This couldn’t possibly go badly, could it?
Oh, FSM, Why? Why?
Are there any words at all?
PS. Don’t forget to look at those related link recommendations.
Right Wing Watch quotes Lou Dobbs educating Ed Rollins (both of FOX Business) on the constitution:
LOU DOBBS (HOST): It’s an obvious, overt attempt on the part of the special counsel to subvert the president of the United States. This is —
ED ROLLINS: But again —
DOBBS: it’s that simple. By the way, let me add to that. It is also clear that Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan are part of the conspiracy and the coordinated attack on this presidency because they say nothing. They stand silent in the face of a supra constitutional authority that is usurping the powers of the presidency.
So here’s a few questions for you, Dobbs: Has the special counsel nominated anyone to the cabinet? The federal judiciary? Has Mueller ordered the Joint Chiefs to send troops into combat? vetoed any bills passed by congress?
Please, tell me Mr. Dobbs: what powers of the presidency have been usurped? Because it’s looking an awful lot like the only constitutional powers that have been usurped are those listed in constitution of the FOXified States of America.
I swear I know more about the constitution of Australia than Dobbs knows about the constitution of the USA.
On Friday, Frank Stallone tweeted a heap of misogyny and violence apologia with some implied heterosexism thrown in for good measure. Why? Well he was very, very upset that David Hogg had opinions about gun control laws that differed from good ol’ Frank’s opinions. You can read the content of his insults in many places, I don’t have to repeat them here. But I thought an audience of skeptics would be particularly interested in the apology he tweeted out today:
Wonkette brought my attention to an essay published by the James G Martin Center for Academic Renewal. It was written by Shannon Watkins and has a whole bunch of things to say about how awful, awful, awful campus feminism is. Then it adds a few things about how hopeful it is that the situation is changing and that anti-feminist groups are on the rise. Yippee! The article itself can be found here. It is intriguingly titled “Campus Feminism: The Real War On Women.”
Stunningly, it fails to grasp the basic idea behind the labeling of “The War on Women”, which was that when certain policies are adopted – policies like instituting (or maintaining) abstinence-only sex “education” – more women die. If someone is advocating for policies that cause increased deaths (or that correlate with increased deaths and have at least a plausible mechanism for causation), labeling that advocacy part of a War on Women is metaphorical but has a reasonable underlying comparison between advocating the policy and promulgating a war: deaths result. However Watkins seems impervious to such points and presents no evidence that more women die when campus women’s and/or feminist centers are permitted to flourish or that more women die in a given jurisdiction when policies favored by those centers are enacted.
Although I’ve been mostly offline and entirely unable to write coherently for more than a month, I have apparently had just enough time to come up with a new honor that Pervert Justice shall now start distributing to the most deserving. I call it the “Unclear on the Concept Award” and its inaugural winner is Kevin Swanson.
The delightful human being Swanson opined on the recent Alabama senatorial election, and it turns out that he has a theory which is rather thin at one end, rather thin at the other end, and, frankly, rather thin in the middle. It is, however, amusing to read: