April 14, 2005 by s.z.

Some Good Stuff 1.  ThatColoredFellasweblog  presents a new comic strip, LaShawn B's Groundhog Day, "the continuing saga of a Black woman trapped reliving a life not of her own choosing, a day of unending events that repeatedly challenge her faith, Conservative values, and sanity."  Will LaShawn learn valuable lessons about stuff?  Read it and see. 2.  Bats Left Throws Right (whose motto is "Would you care for some more pie?") smacks around Rupert Murdoch, then talks about Buster Keaton and Frances Farmer. 3.  Check out  Sisyphus Shrugged for all your Finkelstein news.  The latest: "Saying a Republican is gay is slander, even if (especially if) that Republican is gay."  And More! 4.  Oh, and speaking of how Mary Cheney was slandered, we just added Remove Republicans to the blogroll. It's hosted by Anthony, our runner-up in the "Name Mary Cheney's Memoir" contest (with the entries "Torrid Tales of a Selfish Hedonist" and "Dick and Bush Couldn't Set Me Straight").  We look forward to more great book titles (and equally great blogging) at his site. 6:28:25 AM

The Question the WSJ Failed to Ask: Why Do Liberals Keep Saying 'Big Trunk' and 'Hindrocket' Are the Gayest Noms de Blog on Earth?  From "Big Trunk": The missing question What is the breakdown of left-wing moonbats versus right-wing nuts who obscenely project their fantasies of homosexual conduct on bloggers they wish to abuse? Based on our experience with the beating heart of the left, I bet that the answer to that question tilts astronomically toward the left-wing moonbats who hold themselves out as the guardians of civil liberties from the similarly imaginary depredations of George Bush and John Ashcroft. Unfortunately, however, that's the missing question from the Wall Street Journal's poll report: "Two fifths of Americans online have read political blogs." Yes, how could those jerks at the Wall Street Journal (whom, as you may recall, recently wrote an unsigned editorial which implicitly called the Power Line boys morons) consider themelves to be professional journalists and fail to ask such a question?  And how could Harris, which actually conducted the poll, have been so remiss in neglecting such an important issue? Anyway, we'll try to make it up to Big Trunk by conducting our own poll.  Please answer the following questions if you feel like you are a statistically relevent representation of some demographic group.  1.  Are you (a) a "moonbat"; (b) a "wingnut"; or (c) "don't know"? 2.  Which bloggers whom you wished to abuse have you obscenely projected your fantasies of homosexual conduct upon? (a) Big Trunk; (b) Hindrocket; (c) that other guy at Power Line -- the Owl one;  (d) Ann Coulter; (e) Glenn Reynolds (f) Atrios; (g) Kos; (h) Seb from Sadly, No! (i) other. 3.  Have you ever obscenely projected any fantasies on George Bush and John Ashcroft?  If so, what were they doing in your fantasy?  What do you think this fantasy says about your ability to guard civil liberties? 4.  Why do you think the WSJ hates the Power Line boys?  Is it because the WSJ thinks they are gay? (Note: if you want to insert breaks, put in a <p> for a paragraph break, and/or a <br> for a line break. ) Thanks for your time. 5:13:03 AM

