People who say “What does this button do?” and immediately press the button without waiting for an answer . . .
Amber Alerts
I got an Amber Alert on my phone last night. The same Amber Alert is posted today on those lighted freeway billboards.
How did we decide that child abduction is the one activity that merits a notification to the entire country?
In this case, the woman in the photo, Kandice Johnson, stole a car at gunpoint with a 16-year-old boy in the back seat.
I’m going to feel ridiculously bad if this ends poorly, but for a 16-year-old boy, being kidnapped by a femme fatale like Kandice Johnson is maybe not the worst way to spend a few hours of your life . . .
A Tolerance Dilemma
Malaysia, Indonesia Muslim groups call for Starbucks boycott — Chicago Tribune
The problem is Starbucks’ support for LGBT rights.
Sodomy is illegal in Malaysia and punishable by up to 20 years in prison. Homosexuality is not illegal in Indonesia but a case before the Constitutional Court is seeking to criminalize gay sex and sex outside of marriage.
What do you do if you want to embrace both Group A and Group B but Group A wants to put Group B in prison for 20 years and hit them with sticks?
One Thing I Can’t Tolerate is Intolerance: Yelp at Yale Edition
According to the New York Times, June Chu, dean of Pierson College at Yale, lost her job after calling people “white trash” in Yelp reviews.
Here are some of (former) Dean Chu’s hot Yelp takes:
Regarding a Japanese restaurant: “If you are white trash, this is the perfect night out for you. . . . Side note: employees are Chinese, not Japanese.”
On a local movie theater: “So what they have is barely educated morons trying to manage snack orders for the obese and also try to add $7 plus $7.”
A mochi establishment: “Remember: I am Asian. I know mochi. . . . To be honest, you’d be better off getting mochi ice cream at Trader Joe’s! I guess if you were a white person who has no clue what mochi is, this would be fine for you.”
Remember: I am white. I know racism. This is not racism unless you are a lightweight, amateur racist. I’ve seen better racism at Trader Joe’s.
Really, those are perfectly fine Yelp reviews. Granted that some people are more easily offended than others, I would say that anyone offended by Chu’s posts should stay off Yelp, stay off the internet in general, and probably just stay in bed every morning and not leave their house.
P.S. I like Trader Joe’s mochi.
Anyway, Stephen Davis, head of Pierson College, which is evidently better than being the dean, said in announcing Chu’s departure:
“Let me be clear. No one, especially those in trusted positions of educating young people, should denigrate or stereotype others, and that extends to any form of discrimination based on class, race, religion, age, disability, gender identity, or sexual orientation.”
I’m not sure how the movie theater review violates those guidelines, unless an inability to add $7 plus $7 qualifies as a disability.
Davis went on to say:
“Yale unequivocally values respect for all. . . . what holds us together is our collective effort to ensure that every single person in our midst is valued beyond measure.”
As long as they think the right way, act the right way and speak the right way, and don’t write snarky Yelp reviews that reflect the way people actually talk in real life.
Great Moments in Socialized Medicine: Charlie Gard
If I’m understanding this correctly, socialized medicine really does mean that the government decides if you will live or die, and if your children will be allowed to live or die.
I’m glad to see that the current president of the United States is not on board with the idea of a government being able to decide on the life or death of a baby, and to deny the parents of the baby the ability to counter that decree.
If we can help little #CharlieGard, as per our friends in the U.K. and the Pope, we would be delighted to do so.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 3, 2017
This is a good reminder — since there are people who think that “single payer,” i.e., socialized medicine, i.e., the government runs the healthcare system, would be a good thing to have in the United States — that the government, if you’re very old and/or very sick, is not going to give you all that technology and all those drugs for the last couple of years or months or days of your life to keep you going.
It’s too expensive, so they are going to let you die.
Eat a Bag of D*cks
I was informed today via email that a bag of gummy penises is a great way to tell friends, family, loved ones or enemies to eat a bag of dicks.
An anonymous package is sent to your chosen recipient containing 2 things: A bag of delicious gummy candies and a note exclaiming “EAT A BAG OF DICKS.”
You remain forever anonymous as you picture them wondering “Who sent this to me?” and “Are there more tasty gifts on the way?”
What are you waiting for?
Signs of Trouble
When a headline starts with one of the following, rest assured there’s going to be trouble:
Related link: How Much Paper Does It Take to Stop a .50-Cal Bullet?
Cocaine, Heroin, Ecsatcy
In case you hadn’t noticed, being alive is difficult and probably overrated. Why not take all the drugs you can?
