Glenn Beck’s 9.12 Project Graduates to Book Banning

Wingnuts • Views: 6,971

Glenn Beck’s homophobic, atavistic 9.12 Project has apparently succeeded in getting a library in New Jersey to remove a book for gay high school students, even though no formal challenge to the book was ever filed: NJ Library, Citing Child Pornography, Removes GLBT Book.

A New Jersey public library has ordered the removal of all copies of Revolutionary Voices: A Multicultural Queer Youth Anthology (Alyson, 2000) from its shelves—despite the fact there was no formal book challenge—and its library director has referred to the title as “child pornography,” according to emails obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey through a Freedom of Information Act.

Gail Sweet, library director of the Burlington County Library System (BCLS), in April asked Library Commissioners to approve the removal of the book after a member of the conservative group 9.12 Project contacted Sweet requesting that it be taken off shelves.

While direct calls to Sweet were not returned, she did respond to an email request explaining BCLS’s decision to take Revolutionary Voices off its shelves.

“Thank you for your interest but I have nothing to say on the topic,” Sweet wrote.

Created by American television and radio personality Glenn Beck, the group vows to defend the constitution of the United States-and is the same organization that advocated Revolutionary Voice’s removal from New Jersey’s Rancocas Valley Regional High School this Spring.

In the strange world of Glenn Beck followers, “defending the Constitution” equates to banning books.

Jump to bottom

269 comments
1 Kragar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:48:51am

Up next, beer hall putsches!

2 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:49:30am

Our society is so damn scared of teenagers. Any mention of teenage sexuality throws people into a fucking panic. I feel so bad for a gay kid growing up in that county— one less book to help him or her figure out what’s going on, not to mention the obvious fear and shame that comes from seeing this book banned.

Also: How the fuck do you defend the Constitution by banning books? Fuckers.

3 jamesfirecat  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:49:42am

re: #1 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Up next, beer hall putsches!

Its Glenn Beck so it’s not like you can call Godwin’s law, he’s already done it for us…

4 Four More Tears  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:51:26am

re: #3 jamesfirecat

Its Glenn Beck so it’s not like you can call Godwin’s law, he’s already done it for us…

Nazi Tourrettes!

5 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:52:39am

re: #2 Obdicut

Our society is so damn scared of teenagers. Any mention of teenage sexuality throws people into a fucking panic. . ..

We are, aren’t we?
And they end up growing up to be … us.

My (very conservative) parents put no restrictions on my reading; and I haven’t put any on my daughter. She’s free to read whatever she wants. It’s how people learn to sort wheat from chaff, and come to their own logical conclusions, based on their own life experiences and upbringing. It’s not something to be feared, IMO. It’s something to be encouraged, if what we want is a population that can think and reflect and come to logical decisions.

6 Kronocide  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:53:10am

Pornography? Does it have sexual pictures or graphic sexual dialog? Otherwise, STFU.

7 darthstar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:53:11am

Freedom of speech?

8 RadicalModerate  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:54:28am

Gail Sweet is the antithesis of the stated purpose of the American Library Association, and if she is a member, I feel she should tend her resignation immediately.

ala.org

9 avanti  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:55:59am

re: #6 BigPapa

Pornography? Does it have sexual pictures or graphic sexual dialog? Otherwise, STFU.

No porn pictures, but it’s directed at dangerous groups/

“Revolutionary Voices: A Multicultural Queer Youth Anthology, edited by Amy Sonnie (ISBN 1555835589), is an anthology created by and for radical queer youth, committed specifically to youth of color, young women, trans gender and bisexual youth, (dis)abled youth, and poor/working class youth.

10 Summer Seale  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:56:22am

I find it completely unsurprising that Glenn and the others want to ban books on Gay Teens.

After all, to paraphrase Ahmadinejad: “There are no Homosexuals in America.”

…right?

Yup. That must be it.

I might also add that since Glenn is so fond of McCarthy, one of the biggest charges against “Communists” at the time was that they were also usually Gay.

11 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:56:28am

The book-burners are also coming out of their holes, as I noted yesterday.

12 Eclectic Infidel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:57:42am

Once again, the old stereotype is exploited in order to demonize gay Americans by equating LGBT literature with a vile form of pornography. This is just another way to bash gays, and I despise these conservatives for doing just that.

Editorial Reviews | Amazon.com Review
This groundbreaking, multicultural collection of stories by the queer and young should be required reading for every jaded adult—teachers, parents, politicians—and anyone who fears for the future of our country. In fact, 22-year-old editor Amy Sonnie should run for Congress. Her introduction to this touching, funny, and sometimes sad anthology is smarter and more thoughtful than any political rhetoric this old queer has heard lately. While the work is wildly diverse (one of my favorites involves a mother who bakes a cake to help her queer daughter celebrate Ellen DeGeneres’s coming-out), all of it speaks to the isolation and fear of being queer and young. A boy lies awake at night practicing to be more masculine. An intersexed gay boy comes out to his high school. A butch girl tells of years of daily bashing. Fear, though, is not the overriding emotional tone to this collection. The contributors exhibit a belief in themselves, a well-placed youthful confidence that speaks as loudly as the most poignant writing. Their determination to survive and thrive despite a homophobic society comes through loud and clear. It’s the perfect antidote to adult cynicism about youth. —Jack Connolly

The article about the censorship can also be found at banned librarian, in left column.

13 webevintage  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:57:46am

Wow.
Normally the library director and head librarians are the ones leading the fight to not remove a book.
They are the front line against censorship.

and this book is pulled while teenage girls can still read about having sex with undead creatures.

14 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:57:56am

re: #5 reine.de.tout

Exactly. Not to mention that in this day and age of the internet, banning books makes no sense at all. Books at least have had to go through some sort of quality control process.

This is not in the least bit about protecting children, banning this book. This is about making gay people feel like they’re deviant outsiders. Including gay children.

I simply do not understand those who look at the world and say, “What’s needed here is more divisiveness.”

15 jamesfirecat  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:58:08am

re: #7 darthstar

Freedom of speech?

///This it at work, the freedom of us to talk about how you should take certain books of your shelves and if you do it, well isn’t that just a nice neighborly thing to do?

16 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:58:17am

re: #2 Obdicut

Our society is so damn scared of teenagers. Any mention of teenage sexuality throws people into a fucking panic.

And yet at least 50% of marketing in this country is geared towards teen sex.

17 Four More Tears  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:58:51am

re: #11 Cato the Elder

The book-burners are also coming out of their holes, as I noted yesterday.

Speaking of which…

Florida ‘Church’ Demonstrates How Christians Should Burn Koran (VIDEO)

Sapp then proceeds to put his money where his mouth is and sparks up a copy of the Koran, spraying lighter fluid on it as it catches fire.


I was always taught that it was a bad idea to spray an accelerant on an open flame. Was I told wrong?

18 Kragar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:59:04am

re: #9 avanti

No porn pictures, but it’s directed at dangerous groups/

“Revolutionary Voices: A Multicultural Queer Youth Anthology, edited by Amy Sonnie (ISBN 1555835589), is an anthology created by and for radical queer youth, committed specifically to youth of color, young women, trans gender and bisexual youth, (dis)abled youth, and poor/working class youth.

In other words, the sworn oppressors of the trodden down white middle class male.

///

19 Kronocide  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:59:23am

re: #9 avanti

It’s gonna may people get ‘teh ghey!’ Oh noes!!!!
(run around screaming and burning books)

20 webevintage  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 9:59:47am

re: #2 Obdicut

Our society is so damn scared of teenagers.

I wish I could upding you more then once for this.

21 jamesfirecat  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:00:46am

re: #13 webevintage

Wow.
Normally the library director and head librarians are the ones leading the fight to not remove a book.
They are the front line against censorship.

and this book is pulled while teenage girls can still read about having sex with undead creatures.

Undead creatures, or fantasizing about the lead getting it on with a werewolf.

Or to put it more “graphically”….

graphjam.com

22 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:01:10am

re: #6 BigPapa

Pornography? Does it have sexual pictures or graphic sexual dialog? Otherwise, STFU.

Even if it does have graphical sexual dialog— teenagers engage in graphic sex. They have graphic sexual desires. Their sexuality won’t disappear or be mitigated in the least if we shield them from stories from other teenagers like themselves talking openly about their sexuality.

I would much rather a gay teenager be able to understand his or her sexuality from a book of other teenagers telling their stories than any other source.

23 lawhawk  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:01:15am

re: #14 Obdicut

It’s about control.

24 SpaceJesus  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:01:38am

I got a hundred space dollars that says Beck couldn’t tell you what Article 1 of the constitution says if you ran into him on the street

25 allegro  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:01:41am

re: #5 reine.de.tout

My (very conservative) parents put no restrictions on my reading; and I haven’t put any on my daughter. She’s free to read whatever she wants. It’s how people learn to sort wheat from chaff, and come to their own logical conclusions, based on their own life experiences and upbringing. It’s not something to be feared, IMO. It’s something to be encouraged, if what we want is a population that can think and reflect and come to logical decisions.

Absolutely! My parents were the same, with any book available to us at any time. When I was little, the library wouldn’t allow us to check out books from the adult section of the library so Mom or Dad would check them out for us. They just shrugged off any criticism from those who felt they weren’t adequately “protecting” us from knowing too much. Likewise, there was no topic of discussion off limits. Debates would often get rowdy but nothing was ever shut down.

I’ve always appreciated them for that.

26 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:03:02am

re: #16 Cato the Elder

And yet at least 50% of marketing in this country is geared towards teen sex.

Yep. It’s the taboo. We fear it and we want it and it’s all freaking insane. We celebrate the hell out of sexualized teenagers in films and media, and then treat any girl that has sex as a teenager as a whore, and treat every boy as though they should want to be having sex every moment of every day.

We’re fucking insane when it comes to sex.

I’m so glad I had older brothers to help me figure shit out. My parents took the “Masturbation is a terrible sin and God hates you every time you do it” approach. Sheesh, what a thing to lay on a kid.

27 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:03:34am

re: #2 Obdicut

Our society is so damn scared of teenagers. Any mention of teenage sexuality throws people into a fucking panic. …

Yeah. Funny thing is, in the “real world”, ie without the constructs of civilization to prop us up, teenagers would be full-fledged adults - having kids, hunting and gathering food, and generally being depended on as probably the most physically capable adults.

28 avanti  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:03:39am

IMHO, some of the most controversial books even written were religious texts like the Bible/Koran. Lots of kinky, violent, and extreme acts included there.
Having said that, I’ve found I can read either without feeling the urge to kill in the name of a Supreme being for example.

29 wrenchwench  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:03:59am

re: #5 reine.de.tout

My (very conservative) parents put no restrictions on my reading; and I haven’t put any on my daughter. She’s free to read whatever she wants. It’s how people learn to sort wheat from chaff, and come to their own logical conclusions, based on their own life experiences and upbringing.

I thought you find out which were the interesting books by finding out what adults don’t want you to read. You provided no guidance!

/

30 webevintage  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:05:27am

re: #21 jamesfirecat

Undead creatures, or fantasizing about the lead getting it on with a werewolf.

Or to put it more “graphically”…

[Link: graphjam.com…]

I think I’ll start a movement to ban Twilight to protect teenagers from the twin desires of necrophilia and bestiality. Not to mention creepy stalking “boyfriends” and gross C-sections.

31 Four More Tears  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:05:28am

re: #28 avanti

IMHO, some of the most controversial books even written were religious texts like the Bible/Koran. Lots of kinky, violent, and extreme acts included there.
Having said that, I’ve found I can read either without feeling the urge to kill in the name of a Supreme being for example.

Ever read the story about the Levite and his concubine? Tarantino hasn’t come up with something that fucked up.

32 Kronocide  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:05:52am

re: #22 Obdicut

Even if it does have graphical sexual dialog— teenagers engage in graphic sex…..

Yes, true. If it did have graphic sexual dialog (hetero-homo), I wasn’t saying there would be a reason for exlusion or banning, merely looking at it from the point of Beck’s validation… of which there isn’t any.

If it was graphic, then it may need be in the adult section… maybe.

33 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:06:43am

re: #27 cliffster

Not to mention that every teenager knows a shit-ton of adults that are worthless, incompetent, and immoral— and yet those teenagers are still given less freedom than those adults.

Now that I’m edging closer to parenthood, I keep thinking things like, “Would they really put me in jail if I let my teenager drink? I mean, for fuck’s sake, I want him or her to learn it with me, not at some backwoods beer blast, or at some frat party.”

34 pharmmajor  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:06:52am

Advocating censorship… yet another reason why I get an aneurysm every time the asshole known as Glenn Beck calls himself a libertarian.

35 avanti  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:09:56am

re: #31 JasonA

Ever read the story about the Levite and his concubine? Tarantino hasn’t come up with something that fucked up.

I did now, pretty kinky:

“The biblical text presents the story of a woman, the concubine of a Levite, who leaves her home to return to the house of her father. The Levite, a man from Ephraim, goes to Bethlehem to bring his concubine back with him to their home. After much reluctance on the woman’s part, and at the insistence of her father, the woman agrees to return home with her husband.

On the way back they spent the night in Gibeah of Benjamin. While in Gibeah, some men of the city make an attempt at having a homosexual affair with the Levite. Because of his fear of violence against him, the Levite gives his concubine to the men of the city, who raped her over and over again all that night. The next morning the woman dies, the Levite cut her into twelve pieces and sent the parts of her body to the twelve tribes of Israel.”

