What I’m Reading, May 8, 2014

By Ralph Chaplin [Public domain], via Wikimedia CommonsRepublicans are Trying to Mix the Ideologies of Jesus Christ with an Atheist and That Doesn’t Make Any Sense, Allen Clifton, Forward Progressives, April 14, 2014

It’s amazing to me how few conservatives know who Ayn Rand is. Especially considering that she’s quite possibly the most influential person behind most of the Republican party’s economic ideologies.

She was a person who spoke out against social programs, believed that people should only worry about themselves, opposed big government and worshiped at the “glory” that is unregulated capitalism. In other words, she’s the epitome of what most Republicans support economically.

***

There’s just one problem – Ayn Rand was an atheist. Not that there’s any problem at all with being an atheist (more power to you) but there is a big problem with a political party that builds its social platform on “Christian” values while basing its economic ideology on that of someone who didn’t believe in God.

How Piketty’s Bombshell Book Blows Up Libertarian Fantasies, Lynn Parramore, Moyers & Company, April 30, 2014 Continue reading

Share

An Unsurprisingly Dishonest Headline

The following headline caught my attention the other day:

BREAKING: Supreme Court Judges Say Obama Birth Certificate A Fake

WHAAAAAAAAAAA????????

Dave Winer [CC BY-SA 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/)], via Flickr

My first clue that this article might not be entirely on the level—I mean aside from the extremely WTF headline—is that it was posted on a website called The U.S. Patriot. I decided to look closer.

First off, the article itself made clear that this was an Alabama Supreme Court judge. Not the U.S. Supreme Court. Not even the entire Alabama Supreme Court. Continue reading

Share

Just Because You Think the Second Amendment Says You Can, It Still Doesn’t Mean You Should

By Lucio Eastman (Free State Project - PorcFest 2009 - Open Carry) [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia CommonsYou might have a Second Amendment right to carry a gun into a restaurant, but others also have the right to call the police on you. I certainly have the right to state my opinion that you are a jackass. The following happened in Fort Worth

Let’s all take a moment to pity Open Carry Texas. The armed freaks who enjoy parading around terrorizing the public because they can are once again playing up their victim status after frightening the staff of a restaurant so badly that employees locked themselves in a freezer to protect themselves.

Thursday night, the “peaceful” and “non-threatening” group barged into a Jack in the Box with their usual heavy armaments, striking fear into the staff.

On multiple occasions in the past couple of years, I have heard people explain the difference between carrying a rifle in a manner in which it cannot be easily fired, as though this somehow makes it better that someone decided to stroll down the street with his definitely-not-for-hunting rifle (and I say “he” because it seems like it’s always a “he.”)

What is never explained is why I should trust the guy standing there with an arm cannon that is not in a firing position, simply because at that precise moment he isn’t holding it in a way that it could be fired. I know it doesn’t take long to move it into such a position—it wouldn’t be very useful otherwise—and that makes it impossible to tell the difference between a “good guy with a gun” and a “bad guy.” Continue reading

Share

What I’m Reading, May 5, 2014

Paul T. [CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/)], via FlickrCreationists’ Neil deGrasse Tyson hysteria reaches fever pitch, Dan Arel, Salon, May 2, 2014

Not surprisingly AiG’s own Danny Faulkner, an astronomer by degree, but not in practice claims that if stars are being formed today that we do not need science to explain how because God has the ability to make such things happen on his own.

This kind of thinking is what stunts scientific growth in the US and around the world. Faulkner and those like him aren’t looking for natural answers to the amazing universe we inhabit and simply credit anything and everything to God. When science does make a massive discovery that happens to through a wrench in their faith based beliefs, they simply reject the science.

Saudi Arabia Clueless About Human Rights, Ed Brayton, Dispatches from the Culture War, May 1, 2014 Continue reading

Share

Mean-Girl-in-Chief

One might be tempted to hope that the recent invocation of the sacrament of baptism in defense of torture—which managed to anger the left and the right—heralds the end of America’s reigning mean girl’s moment in the sun.

