John Hawkins of Right Wing News presents some of his uncensored hate mail. It’s all from self-styled “liberals” and is all a variation on one theme – “Fuck off and die!”
Honestly, I’m disappointed with the selection Hawkins shows… I was hoping for some actual flair or creativity among the h8fest, since it’s from people who fancy themselves pillars of intellect and wit. Some insults involving lighter fluid, a pack of condoms, and a goat, at the very least. No dice. But I did discover what is probably a typo and has now become my new favorite word –
Racisy! That is going to be my answer to everything. Vague enough to throw at anything and harder to deflect than a concrete charge like “racist.” Girl won’t call you back? She’s racisy! Didn’t get the promotion? Boss is racisy! That is my default response from now on.
Clearly, we need legislation against the use of super-speed. Because career criminals always obey laws.
4 + 1 + 1 + 5 = 11
For your listening pleasure, Night Sky Radio brings you 11 of the awesomest songs ever performed. Not recommended for the weak or fans of Lite Rock. Click here or on the Toob below to begin the playlist!
And please take a minute to visit our sponsors. If you are strong.
That’s gotta be my clickbaitiest title ever.
So Yahoo’s homepage asks the question, “Why is Taylor Swift buying a .porn Web suffix?”* Obviously clickbait, but one worth investigating. The full story is that a new domain suffix – .sucks – is on the near horizon. The suffix .porn is already out there. Swift, Microsoft, and Harvard have reportedly already bought into .porn. While Swift.porn sounds tailor-made as a service for speedy, uh, delivery, something about combining “micro,” “soft,” and “porn” just seems meta-contradictory somehow.
I’m waiting for someone to start a nightskyradio.sucks site. I’ll know I’ve hit the big time once I’ve attracted hatefollowers.
* The little thumbnail teaser read “Swift buys Web’s .porn”. You know you would have clicked it too.
Stolen without shame from John C. Wright –
Tomorrow at 9.26 and 53 seconds, it will be
Which is pi.
This will happen only once in the history of time.
The world ends. Prepare yourself.
(unless you are not on military time, in which case it happens twice, am and pm)
A bit more numerologizing at his site. No mention, however, regarding apple pi, American Pi, four of fish and finger pi, or private investigators. Disappointing, as one would expect a man of his intellect and wit to have a finger in every pi.
Not sure what to buy your special someone for Valentine’s Day? Find the perfect gift for any significant other here –
…whether they want a gift or not –
… as well as gifts for the entire Facebook LGBTISMAQEDR&B spectrum –
… or however “other” your significant one is –
I’m not even gonna tell you about the chocolates.
So I just heard that Beck won the Grammy award and Kanye West is mad about it because he thinks Beyonce should have won it.
Quoth West, after the ceremony …
I just know that the Grammys, if they want real artists to keep coming back, they need to stop playing with us. We ain’t gonna play with them no more. And Beck needs to respect artistry and he should’ve given his award to Beyoncé.
Because when you keep on diminishing art and not respecting the craft and smacking people in their face after they deliver monumental feats of music, you’re disrespectful to inspiration.
Beck? Not a real artist? Like his songs or not, he is an artist, who plays multiple instruments and writes his own music. As for feats of music, he’s had two gold records, one platinum, and one double platinum, won several awards, and got every Gen X kid in America chanting “Soy un perdedor” in the 1994.
I’m also pretty sure Beyonce never had the Grim Reaper squeegeeing windshields in any of her videos.
I’ve not heard either Beck’s album or Beyonce’s, but I would bet sound unheard that Beck’s is at least as good or better. In the next day or two I’ll hunt them up and give each one a listen and see if Beck really is “disrespecting artistry” somehow. [ Addendum: I forgot, posting very late at night as I did, to mention that Beyonce’s singing ability is far better than Beck’s. Gotta give her that. ]
My favorite part of this nitwittery is how social media lit up like a Christmas tree on fire in a mirrored ball warehouse wondering who this Beck guy is. Not like he’s ever had a hit song on the radio or videos on MTV or anything.
And why is Kanye white knighting for Beyonce? Last I heard, Kanye was married to Kim Kardashian, why’s he out there reppin’ for another (married) woman? Again? Does she snap her fingers and he comes yapping, or does he do this on his own?
Shirley Manson of the band Garbage wrote an open letter slamming West –
“Dear Kanye West,
It is YOU who is so busy disrespecting artistry.
You disrespect your own remarkable talents and more importantly you disrespect the talent, hard work and tenacity of all artists when you go so rudely and savagely after such an accomplished and humble artist like BECK.
You make yourself look small and petty and spoilt.
In attempting to reduce the importance of one great talent over another, you make a mockery of all musicians and music from every genre, including your own.
Grow up and stop throwing your toys around.
You are making yourself look like a complete twat.