36 allegro  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:10:13am

re: #33 Obdicut

Now that I’m edging closer to parenthood, I keep thinking things like, “Would they really put me in jail if I let my teenager drink? I mean, for fuck’s sake, I want him or her to learn it with me, not at some backwoods beer blast, or at some frat party.”

This. I don’t get the overprotective thing so many parents I meet today engage in. How do they expect the kids to learn what they need to know when they’re no longer under their parent’s thumb protection? This is why kids go off to college and die from alcohol poisoning and such. They are never given the opportunity to learn under a supervised situation.

37 lawhawk  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:10:47am

re: #23 lawhawk

The same folks who yap loudly about how they’re all about personal rights and personal freedoms and overreaching governmental interference are busy calling for banning (burning) books. That’s the antithesis of personal freedom.

These kinds of people are hypocrites.

38 Shiplord Kirel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:10:48am

re: #23 lawhawk

It’s about control.

Hallelujah! That may be the most succinct 3 words ever posted here. Fear of “teh ghey” is the number one method of controlling and molding young people in conformist society. In rural west Texas, for example, it is an obsession. As I wrote last year:

Here in Texas (and quite probably elsewhere) many rural high schools have a characteristic and highly informal “initiation ceremony” for boys. This is usually administered to ninth graders and, though I won’t share details, it is nearly always very degrading and includes some obvious homo-erotic elements. It is part of their flimsy local “tradition,” basically a kind of debased right (sic, “rite”) of passage. It is against the law, btw, but most authorities, even now, take a wink and nod toward it so long as nobody is killed or seriously injured.
This same demogrphic, rural high school boys, is notorious for supplying most of the violent gay-bashers in this part of the world. That, too, is a tradition in the Texas yahoo culture. Coincidence? I think not.
39 avanti  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:11:17am

Just in, judge grants partial injunction to Az. immigration law. Breaking story.

40 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:12:26am

re: #33 Obdicut

Now that I’m edging closer to parenthood, I keep thinking things like, “Would they really put me in jail if I let my teenager drink? I mean, for fuck’s sake, I want him or her to learn it with me, not at some backwoods beer blast, or at some frat party.”

Parenthood makes you worry about a lot of things. And you’re wise in wanting to introduce your future kids to the world on your own, sensible, terms.

41 Kragar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:13:49am

re: #26 Obdicut

Yep. It’s the taboo. We fear it and we want it and it’s all freaking insane. We celebrate the hell out of sexualized teenagers in films and media, and then treat any girl that has sex as a teenager as a whore, and treat every boy as though they should want to be having sex every moment of every day.

We’re fucking insane when it comes to sex.

I’m so glad I had older brothers to help me figure shit out. My parents took the “Masturbation is a terrible sin and God hates you every time you do it” approach. Sheesh, what a thing to lay on a kid.

On the other hand, my Mom was buying me Playboys from the time I turned 15. “You’re going to try and get these anyways, so lets skip the stealing and sneaking them into your room phase.”

42 avanti  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:14:12am

re: #39 avanti

Just in, judge grants partial injunction to Az. immigration law. Breaking story.

She blocks police checking immigration status, and failing to carry immigration papers.

43 RadicalModerate  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:14:16am

Sheriff Joe weighs in on Arizona Immigration law to take effect tomorrow - dissent will not be tolerated:

Sheriff Joe Arpaio: I Will Jail Immigration Law Protesters (VIDEO)

44 Kragar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:15:12am

re: #43 RadicalModerate

Sheriff Joe weighs in on Arizona Immigration law to take effect tomorrow - dissent will not be tolerated:

Sheriff Joe Arpaio: I Will Jail Immigration Law Protesters (VIDEO)

So much for free speach in Arizona.

45 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:16:25am

re: #37 lawhawk

The same folks who yap loudly about how they’re all about personal rights and personal freedoms and overreaching governmental interference are busy calling for banning (burning) books. That’s the antithesis of personal freedom.

These kinds of people are hypocrites.

You got that right. So many people are quite passionate about freedom, as long as it’s the freedoms they select. Don’t tell me how to run my business, but I’ll tell you what to do in your bedroom. Don’t tell me what to do in my bedroom, but I’ll tell you how to run your business. Why did the concept of “stay out of my shit” become such a hard thing to grasp?

46 Shiplord Kirel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:17:43am

re: #43 RadicalModerate

Sheriff Joe weighs in on Arizona Immigration law to take effect tomorrow - dissent will not be tolerated:

Sheriff Joe Arpaio: I Will Jail Immigration Law Protesters (VIDEO)

Sheriff Joe is 78 years old iirc. Since we aren’t supposed to torture drug dealers or enslave “vagrants” any more, his school of law enforcement is obsolete and he should have retired 20 years ago.

47 RadicalModerate  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:17:48am

re: #42 avanti

She blocks police checking immigration status, and failing to carry immigration papers.

Any bets whether Arpaio will ignore this injunction just like he has ignored other injunctions directed toward him?

48 Eclectic Infidel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:17:50am

And speaking of gay bashing, here are a couple of posts from Pam’s House Blend:

“Kill the Gays” tour comes to America, sponsored by NOM

and

Elisabeth Hasselbeck the train wreck explains late life coming out for women: there are no men

49 avanti  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:18:24am

re: #41 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

On the other hand, my Mom was buying me Playboys from the time I turned 15. “You’re going to try and get these anyways, so lets skip the stealing and sneaking them into your room phase.”

My wife came screaming out of the bathroom one day saying: “You left your Playboy in the bathroom where your son could find it”
My 15 year old son starts to crack up since he knows he left it there. Short talk later, mom gets a explanation of 15 year old male hormones by me, and the kid is off the hook.

50 SpaceJesus  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:18:43am

glenn, if there’s a copy of the pocket constitution floating around in that closet you are stuck inside of, i’d recommend picking it up and giving it a look over

51 Four More Tears  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:19:06am

re: #45 cliffster

You got that right. So many people are quite passionate about freedom, as long as it’s the freedoms they select. Don’t tell me how to run my business, but I’ll tell you what to do in your bedroom. Don’t tell me what to do in my bedroom, but I’ll tell you how to run your business. Why did the concept of “stay out of my shit” become such a hard thing to grasp?

Not the same things, Cliff.

52 _RememberTonyC  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:19:18am

The Onion News Network on Glenn Beck

Onion Video
53 lawhawk  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:20:26am

Tuscon’s school district voted to not abide by the state law regarding the enforcement of immigration policy.

54 webevintage  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:22:15am

re: #41 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

On the other hand, my Mom was buying me Playboys from the time I turned 15. “You’re going to try and get these anyways, so lets skip the stealing and sneaking them into your room phase.”

Who needs Playboy when the internet is out there.
I just make sure I knock before I go in….

55 garhighway  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:22:21am

re: #45 cliffster

You got that right. So many people are quite passionate about freedom, as long as it’s the freedoms they select. Don’t tell me how to run my business, but I’ll tell you what to do in your bedroom. Don’t tell me what to do in my bedroom, but I’ll tell you how to run your business. Why did the concept of “stay out of my shit” become such a hard thing to grasp?

Is it OK if we (the state, the government) tell you that it is NOT OK to ban blacks from your lunchcounter?

56 Kragar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:23:01am

re: #54 webevintage

Who needs Playboy when the internet is out there.
I just make sure I knock before I go in…

Well that works now. Internet wasn’t much of an option in the mid 80s.

57 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:23:08am

re: #49 avanti

My parents were so repressive I resorted to stealing my dad’s Vanity Fair’s, because I knew there was exactly one naked breast shot in every magazine.

This led to me smelling like perfume samples and my mother thinking I was gay.

58 Eclectic Infidel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:23:23am

re: #43 RadicalModerate

Sheriff Joe weighs in on Arizona Immigration law to take effect tomorrow - dissent will not be tolerated:

Sheriff Joe Arpaio: I Will Jail Immigration Law Protesters (VIDEO)

So long as protesters don’t actually block access to the jail itself, or start fights with the police, there’s no cause for alarm. I say this because of this comment from the sheriff in the article, “Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio says that if protesters want to block his jail, he’ll put them in it.” And honestly, he’d be right to do so, but if all the protesters are doing is standing near the jail on a public sidewalk, constitutionally speaking, they’ve got a right to do that. Civility goes both ways.

59 NJDhockeyfan  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:23:26am

Banned books you read in high school

1. “The Catcher in the Rye”

Holden Caulfield isn’t exactly the kind of hero most teachers want their students looking up to, but J.D. Salinger’s work is considered a classic.

2. “Lord of the Flies”

No one wants to think about what would really happen if a group of adolescent boys ended up stranded on an island. High school freshmen find out anyway.

3. “Brave New World”

Aldous Huxley offered us a disturbing vision of the future. Luckily, we can now choose between reading this contentious novel and taking our soma.

4. “Invisible Man”

Concerned parents wanted to keep Ralph Ellison’s protagonist invisible, but this book remains a part of standard high school curriculum.

5. The Bible

In secular schools, the Bible is taught as literature, which removes the pesky theological concerns that rile people up. Some of them, at least.

6. “To Kill a Mockingbird”

Sure, some of the racial terminology is outdated, but as with “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn,” the book fosters understanding, not hatred.

7. “Ulysses”

Greatest novel of all time? Perhaps. Occasionally kind of smutty? No one ever said James Joyce was a saint.

8. “In Cold Blood”

Sex, violence, foul language. But remember, angry parents, Truman Capote’s book is a mostly factual account of a real-life murder case.

9. “The Grapes of Wrath”

Some have objected to John Steinbeck’s use of profanity, but you’d have a potty mouth, too, if you were forced to live like the Joads.

10. “As I Lay Dying”

This is the William Faulkner novel most frequently banned from high schools, probably because it’s the only one they can get teenagers to read.

11. “Catch-22”

If you’re nervous about reading “Catch-22” because it’s been banned, you’ll have to read it to find out why. Now that’s a catch - well, you know.

60 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:24:01am

re: #51 JasonA

Not the same things, Cliff.

Case in point. And it’s funny the reaction you get if you raise a stink about seat belt laws. “Oh, what a nutcase you are, like it’s really going to hurt you to be forced to wear a seatbelt.” Misses the point completely. It’s simply not anyone else’s prerogative to tell me I have to wear a seatbelt.

61 engineer cat  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:24:10am

Much Predicted Massacre Of Democrats Slightly Less Certain Today:

Nevada Senate - Angle vs. Reid Rasmussen Reports Reid 45, Angle 43 Reid +2

California Governor - Whitman vs. Brown PPP (D) Brown 46, Whitman 40 Brown +6

Illinois Senate - Giannoulias vs. Kirk Rasmussen Reports Kirk 41, Giannoulias 43 Giannoulias +2

62 cineaste  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:24:18am

Also worth noting is this passage in the article:

Then in a May 3 email, Sweet told staffers that they needed to “pull” Revolutionary Voices from library shelves. “How can we grab the books so they never, ever get back into ccirculation (sic),” Sweet wrote to BCLS staffers. “Copies need to totally disappear (as in not a good idea to send copies to the book sale).”

They are going beyond just not stocking the book. She’s saying here that they need to destroy the books, no? They can’t give them away, they can’t sell them and they must be removed permanently. Nice one, a librarian is advocating destroying books.

63 Four More Tears  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:25:19am

re: #60 cliffster

Case in point. And it’s funny the reaction you get if you raise a stink about seat belt laws. “Oh, what a nutcase you are, like it’s really going to hurt you to be forced to wear a seatbelt.” Misses the point completely. It’s simply not anyone else’s prerogative to tell me I have to wear a seatbelt.

Case in point? Nothing I do in my bedroom affects you. Your business can affect me, though, if you’re running an unsanitary eating establishment, for example.

64 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:25:20am

re: #59 NJDhockeyfan

People who think The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn or The Invisible Man are racist anger the hell out of me.

They have to do with race. They are not racist.

65 avanti  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:26:21am

re: #57 Obdicut

My parents were so repressive I resorted to stealing my dad’s Vanity Fair’s, because I knew there was exactly one naked breast shot in every magazine.

This led to me smelling like perfume samples and my mother thinking I was gay.

I know it’s a stereotype, but the biggest slut in my high school was the daughter of a minister. She was watched carefully by her parents, so she made good use of any unsupervised hour or less.

66 engineer cat  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:26:48am

the nazis burned schillerre: #59 NJDhockeyfan

Banned books you read in high school

and the nazis burned schiller

indeed, it seems only the most worthy productions of the human spirit get banned or burned

67 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:27:34am

re: #55 garhighway

Is it OK if we (the state, the government) tell you that it is NOT OK to ban blacks from your lunchcounter?

We could have this conversation all day, mr. highway (and Jason), and it would accomplish nothing. If what I do affects you, then yes there will have to be laws made. The point is, everyone seems to want to tell everyone else how to live.

68 Kragar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:28:06am

re: #64 Obdicut

People who think The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn or The Invisible Man are racist anger the hell out of me.

They have to do with race. They are not racist.

On the other hand, H.P. Lovecraft was a racist bastard. Good books though.

69 wrenchwench  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:28:49am

re: #53 lawhawk

Tuscon’s school district voted to not abide by the state law regarding the enforcement of immigration policy.

I think “not abide by” would not be an accurate description, since they are not a law enforcement organization. The article says

It reinforces that TUSD employees are not to enforce immigration laws, nor are they to investigate or report a student or parent’s immigration status.

and

What the policy does not address is law-enforcement presence on campus and the potential for students being questioned.

