Saturday, May 15, 2010

Comedy Central: Some Religious Bashing Is More Equal Than Others

Comedy Central likes to brag about how edgy and hip their network is. After all they have two of the most watched tv "news-entertainment" programs in the country (Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert) and one of the most popular animated shows ever (South Park). Comedy Central loves to show how good they are by having most of their shows insult normal Americans, religion and scream out curse words repeatedly. South Park ironically is the exception not because it doesn't do any of the first three but that it targets everyone equally.
Well clearly Comedy Central is showing some groups are just not cool to target.
Back in 2007 South Park decided to make fun of the Mohammad Cartoons violence, Comedy central decided that's just not acceptable, and censored it last minute. They then came out with a statement which at least was honest; they were afraid of the death threats and violence and censored the show under the noses of Trey Parker and Matt Stone.
In 2010 South Park decided to include Mohammad in a show to celebrate South Park's 200th episode. The main characters did very well in showing just how ridiculous the hysteria was about showing Mohammad by having him in a bear suit throughout the first part. And then the hammer dropped from Comedy Central; in the second part Comedy Central decided not only to censor the image of Mohammad but to censor every single reference to Mohammad, including a last speech by Kyle where Mohammad's name wasn't mentioned but was instead a speech about standing up for free speech. The delicious irony in that notwithstanding, Comedy Central showed that their commitment to free speech wasn't even skin deep. Any threat or any group labeled "protected" (which was ironically the point of the Mohammad part of the show), especially ones with members who have shown a constant desire to kill anyone who suggests they are not peaceful. Simply put, Comedy Central has shown that they lost their balls at the first sign of violence or threats.
But hey man, Comedy Central is hip, it's edgy, it believes in free speech man!
In a vague attempt to show that not only do they believe in free speech and that there are no sacred cows, Comedy Central is creating a show dedicated to......making fun of Jesus Christ. They already had Sarah Silverman on for years making fun of Jews in insulting ways, so making fun of Jesus, which is how cowardly free speech advocates show that they believe in free speech, seems like no big deal.

And then there's this.
Is this supposed to be funny? A Jew producer opponent, a shadowy hooked nosed main boss, and a robot named Israel killing characters off - I'm sorry did Comedy Central run out of Jewish money lenders to make fun of? From what I've reviewed, the show Drawn together has a character entitled "Jew Producer" who has a JAP wife (see link for explanation) and runs/controls the show. This I guess is supposed to be funny because it's Jews making fun of Jews - I think it's a pathetic stereotype. But hey man its Jews making fun of Jews, that makes it kosher right?
But then to have a robot called ISRAEL run by a guy who clearly looks like something out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion attack the characters of the show, what is the impression your supposed to get if your just playing the game? That Jews and ISRAEL are out there to harm people and ruin things. If the whole point is that the ISRAEL robot is killing off the characters of the show the person likes, is someone supposed to believe that ISRAEL is a good thing then? And the guy pulling "Jew Producers" string looks like an amalgamation of Jewish stereotypes dating back hundreds of years (powerful, hooked nose, in the shadows, sends people off to do his dirty work, all that's missing is the kippah).
Comedy Central has decided that while it can't make fun of a group of people who will go out and kill those who offend them, it can make fun of two groups that won't come after them with a bomb or a knife. How brave of them. I don't know what would possess them to do this other then a pathetic attempt to prove that they are still hip and believe in free speech after they showed the world that they have no guts or spine of any kind. That entire network should be ashamed of itself not only for this but the pathetic double standard it has created.

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

How Mike Huckabee Operates: Passive-Aggressive Politician

How Mike Huckabee operates is very easy to identify. 
He is a politician who employs a passive aggressive strategy against anyone he opposes and is very aggressive rather than passive in his strategy. I wrote in a previous blog how he used this strategy to attack Mitt Romney's religion in the 2008 Presidential election.
I feel vindicated in my analysis of Mike Huckabee.