P.s. I am pretty certain Beyonce doesn’t need you fighting any battles on her account. Seems like she’s got everything covered perfectly well on her own.”
Heh. Seems that Shirley agrees on the white knighting.
There needs to be one of those “Real Men Of Genius” ads for Kanye and his idiotic showboating. There’s already a perfect theme song lying around by some no-name hack.
What Are The Words? Oh, Nevermind
Now I’m mumblin’ and I’m screamin’
And I don’t know what I’m singin’
So Dalrock and others have posted about the newest masterpiece of feminist music…
A commenter wrote –
2014 will be the year that feminists lost control of the narrative, with such fails as “Gamergate” UVa, “Ban Bossy”, “Mattgate”, “He For She” (off the top of my head) demonstrating that they are a bunch of selfish misfits with First World problems.
From the looks of this, 2015 is off to a flying start for them.
Feminism has gone completely off the rails. In the past, there was at least some loosely defined fragment of a plan built on some vague goal of “liberation.” Now all the feminists with half a clue have aged out, died, or left the movement, leaving the useful idiots they recruited running the show. And the evidence of their showrunning skills is readily apparent in the above clip.
Weird Al: Feminist Prophet
What’s the message I’m conveyin’?
Can you tell me what I’m sayin’?
Another commenter wrote “What message they are trying to convey is beyond me.”
Weird Al accidentally predicted how feminism would end up over 20 years ago –
The song describes the utter lack of anything resembling logic or coherency, and anticipates the day when tuneless howling and yipping would be presented as Deep Art.
And the video….
The video is the distilled essence of modern day feminism, covering every beat from
– The fat middle aged tranny cheerleader (see “women without vaginas”)
– Unshaved armpits
– Setting a man on fire
– A genderfluid janitor discovering his true identity
– Violent contempt for cookie-bearing Girl Scouts.
And Dick Van Patten’s eating addiction could be representative of any number of things.
Is this a frivolous challenge to the Affordable Care Act? Ofer Raban says it is –
…one provision of the ACA provides that “Each State shall…establish an American Health Benefit Exchange” — thereby implying that states must establish such exchanges. It is not surprising, therefore, that the provision extending health insurance subsidies for low income households speaks of insurance purchased on exchanges “established by the state[s].”
However, other provisions of the ACA declare that it is up to the states whether to establish a health care exchange and that if a state chooses not to establish one, the federal government would establish a federally operated substitute.
Raban states that “relentless Republican opposition” resulted in only 16 states establishing exchanges on their own, while the other 34 states went with a federal exchange. He continues –
The frivolous claim in the case is simple: Since the language in the subsidies provision refers to insurance purchased on exchanges “established by the state[s],” the government is precluded — so goes the claim — from giving those subsidies to those who purchased their insurance on the federally operated exchanges that came to substitute for those state-exchanges that were never established.
This statutory interpretation makes no sense. As one federal judge put it: This “literal reading of the [statute] renders the entire Congressional scheme nonsensical.” The ACA stretches over 900 pages, and contains hundreds of provisions which, as often happens, are not always perfectly consistent. (I already mentioned the provision that seems to require state-established exchanges, and the other that makes it optional.) When faced with such inconsistencies, judges are supposed to effectuate statutes in a sensible manner. But the main argument in the case does not appeal to any good sense. Instead, it appeals to a theory of legal interpretation that abjures good sense in favor of textual literalism: This is the text, they say, and that is all that matters — even if the ensuing result is an “odd” one.
Raban calls this “interpretative fundamentalism” and writes that the Supreme Court “recently read the Federal Bankruptcy Code in a nonliteral way, after determining that the literal reading ‘would produce senseless results that we do not think Congress intended.'”
It is not the job of judges to engage in guesswork about what legislators “intended.” It’s their job to examine the law as written. If a literal reading of a law seems nonsensical, then it’s because the law as written is nonsensical. Raban admitted as much himself in mentioning the the conflicting provisions.
Trying to “effectuate statutes” to arrive at a “sensible” conclusion instead of an “odd” one undermines equality before the law. Not only is the law not applied equally – different results for different people – but each and every judge will have a different idea of how to apply it. What one judge deems good sense, another might consider unfair or harmful.
Also note this passage – “These subsidies are the heart of the ACA: Without them, millions of people would not be able to afford health insurance and would be exempt from purchasing it. And this, in turn, would deprive insurers of the broad-based participation that makes it financially feasible to forbid them to deny coverage or charge higher premiums of sick or high-risk individuals.” Insurers are no longer allowed to decide who they do or don’t want to do business with, and citizens are no longer allowed to decide which commercial transactions they do or don’t want to engage in. Welcome to 2015, comrades.
This is not some HuffPo blogger or one of the Vox guys. The credit at the end of the column read “Ofer Raban teaches constitutional and criminal law at the University of Oregon School of Law.”