"Symbolic of his struggle against reality."

38 years ago this was hilarious.  Because it was ridiculous.

10 years ago it was cautionary.

Now, in certain places in the country, the behavior shown is illegal.

I Know Something They Don't Know

I say the following all the time. This guy says it better though, and with a byline (with an eagle on it and everything):

Kurt Schlichter, H/T Hugh Hewitt:

Ignore conservative ideas at your own peril.

Conservatives often scratch their heads at the image liberals hold of them, as misers and brutes whose ignorance is only matched by their hatred of anyone who is not a WASP male. The Left's contempt similarly encompasses those women, minorities and gays who "betray" their demographics to throw in with the Right.

Back to me now: I've said this over and over to my friends and fellow internet debaters for years - if I know, understand, and accept their motivations for their liberal positions, and they do not know, understand, or accept mine in turn for my conservative positions, then, well, what is there to talk about? I'm just wasting breath until the next time one of us brings it up.

Another facet has always been this (this is mainly an internet phenomenon, but not solely): I believe people when they say they want to "tax the rich" because they believe the rich aren't paying enough already - why won't they believe me when I say I want to lower all taxes in part because I think most people are already paying too much? Why must they translate that to "Smasher wants to help the rich"? Is it because their brains would explode if they tried to fit an idea other than their own inside? Is it because they've never actually put any thought into most of their positions and get defensive about their ignorance when challenged? Or is it because I don't have a byline with an eagle on it?

But Mama - He's a Magic Man

So the latest "thing" in medialitical circles is something about "rhetoric". The good lefty anti-superstition, anti-religion punditry is worried about a set of words they fear have powerful conjuring abilities - words like "killing", "crosshairs", "and "target".

These words of power have the ability to create action out of nothing merely if uttered.

I hate to point this out to the oh-so-intellectual left, but... that smells like magic and wizardry to me.

- 10 points for Gryffinleft.

Bad Data, No Biscuit!

What are the odds that yet another chunk of data used by the Carbonistas all these years is actually pure shite? Oh, about 100%. Courtesy of In the MIDDLE of the RIGHT, (hat tip to Borepatch, of course) we now know that bad satellite data has been included in the Carbonistas' datasets for years, and that they've known it was bad for years.

"The snuffed out satellite had been run continuously up until being taken offline soon after my article went viral (August 10, 2010) in which I exposed the full extent of how seriously degraded it’s sensors were. The automatic readings had been contaminated by hundreds, if not thousands, of false and absurdly high temperature readings, some as high as 612 degrees Fahrenheit (boiling point of water is 212 F.). We now know NOAA was aware of these outrageous anomalies at least since 2006 but they were not remedied ( see below)."

Now, for years I've been labeling people as fools for getting sucked into the "global warming" cult simply because it was not scientific, but I never disputed the temperature numbers they were given. I didn't believe them, mind you, but I never disputed them. Couldn't prove they were false, so I never argued that point. But I always figured there were lots of bad data in there because there was never any scientific evidence to support those numbers; and again, the Left - and "global warming" is a prime cult of the Left - will stop at nothing to further its agenda.

If the rallying cry of the Libertarian Right is "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch", or TANSTAAFL, then certainly the countercry of the Liberal Left must be "The Ends Justify All Means". or TEJAM.

Called Thought To The Head

There are more conservative/righties in this country than liberal/lefties, so voting can't work for the Left in the long run. Thus the deking and dodging of the various majority rule systems put in place by state and federal Constitutions will never stop as long as the Left is still in the fight. They don't even see it as cheating or subversion - their ends justify any means whether they are legal, moral, Constitutional, or not. And the most you can dig out of ANY liberal in the face of obvious or documented chicanery is the "both sides do it" dodge, which is moral cowardice at its height.

So never ever be surprised by cheating to win votes on the front end or gross miscues of power on the back end when a liberal agenda needs to be served.

I Know (What) You Are But What Am I?

My response to a lefty challenge of my knowledge of non-conservative issues on a public forum I participate in:

I've grown up in a generation saturated by left-wing media and culture. I'm well-versed in all the tropes, memes, paradigms, and cults of the American left. I know all about Mother Gaia, the evils of colonialism, the scourge of racism, and the arrogance of American Imperialism; I'm well aware of the dangers of guns, secondhand smoke, riding bikes without helmets, sugar, salt, and cholesterol; I know all about the evils of Christianity, the stupidity of people of faith, the wonders of the sexual revolution, the need for my 16 year old girlfriend to have access to an abortion, the need for a top-down welfare state, the chuckleheaded ignorance of countryfolk, and the importance of self esteem.

