A Snark of the Day which is a bit on the long side, but who wants to snipe Charles.
This was clearly deception on part of the administration in sending Susan Rice to say this was a spontaneous demonstration, when as you reported, it was known inside the administration within a day that it was not. It was a terror attack. So why did they deceive? It’s obvious. Because the attack took place five days after the Democrats had spent a week in Charlotte touting, spiking the football on Osama. And essentially, since it’s the only foreign policy achievement of the four years they repeated it over and over again, the great triumph over al-Qaeda. Well, within a week, al-Qaeda sacks a U.S. embassy, kills an ambassador and the administration did not want to admit it so it spent a week deceiving Americans to think it’s about demonstration, it’s about a film, thinking, I think correctly that if it strung it out long enough the media would let it slide and now that it becomes it’s obvious and true, nobody will care, I guarantee you. This is not a headline in the mainstream media.
Charles Krauthammer, via Clarice Feldman, American Thinker
Oh yes, I still do love Clarice.
What it like to live, and die, in city that offers no hope:
CHICAGO (CBS) — Gangbangers in Chicago: What makes them tick, what are they thinking?
CBS 2’s Walter Jacobson sat down with gang members in Chicago’s troubled Englewood neighborhood to try to find some answers.
What ever Da Mayor, Rahm Emanuel, is doing, it is not working.
If have told Erika Johnse once, I have told her a million times, never exaggerate. from Hot Air:
Never mind that a fourth-grader could see that the Libya attack was anything but a spontaneous riot over an Internet video the administration, following the lead of the Islamists, has elevated to the genre of “movie.” Protesters generally don’t carry RPGs or use mortars, for starters. …
I don’t know if I will go so far to credit the average fourth grader with the knowledge of basic infantry tactics. However, out ambassador to the United Nations, one Susan Rice, should have an basic knowledge of military tactics, and if have somebody on staff capable bringing her up to speed.
Andres Serraon’s Piss Christ is not art. Whereas art intended to inspire, Serrano’s only intent with Piss Christ was to inflame Christians. Further, the Obama administration has made it abundantly clear that is does not recognize any peaceful protest as legitimate. if a protest sn’t violent, the Obama administration never thinks it ever happened. from Puffington Post::
This Thursday marks the debut of Andres Serrano’s latest show, “Body and Spirit” at Edward Tyler Nahem gallery in New York. On view will be “Piss Christ,” Serrano’s 1987 pièce de résistance that seems to have been causing apoplexy in a number of politicians, religious leaders, and FOX News commenters, who then quickly regained their powers of speech.
On Friday, Rep. Michael Grimm (NY) told FOX News: “I call on President Obama to stand up for America’s values and beliefs and denounce the ‘Piss Christ.'” Gawker was able to sum up the bold request in a headline: “Heathen President Refuses to Condemn Piece of Art From 1987.”
Piss Christ is public property. It was paid for with public tax dollars. President Obama should take back Piss Christ and have it destroyed. If President Obama does not order these co0nmon sense and prudent steps, the Christian community may well become provoked into uncontrollable spontaneous violence. Remember up to six mortars and rocket propelled grenades are allowed in spontaneous attacked.
You have to be dumb to vote for Barack Obama, but there are no shortage of morons, video:
I wondnr4 what B.J. Clinton thinks of President Fifty Seven States, taking personal credit for a law B>J. signed in 1006? from, Time:
Last year, a federal program paid out $1.6 billion to cover free cell phones and the monthly bills of 12.5 million wireless accounts. The program, overseen by the FCC and intended to help low-income Americans, is popular for obvious reasons, with participation rising steeply since 2008, when the government paid $772 million for phones and monthly bills. But observers complain that the program suffers from poor oversight, in which phones go to people who don’t qualify, and hundreds of thousands of those who do qualify have more than one phone.
