Shit that Pissed me off This Week – 1/18
A 17-year-old boy notices that his father is neglecting his mother so what does Robertson do? He suggests that the problem isn’t really his dad but the fact that his mother is too “hard nosed.”
Robertson has been a misogynistic douche for many a year and there are times where I honestly wish god existed just so Robertson would get his ass reamed when he finally kicks the bucket. Maybe Robertson is right and I’m wrong but I’m pretty sure Yahweh is going to have some choice words for that smug douchebag.
Robertson makes the common error of thinking that if there is anything wrong in a relationship, it is the woman’s fault. I assume he bases this assumption on the fact that he’s incapable of viewing women as fellow members of the human race. I don’t know, maybe he’s still pissed about the rib.
Get over it, man. God ain’t going to give it back.
The presumptive front-runner for the 2016 Republican Nomination (maybe) is once again co-sponsoring an anti-abortion bill that doesn’t just seek to ensure that states can completely ban abortion in all cases but also ensures that a woman’s rapist could probably force her to keep the baby – even if she went to a state where abortion was legal.
The far right stand on abortion continues to prove that if a woman gets impregnated, they believe her body is no longer hers to control. I could talk about someone who could die if they carried a child to term or someone who is already in severe mental trauma due to rape or incest but let’s get real here – how about someone who can’t afford to be a parent? How about someone who was using birth control because they don’t want a baby and it didn’t work?
No matter the reason a woman decides to terminate a pregnancy, it is none of your fucking business. It is a health decision she needs to make for herself and whether it is a child, a choice or both, you can’t tell 50% of our population that they lose all rights to their reproductive system the moment a man’s sperm enters their system. Unless you are a member of congress. Then, apparently, you can tell them whatever you want.
Scott Walker Uses a Phrase that I Hate
So yeah, I’m a liberal. We all know that. We are comfortable with that. Well maybe you aren’t but I’m fine with it.
I’m going to bitch about Scott Walker right now but not because I hate his politics. It’s because he’s using a phrase that should be retired from all political discourse. It won’t, of course, because it works. But it is bullshit. Here’s what he said in a Facebook post to raise more money (emphasis mine):
The fight is not over. An activist judge from Madison chose to put politics ahead of the people and overturn the reforms that have saved state and local governments over $1 billion.
See what he did there? He identified a judge who was doing his job as an activist. Politicians do this all the time. They literally call out the judges as political activists as a way to discredit rulings they don’t like.
The result is that we the people distrust judges because we figure that when push comes to shove, they aren’t going to interpret the law fairly. They are going to go all activist on our asses and mess up legislation that honest politicians like Scott Walker are passing.
Look, I’m sure that there are judges who follow an agenda and spend little to no time actually considering the law (Clarence Thomas) but most of them do. And in general, who do you trust more Politicians or judges?
How about the next time Walker (or any politician) uses the term activist judge, we just remind them that at least a judge does something useful.
Remember, they are innocent until proven guilty. Innocent until proven guilty. Innoc….fuck that.
Their own kids, while claiming their adoptive brother deserved it, back up the claims of abuse. Hell, the kids helped out. They don’t think it’s abuse, though. They think that is what you do to kids who “misbehave.”
Though it would appear that the only thing this child did to qualify as misbehaviour was to steal food because they weren’t feeding him.
Which means these deranged parents didn’t just fuck up the lives of the child they were abusing. They fucked up the lives of all of their kids because all of them have now learned that the best way to treat a child who “misbehaves” is to starve them to death.
In the giant leap from “conspiracy theorist” to “asshole,” several folks have decided that the entire Sandy Hook massacre of was cooked up by the Obama Administration to take away their guns. They are so convinced that Obama wants their guns that they are harassing anyone and everyone who has any connection to the event.
Because nothing will convince people gun control is a bad idea better than a bunch of crazy gun owners scaring a dude who sheltered a bunch of kids in his home. That is exactly the sort of reasoned response that really helps make their point.
I should be fair to them, though. I mean, I guess they aren’t shooting at the guy’s house.
See what happens? I go and defend judges above and then I read about this nitwit.
