Sadly, No!

Most realistic plot since Red Dawn!

Hollywoodland*, We Swear Ours is Big Hollywood:
Video Game Depicts Occupy Wall Street Types as Terrorists

*Hollywoodland is the Alan Smithee of Big Hollywood, the appelation that Breitbart and the other bottom feeders use on their posts when they aren’t quite sure they want their actual name on the post. And this is for a site where people will kill each other for the honor of posting a screed on how Sesame Street is a communist plot or An American Carol is the greatest comedy ever produced. So keep that in mind reading this.

It’s been a tough couple of years out there for conservatives. Driven by hatred for all that’s pure and good, vile liberal politicians and children have been leaping in front of proud conservative bullets who were only trying to run away.

Suddenly people have been asking unfair questions like “Does a single radical group 40 years ago who wasn’t as violent as concurrent conservative or even concurrent peacekeeping efforts really erase all conservative violence and prove that liberals are the violent ones for all time?” and “Isn’t that kind of insane?”. Not to mention “Um, could you stop pointing that loaded firearm in my face while you rant wildly about the socialistic menace come to steal your guns?”

It’s so unfair!

And it doesn’t help when video games, tired of dealing with the wingnuts-in-training making things like Xbox Live the equivalent of a modern horror story, decide to metaphorically throw up their hands and devote an entire genre of the medium (first-person shooters or FPS) to pandering to right-wing paranoid fantasies.

But hey, it’s not really full on Breivik. Sure, the Modern Warfare series gave us Neo-Soviet/Pan-Islamic alliances that invade American streets and prove that every vaguely middle-eastern person is a valid target that will start shooting if you don’t. And Homefront gave us literal Wolverines-style Red Dawn action (written by the same guy) as North Korea full on takes over America and starts committing war crimes all over the place to teach you a lesson about letting those sneaky yellow devils out of sight.

But, it’s not like an FPS title is getting released feeding on more close-to-home wingnut fears, like that of OWS (perpetual victims of police harassment and amateur bongo aficionados) being violent terrorists that you will be asked to gun down by the hundreds (I know bongos can be annoying, but geez man, fucking relax) in the course of a game to save America by saving the 1%.

Right?

Ah…right.

So now as a conservative, you have a difficult task. On one level, your hand has already set off on an epic journey of uncontrollable masturbation. On the other, you retain enough humanity to know that this just might just almost… look bad and leave people with the… unfair impression that conservatives…

Oh fuck the humanity, let’s just let the Big Hollywood editors be themselves!

Commence mangos:

Not every Occupy Wall Street type wants to violently stick it to The Man, although an alarming number embrace such a solution.

Our violent fantasies are totally TOO justified. It’s the liberals faults for being those people everyone knows are the violent ones, thus forcing us into violent masturbatory fantasy about gunning down their violent asses.

And they are the ones who support “2nd amendment solutions” not us, because one poorly worded poll asked OWS protestors if violence would “ever be” “sometimes necessary” against a government (you know, a category so vague it would include actions like the French Resistance) and a number of OWS protestors said yes.

Oh, how many “Tea Party” protestors supported the authority-led calls for “2nd Amendment solutions” or think violence is called for in resisting this administration, not some theoretical future administration? Uh, let me just check my… RUN FOR IT!

An upcoming video game takes that branch of the OWS movement to its most radical conclusions.

Yeah, the video game is just taking OWS to its totally legitimate natural conclusions, not really our fault for wanting to shoot OWS hippies at all. Yeah.

What? That would seem to prove the point that the video game is based in our paranoid fantasies that have nothing to do with reality?

Uh, did you see the link in the last paragraph noting that 42% of the protestors wouldn’t even support violence if they were resisting Hitler… uh, let me rephrase that in a way that makes them look bad.

A snippet of the upcoming game “Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six: The Patriots,” which won’t hit stores until 2013, was played over the weekend during the Spike TV Video Game Awards. The game casts the players as anti-terrorism agents squaring off against a group which believes the government and corporations are corrupt and must be taken down.
And if that means hurling an evil banker out the window, so be it.

Fiction?

Bullshit. I saw OWS throw a banker through a window to explode in a crowded American street. Game over libs, who’s the violent deluded ones now?!?

Now, excuse me while I watch the documentaries Red Dawn and 24.

Here’s a quick rundown on the video game’s plot:
Terrorism has evolved and America is under attack. Capitalizing on the sense of frustration in a nation seemingly corrupted by greedy politicians and corporate special interests, a group of US citizens-turned-radicals, the “True Patriots,” will stop at nothing to overthrow the government and financial institutions. As a leader of the elite Rainbow counter-terrorism unit, players will be the last line of defense tasked with saving the nation no matter the cost.

