Not One More Word

288 thoughts on “Not One More Word”

1. Roseanne apparently does have a prior history of statements. Which were apparently acceptable enough to have given her this job.

   The talking point I’ve seen is that those were before her coming out for Trump, not after, so supporting Trump is her real heresy.

   1. They were looking for an excuse, and she handed them one.

      1. Alas, yes. She stepped on her own … whatever.
         But the sheer hypocrisy of Stephen Colbert still having a job after the ‘cock-holster’ crack, and for f**ks sake, a jerk like Keith Olbermann is getting hired again, after a couple of years in the broadcast boonies? I am really getting tired of being lectured on tolerance and civility by these vicious bastards.

         1. Yup. Apply the standards fairly or don’t bother.

            1. If they are not applied fairly they are not really standards, are they?

   2. I’m not going to look up the many sins of Roseanne, 9/11 Truther and generally offensive human being. It is enough to have recently been reminded of her infamously tweeted selfies of herself as Hitler holding a tray of gingerbread men fresh from the oven. I never watched her original series and never watched the reboot. Just don’t have a dog in that fight.

      Yet ABC knew what it was getting when it bought “that house in Amityville” and should hardly claim surprise when Betelgeuse pops up. Nor do I think what Roseanne said was anything worse than what a thousand people affiliated with ABC have said about Trump, Bush (either or even Barbara) and conservatives in general. So while I do not defend Ms Barr neither do I endorse ABC for washing their hands of her.

      They knew what they had when they picked her up.

      1. I DO defend the English language. Roseanne is Roseanne, but if I use apes, I mean apes, I don’t mean “racist dog whistle.”
         Also they can f*ck right off.

         1. Hear, hear!

         2. I was in my twenties before I even heard of an association between apes and ANY specific race– although there is the trope of using a gorilla for the Irish Cop in old cartoons, but
            1) Given my relatives, that seemed a pretty obvious choice, like any other anthropomorphized character
            although
            2) the gorilla probably has less hair,
            and
            3) that’s not actually the “Irish race,” it’s a sub-group; think like the issue of making a racial stereotype that covered both basketball players and football players. Different features give advantage for different jobs, and the Irish group where the scrawny guys are proportioned to the same ratio as a brick made really good cops. You wouldn’t want them as rescue swimmers, though. (My uncles literally sank; even my mom had issues floating.)

            1. Is sinking like a brick associated with Irish heritage? Huh. That…actually explains a lot about my maternal grandfather and me. He sank like a stone. I, being female, float about halfway between surface and bottom–I have to work at it to say on the surface. (And I was/am a good swimmer, but that was ALL learned.)

               And as Mom’s recent DNA thingy came back and told us what was no surprise to anyone: she’s almost entirely Irish…

               1. It was a well known tendency for the “black Irish,” at least in the 50s.
                  You know, the guys who don’t have blue eyes, and are proportioned like a brick, and tend to look like they’re wearing an elk-skin vest when they take their shirt off….

                  1. So, the ones who are most thoroughly Celts instead of Germanic or Scandinavian? 🙂 My understanding from my semester over there is that red hair came in with the Vikings.

                     1. *Shrugs* Not a clue, honestly– although I suspect that you’d have a mess on your hands trying to figure out what original sources meant by “red hair,” anyways.

                        We’re talking about green-hazel eyes being considered ‘dark,’ after all.

                        1. In some older writings, “black” referred more to hair color than skin color.

                        2. > although I suspect that you’d have a mess on your hands trying to figure out what original sources meant by “red hair,” anyways.

                           Or even “black”. I’ve seen period literature from the British Isles where a dark-haired Celt (say, a Welshman) is described as a “black man”.

                           1. Isn’t that where the last name “Black” comes from?

                           2. Most of the people I’ve met with the last name of “Black” were “white,” and most of those I’ve met with the last name “White” were “black.”

                           3. In Finland when I was young people referred to the Sami as small and dark. They usually actually look exactly the same as Finns, or Swedes, or Norwegians, but they do have a larger percentage of individuals who have a bit more Asian features and some who have slightly darker coloring, usually just hair though, than Finns do, and native Swedes and Norwegians don’t really have any people with those Asian features, except for ones who have some Sami blood in them. Nobody seems to know if the percentage of Asian genes in Finns is from mixing with the Sami or from some other source, all that is known is that our language is related to and probably derives from languages spoken near the Ural mountains by people who are more Asian. We seem to be rather related to the Sami, anyway.

                              Lots of pictures in this:

                              http://www.traveldiaryparnashree.com/2018/01/share-smile-sami-indigenous-people-europe.html

                              Although I have to say that “only indigenous people in Europe” bit really pisses me off. Where the hell do these people think Europeans came from, outer space? Europeans ARE the indigenous people in EUROPE, damn it!

                  2. Huh. Well, grandpa and I both qualified under the ‘tall pasty white and red haired’ (well, his beard was red. I am an actual redhead), but are otherwise mostly hairless. But we both have incredibly dense bones, which is what I always figured was the cause.

                     Stuff like this is fascinating though.

                     1. That’s the Neanderthal genes.

                        No, seriously, that’s the consensus among physical anthropologists. My physical anthro prof was of Irish descent, and he used himself as a perfect demonstration model of the robust Neanderthal. Especially in the head and brow ridges.

                        And we know some Neanderthals were redheads, so there you go.

                        1. In some ways it’s rather funny, when you think of the racial theories from the 19th and early 20th century, that now it seem that some of the Africans are probably the purest versions of Homo Sapiens there are. Europeans got mixed with the Neanderthals, Asians with the Denisovans… 😀

               2. The family joke was that they’re dense, from skull to foot. (feet, also, are proportioned like a brick– or a shovel)

         3. I’ve said a good many times, “You know who hears dog whistles? Dogs!”

            1. I tend to say that reading hidden messages in other people’s words that reveal their evil is normally diagnosed as paranoia.

         4. Not to mention that comparing Leftists to apes is a serious insult…to the apes.

         5. I’ve been using “monkey” as a term of endearment -and- a general purpose telling-off for five books now. “Monkey brain” is also very popular. Everybody is white except the person saying it. She’s an alien. A brown one. She calls one of her husbands (!) Monkey King because he’s a wise guy.

            Anybody out there wants to call that raaaaacist, they can go to it. I’ve got my popcorn all ready.

            Does it really matter what skin colour an AI chooses for a social interaction drone? You know they’re going to say yes.

      2. Amen. Neither Roseanne nor Valerie Jarrett is any more or less ape than you or I. ABC fears the mobs it is helping whip up.

      3. Barr is one of them… but Jarrett ranks a lot higher in the pecking order, particularly since her patron just signed a Scalzi-eqsue deal with Netflix.

         Jarrett has moved from politicl functionary to personal functionary; any insult to her is an insult to the Holy and Anointed One, and must be dealt with severely.

         1. I thought it was because PotA was a Disney property. But I was wrong – it’s 20th Century Fox. So, yeah, it has to be Jarrett.

         2. Yeah, that deal has me rethinking my subscription with Netflix.

   3. What gets me is that few, if any, of the people who watch the Roseanne Show would be offended by the Muslim Brotherhood and Planet of the Apes tweet. They’d still keep watching the show. Heck, how many more people would watch the show because of that? Which means that ABC fired her for no good reason. Talk about a company being stupid enough to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs!

      1. Hmm. Todd Starnes post makes too much sense. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/05/30/abc-doesnt-hate-roseanne-network-hates-her-viewers.html

         1. I had a slightly different take on that.
            http://rightasusual.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-collapse-of-roseanne.html

            1. Since she was fired, I wonder if she qualifies for unemployment compensation now?

               1. Been a long time since I left California, but they used to have an extended waiting period if you were fired for cause. OTOH, the rest of the cast and crew would be eligible after the usual 2 week waiting period.

                  1. Oregon has a shutdown announcement requirement. Which is 3 months. They can shutdown faster than that, but then you get “pay in place of notice”. Fancy way of saying if you shutdown immediately, then they get unemployment immediately (even if checks start coming after waiting week) & you get 3 months pay, plus any severance contractually required. Granted, usually that comes under “getting blood out of a turnip” if company went bankrupt. But (morally does not count) Hollywood(weird) ain’t bankrupt.

                     Just wondering.

                     1. California has provisions for a ‘production layoff’ which covers the end of a production whether the end of a production or season or something like a series cancellation.

2. Also, I thought Jarrett was Iranian?

   1. She IS Iranian. She was born there. That’s why I think Roseanne wasn’t being racist. I bet she didn’t know she was “black” just like I didn’t know. That means she didn’t intend racism. I watched the whole thing come down on Twitter live yesterday. She was at first defending against her attackers, thinking they meant she was being racist with the muslim bit!! It took her a bit to realize they meant the Planet of the Apes part… Roseanne got a raw deal and that’s a fact. I am not a fan of her, haven’t watched the new one at all, but truth is truth.

      1. As I said, I obsessively follow politics, and I had no idea Jarret’s father is black.

         1. She’s black on her dad’s side. She was on that PBS genealogy show, and it was tres amusante when she found out she was descended from a Louisiana black slave who was freed by her master and promptly married him.

