Sunday, April 07, 2013
NEW VOICE COLUMN UP...
...about the slow shift rightbloggers are making, in their hour of defeat, from yelling about gay marriage to yelling about straight marriage. You may not notice it yet, but I predict it'll be a comer; it'll be their chance to do outreach to gay people by giving the scolds, nags, and shrews in their community a place of welcome. Hell, they might even turn Andrew Sullivan back around.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What amazes me about all of this is just how hostile many of these pundits are to the very concept of love. It's easy to forget that romantic love is a recent concept and, in many ways, a radical one. Reading remarks like those remind me of any of the Ming Dynasty-era love stories (Hong Lou Meng being the quintessential one) that treat love and duty as contrary forces. Of course, in those stories love always wins in the end, mostly because it didn't in real life. So this idea the cons are pushing now is hardly a new one. But I'm rambling on my own personal obsessions again.
ReplyDeleteWhat's more interesting in a modern, political concept is the plans behind the rhetoric. Most of these pundits are arguing for the government to pressure people (often through economic means) into marriage. When I think about these schemes, a phrase pops into my head, one that has been thrown around by conservatives for ages - "social engineering." Using the government to force people into "right behavior" certainly qualifies, right? So why is it okay for conservatives to do that when it's supposed to be so awful? (Rhetorical question, obviously)
Like Murray, Wilcox believed in nagging -- "highly educated Americans," he said, "need to put their privilege in service of the public good by doing a better job of extending their marriage mindset to the rest of America." He didn't say how it would work, but we like to think he sent troupes of pro-marriage troubadours to wander the hinterlands, singing songs of conjugal wealth transference.
ReplyDeleteEasy. Every like-minded merito-American should simply marry a poor person. Instant increase in the standard of living and, into the bargain, would teach most of 'em firsthand that love, romance, and compatibility have nothing to do with how smart people behave.
Or is that too much like asking the wealthy to volunteer for military service?
Can someone please let me know when oral sex will bring about the apocalypse? I'm asking for a friend.
ReplyDeleteI like to think that I am doing my part to immanentise the Eschaton.
ReplyDeleteAs we put this gay marriage thing behind us, expect tons more
ReplyDeletestraight-marriage lectures -- and, when that gets old, maybe related
lectures, such as whether cunnilingus, for example, inhibits or promotes
the accumulation of assets. Then, when that gets old, whether
anilingus inhibits or promotes blah blah. Then...
Up next from The Ampersand: The Top Ten Conservative Sexual Positions.
I think we'll start seeing some right-wingers seriously advocate for a return to arranged marriage. Honestly, it's the logical conclusion of this marriage-as-social-organizer meme they're using. I can see it now: sophistry about how successful various historical monarchs were in arranged marriages, "the freedom to choose has made us less free", etc.
ReplyDeleteIt didn't occur to me before reading your post, but it seems entirely likely that someone (Dreher, maybe) will start pushing it. Man, what a crazy world we live in.
What is so ironic about this is sermonizing is that you can't shake a Sunday morning news show without a half dozen divorced or philandering Republican spokespersons falling out of it - or so much as drive through the Bible Belt without it unbuckling itself and asking you if you're looking for a good time.
ReplyDeleteDems and Blue States are statistically more successful at marriage than our preachy conservascold betters, so they must frame it as a problem of the poors - the unspoken assumption being that the poor are minorities and therefore Democrats. Never mind that the list of rich and Republican divorcees and cheats starts with Rush Limbaugh and John McCain and Rupert Murdoch and slithers upward from there. It's all, "Hey, look over there! Isn't that single mom stealing your green fees with her public assistance?"
"It's just too easy [to divorce]," the husband told Harris. "She could
ReplyDeleteliterally change her life overnight." We can see how conservatives would
find this frustrating.
They really, really, really don't want to go there.
Also, the dads on TV are "bumbling doofuses." Reynolds is a professor of law.
ReplyDeleteTen bucks also says he's a big fan of The Honeymooners and doesn't understand why the dads on TV are bumbling doofuses.
They do have trouble with some basic concepts. Like love, and consent.
ReplyDeleteAnd freedom, for that matter.
One of those positions should be "the Ampersand".