…so they are leaving out what law enforcement may do on campus.

70 simoom  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:29:25am

This seems to be fall-out from the Right’s (Beck, Breitbart, MassResistance, Jim Hoft) crusade against Kevin Jennings, Assistant Deputy Secretary for the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools at the U.S. Department of Education. This was one of the GLSEN BookLink reviewed titles that they focused their outrage on, so I’d imagine anyone who followed that RW media story closely would have practically had their eyes falling out of their head if they came across the book at their library (though I suppose a much more likely scenario is that they did searches for all the books in question).

71 jamesfirecat  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:29:30am

re: #45 cliffster

You got that right. So many people are quite passionate about freedom, as long as it’s the freedoms they select. Don’t tell me how to run my business, but I’ll tell you what to do in your bedroom. Don’t tell me what to do in my bedroom, but I’ll tell you how to run your business. Why did the concept of “stay out of my shit” become such a hard thing to grasp?

If your business sells me tainted meat, being able to preform in the bedroom will be the least of my worries.

Meanwhile I am eagerly attentive and waiting for you to come up with an example of how what I do in my bedroom can effect your business.

When I buy something from you business I have a right to be involved in knowing how it was made and what not on some level…

72 Shiplord Kirel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:30:34am

re: #41 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

On the other hand, my Mom was buying me Playboys from the time I turned 15. “You’re going to try and get these anyways, so lets skip the stealing and sneaking them into your room phase.”

Back at the time of the Columbine shootings, there were a number of reports about the bomb-making materials and unfinished bombs the shooters had in their rooms at home.
This led me to ask my mother if I could have concealed such an arsenal in my room when I was their age. She said, “Hah! You couldn’t even hide a stack of Playboy magazines.” And all that time, I thought my little brother had stolen them.

73 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:31:11am

re: #63 JasonA

Case in point? Nothing I do in my bedroom affects you. Your business can affect me, though, if you’re running an unsanitary eating establishment, for example.

This is actually good, because it takes the discussion from the standpoint of, “What is an acceptable thing for lawmakers to regulate?” As long as that’s the discussion point, and as long as we err on the side of less-regulation, then things are ok. The problem is the number of people who see it as, “how do I want things to be?” and want to pass laws accordingly.

74 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:31:11am

re: #67 cliffster

The point is, I believe, that telling someone what to do inside their house where it affects nobody else is very different from telling someone what to do— or, more, what not to do— when they’re running a public business. There is a reason the rules are different when it’s a business and not a home. It enters into the society at large, and the rules and responsibilities are obviously different.

But that’s a sideline to this discussion.

75 Gus  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:31:12am

The title alone is enough to send a wingnut into a frenzy: Revolutionary Voices: A Multicultural Queer Youth Anthology.

76 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:32:17am

re: #68 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

On the other hand, H.P. Lovecraft was a racist bastard. Good books though.

Well.. he was racist but he was also racist against white people. There’s that one story he wrote where he alleges the entire white race came about through interbreeding between African humans and savage white-furred apes. Forget which one it was.

He did have a cat named ‘N****-man’ as a child, which is kind of shocking when he uses that name in his stories.

77 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:32:57am

The Onion: “Are Reality Shows Setting Unrealistic Standards for Skanks?”

Youtube Video
78 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:33:21am

re: #73 cliffster

Now that I can completely agree with.

79 Stanley Sea  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:34:55am
A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the most controversial parts of Arizona’s immigration law from taking effect, delivering a last-minute victory to opponents of the crackdown.

The overall law will still take effect Thursday, but without the provisions that angered opponents — including sections that required officers to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other laws.

MSNBC Video
80 garhighway  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:36:59am

re: #60 cliffster

Case in point. And it’s funny the reaction you get if you raise a stink about seat belt laws. “Oh, what a nutcase you are, like it’s really going to hurt you to be forced to wear a seatbelt.” Misses the point completely. It’s simply not anyone else’s prerogative to tell me I have to wear a seatbelt.

That is an interesting example that deviates completely from your initial point. You started with “stay out of my business”. Well, there are lots of examples why that viewpoint is simply wrong: civil rights, workplace safety, consumer protection are just three areas where society as a whole has a powerful right to intervene in how you run your business. The Rand Paul property rights view of the universe has been disconnected from reality for a long time.

With seat belts you get to a much closer call, more like smoking, or engaging in other victimless but unsafe behaviors. Seat belt laws have probably saved tens of thousands of lives. I assume that you would agree that saving those lives was a good thing. Was it worth the infringement on the personal sovereignty of the involved individuals? I say yes, but I agree it is a much closer call.

81 jamesfirecat  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:38:02am

re: #80 garhighway

That is an interesting example that deviates completely from your initial point. You started with “stay out of my business”. Well, there are lots of examples why that viewpoint is simply wrong: civil rights, workplace safety, consumer protection are just three areas where society as a whole has a powerful right to intervene in how you run your business. The Rand Paul property rights view of the universe has been disconnected from reality for a long time.

With seat belts you get to a much closer call, more like smoking, or engaging in other victimless but unsafe behaviors. Seat belt laws have probably saved tens of thousands of lives. I assume that you would agree that saving those lives was a good thing. Was it worth the infringement on the personal sovereignty of the involved individuals? I say yes, but I agree it is a much closer call.

“More like smoking or engaging in other victimless but unsafe behaviors”

Everyone who has ever suffered because of second hand smoke would like to have a word with you….

82 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:39:24am

re: #80 garhighway

There are actually two parts to the seatbelt thing, too: Making car manufacturers install them, and making people use them. One is a regulation of a business, the other is a regulation of a personal behavior.

I am a lot more in favor of minimum safety standards for cars than I am forcing people to wear seatbelts. I think the same amount of money spent on enforcement of that law could have greater cultural effects culturally.

83 NJDhockeyfan  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:39:36am

Bummer…

More Than 1,300 Space Shuttle Workers Get Layoff Notices

More than 1,300 space shuttle workers received layoff notices this week from United Space Alliance, a NASA contractor that is cutting 15 percent of its 8,100-person workforce ahead of the shuttle fleet’s retirement next year.

Layoff notices were issued to 1,394 USA employees in all, company spokesperson Kari Fluegel told SPACE.com. The layoffs take effect Oct. 1 and were announced earlier this month by USA officials.

“Our workforce has known for several years that the Space Shuttle Program has been scheduled to end, but layoffs are always difficult for everyone involved,” said Virginia Barnes, USA president and chief executive, said in a July 6 statement. “We are committed to making this transition as smooth as possible.”

84 garhighway  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:40:28am

re: #81 jamesfirecat

“More like smoking or engaging in other victimless but unsafe behaviors”

Everyone who has ever suffered because of second hand smoke would like to have a word with you…

I agree. I left unsaid “in your home by yourself”. I entirely agree that smoking bans like NYC’s (which had as their premise that it was unsafe to workers in restaurants and bars to be exposed to a roomful of second-hand some for hours on end) are entirely appropriate.re: #82 Obdicut

There are actually two parts to the seatbelt thing, too: Making car manufacturers install them, and making people use them. One is a regulation of a business, the other is a regulation of a personal behavior.

I am a lot more in favor of minimum safety standards for cars than I am forcing people to wear seatbelts. I think the same amount of money spent on enforcement of that law could have greater cultural effects culturally.

Agreed. The first part is a layup. The second is the tougher call.

85 Eclectic Infidel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:42:09am

OT: are there any professional chefs on LGF? Does anyone know any professional chefs I could email and talk to about their career? I’m close to 100% certainty that I want to pursue a career in this field but I’d like to talk with as many professionals as possible first. Feel free to answer here or email.

email for public consumption: discernible.chaos@gmail.com

86 abbynorm  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:44:31am

>


Now that I’m edging closer to parenthood, I keep thinking things like, “Would they really put me in jail if I let my teenager drink? I mean, for fuck’s sake, I want him or her to learn it with me, not at some backwoods beer blast, or at some frat party.”

If this is the future of parent hood remind me not to have kids.

87 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:44:42am

re: #80 garhighway

With seat belts you get to a much closer call, more like smoking, or engaging in other victimless but unsafe behaviors. Seat belt laws have probably saved tens of thousands of lives. I assume that you would agree that saving those lives was a good thing. Was it worth the infringement on the personal sovereignty of the involved individuals? I say yes, but I agree it is a much closer call.

I just can’t understand you saying that. I’m sure you are very passionate about people not being told who to have sex with and how to have it. How can you justify your position that it’s ok to tell someone they have to wear a seatbelt? It just doesn’t make sense. And that’s what I mean - you are all about freedom, as long as it’s the freedoms that you want people to have. If you really think about it, you’ll see how hypocritical that position is.

Think about this - if you’re talking about the safety of the person upon whose personal sovereignty you are infringing, then I can talk about the safety of the person having sex. Multiple partners can expose you to STD’s that can harm or even kill you. There are plenty of arguments to be made from a health standpoint. Why is that not a good reason for regulators to tell you how to live your life in your bedroom? Because it’s not anyone’s prerogative, that’s why. It’s my life, my bedroom, stay out. That’s the way all these things should be approached.

88 darthstar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:45:51am

re: #61 engineer dog

Much Predicted Massacre Of Democrats Slightly Less Certain Today:

Nevada Senate - Angle vs. Reid Rasmussen Reports Reid 45, Angle 43 Reid +2

California Governor - Whitman vs. Brown PPP (D) Brown 46, Whitman 40 Brown +6

Illinois Senate - Giannoulias vs. Kirk Rasmussen Reports Kirk 41, Giannoulias 43 Giannoulias +2

And with an actual “Tea Party” Candidate listed on the ballot in Michigan, Bart Stupak’s seat isn’t a guaranteed win for the GOP any more…and boy are they pissed off about it.

89 NJDhockeyfan  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:46:13am

re: #85 eclectic infidel

OT: are there any professional chefs on LGF? Does anyone know any professional chefs I could email and talk to about their career? I’m close to 100% certainty that I want to pursue a career in this field but I’d like to talk with as many professionals as possible first. Feel free to answer here or email.

email for public consumption: discernible.chaos@gmail.com

I cooked for 14 years. I found it to be a fun job at first then it became a dead end job after a while. Making money in the restaurant business comes from opening your own restaurant, everything else is just small potatoes IMO. If you do want to do it have a great time. You will learn a lot.

90 Four More Tears  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:47:53am

re: #87 cliffster

You’re free to drive without a seatbelt. If you’re doing it on private property. Once you pull your car onto our public streets things change.

91 jamesfirecat  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:48:23am

re: #87 cliffster

I just can’t understand you saying that. I’m sure you are very passionate about people not being told who to have sex with and how to have it. How can you justify your position that it’s ok to tell someone they have to wear a seatbelt? It just doesn’t make sense. And that’s what I mean - you are all about freedom, as long as it’s the freedoms that you want people to have. If you really think about it, you’ll see how hypocritical that position is.

Think about this - if you’re talking about the safety of the person upon whose personal sovereignty you are infringing, then I can talk about the safety of the person having sex. Multiple partners can expose you to STD’s that can harm or even kill you. There are plenty of arguments to be made from a health standpoint. Why is that not a good reason for regulators to tell you how to live your life in your bedroom? Because it’s not anyone’s prerogative, that’s why. It’s my life, my bedroom, stay out. That’s the way all these things should be approached.

By your logic we should also do away with speed limits shouldn’t we?

Also, what if there’s been a study done to show its more dangerous for the other person in a collision if they wind up having a collision with someone who wasn’t wearing a seatbelt?

That may sound far fetched at first, but think about if its a head on collision and they’re not wearing a seatbelt, aren’t the they’ll go flying right through their windsheild, and then possibly right through yours as well and slam into you like a human cannon ball?

92 webevintage  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:48:57am

re: #85 eclectic infidel

OT: are there any professional chefs on LGF? Does anyone know any professional chefs I could email and talk to about their career? I’m close to 100% certainty that I want to pursue a career in this field but I’d like to talk with as many professionals as possible first. Feel free to answer here or email.

email for public consumption: discernible.chaos@gmail.com

Have you worked in a restaurant before? I know it sounds like a stupid question, but people think they want to be a chef or run a restaurant, but they have never actually worked in the food business and then once they do they realize that while they like cooking they hate taking care of the public or cannot deal with the pressure.

93 Renaissance_Man  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:49:20am

re: #57 Obdicut

My parents were so repressive I resorted to stealing my dad’s Vanity Fair’s, because I knew there was exactly one naked breast shot in every magazine.

This led to me smelling like perfume samples and my mother thinking I was gay.

When I was in uni, I would come home every few months or so. On one of these occasions, I was looking for something in my old room, which was now my brother’s room, while he happened to be out of the house. I reached under the bed, and grabbed a large stack of magazines. The natural thought, of course, was ‘large stack of magazines under the bed, 18 year old boy - well, well’. So, naturally, I pulled them out, and lo and behold…

Vogue. Family Circle. Better Homes and Gardens. Interior Designer.

My brother swears he’s not gay. Just very, very, well dressed.

94 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:50:43am

Seat belts? We’re arguing about seat belt laws?

This is what happens when I go out for beer.

95 Shiplord Kirel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:51:10am

re: #79 Stanley Sea

A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the most controversial parts of Arizona’s immigration law from taking effect, delivering a last-minute victory to opponents of the crackdown.[Link: www.msnbc.msn.com…]

Wingnut heads explode!