            Then she found the real problem: she was descended from one of the first US black senators (a Republican, of course), and the Democratic Party never let him be seated.

            Heh, the frozen look on her face would have melted the Grinch’s heart. Even the super-liberal host obviously thought it was pretty funny.

            1. Forgot to say she’s black on her mom’s side too. But both sides are pretty pale; lots of intermarriage.

               The relevant episode of Finding Your Roots is Season 2, Episode 16, “We Come from People.” (Link provided, since pbs.org doesn’t seem to be showing it.)

               1. If you’re curious, here’s a nice picture of Valerie Jarrett’s mom.

                  Unless they really turned up the flashbulb, she’s a lot paler than anybody in my German/Irish family, except maybe my younger brother who looks like an Irish Springs commercial. And that’s not uncommon; Wright State had a magazine cover of a black kid from a historically black Ohio town, and he was paler than my brother and looked like Jimmy Olson.

                  You can’t always tell people’s chosen ethnicity by their looks.

                  1. Picture didn’t show up. Just go to the webpage for where Valerie’s mom works.

                     1. She looks like my grandma, actually.

                        …The one that was pure Scottish.

                        Age does tend to make pale folks either go bone or tan, though, and darker folks go pale. She looks like a nice, happy lady.

            2. “Black on $X side” suggests “doesn’t look it” and, really, why should anyone even give a damn? Color is skin deep (literally!) *character* is another matter.

               It’s depressing when us mythicals, with our incredibly faint connection with Reality, manage to have a better grip on it than some humans. (And ever try ‘gripping’ with hooves? being able to at all qualifies for mythicality, I say.)

               1. *character* is another matter
                  Character is ALL that matters, really. At least to a non-racist.

                  1. It can help with diagnosing genetic diseases.

                     1. Much less helpful these days, when genetic testing is a not-that-expensive option; too many people don’t know their ancestors beyond their grandparents, and “race” is so abused…ugh.

                        For an example, I know a lady who is very proud of her Cherokee ancestry; we’re pretty sure that while her ancestor was part of the tribe, he was a Freeman. (it’s complicated and I am avoiding a lot of details on purpose)
                        She doesn’t have any genetic issues that I know of, but if she did, asking her about her racial ancestry would be useless.

                        You know…those annoying “Genetic Ancestry” tests would actually be really useful for this.

                        1. When I went in for genetic testing, the doctor asked me about my ethnic family history.

                           Part of it was that we would have a better idea whom to alert that they want the test if it came back positive.

      2. Poking around, her dad was there on some kind of a get-doctors-to-see-diseases-that-don’t-exist-at-home program.

         Assuming the guy I found was indeed her father, that was one brave dude– from the pictures he looked like the kind of kid you’d expect if Sowell had married one of those pixie-like, round-faced English ladies, and Iran is really not the place you want to be either African or, worse, half African and half a group they sort of recognize as almost equal. I know it wasn’t as bad as it is now back in the 50s and 60s, but STILL!

         Couldn’t find a picture of the doctor’s wife.

         But their daughter? Let’s see, born in Iran and she’s Muslim, in as much as anybody would give a dang the obvious assumption would be either Persian or Arabic, in as much as she could be considered any “race” at all.

         She just looks normal to me. Basque? Spanish? Some sort of Hispanic? Italian? Ancestors were refugees from the various Middle Eastern conflicts? Probably about as much any of those as I am Irish?
         WHO CARES?

         1. I don’t think most people do care. And if they do, they only care in a “family history is cool” way.

            Everybody alive today is related. That is all we need to know.

            1. *DING*DING*DING*

               The ONLY folks that CARE about ‘race’ are the actual racists.

               1. Well yes. Race is their huge obsession. Despite their screaming otherwise that they’re ‘not racist and just want people of non-white ethnic groups to get benefits based on skin color and ethnic-genetic background’…

         2. Wiki reports that her family was “stationed” in Iran as part of a medical outreach program at the time of her birth but that her parents are American. Being born in a kennel doesn’t make a person a poodle.

            Curiosity but not important. A person is not her ancestors nor her birthplace, but who she has made of herself.

            1. So the stories I read were perhaps the same as calling McCain a Panamanian, if he was Catholic and pro-immigration, and Panama was a major state sponsor of terrorism and a major adversary of the United States. *Sigh*

            2. And she made herself an apologist for the MB, and for Iran.

      3. Jarret was born in Iran, because her American parents were living there while her father worked as a medical scientist for the Shah’s government. That doesn’t make her Iranian, any more than John McCain is Panamanian (born in what was then the Canal Zone), or the Duke of Wellington (born in Dublin) was Irish. As the Duke said, “Because a man is born in a stable, that does not make him a horse.”

         While some countries allow a child of sojourners to claim nationality, most do not, and there is often a requirement that the child grow up in the country.

         Jarret’s parents left Iran when she was five years old.

         1. However, she has aligned herself with the Iranians and the Muslim Brotherhood, so she is effectively one by choice, it seems.

   2. She was born in Iran, and spent her early childhood there. But IIRC, she’s not Persian. Her parents were in Iran working for the US Government. So something likely rubbed off. But it’s an open question how much.

      1. Just for clarity’s sake, none of the discussion of whether Jarrett is Persian or other affects general disdain for her person and her ideology. I am confident all here would find her abhorrent regardless of her ethnicity.

         1. Early childhood can be pretty important. On the other hand, John Ringo. Thought I think his earlier years were in the US.

            My concern is over how my impression of Jarrett’s politics may have been shaped by reports that might have insinuated things that weren’t so. On the other hand, maybe they were clear and I simply was too lazy to investigate further.

            The Jarrett reported up thread seems to be one that identifies strongly with racial politics and at the same time relies on pop culture history instead of digging deeper into primary and secondary sources. Such a person might, especially with early exposure to Iran, buy into Nation of Islam style theology and let that shape their foreign policy views.

            I’ve heard that her father’s contacts in Iran were such that he may have been used as an Iranian agent of influence. Thereby used to impeach Obama’s character, and suggest knowing Iranian influence. This new to me information suggests a credible alternative explanation for their behavior, and a reason what Obama and Jarrett may find each other congenial.

            Absent further information on Jarrett’s father’s pattern of contacts, I am forced to consider the possibility that I have been fundamentally mistaken. Was that suspicion unfounded, akin to what the current public information suggests about “Trump is working for the Russians”?

3. Roseanne is 65 years old. I doubt if she has ever been described as “physically fit.” She faced a grueling multi-year run in a hit series in which she had multiple roles—acting, writing, producing. She probably has enough money.

   I imagine she wanted out. Hollywood likes money. This may be her way of getting out of a contract which Disney would fight to keep.

   1. I don’t actually give a f*ck about Roseanne. I care about the “gotcha” from pseudo freudians on language.

      1. Especially when the network knew *exactly* what Roseanne’s type of humor was and always had been: she’s a shock-jock, offensive humor type.

         I mean, good grief. I remember when she ‘sang’ the national anthem at one Super Bowl, and pulled her usual schtick (did it badly, because she thought it was hilarious. Almost no one else did.).

         Whether or not it was ‘racist’ doesn’t matter–what irks me is those twerps at the network being all outraged and congratulating themselves for cancelling the show. When they knew precisely what she was when they hired her…

         1. I remember that. If I recall, she actually TRIED to sing it right at first, but just didn’t have the chops. She didn’t start making a mockery of it until people started booing.

      2. I’ve not had a TV signal (beyond net connection) for 9 or so years. If Roseanne has a show or not affects me exactly not at all. Neutrinos might have bigger influence. But the big kerfuffle over it? Really? Where we these folks when Mr. Bush was compared to some (non-human) simian? Oh, agreeing or egging on? Guess how much standing they have with anyone sane? None at all.

   2. That was pretty much my take. She started running into issues almost from the beginning with her production/writer staff, and basically said F*** this.

   3. multi-year run? the new series just started…

      1. Technically multi-year is correct. The first season had ended, and a second season had been scheduled. So while she hadn’t yet actually done anything “multi-year”, it was something that she was likely expecting to happen.

4. I really don’t understand how we have set up a system where people are empowered to utterly destroy other people over the accusation of racism, regardless of how ill-supported or nonsensical the accusation is. That’s terrifying to me. True story: friend works in a small business as bookkeeper. A co-worker, an older middle-aged white woman who had been there forever, was on day one of training a new employee who was black. At one point the trainee asked if a certain pile of paperwork needed to be addressed and the older woman explained that this was work that would be handled by the next shift, adding “Not my circus, not my monkeys.” The trainee complained (has she never heard this phrase?) and the older woman was immediately fired. All this in a small midwestern town where jobs are very hard to come by. That’s terrifying to me. In what sane world does the boss not explain that this is a common phrase and that the newbie probably owes the older woman an apology for accusing her of the worst thing that a person can possibly do except perhaps rape children?

   1. THIS is what I object to. This is insane.

   2. Should have fired the trainee for not having sufficient education to do the job.

      1. THIS.

      2. Concur.

      3. In a sane world, yes.

      4. Insufficient education, bad attitude, and uncooperative with others. Recommend not hiring for any position.

         When you are a new hire, you are on the BOTTOM. Not the top, unless you were specifically recruited for a supervisory/expert position. And you’ll have a truckload of experience being at the bottom in other jobs before you get a crack at one of those.