Ah, classy.

Remember if it’s depicted as fiction, that’s as good as real world evidence, because… wishful thinking makes it so!

Uh oh, we’ve had an actual quote of the game’s real content, a headline that acknowledges that the eliminationism will run in a right over left direction, and very little effort to prove that liberals are the real violent ones.

There’s so much actual reality acknowledged, will the mouth breathers of the site remember to know that liberals are the real violent ones even if it requires thinking that paranoid pandering fiction is real life news?

Well, naturally. Conservatives aren’t quitters!

Bonus comment mango:

Wonder if they’ll ask all the people who wrung their collective hands over the violent media images they claimed contributed to Gabby Giffords’ shooting what they think about this piece of video game political commentary…

Yeah, that’ll shut them up all right.

Gene Marks understands the streets.

Gene Marks, Fabergé Egg Magazine:
If I Were a Poor Black Kid*

*Worst remix of Fiddler on the Roof ever.

This one’s a long one, so let’s just jump straight into the mangos.

President Obama gave an excellent speech last week in Kansas about inequality in America.

Oh dear, oh dear.

He’s right. The spread between rich and poor has gotten wider over the decades. And the opportunities for the 99% have become harder to realize.

The President’s speech got me thinking. My kids are no smarter than similar kids their age from the inner city. My kids have it much easier than their counterparts from West Philadelphia. The world is not fair to those kids mainly because they had the misfortune of being born two miles away into a more difficult part of the world and with a skin color that makes realizing the opportunities that the President spoke about that much harder. This is a fact. In 2011.

Huh.

Wow, is this a rich overpromoted windbag who understands how the system has failed and been abused. That his own children’s success on the backs of the connections he can give them doesn’t mean that they are better than some black kid simply because of their skin color or where they were raised. I must admit I’m-

I am not a poor black kid. I am a middle aged white guy who comes from a middle class white background. So life was easier for me. But that doesn’t mean that the prospects are impossible for those kids from the inner city. It doesn’t mean that there are no opportunities for them.

Well, it doesn’t mean no opportunities true, but…

Oh god, this is going right where I think isn’t it?

Or that the 1% control the world and the rest of us have to fight over the scraps left behind. I don’t believe that. I believe that everyone in this country has a chance to succeed. Still. In 2011. Even a poor black kid in West Philadelphia.

Why doesn’t he believe this? Is it because some demonstration of evidence that shows a wealth of opportunities that liberals are just ignoring?

No, of course not, it’s simply because he doesn’t want to live in a world where the young, the poor, and especially the young and poor who are also black, female or queer have been fucked over by those who’ve gone before.

Because acknowledging that would make him feel guilty because he lucked into wealth back when anyone not actively on coke could stumble into a middle class or up job and he doesn’t want to face up to the fact that the people who pay his salary to right meaningless fluff for Forbes Magazine have fucked up the system so that practically no kid can get into the system on their merits, and especially not if they’re black and from “the bad part of town”.

Some people when confronted with their privilege change and become better people and others flee under the bed covers until they can wish it away like the Boogeyman. Gene’s been in his bed since at least 2008.

It takes brains. It takes hard work. It takes a little luck. And a little help from others.

Yeah, mostly the last one. You can have all the brains, talent, and passion for hard work in the world, but if you don’t have connections in high places, you ain’t going anywhere.

It takes the ability and the know-how to use the resources that are available. Like technology. As a person who sells and has worked with technology all my life I also know this.

Yes, poor black kids could use “technology”. What types of technology? Why the technology shaped ones, of course! He made his living on technology despite never bothering to gain minimal understanding of what he was selling, so why should that stop anyone else doing the same?

Oh, because no one’s fucking hiring, even if the candidate is good at “technology”? And yeah, completely erasing the impact of poverty and racism on poor black kids is bad enough, but did you have to demonstrate you know less about your “saving grace” (a saving grace you’ve made millions of dollars off of) than the average poor black kid?

And the very best students, even at the worst schools, have more opportunities. Getting good grades is the key to having more options. With good grades you can choose different, better paths.

Not really. Sure, you might have “more” options than the poor black kid with less good grades, unless they became a rapper or a sports star, but colleges tend to penalize coming from a “bad school” on applications even if you’re a star student. And that’s if you can afford to go to college. If you can’t get a full-ride scholarship (which pretty much don’t exist anymore) or aren’t willing to go massively under in student loans (and most of those require someone co-signing on them, which poorer kids will have a harder time finding), you’re not going to college. And even then, most of those don’t cover much of living expenses while you are going to college.
And if you get in, the lack of nepotism will still make that degree next to useless in getting a job that can pay down the debt.