-“Are you angry enough yet, America?”

“Mexico won.”

“Screw the feds.”

“Americans won’t be pissed enough until one of the Al Qaeda operatives that has crossed into our country via Arizona blows up a mall or a city. Meanwhile, the Ruling Class has the best protection our tax dollars can buy. It is We The People that will suffer the consequences of these Liberal Traitors. Then, the feces will fly.”

“Revolution is the solution!!!!”

“Der Fuhrer wins abother (sic) one… and America takes another one in the a##.”

“Lawlessness and Apostasy
running AMOK!
Illegal Immigration and Homosexuality!
Yahusha’ spoke of the ‘increase of lawlessness’ (Matthew 24:12). And Paul wrote about the man of lawlessness and the secret power of lawlessness. Lawlessness may be defined as an action or way of life ‘not regulated by or based on law.’

Remember, this is one of the more moderate rightwing sites.

96 Four More Tears  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:52:30am

re: #95 Shiplord Kirel

Remember, this is one of the more moderate rightwing sites.

I would not call FR a moderate site.

97 Jerk  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:52:45am

This is actually the library system where I live. They were pretty innovative at one point, but this is just ridiculous. I am really ashamed that they would bow to such pressure.

98 Eclectic Infidel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:53:15am

re: #92 webevintage

Have you worked in a restaurant before? I know it sounds like a stupid question, but people think they want to be a chef or run a restaurant, but they have never actually worked in the food business and then once they do they realize that while they like cooking they hate taking care of the public or cannot deal with the pressure.

I’ve worked in a restaurant before, and I actually like dealing with the public. I’m decent under pressure and honestly I’m not sure I’d want to manage my own business anytime soon. That said, I want to explore the possibilities regarding workplace environments - ones not limited to restaurants. I’m willing to be versatile here. I’m also not expecting this to be an easy road at first but if it’s one thing I know, I am passionate about food and cuisine. Thank you for the input.

99 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:54:12am

re: #87 cliffster

I agree with you here. Seatbelt laws may save lives. So would even more restrictive security and safety measures, or even lower speeds. So would requiring Breathalyzer locks on every car ever made. I’m actually most in favor of the latter.

To me, seatbelt laws are an attempt to change a culture through a law. I am in favor of saving people’s lives, but if we really wanted to do that, we’d ban cars. This is a murky middle.

100 webevintage  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:54:31am

WTH?
online.wsj.com

Rather than being a unifier, Mr. Obama has divided America on the basis of race, class and partisanship. Moreover, his cynical approach to governance has encouraged his allies to pursue a similar strategy of racially divisive politics on his behalf.

It is Obama’s fault that the country still has a race issue and the GOP wants to win at any cost? I guess these guys did not get the memo that things were going to be hard and that no, there is no pony involved.

(and yes I do think that the administration has made a few mistakes, but that does not mean the President is “divisive”.)

101 Shiplord Kirel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:54:32am

re: #96 JasonA

I would not call FR a moderate site.

Among rightwing sites, it is. Don’t believe it? Check out Hot Air or some of the others.

102 Four More Tears  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:54:40am

heehee

Image: mosquemap.gif

yglesias.thinkprogress.org

103 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:55:47am

re: #91 jamesfirecat

By your logic we should also do away with speed limits shouldn’t we?

Also, what if there’s been a study done to show its more dangerous for the other person in a collision if they wind up having a collision with someone who wasn’t wearing a seatbelt?

That may sound far fetched at first, but think about if its a head on collision and they’re not wearing a seatbelt, aren’t the they’ll go flying right through their windsheild, and then possibly right through yours as well and slam into you like a human cannon ball?

Er, no, doing away with speed limits is not a reasonable conclusion to draw from what I said. Like lawhawk said earlier, it’s all about control. And in that example you give, it’s funny to watch you try to justify that control.

104 webevintage  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:56:34am

re: #98 eclectic infidel

I’ve worked in a restaurant before, and I actually like dealing with the public. I’m decent under pressure and honestly I’m not sure I’d want to manage my own business anytime soon. That said, I want to explore the possibilities regarding workplace environments - ones not limited to restaurants. I’m willing to be versatile here. I’m also not expecting this to be an easy road at first but if it’s one thing I know, I am passionate about food and cuisine. Thank you for the input.

Well then good luck!
I’m not a chef so I can’t help there, but I do wish you well.

105 garhighway  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:56:45am

re: #87 cliffster

I just can’t understand you saying that. I’m sure you are very passionate about people not being told who to have sex with and how to have it. How can you justify your position that it’s ok to tell someone they have to wear a seatbelt? It just doesn’t make sense. And that’s what I mean - you are all about freedom, as long as it’s the freedoms that you want people to have. If you really think about it, you’ll see how hypocritical that position is.

Think about this - if you’re talking about the safety of the person upon whose personal sovereignty you are infringing, then I can talk about the safety of the person having sex. Multiple partners can expose you to STD’s that can harm or even kill you. There are plenty of arguments to be made from a health standpoint. Why is that not a good reason for regulators to tell you how to live your life in your bedroom? Because it’s not anyone’s prerogative, that’s why. It’s my life, my bedroom, stay out. That’s the way all these things should be approached.

The ethical argument in favor of seat belt laws is that the costs of that unsafe behavior are passed along to the greater society via health care and auto insurance costs, and that gives the larger society a right to intervene. More simply put, that isn’t a purely victimless behavior because we have to pay for its consequences.

How you behave when you drive a car is also a more generally regulated behavior: you need a license, you occupy public roads and have to operate the vehicle in accordance with various standards. Compare that with bedroom behavior and you get a meaningful distinction, I think.

But I agree that it is a close call.

106 Four More Tears  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:56:53am

re: #101 Shiplord Kirel

Among rightwing sites, it is. Don’t believe it? Check out Hot Air or some of the others.

Every phrase I can come up with to respond to that (ex: I guess I just don’t follow them that closely) sounds much more insulting to you than it’s meant to be…

107 wrenchwench  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:57:07am

re: #100 webevintage

WTH?
[Link: online.wsj.com…]

It is Obama’s fault that the country still has a race issue and the GOP wants to win at any cost? I guess these guys did not get the memo that things were going to be hard and that no, there is no pony involved.

(and yes I do think that the administration has made a few mistakes, but that does not mean the President is “divisive”.)

To be fair, apparently the two authors of that opinion piece are required to share a heart:

We say this with a heavy heart.

So they’re bound to be somewhat pessimistic, I’d say.

108 jamesfirecat  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:58:36am

re: #103 cliffster

Er, no, doing away with speed limits is not a reasonable conclusion to draw from what I said. Like lawhawk said earlier, it’s all about control. And in that example you give, it’s funny to watch you try to justify that control.

How likely does a behavior have to be to harm others before its okay for the government to step in and regulate it?

109 garhighway  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:58:37am

re: #107 wrenchwench

So they’re bound to be somewhat pessimistic, I’d say.

Conjoined twins?

110 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:58:49am

re: #105 garhighway

The ethical argument in favor of seat belt laws is that the costs of that unsafe behavior are passed along to the greater society via health care and auto insurance costs, and that gives the larger society a right to intervene.

Which could also be applied to the spread of STDs, as in Cliffster’s example.

111 NJDhockeyfan  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:59:18am

re: #98 eclectic infidel

I’ve worked in a restaurant before, and I actually like dealing with the public. I’m decent under pressure and honestly I’m not sure I’d want to manage my own business anytime soon. That said, I want to explore the possibilities regarding workplace environments - ones not limited to restaurants. I’m willing to be versatile here. I’m also not expecting this to be an easy road at first but if it’s one thing I know, I am passionate about food and cuisine. Thank you for the input.

I made it up to Sous Chef & Kitchen manager before changing my work to sales. If you stay in the restaurant business you can have a great time. It is hard work and lots of hours but fun. Good luck!

112 Shiplord Kirel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:59:35am

re: #106 JasonA

Every phrase I can come up with to respond to that (ex: I guess I just don’t follow them that closely) sounds much more insulting to you than it’s meant to be…

I didn’t say it was a moderate site, Jason. Context matters.

113 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 10:59:44am

re: #108 jamesfirecat

How likely does a behavior have to be to harm others before its okay for the government to step in and regulate it?

That is a very good question.

114 garhighway  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:00:46am

re: #110 Obdicut

Which could also be applied to the spread of STDs, as in Cliffster’s example.

Yep. Or motorcycle helmets, or eating too much beef. Drawing these lines is hard, and there is an element of “you know it when you see it” there. The more doctrinaire you get, the more absurd your outcomes will be.

115 NJDhockeyfan  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:00:56am

Gaza lingerie shops eyed by Hamas police


GAZA CITY, Palestinian Territories — Hamas on Wednesday announced new regulations on shops selling women’s clothes as part of a campaign to safeguard “public morality” in its Gaza enclave.

The police said shops selling women’s clothes must not have dressing rooms or tinted windows, and that the mannequins on display out front must be modestly dressed.

“It is absolutely forbidden to place any photographic device inside the shop and it is forbidden to display revealing clothes in front of the shop,” a statement said.

The edict came nearly two weeks after Hamas banned women from smoking water pipes in public places and is the latest step taken by the Islamist movement to crack down on the mingling of the sexes in the conservative territory.

116 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:00:57am

re: #108 jamesfirecat

How likely does a behavior have to be to harm others before its okay for the government to step in and regulate it?

What units are used in measuring likeliness to harm others??

Like I said, as long as that’s the thought process for regulators, then things are ok. But, unfortunately, that’s really not the thought process.

117 Sinistershade  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:02:20am

re: #87 cliffster

I just can’t understand you saying that. I’m sure you are very passionate about people not being told who to have sex with and how to have it. How can you justify your position that it’s ok to tell someone they have to wear a seatbelt? It just doesn’t make sense. And that’s what I mean - you are all about freedom, as long as it’s the freedoms that you want people to have. If you really think about it, you’ll see how hypocritical that position is.

If we can group the laws requiring the wearing of seat belts with those requiring motorcyclists to wear helmets, I believe the argument was that we, as a society, have decided to require hospitals to provide emergency care to everyone, regardless of ability to pay, so there is a societal interest in reducing the severity of traffic-related injuries to reduce the burden of health care costs. I’m not entirely certain I buy the argument, as I’m not sure where that line of reasoning stops. (Requiring motorists in automobiles to wear helmets? Foam rubber safety suits?) In any case, I believe the argument referred, at least, to a societal interest, rather than just to a desire to control personal behavior.

118 engineer cat  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:03:27am

re: #88 darthstar

And with an actual “Tea Party” Candidate listed on the ballot in Michigan, Bart Stupak’s seat isn’t a guaranteed win for the GOP any more…and boy are they pissed off about it.

as nearly as i can make out, the overall effect of the bag party so far has been to improve the climate for democrats

bwahahahaha…

119 Four More Tears  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:03:55am

re: #112 Shiplord Kirel

I didn’t say it was a moderate site, Jason. Context matters.

I know you said it was a moderate right-wing site, and I was responding to that. I just remember when Tiller was murdered and all the non-stop venom that poured out of there about him. Honestly, every time I’ve popped in there the comments seemed worse to me than what I’ve seen at Hot Air.

120 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:04:44am

re: #114 garhighway

Yep. Or motorcycle helmets, or eating too much beef. Drawing these lines is hard, and there is an element of “you know it when you see it” there. The more doctrinaire you get, the more absurd your outcomes will be.

Agreed. I mean, hell, motorcycles on their own are fundamentally unsafe.

I don’t think that seatbelt laws are a good idea, but I’m not going to waste any time protesting their existence, either. I do think that a ban on books having to do with teen sexuality is a lot more harmful to freedom than a seatbelt law— to me, banning books is a very, very clear area of what we do not do, and seatbelts are a murky intersection of public and private rights.

121 Stanley Sea  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:05:24am

re: #102 JasonA

heehee

Image: mosquemap.gif

[Link: yglesias.thinkprogress.org…]

My favorite part:

…we should say no mosques south of 14th Street since, after all, the good people of Greenwich Village, SoHo, etc. are well-known fans of Gingrich, Palin, and their brand of xenophobic militarism….

122 Sinistershade  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:05:49am

re: #105 garhighway

You’re much faster than I am. :-)

123 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:05:51am

re: #119 JasonA

It’s just got more creationists, but they try to be less racist.

124 jamesfirecat  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:06:02am

|re: #118 engineer dog

as nearly as i can make out, the overall effect of the bag party so far has been to improve the climate for democrats

bwahahahaha…

PLANTS!!

THEY’RE ALL DEMOCRATIC PLANTS!

THEY’RE COMING FOR YOU NEXT!

125 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:06:46am

I’m a proud member of the Airbag Nation, and I wear my seat belt because I want to.

Always wore a helmet when I was an active biker, too. Even in states that didn’t require it.

As the old Burma-Shave ad said:

Don’t lose your head
To gain a minute.
You need your head -
Your brains are in it.

126 Kronocide  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:08:40am

re: #125 Cato the Elder


Don’t lose your head
To gain a minute.
You need your head -
Your brains are barely fit in it.

FIFY!

127 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:09:12am

It’s not about “defending the Constitution”, it’s about “defending our idea of what the Constitution should be”.

theonion.com

128 lawhawk  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:09:16am

re: #117 Sinistershade

Well, if you’re talking about seat belts, how about 4 or 5 or 5.2 point harnesses rather than 3 point harnesses. It used to be that you only had lap belts, but those proved to be not sufficient to protect passengers in crashes and 3 point harnesses were mandated. The 3 point harness still has dangerous deficiencies when compared to 5 point harnesses, but it’s a tradeoff between comfort and getting people to use the belts.

