Santorum, the "Google Problem", and the analogues of Jim Crow and DADT politics.

Say  what you will about Rick Santorum (and his "google problem")...but the man has a real gift for sticking his foot in his mouth.

Egg on face moment #2,132 is so bad that the Fox News interview in the link almost equals "gotcha" journalism. The commentator gives him a quote from a general against a policy Santorum assumes is DADT for the same biases referenced tirelessly about "military cohesion" and fairly quickly indicates that animus towards people based on immutable characteristics is the driving theme here.

When compared, the mentality of the military on integration was equally opposed when polled as it seemed to be to DADT. A fascinating historical account of both can be found here. Some of the most telling similarities follow:

Bitter Harvests

Ala.: Inmates can replace Hispanic farmhands - Mackenzie Weinger - POLITICO.com:

In other words "They'll have their barely paid, possibly coerced labor system one way or another, damnit!!!" Be it chattel slavery, illegal immigration or this proposal of forcing prison inmates to work the fields...the imagery and the similarities overall seems entirely the norm for the deep south.

The latent functions and social fallout from this legislation seems to be having more sweeping real world  implications than the mavericks in Georgia and Alabama intended (not that any of that is surprising in and of itself).

What does it say about the local economies of areas like this that they cannot function without exploiting or compelling its workforce to do so for either pennies on the dollar and the threat of deportation or as a contingency of their punishment? Either way, they seem insistent on making sure brown people (especially given the sky high incarceration rates for black men in these states) line their fields one way or the other...
'via Blog this'

Wellsprings of Venom- The AFA and "Family Values"

Joe. My. God.: Star Parker: Gay People Make Us Sick:

The only political event that I've ever heard that approaches this sort of language is this "Family Values Summit", which frankly seems to have more in common with an Oi band performance than it does with the more...cautious rhetoric of a nonpartisan function. This is the AFA when it thinks its preaching to the chior. This is what they think and believe. Full stop. Its been unadultrated hatred and undistilled bigotry...but its been very informative... ahhh the internet. It really does have uses outside of pornography. Seeing the coded "family values" misdirect for what it is? May actually be something to thank them for. At the very least, the pretense of civility has at least evaporated in a spate of hate speech and righteous indignation. The Summit has proven to be a wellspring of such.

Its a fascinating notion that the Southern Poverty Law Center has categorized the American Family Association a hate group (explanation from the link), solely on the fact that it uses consistent disproven rhetoric and hate speech to further its anti-gay agenda, is so in line with right wing ideology that numerous GOP candidates for the presidency of the United States have shown up currying favor.The soundbites from its figurehead Tony Perkins (Right Wing Watch has compiled quite a list of inflammatory statements from the guy) are far from partisan and...only rarely deviate from the idea that gay people are going to destroy the world. How he's not advocating gas chambers yet speaks to incredible self control. These orginizations are not as benign as they position themselves to be. The National Orginization for Marriage may have once claimed that its merely interested in preserving marriage, the AFA may suggest its just about "family values", but more and more when one pays attention to the tone, language and frequency of anti-gay hostility in the interests of what they perceive "family interests" to be...their pretense that they're not homophobic and purely interested in politically advancing  that marriage is between a man and a woman (tm) evaporates. 

And now for some theme music. The National- Afraid of Everyone. Apt, no?

'via Blog this'

Trip Ups- North Carolina Politics and the Thinly Veiled Biases That Drive Anti-Gay Legislation

The Gist: NC Senator: "You're trying to trip me up":

'via Blog this'

Two things come to mind when watching the above...utterly infuriating clip: 1.) Signorile doesn't have to TRY very hard to "trip up" Senator Forrester at all, 2.) The misconceptions and loaded rhetoric behind his reasons- "gay as unhealthy lifestyle", "the preservation of marriage" arguments just don't hold up over the slightest scrutiny.

How Dare You...Vaccinate My Children to Prevent Cervical Cancer!!!

Rick Perry Was Against Cervical Cancer Before He Was For It - Duly Noted:

'via Blog this'

I heard a rumor once that bottled water is linked to bisexuality, therefore my loose, poorly supported logic is enough to draw scrutiny on some legislator somewhere providing water for disaster victims. Or something. These people make my head hurt... I'm absolutely mystified over why an attempt to vaccinate teenage girls against cervical cancer is somehow an affront. "How dare you...ensure my daughter not get cervical cancer, fascist!"Can anyone illuminate the darkness to this point? Because this looks like one gigantic headdesk scenario. Wash, rinse, repeat. Have another spoonful of artificial indignation (outstanding post from the Slacktivist on the subject).