         1. yes, and getting other people fired for imaginary slights is how many SJWs climb the ladder… they certainly don’t do it by being competent at their jobs… unless the job involves asking if you want an extra shot in your latte.

            1. Admittedly not just the justice fiends but many careers seem to advance this way.

   3. Why would racism rate so highly on the scale of evil acts? What’s the actual harm?

      It seems there’s kind of a motte and bailey at play. Modern discussion of racism often seems to conflate the evil of a racist justification for a mass murder and a racist hurtful comment.

      The harm of racist mass murder does seem quite high. I would say that each component murder is definitely comparable in evil to the rape or murder of children.

      But what of a hurtful comment? At worst, ‘not my circus not my monkeys’ was a hurtful comment. The charge that it was racist was a hurtful comment. If someone is going to bring in ‘power disparity’, it wasn’t the one crying racism who was fired.

      What is the harm done? What are the people with such opinions going to actually do? Offensive opinions that lead to hurtful comments are perhaps a case where the people kicking up a fuss are at fault. My reasoning is that if a mean comment is truly profoundly unsettling, one may not be stable enough for the world of mentally competent adults, and if it is not and one says it is, one is an asshole. Offensive opinions that lead to mass murder are another issue.

      It may be that most people realize the hurtful comment stuff is bullshit, but it isn’t bullshit enough to put the junkies and mass murder nutjobs in power.

      1. In the Progressive mind (such as it is) racism is the essential component of racial slavery which they see as America’s Original Sin at our creation. It is thus a handy tool for belaboring folks into compliance with Proglodyte demands.

         That it is as normal to the human condition as water and an accusation impossible to effectively refute just makes it all the more useful. it is not that they care about racism, it is that racism is just so bloody useful.

      2. Misunderstandings happen. When they do, a person ought to accept the explanation.

      3. They don’t care how much harm is actually done, they care how useful it is to treat like blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

   4. I was still in my first year or so on the job at the public library when I casually referred to the Circulation Department, or “Circ,” Office, as “the Circus.” It was meant affectionately. Their supervisor (black) apparently contacted my supervisor (Hispanic, but irrelevant) ASAP to complain that I had called her staff clowns, or animals, or something. Fortunately, this was before the Age of Obama the Lightworker, so all I had to do was apologize and never say it again. Some time later I realized how very lucky I was….

      1. I’m fine with ‘animal’ (I liked how Twain differentiated between people and the Higher Animals) and my aunt worked as a clown. Now, bureaucrat would be insulting.

         Difference between a bureaucrat and toilet paper? Toilet paper is useful at least ONCE.

   5. The rest of that business should be looking for a valid excuse to fire that newbie, because that newbie has shown herself to be a liability and a waiting lawsuit that could destroy the business.

      Like every single SJZ ever.

   6. But we’re not living in a sane world. We’re living in a world where 50 years of bureaucracy and regulations and case law mean that young woman will either get her feelz soothed, or she can pick up the phone and call any or all of half a dozen government agencies, a dozen “civil rights” organizations, and probably a street gang or two and put that business and everyone remotely associated with it through absolute hell, up to and including physical violence.

      “The rest of that business should be looking for a valid excuse to fire that newbie, because that newbie has shown herself to be a liability and a waiting lawsuit that could destroy the business.”

      And the legal term for that, Shadow, in this country is “retaliation” which will simply add to the criminal and civil hell in store. And before anyone tells me I’m too depressive, don’t. Because I’ve seen it, up close, in places I’ve worked projects in, for 30+ years.

5. Every news story prior to this that referred to Jarret referred to her as Iranian.

   1. I hardly think this is a venue in which to initiate a debate on the accuracy of MSM narrative construction reporting.

      1. I think that should be “reporting”, as “scare quotes” should be used to indicate the word contained should be read as its opposite.

6. It reminds me of the “dog whistle” language fuss a few years ago. The same people seem to forget that the one who hears said whistle… is the dog.

   FWIW Valerie Jarrett’s affect reminds me more of someone who is – at least in their own mind – three steps ahead and doesn’t care what you read or don’t read in their features. She’s already decided who in the room is a waste of space and who might be useful to her. Why bother trying to fake a smile? It could be a grave misreading of the woman, but that’s how she comes across on the screen and in print.

   1. Yup, that’s how I read her too.

      It’s startling when she’s not absolutely cold. And I speak as someone who is as Odd as they get.

   2. Jarrett, IIRC, comes from Old Money. Wiki relates:

      One of her maternal great-grandfathers, Robert Robinson Taylor, was the first accredited African-American architect, and the first African-American student enrolled at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

      which indicates long established American Negro Elite (see: Sowell, Thomas, Black Rednecks and White Liberals.).

      It is highly likely she has been trained since birth in the duties of her class, and to watch for the types of persons who are prone to exploit such established persons. The affect you describe seems highly likely; she is probably only comfortably herself in gatherings of her social caste.

      1. Doesn’t matter. If Trump has any backbone, her future consists of an orange jumpsuit and a gray-barred cell. Unless she turns State’s Evidence. Seditious Conspiracy carries a 20 year prison sentence.

         1. You know laws like that only apply to the little people, right? 😦

7. I hadn’t heard the Trump / Orangutan thing. Not sure how I missed that one, but yea… I see it. Funny!

   Not only have I heard the Bush Jr (shrub) / Chimp thing, I have to admit I propagated that one. In my defense, I imagine that if/when he heard someone say it, he probably just blew it off with a joke (usually at his own expense). That was one thing I couldn’t help but like about him. Far too few of our Presidents have had that kind of self awareness and humility. Still won’t forgive him for the Patriot act, or the scourge on civil rights that is the TSA.

   Obama? Oddly enough, dude looks more like Herman Monster to me than anything else. If someone can come up with how that’s “racist”… well, more power to them. I’ve been called a racist for more idiotic reasons, so why break a streak.

   Rosanne has always been a crass individual. Not sure why anyone would be surprised that she would come up with this Planet of the Apes thing and have the lack of character to say it out loud.

   1. Obama has Patrician English features, if you change his skin color. OTOH if you take me into paintshop and adjust my skin color I look COMPLETELY African.

      1. Rachel Dolezal?

         1. meh. In my case probably genetic. Meh.

      2. The only American president not descended from King John of England was Martin van Buren.

         1. This has what to do with the price of potatoes? Most Americans are descended from Edward III. But Patrician doesn’t MEAN kingly. It means upper class.

   2. I remember the GW Bush-Chimp comparison. What I thought was hysterical was Obama’s ears stuck out just as much, if not more; and everyone was terrified to mention the simian similarity.

   3. Watching videos of an 18th century reenactor and he had a shitstorm over a dessert called an Orange Fool. The Trump does no wrong crowd are just as bad as the leftoids.

      1. While the President is the leader of the country, he’s also a tool that we the people choose to do the work we think needs to be done. If you can’t get the perfect tool for the job, then you go with the one you have that can do the job. I have some of the ugliest, bent up, beat up, rested up screwdrivers on the planet in my toolbox because I’ve used them as ice chippers, scrapers, chisels, pry bars, and, oh yes, as screwdrivers. Ah ha! I know what to do now. I’ll paint all those beat up screwdriver handles orange and call them Trumpdrivers!

      2. Meh. See C. S. Lewis on the distinction between patriots and pacifists. It matters not which the person is, so long as the person is extremely committed to that beyond useful purpose. These are means to an end and should never become the ends themselves.

      3. Yes, I follow that reenactor – and he was absolutely gob-smacked, and horrified at the reaction to that posted 18th century recipe. It was an entirely innocent thing … and he had no idea.

         1. Yeah, welcome to today’s political stage.
            If you intentionally avoid it, you will be dragged, kicking and screaming, onto it and pommeled for anything they perceive you have done, whether you actually did it or not.

   4. In my defense, I imagine that if/when he heard someone say it, he probably just blew it off with a joke (usually at his own expense).

      When he was young, it apparently really got to him.

      By the time he got elected, he’d grown up and a couple of times made the joke himself– remember one news report where he poofed his cheeks out and put his fingers behind his ears. It was supposed to show he was horrible, of course, but I thought it was kinda cute in that sweet-old-guy way. (I would’ve been in my late teens to twenties so yes, late fifties/early sixties is “old guy.”)

   5. The Patriot Act wasn’t 100% bush. Congress passed it (HR 3162) 358 to 66 out of 398 voting. The Senate passed it 98 for, 1 against, 1 didn’t vote.

      Interestingly, in later years whole lot of Senators claimed they were that dissenting vote, but the records show otherwise. (it was Feingold from WI)

      The Act was like a wet dream of power to the Fed; once they got the idea, it was *going* to happen, one way or another…

      1. > The Act was like a wet dream of power to the Fed;

         It was a laundry list of almost everything they’d been told NO on for the previous 8 years.

      2. Did they overturn his veto? No. He signed it, it’s his. Just like the recent bloated sack of stuff budget that Trump signed now belongs to Trump.

         1. They had the votes to do so, and were threatening not to fund essentials. The vote to make the TSA federal was 98-0.

      3. “The Patriot Act wasn’t 100% bush.”

