Glad you asked. They’re investigating whether or not the military should have used codename “Geronimo” in there hunt for bin Laden.
Me thinkum they not want do real work, Kimosabe.
Seriously, this is the sort of thing that only a handful of folks with degrees in “Native American Studies” would give a damn about… and I doubt many of them are such Hot House flowers that this would be affect them in any real way.
For Our Own Good, the government has banned incandescent bulbs. We should be using “energy saving” CFL bulbs. Guess what? According to a German study, the CFL bulbs cause cancer. It’s already well known (or should be!) that CFL bulbs contain some nice, toxic mercury. Good luck making sure that everyone disposes of them properly.
… and don’t get me started on the crap light quality from CFLs….
This gets into my point about Obama and polling. Race undeniably helped Obama. This is also obvious.
But as people begin leaving wait-and-see mode and entering evaluate-and-judge, are they going to keep thinking “Well, he’s black, so I should studiously scour any and all negative thoughts from my mind, even though he’s brought my family and my business little but misery for three years” or are they going to think, “Gee, maybe I shouldn’t have voted for him last time just because he was black. Maybe this time I should ask about his actual accomplishments and qualifications, apart from his general resemblance to a mash-up of a Heroic Young Crusader played by Will Smith and a Gentle Older Sage played by Morgan Freeman.”
Preference cascade — when once-falsified (falsified even to oneself)suppressed ideas are suddenly too glaringly obvious to be falsified any further and break, unexpectedly and tectonically, from the repressed subconscious to the conscious mind.
Read : “Toronto‘s ’Slut Walk’ Protest–Or, Why Feminism is Doomed“. A cop pointed out that idiot rapists are more likely to target idiots who dress like “sluts”. The cop shouldn’t have used the S-word, especially at a hypersensitive location like a university. Using an evilbadunmutual word is apparently a Big Deal, though… cuz there are enough slutty idiots in Canada for this to go national.
A good rat on this subject can be found at A Dose of Buckley (language alert – duh).
Soooo…. there is a legal right to watch your burrito being made.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday that customers in wheelchairs are denied the “Chipotle experience” of watching their food being prepared because the restaurants’ 45-inch counters are too high.
The company now faces hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages.
The unanimous three-judge ruling overturned a trial court decision pointing to Chipotle’s willingness to prepare a disabled customer’s order elsewhere. The appeals court said that is still unfair.
… always try to claim their opponents are gay, or otherwise link them to gay sex. Wandering around the interwebs, I see this all the time… and not just in youtube comments. You find it in mainstream journals and other media. Weird.
NOW president Terry O’Neill said it glorified violence against women. “I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it,” she said. “That’s what comes across to me even more strongly than the anti-abortion message. I myself am a survivor of domestic violence, and I don’t find it charming. I think CBS should be ashamed of itself.” – LA Times
Suggested rename for NOW : “National Organization for Promoting the Stereotype of Feminists as Angry, Humorless Haters”.
Pronounced “Nops Faaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhh…”
Similar to Hfuhruhurr.
A recently released music video for “Popular Demand” by the Clipse featured the awning of the infamous Obama Fried Chicken joint in Brownsville, Brooklyn. But in comparing versions of the video airing on MTV and elsewhere, it looks like the TV channel completely erased the restaurant’s name from the awning in the video’s opening shot.” – more
People are, of course, protesting.
I’d heard he was going into full Jihad mode against dissent over at LGF, but … wow. I posted a single comment expressing doubt the shocking-ness of the list of Limbaugh quote he snaked from “Media Matters”. (Posted – Sun, Oct 18, 2009 6:05:16pm ) and my old comment account from long ago was turned off (Timestamp – Sun, Oct 18, 2009 6:08:20pm).
I can kinda see why some folks were annoyed enough to start the “other” Little Green Footballs.
Kathryn Russell-Brown thinks so…
“It feels very O.J-ish,” said Kathryn Russell-Brown, the director of the Center for the Study of Race and Race Relations at the University of Florida, referring to the racial divide in public opinion over the guilt or innocence of former football star O.J. Simpson for the 1994 murder of his white wife. Surveys found that white majorities thought Simpson guilty was and blacks didn’t. Simpson was acquitted in 1995. “It’s deja vu all over again. People have staked out their ground: ‘It’s about race; no it’s not about race.'”
Strike blow for the free exchange of ideas… by buying food!
Query: Is Russell Mokhiber a screaming nutbag?
First data point : “Why You Should Boycott Whole Foods“.