You know, part of the 1% “reforming college entitlements and fighting affirmative action” to make sure no one can climb the ladder after them.

I’d become expert at Google Scholar. I’d visit study sites like SparkNotes and CliffsNotes to help me understand books. I’d watch relevant teachings on Academic Earth, TED and the Khan Academy.

Can you tell I’m in sales? Please let me upsell the kids to hide that I don’t know how to do anything else than sell “technology” to other out of touch rich 50 year olds who trust me because “I’m one of their kind”.

The links mixed with various advertisements for places to buy cheap goods continue for at least 3 paragraphs. I’ve seen many things turned into rabbit’s feet and golden cows in this economy but I’ll admit: “Technology” as an amorphous god being is a new one on me.

The tools are there. The technology is there. And the opportunities there.

Yeah, that’s not how most people are using “opportunities”. We’re more talking about “real” opportunities, a means by which poor black kids can grow up expecting that they’ll be allowed to participate in the economy on a real level, that through hard work, they can climb to the middle class or upper class. We’re not talking about “you can learn more unmarketable skills” that won’t matter because you don’t have “3-5 years of experience” or Daddy calling the HR department and saying “he’s with me”.

Or even a private school. Most private schools I know are filled to the brim with the 1%.

Really? You don’t say? In our bought and sold system of nepotism where being from the “right” (i.e. white) school, knowing the “right” (also white, but now also rich) people, and where the conservatives have been gutting the public school system like a fish, it’s turning out that private school is a good way to get to college.

Yeah, almost like that’s part of the criticism, that the children of the rich are buying their way to opportunity whereas the children of the poor have politicians openly wondering if they should force them to do janitor work now to remind them that that’s all they have to look forward to.

But that would be silly. You know about “technology”!

If I was a poor black kid I would make it my goal to get into one of these schools.

Become a 9 year old hedge fund manager, because your parents damn well won’t be able to afford to send you on their salaries.

Trust me, they want to show diversity. They want to show smiling, smart kids of many different colors and races on their fundraising brochures.

Get a job posing for the stock photos they use for said institutions, because they damn well won’t let you into their schools. Also make defeating our racist system your full-time job as a 9 year old, tricking yourself into white and rich programs and ignoring every cultural message to give up now. Your hope must be at full glow before we crush your dreams. Only then will the Dream Wine we make from them taste sweat enough to sell to our white children.

And once admitted to one of these schools the first person I’d introduce myself to would be the school’s guidance counselor.

This is the point where Gene has given up on the article. He’s already basically used, “have you tried being rich and white or sneaking into rich, white areas” and he’s used his one knowledge base (that there is such a thing as “technology”), but he’s got half a page to go.

Talk to a guidance counselor, they’ll magically make jobs appear and will totally be worth a shit, rather than the shockingly high number of guidance counselors who are more in the business of crushing dreams and getting people to undersell themselves, especially if they are poor or come from poor backgrounds. My partner grew up poor and her guidance counselor told her to give up on college and start part-time applications for retail work, even though she was a 4.0+ student.

If I was a poor black kid I would get technical. I would learn software. I would learn how to write code.

It won’t help you. Most youngsters entering the market know how to code (also “software”, “code” in your “get technical” section? How the hell did you shmooze your way through a technology job for 10+ years? By being a manager? Oh, you did, well that explains it then). And most jobs are looking for that all important “industry experience” in their coders.

Because a poor black kid who gets good grades, has a part time job and becomes proficient with a technical skill will go to college. There is financial aid available. There are programs available. And no matter what he or she majors in that person will have opportunities. They will find jobs in a country of business owners like me who are starved for smart, skilled people. They will succeed.

What is the color of the sky on your planet, cause here on Earth and in America, it’s a dull gray ash from all the air pollution. And there are no fucking jobs for “poor black kids with college educations and skills who get good grades”. I can’t find anything as a graduate school graduate in a “good” major with skin so white it can be used to signal low-flying aircraft, I’ve seen that poor black kid and he’s fucking lucky to have that part time job at McDonalds as a well-educated college graduate.

President Obama was right in his speech last week. The division between rich and poor is a national problem. But the biggest challenge we face isn’t inequality. It’s ignorance.

Poor black kids are lazy for not taking advantage of the few remaining options that we are busy eliminating and magically conjuring jobs out of them. Thus it’s not our fault for hoarding the wealth and blocking new “competitors”, it’s the poor’s fault for not being as ignorant as us and knowing that the remaining “options” are a smoke-screen at best.