ReplyDeleteSpoiler alert: They all involve fursuits.
ReplyDeleteArranged gay marriage. That's something they can sink their teeth into.
ReplyDeletea kind of gnostic wisdom
ReplyDeleteMonsignor Douthat seems not to have noticed that he's advocating heresy. Better hope Pope Francis is more broad-minded than his predecessor...
This subject seems to bring out the natural puckishness in Roy, something for which I, at least, am grateful.
ReplyDeleteOther than that, I see the right's rude attempts at social engineering as just a sideline. Secretly, yes, they want to order society in a way that pleases their gut instincts and reinforces their view of themselves as superior beings (this is just more abject longing for the return of an aristocracy, especially an aristocracy founded on priggishness through wealth). But, I don't think we've heard the last of gay marriage as a means of giving the scolds a thrill. Abortion was, in 1973, considered a matter settled, too, and the truly fanatical, much like the scions of the Old Confederacy, have not only not given up, they've been pursuing a radical strategy to undo Roe v. Wade at the state level.
For the mostly insane, there will be myriad ways by which to challenge gay marriage, from states' rights legal arguments, to less overt ways, such as renewing old tactics such as redlining and job discrimination and, not unexpectedly, continuing religious freedom campaigns organized by the likes of the FRC and the mega-churches.
Nor do I think it likely that the GOPers would simply hand off one of their signature wedge issues so easily. They will very likely turn this over to the battery of think tanks at their disposal and await the torrent of studies and reports based on anecdotal and intentionally misinterpreted evidence that approval of gay marriage was a misguided effort at best, and a scourge upon the nation at worst. This is a debate that can be restarted at virtually any time.
In the meantime, yes, they will occupy themselves with ragging on the poors--that's always been a whip close to hand, with a grip of comfortable feel, and promoting a sort of genteel Victorian marriage of convenience model for the proles both lashes the emotional backs of the poors and strokes the vanity of aristocrat manques.
Oh, sure, they'll say there's ten, but, really, there's only one.
ReplyDeleteThe Amper-Sand? Grit in the KY jelly is not a position, it is a cruel practical joke.
ReplyDeleteThe Republicans aren't so much interested in public assistance as pubic assistance.
ReplyDelete"combination of sudden sexual freedom and economic stagnation... more
ReplyDeleteor less demolished traditional family structures in a generation,
helping to create the underclass as we know it today."
It's just depressing that someone either this evil or dimwitted or ill-informed has the pulpit that he does. So there was no fucking underclass before 1967, Ross? So the economic-fucking-stagnation of a 4 trillion$ US GDP in1967 vs. today's 13 trillion? That "stagnation" busted up traditional family structure and "created" an underclass? The "traditional family structures" of the underclass that Daniel Moynihan was bitching about not existing in 1965? The "sudden" sexual freedom of the poors that elites have been moaning about at least through the industrial revolution?
The underclass as we know it today, Ross, you lying sack of shit, has been the product of 6000+ years of a small segment of the population siphoning off (or stealing, or coercing) the bulk of wealth produced by humanity. They--the small segment of elites--have justified and explained their rights to claim the fruits of others' labor in thousands of different ways: the inferiors live immorally; they must be forced to work; they squander resources; usw. You're just another in the long tradition of assholes, helping to create the overclass as we know it today, asswipe.
Economic insecurity does make you think twice about having children. My parents got divorced because of it and I didn't have kids because of it.
ReplyDeleteLike Murray, Wilcox believed in nagging -- "highly educated Americans," he said, "need to put their privilege in service of the public good by doing a better job of extending their marriage mindset to the rest of America."
ReplyDeleteThey're very quick to call "elitism" on highly educated Americans telling other Americans what's what. Apparently this isn't so when the idea has the National Review Seal of Approval™.
"children, once at the center of marriage, have now become negotiable, and what used to be negotiable -- love, companionship, sex -- has moved to the center."
ReplyDeleteYeah, it's one of the many good things about our society that... wait, hang on, that wasn't optimistic?
(a vote for Bart is a vote for anarchy)
Oof, that's an old one. In context, he's claiming that "dumb dad" is harming masculinity and discouraging men from marrying. In high school, I too claimed that the success of Everybody Loves Raymond spelled doom for Western civilization; the difference being that I was kidding.
