1.Ted Cruz’s ‘heart weeps’ because of marriage equality gains.
Our favorite nut-job senator from Texas was holding forth again this week, and our ears were hurting. Texas Senator Ted Cruz explained to Family Research Council president Tony Perkins how his proposed State Marriage Defense Act would, “make it more difficult for married same-sex couples to receive legal recognition.”
Thanks, Ted. We were worried about that.
But the crusading lawmaker didn’t stop there. He explained how the Obama administration’s support for gay equality was “an abuse of power and lawlessness.”
“Our heart weeps for the damage to traditional marriage that has been done,” Cruz sobbed. Or at least his heart did. “Marriage is under attack,” he warned. “There will be pushback from the country when people see the consequences of this redefinition of marriage.” Curiously, he did not elaborate on these dire consequences. An oversight, we’re sure.
Anyway, we’re confident Senator Ted will save us. As soon as his heart stops weeping, that is. Messy business. We know a good cardiologist if he needs one.
See more here.
2. WSJ’s James Taranto says intoxicated young women are equally to blame for their own rapes.
James Taranto graced readers with another glimpse into his “war on men” theory in a column Monday, which promised “a balanced look at college sex offenses.” Taranto is very concerned that young men are mostly being blamed when they have sex with people without their consent, in other words, rape, them. He thinks that when both parties are drinking, the young women who are assaulted are equally to blame. “If both parties are intoxicated during sex, they are both technically guilty of sexually assaulting each other," he argues.
Girls drinking too much, and dressing too provocatively are the problem, all right.
Taranto again:
“What is called the problem of " sexual assault" on campus is in large part a problem of reckless alcohol consumption, by men and women alike. (Based on our reporting, the same is true in the military, at least in the enlisted and company-grade officer ranks.)"
So, wait, does that include gang bangs and the use of roofies too? Maybe so in Taranto’s deranged world, where, wait, a woman could be charged with sexual assault for having sex without her own consent.
Does Bill Cosby know about this?
3. Tom Perkins: Wealthy Americans should get more votes.
Visionary one percenter, Tom Perkins, who sees Nazis when he sees Progressives, and increasing taxes on the rich as a totalitarian takeover of democracy, piped up again this week. This deep thinking venture capitalist suggested that only taxpayers should have the right to vote at all, and wealthy Americans who pay more taxes should get more votes, especially guys like him.
"The Tom Perkins system is: You don't get to vote unless you pay a dollar of taxes," Perkins said, at a Fortune magazine forum. "But what I really think is, it should be like a corporation. You pay a million dollars in taxes, you get a million votes. How's that?"
When the audience guffawed—he had to be kidding, right?—he stuck to his guns. It makes total sense to him. Democracy should be just like a corporation.
Yeah. One man, one vote. That’s so yesterday.
4. Clarence Thomas: Funny, race never even came up in the 60s.
It’s always comforting when a lifetime member of the highest court in the land says something that leaves your jaw hanging agape.
Justice Clarence Thomas does not make a lot of public statements, but when he does, well, it makes you realize why he does not make a lot of public statements.
Thomas recently told a bunch of college students that race relations in America were better when he was a kid in the 1960s. Yes, he did. He said that.
“My sadness is that we are probably today more race- and difference-conscious than I was in the 1960s when I went to school. To my knowledge, I was the first black kid in Savannah, Georgia, to go to a white school. Rarely did the issue of race come up.”
Hmmm. Perhaps the subject of race did not come up because you could be lynched for bringing it up. Let’s see, it was the height of the Civil Rights Movement when Thomas was a kid. Segregation was pretty much the norm, throughout the south, and parts of the north—certainly in Georgia. and African-Americans who protested racial injustice put themselves in grave danger. But little Clarence Thomas was a happy little camper.
The real problem, Thomas continued, is that everyone is just too dang sensitive these days.
“If I had been as sensitive as that in the 1960s, I’d still be in Savannah,” he said. “Every person in this room has endured a slight. Every person. Somebody has said something that has hurt their feelings or did something to them — left them out.”
Yeupp, that’s all institutional racism is, Clarence. Just a bunch of black people getting their feelings hurt.
