‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™
Returning to snark, and in what we hope to be a regular Sunday feature, we bring you this week’s “New Wingnut of the Week.” Today’s NWOTW comes highly recommended by John J. Miller, the guy who created the list of the 50 Greatest Conservative Rock Songs at America’s Shittiest Website™, so you know this is one primo recommendation.
Let’s have the winner tell you a little bit about himself first:
[NWOTW] is a failed screenwriter living in L.A. hanging onto hope without the talent to justify it. Maybe by society’s standards he’s a loser — maybe even by his mothers [sic — we assume NWOTW has only one mother] — but someone unemployed 6 years who still has a tin roof over his head and bootlegged cable is no piker. While the winners enjoy their commutes and quiet desperation, [NWOTW] likes to wake at the crack of noon, blog and porn from the library, see his “doctor” about his “disability,” and write about himself in the third person.
Well, that’s quite a curriculum vitae: apostrophe-challenged failed screenwriter, loser, unemployed, disowned by parents, porn addict, cable thief and disability cheat. So what do you think Harry does in his hours and hours of spare time, other than watch porn in his underwear? Why, he writes “conservative movie reviews.” Yes, indeedy, he does. And his nom de blog is “Dirty Harry,” which is odd since Dirty Harry probably would load a few rounds into this disability cheat and cable thief if he found him in an alley. But that’s another story.*
So, Dirty Harry, take a bow and take it away with your review of Pixar’s Wall-E:
For all its charms and wonders, one moment sticks in my head and, well, craw. It also confuses me. Why? Why go there? Other than the dark chuckles from the liberal critics around me, what’s to gain? And other than a lack of self-control or hubris on the filmmakers’ part, there’s no explaining it. But they did it. They actually had the President (Fred Willard) say about his failed mission, “Stay the course.”
Have we lost Pixar? Have we lost the wonderful studio who brought us The Incredibles and Ratatouille to Bush Derangement Syndrome? Here you have a winning streak going back ten-years, enormous amounts of public goodwill, equal amounts of credibility as serious storytellers, and they stop things cold, yanking you out of the story with the liberal nonsense. Quite a disappointment.
I think our touchy critic is setting the bar for BDS pretty low here. One little joke about Our Glorious Leader and it’s proof that Pixar has come down with a frothing-at-the-mouth, banging-head-on-cement-blocks, wild-eyed-shrieking-banshee case of BDS. How dare they? What will the children think?
At first there’s not much of an environmental message. The piles of garbage covering our planet come off as nothing more than a good idea to set up a cool alt-version of our world and the lead character. Unfortunately, this doesn’t last.
Fucking liberals. First they put in a naughty line about our President, and then they go and suggest that being swamped in our own refuse and garbage is a bad thing.
The humans are introduced as meaty, lazy, chair-bound consumers who live in a world run by a large corporation. The message about our consumerism, sloth, and addiction to visual stimulus is eventually beaten like a drum.
Naturally Harry takes accusations of sloth rather personally.
This may well be the fifth or sixth movie this year to depict our government as taken over by a corporation – as though that would be a bad thing.
Words fail. Really.
Anyway, that wraps up our pilot episode of NWOTW. If you have any suggestions for next week’s award recipient, email them to me at clif (the little at thingy) outsidethetent and then, you know, period com. If your nominee for NWOTW is used, then you’ll win something like, maybe, a free download of Firefox 3 or a lifetime subscription to “The Corner.” And remember, to be eligible, the NWOTW must not have previously been given the S,N! treatment.
* Gavin adds: Due to the site design at Libertas, the daily wrongness-dispenser of the Liberty Film Festival, there’s been trouble, historically, in figuring out which writer there is Jason Apuzzo, and which are Apuzzo epigones (if the world can contain such a thing, as it apparently can). Note, for example, the lack of a named post author here. This problem became somewhat less troublesome not long ago when Dirty Harry was allegedly kicked off the site. We look forward to a successful solo career. Another version of his personal bio is at the third link above. Which version is true? We think it’s not an either/or, but more of a both/and.
‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™
WARNING: This post has a bunch of legal stuff that may bore non-lawyers. And the snark content is low and the outrage content is high. But I’m mad as hell about the willingness of right-wing tools to lie about Boumediene v. Bush, and I’m not going to take it anymore.
Step aside, Doug Feith. Andrew McBride may be either the stupidest or the most disingenuous man on the face of the planet. Needless to say, that makes him perfect to write an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal on the recent Supreme Court decision in Boumediene v. Bush, dealing with the habeas corpus rights of Gitmo detainees.
The first whopper from Andy is let loose barely two sentences in:
For the first time in our history, the Supreme Court has rejected the considered judgment of both the Congress and the president on an issue of national security.
Andy looks like he’s got a few years on him — certainly more than I do — so he really ought to remember the Pentagon Papers case, where the Supreme Court rejected both the judgment of Congress and the President on an issue of national security. Congress had passed a law making it a crime to publish classified information, and the President had sued the Washington Post and the New York Times to restrain further publication of the classified information in the Pentagon Papers. And yet, the Supreme Court refused to prohibit the publication of the documents in question.