ReplyDeleteHey now, I'm a big fan of The Honeymooners. And Ralph Kramden was keenly aware of his own doofusness.
ReplyDeleteIt's hardly mainstream, but at least a few culture cons are rather bullish on "courtship," a social trend that's very popular among evangelicals right now. At its most extreme, courtship is pretty damn close to arranged marriage, with the girl's father deciding when and if the couple will marry.
ReplyDeleteNothing wrong with liking The Honeymooners (except for the domestic-violence threats). But the doofus-husband thing started there -- and, of course, lost its self-awareness over the years as it became just another sitcom cliche.
ReplyDeleteYet the MRAs (who provide Dr. Mrs. Ole Perfesser her adoring audience, and Dave Futrelle at Manboobz his targets) complain bitterly about how the doofus husband/dumb dad trope is created by the feminists who rule the world and keep men emasculated.
Ask them if they like Ralph Kramden, though, and they'll say yes -- but fail to see him as the progenitor of every last incompetent husband in a Swiffer commercial.
For people allegedly hellbent on promoting marriage, they sure are doing their damnedest to make marriage sounding really horrible, aren't they? And I'm sorry; I know I shouldn't be amazed by anything at this late date, but I cannot help but be eternally boggled by the way they just keep pushing this insane "get married and GET RICH!" line. I know, I know: if not for innumeracy, the republican base would collapse into a singularity, but are they REALLY this stupid? Or, alternatively, do they expect other people to be?
ReplyDeleteOkay, stupid question. I'll show myself out.
Hearing a conservative utter a phrase like "put their privilege in service of the public good" is like seeing Halley's Comet. Figures that the one time I hear it it's in service of finding another way for rich people to shame and demean poor people.
ReplyDelete(Looks down) I'd give it about 30 seconds.
ReplyDeleteThere are ten, if you count the positions that are between Republicans and the man in the next stall in the airport bathroom, or the rent boy hired to "carry his luggage," or the prostitute in his car, or what happens on the "Appalachian Trail."
ReplyDeleteTwo wetsuits and a dildo optional.
"children, once at the center of marriage, have now become negotiable...
ReplyDelete'Morganatic marriage' is not a wedding one attends under the influence of too much rum.
If dogfood is involved, it's the alpocalypse.
ReplyDeleteWell, conservatives are sure doing their damnedest to eliminate that "sudden sexual freedom" bit as well -- what with abstinence-only sex education, the attacks on Planned Parenthood, Title X funding, the restrictions on birth control in schools and Medicaid, and the Helms Amendment. And for the queers, they refuse to consider condom distribution!
ReplyDelete"... but are they REALLY this stupid? Or, alternatively, do they expect other people to be?"
ReplyDeleteOh, I think the case for the first inevitably leads to a confirmation of the second.
We've finally got this end-of-the-world thing licked.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure the smugocracy will play around with this one for a while, but they'll discard it when they realize it doesn't have any good propaganda potential. It's one thing to judge the sex lives of a small, poorly understood, and easily demonized minority, but attacking the marriages of the vast majority is a nonstarter. That's why we heard so much about gay marriage, but only the fringe talked about covenant marriage or outlawing contraception. It's the difference between using dog whistles about foodstamps and calling 47% of the country moochers.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I'll admit my little half-baked theory doesn't explain why the reproductive rights of 50% of the population is considered fair game.
ReplyDeleteWait, so Ross is a papist now? I can never keep up.
ReplyDeleteMoney can't buy happiness. Marriage doesn't guarantee either one, although it can be an ingredient in a life with either or both. I suspect a lot of professional social conservatives make a good living but aren't happy, and it shows.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point. These shows have been around for six decades now. Plenty of time to pick up subtext, but these folks haven't.
ReplyDeleteLet's not forget that they also push Christianity as the way to get rich, when God so approves your moral choices that everything you do brings you success. This is of course a bit different from what that long-haired hippie from Nazareth preached, but who cares about him?
ReplyDeleteHong Lou Meng is Qing dynasty.
ReplyDeleteYou maniacs! You blew it up!