Technology can help these kids. But only if the kids want to be helped. Yes, there is much inequality. But the opportunity is still there in this country for those that are smart enough to go for it.

Use the technology!

It has magic space power that give you Super Ultra Mega Job Times Ten. Transforms into Super Happy Mega Blowjob.

Actually yes, use the technology, get a boob job and join the only industry that’s still hiring these days.

Prostitution.

ABOVE: Marsha West (circa 2005)

---

Marsha West at RuhnooMuhrka has discovered that there is sex on television and she is not in the least bit happy about it:

Liberal Hollywood is intentionally corrupting children’s morals via the movies and TV programs they produce for public consumption. Dictionary.com defines the word intentional in this way: done with intention or on purpose.

One of the things that distinguishes RuhnooMuhrka is how its writers can clarify difficult concepts, like the meaning of “intentionally,” and do so by consulting authoritative sources that aren’t generally available to the average reader like you and me. I was, just last night, struggling with uncovering the meaning of “intentional” when, after my fifth cocktail, I had to refute charges that I had intentionally gotten drunk, and, if only I had read Marsha first, I could have authoritatively replied that I didn’t do it “with intention or on purpose.” It also would have come in handy that time there was a fuss about whether I intentionally did, er, you-know-what (rhymes with Mame) in someone’s mouth or not. I simply could have said “not on purpose” and been done with it, right?

Marsha’s outrage is all focused on a Fox Network show about singing high school students which she believes is simply a pretext for that liberal Rupert Murdoch guy to show two boys fucking which, of course, will mean that everyone who watches the show, particularly children, will turn gay on the spot, engage in non-stop sodomitical orgies with their same-sex classmates until they catch AIDS and die. (It is going to be somewhat hard for the girls to get HIV from lesbian sex but let’s not obsess over the minor details, m-kay?)

Now that Glee has turned the nation’s third graders into crazed gay-sex automatons, schools have replaced spelling tests with anal sex tips and pointers. Seriously, she says that:

Instead of children learning reading, writing and arithmetic in our tax funded public schools, teachers all across America are mandated to teach children that sodomy is “normal and natural.” Many Students graduate from high school unable to spell simple words or write a basic sentence, yet valuable class time is taken up to teach them the ends and outs of oral and anal sex?

Awesome. In a paragraph lamenting how kids can’t spell any more, Marsha misspells “ins.” And she probably never learned about anal sex in school either, bless her heart.

But the Glee-based Murdoch conspiracy is not just to turn your kids gay — its even more insidious goal is to turn all adult viewers into pedophiles by including a story line where a teacher has sex with an adult student.

Getting back to ‘Glee’ the executives and sponsors of the show need to tune into the news once in a while. The program that spotlighted a teenage student having sex with his adult teacher was aired about the time that the story of former football coach Jerry Sandusky’s arrest for alleged child rape was making headlines. Which begs the question: Why is ‘Glee’ playing with fire by showing teacher-student sex? Okay, the student was 18. But a senior in high school nonetheless.

My guess is you’re not familiar with the obscure part of the law against sex with minors which defines anyone in school as a minor, no matter how old they are. Where would we be if it weren’t for the careful legal scholarship of RuhnooMuhrka columnists like Marsha?

Hollywood…pushing the envelope…breaking taboos… desensitizing the public…tearing down the moral construct this country was built on…mocking the traditional family…rewriting history…disrespecting Judeo-Christian values…even blaspheming God. Where do they plan to go next?

Oh I don’t know Marsha. Could it be pedophilia? Necrophilia? Cannibalism? Electrified tit clamps?

Could it be the normalization of pedophilia? No, they wouldn’t go that far, would they? [Ed. note: I think this is what is called a rhetorical question.] Former child star Cory Feldman told CBS that pedophilia is Hollywood’s biggest problem.

In fact, next season’s biggest hit is likely to be “Three and A Half Priests,” the funny but touching story of a Southern California rectory and the antics of its residents: three hunky priests and a precocious altar boy who doubles as their sex slave.

There’s not enough space to cover what perverts are doing behind the scenes to normalize pedophilia.

Come on, Marsha, we’ve got all the time in the world and I know that the RuhnooMuhrka website can give you a few more inches, feet even, of column space to reveal these dastardly shenanigans. Unless, of course, you don’t, oh well, nevermind.

