A year ago during the run-up to Halloween, I was contemplating the possibility of passing out politically incorrect candy. I’m pleased to report that I wasn’t prosecuted or sued. So I figure I’ll press my luck and try again.
Why do I bother? It’s cheaper and easier just to go to the local supermarket and buy the same old same old. I guess I just need to do things differently (and preferably disagreeably). This seems to be a theme of my existence.
The following is my post of a year ago, when I first contemplated my folly. The older comments were posted in response to my query of whether I dared proceed:
Evil Candy!
Maynard’s Plea
I (Maynard) suffer from an unusual variant of Tourette’s syndrome. I am randomly compelled to commit acts of gross political incorrectness. This is a serious offence in California.
My immediate fall from grace started (as so many depraved acts do) with an Internet click. I stumbled across a source of nostalgic candy. (I subsequently found there are many such vendors.)
My immediate reaction was, “This is neat stuff!” But I didn’t rush to buy anything. What do I need candy for? I don’t really eat it.
Then the devil whispered in my ear: “Maynard! Buy a load of candy cigarettes and give them to children on Halloween!”
I’ve never been a smoker, but neither do I have anything against smokers. I’m glad there’s no longer smoking on airplanes. But other than that, I perceive smokers as having become one of our national whipping boys. There’s no compelling public interest to justify the legal harassment of smokers, and the excessive regulation of smoking sets a hideous precedent for other nanny-state-type controls. This is a vote-with-your-feet-not-with-a-ballot situation.
I remember candy cigarettes from the days of my misspent youth. Later they disappeared from the shelves. But I see they’re not really gone; they just were forced into hiding. And that ain’t right!
Should I pass out candy cigarettes on Halloween? Is this a funny thing to do? An amusing challenge to the excesses of the era? Or does it fall into the category of not fun and not funny? Crass and pointlessly offensive? Or maybe it’s fun and/or funny, but nevertheless a bad idea because somebody will shoot me?
Angry activists gathered outside a Richmond, Virginia strip club decrying abomination! and sounding alarm over the deteriorating standards in America. Prudish church ladies? No. It was the NAACP. The self-described libertarian owner of Club Velvet, Mr. Samuel J.T. Moore III, had unfurled an Obama as The Joker banner outside his building.
“This country is going to hell in a handbag,“ Moore said, “and the current administration is making things irreversibly worse.“
Mr. Moore is not the ideal champion of liberty.
Moore’s club is awaiting a state Alcoholic Beverage Control hearing on alleged violations. Earlier this year Moore was convicted of three misdemeanor charges related to having sex with a minor and another woman at his apartment in the club, and filming it illegally.
The bold Mr. Moore sent one of his “dancers”, Kaitlyn McGee, out to read a statement.
“Mr. Moore would like to say that anyone who believes that his banner is racist is an ignoramus.”
The ignoramuses from the NAACP said–
“…the Joker banner was typical of what they called escalating attacks on the president – from depictions of Obama as Hitler at rallies to South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson’s “You lie!” outburst during Obama’s recent nationally televised address to Congress.”
“Racism is as American as apple pie,” Khalfani [King Salim Khalfani, president of the Virginia NAACP] said. “The presence of a president that as African blood is very, very troublesome to many in this country.”
“As far as I’m concerned, it doesn’t really bother me,” she said. “You could say a lot worse things about him.”
It isn’t clear from the reporting to which man she is referring. You could say that about either. In fact, I think it is a neat response to the race card. Just imagine the reaction.
There are an array of jokers in this mix at implausibly named Shockoe Bottom, but the assault on free speech is no laughing matter. No situation is too small—or too ludicrous—for the enemies of liberty.
I read about these delightful little imps in this article in the Jerusalem Post. Seems that somebody decided to make a cartoon parody of Palestinian terrorists in the style of “South Park”.
Is this a valid vehicle of humor? Just as some say one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter, others see one man’s humor as another man’s hate crime. But I’m not an advocate of moral relativism; some things are just wrong. The Post article quotes a Palestinian “peace activist” as saying, “These videos are dangerous and full of lies… This type of video will in no case favor reconciliation between Jewish and Arab communities. On the contrary, it can only spawn hate.” It’s a challenge that supporters should certainly be able to address. Considering the reality of terrorism and Jew-hatred, and the hypocritical double standard of political correctness, I think they can do so.
Enough of the philosophical arguments; you’ve heard them all before. You can watch and decide for yourself. I’ll admit that I laughed. There are six short episodes so far (~3 minutes each). They’re on YouTube, but I’m not embedding them here because, like South Park, they’re a bit salty for the page. For more, click to AhmedAndSalim.com. Here’s the episode guide. Or to get directly to Episode 1 on YouTube, go here.