I know about all of these things.

I also listened to NPR for years, have 3 or 4 mugs and or tote bags from donations. I have many left of center friends, and they are NEVER shy about voicing their opinions, even if they are 100% ignorant of the topic involved.

No one can have grown up in the U.S. in the last 50 years and NOT be aware of all this crap. It's in the movies and TV we watch, the music we listen to, the news media that have largely prevailed during that time.

I do occasionally still listen to my local libtalk (ex Air America) station, and sometimes hop to HuffPo or the like. KOS and DU and NYT and the rest of that ilk are just trash in my opinion. And the good conservative sites - HotAir, Breitbart, Townhall, Powerline, etc., all regularly link over to mainstream and lefty stuff in full anyway, so I get a full dose.

So trust me - I know far more about why you think and believe the way you do than you do about why I think and believe the way I do.

Hollywood and Firearm Fetishism in North America

My bloodpressure is low, due to my habit of Living Clean, so I listen to NPR in the car to keep at normal levels.

The other day I heard an interview with Debra Granik, the director of Winter's Bone, a new movie set in the Ozarks. During the back and forth, Granik describes how hard it was to shoot a scene where the main character teaches her younger siblings to shoot.

NORRIS: This scene, I understand, was a difficult day of shooting. Why was it hard to get that scene just right?

Ms. GRANIK: Firearms for an East Coast person, such as myself, urban person, a person who has no hunting experience, they are already complicated. You know, I have a relationship to those issues that are so much a product of my upbringing and where I live geographically. And to make this scene work, I had to really get in the mind frame that this is something very important that people and families have to pass on to each other. And when children are involved, it has to be taught really well and really carefully.

And the idea that people can imbue children with a very great respect for something was also something that moved me. 

If you had to distill the difference between urban gun-fearing leftists and, well, the rest of us into one or two sentences, you couldn't do much better than that. I'm not sure whether to be happy that she saw that millions of people shoot responsibly and teach their kids the same, or irritated that she and so many other like her see firearms as so "complicated."

I Know You Are But What Am I?

The whole Hutaree "white Christians are dangerous too!" thing struck me as pretty weak tea from the very beginning. Although fitting in well with the LordGodKing's decree that there is no such thing as Islamic extremism or terrorism and we're certainly not at war with them, I figured that it was more of a matter of publicizing a case beyond its weight class more than outright fabrication out of desperation.

But the lads at Shot In The Dark have pointed to an article that seems to indicate that the feds might have pulled an iron out of the fire before it was even lukewarm, let alone hot.

Go to their blog to RTWT.

Personally, I'm biased as all git-out but if it does turn out to be a crappy case and the Feds have to drop it, I'd be very interested in the fallout, or lack of same, that we'd see in the Fetid Bog Media.

It's As If A Million Voices Suddenly Cried Out In Terror, And Were Suddenly Silenced. I Feel Something Terrible Has Happened.

The price tag is one thing, and should have been enough to cause anyone with half a brain to reject this "health care" bill. But even if a meteorite made of trillion dollar bills had landed on the White House lawn, I'd still find it sickening, because now the government will send me to prison if I don't buy a product from them.

Doesn't matter if I don't want it, don't need it, or ignore it. It is now the law of the land that if I don't buy a particular product, I'm going to jail.

Frankly, I'm sickened. Angry, yes. Disappointed, sure. But more than that, sickened. I went to bed Sunday night a free man, and woke up Monday morning a serf.

Thanks, Congress

Socialized medicine has been such a smashing success everywhere else.

Stupid, crooked fuckers.

Slaughter on Reconciliation Hill

So let me get this straight:

First, Obama campaigns on health care (2008).

Second, soon after inauguration, he calls for passage of massive health care reform in a speech to a joint session of Congress.

Third, he tells Congress he wants a bill before their August recess. That doesn't happen.

Fourth, during the summer the actual legislators get in front of their actual constituents and catch holy living hell. The legislators are not amused, but then, neither are their constituents.

Fifth, the House passes their bill, which everyone hates, late on a Saturday night by a handful of votes, including one Republican.