You know one of the hard things about reading crazy people like Marsha for your entertainment is this constant coitus interruptus stunt they pull. They get you all worked up about something, say, a Muslim plot to poison all our salad bars, and then just as you get all excited they pull out with something like “but I really don’t have the time or space to explain to you how they are going to do that or what particular salad bars they have targeted or what poisons they are going to use because Sean Hannity is coming on in five minutes and I have to go watch the teevee.” And so I wind up standing there with my wiener in my hand and afraid to go into Applebee’s.

Only known photo of Daniel Horowitz

I don’t tend to do shorters, but sometimes you just have to throw your hands up and post it anyways, because you just can’t believe the argument is that inane.

As such:

Shorter Daniel Horowitz, FascistState:
Newt Gingrich Tells the Truth About the Palestinian Non-Entity

Yeah.

I fucking dare you to get off the boat.

Oh and a taste of what you are in for?

The Palestinians are the global warming climate change of geopolitical conflict. They use deceptive parlance to advance their agenda. Thankfully, Newt is speaking the truth, instead of worshiping at the altar of the pan-Islamists in the UN.

Newt Gingrich is just as right on Palestine as he is about climate change! Also the UN is controlled by Muslims who probably also planted all those fake fossil records for evolution. The sky is green and the Freemasons control my teeth!

I…I…just.

Sorry people, I’m out.

But as apology, please enjoy what this douche uses as a twitter logo:

Fighting the fight against vegetables and tasteful visual design since I realized Mommy was part of the Islamo-Communist Conspiracy!

‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™ Stealing Tintin’s shtick on the very same blog is created by Cerberus.

Meet Fay Voshell, who gets to post at the American Genius blog because many years ago she got the high score on some test at University of Delaware, apparently due to the fact that she was one of the few students there who could spell the name of the university correctly.

Evidently it isn’t enough for rabid secularists to take Christ out of Christmas. Now, in a macabre twofer …

What now, Fay? What are the liberals doing to Christmas this year? Putting free abortion certificates in Salvation Army kettles? Are they making the Yuletide gay? Arresting people for saying Merry Christmas to store clerks? What?

Santa is being crucified, too.

Those Jews They just couldn’t stop with our Lord, could they?

The most recent location of the worldwide phenomenon which is characterized by a ritualistic crucifixion of good St. Nicholas has been the Leesburg, Virginia courthouse lawn, apparently merely one of a spate of Santa crucifixions across the world.

You know that Fay belongs in the august company of all the thinkers over at the American Thinker because she uses words like “spate,” except I’m not sure she knows what it means because her link goes to an article that talks about the Leesburg “crucifixion” and says nary a word about any other crucifixions manifesting this “worldwide phenomenon.” I mean, I was expecting to read about the latest Santa-fixions in Riyadh, Tel Aviv and Beijing, presumably some of the more significant fronts in the War on Christmas, but, no, just Leesburg. Sigh. Fay had gotten me all excited for nothing.

But, actually, even in Leesburg, there doesn’t appear to have been any Santa-crucifying going on. Let’s roll the tape:

Gee, Fay. That doesn’t look like Santa to me. Not even Santa after a few months on the grapefruit diet. That look like a skeleton in a Santa suit. No beard. No rotund tummy. No rosy cheeks. I call bullshit.

The crucified Santa is mockery of Christmas and Christian beliefs; mockery similar to the anti-Semitic outbreaks with which we all are familiar.

Yep, put a Santa suit on a skeleton on a cross and the next thing you know, they’ll be pulling children out of Sunday school and sending them off by the railroad car to get gassed. That’s what happens when you forget that the true meaning of Christmas is about the birth of the baby Santa to a virgin in a manger and about how he gave gifts to the Magi and performed the awesome miracle of the flying reindeer and then was crucified by the Jewish merchants because he was hurting Christmas sales and then, on the third day rose again, exclaiming, ere he flew out of sight “Happy Easter to all and to all a good night!” Or something like that anyway.

It’s the only place he can hide to escape the incoming gynocracy

Matt Patterson, American Thin-ow-brain-words-hurting:
A World Without Men

For a conservative defender of the patriarchy, life is apparently like being one of the B-list action stars in Predator. You fire your gun wildly around at any glimpse or glimmer you can spot and pray to God that the black guy gets it first.

For Matt Patterson, the enforced paranoia has him bunkering down in his suburban tract fearfully looking out the keyhole for the hordes of feminists he knows are coming to eliminate all men off the planet.

Last year an article in The Atlantic asked the headline question, “Are Fathers Necessary?” The answer was thoughtfully supplied in the subhead — “A paternal contribution may not be as essential as we think.” Uh-oh.