Last summer, a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review story shed some light on a government program that relatively few Americans knew existed. (Read more about it here.) The Lifeline program provides low-income Americans with free cell phones (basic ones such as those made by Tracfone, not smartphones) and covers up to 250 free minutes each month. As many as 5.5 million residents in Pennsylvania alone could qualify for the program, which is funded primarily by the Universal Service Fund fee added to the bills of land-line and wireless customers.
The program came to be after the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was passed, and the FCC created the Universal Service Fund to help “to promote the availability of quality services at just, reasonable, and affordable rates,” among other things. All telecommunications carriers must pay into the fund, and many do so by tacking on a fee to each of their customers’ bills. It’s probably added into your monthly wireless bill and your landline bill, if you still have one.
Hat tip and reax, Cripes Suzette:
Sadly, “Fool Stamps” Does Not Have Its Own Website
The latest We’re Laughing On The Outside But Crying On The Inside internet sensation is the ObamaPhone lady who wants to “keep Obama in president”.Interesting thing about that Obama Phone – did you know it’s been a federal program since 1966 ? And not only is it this program known as Obama Phone but Obama Phone has its own website? I’m not even kidding!
Give away free stuff, let people think you provided it.
‘Come on honey, bring your mortars, we’re going to a spontaneous demonstration,”
John McCain, via Ed Morrissey, Hot Hot.
Shame the old man never showed this much scorn four years ago. I , like McCain, know his about mortars, that they have heavy. Now some Obami needs to make Power Point to explain that to Susan Rice.
Alas poor Professor Althouse, the blond hair dye finally got to her. In an otherwise interesting discussion about the decreasing number of accident motor vehicle deaths and the increasing number of suicide death, the Professor make this bone headed statement, from Althnouse:
Quite apart from that, if car crashes decrease and suicides increase, maybe all that is really happening is that the car crash method of suicide is becoming less popular. That is, previously, some suicides were hidden within the car crash numbers. Suicide numbers will go up if the method used for a suicide makes it crushingly clear it wasn’t an accident. I’ll speculate that guns cause a high proportion of suicides in part for this reason.
Suicide is a choice. A gun is merely a mechanical tool, inherently incapable of exercising any choice. If you don’t like suicide, then don’t commit it. In a country which freely allows a minor child to legally kill her unborn son, I refuse to get worked up over any competent adult exercising his choice.
Dirty Harry Reid (Dingbat – NV) continues his never ending campaign to make Debbie Waserman-Shultz appear sane. Dirty Harry has been publicly complaining about Mitt Romney’s taxes. This is despite the fact that if Dirty Harry had ever seen Romney’s tax return, it would be a felony to disclose them. Dirty Harry is either a felon or a liar.
The same Dirty Harry has claims to be an expert on Romney’s taess, who failed to submit budget as requir4ed by the Constitution, is now claiming be an expert on t he Mormon faith, from Thomas Burr, Salt Lake Tribune:
Washington – Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says he agrees with a fellow Mormon who wrote recently that Mitt Romney has “sullied” the LDS faith and that the GOP presidential candidate is “not the face of Mormonism.”
Reid, a Mormon Democrat from Nevada, blasted Romney in a conference call for reporters over a litany of things the Republican nominee has said recently. And Reid added that Latter-day Saints aren’t buying Romney’s rhetoric.
“He’s coming to a state where there are a lot of members of the LDS Church,” Reid said in advance of Romney’s Friday visit to Nevada. “They understand that he is not the face of Mormonism.”
Dirty Harry seems to found one other Mormon As for me, I’l bet that Dirty Harry knows almost as much about being a good Mormon, as he does about Romney’s tax returns and the Constitution o of the United States. Takers?
Dirty Harry contends that Mitt Romney is not the face of Mormonism. Sobeit. Well Dirty Harry is not the face of sanity.
Mrs. Clinton has her knickers in a twist. Her State Department failed to provide adequate security to our consulate in Benghazi before Ambassador Steven was murder, and even after his murder
(CNN) — Three days after he was killed, CNN found a journal belonging to late U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens. The journal was found on the floor of the largely unsecured consulate compound where he was fatally wounded.
