Two-Minute Townhall

Shorter Mary Katharine Ham: It was nice to see someone ask Hillary Clinton some tough questions regarding her Presidential records.

Shorter Amanda Carpenter: Americans dread another eight years of Hillary Clinton as president.

Shorter Michael Medved: Principles and democratic ideals have no place in politics, where winning is everything.

Shorter Allison Kasic: Lady science professors??? What’ll they think of next?

Shorter Austin Bay: The State Department is going to need more diplomats who look dashing in pith helmets.

Shorter Paul Greenberg: After cocktails, metaphors!

Shorter Ed Feulner: Scientists who question whether a missile defense system could plausibly work underestimate America’s can-do spirit!

Shorter Mike S. Adams: College students should be allowed to wear their racism as a symbol of their individuality and a belief in personal freedom.

Shorter Jacob Sullum: As a libertarian, I believe the invisible hand — not courts — should mete out slaps on the corporate wrist.

Shorter John Stossel: Utah voters have a chance to take back their public schools from the so-called experts (oh, I how I despise them…).

Shorter Walter Williams: Statistics show that America’s poor are 52 percent less wretched than in yesteryear.

Shorter Ben Shapiro: The handover this week of the eighth Iraqi province in four and a half years spells certain victory for our forces, their wily commander in chief and his worthy successor, Rudy Giuliani, and … and … ah, good ol’ sock. I’ll just put you back under the bed ’til next time.

Shorter Kathleen Parker: The Laura Bush headscarf episode makes me question whether some of my Townhall colleagues are more interested in diplomacy with Muslim countries or … something else.

Shorter Michelle Malkin: Liberals want to teach your child yoga instead of math.

Shorter Terence Jeffrey: Illegal immigrants become even scarier when you describe them as drug-dealing terrorists.

Shorter Jonah Goldberg: Half of the people can be part right all of the time, some of the people can be all right part of the time, but all of the people can’t be all right all of the time. I think Ronald Reagan said that. “I’ll let you have this handful of greasy candy corn if I can have your Little Debbie snack cakes.” I said that.

 

Comments: 46

 
 
 

Q: How could one convey in print the act of joyfully inhaling one’s own flatulence?

A: Jonah Goldberg Column

 
Despondant Cantabridgian
 

Oh, conservatism is more popular than a lot of things we call popular these days; more people call themselves conservatives than Red Sox fans, for instance

On the other hand, more people call themselves Muslims than Republicans. Your move, Goldberg.

 
 

I’m so glad TMT is back. Thank you sir!

 
 

Wow, you even managed to make Mike Adams not sound completely offensive, too. Shorter and less offensive. I like that. Makes not reading them all the more a pleasure.

 
 

A righteous Dylan reference, T.

 
 

College students should be allowed to wear their racism as a symbol of their individuality and a belief in personal freedom.

Another Elvis fan.

 
 

This Mike S. Adams guy is a hoot:

The Delaware RA is also taught that the term “reverse racism” is created by whites to deny their privilege. An official Delaware training manual says that “those in denial use the term reverse racism to refer to hostile behavior by people of color toward whites, and to affirmative action policies, which allegedly give ‘preferential treatment’ to people of color over whites.” Then, after defining the term “reverse racism” the manual claims that “there is no such thing as ‘reverse racism.’” Later, it says the non-existent term “reverse racism” is an example of “racism.”

Lewis Carroll would have been proud.

What’s so hard to understand about this? A term can exist without describing something real. Does he not get the use/mention distinction?

Lewis Carroll would be … well, I guess he’d be trying like heck to get out of that grave he’s in, probably. There’s a disturbing thought.

 
 

Liberals want to teach your child yoga instead of math.

Mmmmm…yogurt.

 
 

Do stop by the web log that Technorati rates as among the top 600,000 for a longer shorter Jonah.

It’s free, too!!

 
 

Ummm, the thing is, reverse racism does exist.
Granted, it’s mostly practiced by patronizing rich white female sophomores, but it does exist. No, it’s not even vaguely in the league of real racism, and as a rich white guy I realize no one wants to hear us whine, with very good reason.
But reverse racism does exist.

 
Despondant Cantabridgian
 

Isn’t that just more racism though? What makes anti-white racism so special?