It’s been a year, but Matt has carefully scratched the question into his flesh every night. It itches at his eyes, but he hasn’t crafted a blade delicate enough to scratch the words onto his eyelids. He knew that the gynocracy would come for him, but not so soon, not like this. Not through fatherhood!

Quoted below is the study he was freaking out over, that he also quotes:

[O]ur ideas of what dads do and provide are based primarily on contrasts between married-couple parents and single-female parents: an apples-to-oranges exercise that conflates gender, sexual orientation, marital status, and biogenetic relationships in ways that a true comparison of parent gender — one that compared married gay-male couples or married lesbian couples to married heterosexuals, or single fathers to single mothers — would not. Most of the data fail to distinguish between a father and the income a father provides, or between the presence of a father and the presence of a second parent, regardless of gender.

Huh, that seems like it’s just saying that two person households regardless of gender roles do about the same as each other. That ensuring a man and a woman is raising a kid doesn’t somehow add something. That what matters is the attention and the ability of another adult (any other non-Sandusky adult) to take over when the first is overwhelmed. And they seem to be saying that single parents even do pretty well when they are comfortable enough that they can spend time with their kid and not worry about the money and maybe can afford to give the kid to someone else when they get over-stressed and need a breather. So how’s our paranoid friend going to freak out over this?

Got that, fellas? There’s no difference between “you” and the “income you provide.”

Of course. Ignore all the important details about the sex of the parent not mattering and fixate on the money, because bitches only be after men for one reason, amirite?

Oh god, the gynocrats have found the money I hide under the bed to keep it out of the hands of female bank tellers. Now they are performing their Satanic lesbian sex orgies upon the bills. My usefulness at an end, they will move on to sacrificing me soon. Warn the others!

This dispiriting news followed on the heels of the 2009 revelation by researchers at Northeast England Stem Cell Institute that they had devised a method to create human sperm from embryonic stem cells. As the U.K Telegraph reported:
Within 10 years, the scientists say the technique could also be used to allow infertile couples to have children that are genetically their own. It could even be possible to create sperm from female stem cells, they say, which would ultimately mean a woman having a baby without a man.

You mean sperm isn’t the most magical fluid on the planet? Why then have I been guzzling it by the truck load in truck stop bathrooms in order to keep up my masculine energies?

What other lies has the gynocracy kept away from teh MENZ?!? TELL ME NOW!

For anyone who has ever loved his or her father (this author is certainly guilty), this all may come as a shock. But someone who is doubtless not shocked by these developments is the New York Times’ own Maureen Dowd, who got this whole male-maligning ball rolling back in 2005 with her book, Are Men Necessary?
It’s the sort of lament one has long heard from the salons of feminism, where the evils of men — war, leaving the toilet seat up — are eagerly condemned, and male contributions to society and family bitterly denigrated.

Ah to be an insane wingnut and think that Maureen Dowd is a feminist.

Such a simple life.

Also, stem cells apparently mean that no one will be allowed to love their fathers (especially like that). I guess the logic is that once women can replace sperm and money, then there’s no reason for any woman to be with a man ever again.

Don’t sell yourself short Matt, I’m sure you have plenty to offer a woman besides that. Like…uh…hmm, well…for instance… oh just skip to the next quote.

Now that a world without men seems to be at least on the cusp of possibility, it’s worth considering for a moment, I think, what such a world would really be like. It would almost certainly be a world without war, true, but it would also be a world without:

Huh, I was unaware that poorly written lesbian utopian novels of the 1960s were being taught as history textbooks in conservative universities.

Learn something new every day.

1) Literature — From Homer to Stan Lee, the majority of the world’s great stories have been spun by men. And the great poets have been almost exclusively male — there is no female equivalent to Byron or Whitman, let alone Shakespeare or Dante, men whose breathtaking vision shaped not only our language, but our sense of what it means to be human. A world without men would be a world whose list of great authors would include Jane Austen, Sappho, and…uh…uh…

Worst adaptation of It’s a Wonderful Life ever.

When you want to remind women of the importance of men because of your fear that some women may live lives without male involvement, it is important to highlight the best of male accomplishment.

In short, it is best to not be a giant douchebag who assumes that just because sexist historical practices with regards to women, writing, and who is considered a “great writer”, that women are incapable of producing great literature.

Fuck, look at a modern bookshelf for recent authors. I don’t think women in a women-only world will be hurting for books anytime soon (though the book scene might be even heavier on the vampires and werewolves).

2) Technology — Men have invented almost everything worth inventing, from the printing press to the iPad. If there’s a gadget or device that makes your life easier or more enjoyable, odds are 99 to 1 that it was first envisioned — and first brought to you — by a man.