         Neither was the TSA. DuckDuckGo the phrase “to professionalize you must federalize” and realize that the Democrats were perfectly prepared to hold up on defending the country until they could get more government union workers to support Democrats.

         That was when I realized that there will have to be a civil war, because these aren’t Americans.

   6. One fellow who seems OTHERwise fairly sane describes the current President as Cheeto & worse.. and seems to believe the Mueller mewling has some worth. It’s jarring to watch, it is.

   7. Bush Jr. having a call sign of “Shrub” I could well believe. Certainly in a Navy ready room he’d be up for it. OTOH, turn about is fair play…Naval Aviators are notorious for a warped sense of humor.

      1. “Shrub” would be rather tame for a military nickname.

         1. It would be a callsign… nasty nicknames don’t get painted on planes.

            Any time anyone tells me how stupid he was, I ask them if they can fly an F-106…. which were notorious for having information overload for the pilots and one of the planes that directly contributed to two-seat air superiority fighters as well as MFD development.

            1. It was weirdly fascinating to watch the critics claim that he was both an utter idiot… and the cleverest of schemers.

               1. It’s how we’re somehow this uber-powerful group that manages to MAKE THINGS HAPPEN… but we’re powerless at the same time. Somehow.

               2. Logic is a construct of patriarchy, comrade! What are you, some kind of kulak?

               3. As Scott Adams would point out, such cognitive dissonance is a sure indicator you have left reality behind.

            2. I can fly one of those. Straight into the ground. 🙂

               I’m no pilot, don’t have the dexterity or focus, and got confused by TIE Fighter, back in the day.

               1. a lot of pilots flew those right into the ground, so you’re not alone in that.

                  1. Recently I learned a bit about what ‘unforgiving aircraft’ actually means, and why certain models might be nicknamed lawn dart.

                     1. I also heard them called “Telephone Pole Catchers”.
                        The SAMs used back then looked like someone launching phone poles and the 106 was very good at not avoiding them.
                        GWB didn’t go to ‘Nam not because he went into the ANG to avoid it, but because even though he was willing, the military learned not to send any more 106s and pilots to almost certainly die.

                        1. I remember hearing once that he was *pissed* that they withdrew those planes just before he was to deploy, and that he tried to get trained on the replacement plane but got bumped by pilots returning for retraining.

                        2. They didn’t need interceptors, really.

            3. He not only flew the bastards, he flew from Texas to Florida, with the canopy painted white so he could get instrument rated in the thing.

               1. *shudders*

                  1. How’s that for pucker factor?

                     1. 

         2. See https://thelexicans.wordpress.com/2012/04/07/whats-your-call-sign/ for an outstanding explanation of how Navy call signs come about.

         3. Given the widely acknowledged gentility of jet fighter jockeys I am confident that the surname “Bush” would engender a call sign referential to the same euphemism employed by this ad:

            And we’re not talking topiary here.

            1. Considering the popularity of a then recent TV series, perhaps George W might have been provided the call sign “Beaver”?

8. All I can say on the Rosanne thing is that if you didn’t see this coming, you need new glasses. She’s always been loud, crude, and ignorant, and the minute she came out in support of Trump she was done. All ABC needed was an excuse.

   1. Wait! The lady who dressed as Hitler and held a pan of ” Jewish” gingerbread men, did something that offended people? Cue Louis

   2. Indeed, I’ve never watched a show with her. I’ve seen her in a few preview blurbs and was repelled by her even in that short exposure. I have to ask by ABC wasn’t embarrassed by her long ago.

9. By the way, Fred Reed had a fairly decent post this week. https://fredoneverything.org/affirmative-action-and-the-american-mind-if-any/

10. Who is Roseann Barr,and why should I care about her opinions on any subjects? She’s just aTV personality, it I understand correctly, so not worth bothering with. Any more than I credit David Attenborough with.understanding of the AGW furore when climatology is not his specialist subject, or any TV presenter with knowing more than his cheat sheet says about whatever he or she is talking about.

    1. The only time I had ever heard of her was when she mocked the National Anthem while “singing” it at some feetball game.

       I guess that was too long ago for her to have kept her Leftist street cred.

    2. The post wasn’t about Barr and her opinion, it was about the reaction to it, especially by people who should have known.

11. I would bet she was given the rehash of be show with the knowledge she would do something stupid and it could be used to smear anyone and everyone not of the correct mindset. She has a long list of stops things she has done thinking they were funny or brilliant, they had to expect this. That said Jarrett looks almost like one of the PotA characters missing the chimp nose/mouth prosthetic, and is very much a supporter of the asses in the Brotherhood. I also didn’t know her father was black, I just thought she has Persian in her bloodline

    1. Stupid phone. Stupid things, not stop things.

    2. I was wondering the same thing, and suspect I am too paranoid.

       1. Well it to often seems we are not paranoid enough, lately, bc so …

12. N.B. – apparently Roseanne’s tweet was the Twitter equivalent of Mel Gibson’s drunken ranting when pulled over by cops:

    In Late-Night Plea, Roseanne Begs Fans: Do NOT Defend Me or My ‘Egregious, Indefensible’ Tweet
    First, Roseanne Barr lost her job. Then, she lost her agents. But she kept a lot of defenders, who have been on Twitter expressing anger and outrage throughout the day after the fallout from her racist tweet.

    Having apologized a few times, Roseanne took to Twitter again Tuesday night, and she pleaded with those defending what she said to stop. (Screenshots because the originals were later deleted.)

    guys I did something unforgiveable so do not defend me. It was 2 in the morning and I was ambien tweeting-it was memorial day too-I went 2 far & do not want it defended-it was egregious Indefensible. I made a mistake I wish I hadn’t but…don’t defend it please. ty
    9:15 PM * 29 May 2018

    Please don’t start all that boycott abc stuff-I’m not a censor and they have the right to do what they wish. It’s all ok. thanks tho guys!
    9:43 PM * 29 May 2018

    [END EXCERPT]

    So in my book she’s way ahead of Kathy “Sweeney Todd” Griffin and Jimmy “Boobs On A Tramp[oline]” Kimmel.

    Oddly we never hear news of Liberals ranting drunkenly. I doubt it is because they don’t, because I’ve read and heard enough of the ranting soberly. A more cynical person than I might suggest the MSM provides air cover for their drunken rants but a more cynical person than I would be hard to find.

    In the meantime, I trust all here will understand if I do not jump immediately upon a couch whenever the MSM cries, “Eek! A conservative mouse!”

    1. I don’t actually care about Roseanne, I care about the constant policing of language used by people they don’t like. I’m sick of it.

       1. It isn’t the defenestration of Ms Barr that is noteworthy, it is the fact that they only defenestrate certain people. Their selective outrage over linguistic presumptions is merely a tool used to force those windows.

          1. It’s not about who they’re defenestrating, it’s about their breaking of the glass to do so.

       2. >… we don’t care what words mean when you spin them through the tilt-a-whirl that passes for your brain.

          I have long referred to this as the “Humpty Dumpty theory of language”.

          It is a bait-and-switch technique designed to secure one’s agreement on something, based on a historic meaning, but when one objects to the result, one is told something like “oh, I’ve always used that word/expression to mean …”

    2. “Please, please, please don’t help me. If I grovel hard enough maybe they’ll let me back in!”

    3. I do care (somewhat) about Roseanne, only because I did like the old show, and I don’t like a lot of shows. And, in her day, she was genuinely funny. In more recent years, she’s struck me as the female equivalent of that old drunk blue collar guy saying outrageous things at the bar, but probably meaning none of them (though, unlike that guy, she was getting attention on Twitter for it).

       And yeah, I’m sure this is about her supporting Trump. And how big a hit the new show was, and how many conservatives praised it. I didn’t see it, but I was glad it was doing well and it means something that a lot of the cast came out in her defense.

       We need to get Bob Iger of Disney fired. There was already a shareholder revolt this year, and they denied him a pay raise, but that’s just a drop in the bucket.

       1. Never watched the old show, but figured give the new one a shot, if only because of some of the other characters & their roles on other shows. I liked it. ROFLOL funny, meh. But definitely chuckle worth. Plus the show did take on some controversial topics. I think it would have gotten old over time, but ???

          Do I think she should have been fired? uhhh 1st Amendment. Did her tweet advocate violence? Was it Bullying? Was it rude & crude to someone? Lets see: No, No, & obviously … I didn’t understand any of the “obvious” references until it was so nicely & repeatably outlined for me by those outraged. Heck, I wouldn’t know who Valerie Jarret was if I bumped into her. Wouldn’t know Roseanne outside of her venue’s either, provided her name was posted at the venue. Just me.

          So, yes, makes sense. Those yelling Racists, are the Racists!!!

13. “Would they have been racist if said about Obama?”

    As anything short of “I think Obama is super specially wonderful” was deemed racist, yes.

    1. “I think Obama is an angel who has come here to walk among us.”

       “What? You don’t think he’s actually God? You think black people must always be in a subordinate position to an old white guy? RACIST!!!!”

       Okay, I’m admit that I’m exaggerating on that one. Slightly.