ReplyDeleteand according to Reynolds, there were no doofus fathers on TV before 2000 AD. Ricky Ricardo never appeared during the 1950s, he was computer-engineered and implanted in reruns to replace Lucy's real husband by feminazi subversives.
ReplyDeleteI suspect part of the reason is that The Honeymooners accepted Ralph Kramden was supposed to be giving the orders (Ricky Ricardo too)--part of the fun is therefore that he's not man enough to keep his wife in line. Whereas According to Jim etc. assume the wife has the right to give her husband orders, at least some of the time.
ReplyDelete"Life was better when all the hot women married assholes like me because we had money, and we could treat them like shit all the time because they weren't allowed to divorce us and take half our money."
ReplyDeleteAs we put this gay marriage thing behind us
ReplyDeleteOo-er.
Silly, it's because that stuff about abortions and morning-after pills doesn't apply to all women, just sluts.
ReplyDeleteMaybe "put privilige in service to the common good" means polygamy for the upper classes to save more poor (but beatific) women from poverty? The institution of polygamy in many places and certain times has been seen as explicitly charitable in that wealthy men can marry and support women who have been rendered destitute by wars and widowhood.
ReplyDeleteI eagerly await the resurgence of both arranged marriage and the FLDS --the only question is whether the gatz or the Democratic Party will more easily absorb the reserve army of the in married when all the nubile girls are snapped up by the gerontocracy.
Hearing a conservative utter a phrase like "put their privilege in service of the public good" is like seeing Halley's Comet.
ReplyDeleteSimilar phraseology features in the opening chapters of "Bobos in Paradise"; and possibly in later paragraphs but I never reached far enough to tell. Brooks was pining for the Good Old Days of WASP Republican ascendency, when the scions of good families -- motivated by a sense of Noblesse oblige -- would take turns sacrificing a few decades of their lives to run the country for the common good. It was by all accounts a kind of national service.
Kinky.
ReplyDelete"Courtship," "purity balls," "promise rings," early marriage and no divorce--as well as "complementarianism" and rigid gender roles are all very good ways of trying to prevent women and children from voting with their feet and running away from oppressive family systems. I think there's probably a pretty good dissertation that could be written about the rise and fall of truancy laws, emancipation of minors, and the anxiety of right wing america that drugs and gay sex are pulling their children out of safe, patriarchal, enclaves.
ReplyDeleteRushing girls and boys into marriage at an early age, preventing experimentation, are all ways of trying to prevent people from learning about outsider practices like education, "free love" and contraception. Someone here linked to an astonishing essay by a young christian woman about what it was like to be forced into one of these courtship relationships with her husband, who she loved and loves but just how awful it was to be forcibly restrained from having any normal exploration of the love relationship with the very person you were supposed to spend your life with. I bookmarked it but can't find it.
At this distance I think its pretty obvious that Ralph Kramden and that bus driver were having a long term closeted relationship and the women were merely the beards.
ReplyDeleteBut actually even granting some didactic role to what was essentially a vaudeville skit done on tv the lesson of the Honeymooners is that men dream big and their long suffering wives pick up the pieces after them. The fantasy is that men never really fuck up enough to destroy the world, and that everything is ok at the end and mommy still loves them. That's not subversive of the institution of marriage or of patriarchy--that's just another way of legitimizing it and defusing the tensions inherent in the power and class politics of their real lives. Alice never leaves Ralph for a more productive, less abusive, wealthier guy. And so Ralph never has to rock the boat economically. And he's faithful to her and keeps her close through a mixture of pity (on her part), love, and agressive policing of her boundaries.
Not that anything else would be particularly funny. I'm not sure why these guys look to sit coms for validation--why don't they look at dramas and ask how many police dramas undermine the "traditional family" or masculine domination of the discourse? I blame Hill Street Blues for the destruction of my marriage--Frank Furillo cheated on his wife with a much more beautiful woman and that ugly guy got a gorgeous dame and showed his backside to the world. How very nontraditional that was!
I love the idea of an attack of sudden sexual freedom. Is it more like Godzilla's attack on Tokyo or more like a sudden craving for cheetos? Whatever, I'm still waiting for mine.