Susan came in second on tonight’s “Britain’s Got Talent” finale. Just one more sign of how liberal attitudes and political correctness is a flagstone of mediocrity, compromise, and ultimately, failure. Susan will be fine; just like Adam Lambert she has gained worldwide fame and appreciation, and whatever career she wants is available to her. Here’s the video of the finale. I think we can trust we’re going to hear a lot more from Susan Boyle. If we’re lucky, maybe we’ll get one more Scot to add to America
Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders has been outspoken in sounding the warning of the rise of Islamic Fascism and its threat to Europe. See my earlier blog notes here and here.
Europe does not have the First Amendment protection Americans enjoy, so it’s generally easier to curtail free speech in Europe. Some of us have been concerned that the proliferation of “hate crime” legislation in America will — if our courts are not properly diligent (and I don’t trust them) — chip away at the First Amendment and be used to enforce politically correct expression under penalty of law. We’re already seeing “speech codes” proliferate at, for example, universities. Is this the wave of the future?
The Wilders trial may become a lightning rod of controversy, as Wilders will probably submit as much evidence as the court will allow showing his statements were true and not libelous. Will the event help bring about greater awareness and concern, or will it merely become a circus radiating much heat and no light? I guess we’ll find out.
Obama came from the hard Left, but he won the presidency by making appeals to the Center and even the Right. Now that he’s got to make decisions, somebody is bound to be disappointed. This article discusses the rising tensions as internal factions start to battle within the Obama camp.
Disagreements among senior Democrats and members of his team over who he should pick has given the President-Elect a wake up call about the treacherous partisan waters he now has to navigate, according to those familiar with the discussions.
Wall Street was expecting that Obama would, in the course of his first press conference, announce his Treasury Secretary. The name Lawrence Summers loomed large. Summers was Treasury Secretary under Bill Clinton, and his selection would inspire confidence. However, he came under attack from ideologues for lapses of political incorrectness (see his Wikipedia entry for details.
For example, as President of Harvard, he acknowledged that there are physical differences in the development of male and female brains. This is of course a fact, but we’re not supposed to explore it, especially in an institution of higher learning. This gaffe is still haunting Mr. Summers.
Patterico nails it. Let’s hope the McCain team pays attention to this analysis and realize why they need to take the gloves off, stop being afraid of being called names, and not let Obama’s race-baiting gang take control of this thing through verbal thuggery.
UPDATE: The link directly to the post was way too jammed, so I’ve fixed it to link to his site in general. Just scroll down a bit for the specific post.
With the political arguments swirling fast and furious, here’s what I see as the bottom line on Obama.
I don’t place much faith in what a candidate says and does after declaring his or her candidacy. Once he steps into the spotlight, he’s playing to the crowd. He’s on good behavior, and he’ll tell us whatever we want to hear. This is a demonstration of his acting ability…and a politician is indeed part actor, but there’s more to the job than that. The true measure of the man is what he did with his life when he didn’t think he was being watched. That’s what you’re going to get when the candidate is in power, and never mind the speeches.
As we do with celebrities, we tend to project our fantasies onto politicians. The less we know about a person, the easier this is. With Obama’s charisma and short history, and with the sympathies of the mainstream media behind him, he’s been allowed to remain too much of a blank slate. This is slowly changing, as the reality becomes known and eats away at his mystique. Note that Obama’s greatest string of victories in the Democratic primaries came when he was a new thing. As information trickled out, he lost steam. If more facts had been on the table earlier, Hillary certainly would have been the Democratic nominee.
Our job as voters isn’t to nitpick and debate every nuance and gaffe. In a world of trivia and spin, we must seek the most essential truths and make them known.
McCain a little less so than Obama, but just appearing at a convention for a group called “The Race” and whom advocate for an end to the Rule of Law and the sovereignty of this nation is in and of itself pathetic.
Obama spoke to the national La Raza conference on Sunday, managing to differentiate himself from McCain on the immigration issue…by casting border law enforcement agents as terrorists.
McCain picked up the soap for them today, with a message that focused more on economics than on immigration. That was a smart move, but he did end with his usual rhetoric about how once we get the border “secured” (no doubt with another virtual fence that doesn’t work) then he’ll set about to get everyone amnesty and set up the New Slave Class of the Brown People Who Do Work The White People Won’t Do.
His remarks in full are at his official site, but here is his main point about immigration. Listen to Obama’s comments and even though we’re tired of this pandering by McCain, compared to The Messiah calling our law enforcement agents terrorists, McCain sounds practically reasonable.
Let me address one other issue important to all of us. As you know, I and many other colleagues twice attempted to pass comprehensive immigration legislation to fix our broken borders; ensure respect for the laws of this country; recognize the important economic contribution of immigrant laborers; apprehend those who came here illegally to commit crimes; and deal practically and humanely with those who came here, as my distant ancestors did, to build a better, safer life for their families, without excusing the fact they came here illegally or granting them privileges before those who have been waiting their turn outside the country. Many Americans did not believe us when we said we would secure our borders, and so we failed in our efforts. I don’t want to fail again to achieve comprehensive immigration reform. We must prove we have the resources to secure our borders and use them, while respecting the dignity and rights of citizens and legal residents of the United States. When we have achieved our border security goal, we must enact and implement the other parts of practical, fair and necessary immigration policy. We have economic and humanitarian responsibilities as well, and they require no less dedication from us in meeting them.