129 Shiplord Kirel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:09:16am

re: #119 JasonA

I know you said it was a moderate right-wing site, and I was responding to that. I just remember when Tiller was murdered and all the non-stop venom that poured out of there about him. Honestly, every time I’ve popped in there the comments seemed worse to me than what I’ve seen at Hot Air.

It was an ironic comment about the miserable state of the rightwing net these days. Prohibiting racial slurs and (most) open calls for mass murder would qualify as moderate in that context these days.

130 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:09:52am

re: #120 Obdicut

Agreed. I mean, hell, motorcycles on their own are fundamentally unsafe.

Oh, bite me with that. I have 90,000+ accident free miles under my belt, mostly at speeds well in excess of whatever the posted limit was.

131 engineer cat  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:10:12am

re: #125 Cato the Elder



You need your head -
Your brains are in it.

true, despite the fact that there are many days when i feel that my brains are in my ass

132 avanti  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:10:16am

Gun dealer offers discount for Az. residents, the closer to the Mexican border, the bigger the discount on guns and ammo. Is the game hunting better near the border ?/

Patriot discount.

133 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:10:35am

re: #29 wrenchwench

I thought you find out which were the interesting books by finding out what adults don’t want you to read. You provided no guidance!

/

Devious planning, eh?

134 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:11:27am

re: #120 Obdicut

Agreed. I mean, hell, motorcycles on their own are fundamentally unsafe.

I don’t think that seatbelt laws are a good idea, but I’m not going to waste any time protesting their existence, either. I do think that a ban on books having to do with teen sexuality is a lot more harmful to freedom than a seatbelt law— to me, banning books is a very, very clear area of what we do not do, and seatbelts are a murky intersection of public and private rights.

If you want to further muddy the philosophical waters, motorcycles may be inherently unsafe, but…

A. They become less unsafe the smaller the other vehicles on the road. I.e., the less cars there are around, the safer motorcycles are.
B. They are the source of the majority of organ donations in the US, as motorcycle accidents tend often to be traumatic brain injuries with no hope of recovery, leaving other organs intact. Think of the kids!
C. Motorcycles are extremely fuel efficient, relative to cars.

135 jamesfirecat  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:11:28am

re: #130 Cato the Elder

Oh, bite me with that. I have 90,000+ accident free miles under my belt, mostly at speeds well in excess of whatever the posted limit was.

I think he means fundamentally unsafe in the sense of not that if you drive one you’re destined to have an accident, but if you do have an accident, odds are you’re in a much worse situation than if you had that same accident in a car….

136 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:12:22am

re: #130 Cato the Elder

Oh, bite me with that. I have 90,000+ accident free miles under my belt, mostly at speeds well in excess of whatever the posted limit was.

Nah, Cato, I’ll pass up on biting you. Motorcycles are fundamentally unsafe in our system because of cars, not because of motorcycles.

If we had separate roads for motorcycles, they’d be safer than cars. But we don’t, and we can’t.

137 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:12:47am

re: #130 Cato the Elder

Oh, bite me with that. I have 90,000+ accident free miles under my belt, mostly at speeds well in excess of whatever the posted limit was.

They are still incredibly unsafe. Your own skill as rider has less to do with it than the fact that there are retarded people everywhere driving cars.

138 wrenchwench  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:12:54am

re: #132 avanti

Gun dealer offers discount for Az. residents, the closer to the Mexican border, the bigger the discount on guns and ammo. Is the game hunting better near the border ?/

Patriot discount.

Considering the amount of guns and ammo that get smuggled into Mexico, I’d have to say that’s in poor taste at best.

139 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:13:31am

re: #134 Fozzie Bear

Yep. If we could switch everyone over to motorcycles, we’d all be safer and using less fuel, and the streets would be much less congested. We could have the motorcycle roads and the truck roads and that’s it.

Full disclosure: I can’t drive a car, and I don’t like ‘me. I did ride a motorcycle and I loved it.

140 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:13:38am

Wingnuts are outraged…
Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law

141 Sinistershade  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:14:02am

re: #128 lawhawk

Well, if you’re talking about seat belts, how about 4 or 5 or 5.2 point harnesses rather than 3 point harnesses. It used to be that you only had lap belts, but those proved to be not sufficient to protect passengers in crashes and 3 point harnesses were mandated. The 3 point harness still has dangerous deficiencies when compared to 5 point harnesses, but it’s a tradeoff between comfort and getting people to use the belts.

As I suggested, there’s a fundamental problem in the reasoning, as the same line can lead to absurdities in the name of safety. As you suggest, any attempt to legislate behavior has to be balanced by a reasonable understanding of how much hassle people are willing to put up with.

142 sattv4u2  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:15:13am

re: #120 Obdicut

I mean, hell, SOME motorcycles DRIVERS on their own are fundamentally unsafe.

just as some car drivers,,,bike riders ,,, skateboarders,,, rollerbladers

ggeezzz!!

143 sattv4u2  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:15:40am

re: #120 Obdicut

re: #142 sattv4u2

I mean, hell, SOME motorcycles DRIVERS on their own are fundamentally unsafe.

just as some car drivers,,,bike riders ,,, skateboarders,,, rollerbladers

ggeezzz!!

FTFT, BTW

144 sattv4u2  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:16:04am

re: #143 sattv4u2

re: #142 sattv4u2

FTFTY, BTW

PIMF

145 wrenchwench  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:16:27am

re: #136 Obdicut

If we had separate roads for motorcycles, they’d be safer than cars. But we don’t, and we can’t.

I don’t know whether you’ve thought that through, but it’s the opposite of true for bicycles, because everyone is trying to get to the same places, so the systems need to intersect. That’s where they become more dangerous.

Everyone needs to operate in the same system by the same rules for maximum safety.

146 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:16:40am

re: #138 wrenchwench

Considering the amount of guns and ammo that get smuggled into Mexico, I’d have to say that’s in poor taste at best.

A serious irony deficiency at best, a dangerous delusion at worst.

147 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:16:57am

I fully support people who don’t want helmet laws for motorcycles.

People need kidneys, livers, lungs, and other organs. Motorcyclists provide the vast majority of organ donations. Thus, I fully support people in their decisions to kill themselves in such a way. It helps other people.

148 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:17:41am

re: #145 wrenchwench

Meh, it’s an impossibility anyway, just a pipe dream. All I mean is that motorcycles are made unsafe by cars. Motorcycles on their own, not taking into account collisions with cars, are safer— though have higher mortality when you do have an accident.

It’s a very, very, very moot point.

149 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:18:03am

My grandfather, rest in peace, found me reading “The Lord of the Rings” when I was on vacation in Michigan with the old folks. I guess I was around twelve at the time.

I was reading the old Ballantine paperbacks from the sixties with the psychedelic covers that made one picture if you put them side-by-side. That raised his suspicions, so he did a quick browse through whatever volume I was on at the time and then peered over his glasses at me and asked, “Do your parents check up on what you’re reading?”

LOL. The very thought was so new to me that I believe my first response was to laugh. Then I became indignant at the idea.

150 garhighway  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:18:22am

re: #128 lawhawk

Well, if you’re talking about seat belts, how about 4 or 5 or 5.2 point harnesses rather than 3 point harnesses. It used to be that you only had lap belts, but those proved to be not sufficient to protect passengers in crashes and 3 point harnesses were mandated. The 3 point harness still has dangerous deficiencies when compared to 5 point harnesses, but it’s a tradeoff between comfort and getting people to use the belts.

The combination of air bags and three point harnesses works well. Nothing’s perfect, but modern cars are pretty damn safe.

151 lawhawk  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:19:20am

Newt Gingrich’s mosque no-go zone in NYC.

80 blocks from Ground Zero? Considering that several mosques already in existence are within that zone, what then Newt? Ignore reality? Ignore that the mosque that is proposing this project is located within the 80 block “exclusion zone”?

Sheesh.

152 garhighway  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:19:51am

re: #151 lawhawk

Newt Gingrich’s mosque no-go zone in NYC.

80 blocks from Ground Zero? Considering that several mosques already in existence are within that zone, what then Newt? Ignore reality? Ignore that the mosque that is proposing this project is located within the 80 block “exclusion zone”?

Sheesh.

Bigotry run amok.

153 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:20:21am

I don’t know about seat belts, really, but I’m all for regulating the shit out of baseball bats and crowbars.

They can be bought by anyone, anytime, and nobody knows what people may end up doing with ‘em.

154 garhighway  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:20:50am

re: #153 Cato the Elder

I don’t know about seat belts, really, but I’m all for regulating the shit out of baseball bats and crowbars.

They can be bought by anyone, anytime, and nobody knows what people may end up doing with ‘em.

And 7 irons.

155 sattv4u2  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:21:15am

re: #153 Cato the Elder

I don’t know about seat belts, really, but I’m all for regulating the shit out of baseball bats and crowbars.

They can be bought by anyone, anytime, and nobody knows what people may end up doing with ‘em.


The way the Orioles play, I don’t blame you!
/

156 NJDhockeyfan  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:21:23am

House Republicans Giving Green Light for Israeli Strike on Iran

Nearly one third of the Republican congressmen in the U.S. House of Representatives have introduced a resolution that would support Israel’s right to use “all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by Iran”, including military force.

The resolution was introduced by Rep. Louie Gohmert [R-Texas] and 46 co-sponsors.

House Resolution 1553 “condemns the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran for its threats of ‘annihilating’ the United States and the State of Israel, for its continued support of international terrorism, and for its incitement of genocide of the Israeli people.”

It “supports using all means of persuading the Government of Iran to stop building and acquiring nuclear weapons” and pledges that the U.S. will ensure that Israel “continues to receive critical economic and military assistance, including missile defense capabilities, needed to address the threat of Iran.”

In addition, it “expresses support for Israel’s right to use all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by Iran, defend Israeli sovereignty, and protect the lives and safety of the Israeli people, including the use of military force if no other peaceful solution can be found within a reasonable time.”

157 Feline Fearless Leader  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:21:29am

re: #139 Obdicut

Yep. If we could switch everyone over to motorcycles, we’d all be safer and using less fuel, and the streets would be much less congested. We could have the motorcycle roads and the truck roads and that’s it.

Full disclosure: I can’t drive a car, and I don’t like ‘me. I did ride a motorcycle and I loved it.

I’d like to see the bike lanes in Philly be enforced better, or better yet potentially protected by barriers where reasonable. One reason I avoid biking in certain areas is that even though the bike lanes are marked clearly the cars pay them little or no heed.

And when someone parks and blocks one you get interesting effects like bicycles suddenly appearing coming towards you in your lane of automobile traffic… (Though I saw the parked car and had slowed down anticipating something possibly happening. I even got a “thank you” wave from the cyclist as they swerved back into their lane.)

The inherent danger with vehicle collisions is discrepancy of size combined with people simply being idiots and/or oblivious. We’re a nation of poor drivers and many of us think we’re better than average drivers when we’re really not and have simply been lucky.

158 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:21:56am

re: #154 garhighway

It’s 3-irons you’ve got to watch out for.

imdb.com

159 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:22:02am

re: #151 lawhawk

Newt Gingrich’s mosque no-go zone in NYC.

80 blocks from Ground Zero? Considering that several mosques already in existence are within that zone, what then Newt? Ignore reality? Ignore that the mosque that is proposing this project is located within the 80 block “exclusion zone”?

Sheesh.

I wish Newt would exclude himself from politics. The man has never expressed a single intellectually honest policy position in his entire fucking career. The man exists to triangulate, massage opinions, and ride the tides. The man couldn’t lead if his life depended on it, but he sure can work people’s fears.

160 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:22:31am

re: #9 avanti

No porn pictures, but it’s directed at dangerous groups/

“Revolutionary Voices: A Multicultural Queer Youth Anthology, edited by Amy Sonnie (ISBN 1555835589), is an anthology created by and for radical queer youth, committed specifically to youth of color, young women, trans gender and bisexual youth, (dis)abled youth, and poor/working class youth.

So it might be so loaded down with its own sense of urgency and mission that it is unbearable…for me.

But I’m not the target audience, so who cares? I don’t read Georgette Heyer either.

161 sattv4u2  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:22:39am

re: #154 garhighway

And 7 irons.

hey know

I hit an absolutely spectacular 7 iron on the 14th hole this morning!

162 Feline Fearless Leader  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:22:49am

re: #152 garhighway

Bigotry Pandering run amok.

FTFY. For Newt pandering > bigotry. I suspect that if he thought the votes were there he’d make statements about banning invisible pink unicorns.

163 Feline Fearless Leader  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:23:29am

re: #158 Obdicut

It’s 3-irons you’ve got to watch out for.

[Link: www.imdb.com…]

But everyone is safe from the 1-irons… ;)

164 lawhawk  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:23:42am

re: #140 Killgore Trout

Here’s one thing that I think it troublesome. The judge argues that the enactment of the law would be burdensome on legal immigrants because they’d be required to show papers attesting to their lawful status.

That is one argument I don’t buy. After all, if you’re driving in a vehicle, you’re required to maintain and present ID if you’ve been stopped for a vehicle traffic violation.

Maybe if the person is being stopped on the street, then the judge might have a point, but people generally carry ID with them wherever they go since they’re often required to show ID to enter office buildings, etc.