Sixth, the Senate passes their bill, which everyone hates, on Christmas fucking Eve, on a strict party line vote - not a single Republican votes for it.

(Thieves in the night reference, anyone?)

Seventh, Obama and his sled dogs start whining that Republicans haven't put forth any of their own ideas. This is absolutely true except for the fact that it's absolutely false, seeing as the Republicans have at least three proposed bills they've put forward regarding health care reform.

(Lying sacks of crap reference, anyone?)

Eighth, Scott Brown (R) campaigns loud and strong in the Special Senate election in MA on being the 41st Senate vote to stop the current health care mess and wins handily.

Ninth, Obama says he wants a bill to sign by his 2010 State of the Union address, but that doesn't happen.

Tenth, as Spring claws its way out from under the snowpack and the Congressional Spring Recess approaches, during which legislators will once again be forced to suffer the indignity of being bothered by their constituents, Obama has once again signaled a deadline for health care reform - March 18th.

Eleventh, To meet this new deadline our Congressional betters have come up with a great idea - reconciliation:

Instead of using the standard rules of the House passing a bill, the Senate passing a bill, and then voting on a new bill that both houses agree upon, this pack of feral Antoinettes wants the Senate to use a budgetary rule to pass a non-budgetary bill with less than 60 votes in the Senate, and the House to pass the Senate's bill unchanged, trusting that they can attend to all the nasty details of disagreement "afterwards". All of which brings to mind one of my favorite quotes from one of my favorite movies: Rochefort in 1973's The Three Musketeers: "Once in the Bastille, there is no 'afterwards'."

House members are right to be wary of agreeing to temporary lodgings in the Senate's Bastille.

Twelth, the latest option that's floated to the top of the bowl had been proposed by Congresscritter Louise Slaughter (D NY) who, as Chair of the House Rules committee, proposed that the whole bill could be considered passed in House if the House merely voted to approve changes that the Senate proposed to make. In other words, you don't have to read the whole thing before you sign it, just the parts I rewrote. Now, that pig's anus of an idea was strangled yesterday in its crib by the Senate parliamentarian (The what? I asked myself - Who are these nerds?), but the fact that they would have considered it put them in the grand position explained over on the Corner yesterday:

Democratic leaders should be asking themselves just how they have gotten to the point that their strategy is to amend a law that doesn’t exist yet by passing a bill without voting on it. Surely it’s time to start over.

Also, it shows just how desperate the Dems are, how inured from the public will, and how unwedded they are to Democratic principles. They want it, their leader wants it, so it's going to happen, natch.

I barely remember why I started this gambol through the splashy sewer pipe of "Health Care Reform, Or Else", but here I am a coincidental 12 steps later without a decent Alcoholics Anonymous joke and a feeling of sick ridiculousness pervading my being.

Do they really think we're that stupid? I think, Yes.

Are they really that stupid? I think, Yes.

Are they such committed leftists that they are willing to throw away a whole slew of careers, a presidency, and probable control of both houses of Congress over a nation-wrecking solution to a problem that doesn't exist? I think, Yes.

Yikes.

Hailing Frequencies No Longer Open

Ahh, the great experiment is dead. I love it.

"It is with the greatest regret, on behalf of our Board, that we must announce that Air America Media is ceasing its live programming operations as of this afternoon, and that the Company will file soon under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code to carry out an orderly winding-down of the business.

The very difficult economic environment has had a significant impact on Air America's business. This past year has seen a "perfect storm" in the media industry generally. National and local advertising revenues have fallen drastically, causing many media companies nationwide to fold or seek bankruptcy protection. From large to small, recent bankruptcies like Citadel Broadcasting and closures like that of the industry's long-time trade publication Radio and Records have signaled that these are very difficult and rapidly changing times."

Translated: "We never said anything much different than what you already read in the newspapers, see on most TV, and hear on NPR. We tried saying it louder and more stupidly, but it turns out that nobody listened, and nobody other than local sex toy shops paid to advertise. Plus, now that Bush is no longer President we have no boogieman to rant against."

Welcome to Idiot-Ville. Population: NPR

I heard this little gem last night on NPR when I was driving home. During a discussion of attacks on illegal immigration in Long Island, one of the interviewees claimed that using the phrase 'illegal immigrant' caused violence.