ReplyDeleteChildren, where they occur, are lucky if they get to be cared for and loved at all. The problem isn't marriages where children are "negotiable"--where that means non existent. The problem is marriages and relationships where children are not negotiated but merely a thoughtless or careless byproduct of other relationships. Sex without protection because g-d wants you to play russian roulette with someone lest you become an old maid/be thought to be gay is just a terribly sick thing to push on people. But I guess that goes without saying.
ReplyDeleteits already happened, there was an editorial saying just that in some of the crankier anglo catholic magazines (not FT, before that one came out)) i read many years ago, the author was all about 'it worked so well in the old days!!"
ReplyDeleteyeah why dont they get the correlat ion =/= causation thing?? ....a logicl person might go, hm, marriages cost a shit ton, the debt load from a "tradtional" marriage can often be a factor in divorce, since fighting over money is a huge cause, maybe rich people get married more bc only rich people can really AFFORD to get married??
ReplyDeleteliberty is the new freedom
ReplyDeleteBut in I Love Lucy Ricky is the sensible one, whose orders Lucy doesn't follow --at her peril. "Lucy, you got some 'splainin to do" is the catch phrase that sums it up.
ReplyDeleteWell, Ricardo certainly had the condescending attitude towards the "little woman" down pat, but I think he was a little too much Not White to truly represent the Dominant American Husband for conservatoids.
ReplyDeleteOne of those positions should be "the Ampersand".
ReplyDeleteI know that one. It's an elaborate and graphic way to get et.
"Up next from The Ampersand: The Top Ten Conservative Sexual Positions."
ReplyDeleteTen? Really??
Could it be that Ken Cuccinelli's campaign to bring back anti-sodomy laws in Virginia would avert the apocalypse?
ReplyDeleteKEN! WHOA-O!
He saved every one of us!
At any rate, you blew it!
ReplyDeleteThere's a reason the production company was called Toho.
ReplyDeleteHey, those no-bid cost-plus contracts don't write themselves, mister!
ReplyDeleteThat would explain why Viagra is covered by most medical plans.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure why
ReplyDeletethese guys look to sit coms for validation--why don't they look at
dramas and ask how many police dramas undermine the "traditional family"
or masculine domination of the discourse?
It's because they're shallow dumbasses who are only equipped to comment on "lowest common denominator" forms of entertainment.
I double dog dare you to google "Confurvatives".
ReplyDeleteYou can't have freedom without a contract - any number of libertarians have told me so - and a marriage contract is as good as any.
ReplyDeleteThe first shall be last, and the last first doesn't seem to bother 'em - for a god-fearing bunch, they sure live their lives like atheists.
ReplyDeletePlus nine different varieties of bitter regret.
ReplyDeleteThey ARE doing their damnedest, and meeting with worrying success down at the red state level, where the rubes are eating it up in spite of their initiatives being the social policy equivalent of castor oil.
ReplyDeleteI think it's kind of cute. It's like they're desperately looking for an issue that won't grievously offend at least one important demographic. Married people, even those with hues that are problematic for Republicans, are much more likely to vote than sluts those guys with their pants on the ground. Hetero marriage is like apple pie and baseball. Who can be against it?
ReplyDeleteOf course they fail to consider the question of how ridiculous they come off, and ignorant, largely mistaking cause for effect, but at the end of the day, they get paid and can rest content that they managed to piss off at least a few liberals, so it's all good.
And of course, Ralph and Alice were never "blessed" with children, and Alice didn't work, but Ralph did have his priorities straight:
ReplyDeleteRalph: "You know, no Kramden woman has ever supported her husband. The Kramden men are the workers in the family.
Alice: "Wait a minute, Ralph. What about your father? For a long time, he didn't work at all."
Ralph: "But neither did my mother. At least he kept his pride, Alice... he went on relief."
Plenty of time to pick up subtext
ReplyDeleteThese are people who can look at a graph of the national debt by year and deny that Reagan and Bush had anything to do with it. Subtext may as well be on another planet.
Oh for fs it should be beautiful not beatific and gays not gatz. Fucking iPhone.
ReplyDeleteSomeone actually did research on that and concluded that yes, working class fathers tend to the doofus mode, educated fathers get to be wise and cool.
ReplyDeleteBut of course, I'm not sure According to Jim, etc. is about fathers being doofuses as much as it's pointless to put Jim Belushi in a show and make him the wise, responsible one.
