think their test was racist. In doing so, they're just perpetuating perceived racism that isn't even there. If white officials keep patting minorities on the head and saying, 'There, there, you did really well! Well, you would have if that evil test wasn't so racist! Don't fret, we'll just give you a different test and maybe you'll do better on that one'. If, just one fucking time, someone in charge would say to those crying racism, 'Study harder next time mother fucker, then you might get a promotion', we'd get somewhere with race relations. Not every fucking failure in your life is because people are out to get you, sometimes it might be, and other times it's because there are people out there who are better, harder working, smarter or more diligent than you are. I suspect a lot of minorities know this, but they also know that if they fuck up and don't do well, the guilty white liberals will blame it on racism and they'll get whatever they want anyhow.
This case worries me because our next Supreme Court justice agrees with the decision here. It's fucking racism. Not to mention her comments about how she makes better decisions because she's a Hispanic woman and not a white man. No Republicans are causing a fuss because they're all castrated faggots and there is really no hope in sight.
I'm depressed. Anyone want to start a third party with me?
Ricci v. DeStefano is the case everyone is talking about. This is the case in New Haven, Connecticut where a group of firefighters (17 white, one Hispanic) brought a lawsuit against New Haven because of 'reverse discrimination'. (Side bar: What the fuck does reverse discrimination mean anyhow? It's not reverse anything, it's just discrimination. I understand that the majority is the one claiming to be discriminated against, but even though the majority of rapists are men, a female who commits rape isn't called a 'reverse rapist'. That term fucking infuriates me). Anyhow, a group of firefighters took a test to see if they qualified for a promotion. The city claims to use something called 'The Rule of Three' which means that the person chosen for the position will be picked from the top three scorers on the test. Crazy right? The people who did best get the job. That is, of course, unless the people who do best on the test are white. I won't bore you with the numbers, but there were seven openings for captains positions and only one or two Hispanics and no blacks scored high enough to be considered, and out of eight openings for lieutenant, no blacks or Hispanics scored well enough to be considered. Here's where it gets weird, because any sane person would think, 'Oh, I guess there won't be any black captains or lieutenants, and there might be one or two Hispanic captains. Guess they'll try harder for the next exam'. Not so much. The city of New Haven decided to chuck the test results and promote no one because the blacks and Hispanics didn't do as well as the whites. The firefighters who sued would have all been eligible for a promotion had the test results not been thrown out. They lost. They appealed to Sotomayor's court, they lost again. They appealed again to the Supreme Court, where the case is now being heard.
What lesson does that teach? If you're a minority and you don't do as well as a white person, we'll penalize the white person who worked harder than you so you don't get your feelings hurt? How the fuck can a standardized test, created by an independent agency to test firefighters for promotions, be biased? Is it possible that the 68 white people who took the test just did better than the 50 minorities that took the test? Why in the fuck is that so hard to believe? That can never be the case though right? Even if it's true, the minorities might get their feelings hurt and just give up. They wouldn't take that failure and what they've learned from it and apply it to future tests they may take, they'll just quit all together. Apparently, the only time minorities don't do well on tests is when they're being discriminated against. Isn't that what these fucking racists are saying? And this isn't even something that the minorities who did poorly on the test brought about, the city of New Haven threw the scores out because they were afraid someone might think their test was racist. In doing so, they're just perpetuating perceived racism that isn't even there. If white officials keep patting minorities on the head and saying, 'There, there, you did really well! Well, you would have if that evil test wasn't so racist! Don't fret, we'll just give you a different test and maybe you'll do better on that one'. If, just one fucking time, someone in charge would say to those crying racism, 'Study harder next time mother fucker, then you might get a promotion', we'd get somewhere with race relations. Not every fucking failure in your life is because people are out to get you, sometimes it might be, and other times it's because there are people out there who are better, harder working, smarter or more diligent than you are. I suspect a lot of minorities know this, but they also know that if they fuck up and don't do well, the guilty white liberals will blame it on racism and they'll get whatever they want anyhow.
This case worries me because our next Supreme Court justice agrees with the decision here. It's fucking racism. Not to mention her comments about how she makes better decisions because she's a Hispanic woman and not a white man. No Republicans are causing a fuss because they're all castrated faggots and there is really no hope in sight.
I'm depressed. Anyone want to start a third party with me?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