The story explains that Steven Levy, the Suffolk county chief executive is against illegal immigration.

Levy has taken a strong stance against illegal immigration, but he rejects efforts to connect those policy positions with acts of violence against Hispanics.

"It's a real disservice to try to say these things only happen in those areas where there might be a debate over the issue of illegal immigration," says Levy. "It's dangerous, because it gives the impression that if you don't have a debate over illegal immigration, Latinos are safe. That's not necessarily true."

Levy points out that even cities that welcome illegal immigrants struggle with crimes of racial hatred.

But Phil Ramos, who represents eastern Long Island in the New York State Assembly, says Levy does not appreciate that his words have violent consequences.


"If you say the word 'illegal' enough times as buzzwords in your speeches, these people cease to be human beings," says Ramos. "And that's what leads a group of six or seven young men to hunt an Ecuadorean man on the street like an animal, and just stab him and kill him."

Ramos was a police officer here for 20 years before he retired and ran for public office.

 Yeah, this makes sense -- there's now no difference between a man who claims "Illegal immigration is a violation of our laws and causes severe problems in our society" and a guy who says "lets beat illegal immigrants to death."

For what its worth, I'm against both illegal immigration AND beating innocent people to death.

Only a few moments later, the same program did a story on new breast cancer screening recommendations from a US Government task force. 

The message that breast cancer screening saves lives has taken root, and powerful breast cancer advocates who promote this message have earned women's trust. Perhaps that's why there's such a backlash against new recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force that advise against routine screening for women under age 50.

The task force recommendations were based on science studies that evaluated the effectiveness of mammograms. In one study, researchers determined that for every 1,900 women in their 30s and 40s who are invited to have a mammogram, one death from breast cancer was prevented.

When public health types look at these numbers, they conclude that it's not necessary to test every woman, every year — given the risks that accompany testing, including false positives, anxiety and scar tissue from biopsies.

But here's the rub: Individual women don't tend to think like public health folks. The 1 in 1,900 figure means little to a woman who has a sister, cousin or friend with the disease.

Nearly every woman interviewed for this story was profoundly hacked off, and I bet you that every single one would also be in favor of government run healthcare. Of course, nobody made the (to me) blindingly obvious connection that THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE GOVERNMENT RUNS HEALTHCARE.

The Liberal Whisperer, Part XVI

Liberal: I don't understand how anyone could be against this health care bill.

Conservative: We don't want more government involvement in our lives.

Liberal: But you'll take Social Security!

Conservative: But that's already in place.

Liberal: I still don't understand why anyone could be against this bill.

Conservative: Even if it were a good idea, we can't afford it right now.

Liberal: Why can't this huge Democratic supermajority get this thing done? Bush got everything he wanted for eight years without a supermajority. Absolutely everything.

Conservative: You mean like Social Security reform, Harriet Meiers, the Dubai Ports deal, and Immigration Reform?

Liberal: I would respect the Republican's position more if they did something more than just object to the House and Senate bills.

Conservative: Well, the Republicans have tried to offer suggestions and amendments to the Democratic bills, but they've been blocked. In some cases they've been physically barred from attending meetings on the subject. In spite of all that, they have offered a much smaller and non-intrusive bill for consideration. So you should respect them now.

Liberal: I still don't understand why anyone could be against this bill.

There really is no talking to these people. They not only aren't listening, they couldn't even process the facts at hand if they did listen.

And I've learned that there is no greater political and philosphical meter for reading the core of this nation than the degree to which liberals run away from their own views in public. Conservatives are, and have always been, proud to espouse and own their views (even when they fail to live up to them): smaller government, lower taxes, and a strong America at home and abroad. Liberals are almost never willing to admit what their policies really are: large and intrusive government, high taxes, and a neutered, internationalized America.

When Obama won last fall a fair number of people figured it was a core realignment and that somehow, decades of basic American conservatism had shifted to liberal leftism, and from Obama on down the liberals threw off their cloaks of moderation and have scampered to the left.

How wrong they've turned out to be. The next few months should be entertaining, at least.

I Am Not A Brain Surgeon...

...nor do I play one on TV. Because I am not a brain surgeon I tend to not hold strong opinions on the topic of brain surgery beyond "I think it's good that there are brain surgeons, and should I ever need one, I hope I get a good one." That's pretty much it. Now, there are many topics about which I'm vaguely knowledgeable where I might have a strong opinion or two, but I'm always well aware of of my own potential ignorance, and there of course a few things that I consider myself to be well-informed or even an "expert".