I want to make sure I get this exactly right. What he specifically said was:
Consideration needs to be taken thoroughly for the imposition of death penalty for a rapist because in a rape case both the rapist and the victim enjoy it
I’m against the death penalty except in extreme cases so I’m all for careful application but wow does this guy have no fucking idea what he’s talking about. Maybe he’s watched one too many porn videos or something.
He did apologize and say that he was trying to make a joke.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha!
No problem, dude. You were just being interviewed to sit on the Supreme Court and you decided that’d be the perfect time to trivialize rape victims. As a joke! I’ll bet you would have been the funniest guy on the bench!
As it is, you’d better brush up on your stand-up skills because your career as a judge is probably drawing to a close.
Yep, they are. Kids are getting sent on field trips to the Creation Museum on taxpayer money because that’s what vouchers do. They let you send your kid anywhere for school. That includes a school that believes that the basis for a sound understanding of science is an understanding of Genesis.
I have a problem with this brainwashing on any level but when taxpayer dollars are used to fund schools that are teaching science from a biblical perspective, the lines between church and state haven’t been blurred. They have been consciously ignored.
I can’t stop people from teaching their kids bad science in the name of religion. Much as I wish I could, I can’t do it.
But I sure as hell think we all ought to be able to stop programs that put taxpayer dollars in the hands of people who are doing exactly that.
Even in a Republican controlled legislature, the anti-gay movement didn’t have enough votes to deny a qualified candidate his seat on the bench. That didn’t stop 12 legislators from walking out on the vote rather than having the guts to cast a “no” vote so everyone would know they were homophobic jerks.
Why were they against a gay judge? Because they were of the opinion that his sexual orientation would affect his ability to issue fair rulings from the bench.
Funny, I’ve never heard that argument put up against a straight judge. Or a female one. Or a male one. Or a black one.
Oh, but gays are different because being gay is a “choice.”
OK, how about this, then? I don’t recall any judge being denied a seat on the bench because they were married. Or single. Or had kids. Or drove a Jeep Grand Cherokee.
Either they can apply the law fairly or they can’t. The rest is just bullshit.
I know I have friends who are advocates of the right to bear arms but I honestly think that the NRA has travelled just a little bit too far off the reservation, don’t you? They want to keep their guns so bad, they attack the President for the fact that his daughters have armed guards because they have to.
That’s what the secret service is there for. It doesn’t make Obama elitist, it makes him the President! It create a false equivalency and makes the President’s daughters the focus of a political attack, which is an asshole move.
Those girls didn’t decide to be the children of a President. They probably wish they didn’t have armed guards. So leave them out of it.
I get that the folks running the NRA want their guns and they want them bad but it would seem that they are willing to sell their souls to keep them. Rather than sticking to the issues, they decide to use a completely invalid argument that has nothing to do with the debate at hand.
I mean this in all sincerity, there can be no rational conversation about guns in this country if the NRA is involved in the conversation.
But then, I don’ believe the NRA wants a rational conversation.
Warning: I’m going to use a lot of swear words talking about this guy. He earned them. Also, I didn’t link directly to his blog because fuck him.
I’m pretty annoyed at PZ Myers for including a link on his blog to this prick. Myers was pointing out this list, which was compiled for the sole purpose of ensuring that this fuckwit would never get another date as long as he lives, did not contain a single male feminist.
Let’s be honest, there are some pretty ugly feminist dudes out there.
But look, the basic idea behind this kind of list is to give the list maker some false sense of empowerment. Everyone look at how “funny” this guy is! He’s making fun of women who have the guts to speak up by attacking their looks.
Which, shitbrain, is one of their fucking points. You can’t actually engage them on their argument so you fall back on calling them ugly and attacking their sexuality. Because you seem to believe that their appearance has anything to do with their argument.
Which, in turn, makes you ugly.
I don’t know what this guy looks like but I guarantee you he is ugly. I have a lot of feminist friends and you know what? I don’t always agree with them. Those disagreements however, can be civil and honest and free from personal attacks.
Unless you’re like this fucking asshole. Then he deserves nothing better because he’s incapable of anything better himself.
Fuck this guy.
Oh, hey, one more thing about this asshole.
He seems to think that if a woman gets dressed up and puts on make-up so she’ll look good for a picture, that invalidates her argument. Because if a woman wants to look nice, she clearly isn’t a feminist.
Fuck that. Anybody has the right to want to look nice. That does not render their argument null and void.