 
 

Mike Adams is pig-fucking stupid. That’s all you need to know about him.

Oh, & he’s a hate & resentment-filled jerk. And he wears it as a symbol of his individuality & personal freedom.

No, the two things you need to know about…

 
 

Anti-white racism is special to Adams because he’s white.

 
 

Medved is not the only one telling us to resist the third party temptation.

You know the mantra. “More and better democrats…”

 
 

It’s not special, don’t mean to claim that. I’m not siding with Adams, except to say it does exist. I guess what makes it different is that it’s overwhelmingly… what’s the word… practiced by whiteys themselves.
I’m just thinking of a class I once took, called the Question of the Other, where I was the only male, and thus became a proxy for the misdeeds of folk who looked like me. That I agreed with the basic premises of the course and mostly argued against the white man being intentionally malicious at every point in favor of the banality of evil, and the unfortunate ability of stupidity to do massive harm, became, in the minds of a few wealthy, white women in the class trying to escape their own cultural guilt, me trying to argue in favor of the patriarchy.
You’re right, tho, it’s just racism, and doesn’t deserve a special name, really.

 
 

Hah!

He’s just wondering why he never gets Perry Kings’ action.

 
 

Kathleen Parker seems to have jumped on the Laura Bush for Senate bandwagon.

 
 

Utah voters have a chance to take back their public schools from the so-called experts (oh, I how I despise them…).

Here in Salt Lake City, I’ve been surprised at the level of anti-voucher advertising / phone-calling / what-have-you-ing I’ve encountered. I’d have thought Utah voters would fall for the whole voucher thing without a peep just because they’re ordered to by the Republicans and the Church, so I didn’t expect to see any significant opposition. The only pro-voucher call I’ve gotten was the single most slanted robo-pushpoll I’ve ever received, but other than that, nothing.

I’m not sure what the public feeling about the referendum is. I still expect it to pass, but it’s more of a race than I’d thought.

It did pain me that, though the anti-voucher folks used actual humans to call and poll me about it, the high school kid they had working the line was a terrible speaker who requested that I oppose the “reffer-dumb.” I suppose if it had been intentional it would have been a good joke.

 
 

Ummm, the thing is, reverse racism does exist.

As i often say when I see an able-bodied person in a handicapped space, being a dick is not a handicap.

Nor is it a race.

Carry on.

 
 

A thing can suck even if the person criticizing it is an assclown like Mike Adams and even if the criticism is dressed in cretinous rhetoric like his. UD may well be a good example.

(If you follow the links, there’s a story about an RA who wrote an angry complaint to his superior because he asked a frosh when she discovered her sexual identity and she responded, in effect, none of your biz, perv.)

 
 

Umm, eff you too, Duros?
Guess what? Bias does not know bias. Any group can be stereotyped, even white guys.

 
 

And, to reiterate, because it’s worth making clear and might avoid antagonisms with any others, I ain’t whining about it. I’m not looking for sympathy, or feeling sorry for myself. It’s a tiny thing, which mostly slides right off my back. And I agree with everyone else when Rush starts trying to use the topic for his advantage. Bias and racism against white guys is trivial, and I would never claim otherwise. The female Indian prof in the class I used as an example gave me an A-, and never failed to defend me in class.
I’m simply saying there is a genuine phenomenon of anti-white guy bias, even, rarely, racism, underlying the misnomer reverse racism.

 
 

adb: Racism isn’t an action, it’s a system. Whites can be victims of discrimination based on their race, but they can’t be subject to racism because racism involves systematic marginalization, and racial discrimination against whites (in the US) is extraordinary.

When the right wing refers to “reverse racism,” they’re suggesting that affirmative action, desegregation, etc. amount to systematic discrimination against whites. This isn’t true. “Reverse racism” doesn’t exist.

Now, I’m aware that ‘racism’ has both a sociological (systematic) meaning and a vernacular meaning that suggests personal bias, but ‘reverse racism’ is a meaningless term except in the sociological sense.

By the way, it’s clear to me that you’re arguing in good faith here. I don’t think there’s any call for anyone to call you a dick.

 
 

Isn’t that just more racism though? What makes anti-white racism so special?