Lucky for us, at least Ambassador’s Stevens’ papers were found by an American reporter, via Darleen Click, Protein Wisdom:
CNN broke a pledge to the late ambassador’s family that it wouldn’t report on the diary, said State Department spokesman Philippe Reines, a senior adviser to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
In a blistering statement, Reines called CNN’s actions “indefensible.”
Reax:
CNN’s reporting was not of salacious nor irrelevant gossip from a personal diary, but of seven pages of direct, work-related observations and opinions of Chris Stevens. Now Hillary’s advisor is blasting CNN “for the family”?
What is indefensible, CNN’s reporting a public official’s work product, or Mrs. Clinton’ State Department failing to secure our consulate in Benghazi even after Ambassador Stevens’ murder?
Stable Hand expresses frustration with Dumbo’s, b/k/a Barack Obama, ceaseless quest to blame the shambles of his failed Middle East policy on some stupid Internet video, from Jawa Report:
“UNGA always provides an opportunity for the President to put the international situation in context, and to put forward a vision of US leadership. I would certainly expect the President to address the recent unrest in the Muslim world, and the broader context of the democratic transitions in the Arab World.”
“As he has in recent days, the President will make it clear that we reject the views in this video, while also underscoring that violence is never acceptable – a message that has been echoed by the leaders he has personally reached out to in places like Libya, Egypt and Yemen. He will also send a clear message that the United States will never retreat from the world; will bring justice to those who harm Americans; and will stand strongly for our democratic values abroad.
Reax:
Obama, stop your damn nonsense and man up for God’s sake. The death of four Americans is on you and your administration’s hands, not on the maker of that stupid video.
Had not Dumbo, Mrs.Clinton and the entire White House foreign relations team not been endlessly hyping the video, few would have ever known about it. Does Obama’s posse of clown blame the biggest loss to Marine Corp aviation sine Wake Island in 1931 on some stupid Internet video,from John Hudson, Atlantic:
The U.S. Suffered Its Worst Airpower Loss Since Vietnam Last Week and No One Really Noticed
The Taliban attack on an air base in southern Afghanistan on Friday drew coverage for the way the insurgents cloaked themselves in U.S. army uniforms to gain a tactical advantage, but few have taken note of the historical proportions of the damage inflicted. John Gresham, at the Defense Media Network, has published a detailed account of the attack on Camp Bastion, in which two Marines were killed, six U.S. Marine Corps jet fighters were destroyed, and two more “significantly” damaged. Those facts were all carried in most reports, but if that just sounds like a typical damage report from a decade-long war, you’re wrong. Gresham explains the devastating damage done to VMA-211, the name of the Marine Corps attack squadron that was most affected last week, noting that it is “arguably the worst day in [U.S. Marine Corps] aviation history since the Tet Offensive of 1968.” Or you could go back even further. “The last time VMA-211 was combat ineffective was in December 1941, when the squadron was wiped out during the 13-day defense of Wake Island against the Japanese.”
American infantry used to count on American air supremacy Had to to do air support without airplanes.
There’s an interesting trend developing in open to foreign policy, and it’s been there since the outset; sense Obama speech in Cairo Egypt, his supposed Arab reset, Arab Spring phenomenon and so on, every single attack on our interests, every loss of life, has been labeled a “Lone Wolf” Attack. Te Obama administration invested quite a bit in the way of news cycles to prepare us for the idea that these were going to be “lone Wolf attacks, and not organized attacks by a AlQuieda or some other agency.
Consider for example Janet Napolitano, who advanced this idea quite a while back. Consider her speech at a Chamber of Commerce event in August of 2011:
WASHINGTON — “Lone wolf” terror plots are on the rise and are “much more difficult to intercept” than the major coordinated effort that went into the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday.