       1. The answer to that is “No… Gdo is CLEARLY purple you heathen!”

       2. The possibility of Obama being a Fallen Angel would explain much. 😉
          He does seem to try present himself as “a man of wealth and taste” and clearly articulated that it “was a time for a change.” While president he was definitely “in need of some restraint.”

14. “[I]n their minds, all black people are associated with apes.”

    Aren’t they the faction denying Human Exceptionalism, arguing humans are no different from apes? Aren’t they the ones wanting to extend human rights to apes, dogs, pigs, rivers, fungi?

    I think I detect a slight inconsistency.

    1. I am reminded how of Marvel (the comics) killed off the character of Moon Boy (a protohuman) and then sent his companion T-Rex Devil Dinosaur to the mainstream Marvel universe and immediately paired him with . . . an African-American girl, who becomes Moon Girl.

       Did they really think that one through?

       1. “If You Were a T-Rex Devil Dinosaur, My Love…”

       2. Bunch of Moonies….

          1. and I said “Don’t look Ethel!” but it was too late, she already been moooooned.

       3. They killed Moon Boy? 😦

          1. Of course. They could, oh, have him left behind on his own world, or anything crazy like that. Moon Boy must die so that Moon Girl is Important.

15. “It’s only the left that’s neurotic enough to both be racist and try to hide it.”

    This is typical of adolescents who are still trying to reconcile the distinctions between what they think is socially permissible and their inner convictions.

16. Oh look, another witch burning on the Left. Must be Wednesday.

    Rosanne Barr (RB) is a fully-paid-up member of the hard-core Hollywood Left. She’s also reputed to be crazy. As in takes medicine for The Voices crazy. That’s what I’ve heard on Teh Interwebz, how true it is, I wouldn’t bet money.

    Neither of those things is why the New Roseanne Show went pro-Trump (it didn’t) and neither of them is why the show was cancelled.

    The -main character- of the Roseanne Show went pro-Trump. All the other characters ragged on her for it. Lots of controversy, lots of room for crass jokes, et cetera. Perfect setup to capture both halves of the divided AND SHRINKING television audience.

    RB might be crazy, but she’s not stupid. She can do basic arithmetic. (Full disclosure, I can’t stand RB and I have never watched any of her shows. At all. Not the old ones, not the new one, not her stand-up comedy. Nothing.)

    Cable cutting and Netflix are killing broadcast TV. To get an audience she had to appeal to that broad swath of America that hated Obama, hates New York City Liberals, and pretty much hates everything on TV because its all pro-Liberal. Even Fox News is Liberal, just a bit less than NBCABCCBSCNN.

    They want to see somebody, anybody, mock some Liberals. They will pay money to see that. If the Liberals hate it, they will pay -more- money.

    Meanwhile, Liberals are starved for outrage these days, so a pro-Trump show will pull them in like crazy. Give them something to scream about.

    It worked great. The show put up big numbers. Fly-Over Country watched it. RB was in the news again and making money. Liberals screamed, so they were happy too.

    The show was cancelled. They literally cancelled one of the biggest hits they had. The RB “Valerie Jarret comment” is the excuse they needed. RB may have even said it deliberately to give them an out.

    Network Television is not about making money anymore. Its about controlling elections. The show disrupted their narrative, so it had to go.

    I would bet that RB knew this outcome going in, and is laughing all the way to the bank with a multi-million dollar cancellation settlement.

    I have zero evidence of this, it is just my theory of the crime, as it were. But I suspect if we just wait a little while evidence will present itself.

    By the way, for this week’s SFF witch burning, some woman author was ejected and banned from WisCon for being insufficiently Woke ™ about history. Somebody with a stronger stomach than mine can wade through the SJW cesspool for the details. I’m going to cut the grass instead.

    1. I don’t want to wade through SJW crap. And I’m not at all upset about Roseanne. I really couldn’t pick her out of a lineup but had a vague idea that there was something about fire can’t melt steel.
       It’s just next time I say someone is aping me, because you know, they are, and the person is 1/16th black, and the “racist” cries come out, I’m going to be really, really mad. I’m tired of this shit. REALLY tired.
       If they’d fired her for being “Stupid crude” great. If they’d fired her for “regular racist attitudes” whatever. BUT for a tweet, no matter how stupid, because in their minds “ape” means “black”. No. Not. One. More.Word.

       1. The “fire can’t melt steel” idiot was Rosie O’Donnell who really *is* stupid.

          Rosanne Barr had that TV show where her lower-working class family actually mostly supported each other and pulled together while everyone was a mess and they tried to make ends meet. (In contrast to the Bundy’s who were all uniformly horrible people who were awful to each other.)

          1. Yes, do not confuse Roseanne with Rosie! I can take Roseanne, I can’t stand Rosie.

          2. Mostly awful to each other. But heaven help any outsider who truly crossed one of them – down deep, at the very core, things worked. Yeah, I used to watch it once upon a time. Of course the best (in perhaps every sense of the word) character was the dog.

       2. “I don’t want to wade through SJW crap.”

          No, not you. I was thinking we could rope Chupik into doing it. ~:D

          “…there was something about fire can’t melt steel.”

          That, as the other sharp eye people said, was Rosie O’Donnell. Who really is dumber than she looks, apparently. Dumber than a bag of hammers.

          “…because in their minds “ape” means “black”.

          That just makes me want to say it more, and show them both my middle fingers while I’m saying it. ~:D With a megaphone! Orangutans have red hair like I do. And they’re white! Bwaha!

          Remember Harambe, the gorilla that the Zoo guys shot because a “white” baby fell in his cage, and the Lefties were all screaming because Harambe was a Black Man!!!11! who was killed by the White Man!!! Remember that? Then it turned out the baby was black, and they all got really quiet?

          Yeah, these are my middle fingers, bitchizz. Feast your eyes.

    2. > They literally cancelled one of the biggest hits they had.

       Nothing new there. The original Star Trek was somewhere between #2 and #5, depending on whose account you believe, and that was after they bounced its timeslot around like a pachinko ball. And when they moved it to 10PM, remember that was when probably half the stations in the US signed off for the night…

       And that #2 (or #5) was a *much* bigger market share than in 2018; there were three (or two) stations in most areas, and that was it. No cable, no streaming, no video rentals.

    3. Must be Wednesday.

       Must be a day that ends in “y.”

       FTFY.

    4. I’m out of the cesspool business. Some other brave, doomed soul will have to volunteer.

       1. Hung up your hip waders, eh? ~:D

          1. Let’s just say I’ll drive past the dumpster once in a while, but I ain’t diving into it.

             Unless someone pays me. 😉

17. If the precious little monkeys climb the curtains, (as some have been known to do) they may earn the appellation “Drape Apes”. More an affectionate term than otherwise, as I’ve heard it used.

    1. If we give them purple Kool-Aid, will be… Grape Apes?

       (Yeah, yeah, my 1970’s is showing…)

       1. But he was a really swell guy…

18. Thanx, Sarah!
    In all the news about this tweet (amazing how big a NEWS story a tweet can be, isn’t it?) I never see the comment referred to as an ALLEGED racist tweet (the word that gives benefit-of-the-doubt to caught-in-the-act school-shooters), nor referred to as a “racist” tweet (quotes to imply something in doubt – especially when said by the other side.)
    Rosanne’s racism (and Trump’s by extension) is assumed to be a fact by those who are better suited to tell us how (and what) to think.

19. Noted:

    Trump weighs in on ‘Roseanne’ cancellation, accuses Disney CEO of double standard
    President Trump on Wednesday accused Disney CEO Bob Iger of exercising a double standard by calling former Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett this week to apologize for actress Roseanne Barr’s incendiary comment about her, claiming he never received an apology for “horrible statements” made about him on ABC.

    “Bob Iger of ABC called Valerie Jarrett to let her know that ‘ABC does not tolerate comments like those’ made by Roseanna Barr. Gee, he never called President Donald J. Trump to apologize for the HORRIBLE statements made and said about me on ABC,” Trump tweeted.

    He added: “Maybe I just didn’t get the call?”

    [END EXCERPT]

    Increasingly the Left resembles a mafiosi “protection” racket in which paying fealty to the correct idols offers a shield against attack from their mob. That would explain Harvey Weinstein’s initial idea that he could shield himself from consequences for his sexual harassment by increasing his purchase of indulgences in the form of attacks on the NRA.

    1. If nothing else Trump knows both his base and the viewership of the Rosanne revival.

20. c4c

21. Mobs have never been rational, and the people who whip them into a frenzy have never cared. My tribe has been driven clear across the US by them in historical times, and their great great grandchildren have still not forgotten. We know their kind. They are the enemy. Hold the fort, and tbey will destroy each other.

    1. Mobs have never been rational; for the people who whip them into a frenzy, that’s their main chief virtue.

       1. Truth

       2. That’s why you never shoot the guys with the torches and pitchforks at the front. You shoot the guy with the megaphone at the back.

          Or, modern version, find the location of the phone sending out all the tweets and go ’round for a “friendly chat.”

          I remember a MilSF story about that, some inventor created a drone swarm that traced where all the C&C signals were coming from and attacked there, killing the officers and leaving all the soldiers milling about with no orders.

          1. Er, for many militaries that might work, but as I recall there is (or at least one) where “Comms are out. That means something bad happened. Attack!” would happen.