Well, only one of them involves a partner.
ReplyDeleteYes, both marriage and weddings and, for thirdsies, children are, in fact, luxury items. If you can afford the children and a job you are double plus wealthy. If you can afford the children on one person's salary your partner is wealthy. If you can have the children and you have no partner or job you are condemened to our threadbare welfare system and/or your kids get taken away.
ReplyDeleteAccording to statistics, "Internet radio attracts an upper-income audience, with weekly Internet radio listeners 36% more likely to live in a household with annual income of $100K+ than the general US population 18+".
ReplyDeleteAnother consideration when choosing your software is whether you will be connecting
to a single stream or multiple streams. com ( is the home site for a radio station
only on the internet which provides exactly what it says: Worship music.
My page - online radio
The problem they will always have is that their method of creating and using issues is dependent on creating a wedge between some constituency and another in order to get the favored constituency out and spite voting against the less favored one. Its olds against youngs, men against women (s rights), whites against blacks, healthy people/insured people against sick people/uninsured people--now they are trying to turn marriage rights into another wedge issue against the gays and having lost that turn it into a wedge issue between....what two groups?
ReplyDeleteThe problem they are having is that their political fortunes rise as long as the voting populace is fragmented and angry. They could try to mobilize lots more people against an external enemy--like the commies, the eco-"terrorists" or the muslims but each of these enemies has been somewhat exhausted as a unifying theme. If the Republicans were smart they'd manufacture a new evil--maybe something from outer space--and try to create a new coalition of the angry, resentful, and fearful based on that. Instead they are going to keep trying to split their own coalition in search of internal enemies.
Its happening right now in South Dakota where their rush to attack women and sexuality is losing them their own middle class, secure, republican female voters. You can't extend your demonization of the sluts to include your sisters, wives, and mothers and not find yourself in a smaller and smaller meeting room with no one serving you snacks or doing your laundry.
Has anybody suggested bringing back dowries as a way to "encourage marriage"? Hell, that would arguably be *closer* to the whole "bringing back traditional marriage" thing the wingnuts have been screaming about for years...
ReplyDeleteKeep "gatz." It makes you sound even hepper than you are.
ReplyDeleteLife of Riley.
ReplyDeleteTwo: Protestant Missionary and Catholic Missionary. They're really the same except the theme for the Catholic Missionary is "she's got rhythm."
ReplyDelete(Ralph Kramden WAS the bus driver. Ed Norton worked in the city sanitation system.)
ReplyDeleteDems and Blue States are statistically more successful at marriage than our preachy conservascold betters
ReplyDeleteBy a lot. This is a problem for Gooper marriage grifters, since the people most inclined to marry early and divorce or have multiple marriages make up their base. Divorce rates are significantly higher in the South than the Northeast, despite all the Bible-thumping.
Studies have also shown that while poor and rich people share similar values about marriage, bad economic and social circumstances lead to a higher divorce rate among the poor -- e.g., unemployment is not only a factor in whether people get married but the likelihood that the marriage will fail when they do.
Well, it's true that marriage is not as popular today as it was in that golden age called the 1950's. I blame the Lockhorns.
ReplyDeleteSo I guess "Sorry about making such a fuss about gay marriage" was not considered as a possible response.
ReplyDeleteI explored these issues in my college thesis, "Feminist subversion of the portrayal of men in mass media as demonstrated by Fibber McGee and Molly".
ReplyDeleteI know, I was wondering why that little bit of historical dialect trivia was in the iphone but so much else isn't. Also, I wish to plug "Gatz" the stage performance which I saw last year which is an extended, eight hour (?) reading and weirdly powerful evocation of The Great Gatsby as a crew of bored workers at a factory read and enact the entire text. Here's a review of it: http://articles.latimes.com/2012/nov/30/entertainment/la-et-cm-gatz-review-20121201
ReplyDeleteI'm not seeing any tearful eulogies for Margaret Thatcher here the way there were for Roger Ebert, so all liberals are evil forever.
ReplyDeleteThe Professor was totally banging that Nanny, don't let anybody tell you different.
ReplyDeleteI blame Ronald Reagan's first wife.