In a speech at a Chamber of Commerce event, Napolitano said the U.S. has a “layered system of security that would give us multiple ways to deter” an attack like the one a decade ago in which airplanes were weaponized.
“What we see now is smaller plots,” she said. “We are also seeing a rise of activities by individuals who are actually in the country, and they are acting by themselves and that kind of attack is the most difficult to prevent because there is nothing to intercept.”
Napolitano’s comments echoed what President Obama said in an interview Tuesday in discussing the 10-year anniversary of Sept. 11.
The FBI and Homeland Security sent a bulletin late Tuesday to local and state law enforcement agencies and obtained by Fox News that warns of potential lone wolf threats to the U.S., specifically “small arms operations.
Certainly, this argument sounded plausible, at least arguable, at the time. It also served to exonerate, in advance, the failed foreign policy of Mr. Obama and company. After all, if these are lone- wolf attacks, they can certainly not be blamed on the White House for its ineffective dealings with organizations such as AlQuieda. With such excuses and mislablings in place, Obama can still claim his foreign policy effective and his leftist worldview accurate.
The idea of a terrorist single actors as opposed to an organization of terrorists is somewhat more mysterious, unknowable, and untraceable. On that basis, the concept is hard to disprove. That’s a point that gave Obama certain level of cover until these most recent attacks. That cover is now gone.
It should be noted that the logic employed by the Obama administration in it’s self-defense in these matters, is on it’s face absurd, and unconstitutional.
A comparison does seem in order.; If I was to go to a museum where the supposed work of art displayed here, (“Piss Christ, where the supposed artist dumped a Crucifix in a bottle of his own urine) On my arrival at the museum where this is displayed , I murder the curator of the museum and a few of his staff, and blow the place up to display my disgust would Mr. Obama suggest that the whole thing occurred because Andrew Serrano, the supposed artist, had abused his free speech rights? Somehow, I don’t think his concern for free speech extends quite so far.
Yet, Obama has tried to convince us that the issue, the cause of all this, is a piece of film that nobody has ever seen…. save for the trailer of the thing… which has subsequently been removed unconstitutionally from YouTube…. basically, a piece of art, and of free speech. And, protected under the first amendment to the Constitution of these United States. Yet Obama’s first response is to send out the brown shirts… literally!… to round up this film maker at 2am, to silence not only him but anyone else who dares to speak out against what radical Islam is.
Granted that the filmmaker’s no angel. Granted also, that technically a probation violation occurred. But why would the FBI, who serves at the behest of the white house, be involved in a simple probation violation absent pressure from the White House? Would this individual even have been questioned about said violation? Frankly I tend to doubt it. So do his lawyers, by the way, and I fully expect this will be sent to a series of courtrooms.
With that comparison, out the window goes everything that the Obama administration has been telling us about this case and indeed about everything in the region. Made particularly invalid is the claim that none of what we’ve seen for the past few weeks is the fault of liberal foreign policy. It should have been gone in fact quite some time ago.
An article by J.M. Berger in the website Foreign Policy points out that these people have not been acting alone, and that there is in fact no real threat from lone wolf actors. At least, in comparison to the organizations that have been fostering attacks on the United States and its interests around the world. A small piece ;
“How to catch a ‘lone wolf'” was the headline at the Christian Science Monitor. The headline at CNN.com: “The ‘lone wolf’ — the unknowable face of terror.” ABC’s World News reported on the arrest and warned of other “so-called lone wolves” with a quote from former White House counterterrorism advisor Richard Clarke, who claimed that people “spontaneously can become terrorists without any real communications connection to al Qaeda.”
ABC then cut to a picture of Faisal Shahzad, the attempted Times Square bomber, who had traveled to Pakistan to train with a branch of the Taliban, which helped pay for the attack and publicly claimed responsibility within hours of its failure.
“Lone” wolf, indeed.