I just don’t know how much of a burden carrying the ID would have been.

The judge here thinks it was significant enough to require a temporary injunction until the courts could suss this out.

165 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:23:48am

re: #159 Fozzie Bear

I wish Newt would exclude himself from politics. The man has never expressed a single intellectually honest policy position in his entire fucking career. The man exists to triangulate, massage opinions, and ride the tides. The man couldn’t lead if his life depended on it, but he sure can work people’s fears.

Nope, can’t lead shit. That whole balanced-budget thing that happened when he was leading the House.. terrible.

166 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:23:49am

re: #156 NJDhockeyfan

Wow. The minority party wants to start setting foreign policy agendas now?

That’s bold, to put it mildly. Incredibly stupid too.

167 simoom  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:24:03am

re: #95 Shiplord Kirel

Wingnut heads explode!

Remember, this is one of the more moderate rightwing sites.

If you really want to see heads explode take a look at the highest rated comments to this recent WaPo article about how under President Obama’s administration enforcement of immigration law is way up, with record numbers of deportations (in both 2009 and so far in 2010) and audits of companies that hire illegal immigrants. The facts caused enough cognitive dissonance to right-wing narratives that many commentors seem to feel they can’t possibly be true:

washingtonpost.com

Puhleeze. Lies, all. I hope he doesn’t expect ANY of us to believe this drivel. Action, not words please. Thanks. You can start here in Manassas Park where many houses already ‘enjoy’ 10-15 of them PER house. The one right next to mine included. Tell them I said thanks for the roaches when you come for them. I’ll be holding my breath…

—-

Yeah, sure. The WaPo is in the tank for President Dither and has no credibility. How abuut cutting off federal funds for “sanctuary cities” and suing them instead of the good people of Arizona? Get real. Nobody believes ths slanted false article except the hate-America crowd lke Obama, Eric Holder and the MSM.I was a Democrat for many years; no more.

—-

Did someone at Journolist send out a bat signal to help this misadministration counter the AZ federal judge’s skepticism that the feds are doing anything to enforce the immigration laws already on the books. Come on, a little intellectual honesty is all we expect from a newspaper, not hucksterism.

—-

Warning to the reader: This article contains more fiction than reality. It must be viewed for what it is. Democratic Party propaganda.

In reality, the democratic party, and Barrack Obama, WANT illegal immigrants to come here. Socialism can not exist without class warfare. And to ensure this is the case, they want peasants from Mexico to come here to perpetuate this warfare.

…

168 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:24:34am

re: #13 webevintage

Wow.
Normally the library director and head librarians are the ones leading the fight to not remove a book.
They are the front line against censorship.

and this book is pulled while teenage girls can still read about having sex with undead creatures.

Only after they’re married!!!!!

//Someone did an article based on other supernatural creatures that you could get a teen series out of. My personal favorite was ‘Purity Ring Werewolf’. His problem, you see, is that the purity rings are silver…and the Purity Ball is the night of the full moon…

169 mardukhai  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:24:57am

I’m in favor of banning Dixie Cups. Never know what wingnuts will do with them…

170 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:25:19am

re: #164 lawhawk

Here’s one thing that I think it troublesome. The judge argues that the enactment of the law would be burdensome on legal immigrants because they’d be required to show papers attesting to their lawful status.

That is one argument I don’t buy. After all, if you’re driving in a vehicle, you’re required to maintain and present ID if you’ve been stopped for a vehicle traffic violation.

Maybe if the person is being stopped on the street, then the judge might have a point, but people generally carry ID with them wherever they go since they’re often required to show ID to enter office buildings, etc.

I just don’t know how much of a burden carrying the ID would have been.

The judge here thinks it was significant enough to require a temporary injunction until the courts could suss this out.

The ID required is usually a driver’s license, isn’t it?
But a DL is not proof of citizenship; so folks would have to carry something else.
A copy of a birth cert or a passport -

171 RogueOne  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:25:27am

Posting from my phone. from a jail cell, that has to be a first ever doesn’t it? I should win something.

172 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:25:28am

re: #17 JasonA

I was always taught that it was a bad idea to spray an accelerant on an open flame. Was I told wrong?

No, I think you were taught correctly.

I myself was taught that you shouldn’t burn religious books.

173 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:25:29am

re: #164 lawhawk

There’s plenty of ID that doesn’t verify immigration status, though, that functions as ID.


Maybe if the person is being stopped on the street, then the judge might have a point, but people generally carry ID with them wherever they go since they’re often required to show ID to enter office buildings, etc.

Um, no. I have not had to show an ID that verified immigration status a single time in the past four years for any reason.

Most IDs to enter office buildings are for that particular business.

174 sattv4u2  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:25:38am

re: #164 lawhawk

Maybe if the person is being stopped on the street, then the judge might have a point, but people generally carry ID with them wherever they go since they’re often required to show ID to enter office buildings, etc.

Credit card purchases
Liquor sales
just to name two that have nothing to do with driving

175 darthstar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:25:43am

re: #156 NJDhockeyfan

House Republicans Giving Green Light for Israeli Strike on Iran

Mmm….war…so awesome. Does anyone realize House Republicans could give a rat’s ass about Israel and only want to see more violence as it supports their own story about Democrats being weak on national security? And that they’re willing to sacrifice as many Israeli and Iranian lives as it would take to help them get back in power?

176 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:26:32am

re: #171 RogueOne

If you are actually going to be tried for anything do not say a damn thing about whatever occurred right now.

177 garhighway  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:26:42am

re: #174 sattv4u2

Maybe if the person is being stopped on the street, then the judge might have a point, but people generally carry ID with them wherever they go since they’re often required to show ID to enter office buildings, etc.

Credit card purchases
Liquor sales
just to name two that have nothing to do with driving

Those are both voluntary transactions.

178 wrenchwench  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:26:53am

re: #171 RogueOne

Posting from my phone. from a jail cell, that has to be a first ever doesn’t it? I should win something.

I guess that will be up to the Judge, eh?

I hope you’re out soon.

179 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:27:13am

re: #174 sattv4u2

Maybe if the person is being stopped on the street, then the judge might have a point, but people generally carry ID with them wherever they go since they’re often required to show ID to enter office buildings, etc.

Credit card purchases
Liquor sales
just to name two that have nothing to do with driving

Again, though - the ID required is not any ID that is recognized as proof of status (citizen, legal alien, student, whatever).

180 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:27:23am

re: #171 RogueOne

Posting from my phone. from a jail cell, that has to be a first ever doesn’t it? I should win something.

DON’T SAY A WORD. THIS IS DISCOVERABLE.

181 Four More Tears  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:27:25am

re: #178 wrenchwench

I hope you’re out soon.

Well, that kind of depends on why he’s in there, no?

182 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:27:40am

wtf happened to Rogue?

183 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:28:05am

re: #182 cliffster

wtf happened to Rogue?

No. Don’t ask. If he describes it, it can be used against him in court.

184 wee fury  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:28:16am

re: #171 RogueOne

Posting from my phone. from a jail cell, that has to be a first ever doesn’t it? I should win something.

So … you were not frisked. You have a phone in a jail cell. Odd.

185 sattv4u2  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:28:36am

re: #173 Obdicut

Um, no. I have not had to show an ID that verified immigration status a single time in the past four years for any reason

HAve you ever been stopped for suspicion of another felonious act in that time? Because that’s when AZ law enforcement could have asked about citizen status. NOT when you were just buying beer or verifying a credit card purchase

186 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:28:52am

re: #164 lawhawk

Here’s one thing that I think it troublesome. The judge argues that the enactment of the law would be burdensome on legal immigrants because they’d be required to show papers attesting to their lawful status.

That is one argument I don’t buy. After all, if you’re driving in a vehicle, you’re required to maintain and present ID if you’ve been stopped for a vehicle traffic violation.

Maybe if the person is being stopped on the street, then the judge might have a point, but people generally carry ID with them wherever they go since they’re often required to show ID to enter office buildings, etc.

I just don’t know how much of a burden carrying the ID would have been.

The judge here thinks it was significant enough to require a temporary injunction until the courts could suss this out.

I think the ruling is available online somewhere if you want6 to read the whole thing. I ‘m not sure of the specifics.

187 sattv4u2  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:29:59am

re: #184 wee fury

So … you were not frisked. You have a phone in a jail cell. Odd.

He may have been frisked, but the full body cavity search was put off till after dinner!

188 lawhawk  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:30:33am

re: #170 reine.de.tout

Obtaining a DL generally requires gateway documents (passport, Green Card, birth certificate, etc.) - and so would be a good substitute for identification purposes. NJ uses points to determine what documents are sufficient to grant a license.

189 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:30:53am

re: #182 cliffster

wtf happened to Rogue?

My guess is that he confronted the sis-in-law’s boyfriend and it wasn’t pretty.
Could be anything, though.

190 sattv4u2  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:30:55am

BBL

191 wee fury  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:31:35am

re: #187 sattv4u2

He may have been frisked, but the full body cavity search was put off till after dinner!

eeeew. That is an unsavory vision.

192 NJDhockeyfan  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:31:49am

re: #175 darthstar

Mmm…war…so awesome. Does anyone realize House Republicans could give a rat’s ass about Israel and only want to see more violence as it supports their own story about Democrats being weak on national security? And that they’re willing to sacrifice as many Israeli and Iranian lives as it would take to help them get back in power?

Really? Got some proof? I was under the impression both parties support Israel.

193 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:32:42am

re: #188 lawhawk

Obtaining a DL generally requires gateway documents (passport, Green Card, birth certificate, etc.) - and so would be a good substitute for identification purposes. NJ uses points to determine what documents are sufficient to grant a license.

It doesn’t verify that the immigration status is still valid, at all, though. Given how many ‘Illegal aliens’ are people who overstayed their VISA, it’s a significant hole in your logic, along with the ‘entering a building requires ID’ part.

Not to mention that for people like me who don’t drive, there’s never a reason to carry a driver’s license.

194 jordash1212  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:32:56am

I’ll start stretching now for the unreal mental acrobatics I’ll have to perform when Beck comes out with an explanation for this book banning.

195 webevintage  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:35:12am

re: #159 Fozzie Bear

I wish Newt would exclude himself from politics. The man has never expressed a single intellectually honest policy position in his entire fucking career. The man exists to triangulate, massage opinions, and ride the tides. The man couldn’t lead if his life depended on it, but he sure can work people’s fears.

Exclude?
Hell, he is thinking about running for President in 2012 is President Palin lets him.

196 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:35:19am

re: #171 RogueOne

Posting from my phone. from a jail cell, that has to be a first ever doesn’t it? I should win something.

Sure, you win something. What the hell happened?

197 rogueone  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:35:20am

re: #176 Obdicut

If you are actually going to be tried for anything do not say a damn thing about whatever occurred right now.

The man can’t keep me down!

Actually i’m working. They’ll let me out in a bit.

198 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:35:53am

re: #176 Obdicut

If you are actually going to be tried for anything do not say a damn thing about whatever occurred right now.

Oh, right. Sorry. Belay that last question.

199 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:36:24am

re: #188 lawhawk

Obtaining a DL generally requires gateway documents (passport, Green Card, birth certificate, etc.) - and so would be a good substitute for identification purposes. NJ uses points to determine what documents are sufficient to grant a license.

When an employer must verify the employability of a person, the INS considers the driver’s license to be proof of identity.

List A on page 5 of this form lists documents that alone are considered acceptable for identity and employment eligibility.

List B lists documents are acceptable for identity and List C lists documents that are acceptable for employment eligiblity when paired with an item from List B.

I’m thinking they might be trying to work out what will constitute appropriate ID for identity and legal status.

200 Eclectic Infidel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:37:18am

re: #197 rogueone

The man can’t keep me down!

Actually i’m working. They’ll let me out in a bit.

My my, just wanted some tender-lovin’ attention, eh?

201 rogueone  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:38:49am

re: #189 reine.de.tout

My guess is that he confronted the sis-in-law’s boyfriend and it wasn’t pretty.
Could be anything, though.

I’m not sure how to take that” it could be anything”./

I have a funny update on the sis n law problem but posting it from the phone would be a problem.

202 lawhawk  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:39:18am

re: #166 Fozzie Bear

Not any different than the multiple attempts by Democrats to cut funding for Iraq and Afghanistan during the Bush administration.

203 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:40:43am

re: #201 rogueone

I’m not sure how to take that” it could be anything”./

I have a funny update on the sis n law problem but posting it from the phone would be a problem.

I’m looking forward to hearing all about all this.

204 rogueone  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:41:49am

I did get to see a mini-riot today. They had to bring in an extraction team to get a guy out of his cell. If the mace isn’t still bothering him i bet that beanbag left a mark. The place was going nuts.

205 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:42:42am

re: #201 rogueone

I’m not sure how to take that” it could be anything”./

I have a funny update on the sis n law problem but posting it from the phone would be a problem.

It merely means “I have no clue”.
LOL.

206 garhighway  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:43:37am

OT from Andy Borowitz:

LONDON (The Borowitz Report) — Following through on its pledge to install fresh leadership at the top of the company, BP today replaced embattled CEO Tony Hayward with a startled deer.
Bucky, the red deer selected to take the helm at BP, is believed to be the first woodland creature ever to run a multinational corporation.
In his first appearance before reporters in London, however, the antlered executive garnered mixed reviews for what some observers said was an unsteady performance.
Appearing frightened by the TV lights, Bucky kicked over the podium and then pranced down the hall before being subdued with a tranquilizer dart.
“Clearly he’s a little rough around the edges,” said BP board chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg. “But he still did better than Tony.”
Elsewhere, Apple unveiled a new iPhone app that translates Fox News into news.