And the very next sentence is also a steaming pile of nonsense:
The writ of habeas corpus, a bulwark of domestic liberty, has been extended to foreign nationals whose only connection to the U.S. is their capture by our military.
Now either McBride is popping off about a decision he hasn’t either bothered to read, or he’s lying. Or both. The court extended the right not to all foreign nationals captured by the military, but only to foreign nationals held in a place over which the U.S. exercised de facto sovereignty. The U.S. exercises such control over Gitmo by virtue of a lease that gives the United States “complete jurisdiction and control” over that base. (Link to opinion page.) The Supreme Court did not say that a prisoner held on a battlefield has habeas corpus rights.
But wait, there’s even more bullshit:
The situation is entirely different when the nation faces an external threat. In fighting an enemy, there is no reason for the judicial branch to “check” the political branches. … But had Boumediene been decided in 1940, more than 400,000 Axis troops held in more than 500 military facilities in this country during World War II would have had a right to challenge their detention in federal court.
Sadly, no. The majority opinion takes care to point out that none of the Gitmo detainees is a citizen “of a nation now at war with the United States.” (Link to opinion page.) The POWs on U.S. soil in World War II were, of course, citizens of countries with which we were at war, and they were released when the war was over. Nothing in Boumediene would have given such prisoners habeas corpus rights had it been decided in 1940.
Of course where McBride is heading is to throw the courts out of all determinations of security threats, even with respect to U.S. citizens on U.S. soil:
The judiciary is not competent to make judgments about who is … a threat to the U.S.
And there you have it: a former U.S. prosecutor, in a prestigious national newspaper, arguing that if the U.S. thinks one of its own citizens is a threat to national security, it has the right to throw that person in the slammer and let the military decide in its own good time whether that’s true or not.
Now back to our regularly scheduled snark, juvenile humor, silly pictures, wingnut harassment and troll-baiting.
Gavin adds: As if on cue, here’s an email fresh from Townhall.com. Would you believe two wingnut former prosecutors named Andrew?
Dear Friends,
Last week was not a good week for national security. The Supreme Court decided to give captured terrorists more rights than American citizens have in American courts. In his dissenting opinion Justice Scalia said this decision “will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed.” Barack Obama then lauded this “law enforcement” first approach to the war that Osama Bin Laden and his followers declared on us long before September 11.
For over a decade Osama Bin Laden and his followers were at war but the Clinton Administration saw individual criminal acts and brought lawyers to a gun-fight. It appears that an Obama Administration — with the Supreme Court’s support — would do the same. This is something our nation cannot afford.
To make sure you have the facts you need in the fight to preserve our nation, Townhall is offering you this must read edition of Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad. Rush Limbaugh describes terrorism expert, Andrew McCarthy’s book best:
“Finally, from the legal front line, a devastating account of the peril we put our country in when we treat terrorist atrocities as if they are mere crimes. Andy McCarthy was there when the jihad began. Read this book and you’ll understand why this war is a war, and why we have no choice but to fight it and win it.” — Rush Limbaugh
Oho yes indeed, it’s ‘terrorism expert Andrew McCarthy’ once again. Take it away, Clif…
Clif adds:
The Supreme Court decided to give captured terrorists more rights than American citizens have in American courts.
No, No, NO, NO, NO!
The Supreme Court gave foreign detainees at Gitmo the right to have a federal court decide whether they were properly detained, the same right that all Americans have. And, significantly, the decision did not indicate what additional rights, if any, the detainees would have at any military or other trial once a federal court made a preliminary determination that they were being properly held.
Next thing you know, the wingnuts are going to be claiming that the Supreme Court decided that Gitmo detainees have the right to bring shoulder-fired rocket launchers to their trials and to appear as contestants on “Dancing With the Stars.”
Grain prices have gone down the last two days, but it’s probably because of profit-taking. Long-term, things are gonna get worse, by which I mean, prices will escalate with the consumer getting the ultimate shaft.
I don’t farm corn, have never worked for anyone who does; and beyond childhood episodes of helping the old folks in the garden with their sweet corn, I’ve never messed with the stuff.
But I do know a little about soybeans.
When you’ve lost an early crop (like corn) to damage or flood, and it’s too late to replant (as it is now) the same crop, then you plant soybeans. This is just SOP.
The only issue is, this year, there already has been a shortage of seed. Now with corn acres being diverted to soybeans, and existing soybean fields needing replanted, the problem is worse. The comments on this thread speak of the problem:
[O]n the beans Monsanto needs to step up to the plate and say ok for one year we are going to let you plant bin run beans. I have been talking to to seed dealers and there were just enough for the first time let alone a major replant like we have this time.