The Moroccan-American man arrested Friday for attempting to blow up the U.S. Capitol building, Amine El Khalifi, was also far from alone. He was in contact with men he thought were part of al Qaeda, and those men handed him a complete (but inert) suicide vest and an automatic weapon to carry out his attack. The fact that those men were FBI undercover agents is beside the point: If someone claiming to work for al Qaeda hands you a fully assembled bomb for your attack, you are not a lone wolf.
While lone-wolf terrorism exists and is legitimately cause for concern, the threat it presents revolves around the idea of an individual who will carry out attacks without direction from abroad and without help from a terrorist organization or cell.
Consider the following cases, all of which have been cited as examples of lone-wolf terrorism:
- Jose Pimentel: A New York man tries to build a pipe bomb using a recipe from Inspire, the now-defunct English-language magazine of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. He enlists a neighbor in the plot, works on building the bomb in another man’s apartment, and is accompanied by the second man during virtually every stage of the project.
- Antonio Martinez: A Baltimore man plots an attack on a military recruiting station. He tries to enlist at least four people from the community to help. Only one agrees to help, introducing him to a fifth person who represents himself as an operative for an AfPak militant organization. The fifth man provides Martinez with a fully assembled bomb.
- Mohamed Osman Mohamud: A Portland, Oregon, teenager emails someone in Pakistan with links to a terrorist organization to volunteer his services. He subsequently comes into contact with a ring of jihadists who provide him with a fully assembled bomb that he tries to deploy at a Christmas tree lighting ceremony.
- Rezwan Ferdaus: A Massachusetts man provides electronic detonators of his own design to two al Qaeda members who promise to send the devices to al Qaeda in Iraq. The al Qaeda members and a third man discuss plans to attack government targets in Washington, D.C., using remote-controlled planes loaded with explosives. The al Qaeda members provide Ferdaus with money to buy the components for this attack.
- Faisal Shahzad: A Connecticut man single-handedly assembles and deploys a bomb in New York’s Times Square. But Shahzad had received financial help and training from the Pakistani Taliban. He was an individual actor, but he was not a lone wolf. He was an agent for a robust terrorist organization.
Does it matter that some (but not all) of the terrorist network members described above were actually undercover law enforcement agents or informants? It doesn’t change the fact that none of these individuals was working alone. They were receiving advice, concrete assistance, and passive reinforcement from people they believed — rightly or wrongly — to be part of larger terrorist organizations.
So what we have here, is abject failure on the part of this administration. but more importantly, and from the larger picture, what we have also is a failure of liberalism in terms of foreign policy, which in trun is driven by the left’s misguided and fatally flawed worldview.
So it was that it was no surprise at all when on the anniversary of 9/11 the attacks occurred around the world, and Obama and company yet again claimed that the violence wasn’t the result of AlQuieda terrorism, and was simply a bunch of lone wolf actors, annoyed about a film they’d not even seen. . Frankly, such attacks shouldn’t have been a surprise at all to this administration either, and probably was not, given that we had information from several different sources that attacks were going to occur. And that doesn’t even include the common sense of it.
Yet the administration spent the first nine days dancing around the undeniable fact that these attacks were both orchestrated and coordinated by the AlQuieda that Obama was so busy spiking the football over. It seems clear that the dancing was the administration lied to us, in an attempt to save the meme that Obama foreign policy was a success. That the Arab Spring hadn’t changed to winter, that Obama was a genius, etc. That’s something of an understandable priority given that Obama is currently dealing with an election. Certainly a foreign policy failure on this level would negate any chance he had of being reelected.
But, failure it was and not just of Obama, but of leftism in general. Nor is this a case of simple incompetence on the part of Mr. Obama and his administration. Indeed, Mr. Obama and his people have been all too compeitant at installing liberal policy. The failure is the policy itself and the world view attached to it , not the political operations of the people in question.
At the root of that failure is the leftist worldview which is centered around the idea that all cultures are equal and that given the proper respect all cultures will be peaceful.
