Thursday, September 13, 2007

Just how dumb is Jessica Valenti? 
THIS Dumb!

A pastor in Australia who recently pled guilty to raping two of his teenage daughters said he only did it in order to teach them how to be good wives:

The man told the court the sex was not about fulfilling his desires but about teaching his daughters how to behave for their husbands when they eventually married, as dictated in scripture.

Just a thought--how far off is this from Purity Balls?

After all, it's all about fathers owning their daughters' sexuality and preparing them to be "good wives." And while incest isn't explicit in the purity ball madness, it sure is implied. Thoughts?

Yes, Jessica. I have a thought. You're a moral retard.

You can't tell the difference between the self-serving sexual exploitation of children and young women by an authority figure on one hand and a loving act of devoted fathers on the other?

This is the kind of discernment it takes on the left to get a book deal and a bunch of fawning media appearances from chuckleheaded news producers at CNN?

Conservatives have to be intellectual .400 hitters to get the media exposure this benchwarming doofus gets.

Shit, if I were a surrender monkey liberal, Countercolumn would have been getting 70,000 hits a day back in 2004/2005 when I kept up the place better, and I'd be on MSNBC every stupid week, getting fawned over and invited to deliver the Democratic response to the weekly radio address and shit.

Splash, out


Labels: ,

Yes, it's pretty distressing that the argument from the right is not getting any media play. Just like the most important demonstrations in world history - December 2003 in Iraq - were ignored by the media. Bush manages to get his argument out, but without the support from others, it seems to be assumed that what he is saying is invalid for unspecified reasons. I mean, is freedom for brown people really important anyway?

If we actually manage to win this war, this period of brainwashing despite an environment of total freedom will be one for historians to ponder and ponder and ponder. As we do already.
The pro-Saddam demonstrations were the most important in world history?

More important than the demonstrations precipitating the collapse of the Soviet Bloc in 1989, or the Yeltsin demonstrations in 2001?

More important than Tiananmen? More important than the demonstrations against Ferdinand Marcos?

Dude. Put down the crack pipe. The left seriously needs to stop reading its own press.
Hmmm. Rereading your comment, I'm not sure how ironic you're being.

Maybe it's sleep deprivation on my part.
You mean I'm not one of 70-thousand?

My bad. I'll try harder.

Thanks for your post...and as always, your blog.
Jason, "The pro-Saddam demonstrations were the most important in world history?"

They were pro-American. Pro-liberation. You apparently aren't even aware that they existed, they were that well covered-up. Go to the Iraqi blog healingiraq to see many photos of the demo.

"More important than the demonstrations precipitating the collapse of the Soviet Bloc in 1989"

Yes, those demos didn't cause the collapse of the Soviet Union.

"or the Yeltsin demonstrations in 2001?"

1991? I'm not sure I'd classify Yeltsin's mini-revolution as mere "demonstrations".

"More important than Tiananmen?"

That's a tough one. The Chinese demos were certainly important, but didn't really give any new information. Anyone could have guessed there were people in China who wanted democracy.

"More important than the demonstrations against Ferdinand Marcos?"

Definitely. The Philippines is nowhere near as important as the Middle East, and again, it wasn't validation of the philosophy of using the US military to liberate people.

"Dude. Put down the crack pipe. The left seriously needs to stop reading its own press."

I'm a Bush supporter you doofus! Those Iraqi demos validated the fact that there were Iraqis who wanted the US invasion/liberation. The left insisted that these people didn't exist. Prior to the war, I believed these people existed, but I had nothing with which to counter the left-wing. Those demos provided the validation that there were Arabs who appreciated freedom and were willing to have a foreign power come in to give them that freedom. It was a very important concept to shove in the left's face.

Unbelievable. You don't even know about the demos. Someone should be tried with treason for this. You were in the friggin' country and didn't even know about it.

Yes, you're right. I see now that you were referring to the demonstrations in late 2003, well after the war.

For some reason, I glossed over that, and read your post as referring to the well-publicized peace demonstrations all over the rest of the world.

Forgive me...I had been working 80 hour weeks and had just returned from CEDIA EXPO, the trade show from Hell.

My apologies for confusing you with the idiot wing of the Democratic party.

Jason, "My apologies for confusing you with the idiot wing of the Democratic party."

No problem. But you still haven't addressed the actual issue at hand. Even the right-wing elements of the media covered up those historic demos - the first pro-American demos in the history of the Middle East. There should have been endless talkshows arguing where exactly these people were coming from, and why they were different from the terrorists, and also calling the left-wing to account for insisting that "no-one wants to be bombed", and asking why they came to those conclusions in the first place. What assumptions had they been using? Were they racist assumptions? Were these racist assumptions a product of US academia? If so, what should be done to combat this racism? Etc etc etc. It could have been strung out for months. A "Congressional Inquiry" (or whatever you guys call it) into the state of US academia or something. Instead, there was about 10 seconds on Fox News. That's it. History was made on that day. But without the media acknowledging that, it is instead deemed unimportant. Just like the pro-liberation Iraqi blogs were unimportant. And institutionalized rape was unimportant. And cutting out people's tongues was unimportant. I mean, they grow back, don't they? It's just one of those quaint cultural things regardless. I bet if you ask those people with their tongues cut out by Saddam whether they have any complaints, you won't hear a peep out of them, so it's probably fine. Yeah, I'm sure of it. It wasn't on TV, so it's not an issue.
Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Site Meter

Prev | List | Random | Next
Powered by RingSurf!

Prev | List | Random | Next
Powered by RingSurf!