             1. A French soldier working with some American troops (Marines, iirc, though it might have been Army) made an observation or two about them. He noted that when ambushed, the default response for most armies is to hunker down, take stock of the situation, and figure out the proper response. But the troops he was with had a different default response – “Attack!” If they got ambushed, they immediately counter-attacked against the ambushing enemies.

                1. Given the formative wars for the US military, that makes so dang much sense….

                   1. Looking back on my Canadian army training, which may have been influenced by American standards, our response to an ambush was to turn and counter attack. One of those things which is counter intuitive but works.

                      1. Canadian doctrine, like the Americans’, was developed through years of tutelage by the Amerindian tribes.

                2. Yes, that is standard US doctrine for dealing with an ambush: either “drive through and get away” if it’s very close, “counter-attack now”, or “flank it and attack” if it’s too far away for direct counter-attack.

                   And, if it’s “drive through and get away”, if you’re a combat unit without another place to urgently be, that turns into “now turn back, flank it, and attack”.

             2. Yes. The US tends to push down enough “big picture” to its lower echelons that they can carry out their general orders even if communications go out entirely. Sometimes even better than when higher command can still interfere.

22. I wish everybody would quit holding back.

    Tell us what you really feel! [Very Big Grin]

    1. The mass media are [EXPLETIVE DELETED] that should be treated as the [EXPLETIVE DELETED] that it is/they are and flushed – or added to a pile or pile as they such HUGE [EXPLETIVE DELETED] that would clog a normal sewer system. Also, they should commit sexual relations of the Sodom sort with chainsaws. Large, rusty, and sideways. And TWICE on Sundays.

       Alright, I admit to holding back considerably. Some of the bastages might even enjoy that, the sickos.

23. > “niggling doubt.”

    I had a forum moderator lose his rag because I used the hateful racist word “snigger.”

    Apparently his vocabulary didn’t stretch to “the sound Snidley Whiplash’s dog makes.”

    1. This is really a case of “found the racist” because the person insisting that a “niggling doubt” will cause harm to POC who hear the term is defacto proclaiming that POC “don’t do language good.”

    2. lose his rag
       SEXIST!
       /prog

       1. No, no, it’s racist because only [minority] members wear do’ rags!

    3. Yeah, I’ve run into that, too. Oddly I learned the word from Miss Liza Dolittle:

       Well, if I was doing it proper, what was you sniggering at?
       2’55”

24. One lesson that’s constantly being drummed in is that minorities are too fragile to withstand what white males are expected to take in stride. “Chimpy McBush” is an example of patriotic dissent. A rodeo clown wearing an Obama mask is guilty of lèse-majesté.

    And of course, we know Starbucks is staffed by racists who need special training.

    1. Ah, for one GLORIOUS afternoon the country was afflicted with… adequate to good coffee.

       1. Damn Orvan. I’ll drink to that!

       2. If I feel like a Starbucks, I make my own cappuccino at home (far, far superior) and then light a five dollar bill on fire.

          1. /laugh

    2. Just another example of how anti-racists make the strongest arguments for white male supremacy I’ve ever heard.

       My question to them has always been, “If I, as a white male, I can take what non-whites and non-males cannot how am I not superior?” I have yet to receive an answer beyond, “Asking that is racist.”

25. And of course, there’s this handy guide to when comparisons with simians is, and is not, racist:

    1. Please to add the link after your colon (:) for the handy guide.

       1. I thought I had. Maybe with no ornamentation at all…
          http://www.bookwormroom.com/2018/05/29/roseanne-double-standard-race/

26. the obsession is in THEIR minds, not ours
    So……
    A man goes to a Psychologist and says, “Doc I got a real problem, I can’t stop thinking about sex.”
    The Psychologist says, “Well let’s see what we can find out”, and pulls out his ink blots. “What is this a picture of?” he asks.
    The man turns the picture upside down then turns it around and states, “That’s a man and a woman on a bed making love.”
    The Psychologist says, “very interesting,” and shows the next picture. “And what is this a picture of?”
    The man looks and turns it in different directions and says, “That’s a man and a woman on a bed making love.”
    The Psychologists tries again with the third ink blot, and asks the same question, “What is this a picture of?”
    The patient again turns it in all directions and replies, “That’s a man and a woman on a bed making love.”
    The Psychologist states, “Well, yes, you do seem to be obsessed with sex.”
    “Me!?” demands the patient. “You’re the one who keeps showing me the dirty pictures!”

    You had to know that was coming, right? 🙂
    (Now I’ll go read the rest of the post.)

27. I have a scenario for you;

    Roseanne restarts her sitcom. She and her writers figure the people she plans to portray would be Trump supporters, and write it that way. As I recall, the character are supposed to be negative examples. I was corralled into watching a few minutes of a few episodes of the first run. Like Archie bunker, Roseanne and her family were supposed to be wrong thinkers who would illustrate the correct thoughts by contrast. Roseanne maybe even makes some edgy remarks about liking Trump as part of her publicity push.

    To the shock of the gliterati, the Characters are popular. The point – that they are wrong about Trump – is totally missed by the Unwashed. Alarmed, the network starts looking for an excuse to pull the plug. Roseanne is in a tough spot. She agrees to make a tweet that could be interpreted as Racist while being sufficiently off the wall that it won’t actually be damaging to her coming back in a year or so. Maybe she gets slipped a nice cancellation fee.

    Is it likely? The Left have done weirder things…

    1. *DING*DING*DING*DING*

       This explains it even better than mass dosing of the water supply with Dumbassatol HCl.

       1. Like a lot of my theories, I don’t insist on it. Roseanne strikes me as a loose cannon, capable of any degree of idiocy. But I hear echoes of the problems the Left ran into when the Archie Bunker character proved so popular. They really expected people to love to hate him, and instead the viewers left out the hate part.

       2. I noted (but did not read) a news report about ABC attempting to do a spin-off of the show without anyone whose initials are R.B.

          At a guess, Roseanne has an ownership interest in the show and characters and would be in line to receive a hefty remuneration for use of her creation.

          1. It would hilarious to watch them try only to have people tune out in droves.

    2. It’s a variation of the clown nose technique. Comediens can get wide latitude, especially if they target the unpersons. But it’s an easy gotcha. Even easier in the ‘i feel hurt’ environment where facts don’t matter. Especially when it’s by someone not used to the environment. Same as the Russian meeting stuff. Most campaigns would have heard the allegations. But most would use layers of lawyers and shell PACs. Same with emoluments or obstruction arguments.

    3. You may be right. After the mess with the FBI wiretapping the Trump campaign, I’m not so sure the tinfoil conspiracy crowd is not on the right track. Not these days.

       1. The thing about the FBI scandal is, it sounds like business as usual for the Democrats…except they usually don’t get caught out until 20 years later, by which time the hagiography of those involved is firmly in place. There’s considerable evidence that Kennedy’s election was stolen for him by the Democrat Machine. There’s a certain amount of evidence that he routinely spied on political opponents. But most of that came out after the Cult of St. Kennedy The Martyr was firmly in place.

          The tinfoil hat brigade extends to people who think the Air Force is hiding a flying saucer in ‘Area 51’. On the Left, they include the pillocks who think Bush had the Towers brought down with controlled detonations (they can’t have ever looked into how complicated and obvious that would have been to set up). On the Right we have the sad old geezers who maintained that FDR ‘planned’ Pearl Harbor (The Japanese got to Pearl Harbor because the American Military and the FDR administration were bigots who thought the farthest the Japanese Navy could get was the Philippines.).

          Political skullduggery, misuse of Federal Law Enforcement? Pretty much how things go. Some Republicans get exposed. Democrats get protected. Or GOT protected. The newsworthy part of that story is that A) The effort was so clumsy and B) The Usual Suspects in the Media haven’t been able to bury it.

          They really are falling apart.

          1. “they can’t have ever looked into how complicated and obvious that would have been to set up”

             Nonsense! I’ve seen the like done countless times in tlevision and movies. Piece of cake.

             [SPIT]

28. Your point about language being coopted reminds me of the controversy a few years back when a government official used the term ‘black hole’ to describe another department, and was accused of racism,

29. How long was the kathy Griffith cluster. For some reason I’m thinking it was a day or so before dropped from one special. Some other stuff later but was a multiday thing with a perfunctory “I’m sorry my joke offended you” response. This was within 12 hrs for both reruns to be pulled and show cancelled. This was a decision looking for an excuse.

    And when the standard for badthink grows, more people are caught up and a chunk start getting the “penny for a pound” process. It’s a great way to polarize.

    And sorry, ambien, you’re well known for cases of altered mental states where poor decisions are made. But let’s sidestep and say it’s only the racism that was being referred to.

30. Valerie Jarrett, known Boston slumlord, has injured more African-Americans than Roseanne ever will. It’s a disgrace to hide her behind the race card.

    1. She harmed no one. We are in a place where words are violent and attacking someone physically is defending yourself from the violence of their words.

       I am more afraid of this ending badly than I was 18 months ago.

31. “Liberals” had no problem making chimp jokes about Bush. I even heard him called such creative, if pointless, epithets as “Chimpy Mc$hrubya Bu$hitler.”

    They only have a problem with people comparing blacks to chimps.

    Why?

