Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Aussie moonbat: global “warming” curbs circumcisions

Whenever I ask if there’s anything global “warming” can’t be linked to, it’s generally rhetorical.  Well, enter Australian genocidal environut Tim Flannery (from Moonbattery):

Is there no end to the baleful consequences of the imaginary climate change crisis? It even prevents young Africans from getting circumcised, according to mammologist, paleontologist, and Kool-Aid–guzzling global warming hysteric Tim Flannery, who rants in his new book An Explorer’s Notebook:

The Samburu circumcise their youths in grand ceremonies, which are held every seven years or so, when enough cattle and other foods have accumulated to support such celebrations. Circumcision represents a transition to manhood, and until a youth has passed it he can’t marry. But it’s been 14 years since a circumcision ceremony has been held here. There are now 40,000 uncircumcised young men, some in their late 20s, waiting their turn. All of the eligible young women, tired of waiting, have married older men (multiple wives are allowed), so there are no wives for the new initiates.

I could never have imagined that climate change would have such an effect on an entire society.

We have to take Flannery’s word for it that the absence of rain in the African desert is due to nature having recently noticed all the carbon we’ve been emitting. 

This is the same dude who thinks that Mother Gaia would be well served if 1/3 of humanity were exterminated.  Oddly enough, he doesn’t exactly practice what he preaches by starting with himself.  Go figure.

November 5, 2007 Posted by | environuts, global warming, moonbats | 5 Comments

More AP poll manipulation

I’m guessing the AP thought it could get away with this.  From Michelle Malkin:

I saw the headline yesterday: “Poll: Most OK birth control for schools.”

Here’s what the AP emphasized–the soundbite that got recycled on the nightly news and radio briefs endlessly over the last 24 hours:

Sixty-seven percent support giving contraceptives to students, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll. About as many — 62 percent — said they believe providing birth control reduces the number of teenage pregnancies.

Only guess what?

There’s much more to the poll results than the dumbed-down soundbites suggest.

Sweetness and Light deconstructs the spin, including this telling tidbit:

Nope…no liberal media bias! 

That certainly explains quite a bit, doesn’t it? 

Two suggestions here: (1) How about a poll that asks only parents of school-aged kids what they think?; and (2) if you’re not the parent of a school-aged child, how about a steaming cup of STFU latté with cinnamon sprinkles?

Nope…no liberal media bias!

November 5, 2007 Posted by | media bias, polls | 7 Comments

How about some junk food science with your football?

As I’m perched on the couch watching the Sunday Night Football game between the Eagles and Cowboys, my expectations of halftime football analysis are shattered by Matt Liar…er, “Lauer”…peppering the football audience with global “warming” claptrap.  Details and video (for those who can stomach it) are here.

It isn’t bad enough that NBC subjects its Sunday Night Football viewers with certified moonbat Keith Blabberman.  Now they’ve got to hit us with global “warming” nonsense?  I’ll TiVo Heroes and Journeyman, but I’m not watching a damned thing on NBC from now on.

One bright spot: at least a former Cowboys player (and now a Troofer), Mark Stepnowski, didn’t torture us with his paranoid 9/11 conspiracy theory.  Getting one bit of propaganda was bad enough from NBC.

November 5, 2007 Posted by | global warming, media bias | 5 Comments

Feminist accuses Hillary of playing “woman as victim” card when convenient

How’s about some hot “blue on blue” action?  From the LAT:

A prominent feminist, allied with the presidential campaign of former Sen. John Edwards, accused Democratic front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Saturday of “disingenuously playing the victim card” by infusing her campaign with messages about gender.

“When unchallenged, in a comfortable, controlled situation, Sen. Clinton embraces her political elevation into the ‘boys club,’ ” Kate Michelman, the former president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, wrote in a posting on a blog of the liberal group Open Left.

“But when she’s challenged, when legitimate questions are asked, questions she should be prepared to answer and discuss, she is just as quick to raise the white flag and look for a change in the rules,” Michelman said. “It’s trying to have it both ways.” (I’m trying to avoid the juvenile, obligatory “Hillary / ‘both ways’” snark! – Ed.)
…
The issue erupted after the Clinton campaign complained that male Democratic rivals at Tuesday night’s presidential debate in Philadelphia had subjected her to a “pile-on.”

At the debate, Clinton appeared to give nonspecific answers on several topics, such as on whether she supported the controversial plan of New York’s Democratic governor, Eliot Spitzer, to give driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. Democratic rivals seized the moment as an opportunity to portray Clinton as a calculating candidate with chameleon-like views.

Clinton’s campaign subsequently posted a video on her website called “The Politics of Pile-On” that showed clips of the men at the debate uttering her name in rapid-fire succession.

On Thursday, she gave a speech at her alma mater, Wellesley College, in which she spoke about her effort to break into “the all-boys club of presidential politics.”

Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, a top rival to Clinton in the Democratic race, said of the New York senator Friday that when “people start challenging her point of view, that suddenly she backs off and says, ‘Don’t pick on me.’ “

Michelman reacted similarly.

“At one minute the strong woman ready to lead, the next, she’s the woman under attack, disingenuously playing the victim card as a means of trying to avoid giving honest, direct answers to legitimate questions,” Michelman wrote of Clinton.

“It is not presidential,” Michelman said, adding that women “know better than to use our gender as a shield when the questions get too hot.” … 

Her Highness says that a woman can be president and handle the toughness of the job, but then she cowers behind her gender when things get tough for her.  “I am tough…but don’t get tough with me, because I’ll call you a sexist bully!”  Time will tell if that approach works.

November 5, 2007 Posted by | feminism, Hillary | 1 Comment

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 25 other followers