ReplyDeleteInside the heart of every Cuccinelli is a Buttafuco yearning to be set free.
ReplyDeleteI just did and damn you, I cannot now un-Google it from my mind. http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/ConFURvatives Also, there is such a thing called wikifur??!!!
ReplyDeleteThis is why they're so afraid of marriage without defined gender roles.
ReplyDeleteIt's like a license to threadshit!
ReplyDeleteYou get the feeling that they'd like to tell America that it should eat its vegetables and go out and play, but someone beat them to it.
ReplyDeleteThe Death of Maggie Thatcher brought tears to my eyes...... tears of joy, hahahahaha!
ReplyDeleteSounds like the beginning of a Shaggy Dog story....
ReplyDeleteAs long as it's not broccoli, I guess they're OK with being ordered to eat vegetables.
ReplyDeleteSorry, forgot to put "inb4" in front of it.
ReplyDeleteRoss has been a papist for a while now. You're probably thinking of Rod Dreher, who zoomed past papist to Eastern Orthodox.
ReplyDeleteFor the mostly insane, there will be myriad ways by which to challenge gay marriage, such as...continuing religious freedom campaigns organized by the likes of the FRC and the mega-churches.
ReplyDeleteAnd denying people communion.
Wouldn't it be something to have folks such as Donald Trump or Jamie Dimon lecturing the plebs about how marriage will make you rich!
ReplyDeleteI'd spend a wild weekend in Vegas with this comment.
ReplyDeleteDivorce rates are significantly higher in the South than the Northeast, despite all the Bible-thumping.
ReplyDeleteIts those dammed "no fault" divorce laws.
Thank you. I was wondering if I was the only one who noticed Lucy Ricardo's serial ineptness not only set back the cause of women in the workplace for at least a decade, her back-row mugging was never that funny to begin with. Most overrated comedienne of all time.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry to have to say this, but if conservatives have no enemies, they'll make some up. This is why they keep doing this--it works for them. (If you take away the backhoe, they'll get a shovel; if you take away the shovel, they'll use their hands.) The solution is to outvote them, and outwit them, because we can't outwait them.
ReplyDeleteThank you, I couldn't remember Norton's name and I forgot which was which although I had a clear mental picture of Ralph's hat.
ReplyDeleteIs it on some kind of direct line, or do you have to change somewhere?
ReplyDeleteΕѵeгythіng is veгy open with a very сlеar clarifiсаtion οf the challenges.
ReplyDeleteIt was trulу informatіve. Υouг website is verу
useful. Thanks for sharing!
My wеb page; cialis
I blame The Bickersons.
ReplyDeleteI always wanted to see a sequel to Independence Day that started out with the world celebrating both its victory over the aliens and their newfound alliance in the face of extraterrestrial threats... and five years later, they're flying around in captured flying saucers, blasting at each other.
ReplyDelete"The world has lost one of the great champions of freedom and liberty, and America has lost a true friend."
ReplyDeleteIn Death Squads We Trust™
~
Nobody actually thinks that guy is a liberal, do they?
ReplyDeleteHey, now, don't be so hard on the Cucc.
ReplyDeleteKEN! WHOA-O!
ReplyDeleteHe saved every one of us!
"General Kala! Ken God-dumb approaching!"
"What do you mean, 'Ken God-dumb approaching'?"
No, they live their lives like assholes. Don't go dissin' atheists, Your Holiness.
ReplyDeleteI'm hoping they kept a pit in hell hot enough for her.
ReplyDeleteWith no thought for the afterlife.
ReplyDeleteThat would explain the original title for the series, "Nanny will do."
ReplyDeleteJust like the Pharisees that Jesus denounced throughout the Gospels.
ReplyDeleteHe'll have to get in line.
ReplyDeleteOkay, you got me thinking about how much money could be made by being the first man to gay-marry The Donald. Of course it would have to be a younger and buffer man than myself, and preferably a deaf one.
ReplyDeleteI dunno about Dimon, but Donald Trump got rich off his parents' marriage.
ReplyDeleteJust as the greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was getting people to think he doesn't exist
ReplyDeleteI just have to interject that the greatest trick the authoritarians ever pulled was getting people to believe the Devil existed.