I’m pessimistic enough, though, that I wouldn’t count on it. I like the way Robyn Pennacchia said it:

There’s something deeply unsettling about her, and it has very little to do with the fact that I disagree with her politically. There are people I disagree with firmly but could perhaps have a pleasant conversation with on a non-political subject. In fact, it’s something I try to do on the regular because I am not really comfortable with thinking anyone is completely terrible, because that makes me feel too hopeless. Sarah Palin is not one of those people. If she agreed with me on everything, she would still freak me out.

In her speech, Palin goes on about how they are our enemies, which means we should be able to do whatever to them. She then goes on to talk about her other enemies– “those clownish little Kumbaya-humming fairytale-inhaling liberals.” She has a lot of vitriol for people she perceives as being kind–and almost more for that reason, specifically, than any political position. Even the way she speaks of her God–as though she wants to use him as an instrument of punishment, as an instrument of her own vengeance. There are the people who are on her side, 100%, and everyone else is her enemy.

Where have I heard that last bit before?

Oh yeah. Cersei Lannister.

20140429-221801.jpg

Eek.

Share

What I’m Reading, May 2, 2014

But silence is political, PZ Myers, Pharyngula, April. 28, 2014

Somehow, silence on issues like feminism, abortion rights, and gay marriage are pushed by some as the only acceptable non-political response — anything but neglect of the issues is “mission creep” and is to be deplored. I’m afraid though, that if you don’t take a stand, you are taking a stand — on the wrong side of those subjects.

Consent: A Concept Apparently Unknown to Republicans, Scott Lemieux, Lawyers, Guns & Money, November 30, 2011

Not only have a lot of Republicans and journalists conflated sexual harassment and consensual affairs into indistinguishable “sex scandals,” the former seem to think that the consensual conduct is actually worse. When the Cain story first broke, I saw multiple people bringing up John Edwards and Monica Lewinsky, exemplifying the same mistake. Consent matters, and while the battle to preserve any substantial privacy for public figures has been lost in my mind it’s also the line where gossip turns into something of actual significance to evaluating a candidate.

(See also Conservatives and the Concept of Consent: A Permanently Estranged Relationship)

Share

What I’m Reading, April 30, 2014

By Constitution_Pg1of4_AC.jpg: Constitutional Convention derivative work: Bluszczokrzew (Constitution_Pg1of4_AC.jpg) [Public domain], via Wikimedia CommonsLibertarian Law Prof Debunks Bundy Nonsense, Ed Brayton, Dispatches from the Culture Wars, April 25, 2014

As some of the more militant libertarians, especially the anarcho-capitalists, flock to the support of Cliven Bundy in his standoff with the federal government, most of the libertarian-minded law professors are debunking their absurd claims and pointing out how gloriously wrong those people are. Josh Blackman is one of them.

First, Bundy seems to reject the Constitution’s property clause. (It was a wonderful twist of scheduling fate that I assigned the “Property Clause” in ConLaw the week after the Bundy Ranch standoff. ) In an interview he said that the federal government has “no jurisdiction or authority” on his grazing rights. Under the Property Clause, Congress has the power to “dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States.” The land at issue was owned by the United States prior to Nevada statehood as a territory. I suspect Bundy will argue that his family has obtained a prescriptive easement on the land, as it has continuously, openly, and (absolutely) hostilely, grazed on the land for 170 years. Though, adverse possession is not permissible against the federal government. Continue reading

Share

What I’m Reading, April 28, 2014

klsgfx [Public domain, CC0 1.0 (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)], via OpenclipartPlease, Please, Please: Do Not Make Your Kid The Center Of Your Universe, Cassie Murdoch, Jezebel, July 6, 2012

It’s impossible to say for sure that intensive parenting leads to depression and stress and being dissatisfied, but the links don’t really make sense if you flip them around. It’s also not clear whether intensive parenting has any great impact on the children, but Liss concludes that anything that makes moms depressed probably doesn’t benefit children in the long run. Plus, anecdotally some of us have observed that making your child the center of the universe tends to result in rather obnoxious offspring.