Just playing devil’s advocate here . . .
Aside
This is how it is now. I’m in another chapter of my life.
They’re the Oppressors Now
The Washington Post has an update on Brian Talbert, a gay man denied entry to the Charlotte Pride Parade because he voted for Donald Trump:
Talbert — a 47-year-old North Carolina native — said he was one of about 50 people who attended the first pride parade in Charlotte in 1994. He recalled that Christian demonstrators threw rocks and bottles at the marchers and that someone spit in his face. More than two decades later, he said, the discrimination continues — but this time it’s being directed at him by the gay community.
Talbert said he feels betrayed because it shouldn’t matter who you vote for.
“I want them to realize that they’re doing the exact same thing they say bigoted people are doing to them — they’re the oppressors now,” he said. “It’s disgusting, and every gay person in America should feel ashamed.”
Radical New Theory
Radical new theory proposes judging people on how they behave, rather than what they say their identity is. pic.twitter.com/XDsd79ix1R
— Satiria (@SatiriaNews) June 8, 2017
One Thing I Can’t Tolerate is Intolerance: Gays for Trump Edition
Well, so much for acceptance and tolerance . . .
The banned group is called Gays for Trump. Brian Talbert, a member of the group, said, “It was going to be fun. We wanted to be energetic. We wanted to show that we weren’t the racist, bigot, misogynistic . . . We wanted to show that we are Americans, love our country and our president. We wanted to be there to celebrate gay pride. Everything fell into place except being able to celebrate who I am.”
Where that strategy fails is that showing Trump supporters are not anti-gay, racist, bigots, misogynists, etc., is not part of the mainstream gay agenda. Quite the opposite. The agenda is to keep that stereotype alive and keep those labels in play.
“For a group of people to claim to want tolerance, acceptance, and give it to every single person you can imagine to give it to, for them to sit back and judge me for exercising my right as an American to choose my leader without judgment is hypocritical,” Talbert said, stating the extremely obvious.
A spokesperson for the Charlotte Pride organization said in written statement:
“Charlotte Pride envisions a world in which LGBTQ people are affirmed, respected and included in the full social and civic life of their local communities, free from fear of any discrimination, rejection, and prejudice.”
Unless they happen to be Trump voters, in which case take a hike . . .
One Thing I Can’t Tolerate is Intolerance: Margaret Court Edition
Margaret Court is being vilified and stigmatized this week — “racist,” “homophobe,” ‘blood on her hands,” name should be taken off the Australian Open arena, etc. — because she opposes gay marriage and homosexuality in general.
If you want to position yourself as a champion of inclusion, diversity, respect, tolerance, you’ve got to extend those things to other people as well, and not just people who see the world exactly like you do.
You want tolerance and respect for sexual preferences? What about religious preferences? Margaret Court is a Christian pastor. A lot of people believe that God frowns on homosexuality. I don’t believe that myself but it’s not a weird fringe opinion.
Yes, Margaret Court introduced Satan and Nazis and Communists into the conversation, but Margaret Court isn’t presenting herself as an advocate of inclusion and tolerance. She’s saying this is right and that is wrong.
You can’t position yourself as an advocate of tolerance and oppose Margaret Court if you’re engaged in the same name-calling and bashing that she is: As an advocate of tolerance, I say that people like Margaret Court should not be tolerated!
If you were to come out and and say, “Look, I’m just as intolerant as Margaret Court but in the opposite direction. That’s the only difference between us. Whereas Margaret Court says these people are bad and these people are good, I say these people are good and these people are bad.”
That seems like a consistent, respectable position to have, but not intolerance in support of tolerance. That doesn’t make any sense . . .
Regal Cinema is Alienating Me
Went to the movies yesterday and found that Regal Cinema has joined the ranks of Chevron and Walgreens as companies willing to hit up customers for a charitable donation as part of their regular purchase.
You’re part of an industry that burns up a billion dollars making pirate movies and Baywatch and special effects science fiction bullshit. Donate that money to whatever cause you’re passing the hat for, instead of hustling the customers for a donation over and above the price of a ticket and a 6-dollar soda and a 10-dollar sack of popcorn, and then tooting your own horn over your generosity and community involvement.
See You In Hell
[See You in Hell is a feature by our guest blogger, Satan — PE]
Doctors are right to give transgender kids puberty-blockers and hormones at younger ages. https://t.co/DcNgjUTXj7 pic.twitter.com/UFziAAZwQC
— NYT Opinion (@nytopinion) April 9, 2017
I just wanted to let everyone know that Joseph Mengele is down here kicking himself because he didn’t think of this first.