Because white people are the most specialist of them all. Especially white males, because, ya know, Jesus was a white dude. Straight white dude. Spoke English, too. Probably said “y’all”.

a different brad,
They didn’t make you sit at the back of the class, did they?

 
 

Djur, I think you can argue that there is a better definition of racism, or a more convincing definition, or an emerging definition in some circles, that says it is a system that can’t include hatred of whites. But I don’t think it’s accurate to belittle the plain definition as “vernacular.” Most dictionaries I can find list that “vernacular” definition as one of the, if not the, primary definitions. The systemic definition might be preferred in some circles — and, as Humpty Dumpty says, a word means only what we pay it to mean — but I think it’s more accurate to argue that’s what the word should mean rather than that’s what it does mean.

(Not that I necessarily agree with that definition).

 
 

By the way, no amount of abuse of the term racism will ever be as obnoxious as the attempt to portray the mouthy middle-class white guy as the central tragic figure of the modern age, as commonly seen around Townhall, etc.

 
 

I think we can all agree ‘reverse racism’ is a misnomer, even a potentially loaded one. I should have considered my initial terms better, I’ll admit.
I somewhat disagree, Djur, in that I think racism doesn’t need a structural component. I think of racism tas the place where bias and hatred meet, but this might be a difference of perspectives. I’m a philosophy student who spends a lot of time reading Plato, and in this case I’m thinking in the abstract, whereas you seem to be coming from the actual expression of it in society.

 
 

No, Matt. T. They made me wear a strap-on above my clothes, which they would slap at will.

 
Qetesh the Abyssinian
 

adb, bigotry is perhaps a better term. And anyone can be a bigot: all it takes is the ability to lump all members of a group together under one stereotype. So some feminists deplore all men, some white folks deplore all black folks, and some men deplore all women.

In short, some idiots deplore using their brains.

They made me wear a strap-on above my clothes, which they would slap at will.

Yoiks!

 
 

“reverse racism” or what I like to call “Whitey Whitman’s Tightassssssssss Lament” is the crippling result of having run everything (mostly unfairly and completely inequitably) since the beginning of time and wanting to trade it all in for just a little more.

 
 

Now, I’m liberal, but to a degree
I want everybody to be free
But if you think I’ll let Ben Shapiro
Move in next door, borrow my play dough
You must think I’m crazy
I wouldn’t do it for all the crack in K-Lo

 
 

Sorry, but your characterization of Jacob Sullum’s (who is a harsh critic of Bush’s imperial domestic and foreign policy theories) column is vapid and wrong. He does not remotely allude to the “invisible hand,” but rather, makes a sensible point about the oft-discussed issue of when punitive damages are excessive and harmful.

 
 

“Principles and democratic ideals have no place in politics, where winning is everything.”

Unfortunately that’s true

 
 

Malkin is such a ignorant little cow. Oooooo yoga! Watch out, it’s so exotic and new-age sounding! It’s basically the same as teaching kids channeling and forcing them to engage in tantric masturbation and worship crystals or something.

 
 

Well said, Djur.

Where are the black folks trying to prevent whites from voting? Or lynching white people for whistling at a black person (and getting away with it)? When was the last time a white guy had to use a seperate and inferior bathroom, lunch counter, etc.?

“Waaah! I ran into someone who doesn’t like white people!” Puh-lease.

 
Despondant Cantabridgian
 

Poor Michelle. It wasn’t enough for God to curse her with the weak flesh of a woman, he had to trap her in an Asian body too.

She works with a lot of very ignorant white men. How much do you want to bet that every time one of them hears an unfamiliar Asian sounding word he automatically turns to her? Yet, she cannot be offended as an Asian person by a conservative, because that would set her apart as a minority and a Liberal.

This morning at Townhall:

“Hey Michelle, you’re Chinese. If a 15-year-old girl gets pregnant at school while practicing yoga with a classmate, do you think that it is reasonable to assume that her Liberal teacher might force her to have an abortion using the ancient herbal secrets of your people?”

“Gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh I HATE YOGA!!! LIBERAL TEACHERS SHOULD BE BURNED!!! I’M NOT DIFFERENT, I WOULD HAVE THROWN ALL THE JAPS IN CAMPS TOO!!!”