I can talk your ears off all day long about those topics, defend my opinions and positions quite well, and live very comfortably with the idea that some may disagree. I've even burned a few ones and zeroes in my day to "engage" some few folks on those topics on the Intertubes. Ahem.

So Friday night I'm headed home from work and I'm listening to the Air America chick and her dizzy friend/guest yakking about how health care isn't a right but should be, because it's all right there in the Constitution: Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Etc. Except, of course, I screamed at the radio speaker, that's a phrase from the the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. One document is the instruction manual for running our country, and the other is an exercise in rhetoric, albeit a great one. And sure, one can use the Declaration, I suppose, just like one can use the Federalist Papers and other founding documents to inform one's interpretation of the actual instruction manual, the Constitution.

But the Constitution rules all.

All of which really just allows me to raise the whiney point that these people that prattle on about health care "rights" and such could not be more ignorant and misinformed if they tried. But it will never, ever matter to them. They use a founding principle argument only so long as it convinces themselves or others that they are one step closer to what they want: complete abdication of all effort and will to the blanket of a government.

Point, Counterpoint!

A Mr. Tom Degan was kind enough to comment at length on my Highly Illogical, But... post below. Kind enough to comment (and as always, thanks for reading), but not kind enough to make the comment really relevant to the post topic. Because it's kinda long I'm copying it here so I can address his points one by one:

This is all about the underlying, hideous factor of the racism that is so deeply ingrained in the American character.

So I'm a racist because I think a black guy is a horrible president. Am I a racist because I think Jimmy Carter was also a horrible president? Am I a racist because I think Hillary Clinton would be a bad president? Or am I a racist, to you, because that label allows you to conveniently stop reading and listening to my ideas?

The attempt to portray this president (Of all people!) as a socialistic, left wing extremist doesn’t even pass the giggle test for people who have bothered to pay attention to their times and their history. Let’s face it - Franklin D. Roosevelt, he ain’t!

"Franklin D. Roosevelt, he ain't!"? Only because he's had a bare seven months to enact his agenda - give him time. And I think his words on the campaign trail, his words before the campaign trail like his statement regarding "redistributive justice" and the Supreme Court, his political mentors, personal companions, ethical leaders, and administrative appointments all clearly show a president as far to the left, if not farther, than anyone in that office in a long long time.

After all, he wants to, and in some cases already has

- increase the size of government
- increase the scope of government
- impose punitive taxation on the wealthy
- sieze ownership and control of private businesses
- legislate the destruction of private businesses
- reduce the scope and power of America's influence on the world
- slow and shrink economic growth
- replace the will of the individual with the will of the State

How is all of that added together not passing anyone's "giggle test" for a socialistic, left wing extremist, Mr. Degan? How is it not passing yours? What does all of that mean to you - centrism? Conservatism? Right wing?

They can’t obstruct his agenda with a manufactured scandal regarding his personal life, as they did with Bill Clinton. eleven years ago.

"manufactured"? That is the height of wilfull blindness. No one manufactured Ms. Lewinsky into Clinton's pants, or manufactured the president into perjury. Your version of reality is completely disassociated from the facts here.

Their only hope is for enough of the American people to become really frightened by the Big, Bad Negro Commie.

What "their" are you referring to? I assume you mean Republicans, and you couldn't be more wrong. All of the resistance to Obama and his agenda is coming from the people. Tea Parties, marching on D.C. hundreds of thousands strong yesterday, etc., is not coming from the Republican Party. The RNC or Republican congresscritters couldn't generate this much will and effort if they were paid to (which of course, they are. I make joke!).

Without the people getting pissed off, and yes, frightened, the Republicans in Congress would never have felt the need to resist all this hope & change coming down the pike at us.

An ironic description when one takes into consideration how boringly moderate Obama really is.

Here I begin to see. Anyone who can, with a straight face, claim that Obama is a moderate is so far to the left themselves that they might as well be from a different planet.

Think about this: In the last presidential campaign only one of the nominees of the two major political parties was born in the United States - Barack Obama - John McCain was born in Panama. Do you find it as revealing as I do that it was the black guy had his citizenship called into question?

No.