Right. Not to mention that seed quality this year is for shit, with quite reduced germination rates due to (I’m told) an unusually thin seed coat. Anyway, Monsanto, the Great Satan of Agriculture, ain’t about to give any relief. A lot of these Iowa and Illinois guys are just screwed.
Bottom line: I think the corn crop this year will be terrible. And though the books will reflect more acres planted in soybeans, that crop too will be relatively crappy. Even the rice here in Arkansas is late, with some of the ugliest stands I’ve ever seen. All of which means, compounded with all the fund dollars flooding the markets, that prices will keep going up. Not that farmers will realize as much of this profit as you might believe. For instance, the other day when wheat closed at $8.89, I got paid a whopping $6.37 a bushel for my share of thirty paltry acres of soft red winter. This huge differential is officially called the “basis,” but around here it’s called “how much you get fucked.”
I think this catching-up-with-one’s-email thing is paying off. Look what just came in:
Dear Human Events Reader,
Wouldn’t it be great if you could have instant impact on the political issues you care about most?
Well, now you can. And it won’t cost you a dime — or an extra minute of your valuable time.
All you have to do is join RedState’s Action Items Email List.
Then, whenever we identify some liberal outrage that needs stopping, or some conservative cause or politician that needs your immediate support, we’ll shoot you an email explaining the situation and giving you everything you need — such as phone numbers or web addresses — to take immediate and effective action.
It’s hard to believe, but Human Events and RedState.com are offering to help us make fun of them. I wonder if anyone else has gotten one of these emails? I think the Action Items will look something like this:
Hello, Actioneer!
Our own Jeff Emanuel has identified a liberal outrage in the passage of the Iraq War Bill. He says gleefully that liberals are being cynically manipulated by their leaders. For the sake of context, here are some links on how Emanuel personally helped stage the phony rescue of Pvt. Jessica Lynch.
Thanks!
Erick Erickson, RedState.com,
a.k.a. Human Events,
a.k.a. Eagle Publishing,
a.k.a. Regnery Publishing,
a.k.a. Alfred S. Regnery,
a.k.a. William Regnery II,
a.k.a. Noted White Supremacist Publications,
a.k.a. White Supremacist Dating Service
This spells ‘more Mario Kart time’ with a capital whee!
Ol’ Pam Atlas seems upset about something she read on the Internet. Is it another tentacle of the Global Muslim Octopus? Let’s look and see:
WHY WASN’T A.Q. KHAN ASSASSINATED?
Iran’s got nuclear warheads.
Oh no, not again! Every time Iran obtains nuclear warheads, they get that much closer to having a nuclear weapon!
If things keep up at this rate, Iran will have the bomb as soon as five years ago, and we may be long dead by the time we even read about it in the paper.
And what are we going to do about this? Wait? The only thing that ever stopped Iran was America and Israel’s superior strength.*
She means this, by the way.
Click here and Pam will be able to say, “Hey! Youse got a Ferrari 288 GTO.” …Or, better, she’ll be able to say that Mahmoud Ahmadenijad has one, because for all anyone knows you might have given it to him.
Seriously though, as with the AP-shaking-down-bloggers story, one’s heart really has to be with the wingnuts on this one. It’s dangerous to have nuclear weapons fall into the wrong hands.
Consider, for instance, what might become of the world if Pam were to have access to nuclear technology:
I’d rather we blow up the whole world than surrender it to Islam.
Yes indeed, emphasis hers, and it’s certainly a boon to us all that such a brazenly evil madwoman as Pam is relegated to the margins of society, where she can do no harm.
* Except for the U.N. and Iraq, that is. Pff! Details, details.
[Hanx! CK]
Here’s Confederate Yankee, back to blow your mind again:
[…]
I propose that in addition to charging AP for using blogger content, that AP be charged editorial fees when bloggers are forced to do the fact checking that in-house editors fail to do. For every blog entry proving than an Associated Press story is using false information or misleading, the Associated Press should pay that blogger the AP-supplied standard of $2.50/word. Just doing a quick check of my content from the present back until the beginning of May, the Associated Press owes me editorial services fees of $2,580 for 1,032 words correcting AP stories dating back to May 2. Some of that would be returned to AP (at $2.50/word) for the text examples I cited, but overall, it is a worthwhile enterprise. If I went back through all of my archives, I suspect that I could easily compile a fact-checking bill for the AP in the tens of thousands of dollars.
Above: Message sent to Confederate Yankee in regard to our fact-verification solutions
[Hanx: Dragon-King Wangchuck]
Above: Email sent to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research
Update: Simba asked if the 81,261 unread messages are real or a Photoshop trick. Nono, they’re all too real.
In fact, I’ve been meaning to say something since I got back (or actually since before I left) about how awful we’ve been at replying to mail lately, and about the insidious, crushing guilt from the tips unfollowed and comments unrejoined. If you’ve sent something and we haven’t replied, please don’t take it personally. We’ll be a lot better at replying promptly from now on.
…Or at least I will; I can never quite tell what anyone else is up to around here, from one day to the next.