You Never Hear the Pie That Has Your Name On It It seems that Ann is still traumatized by that close brush with food she experienced last Fall, since she's still writing about it.  Here's part of this week's column, "It's only funny until someone loses a pie": Last October, two liberals responded to my speech at the University of Arizona – during question and answer, no less – by charging the stage and throwing two pies at me from a few yards away. Unfortunately for them, Republican men don't react favorably to two "Deliverance" boys trying to sucker-punch a 110-pound female in a skirt and heels. The geniuses ended up with bloody noses and broken bones. [...] Then on March 19, all charges were dismissed against the "Deliverance" boys – including a felony charge for $3,000 worth of damage to school property. Inexplicably, this outcome did not instantly lead to widespread rioting and looting in South Central Los Angeles. Democrat Barbara LaWall is the Pima County attorney who allowed the liberal debate champions to walk. LaWall brags on her website about "holding criminals accountable." She didn't say anything about liberals, however. Be forewarned, conservatives: Do not expect the law to protect you in Pima County. Yes, pity the poor conservatives whose lives aren't worth a plugged nickel in Arizona, what with the gangs of liberal ruffians who toss pies at little 110 pound women (and miss them, said women being thin and hard to hit), and then get their noses and shoulders broken by chivalrous Republican men.  Sure, the pie throwers will get arrested, booked, and jailed (and, as Ann said to the NY Observer a few months ago, hopefully raped while in prison) -- but if the charges against them are ultimately dismissed, it means that there is no justice for conservatives.  (Isn't that always the way is always is for our country's most persecuted minority: thin, blonde, psuedo-Christian wingnut pundits?) However, along with the need to seek healing from post-pie traumatic stress by whining about it in print, Ann is undoubtedly also revisiting the incident so she can jump on the "liberals are all vicious thugs who throw food at kindly, old and/or delicate, petite female conservatives, and this whole thing won't end until Jonah Goldberg is blown up by some Molotov cocktail-flinging Bolshevik" bandwagon.    Here's what Ann told NewsMax a few days ago: Thank God for vigilante justice because that's the only justice there is in Arizona. All the attacks of the last week [pies thrown at Buchanan Horowitz and Kristol, salad dressing flung at Buchanan]came soon after the Pima country prosecutor dropped all charges against my ... assailants, even though the whole attack was on videotape, all over TV, and I offered to fly out for the trial if necessary. I got a notice at the end of March that charges were dropped on March 18 or 19 (Friday). Right-wingers should refuse to speak in Arizona on the grounds that law enforcement refuses to prosecute cowardly thugs who stage sneak attacks on right-wingers. Yes, it was Pima County dropping the charges against the young men who attacked Ann that embolded the cowardly liberals to begin their new reign of terror.  And yes, right-wingers should refuse to speak in Arizona, or in any other state where a conservative has been threatened by food -- or in any state touching those states, or in any state which contains any of the same letters as those states.  It's the only way that conservatives can feel safe. We can thank the Moonie Times for inspiring both Ann and NewsMax (and countless other wingnuts) to bemoan the fact that while conservatives are unfailingly decent, civil, and pleasant, they live in constant fear from liberal thugs who are but one step away from tossing hand grenades at those with whom they disagree. But the Times starts out with a lie, which should tell you something about the sincerity of their argument: When two assailants attacked conservative columnist Ann Coulter with pies while she was giving a speech at the University of Arizona in October, most people, including the speaker, dismissed it as a prank. Of course, Ann DIDN'T dismiss it as a "prank" -- she claimed to have been assaulted, and pretty much called for the death penalty for the perps.  Here's part of what she said on the subject during her NY Observer interview : I was physically attacked this year. I hear MoveOn.org has a bounty for anyone who throws a pie in my face. Neither of those guys hit me. I think one is still in prison. It is a funny thing, that they ended up in prison—enjoying the benefits of gay marriage. One guy with a broken shoulder and one with a broken nose. And that was when I was traveling totally unprotected. Let ’em try it again, they’ll end up dead." Okay, I don't think that throwing food at people like Ann is a legitimate response to her vile speech.  (The right way to respond is by making fun of her in blogs and such.)  In fact, I denounce such acts, for I find them juvenile, impolite,  best reserved for Mack Sennett and Three Stooges comedies, and a waste of perfectly good cream pies.  However, face it, Ann, having a custard pie tossed at you is not being "sucker punched."  You were not "physically attacked."  And it's not an example of the kind of violence against women that demands that red-blooded men beat your attackers to a pulp, or kill them. Ann, take a lesson from Anita Bryant, courtesy of the Homo Vaccine page of www.bible.ca After being hit in the face with a fruit pie, she started to pray seconds later: "Father, I want to ask that you forgive him and that we love him and that we're praying for him to be delivered from his deviant lifestyle." (Des Moines, Iowa, October 14, 1977) So, on the one hand we have Ann rejoicing that her attempted pie-ers were "enjoying the benefits of gay marriage" (as she so humorously referred to prison rape), and hoping that they tried it again and got killed by manly Young Republicans. And on the other hand we have Anita Bryant, expressing love for her assailant (and publicly asking God to cure him from being a deviant pervert). Yes, it's telling that in a face-off with Ann Coulter, wacko Anita comes off as the classier act.. I hope that she can spare a thought for Ann, and will maybe ask God to deliver Ann from being such a whiner. 3:43:43 AM