    Because apparently, they believe black people look enough like chimps that the comparison is hurtful.

    So, as always, the “liberals” are the racists.

    1. Yep. It’s what I think. THEY are the racists.

    2. I don’t think it was the “raciss” bit that got her canned, it was pointing out the muslim/ISIS connection with Obama. Jarret is the Rasputin behind Obama going way back.

32. If I hadn’t know what she said all I would know when people yelled Rosanne was “racist” is that she “said something that upset a black leftist somewhere”. Because that is what the left has reduced the word racist to mean. Similar for misogynist and leftist woman and homophobic and leftist gay person.

    Now that I know what she said…well, yep, pretty much spot on. She said something that upset a black leftist or three.

    Hope you guys are happy that you’ve so reduced the word to a meaning so broad whats his name Spencer (the Stormfront guy), Rosanne Barr, and Larry Elder all fall under it.

    1. Of course they are. Means that they can bully even more people from the high ground in culture and power where they stand.

       1. For only so long. There is a reason certain groups are more acceptable on the right than they were 20 years ago. It is because if you cannot differentiate yourself from racists/sexists/etc then you have no reason not to make common cause with them against the common enemy.

          They think doubling down on what got Trump will get rid of Trump.

          It will, but not to replace him with another Obama but someone a lot closer to what they claim Trump is.

          1. The danger is that when oscillations are unstable and grow they RIP everything apart. Doesn’t matter which side when it rips free.

             I am actually surprised that almost none of the workplace shooters have been over termination from stuff like this. YouTube was the closest. It’s either withheld anger or too much passivity

          2. then you have no reason not to make common cause with them against the common enemy
             Or, if we had fewer scruples, to use them against said enemy, as your one-cutout-removed troops.
             “What? *We* planned that? Are you nuts? We don’t even LIKE those people! Though you certainly have demonized us enough to understand their hatred of you. But we would *never* endorse those people, make common cause with them, nor hire them!”
             *KABOOM*
             “Dang! Look what you made them do!”

             /Alinsky

             1. Also, they make very useful disposable cannon fodder.

             2. Oh, I’m happy to let them flush our mutual enemies out of their hiding places. That doesn’t requirement active engagement by me. It just requires I quit protecting my enemies for their other enemies.

                And if we lose I’ll happily smile while they eat each other (see my common “smiling when they are yelling ‘But I support the Revolution’ to the firing squad” comments).

    2. I am REALLY looking forward to the fauxpology to (rather than BY an) SJW that is, “I’m so sorry… that you’re such a whiny little bitch.”

33. It makes sense that some people are very sensitive to and offended by any mention of apes or monkeys considering that a century ago all the best people believed absolutely in some weird Darwinist progression of evolution up the ladder with wealthy Brits (mostly) and Americans (certainly) at the tippy top. All the most bestest, most educated, sophisticated, progressive people who believed in science above superstition were right on board with that (very self serving) bit of snobbery. Everything was explained by evolution. If you were wealthy it was because you were evolved. If you were poor it was because your mind was weak. Everything was genetic. Your success, your failures, your moral weaknesses. Criminality was genetic. All the very best people knew this. All the most progressive and all the most educated and it got us eugenics out of the bargain. It got us forced sterilizations in the US of people for “moral weakness” because that was genetic and they shouldn’t be allowed to breed. There were children sterilized because of the sins of their mothers because all the smartest people knew that everything was in your genes. We got abortion and got it aimed at the poor and minority communities, if they could be convinced to get abortions and stop breeding the world would be a better place. And then came that chap from Germany who looked at the currently acceptable beliefs of all the Very Best People and said, hey, if I work out the inefficiencies I can breed a master race.

    The left wants to pretend they weren’t the party of slavery and wants to pretend that they weren’t the progressive party of “science” and eugenics and the perfectable human, of abortion and Margaret Sanger, and they’re going to read this and have a cow, but you know… they were going to have a cow anyway.

    We’ve rejected that old “party of science” paradigm, that progressive Brave New World way of thinking, because those who worshiped evolution found the answers that soothed their importance and still today mock and scorn those back then who rejected the enlightenment and application of “evolution” as a way to sort people. People who utterly refused the “we came from apes” ideology because it stripped humans of their divinity were and still are mocked for being backward, despite seeing the *important* part of the question.

    Eventually eugenic ideology needs to be relegated to the dust bin of History and those who continue to insist on dragging it forward into the future seem to be those who can’t live so well without it.

    At some point, to quote a certain ice princess, society just has to Let It Go.

    1. An awful lot of the social history of the 19th and early 20th century is distorted by popular misunderstandings of Darwin. As, I suspect, a lot of,the,social history of the 20th century is driven my misunderstandings and misapplications of Einstein.

       I mean, where else do you get the Progressive Left’s mantra of everything is relative?

       1. “An awful lot of the social history of the 19th and early 20th century is distorted by popular misunderstandings of Darwin. As, I suspect, a lot of,the,social history of the 20th century is driven my misunderstandings and misapplications of Einstein. I mean, where else do you get the Progressive Left’s mantra of everything is relative?”

          Einstein said he *almost* called it the Theory of Invariance (or the speed of light) instead of the Theory of Relativity. If he had….

          1. “Invariance OF the speed of light”

34. c4c

    1. c4c

35. There’s a part of me that thinks the cure to all this is the return of dueling. You want to play the offended? Fine. Pistols for two, hot chocolate for one.

    (I don’t drink coffee, my last pistol practice was Saturday, I started training pistol seriously over forty years ago, and both flintlock and percussion duelers are a specialty of mine. 🙂 )

    1. I always say we should revive the Code Duello.

       My favorite duel was the hatchets in a dark basement. Some artist said that one, can’t remember who off hand.

       1. Louis L’Amour had someone relating a scene where a short cowpuncher challenged a taller man to a duel. Tall man agreed, and his weapons: sledgehammers, in six feet of water.
          Shorty laughed, and the two became friends.

          (OK, that’s the way I remember it. Don’t spoil it with facts!) 🙂

36. I routinely call my kids little monkeys.
    Given that we, Jews, have been called monkeys in the past by some bad people, I guess I am guilty of blatant anti-Semitism and should report to the nearest reeducation center.
    Or is it too late for that, and guillotine is the only option?

    1. The Squire is dual “heritage” (I refuse to say bi-racial because we are both human). I had a bunch of monkey outfits and stuff and someone asked me if that wasn’t racist. I turned and said that the items were purchased from Walmart which had a much larger demographic that didn’t find them offensive. The look of thoughtfulness was perfect.

       1. Huh. I wonder if that means I would get to claim “biracial”… if I were so inclined, which I am not.

          1. Nah you’re mythological, you’re covered. 😏😁

          2. Heck, Orvan, anyone can claim anything (Shaun King aka Talcum X); how they gonna know without a genetic test, and maybe not even then?

             That’s what will sink this thing (please God); when the advantages of claiming a basically uncheckable Victim Group get everyone claiming it, the ONLY thing left will be ideology, and that won’t be pretty.

             It’s going to be even worse, of course, when they find a set of supposedly reliable genetic markers for “definite Group X member”.

       2. Some mail order catalog had the same. “My little monkey” sorta thing on a jungle gym with a black toddler or so. And parents were aware and agreeable iirc. But hue and cry because there is no assumption of innocence or tolerance anymore. At least if it is performed by the untermensch.

37. And now I recall the tune by Spike Jones Jr about the ‘getting high on banana peel smoke’ thing that went around for a moment once upon a time…

    That funky little monkey,
    That little jungle junkie,
    Eats bananas and goes
    Streaking through the trees.

38. c4c

39. Reading this, I kept thinking of the rather well-known book The Naked Ape by Desmond Morris. Worth reading.

    1. Completely wrong, incidentally. It’s been thoroughly debunked. BUT I enjoyed reading it at 14.

       1. Yep. It was well written, but just about everything in it is contradicted by science now, if not then.

40. Bravissima.

    First they come for the words. Always.

41. So I had to look at Jarrett and Rosanne was spot on. I’m pretty sure after looking at the tweets that she was trying to be “funny.” She did start as a comedienne before actress.

    1. A joke about how someone looks is still a joke, I suppose. And have you seen a picture of Jarrett alongside the Planet of the Apes scientist lady? Practically twins separated at birth. So noticing that isn’t outrageous. Jokes about people’s appearances are still not often at all funny, even if meant to be.

       It’s also not particularly funny how jokes about appearances are okay when directed in certain politically and socially accepted directions by certain socially acceptable comedians.

       1. I think it was the Muslim Brotherhood part that struck too close to home. Remember, the Obama Administration attempt to turn Egypt over to the Brotherhood was largely Jarrett’s policy push.

          1. Oh, don’t be silly, RES.

             Huma Abedin probably pushed for it too, both of her parents and from memory at least one brother are big guys in various Muslim Brotherhood organizations.

             I think there were a couple of others with known ties…..

             1. That she undoubtedly had helpers doesn’t refute RES’s statement…. which is largely based on an opinion and who had the best access to the President.

42. So…. black hole, niggerdly, niggling, ape-sh*t, yard ape, anything related to simians that isn’t about a member of the Bush family, black-mail [yes, someone in the US Army tried to get that one removed at one point], to black ball, black-list, chigger, chink in the armor…

    These people need to get lives and a dictionary, not necessarily in that order.