He is now starting to play the same game against a potential 2012 competitor; Sarah Palin. Vanity Fair wrote a short little piece about Huckabee's support for Chuck DeVore and correctly called the endorsement for what it is: "Mike Huckabee Takes “Passive-Aggressive” Swipe at Sarah Palin."
Last week, Sarah Palin’s constituents (her Facebook friends) were very upset that Palin endorsed Carly Fiorina over Tea Party favorite Chuck DeVore in the California senate race. Level-headed comments of rational dissent followed. “Mrs. Palin, While I have been a fan, supporter, reader, and defender of yours, you could not be MORE WRONG about Fiorina! She is 100% RHINO! She put an R by her name for this race, Period! Chuck DeVore is the ONLY REAGAN CONSERVATIVE IN THE RACE. I live here and I know! If you chose her because she's a women, and based on your book I doubt it, then that was a mistake!” for example.
Mike Huckabee, who’s well poised to run (possibly against Palin) for president in 2012, responded to the ensuing controversy by supporting Chuck DeVore in as conspicuously garish a fashion as possible. First, Huckabee changed his Facebook status to say something about how much he loves DeVore, and now Huckabee’s Twitter background is a picture of DeVore and some winning blurbs about why DeVore is just the best. (Ben Smith calls this “passive-aggressive”!) Huckabee will need to use his Twitter in this way if he’s going to convince a bunch of disorganized anti-government protesters to elect him to said government, in 2012.
This isn't the first time Mike Huckabee went after Sarah Palin in a passive aggressive way. In fact, that's how he goes after everybody he doesn't like.
Exit Question:Will voters tolerate this kind of behavior in 2012?

Monday, May 10, 2010

Morgan Hill and the Failure of Cultural Assimilation

The issue at hand is not the flying of Mexican flags on Cinco de Mayo, at least its not to me. Pride in your cultural heritage can be displayed by waiving a flag of another country without issue. I've seen it happen lots of times during St. Patricks day marches and even on Columbus days or (if you've ever been to New York) on numerous Italian Saints days. I've seen Maori celebrations that waive either New Zealand flags or Maori symbols on flags, I've seen Indian cultural days where the banner of India is flown proudly. Even on Israeli Independence day you'll find American Jews (many of whom are not Israeli) waiving Israeli flags. Flags by themselves are not a sign of a lack of assimilation or respect for one's home country.
The issue is the affect the American Flag has on the cultural celebrators. Back again to the Israeli Independence Day celebration - if I wore an American flag t-shirt to that celebration, no one would care. In fact I saw American flags at those celebrations and even heard the Star Spangled Banner played to open the festivities. The celebration was devoted to Israeli culture but those who attended did not forget who they were and where was their home. I saw plenty of American flags during St. Patricks day parades, some during the Italian saints festivals and during all the other cultural festivals. The message was the same; we honor our heritage but we don't forget who we are and where we live. That's what is called Assimilation - not forgetting your heritage but also integrating yourself into the country you live.
Now take the brats at Morgan Hill (please); it can be rightly assumed that many of these kids are born in the United States and are therefore American citizens. These children are blessed with something their families desperately wanted, the chance to live and work here without being deported to Mexico. Just by their being born they are given benefits that thousands of people have strove for years to get and something their parents risked life and limb to achieve (please no immigration debate now). But as second generation Americans they should be allowed to be proud of their heritage, no different then many of the first wave of Irish, Italian, German, Chinese, etc immigrants who came here.
But their school's response to other boys wearing American flags was to be outraged and then, after being made to feel like victims by their moronic principal, to go out and scream that they were offended. It got to the point that prior to the boys being reinstated in school that the principal demanded that the American flag wearing boys be made to apologize to the Mexican students for offending them. The principal also stated that "Cinco de Mayo is not the day to show Patriotism". Ignoring the idiocy of that statement, please return to the previous celebrations I mentioned above - American flags are either part of the celebration themselves or shown without incident (at minimum). Why? Because pride in cultural heritage can be shown at the same time as pride in your national identity. To these brats and their moronic principal, such can't be allowed. Why? Because many of these brats don't have an American identity to begin with. It goes to such a point that not only are they offended by American flags but are repulsed by them to the point of trying to strike them down.