Don’t unleash your gynocratic hordes on us! We’re important, we invented everything, with no help and you ladies can barely work the kitchen, amirite lads?

No wonder he’s so afraid of disappearing, he’s apparently a ghostly echo from 1950s television serials in some hideous reverse Pleasantville situation.

Also, you mean all the stuff that wasn’t stolen from a female scientist or which the man could work on because his house, food, and child care needs were being upkept by a forgotten woman of history.

3) Food — How many farmers throughout history have been women? Exactly.

A lot? Farming communities can’t really afford to be sexist when you need all the hands you can to keep things running. Especially at harvest time. Also, have you ever been to a farm? Like ever in your life?

4) Comedy — A world without men would certainly be a world without jokes and laughter. Guys, and especially dumb guys, are responsible for more comedy than anything else, from The Three Stooges to Beavis and Butt-head. And the male-female ratio in stand-up comedy has to be something like 4-1 (none of this, of course, takes away from those few female comedy greats like Lucille Ball and Carol Burnett).

Yes, the coming gynocracy, in a world without men, will be longing most of all for douchebro “comedians” to recycle stale “jokes” about how women talk too much, bitches be complicated, or how they’ll “git r done”. How will women survive without condescending “jokes” that only men laugh at. Truly they will be lost and adrift without such necessary sustenance.

Really though, you got paranoid and frightened for an entire year that the ability of lesbian couples to raise a child without a man there to rule them and your counter argument to the world you imagine will arise is a list of stereotypes so old and archaic that even the ghost of Archie Bunker would be going “hey now”.

Well, you certainly did put forth an intriguing argument for a manless society, but not in the way you thought.

In short, a world without men would be pretty boring, even if it becomes possible. I mean, let’s face it — men invented civilization itself. Can anyone really deny that? So for all those ladies thinking that they would be better off without their hairy, smelly other halves, just think about that. And if that doesn’t convince you of the necessity of men, just ask yourself:

Yes, men are really only worth their forced intrusion on women, their sperm, and possibly the money they earn more of by paying less to women in the workplace.

And that any ability for women to bypass a man for a single step will instantly lead to every woman on the planet choosing the no-man route.

But remember, it’s feminists who are the real man-haters.

Who would open your jars?

Hurr hurr, like with your girly weak arms, cause we all know women are fragile nothings who can’t even manage basic tasks. Okay, now you’ve opened the jar and you’ve smashed the jar on the countertop to manufacture a basic shiv. And now…

Oh god, it’s time! The gynocracy is upon us! Run for the hills, men, only stopping long enough to grab your copies of Red Dawn!

WOLVERINES!!!

“Mr. Bailey, your assault with a rancorous tone upon my person will not stand!”

Leon Cooperman:
Open Letter to the President of the United States of America

From the comment threads to the front page, it’s me Cerberus. See now what your unnatural appetites for more content have wrought? Repent Sadlies, repent!

(Warning, I don’t do shorters, so this will be meaty.)

Now, we here in the liberal community have thought hard about a number of suffering communities in this time of Great Depression II: Electric Boogaloo.

But in our zeal to be inclusive we have forgotten the most hard-done group of all.

That being 1% hedge fund managers who after sleeping on their piles of money and finishing the day’s tasks of paying the police to evict the OWS protestors, have found their lives ruined by the most painful bigotry of all.

That’s right, mild comments of disparagement that maybe collapsing the global community and preventing any positive action to fix it wasn’t the best response after having the government save your rigged Casino from itself.

How could we be so cruel? Let us truly sympathize with the raw pain of this man.

It is with a great sense of disappointment that I write this. Like many others, I hoped that your election would bring a salutary change of direction to the country, despite what more than a few feared was an overly aggressive social agenda.

I expected you to fix our mess and do absolute nothing else socially to distinguish yourself from a right-wing paid shill. How dare you not live up to those standards and occasionally remember that you are the nominally liberal choice?

And I cannot credibly blame you for the economic mess that you inherited,

Well, that’s big of you, seeing as how you and your right-wing stooges in government got us into this mess by-

even if the policy response on your watch has been profligate and largely ineffectual. (You did not, after all, invent TARP.) I understand that when surrounded by cries of “the end of the world as we know it is nigh”, even the strongest of minds may have a tendency to shoot first and aim later in a well-intended effort to stave off the predicted apocalypse.

Ah, not even going to retain that pretense of not being a wingnut for longer than a second.