How much more proof do we need of the overt racism that is inherent in that party - or in our own country for that matter? Honestly, this isn’t rocket science, folks!

No, it's simple psychology. It's called "projection". See, you're a deep-cored racist. And the fact that you automatically judge people by the color of their skin and their ethnic background bothers you very, very much. You know that you shouldn't think that way, but you do. You look at a Barack Obama, or a Clarence Thomas, or a Thomas Sowell, or a Sonia Sotomayor, and you see black people and Hispanic people. The actual skills, qualifications, successes, and failures of these people are secondary to you compared to the fact that they are members of ethnic minorities, and are therefore deserving of different treatment.

You're not going to let anyone else figure out your secret shame of racism so you'll label everyone else one first.

Trust me, if Obama's presidency turns out to be the single-term flaming failure that I personally think it will become, it won't be Republicans, conservatives, or right wingers assigning blame to the color of Obama's skin; it will be Democrats, liberals, and left wingers. And you know that to be true just as much as I do.

Summing up my rambling above much more succintly, I'll put it this way: I see a bad president, you see a black president. Which one of us is the racist?

But wait! It gets better! Now Glenn Beck is slated to become the Martin Loony King of the Far Right thanks to his stupid “March on Washington” yesterday.

Isn’t life interesting?

I admit I don't understand the relevance of this last bit.

http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com

Tom DeganGoshen, NY

Thanks for reading, Tom!

For Thee, Not For Me, Part XVIII

So last night I'm zipping home from work, and I flip over to the local Air America station for a minute or two, it's whatever late night slop they have filling that slot (it's changed several times over the last 4 months or so), and naturally they're yapping about Health Care.

The guest actually complained that Obama was weak compared to Bush, that Bush rammed through everything he wanted without worrying about bipartisanship, and the host agreed. Like Social Security reform? Like Alberto Gonzales? Like Harriet Myers? Like No Child Left Behind? Like Senior Drug Prescriptions for Medicare? Like the Dubai ports deal?

Now, leaving aside the sadly typical ignorance and willful rewriting of history that is so typical of a liberal lefty, the next thing the guy said and the host agreed with is that Obama, if he was strong, would "pack the Court" like Roosevelt tried to do in 1937.

The most overused phrase in the blogosphere is quickly becoming "Can you imagine [liberal person's name here]'s outrage if the same thing had been proposed by President George W. Bush, or indeed any Republican politician?" You can't make this stuff up. It's like a Muslim threatening to cut your throat for being associated with violent, oversensitive reactions.

Self Abuse Revisited

This really should be an Update to my post below about the stimulus, or it could be an update to the recent one about transparency, but what the heck, we'll let it stand on its own, courtesy of Powerline.

Upon taking office, President Obama proclaimed that "transparency will be the touchstone of my administration." Six months later, we learn (via AP) that Obama has decided to put off the annual mid-summer budget update from mid-July, when it usually is released, to mid-August. Apparently, as AP suggests, the White House wants to delay the bad news at least until Congress leaves town on its August 7 summer recess.

On the one hand, it's kinda banana-peel funny when you see a guy you don't like repeatedly punch himself in the nads, but as I mentioned a few days ago, soon it begins to approach Ben Stiller levels and stops being entertaining. Also I have to remember that Obama ran his campaign the same way, and in the end 30% or so of the electorate still decided that they wanted to see what it would be like to have an inexperienced arrogant black dude in the White House. I think those 30% are pretty disillusioned by now but that doesn't make their congresscritters any smarter.

I'd report what my liberal friends think about the whole matter but I don't generally bring up the subject of politics, and wonder of wonders, now that it's their choice sitting in the Big Chair they're far less interested in politics, or my opinions thereof. Fancy that.

"For Me, Not For Thee" Part IV

So let me get this straight.

If I was interviewing for a counter job at Denny's, and I said "Yeah, well, I think a white guy makes better decisions based on being a white guy than, say, an Hispanic chick." I'd be laughed at, pointed at, called a racist, and generally be thought of as an embarrassment to anyone who knew me.

But if I'm an Hispanic chick applying to sit for the Supreme Court of the United States and I say Latina chicks make better decisions than white dudes, because of their inherent Latina-chickyness, no one is supposed to be aghast?

Because that's what I'm a-hearin' via the Air America gents I listen to occasionally.

Lefties are simply amazing in their capacity for ignorance and self-delusion.