So we see the results of the application of these ideas; The Iranian hostages and the taking thereof back in 1979 were a response to a removal of strength from the region, in the person of the Shah of Iran, as well as the removal of our own strength in the region. We removed the Shah of Iran, supposedly because he was a mean person. The result was the mullahs taking over. I suppose there are very few people now in Iran will consider that their lives of improved dramatically since the Shah met his demise .
We did the same thing with Qaddafi more recently, and for the same stated reason. and with the same results.
Indeed, the results, in both of those circumstances was that violence in those countries increased dramatically, anti American sentiment was increased dramatically, and the chances of peace in the region were lessened.
Nature, you see, abhors a vacuum. Remove from power someone who, while less than desirable from a western viewpoint, managed to keep the peace in the country for decades, and should anyone really be surprised that violence increases? Handed power from these strong men to the Muslim brotherhood which is in fact a terrorist organization, why should anyone be surprised that violence increases? The parallels in foreign policy between Carter and Obama are inescapable. The results in both cases were also disastrous.
I would add a third Datapoint to these comparisons. That being the 9/11 itself,is as I said at the time, the direct result of the leftist foreign policies as applied by Bill Clinton. In all these cases, our foreign policy has been seen by AlQueida, the Taliban, et al, as WEAKNESS.
What we have additionally in the case of Obama, this time, is a case of liberals outright lying to us to cover their own backsides. Not only is Obama foreign policy a failure, in much the same way and for the same reasons that Jimmy Carter’s foreign policy was a failure, but now Mr. Obama and his people have been caught flat out lying to the American people in a feeble attempt to cover the failure of their worldview and their foreign policy.
Remember also that of a telling us, on July 15, 2008:
As president, I will make the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban the top priority that it should be. This is a war that we have to win.
I called Obama the Liar in Chief at the time. Not much has changed. He’s still a liar. I suggest that if the foreign policy failures themselves, and losing the war he himself said we must win, through his own lack of willingness to fight it properly, were not enough to remove Obama from office as they were in the case of Jimmy Carter, Demonstrably lying about it certainly should be.
The so-called work of art, Andrew Serrano’s Piss Christ, is scheduled to be displayed in New York City. Normally I’d suspect this of being a dog and pony show to redeem the Obama administration’s credentials on matters of pertaining to the Christian religion. Alas the Obami are just not that smart.
Background, in 1887, the United States government commission, with taxpayer dollars, one Andrew Serrano for supposed work of art intended to offend Christian, to wit the infamous Piss Christ. I do not deny Serrano the right to produce art as he alone sees fit, or for private patrons to sponsor Serrano, no matter how vile the art. I did object, and I do object, to having my tax dollars confiscated to support Serrano’s private sensibilities.
Jump forward to this year. An American citizens produces a Y-Tube video, it is too short to be a film and too crude to be called art, which has offended the current administration. The administration new sees fit to have government official denounce the video, and uses tax payer dollars to denounce the video. More, from Todd Starnes, Fox Nesw:
The State Dept. referred to a previous statement Clinton made in reference to the anti-Islamic film.
“America’s commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation,” Clinton said. “And as you know, we are home to people of all religions, many of whom came to this country seeking the right to exercise their own religion, including, of course, millions of Muslims. And we have the greatest respect for people of faith.”
[…]
The artwork debuted in 1989 and was funded through prize money provided by the National Endowment for the Arts. The art gallery hosting the retrospective salute to Andres Serrano is privately owned.
[…]
It [Piss Christ] also brought strong rebukes, condemnations and apologies from President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and a host of administration officials.
[…]
The administration tried to have the film [“Innocence of Muslims”]removed from YouTube – but Google rebuffed their request. The State Dept. spent $70,000 on a Pakistani television advertisement rebuking the film. And the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff personally telephoned a Christian minister in Florida to ask him to withdraw his support of the film.