207 wrenchwench  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:44:26am

re: #199 reine.de.tout

When an employer must verify the employability of a person, the INS considers the driver’s license to be proof of identity.

List A on page 5 of this form lists documents that alone are considered acceptable for identity and employment eligibility.

List B lists documents are acceptable for identity and List C lists documents that are acceptable for employment eligiblity when paired with an item from List B.

I’m thinking they might be trying to work out what will constitute appropriate ID for identity and legal status.

That must be one of the big problems. Especially with New Mexico next door having lots of Mexican-looking people with driver’s licenses that are not considered proof of citizenship.

Do you know where I can find out which other states have that situation? My google-fu is non-existent. I think there are 5, and one other is Illinois.

208 NJDhockeyfan  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:44:30am

Haim Saban to CBS: Cancel Oliver Stone’s Showtime Series

A furious Haim Saban has mounted a campaign to get Showtime to cancel its planned airing of Oliver Stone’s 10-part series, “A Secret History of America,” in the wake of anti-Jewish remarks by the outspoken director.

Stone’s apology “is transparently fake,” Saban said in an interview with TheWrap. “He has been consistent in his anti-American and anti-Semitic remarks. I respect his First Amendment rights. I hope he respects mine.”

The billionaire and outspoken media mogul told TheWrap he had contacted CBS chief Leslie Moonves to urge him to pull the series.

He said that WME chairman Ari Emanuel had also called CBS privately to urge the series be pulled.

Stone has previously said the 10-part “Secret History” series would put Hitler and Stalin “in context,” and offer an alternative crash course to the “grossly inadequate history” taught by American schools and proffered by mass media.

CBS, Moonves and Emanuel did not respond to emails seeking comment.

209 darthstar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:45:47am

re: #192 NJDhockeyfan

Really? Got some proof? I was under the impression both parties support Israel.

Giving a green light for bombing Iran isn’t “supporting Israel” - it’s encouraging war between Israel and its neighbors. If you like seeing Israelis getting killed, then by all means, encourage them to launch an attack on Iran. Me, I prefer people to stay alive.

210 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:48:18am

re: #155 sattv4u2

The way the Orioles play, I don’t blame you!
/

[Cato reaches for unregistered crowbar]

211 justaminute  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:49:21am

re: #85 eclectic infidel


Hi, My husband and I own a restaurant. You have been given some great advice by the other posters. I don’t know where you live but the best place you can seek help and get a good look at the career you seek is in the kitchens of upscale hotels. I also recommend checking out your state’s restaurant association. Check out cooking schools, yes they will try and recruit you, but the description of professional chef is like any other profession - education. I’ve meet plenty of professional chefs and some have worked their way up but frankly you get more respect with professional education. Also, start collecting some fine tool of the trade, like knifes and such, most fine chefs bring their tools with them and reject employer provided. PS Most chefs want to own their own restaurant and keep watch over your credit rating because no one loans money to people starting out in this business because most fail. Good Luck.

212 Jerk  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:49:47am

re: #204 rogueone

I did get to see a mini-riot today. They had to bring in an extraction team to get a guy out of his cell. If the mace isn’t still bothering him i bet that beanbag left a mark. The place was going nuts.

ATT’s network gives you the best 3G coverage in the US, even in a jail cell!

213 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:49:49am

re: #207 wrenchwench

That must be one of the big problems. Especially with New Mexico next door having lots of Mexican-looking people with driver’s licenses that are not considered proof of citizenship.

Do you know where I can find out which other states have that situation? My google-fu is non-existent. I think there are 5, and one other is Illinois.

I’m unsure about your question

The INS stuff I linked to is a federal requirement - employers must (or are supposed to) verify the employment eligibility of people before they hire them.
And the list of acceptable documents and the acceptable combinations of documents is standard in all states.

And here’s what they tell you as to how long you have to keep your forms:
There is a 3 year requirement to keep the I-9 form; however, if they come look at your records at any time, they expect to see the I-9 forms. In other words, the employer should just keep the form forever.

214 garhighway  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:50:46am

re: #212 Jerk

ATT’s network gives you the best 3G coverage in the US, even in a jail cell!

Disagree. I get dropped calls in the heart of Manhattan.

215 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:51:05am

re: #210 Cato the Elder

[Cato reaches for unregistered crowbar]

you are an orioles fan? oh you poor, poor man

216 Gus  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:52:50am

re: #209 darthstar

Giving a green light for bombing Iran isn’t “supporting Israel” - it’s encouraging war between Israel and its neighbors. If you like seeing Israelis getting killed, then by all means, encourage them to launch an attack on Iran. Me, I prefer people to stay alive.

It’s just a resolution so it’s meaning or weight is largely symbolic. Israel doesn’t need a “green light” to take action when they deem it necessary against Iran. Let alone a green light from a politically motivated resolution authored by Louie Gohmert. The real intent of this resolution is to make Obama appear “soft on Iran.”

217 darthstar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:52:52am

re: #214 garhighway

Disagree. I get dropped calls in the heart of Manhattan.

I get crappy cell phone reception at AT&T park. Their wifi is pretty good, though.

218 wrenchwench  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:53:48am

re: #213 reine.de.tout

Sorry, my question was a bit of a tangent.

Never mind. I gotta go check my files and be sure the I-9s are still there!

/

219 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:53:59am

re: #216 Gus 802

I really wish Congress wouldn’t waste time with meaningless resolutions. What the fuck is the point?

220 Gus  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:54:05am

re: #216 Gus 802

Its not it’s. Darn it.

221 darthstar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:54:27am

re: #216 Gus 802

It’s just a resolution so it’s meaning or weight is largely symbolic. Israel doesn’t need a “green light” to take action when they deem it necessary against Iran. Let alone a green light from a politically motivated resolution authored by Louie Gohmert. The real intent of this resolution is to make Obama appear “soft on Iran.”

And it’s yet another reason why Republicans shouldn’t be allowed to regain control. They get a hard-on for middle-east conflict because it’s over there and doesn’t affect US troops (except the ones currently over there, but they don’t really care about them either, apparently).

222 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:55:32am

Does the ‘9-12’ project have a list of books that they would like to get rid of, or do they just make random calls and hope for the best?

223 darthstar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:56:54am

Good news!

PHOENIX - A judge has blocked the most controversial sections of Arizona’s new immigration law from taking effect Thursday, handing a major legal victory to opponents of the crackdown. The law will still take effect Thursday, but without many of the provisions that angered opponents — including sections that required officers to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other laws.

The judge also put on hold a part of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places. U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton put those controversial sections on hold until the courts resolve the issues.


abc15.com

224 lawhawk  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:57:11am

The jury is now deliberating on Blagojevich’s fate. A separate consideration is being made for his hair.

225 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:58:16am

re: #221 darthstar

And it’s yet another reason why Republicans shouldn’t be allowed to regain control. They get a hard-on for middle-east conflict because it’s over there and doesn’t affect US troops (except the ones currently over there, but they don’t really care about them either, apparently).

eh?
That’s pure speculation - good grief - and I suspect mostly not true.
Please.

We are asked to have trust in our country and our President, and assume good faith, no matter who he is.

Grant the opposite “side” the same courtesy, and assume good faith, wouldja?

226 wrenchwench  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:58:27am

re: #223 darthstar

Good news!


[Link: www.abc15.com…]

144 comments late…

227 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:58:31am

So, having watched the David Niven movie “Around the World in Eighty Days”, I poked around Netflix Instant to see what else I might like.

I’m now watching Michael Palin’s version: a real-life trip sponsored by the BBC to see if he can follow in Phileas Fogg’s footsteps in 1988. Around the world in eighty days, following the route of Jules Verne’s novel. No air travel. It’s very endearing and quite family-friendly. I have no idea whether he accomplishes the feat, so no spoilers, please.

His first setback happens on the Orient Express, which is supposed to take him all the way to Venice. But the Italian railway workers choose that day to go on strike, so he has to take a bus instead. Oh, the horror!

228 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 11:59:26am

re: #227 Cato the Elder

So, having watched the David Niven movie “Around the World in Eighty Days”, I poked around Netflix Instant to see what else I might like.

I’m now watching Michael Palin’s version: a real-life trip sponsored by the BBC to see if he can follow in Phileas Fogg’s footsteps in 1988. Around the world in eighty days, following the route of Jules Verne’s novel. No air travel. It’s very endearing and quite family-friendly. I have no idea whether he accomplishes the feat, so no spoilers, please.

His first setback happens on the Orient Express, which is supposed to take him all the way to Venice. But the Italian railway workers choose that day to go on strike, so he has to take a bus instead. Oh, the horror!

Won’t spoil it.
But I watched that series years ago, and thoroughly enjoyed it.

229 Gus  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:01:20pm

re: #221 darthstar

And it’s yet another reason why Republicans shouldn’t be allowed to regain control. They get a hard-on for middle-east conflict because it’s over there and doesn’t affect US troops (except the ones currently over there, but they don’t really care about them either, apparently).

Well, if they did regain control I’m sure they’d be doing the same thing they were doing prior to 2006 or January 20, 2009. That is they’d be doing what Bush did which is essentially the same thing that Obama is doing. Like I said, it’s just a politically motivated resolution (with a great deal of saber rattling) to make Obama appear weak on Iran.

230 darthstar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:03:18pm

re: #229 Gus 802

Well, if they did regain control I’m sure they’d be doing the same thing they were doing prior to 2006 or January 20, 2009. That is they’d be doing what Bush did which is essentially the same thing that Obama is doing. Like I said, it’s just a politically motivated resolution (with a great deal of saber rattling) to make Obama appear weak on Iran.

But all it does is make themselves look stupid, and puts the country at risk. It also sabotages diplomatic efforts. Fuckin’ assholes.

231 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:03:22pm

re: #227 Cato the Elder

So, having watched the David Niven movie “Around the World in Eighty Days”, I poked around Netflix Instant to see what else I might like.

I’m now watching Michael Palin’s version: a real-life trip sponsored by the BBC to see if he can follow in Phileas Fogg’s footsteps in 1988. Around the world in eighty days, following the route of Jules Verne’s novel. No air travel. It’s very endearing and quite family-friendly. I have no idea whether he accomplishes the feat, so no spoilers, please.

His first setback happens on the Orient Express, which is supposed to take him all the way to Venice. But the Italian railway workers choose that day to go on strike, so he has to take a bus instead. Oh, the horror!

Great series. You’ll love it.

232 Gus  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:05:25pm

re: #230 darthstar

But all it does is make themselves look stupid, and puts the country at risk. It also sabotages diplomatic efforts. Fuckin’ assholes.

I agree regarding the sabotage. My thoughts were that it undermines the efforts of the president and the international community in their efforts with regards to increased sanctions against Iran.

233 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:06:36pm

re: #231 Killgore Trout

Great series. You’ll love it.

I’m utterly charmed by it so far.

234 Kragar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:06:50pm

Well, just made the arrangements. Going to Disneyland saturday, the kids don’t know yet.

235 allegro  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:09:02pm

re: #225 reine.de.tout

Grant the opposite “side” the same courtesy, and assume good faith, wouldja?

This is a lovely sentiment, however it grows increasingly difficult to assume good faith for the Republican side when so little good faith has actually been demonstrated since this administration took office.

236 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:09:08pm

re: #234 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Well, just made the arrangements. Going to Disneyland saturday, the kids don’t know yet.

Have fun! Wear sunblock!

237 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:09:15pm

re: #224 lawhawk

The jury is now deliberating on Blagojevich’s fate. A separate consideration is being made for his hair.

On the charges of First Degree Being a Complete Jackass, we find the defendant… GUILTY

238 Kragar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:10:31pm

re: #236 SanFranciscoZionist

Have fun! Wear sunblock!

Yeah, I’m still peeling from the beach incident 2 weeks ago.

239 cliffster  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:11:19pm

re: #234 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Well, just made the arrangements. Going to Disneyland saturday, the kids don’t know yet.

From Jack Handy:

One thing kids like is to be tricked. For instance, I was going to take
my little nephew to DisneyLand, but instead I drove him to an old
burned-out warehouse. “Oh, no,” I said, “DisneyLand burned down.” He
cried and cried, but I think that deep down he thought it was a pretty
good joke. I started to drive over to the real DisneyLand, but it was
getting pretty late.

240 Kragar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:12:45pm

And wouldn’t you know it, they shut down the Star Tours ride this week for 9 months of rennovations, dammit. My youngest girl was too small last time we went and its closed this time :(

241 Eclectic Infidel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:12:59pm

re: #236 SanFranciscoZionist

Have fun! Wear sunblock!

And be prepared to pay $40 for a “small” pizza.

242 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:13:48pm

re: #238 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Yeah, I’m still peeling from the beach incident 2 weeks ago.

I’ve still got a deep dark patch of tan from the burn I got wearing a scoopneck shirt to a pro-Israel counterdemo in back in June. Note to self: modest necklines; its not just the Law, it’s a good idea!

243 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:14:19pm

re: #235 allegro

This is a lovely sentiment, however it grows increasingly difficult to assume good faith for the Republican side when so little good faith has actually been demonstrated since this administration took office.

No good faith whatsoever on the part of the teapartiers, that’s for sure.