Comic Books and the "Liberal Agenda". (My mind hurts)

Retailer boycotts Action Comics, Morrison over perceived blasphemy | Robot 6 @ Comic Book Resources – Covering Comic Book News and Entertainment:

In other news, a crotchety comic book retailer in Asheboro (my cousins live there- and it gives new meaning to the term remote) has decided to drop Action comics because of...something... in his own lunatic words...

"I deal with books like Crossed and The Boys,” he wrote. “I accepted gay characters being introduced into a children-specific book like Archie Comics. I however am getting very tired of having comic writer’s liberal agendas force fed to me. Mr. Morrison has stepped over my line. If I have to stand alone on this … I will.”"

To which I say, oh poor put upon Christian, having to "put up" with the idea that some people, both writers and readers alike might have ideas that aren't yours, might want to read stories about "gay kids in Riverdale" that you have to "tolerate", or ultraviolent anti-terror comics like the Boys. You're a retailer, not a televangelist. Either provide your customers the things they want from you, or do not, but to attach it to some batshit crazy rant on Superman being the embodiment of goodness and christianity to the point that whatever he thinks was uttered by him is an affront is just delusion personified.

More to the point? The percieved slight is this man reacting to comic book style grunting of Superman being hit by a tank. "Gd" could very well be an appropriate response. What he's done here, using something this inane as an inference to some sort of "liberal agenda"? Beyond absurdity. People like this should be laughed off the planet. Only in North Carolina, folks! (also, I rather assure you you stand alone on this on account of all the crazy)

'via Blog this'

Here's some Friendly Fire inspired earworm. Dig it.

Shocking, I Know (WBC for the win?)

‘God Hates Fags’ church to picket Ground Zero and Nevada National Guard funerals - PinkNews.co.uk:

'via Blog this'

Anyone else blatantly not surprised here? The interesting thing about the Westboro Baptist Church is that their fire and brimstoning tends to alienate them from both the uber-tolerant and liberal and the more mainline socially conservative (Especially due to the "lets draw a parallel between a civilization that doesn't outright murder its homosexual population annnnnd tolerance" - which I'm unsure is a very valid association) , pretty much cementing their status as a counterculture nobody (even fundies like NOM and Michelle Bachmann) feel comfortable supporting publicly.

With the exception that teaching abject intolerance to your children is not doing them any favors (its hard to have a functional life as a member of the KKK and have to live/work around people who aren't part of your stunted world view for instance) , in a way the more press the WBC gets, the worse its brand of intolerance looks to mainstream America. So....You guys have fun with that protesting cultural events that mean something to people! (and fashion week)

Its Like Watching a Morally Bankrupt, Dispicable Trainwreck...

There's something particularly troubling about how the press has been covering the tragedy in Oslo. When they're not blatantly diverting the subject back to their discomfort zones (Look, over there Muslim terrorists!) , or Beck's classicly horrifying "Those kids were practically hitler youth (so its not AS bad some nut killed them all)" they're pontificating on Breivik's methodically chilling manifesto and coming up with THIS disturbing assessment:

"As for a climactic conflict between a once-Christian West and an Islamic world that is growing in numbers and advancing inexorably into Europe for the third time in 14 centuries, on this one, Breivik may be right."(emphasis mine)

Its difficult to understand what anyone would have to gain from not uniformly denouncing someone who is capable of the cold blooded murder of innocents, and further an odd intersection between troubling and fascinating to watch some do this- all in the name of being loosely affiliated with the same (tremendously common) religion.

When involving Breivik, one hears pleas for nuance and understanding regarding what it is the writers and the villain share- belonging to an aggregate. The post Brayton showcases by Adam Serwer does a great job illuminating this position, especially given many of these same conservative writers eagerness to paint the "run of the mill" threat to America (tm) as being anti-American, Anti-Christian and most assuredly of the Muslim faith.

Sewer's article raises the serious concern with the tone of the argument here- not that they're writing and responding to a very real human tragedy...but they're responding with what a friend on the book of faces rightly categorized as a "No True Scotsman" logical fallacy (which the wiki-page helpfully provided Bill O'Riley's response to the Oslo massacre as an example). "Why, surely no one belonging to our group could be responsible for such awful things. But everybody from those OTHER groups they're monsters worthy of being suppressed and chased from this American life... but please, show some nuanced consideration for how intricately different we as Christians can be. Please excuse me while I demonize everyone practicing a religion I know little about."

Jon Stewart nails this bizzaro ideological contortion brilliantly.

Some days, I shudder for the universe. Oh what a world my parents gave me...