Verdict : yes.
There was some good commentary in the middle of their coverage of WFMI :
Personally, I support Mackey’s public advocacy of alternative ideas. He’s one CEO trying to be part of the solution, not the problem — and even if they’re not delicately phrased, he often makes excellent points.
If anything, General Motors’ bankruptcy shows that Mackey’s quip about unions may have been too kind. Combined with management’s own poor decisions, unions’ costly and short-sighted demands proved more like a fatal disease to the automaker than an inconvenient and socially embarrassing one. That’s why longtime labor foe Wal-Mart’s (NYSE: WMT) recent decision to team up with unions to support employer mandates practically dripped with irony. Whole Foods, Starbucks (Nasdaq: SBUX), and Costco (Nasdaq: COST) are all good examples of companies that have made it a point to provide employee benefits without coercion.
Here’s another thought: Shouldn’t the very people contemplating a Whole Foods boycott on these grounds applaud many of the company’s existing initiatives? Are they aware of its progressive, employee-friendly policies? And if so, does this mean they don’t care as much as they think they do?
I mean, really, how dare Whole Foods let employees vote on their benefits, when most retail workers get no benefits whatsoever? The nerve of Mackey, forgoing his base salary and capping management’s pay at 19 times that of his lowest-paid employee? What is Whole Foods thinking, donating part of its profits to local and global organizations working to make a positive difference? And giving the majority of its stock options to rank-and-file employees, rather than upper management? That’s just diabolical!
Sometimes, trying to be part of the solution seems to challenges some people’s assumptions about the way things are supposed to be. Mackey’s belief in conscious capitalism — a world where responsible, entrepreneurial capitalists try to make things better, not worse, and where we all take greater responsibility for our own decisions — might challenge some people’s long-held assumptions. But it’s a great thing to contemplate.
I don’t remember much in the way of outrage on the left when these sorts of things were happening in San Francisco :
Now, thanks to Obama’s rapidly-collapsing “Healthcare” “plan” … one lone idiot yelling “Heil Hitler” merits national condemnation!
In the future, I hope these leftie types remember that the whole Nazi/Israeli thing is just no longer cool.
On this basis, I am considering a purchase and urge the reader to do so as well.
Maybe I’ll get this one instead; it’s nicer and cheaper :
Write your congressman (or whatever Czar is in charge of such things).
Sarah Palin responds to Obama, using the actual text of the HR 3200. Here’s some of it –
Yesterday President Obama responded to my statement that Democratic health care proposals would lead to rationed care; that the sick, the elderly, and the disabled would suffer the most under such rationing; and that under such a system these “unproductive” members of society could face the prospect of government bureaucrats determining whether they deserve health care.
The President made light of these concerns. He said:
“Let me just be specific about some things that I’ve been hearing lately that we just need to dispose of here. The rumor that’s been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for death panels that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we’ve decided that we don’t, it’s too expensive to let her live anymore….It turns out that I guess this arose out of a provision in one of the House bills that allowed Medicare to reimburse people for consultations about end-of-life care, setting up living wills, the availability of hospice, etc. So the intention of the members of Congress was to give people more information so that they could handle issues of end-of-life care when they’re ready on their own terms. It wasn’t forcing anybody to do anything.” 
The provision that President Obama refers to is Section 1233 of HR 3200, entitled “Advance Care Planning Consultation.”  With all due respect, it’s misleading for the President to describe this section as an entirely voluntary provision that simply increases the information offered to Medicare recipients. The issue is the context in which that information is provided and the coercive effect these consultations will have in that context.
Section 1233 authorizes advanced care planning consultations for senior citizens on Medicare every five years, and more often “if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual … or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility… or a hospice program.”  During those consultations, practitioners must explain “the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice,” and the government benefits available to pay for such services. 
Now put this in context. These consultations are authorized whenever a Medicare recipient’s health changes significantly or when they enter a nursing home, and they are part of a bill whose stated purpose is “to reduce the growth in health care spending.”  Is it any wonder that senior citizens might view such consultations as attempts to convince them to help reduce health care costs by accepting minimal end-of-life care? As Charles Lane notes in the Washington Post, Section 1233 “addresses compassionate goals in disconcerting proximity to fiscal ones…. If it’s all about alleviating suffering, emotional or physical, what’s it doing in a measure to “bend the curve” on health-care costs?” 