And I blame this crap directly on the principal and the school system. We have been such a multi-culturalist society that we have forgotten to teach children that they are Americans and they should take pride in such. But when kids are taught constantly in their schools about how America is an evil imperialist hate filled society formed by rich evil white slave owners and are taught that as minorities they have a right to feel aggrieved at every turn, is anyone surprised they don't think of themselves as Americans? Is anyone surprised as well that they think they have a right not to have themselves "offended"? Even when forced to apologize for his mistakes, the principal has the gaul to state that this was mostly the doing of bloggers and sensationalist media who mis-interpreted the situation.
This is made worse when you consider that many of them are not taught the history of the Mexican-American War which lets them think this is nothing but stolen territory when in fact it was acquired and then paid for when the American Army invaded and captured....Mexico City. Surprise, not only did we give the Mexican government most of its country back but we paid them $10 million for the territory we won in battle. What was to have stopped us back them from saying "Screw you all, we captured Mexico City, we're adding a dozen or so new states to the American flag"? Nothing. And then we paid Mexico for another strip of land that now makes up the borders of Mexico with Arizona and New Mexico (Gasden Purchase, wikipedia it).
This isn't limited to these brats, look back at most May Day immigration protests from 2007, 2008 and now. The majority of American flags are held by those counter demonstrating the illegal immigrant protesters, many of whom are waiving not American flags but Mexican, Guatemalan, El Salvadorian, etc flags. While some illegal immigrant protesters do indeed waive American flags, its a small number. How many members of groups like La Raza and MECHa speak of this land as stolen land or the creation of a new nation of Aztlan within the south-western United States? Assuming many of them are actual US Citizens, do they bother to read their own history, instead content with a bastardized version to fit their sensibilities, or do they not care in the first place?
Without getting into too much of the immigration debate what Morgan Hill shows, besides the stupidity of some of our youth, is that we have as much of an assimilation problem as we do an immigration problem. One is tied into the other because with the increase in illegal immigration, we have a bigger group of individuals who do not assimilate to American customs, who have produced children who feel no attachment to the country their families strove to come to. This is compared to hundreds of LEGAL immigrants who come here to live and work and who become assimilated into our melting pot. When combined with a school system that feeds their grievances and specifically targets against forming any sort of American identity, we are quickly on the way to losing what makes a nation a nation (borders, language and culture). And if this doesn't stop soon, within a few generations, we could be in for a major problem.

Sunday, May 9, 2010

Bill Bennett Ousted. What Happened In Utah!?

The handwriting was on the wall for Senator Bob Bennett of Utah. His loss at the Utah GOP convention was not a surprise for anyone who was keeping track of the Utah Senate race. The Salt Lake Tribune released a poll on April 27, 2010 that showed that the Senator was in real danger of losing his seat: 
A new Salt Lake Tribune poll of Republican delegates shows Bennett running in third, behind GOP challengers Mike Lee and Tim Bridgewater. Lee logged 37 percent support in the survey, while Bridgewater came in at 20 percent, and Bennett lagged at 16 percent.
Bill Bennett was tossed out by angry conservatives and TEA party members who felt that he wasn't conservative enough to remain in office and that they are fiercely anti-incumbent. Thus, the Senator's voting record and his18 years of representing the state of Utah just painted a big target on his back. There was no way for him to avoid defeat despite spending $2.8 million and getting Mitt Romney's endorsement

It was a futile attempt to get reelected.   
Interestingly enough, while the people of Utah may be angry with Bill Bennett, they still like Mitt Romney. Not surprisingly, a recent poll shows Mitt Romney would crush Obama in 2012 in Utah by a huge margin: Romney 73% vs. Obama 22%.