5. Anne Coulter: Obama acts like he’s from Kenya, weed is like ‘retard’ pill.
Vitriol-spewing conservative author Ann Coulter offered up a twofer this week. First, she argued: Obama may not be a brain-washed, foreign born agent of destruction like some latter-day “Manchurian candidate,” but he may as well be. “Let’s just think for a thought experiment for a moment,” she said Monday on the Howie Carr radio show. “If Obama were born in another country, had no love for this country, and had set out to destroy America, what would he be doing differently?”
Think about it. America’s enemies, even now, plotting to impose healthcare on all of us. Terrifying! Thanks, Ann.
Next topic: that old devil weed, systematically reducing the IQ of millions of Americans by up to 8 points, Carr claimed a study said.
“And a hundred points off your initiative and ambition,” Coulter chimed in. “It is as if they have legalized retard pills.”
She has such a lovely way with words.
h/t: Rawstory
6. Laura Ingraham: Obama treats the Constitution like an abusive spouse.
Not to be outdone by the previous blonde blowhard—yep, we’re talking to you Ann—Laura Ingraham dished out her own colorful metaphors this week: Obama is to America as an abusive spouse is to his victim. Kids, listen up, this analogy may turn up on your SAT test.
You have to follow some pretty twisted logic to understand this, but we’ll try. Ingraham, as most will remember, does not like immigrants, especially Latino ones. She recently questioned the patriotism of Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor, and has said Mexicans are “jingoists” out to destroy the English language.
So, she really does not like how this Obama fellow is pushing for immigration reform, and she does not even believe the fact that he has deported two million undocumented aliens for minor crimes, because that would make her like him, causing a severe case of cognitive dissonance.
So imagine her horror that someone like Rep. Paul Ryan is voicing his support for possibly, eventually, granting legal status to undocumented immigrants. And she does not give a hoot about all the “enforcement mechanisms” Ryan is promising will be in any immigration reform bill he votes for.
Ready, here comes the domestic abuse analogy.
“It’s like spousal abuse!” Ingraham fumed, referring to Ryan and other Republicans’ willingness to trust that Obama will enforce the laws. “It’s not going to be different. They are abusers! The administration, led by Barack Obama, are abusers of our Constitution. And just when you think that maybe they’re going to see that [Obamacare] isn’t working, this is hurting our health care system, they abuse the Constitution once again.”
If this all seems really confusing, perhaps this will help.
7. Rush Limbaugh’s absurd rant about Michael Sam: Heterosexuals are under attack!
Sputtering right-wing fool Rush Limbaugh was very confused this week. He knew he had to say something about this whole horrifying business of Michael Sam coming out as the first openly gay player projected to play in the NFL. Rush knew he had to protect heterosexuality from this terrible threat. “Heterosexuality has no political agenda and there is no agenda attached to it,” he helpfully pointed out. “Heterosexuality does not have activists.. . . [Heterosexuals] may be 95, 98 percent of the population — they’re under assault by the 2-5 percent that are homosexual.”
Under assault, do you hear him?
Rush has so many questions about this, his head is spinning, and green venom is spewing forth. “Why is it OK now for a gay man to play football? I thought it was dangerous and leads to concussions, that it was barbaric . . . Why is it heroic for a gay man to play football?”
Yeah. Wait. Huh?
Well, it turned out that Rush was just playing with us. He knows the answers. It’s because the media wants a gay football player to succeed.
File it under the vast left-wing-gay-mafia-liberal-throw-in-Jewish-and-other-minority-groups-conspiracy.
8. Colorado Sen. Bernie Herpin: It was a “good thing” the Aurora movie theater shooter had a 100-round magazine.
It might be useful to remember that this gun-nut was elected to replace a legislator who voted for gun control in Colorado after the Aurora shooting. So, we knew where he stood. We just did not know that he was standing on another planet, altogether.
“Perhaps, James Holmes would not have been able to purchase a 100-round magazine,” he said this week. “As it turned out, that was maybe a good thing that he had a 100-round magazine, because it jammed. If he had four, five, six 15-round magazines, there’s no telling how much damage he could have done until a good guy with a gun showed up.”
Yes, it was a good thing he had so much firepower, because the more the firepower, the more chance of the gun jamming? Right? And so, we should supply all of our mass murderers with these, then there is just that much better of a chance that the good guys with the guns will show up before hundreds of people are slaughtered.
Unsurprisingly, victims’ families were not cheered by Herpin’s totally unhinged theory.
Shares