Justice Sotomayor accuses colleagues of thinking they can ‘wish away’ racial inequality, Robyn Pennacchia, Death and Taxes, April 23, 2014

Just yesterday, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the people of Michigan had the right, via mob rule, to ban the practice of Affirmative Action at state institutions such as the University of Michigan. It wasn’t a good ruling. Ever since the state voted to ban it, minority enrollment has declined significantly. Which is not surprising, because when you ignore unearned privileged and advantages, it’s hardly shocking when the priviledg and advantaged pull ahead. Obviously the person who starts the race in the middle of a marathon is going to have a better chance at winning.

Continue reading

Share

What I’m Reading, April 25, 2014

By Robin klein (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia CommonsPut Your Money Where Your Mouth Is, evolved beyond the fist mistermix, Balloon Juice, April 19, 2014

The Will/Krauthammer justification for unlimited campaign contributions is that it is free speech protected by the Constitution, and it’s just a happy coincidence that the political party they back has more money to spend on political donations. Now that they’ve installed a Supreme Court that agrees with them, they’re trying to turn the reasonable consequences of free speech into some form of persecution.

Hellraiser vs. The Hellbound Heart, Mark Pellegrini, Adventures in Poor Taste, October 12, 2012

Personally, I prefer Hellraiser over The Hellbound Heart just as I prefer Candyman over The Forbidden; I found it took all the elements I enjoyed from the story and improved upon them. However, there were a couple of items from the book which I either liked better or thought added a bit more to the story. In the book, when Frank summons the Cenobites, they make him feel every orgasm he’s ever had in his entire life all at once before tearing him to pieces (as opposed to the movie, where they just eviscerate Frank as soon as they arrive). This was important to the plot in that the spillage of Frank’s semen acted as a catalyst to his resurrection when Raury/Larry spilled his blood in the attic. Additionally, this version better represented the “pleasure and pain unified” concept which the Cenobites are supposed to embody. I suppose the only other detail from the book which I wish had made it into the film is what happened after Kirsty made her deal with the Cenobites. In the book, they give her a time limit and as each minute passes she can feel an invisible “noose” squeeze tighter around her neck. This added a bit of suspense to the climax, as Kirsty struggles to get Frank to verbally admit to his escape from Hell.

Technically, this is from “Hellraiser 2,” but shut up.

Continue reading

Share

What I’m Reading, April 24, 2014

Nari Sin [CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/)], via FlickrThe Difference Between a Tea Party “Patriot” and a Real Patriot, Allen Clifton, Forward Progressives, April 19, 2014

Republicans are great at coining a term and using it over and over and over and over and – well you get the point. It’s as if there’s a secret handbook only conservatives are given access to where they’re instructed which words to say and when to say them. Rich people aren’t wealthy, they’re “job creators.” Laws that legalize using religion to discriminate against others are “religious freedom” laws. Even when it comes to patriotism they act as if they’re the only ones who are patriotic. As if flying an American flag, putting a “God Bless America” bumper sticker on their vehicle and finishing sentences with “support our troops” instantly makes them patriotic.

Maddow Asks: ‘Why Do We Overlook Right-Wing Violence and Refuse to Call it Terrorism?’ Answer: Because They’re White, Chauncey DeVega, AlterNet, April 18, 2014

Domestic terrorism is an oxymoron in America when white folks are involved. Whiteness imagines itself as kind, benign, safe, neutral, normal, and good. “Terrorism” is something those “other people” do, i.e. the Muslims, or some other ambiguous cohort of black and brown people who “hate American values”. Whiteness and the white racial frame are possessed by an acute sense of historical amnesia as well. The most dangerous domestic terrorist organization in the history of the United States was the Ku Klux Klan, a group that killed thousands of black Americans during the 19th and 20th centuries.

Open Thread: “Why Be A Neocon?…” Balloon Juice, April 19, 2014, comment by Patrick II

Continue reading

Share