Or so I imagine…

 
 

He does not remotely allude to the “invisible hand,” but rather, makes a sensible point about the oft-discussed issue of when punitive damages are excessive and harmful.

Which should be decided by federal regulation restricting the right of harmed parties to seek redress via civil actions. How… libertarian.

Seriously, I’m really not getting libertarian cheerleading for “tort reform” or rage about punitive damages. If the government isn’t supposed to use regulation, and ordinary citizens aren’t permitted to enact punishment against vast corporations if the corporations think they’re “unfair”, how exactly is individual liberty maximized? (Checks article) Oh, right, by social shunning. (Checks stock quotes) (Checks the size of Lee Raymond’s retirement package) Yeah, Exxon has suffered so goddamn much due to its poor reputation from enacting massive destruction on the Alaskan coast by flagrant malfeasance. Boo-hoo.

 
 

Malkin:

The surgeon general really needs to slap a health warning on The New York Times. My blood pressure increases a few points every time I read it.

Hey, maybe if you’re so stressed you should try yoga…oh sorry.

 
 

mds: Do you not understand the difference between compensatory and punitive damages? Has nothing to with the “invisisbale hand.” Or with libertarianism per se.

 
 

“invisisbale hand.”

Okay Gary.

 
 

Oooooo yoga! Watch out, it’s so exotic and new-age sounding! It’s basically the same as teaching kids channeling and forcing them to engage in tantric masturbation and worship crystals or something.

She’ll be OK with yoga as soon as someone points out to her that it was invented, and is largely practiced, by Hindus, some of whom have incinerated large numbers of innocent Muslims over the last several years.
And if Jesse practices it diligently, he’ll be able to address his own needs.

 
 

mds: Do you not understand the difference between compensatory and punitive damages?

Yes, one is assigned to cover the costs of damage as best they can be quantified at the time. The other is used to punish bad-faith actions, willful negligence, disregard for contracts, etc, etc. Mr. Sullum thinks Exxon was punished enough; a jury in a civil court disagreed with him. Fortunately, rich and poor alike are permitted to use their high-powered corporate lawyers to mount appeals.

Has nothing to with the “invisisbale hand.” Or with libertarianism per se.

Um, well, it seems to turn up an awful lot in libertarian discussions, how people will “simply” be able to seek relief through civil courts, or even privatized courts, once all those onerous government regulations meant to protect the public have been eliminated.

Unlike many libertarians, I’d be glad to leave punishment up to the heavy hand of the government, as long as it wasn’t giving the rulebreaker a handjob instead. Perhaps Exxon was already punished severely by, for instance, having to pay to clean up the huge mess it caused. This doesn’t actually strike me as a good general recipe for deterrence, however, especially given its reliance on how vigorously a government agency pursues wrongdoing. For instance, based on the flagrant contempt for miners’ lives on display on the mining industry lately, I think one could be forgiven for seeking some other way than waiting for another corrupt Bush crony to enforce the rules. And at an emotional level, Exxon whining about how a punitive judgment is too onerous while (1) it is easily able to afford appeals all the way to the top, unlike many civil action litigants, and (2) it is posting astounding profits based on how much disapproval it’s faced for ecosystem-smashing, just doesn’t emanate a sympathetic glow.

For what it’s worth, and in fact part of the reason for my current upset, is that every Two-Minute Townhall with Mr. Sullum that I’ve seen here has been something I agreed with… until now. (Said via a Sean Connery voiceover.)

 
 

Oh, and Mr. Bubba, I can assure you that Mona is no Gary Ruppert, especially based merely on “invisisbale,” which is a perfectly cromulent word. Of course, there’s no reason you should accept my assurances, though I am actually Gary Farber Glenn Greenwald. (Sorry, had to check my sockpuppet dayplanner.)

 
 

“Utah voters have a chance to take back their public schools from the so-called experts (oh, I how I despise them…).”

Um, yeah, but Utah voters (56%) don’t their tax dollars going to people who send their kids to private schools. The pro-voucher folks just want a free handout. It doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of passing.

Boo fucking hoo for the pro-voucher folks who’ve spent millions on advertising. If they feel so strongly about it, maybe they shoulda just given that money to the poor folks (that they are so concerned about, yeah right!) who really need it.

 
 

(comments are closed)