In 1987 the government uses public sax dollars to attack one particular religion, Christianity. Now the same government uses tax dollars to defend the religious sensibilities of Muslims. Yet they are blind to their hypocrisy.
Mrs. Clinton should join Lizzy Warren is claiming to be an Indian
Mrs. Clinton’s name, Lying Squaw..
Christian get offended, turn the other cheek, and the Obama administration ignores them. Muslims get offended, commit rape and murder, and the Obama administration panders to them. Similar analogy between the Tea Party and the Occutards. The Obama administration is sending the clear message, that violence is the only language they comprehend.
Addendum: I just feel in love with Ethel, from Ethel C. Fenig, American Thinker:
Piss Christ, “a photograph of the crucifix submerged in the artist’s urine” that the New York Post delicately labeled “controversial” will be going on display at a New York art gallery. The gallery is anticipating violent Christian mob protesters as “security is being heavily ramped-up at the gallery that will show the piece.”
While offended peaceful Christians are rioting, Clinton, of course, will beg for calm while calling Piss Christ “a deplorable work of art” because the US “respects all faiths.” However she won’t be able to state, as she did with that other piece of art, “Innocence of Muslims,” that the US government had nothing to do with it.
An alternate theory has been advanced, that Barack Obama is only offended by anti Muslim expressions because he him is a Muslim. Obama seems to revel in personally offending Christians but os horrified by the thought of anybody offending any Muslim.
The sodomites willingly choose their life style and they die. Opt for a risky life style and risk premature death. This is not exactly rocket science or even news I mean even a blond can figure it out, from Raw Story:
Audio surfaced on Thursday of socialite Paris Hilton making homophobic comments about “disgusting” gay men, who she said “probably have AIDS.”
RadarOnline obtained audio secretly recorded by a cab driver in New York earlier this month of one of Hilton’s openly-gay model friends telling her about the gay hookup app Grindr.
“Say I log into Grindr, someone that’s on Grindr can be in that building and it tells you all the locations of where they are and you can be like, ‘Yo, you wanna f___?’ and he might be on like, the sixth floor,” the friend explains.
“Ewww. Eww. To get f_____?” Hilton replies. “Gay guys are the horniest people in the world. They’re disgusting. Dude, most of them probably have AIDS.”
“I would be so scared if I were a gay guy,” she adds. “You’ll like, die of AIDS.”
Reax R.S. McCain:
- In describing men who hook up with complete strangers via the Internet, Paris said “most of them probably have AIDS.”
- This was not offered as a scientifically valid estimate, but a rather common-sense health concern, related to the promiscuous behavior described.
- Butt-f____ isn’t healthy. Excuse the blunt language, boys and girls, but the rectum is not a sexual organ. It is foul and unsanitary, and if you have some kind of weird obsessive-compulsive fetish about doing it in the hiney-hole, you need to seek help.
- Yes, Point 3 applies equally to you hetero guys who, to satisfy your porn-influenced kinky craving, coerce or cajole your girlfriends into taking it up the poop chute.
Stacy makes a total of seven common sense points.
As to the sodomites, until somebody can find a gene which causes homosexuality, consider sodomy to be a life style, or is that death style, choice.
Bearing in mind that engaging in sodomy is a life style choice and not predestination yo it would behoove one to think of GAY as an acronym for Got AIDS Yet? And to consider AIDS as another acronym, Anally Injected Death Sentence. Quibble if you will about the scientific accuracy of these assumption. Try to demonstrate they are not prudent.
Exit question, why is celibacy deemed to be only an acceptable choice for normal people? For example, priests and nuns can be expected to be celibate unless the priest claims to homosexual. Sure.
As to Ms. Hilton, her statement were part of private conservation and not a public statement. In the conversational sense, they were close enough to the truth to be considered figuratively accurate.
If you don’t like what Ms. Hilton says in taxi cabs, don’t listen in on her private conversations.