As Lane also points out:
Though not mandatory, as some on the right have claimed, the consultations envisioned in Section 1233 aren’t quite “purely voluntary,” as Rep. Sander M. Levin (D-Mich.) asserts. To me, “purely voluntary” means “not unless the patient requests one.” Section 1233, however, lets doctors initiate the chat and gives them an incentive — money — to do so. Indeed, that’s an incentive to insist.
Patients may refuse without penalty, but many will bow to white-coated authority. Once they’re in the meeting, the bill does permit “formulation” of a plug-pulling order right then and there. So when Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) denies that Section 1233 would “place senior citizens in situations where they feel pressured to sign end-of-life directives that they would not otherwise sign,” I don’t think he’s being realistic. 
Don’t be misled. These new posters featuring Barack Obama’s face imposed over the likeness of Tinky Winky may appear benign, but they’re not.
Their intent is far deeper and insidious: to stir ugly racist thoughts in America’s subconscious.
On the surface, the posters don’t add anything new to the discussion. Obama has been called a “socialist” before. But, subliminally, the posters draw heavily on stereotypes of the worst kind.
Consider the following evidence:
– First, the obvious: Purple is only a tick or two away from black on the color spectrum, so it’s clearly no coincidence that Obama’s likeness was imposed over Tinky Winky and not Dipsy, Laa-Laa, Noo-Noo, or Po. Tinky Winky is an unspeakably devious subliminal reminder of the pigmentation of our President’s skin.
– Tinky Winky – and the rest of his Teletubby ilk – are meant to draw upon latent and subconscious racism and xenophobia. They’re odd looking, they speak in incoherent phrases, they eat strange food and live in a futuristic dome. Clearly, they’re not from around here – and they may not even be from this planet. To superimpose Obama’s likeness over such a character is a truly despicable tactic designed to remind white people of his foreign heritage and to reinforce the notion that he is “of the other.”
– Lastly, using Tinky Winky is a cretinously creative way to emasculate the President. Everyone knows Tinky Winky carries a red handbag, for crying out loud. White evangelicals are particularly attuned to subliminal associations with Tinky Winky since Jerry Falwell outed the cartoon character as a symbol of gay pride with his purple (but remember, also almost black) color and his triangular antenna.
This is ugly stuff. By superimposing Obama’s face over the likeness of Tinky Winky this new poster creates a subtly coded, highly effective racial and political argument. Forget socialism, this poster is another attempt to undermine the President by drawing on deep seated stereotypes against blacks, foreigners, and gays. It’s disgusting.
(From Tom Bevan, at RCP )
2009/08/11 at 9:08 am (political correctness, Psycho Donuts)
Tags: Bob's Big Boy, campbell california, Chubby Maid Café, Chubby's, Fatburger, Heart Attack Grill, ignorance, political correctness, politically correct, Psycho Donuts, www.psychodonuts.com
In reply to The ridiculous contoversy of Psycho Donuts (examiner.com), Melany, a Well Meaning Oppressor generate another “scoking” What-If scenario :
Family member name affected by mental illness: Travis. When did mental illness become part of pop culture? When the civil rights act was first implemented, there were idiots who thought it was moronic too. It your concern is the taste of a donut, then why does the name of facility matter. I guess you do not believe in equal rights for fat people too. I see that you are chubby and clearly like donuts, so what would happen if we created a donut shop called Chubby Fatso, which would include your segment of the population? Would your feelings not be hurt? It may seem like not a big deal to you, but those of us who battle the stigma each day, dont want society making a joke of those we love fatso.
Let’s go down the list :
- Having a “family member” “affected” by “mental illness” doesn’t make you a spokesman for anyone. Sorry.
- Mental illness has been part of “pop culture” from before it was called “Mental Illness”. Look at King Lear, Victorian Novels. Poe. Fritz Lang. Alfred Hitchcock. The Joker. Twilight Zone. Monty Python’s Flying Circus.
- It’s always fun to assume that since some people though something good (ie, the Civil Rights Act) thought it was “moronic”, anything thought to be moronic is therefore good. Lots of things were thought to be “moronic”, too : Slavery, Nazism, Communism, racism, phrenology, etc, etc.
- I note this in a lot of these Psych protester types – they tend to make attacks personal; “I see that you are chubby…”. They just don’t seem to grasp that there are many things that are only offensive if directed at individuals.
- Finally, the “shocking” idea of a restaurant that invokes “fat”-ness. Oh my. There couldn’t possibly be examples.
Time for a celebration of Culinary Fattitude!
To close, let’s go international!
More later, maybe… this is fun!