Wednesday, April 8, 2009

mirror mirror on the wall

wow, does camille paglia suck. queen of the overgeneralization, lover of her own experience to the exclusion of all others', translator of others' rejections into theory. all knowledge, or at least that which isn't pointy-headed elitism, just happens to be whatever camille knows, or at least finds entertaining. how dare liberals object to criticism of themselves- especially when it's based on camy's personal surface impressions. don't liberals know their job is to sit down and shut up and let every superficial remark about barack obama go? no, i won't link to her "column". it's on salon premium anyway, and i'm sorry i even read it. don't make the same mistake i did.

this is the woman who doesn't accept that humans cause global warming because there's no way we could have that much effect on something as enormous and constantly changing as the earth. this is someone who takes getting twitted for liking the rolling stones as some sort of statement about feminism. this is someone who doesn't understand that sometime working-class people grow up to be really liberal, and not just claim to be. this woman somehow also has completely missed the long line of religious liberals, such as nancy pelosi, jim wallis, michael moore, cory booker, blah blah blah. and she liked titanic. really liked it.

camille paglia, like most conservatives, is stuck in the late 60s and 70s, when academia had a few examples of what paglia claims liberalism is now, completely. in one column, she double-handedly (she had help from "letter writers") decided that hating religion was the defining movement of liberalism (well, i do, but i'm in a minority of even liberals); obama was disappointing for diplomatic gaffes (some of them non-existent, none of them actually insulting, and none of them involving vomiting); conservatives veer toward facts and not emotion and play fair (does she even read glenn greenwald's stuff? he's a fellow salon, blogger, so she probably wouldn't have to pay), while liberals just leap on anyone who disagrees with them; and that the lessons of her working class background negate the lessons of any other liberal's (i'm using that term loosely with her) working-class background.

according to camy, sarah palin was real, which apparently washes out the facts that she was also stupid, lacked any connection to reality, and had no professional ethics. in camy-world, liberals can't poke fun at themselves (except john stewart and stephanie miller and cenk ungur and i could go on), the media cleverly covers up a murder in a gay, gay townhouse by putting it on the front page. in the gospel according to camy, you can be a feminist and accuse any woman who has aborted a fetus of murder. and the tripe! i have no idea what "all gods exist- because thinking it makes it so" means, but i know of no other atheist who would say something so silly.

because that is what camy page does- she says something so based on surface, subjective impressions, and has no compunction to do routine fact-checking. instead of doing any research on liberal talk radio and where it's going, it's so much easier and makes her look so much smarter to spew out some weird-ass generalization that stephanie miller and randi rhodes could just shove back in her mouth. it's also alot of time to research how increased corporate ownership and reduced diversity of ownership has pushed liberal talk radio out of markets, even when they were doing well. it would require camy to talk to researchers, who might act as if their experience and data trump whatever erudite concepts are bouncing around camy's head.

it's always more important to camy to look like she's an independent thinker rather than actually dig up some fucking facts and base her opinions on them. it's so great to note that moms homeschooling their kids seem feisty and super-organized, and not trouble oneself to ask what they're actually teaching their kids, and whether it's based on actual research or study materials from bob jones "university". it's more fun to act like an atheist who can't understand why atheists would flock to the only major political party that even gives them a voice, and a marginalized one at that. really, camy, you can't understand why atheists tend to be liberal- could it be the conservative disdain for the establishment clause of the first amendment? why don't you show some independent thinking by claiming it's orgies at the democratic national convention. that at least would entertain.

yeah, camy, their are some major fruitcakes out there, and somehow salon.com hires one once in a while. i'll end by linking to something worth reading. if we lived in a just universe, camy would have died of cancer, and molly ivins would still be with us.

Monday, April 6, 2009

just who the fuck voted for her, anyway?!?!?!?!?!?!

the fact that michelle bachmann needs an extra "n" at the end of her last name should tell you everything you need to know. okay, i exaggerate. this should tell you everything you need to know about michelle bachmann. she is bugfuck, apeshit insane. she uses already discarded pieces of legislation to argue that stalin is in the building. and the discarded pieces? they didn't even call for what she said they did.

here's what the new serve america act does do: it gives federal funding status to a slew of already existing community service programs (or new ones some goddamned do-gooder dreams up), and also awards increased pell grants for anyone who completes these programs that can be used to pay for college or student loans. it also reinforces rules about what programs do and don't qualify. basically, any program that engages in politics, supports a for-profit company or union, or is religious instruction does not qualify. if you're program is receiving funds under this bill, it can't have any of those goals, and the volunteers can't do any of those things while they're supposed to be doing community service. last, it sets rules for school districts that would like funding as a "youth engagement zone": at least 90% of students must be in a service program, and the high school has to have some "service learning" as a part of the mandatory curriculum. did we save the statue of vladimir lenin? i think we're gonna need it.

it does not stipulate that you can't attend church, work for a union, or tell mccain supporters he fathered a black baby. you just have to do those things on your own fucking time. maybe the problem bachmann has with the bill is that the people in her district don't have any of their own time anymore, what with all their foreclosures. or maybe she thinks that if public schools taught kids to give a shit about someone else for a change, they might not demand tax cuts when they're voting age. why is it that actually teaching americans to care about other americans has mixed republican support, but just about full democratic support? doesn't that say something about how different the parties are, ralph?

and here's what michelle rails about the most- the stuff that got yanked! the bill, originally, would have just looked into whether making some form of community service for young adults mandatory would improve the country. the original version also would have required the government "look into" (read: we'll get back to you when jfk's assassination reports are declassified) creating a 4-year, college-level institution for educating people for public sector jobs. the fact that we would even talk about requiring kids to give a shit about something besides the coolness of their own sneakers (i'm sorry, athletic shoes) and what color their ipods should be is a sign that castro's mind-control experiment has finally succeeded.

why is it that every single action by a government that aims to make this a better place to live is some sort of communist plot? whether it's flouride in the water, social security, the minimum wage, and now some additional government support for teaching young people the value of actually giving a shit. why is banning smoking from public places some sort of outrage? i don't see a right to tobacco anywhere in the constitution. i don't see a right to demand every single dollar your boss paid you in dollars that only have value because the government says so in the fucking bill of rights. but then again, i'm one of those pointy-headed intellectuals whose actually bothered to read the damn thing.