    1. Next thing you know, you won’t be able to get a shaker of black pepper to sprinkle your food with some extra flavor.

    2. Can I use the dictionary to encourage them to get a life? And, no, I don’t mean by opening it. I’m partial to an in-abridged I have at home…………

       1. *UN-abridged*
          Spell-check has started assuming there is no such thing as an “un-” anything.

          1. Hmmm. Mine is about 12x10x5 inches, & weighs about 8 or 10#’s (thing is HEAVY), & almost 45 years old. Now that everything is online, sounds like a good re-purposing idea! 🙂 Besides the print is so small I can’t actually read anything in it anymore.

    3. Leave us not overlook such idiocies as referring to such as Royal Wedding cellist Sheku Kanneh-Mason as “African-American” rather than Black or Negro.

       Nor calling the New Zealand national rugby union team the “All African-Americans.”

       1. Why not call him Sheku Kanneh-Mason?

       2. Oh wait, is he British?

43. Speaking of stealing language and the meaning of words…

    Someone linked yesterday to a “review” of Jordan Peterson’s book who went on some bit about how the young white cis men who shoot up schools are “privileged”.

    Not that it excuses murder because it doesn’t, and the vast vast majority of people with the sort of problems and oppressions that school shooters invariably have do NOT murder anyone.

    But to describe any of the shooters from Columnbine to Sandy Hook to the asshole in Florida or Texas as *privileged* does extreme violence to the English language and to the very concept of reason.

    1. No, totally privilege. If cops were routinely blood testing teens, and summarily executing them for failing, some of the spree killings would have been prevented.

       Okay, that bit of technocratic madness could not actually be implemented in the real world. But the school shooters totally have ‘were not murdered first’ privilege. 🙂

       Common sense ‘criminal justice reform’ control. Common sense ‘prison reform’ control. Common sense ‘education’ control.

       1. If they are serious about addressing the problem, there is a route:

          An Important Consensus on School Shootings, the Media, and the ‘Columbiner’ Culture
          By Jim Geraghty
          [SNIP]
          … the Times article briefly mentions an Internet subculture that is, essentially, pro-school-shooting. If there really is a twisted “Columbiner” subculture that is celebrating these sorts of massacres . . . well, if we’re willing to pressure social-media networks and Internet providers to shut down jihadist and hate-group web sites . . . why wouldn’t we do the same to “Columbiner” chat rooms? Or for that matter, why wouldn’t the FBI or other law-enforcement officials monitor those chat rooms as they do for other extremist groups?

    2. But when they put down guns and knelt in surrender the cops didn’t gun them down in cold blood.

44. Not one word about having standards …

    Samantha Bee Calls Ivanka Trump a ‘Feckless C**t’
    TBS late-night host Samantha Bee tore into Ivanka Trump as a “feckless cunt” Wednesday for not doing more about the White House’s immigration policies.

    The remark came at the end of her weekly program “Full Frontal”‘s A block, where the left-wing comic blasted the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” policy of separating illegal immigrant children from their parents at the border. Bee acknowledged this policy did not begin under President Trump, but she said he had made it worse.

    Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter and a top adviser, took heat from progressives for tweeting a loving photo of her and her son amidst coverage of the story, and it served as fodder for Bee to blast her for not influencing her father in a matter Bee found acceptable.

    “Ivanka Trump, who works at the White House, chose to post the second-most oblivious tweet we’ve seen this week,” Bee said. “You know, Ivanka, that’s a beautiful photo of you and your child, but let me just say, one mother to another, do something about your dad’s immigration practices, you feckless cunt!”

    The remark drew loud cheers and applause.

    The show thought enough of Bee’s Ivanka rant to post it as its own stand-alone video on the “Full Frontal” YouTube channel.

    Bee added in her advice to Ivanka Trump that she should “put on something tight and low-cut and tell your father to fucking stop it.”

    Bee’s segment also included Bee comparing Attorney General Jeff Sessions to a cannibalistic serial killer and saying she liked seeing President Barack Obama shirtless.

    [Links and video at article]

    Not. One. Damned. Word.

    1. I judge anyone who can stomach that show.

    2. Bee added in her advice to Ivanka Trump that she should “put on something tight and low-cut and tell your father to fucking stop it.”

       Wow. Just… that, right there, reveals the pro-incest views of the Left.

       1. Not really. Donald Trump made some inappropriate comments that would put the possibility in the mind of anyone who has really studied his statements for hints of possibilities.

          It is the reason why the best two president model for a worst case Trump pretty much has to include JFK. I think Trump is probably not bent that way, but coverage of the absolute worst possibilities has to include that. If any of the Presidents was capable of that sort of thing, it pretty much would have to be JFK.

          1. Sure, we could give them that excuse.

             Actually… no. I’d rather not. It lets them normalize this sick shit.

             This is what passes as "journalism" in 2018.

             No wonder that people don't trust the mainstream media anymore. https://t.co/5LGMQWu1Wp

             — PeterSweden (@PeterSweden7) May 31, 2018

             1. What on earth is this nonsense?

                1. Not something that I want to see featured as normal in either parenting, or sex-ed classes for children.

                2. Really though, it’s the kind of nonsense they’ve been getting away with for a while now. If they change the meaning of words… they hold hostage your ability to think or express your thoughts.

                   This is the official Oxford dictionary definition of "Islamophobia"

                   If you dislike Islam as a political force, then you are Islamophobic.

                   This definition is absolute bonkers. Who makes this up? pic.twitter.com/C7Urnll4KH

                   — PeterSweden (@PeterSweden7) May 31, 2018

                   1. It’s very poorly written, especially for a dictionary, but I think the definition was supposed to be a political platform which consists of disliking Muslims.

                      Which is….well, I hate the damage it does to the English language, but that is how it’s used; if you oppose Islam you’re “phobic.”

                      Still really poorly written.

                      1. INCREDIBLY poorly. Oxford’s gotten converged; you’d think they’d have learned by now.

             2. Thought it through a bit more, and I think I have to retract my original objection.

                Coming to mind is one thing, making such a calculated public statement is another. I think there are two possible root causes. 1) A callous disregard for decency. 2) Being pro-incest.

                That’s not different enough from what you stated to justify the degree of disagreement I expressed.

                I think there is definitely a lack of decency, but I have no real grounds for an opinion on the other. I count that as an error.

                1. The creepiest thing about the suggestion made to Ivanka is that the person making it claims to be a mother herself. ‘Go seduce/sex up your dad into getting your way’ is sick, and is way, way beyond the pale. Also very different from a daughter acting cutesy to their Dad to get Dad to say yes to something (like an outing, or an expensive purchase.)

                   The sick bitch making the suggestion would probably be up in screeching arms to all and sundry for ‘her children to be protected’ had anyone else made the suggestion about HER children. Ivanka being an adult makes no difference in this case.

             3. Remember, these are the same people that folks believe when they describe other human behavior– say, how normal the preferred lifestyle of New York liberals is, if Hollywood morality is “normal”, etc.

                Sense check stuff!

       2. Unlike Roseanne’s Ambien-fueled tweet, Bee’s remark was scripted. She and her producer(s) had every opportunity to give that plenty of thought before recording and airing it.

          There are reports that producer of her show is boasting of their insult two-step.

          Yet these [expletives] presume themselves our moral betters? Pfui!

45. Nicely put:

    Samantha Bee’s Defenders Play Calvinball with the Language
    By Charles C. W. Cooke
    Do you ever get the impression that the rules of the game are being made up on the fly? Consider this tweet, from CNBC’s Christina Wilkie:

    Christina Wilkie ✔ @christinawilkie
    Conflating racism and profanity is dangerous. One is a worldview, the other is a word choice. Big difference. https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1002508937445478402 …
    7:26 AM – Jun 1, 2018
    12.6K
    3,916 people are talking about this

    This is Calvinball. Imagine, if you will, that, say, Sean Hannity or Ann Coulter had called, say, Chelsea Clinton a “c***.” In what universe would the word have been dismissed as merely a “word choice,” divorced from any associated “worldview”? In such a circumstance, we’d be told that the word reflected the speaker’s sexism and misogyny; that it indicted his entire political ideology; that it highlighted the depravity of his audience; and so forth. The New York Times would link the comment to “rape culture” and “toxic masculinity.” College professors would explain that it came deep from the wells of American inequality. MSNBC would write an opera, and broadcast it over three days. The word would become a Weltanschauung in ten seconds flat.

    [SNIP]

    Questions abound. Why was Roseanne’s crime one of conscience rather than of lexicon? What determines whether a phrase can be separated from a creed? N***er is just a word — abhorrent in the mouth of a Klansmen; emancipatory from the pen of Mark Twain — in what circumstances is it damning of a culture, and in what merely a joke? Is sexism less prone to capture our language than racism? Do wounding words not wound when wielded by someone popular? But none of these questions matter much, and it is futile to try to answer them, because there are no rules on display here. Bee is given a pass where others are not because . . . well, because she is. On Monday, words are mere tools; on Tuesday, they are superglued to superstructure. This is a game — nothing more, nothing less. It’s different when we do it.

Comments are closed.