Also, 1%ers of the world. We’re trying to work our asses off to prevent “shoot first and ask questions later”, but you’re going to have to start recognizing that OWS and Keynesian economics is there to prevent the poor from having no other recourse than breaking into your homes and harvesting your organs for the black market.

But what I can justifiably hold you accountable for is your and your minions’ role in setting the tenor of the rancorous debate now roiling us that smacks of what so many have characterized as “class warfare”.

Well our paid shills characterize it as that. But we paid a lot of shills, so that counts for something, right?

And yeah, if he thinks the current political climate on the left is “rancorous” and unfairly targeting him then he might just want to stop dropping leaflets from the skyscrapers and actually listen for once to what is being said. (Hint: Barack Obama isn’t actually a black panther).

This is a person who thinks a subpar blowjob is a “vile attack to separate his scrotum from his body in what he can only describe as anti-male warfare”.

Whether this reflects your principled belief that the eternal divide between the haves and have-nots is at the root of all the evils that afflict our society or just a cynical, populist appeal to his base by a president struggling in the polls is of little importance. What does matter is that the divisive, polarizing tone of your rhetoric is cleaving a widening gulf, at this point as much visceral as philosophical, between the downtrodden and those best positioned to help them.

LEAVE MR. POTTER ALONE!!! Just because the rich want all the money and have directly blocked attempts to directly aid the poor or otherwise keep them from dying in the Depression the rich caused is no reason for the reaction to them to be anything other than fawningly begging them to “Please Mr. Sky God, make the money and jobs come back”.

Anything less is the real bigotry.

People of differing political persuasions can (and do) reasonably argue about whether, and how high, tax rates should be hiked for upper-income earners

Oh can we? Pretty please can we? With sprinkles on top? We’ve been oh so good Mr. Cooperman.

whether the burdens of paying for the nation’s bloated entitlement programs are being fairly spread around, and whether those programs themselves should be reconfigured in light of current and projected budgetary constraints

Just can’t resist, can you? It’s like some pus-filled zit you just need to pop. There’s still some money in the economy that’s not in your rigged casino and that just offends you to the core.

Anyone who could survey today’s challenging fiscal landscape, with an un- and underemployment rate of nearly 20 percent and roughly 40 percent of the country on public assistance, and not acknowledge an imperative for change is either heartless, brainless, or running for office on a very parochial agenda. And if I end up paying more taxes as a result, so be it. The alternatives are all worse.

Okay, fine, I guess I’m forced to acknowledge that maybe giving us all the money in the world isn’t sustainable, but but, wah BUTTHURT!

But what I do find objectionable is the highly politicized idiom in which this debate is being conducted.

Wah, recognizing our role in the financial crisis is the real hate crime!

Capitalism is not the source of our problems, as an economy or as a society, and capitalists are not the scourge that they are too often made out to be. As a group, we employ many millions of taxpaying people, pay their salaries, provide them with healthcare coverage, start new companies, found new industries, create new products, fill store shelves at Christmas, and keep the wheels of commerce and progress (and indeed of government, by generating the income whose taxation funds it) moving.

Worship us as Gods! Oh, where are those jobs, you say? If we are the guardians of all that is good and pure and no jobs will arise but through us?

Uh, look over there! (click, vroom, squeal)

You might do well at this point to eschew the polarizing vernacular of political militancy and become the transcendent leader you were elected to be. You are likely to be far more effective, and history is likely to treat you far more kindly for it.

Your meek and belated acknowledgement of our role in the financial collapse is the worst thing to ever happen.

Also, why are you so BLACK? I just can’t help but see the ghost of Malcolm X whenever you speak and that’s also your fault.

But yeah, if I had to pick out one flaw Mean Green Leon, it was being so out-of-touch with the outside world that you think Barack Obama (a man so mild-mannered and overly forgiving to his enemies that he’s turned pre-emptive over-compromise into an art form) is the symbol of the angry faces you see outside your window.

I know. In wingnut world, the protests on the streets are bought and paid for astroturfs on behalf of big donors and high-level party members, but here in the real world, Obama is the good cop to OWS’s patient cop.

You don’t want to see bad cop.

Shorter Jo-Dough Loadberg, America’s Shittiest Website™
Newt the Compassionate

‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™

Shorter James G. Wiles,* The American Genius:
Chelsea Clinton’s Baggage. No, Not Them.

‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™

*Mr. Wiles, when not littering the wingnut-o-sphere with his deep thoughts, appears to spend his time filing legal documents for clients notwithstanding that he has been disbarred, something which rather annoyed this judge.

ABOVE: William A. Levinson

Shorter William A. Levinson, The American Genius:
Harry Potter and the Islamization of America

‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™