I was more referring to our elected officials - accusing them en masse of not caring about the troops - I don’t recall ever accusing the Dems of that because I think it’s wrong to assume those sorts of things. I still feel like it’s wrong.

244 Kragar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:14:47pm

re: #241 eclectic infidel

And be prepared to pay $40 for a “small” pizza.

Big breakfast, and we got a hotel across the street so we can crash and get some dinner off park before we head back in for the evening fireworks. Summer hours, the don’t close till midnight.

245 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:14:57pm

re: #243 reine.de.tout

No good faith whatsoever on the part of the teapartiers, that’s for sure.

I was more referring to our elected officials - accusing them en masse of not caring about the troops - I don’t recall ever accusing the Dems of that because I think it’s wrong to assume those sorts of things. I still feel like it’s wrong.

That’s a reasonable take.

246 Varek Raith  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:15:22pm

*Gets out chalkboard*
You know who else banned books…?
Yep.
Hitler.
Reading books is Nazism.
/

247 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:15:58pm

re: #164 lawhawk

Here’s one thing that I think it troublesome. The judge argues that the enactment of the law would be burdensome on legal immigrants because they’d be required to show papers attesting to their lawful status.

That is one argument I don’t buy. After all, if you’re driving in a vehicle, you’re required to maintain and present ID if you’ve been stopped for a vehicle traffic violation.

Maybe if the person is being stopped on the street, then the judge might have a point, but people generally carry ID with them wherever they go since they’re often required to show ID to enter office buildings, etc.

I just don’t know how much of a burden carrying the ID would have been.

The judge here thinks it was significant enough to require a temporary injunction until the courts could suss this out.

If we wanna institute a Nation ID Card system and require all our citizens to carry it with us at all times and present it upon demand to officers of the law, then we can institute a law like the one in Arizona with no problem.

248 Kragar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:16:34pm

re: #242 SanFranciscoZionist

I’ve still got a deep dark patch of tan from the burn I got wearing a scoopneck shirt to a pro-Israel counterdemo in back in June. Note to self: modest necklines; its not just the Law, it’s a good idea!

My kids keep coming up and asking “Can we peel off your skin?”

249 Shiplord Kirel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:16:57pm

Just posted in pages:

In Iraq, US military chief touts ‘stunning’ progress

Of all the bogus anti-Obama talking points, the most divorced from reality is probably the claim that he is weak on defense. The Bush instigated surge gets a lot of the credit for the improvement in Iraq, together with tactical and command changes instituted after the departure of the tyrannical and incompetent Donald Rumsfeld but Obama has been president for a year and a half now. He rightly deserves a large part of the credit as well. The decision to retain Republican Bob Gates as SecDef was an early and strong indication of how things would be.

Things are not going so well in Afghanistan, as everyone with a net connection or a tv is likely to know, but that is a very tough nut to crack after the Taliban were given years to entrench themselves and refine their methods. Unpalatable as it may be after almost a decade of war, serious efforts to reverse this have only just begun. The appointment of General Petraeus is a very good sign. Taliban who have been on the receiving of the much-increased drone campaign would probably not say that Obama is soft on defense, but they are not available for comment.

None of this matters to the talk-radio wingnut industry. According to them, Obama, like every Democrat, would prefer to see American troops leave Iraq by helicopter, under fire, from the embassy roof.

250 allegro  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:17:19pm

re: #243 reine.de.tout

I was more referring to our elected officials - accusing them en masse of not caring about the troops - I don’t recall ever accusing the Dems of that because I think it’s wrong to assume those sorts of things. I still feel like it’s wrong.

I would agree with that. Where I have problems with the good faith side of the equation is the deliberate refusal to participate in any legislation that might help put this country back on some kind of solid footing when it is desperately needed. It’s the Party of No thing, that even they claim with pride, that is so ugly.

251 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:17:44pm

Incidentally, were you all aware that on the list of most challenged and banned books, the Junie B. Jones series comes in AHEAD by about a dozen titles, of The Joy of Gay Sex?

(Giving a class of high school students a list of most challenged and banned books is quite interesting. They’ve read many of them, and liked many of them. One girl looked up at me and said, “So, do people want kids not to read these books because they tell it the way it is?”

I said, “Hon, you have hit the nail on the head.”

252 darthstar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:18:02pm

re: #243 reine.de.tout

No good faith whatsoever on the part of the teapartiers, that’s for sure.

I was more referring to our elected officials - accusing them en masse of not caring about the troops - I don’t recall ever accusing the Dems of that because I think it’s wrong to assume those sorts of things. I still feel like it’s wrong.

Their actions speak louder than their patriotic rhetoric. When they actually vote to approve of more conflict in the middle east when we have troops in harm’s way, it shows a complete disregard for those troops…all in the name of scoring political points at home.

253 Jack Burton  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:20:24pm

re: #234 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Well, just made the arrangements. Going to Disneyland saturday, the kids don’t know yet.

There is a cart at the end of Main Street that sells The Greatest Corn Dogs EVER!™ so if they like them, make the stop. It’s worth it. There’s usually a line though so we call it the Corn Dog Ride.

254 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:20:47pm

re: #250 allegro

I would agree with that. Where I have problems with the good faith side of the equation is the deliberate refusal to participate in any legislation that might help put this country back on some kind of solid footing when it is desperately needed. It’s the Party of No thing, that even they claim with pride, that is so ugly.

That part of it goes back and forth all the time, no matter which party is in power at the time. It’s part of the way our gov’t does business. Good grief. So when the R’s do it, it’s a big enough problem that we should make sweeping generalizations about their state of mind and who they “hate”, but when the Dems do it we should assume good faith?

I’m not on board. I assume our elected officials act in good faith, based on what they believe is in the best interests of their constituency and the country as a whole. I acknowledge that it works imperfectly at times. Both sides have the right, and at times the obligation, to be “the party of NO”.

255 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:21:33pm

re: #252 darthstar

Their actions speak louder than their patriotic rhetoric. When they actually vote to approve of more conflict in the middle east when we have troops in harm’s way, it shows a complete disregard for those troops…all in the name of scoring political points at home.

You are making assumptions as to their motives, IMO.
But - what the heck, proceed.

256 Eclectic Infidel  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:24:49pm

re: #242 SanFranciscoZionist

I’ve still got a deep dark patch of tan from the burn I got wearing a scoopneck shirt to a pro-Israel counterdemo in back in June. Note to self: modest necklines; its not just the Law, it’s a good idea!

…or I could bring 70 proof sunblock and you could still wear the scoop neck. It is, after all, a nonviolent way to distract the jihadis screaming at us from nearby. Just sayin’. Feel free to ignore this comment. :)

257 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:26:09pm

re: #256 eclectic infidel

…or I could bring 70 proof sunblock and you could still wear the scoop neck. It is, after all, a nonviolent way to distract the jihadis screaming at us from nearby. Just sayin’. Feel free to ignore this comment. :)

:)

258 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:33:47pm

re: #252 darthstar

Their actions speak louder than their patriotic rhetoric. When they actually vote to approve of more conflict in the middle east when we have troops in harm’s way, it shows a complete disregard for those troops…all in the name of scoring political points at home.

I would hate to be making any of my decisions based on a personal perception that a person or a group of people are doing something for no better reason than they hate the troops.

I don’t believe we can assume the state of mind of others like that, and stay sane or rational.

259 darthstar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:37:32pm

re: #255 reine.de.tout

You are making assumptions as to their motives, IMO.
But - what the heck, proceed.

Yes, I am. But maybe they really think an escalation of violence in the Middle East is a good thing…and will be better for everyone involved. Certainly, they wouldn’t just pass a republican resolution green-lighting the invasion of Iran for political gain. That would be ludicrous.

260 darthstar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:40:15pm

re: #258 reine.de.tout

I would hate to be making any of my decisions based on a personal perception that a person or a group of people are doing something for no better reason than they hate the troops.

I don’t believe we can assume the state of mind of others like that, and stay sane or rational.

I never said that the Republicans hate the troops. I know that’s not true. I said their actions show a disregard for the troops, as an escalation of violence in the ME puts our troops at greater risk, and this resolution obviously doesn’t take the troops into consideration. And I do think that’s a valid criticism. Every one of these reps will have a troop or two appear with them at campaign stops, because they love the troops.

261 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:48:47pm

re: #260 darthstar

I never said that the Republicans hate the troops. I know that’s not true. I said their actions show a disregard for the troops, as an escalation of violence in the ME puts our troops at greater risk, and this resolution obviously doesn’t take the troops into consideration. And I do think that’s a valid criticism. Every one of these reps will have a troop or two appear with them at campaign stops, because they love the troops.

Escalation of violence in the ME puts a lot of people at greater risk.

Our armed forces are volunteer. People sign up knowing what it is they are signing up for. There are many who see it as an honor to serve, not a burden. No one wants to be in harm’s way. We owe HUGE gratitude to those of our population who volunteer to do the things necessary to keep this country safe, knowing full well the dangers, and knowing full well that they are subject to being assigned to a dangerous area if the government deems it necessary. I never had that kind of courage.

You demean the courage of those who volunteer for the armed services when you assume that our government’s need for them to be deployed is in any way a disregard for any individual person in the military.

262 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:50:09pm

re: #260 darthstar

I never said that the Republicans hate the troops. I know that’s not true. I said their actions show a disregard for the troops, as an escalation of violence in the ME puts our troops at greater risk, and this resolution obviously doesn’t take the troops into consideration. And I do think that’s a valid criticism. Every one of these reps will have a troop or two appear with them at campaign stops, because they love the troops.

And from your 221:

e: #221 darthstar

And it’s yet another reason why Republicans shouldn’t be allowed to regain control. They get a hard-on for middle-east conflict because it’s over there and doesn’t affect US troops (except the ones currently over there, but they don’t really care about them either, apparently).

I assumed the “they” you were referring to was ‘Republicans”

263 darthstar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 12:54:40pm

re: #261 reine.de.tout


You demean the courage of those who volunteer for the armed services when you assume that our government’s need for them to be deployed is in any way a disregard for any individual person in the military.

I’m sorry, reine, but I couldn’t disagree with that statement more. I’ve said nothing to demean the courage of those serving by being critical of reckless pronouncements by the House Republicans. I’ll demean the House Republicans, because I do think they’re simply grandstanding for attention. But supporting our troops requires we stand behind our Government and Military Leadership, not make non-binding policy statements that are meant to indicate that our government is divided on foreign policy. I also never said that anyone “hates the troops.” I was accused of that many, many times when I stood against sending our troops into Iraq in 2002 and 2003…because I didn’t want to see them in harm’s way for some personal vendetta of the previous president’s.

Obviously, we’re going to disagree on this subject, and I’m headed into two hours of meetings, but I will check back afterward. Take care.

264 reine.de.tout  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 1:02:31pm

re: #263 darthstar

I’m sorry, reine, but I couldn’t disagree with that statement more. I’ve said nothing to demean the courage of those serving by being critical of reckless pronouncements by the House Republicans. I’ll demean the House Republicans, because I do think they’re simply grandstanding for attention. But supporting our troops requires we stand behind our Government and Military Leadership, not make non-binding policy statements that are meant to indicate that our government is divided on foreign policy. I also never said that anyone “hates the troops.” I was accused of that many, many times when I stood against sending our troops into Iraq in 2002 and 2003…because I didn’t want to see them in harm’s way for some personal vendetta of the previous president’s.

Obviously, we’re going to disagree on this subject, and I’m headed into two hours of meetings, but I will check back afterward. Take care.

You’re right, we aren’t going to agree, and honestly, I have no desire to even try to change your mind on this issue whatsoever.

My bigger point was this:
I think that all of us are poorly served when we start from a position of assuming the “other side” is acting in bad faith. Take issue with the REpublicans and their resolution or whatever, of course. But it bothers the heck out of me to see discussions of policy or issues get boiled down to, “They hate the whatever”. They don’t. Neither the D’s nor the R’s.

Each side has a different vision for what they deeply and truly believe is best for the country. And there are struggles in Congress, and sometimes one party or the other MUST be “the party of no”.

Things always get worked out in the end, do they not?
And usually somewhere in the middle - which is not necessarily a bad thing.

265 Cheese Eating Victory Monkey  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 1:43:25pm

What would Beck’s Banning Brigade do if the Bible was banned from public libraries due to church and state separation? I think we know the answer.

266 sattv4u2  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 2:40:38pm

re: #265 Cheese Eating Victory Monkey

What would Beck’s Banning Brigade do if the Bible was banned from public libraries due to church and state separation? I think we know the answer.

I would think neither he nor you know what the Establishment Clause says and/ or means
Him, for thinking it would be wrong for the library to ban it
You for conflating the two (a bible in a public building has nothing to do with it)

267 darthstar  Wed, Jul 28, 2010 3:41:45pm

re: #264 reine.de.tout

That’s why I avoid using the “they hate xxx” argument, even in jest.

268 ihateronpaul  Thu, Jul 29, 2010 4:07:01am

hm according to beck if I don’t agree with him 99% then I am “part of the problem.” I think “part of the problem” with america today is that a book is banned and no one cares, except for the american library association

269 SafeLibraries  Tue, Aug 3, 2010 8:13:45am

Hi. This blog post is completely inaccurate, but the fault lies in the media reports being incorrect thanks to interference from organizations like the ACLU. LGF is not to blame for acting appropriately given the misinformation in the media.

For accurate information, see “Et tu, Mary Minow? Then Fall, Gail Sweet!” and particularly comment #2.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
2 days ago
Views: 92 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 259 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1