Heh... "working in the sewers" indeed.
ReplyDeleteYou misspelled "buttfucker".
ReplyDeleteNice. I'd never heard this chune before.
ReplyDeleteTheir entire oeuvre was fantastic. Check out anything from "No Rest for the Wicked".
ReplyDeleteDidn't see it, although I'm told by some of my friends that I'm missing a lot.
ReplyDelete> If you can afford the children on one person's salary your partner is wealthy
ReplyDeletewell, or else you are milking charities both religious & secular & maybe the welfare system but certainly your saner family and kinder neighbors who are willing to spot your kids food and some used toys and clothes....its pretty common among the Quiverful crowd, miserably poor and /or depending on the non overpopulating population to subsidize them...the duggars just got real successful at it!!
moliere had a couple iirc....
ReplyDeleteI was gonna say they'd find some good aluminum deposits but it looks like I'm far behind on my medical studies.
ReplyDeleteThis is a problem for Gooper marriage grifters, since the people most
ReplyDeleteinclined to marry early and divorce or have multiple marriages make up
their base.
You write as if "hypocrisy and projection" are a *problem*. That is as silly as saying that "The Palin family are ill-suited to be exemplars of moral standards and Family Values".
Shirley the marital failings of the Red-State base provide much of the allure of signing up with the GOP and vicariously scolding other people.
Apart from the not-Alzheimers-linked point, a high aluminium content would come as no surprise... during the Falklands unpleasantness she was practically standing downwind of the HMS Sheffield.
ReplyDeleteAnd Ed Norton was played by Art Carney. I hope that some day Edward Norton with get to play Art Carney.
ReplyDeleteThey all look alike to me.
ReplyDeleteWe have an enemy behind the Barrier!
ReplyDeleteIf some one wishes to be updated with hottest technologies afterward he must be
ReplyDeletevisit this web site and be up to date daily.
Stop by my site: Full Report
I figured there were some literary ones my education and memory were failing me on.
ReplyDeleteI thought beatific worked as well.
ReplyDeleteUh-oh. Next you're going to say this brings new meaning to the phrase "Tain't funny, McGee."
ReplyDeleteAnd McGee had a five inch taint.
ReplyDeleteThey ARE the Pharisees. That's the hell of it for me. I ain't no Christian but I can read. You morons! The letters in red are NOT OPTIONAL;
ReplyDeleteThe letters in red are NOT OPTIONAL
ReplyDeleteThen why are they commie-colored? Huh?
Mail-order brides. Always the eventual answer.
ReplyDeleteThis reminds me of the lyrics to the Chad Mitchell Trio's song -- "Join the John Birch Society, fighting off the Reds / We'll use our hands and hearts, and if we must, we'll use our heads."
ReplyDeleteYοu need to take pаrt in а contest for onе of the higheѕt
ReplyDeletequality blogs on the internet. I'm going to recommend this website!
Feel free to surf to my web-site: авиабилеты стоимость
Prеtty ѕеction of сontent.
ReplyDeleteI just stumblеd upоn уour ωebsite anԁ іn acсеssіon caріtal to assert that I get іn fасt enјoyed accοunt your blоg poѕts.
Anуωаy Ι wіll be subscribing to
your augmеnt anԁ even I аchievеment уοu access consiѕtently
fаst.
mу blog ... купить авиабилет онлайн
Right away I am gοing to do my breаkfast, when having
ReplyDeletemy breakfаst coming уet again tο rеad
addіtionаl neωѕ.
Feel fгee to ѕurf to my web page .
.. База данных авиакомпания
It's really very complex in this active life to listen news on Television, thus I simply use web for that reason, and obtain the hottest news.
ReplyDeleteAlso visit my webpage авиабилеты онлайн киев
Τhanks , I hаѵе juѕt been seагching for іnfο aρpгoxіmately this
ReplyDeletesubϳeсt for a lοng time and yours is the
best ӏ've came upon till now. However, what about the bottom line? Are you positive concerning the source?
My website - авиабилеты украина
fantastic submit, very informative. I ponder why the other
ReplyDeleteexperts of this sector do not notice this. You must proceed your writing.
I'm sure, you've a huge readers' base already!
Stop by my page алматы киев авиабилеты