In fact, the thing that incensed Pat S. the most was this rather remarkable comment to ‘Latinos’ by Obama during his speech. Barry seems to think that a special interest group that caters to law-breaking foreigners will control this election. Let’s make sure he gets a different lesson i November about who is really in charge–that would be Us. In addition to casting American law enforcement as terrorists, he also made note of a few other things:
In his speech Obama spoke about immigration, “the need to stop the hateful rhetoric filling our airwaves” and “bringing the 12 million people here without documentation out of the shadows” to give them a “pathway to citizenship.” Obama accused McCain of abandoning after major immigration legislation fell apart last year.
So, he promised clamp down on Freedom of Speech if it irritates illegal aliens, romaticizing the millions of illegals, while then promising citizenship and amnesty. Terrific!
And Pat’s favorite statement:
“Make no mistake about it: The Latino community holds this election in your hands,” Obama said to cheers. “I am here today to make you this promise: I will be a president who stands with you and fights for you and walks with you every single step of the way.”
That’s funny. I thought it was the American citizen who voted who hold this election in their hands. You know, I think I’m right. let’s indeed make sure Barry gets another lesson in American civics. He recently learned there aren’t 57 states. Now hell learn who’s in charge here, and it’s not “La Raza.”
Related link:
The San Francisco Chronicle, in all its liberal haze, gives a big, sloppy French kiss to La Raza and tries desperately to explain why it was okay for Barry to translate “La Raza” to “The People” instead of “The Race.” Get ready for some seriously ridiculous panty twisting here.
(They don’t provide you with the link to the original story referred to in the link above. I have done so here. Apparently while more than willing to defend Barry’s pathetic spinning with some of their own, they don’t really want to make it easy for you to take a look for yourself at their rank bias).
Today FoxNews is reporting that Commissioner Kenneth Mayfield, a Texas bureaucrat, wants to abolish the term “black hole”. Also, “angel food cake” and “devil’s food cake” are bad. “I think people should always be careful,” he told Fox.
He’s got a point. Whoever put this clown in power certainly wasn’t being careful.
Black hole is a common astronomical term. For the record, there are also white holes. It never occurred to me to be offended by this.
By the way, my pet-gripe-of-the-moment is that my Microsoft Encarta Dictionary blandly informs me that the term “mankind” is “considered offensive”. So now on top of everything else, I’m annoyed at Bill Gates.
Speaking of dictionaries…Does anyone remember the Newspeak Dictionary of Orwell’s “1984″? It seems that life imitates art.
Lately I’m finding the word “offensive” to be offensive. But I don’t suppose anyone in power cares what I think.
Coming soon to a liberal, bloated, mentally ill collection of multicultural bureaucrats near you (oh, sorta like what an Obama admin will look like). This one is courtesy of another politically correct liberal nutgroup in England. (HT Marlee).
Toddlers who dislike spicy food ‘racist’
Toddlers who turn their noses up at spicy food from overseas could be branded racists by a Government-sponsored agency.
The National Children’s Bureau, which receives £12 million a year, mainly from Government funded organisations, has issued guidance to play leaders and nursery teachers advising them to be alert for racist incidents among youngsters in their care.
This could include a child of as young as three who says “yuk” in response to being served unfamiliar foreign food.
The guidance by the NCB is designed to draw attention to potentially-racist attitudes in youngsters from a young age…The 366-page guide for staff in charge of pre-school children, called Young Children and Racial Justice, warns: “Racist incidents among children in early years settings tend to be around name-calling, casual thoughtless comments and peer group relationships.” The guide goes on to warn that children might also “react negatively to a culinary tradition other than their own by saying ‘yuk’”…
Nurseries are encouraged to report as many incidents as possible to their local council. The guide added: “Some people think that if a large number of racist incidents are reported, this will reflect badly on the institution. In fact, the opposite is the case.”
The English have allowed liberals to drive them officially insane.
Shocked In Shockoe Bottom
by Pat_S on September 30, 2009 · 7 comments
A post by Pat
Angry activists gathered outside a Richmond, Virginia strip club decrying abomination! and sounding alarm over the deteriorating standards in America. Prudish church ladies? No. It was the NAACP. The self-described libertarian owner of Club Velvet, Mr. Samuel J.T. Moore III, had unfurled an Obama as The Joker banner outside his building.
Mr. Moore is not the ideal champion of liberty.
The bold Mr. Moore sent one of his “dancers”, Kaitlyn McGee, out to read a statement.
The ignoramuses from the NAACP said–
Speaking for herself, waitress and dancer McGee said–
It isn’t clear from the reporting to which man she is referring. You could say that about either. In fact, I think it is a neat response to the race card. Just imagine the reaction.
There are an array of jokers in this mix at implausibly named Shockoe Bottom, but the assault on free speech is no laughing matter. No situation is too small—or too ludicrous—for the enemies of liberty.
h/t ArtGal
{ 7 comments }