See you in Hell . . .
Denis Johnson, 1949-2017
Write naked. That means to write what you would never say.
Write in blood. As if ink is so precious you can’t waste it.
Write in exile, as if you are never going to get home again, and you have to call back every detail.
RIP Denis Johnson
Aside
I just don’t understand it . . . I just don’t understand it . . . I just don’t understand it . . . I must have got lost . . .
Big Losers
I saw this headline on an AP story today — Poor and disabled big losers in Trump budget.
The story includes a photo of the budget (see below), so I think it’s safe to say that the AP writer didn’t read the entire thing before announcing who the “big losers” are. He’s just flogging his own agenda. (See also Harvard Study Says Media Are Very Biased Against Donald Trump)
“Trump’s plan for the budget year beginning Oct. 1 makes deep cuts in safety net programs . . .” the story says.
What’s the difference between a “cut” and a “deep cut”? The latter sounds mean and scary. Why not just say something factual like “10 percent cut” or “50 percent cut” and let readers put their own characterization on it?
“Safety net programs” is also a loaded expression.
“Trump’s budget would cut the food stamp program by $191 billion over the next decade.” OK, there’s a factual assertion. But the government doesn’t use zero-based budgeting, in which each year’s budget starts at zero and all expenses must be justified for each new period. Government budgeting calls for incremental increases over previous budgets.
For example, if the cost of Program X is budgeted to increase 10 percent per year, and we “cut” it by 5 percent, the cost still goes up 5 percent. We can have budget cuts and more spending at the same time.
So “Trump’s budget would cut the food stamp program by $191 billion over the next decade” actually means something like — I don’t know the actual numbers, but something like “The cost of the food stamp program would have gone up by $800 billion over the next decade but because of the $191 billion ‘cut,’ it will only go up by $609 billion.”
Also — numbers in a federal budget look really big because the US is a big country with a lot of people — 320 million. If you wanted to give every person in the country 5 dollars, you’d need to have more than $1.5 billion on hand to do it.
A small number — 5 bucks — becomes a big number — $1.5 billion — when you project it to a national scale.
Food stamp costs of $191 billion over a decade comes to $19 billion per year. How many people receive food stamps? About 45 million. So $191 billion is only about $400 per person per year.
I saw Elizabeth Warren on YouTube emoting about the budget: Blah blah blah Donald Trump blah blah blah Betsy DeVos blah blah blah …
I could be wrong but I don’t think Elizabeth Warren or fans of Elizabeth Warren really care about people on food stamps, at least not enough to help out of their own pockets. I think they care about having the power to deem things worthy and then make other people pay for them.
Elizabeth Warren didn’t say “I am personally contributing $400 per year and I want all of you who are as outraged about this as I am to contribute $400 per year to make up the difference in the food stamp budget.” What would happen if she did?
Harvard Study Says Media Are Very Biased Against Donald Trump
According to a Harvard University study, the mainstream media are very biased against Donald Trump.
Here’s a chart from the study, showing that the tone of some news outlets is negative in as many as 98% of reports:
I’ve noticed that even our local news station is about 90-10 negative on Trump coverage.
We have to look at the way the media handled Trump before he was elected. How many newspapers in the entire country endorsed Trump for president? I don’t think the number is zero but it has to be very close to zero.
Some newspapers — The Washington Post and New York Times come to mind — were virulently anti-Trump on the editorial page, which bled over into the news coverage.
Every news network except Fox was anti-Trump, the only positive news being that he was most definitely not going to be elected. Well, actually it was that he was definitely not going to be the Republican nominee, and then that he was definitely not going to be president.
The Huffington Post refused to cover Trump at all as part of its political reporting. All Trump news was published in the entertainment section.
And then he was elected president!
So everyone in the media had to either a) recalibrate their self-image from “We are super smart people who knew in advance that Trump would never be president” to “We are the dumbest people in the universe,” or b) commit to spending the next four years (at least) finding ways to say “we told you so,” e.g. “We told you he was a monster,” “We told you he was a moron,” We told you he was crazy,” etc.
Here’s a chart showing the tone of Trump coverage compared to other recent presidents:
The media are setting a new standard for unfavorable press coverage of a president. No president in recent history is even close. Note that the media were mostly cheerleaders for President Obama.
Anything Bothering You?
“Anything new?” the dental hygienist asks. “Anything bothering you?”
“Oh my god yes,” I reply. “The media coverage of Trump, for one thing.”
“I meant with your teeth,” she says.
“Oh my teeth are fine.”