News that makes us laugh, cry, or both

[Parthenon]

From that article:

"Mr. Penn is calling for a communist-like regime in which journalists who criticize the government are sent to jail because of that criticism," Napolitano added. "That is utterly un-American and hasn't happened here since the Civil War."

I'm probably making stuff up, but hasn't there been various points where journalists and various people have had just that happen to them, especially around the time of McCarthy and the anti-communism period? Unless of course my American history is terrible and the Civil War refers to the one after 1960.

[Crissa]

I think the biggest tell is whether their viewers come off more, or less, informed after viewing their 'reporting'.

Of course you know that viewing FOX seems to result in people actually knowing less about issues than just choosing the answers randomly.

-Crissa

[mean_liar]

You get sued for libel, you don't go to prison. And public figures are fair game for a lot of things by most standards.

I don't know what to make of the rectal cancer comment.

However, anything anyone inconsequential says on Bill Maher or any other talking head show should pretty much be treated as chaff. I'm surprised this merits any article at all, but I suppose every time someone conservative says something stupid it ends up on HuffPost or DailyKos.

[Kaelik]

You get sued for libel, you don't go to prison. And public figures are fair game for a lot of things by most standards.

Right, and I strongly disagree with him about the punishment for libel and slander. And I'm not sure it is libel or slander, because I don't know shit from a hole in the ground when it comes to Chavez, because it's never been a big enough deal for me to search out reliable information about it.

But having the opinion that particularly heavy handed slander should land you in jail is not in and of itself retarded. Certainly less so than many things that are said in public all the time be people PR never bothers to call retarded.

[Crissa]

Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen's views on torture are reprehensible, but now he defends attacking DOJ attorneys for working for the defense of terrorism suspects.

*sigh*

At least he looked like a fool on the Daily Show.

-Crissa

[shadzar]

Sean Penn again proves he is retarded.

"Every day, this elected leader is called a dictator here, and we just accept it, and accept it" said Penn, winner of two Best Actor Academy Awards. "And this is mainstream media, who should -- truly, there should be a bar by which one goes to prison for these kinds of lies."

It was just the beginning of a busy weekend for Penn. When asked on CBS' "Sunday Morning" about those who question his motives for his humanitarian work in Haiti, he said:

"Do I hope that those people die screaming of rectal cancer? Yeah. You know, but I'm not going to spend a lot of energy on it."

Yes he talked about that friday on Real Time with Bill Maher. check youtube for it, or catch it on demand...

[Username17]

My interpretation was simply that Penn was suggesting that rabble rousing to get Teabaggers to take up arms against the state was tantamount to yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater - an act of speech that yes, carries jail time. It was not a particularly well crafted argument, but it also wasn't a persuasive argument at all, it was an off-the-cuff remark made orally and then taken out of context.

Had he written up a draft of "Journalists who disagree with me should be jailed" or something, then he would be in all kinds of wrong. But he didn't do that. He just said that he thought some of the people rabble rousing Teabaggers should be jailed. And considering that people like Glenn Beck actually have suggested violence against the President (which is a crime), that's not a completely indefensible stance.

As for the rectal cancer bit, I'm totally with him. He went off to spend some of his own money and donate his own time to go help out Haitians and people made up crazy conspiracy theories about how it was some sort of international communist plot that he was fronting for. Under the circumstances, saying that you hoped those people got rectal cancer and died seems pretty reasonable. Not diplomatic, but reasonable.

-Username17

[Neeeek]

Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen's views on torture are reprehensible, but now he defends attacking DOJ attorneys for working for the defense of terrorism suspects.

People who attack defense attorneys should be punched in the face. And denied counsel when they are accused of a crime.

[Username17]

Marc Thiessen got an extended interview on the Daily Show. It came in 3 parts, but I couldn't even sit through the first part. The man was so obviously wrong and his arguments so nonsensical that I was unable to see why he was given a public forum.

It oiled down to "If someone defends people accused of heinous crimes, don't you think we should be able to lynch then, even if the courts agree with them, thereby meaning that by definition they were defending innocent people?" And I was like "No. That's a fucking horrible idea."

Seriously, John Stewart brought up the fact that the attorneys had won the case and the Supreme Court agreed that there was no legal reason to jail some people indefinitely, and Thiessen just kept ranting as if the fact that he was definitionally in the wrong from a legal perspective had no basis on his legal arguments. It was horrifying and I just couldn't even watch it.

-Username17

[Maj]

I watched the interview that aired, but the thought of watching Thiessen's obstinance in an even longer interview really didn't pique my interest that much. In roughly ten minutes of TV time - and somehow accomplishing the feat with allegedly no time to actually say anything - Thiessen demonstrated that he was scripted, biased, and incapable of determining fact from fiction.

---

MSNBC[/url] {OK, Lesbians, Prom, High School}]Lesbian teen back at school after prom flap
School district cancels event rather than allow same-sex couple to attend

JACKSON, Miss. - An 18-year-old Mississippi lesbian student whose school district canceled her senior prom rather than allow her to escort her girlfriend and wear a tuxedo said she got some unfriendly looks from classmates when she reluctantly returned to campus Thursday.

Constance McMillen said she didn't want to go back the day after the Itawamba County school board's decision, but her father told her she needed to face her classmates, teachers and school officials.

"My daddy told me that I needed to show them that I'm still proud of who I am," McMillen told The Associated Press in a telephone interview. "The fact that this will help people later on, that's what's helping me to go on."

The district announced Wednesday it wouldn't host the April 2 prom. The decision came after the American Civil Liberties Union told officials a policy banning same-sex prom dates violated students' rights. The ACLU said the district not letting McMillen wear a tuxedo violated her free expression rights.

‘Thanks for ruining my senior year’

McMillen said she felt some hostility toward her on the Itawamba County Agricultural High School campus.

"Somebody said, 'Thanks for ruining my senior year.'" McMillen said.

The school board issued a statement announcing it wouldn't host the event in Fulton, "due to the distractions to the educational process caused by recent events."

The statement didn't mention McMillen or the ACLU. When asked by the AP if McMillen's demand led to the cancellation, school board attorney Michele Floyd said she could only reference the statement.

"I guess they would rather do that than what's right, what's constitutionally correct," McMillen said.

Same-sex prom dates and cross-dressing are new issues for many high schools around the country, said Daryl Presgraves, a spokesman for GLSEN: Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, a Washington-based advocacy group.

"A lot of schools actually react rather than do the research and find out what the rights of these students are," said Presgraves, who was preparing to facilitate a discussion about anti-gay bullying at a National Association of Secondary School Principals meeting.

The school district had said it hoped a privately sponsored prom could be held. McMillen said if that happens, she's sure she'll be excluded.

"It's a small town in Mississippi, and it's run by an older generation with money. Most of them are more conservative and they don't agree with it," she said.

‘I am a little bummed out’

Fulton Mayor Paul Walker said he supports the school district's decision and knew of no private efforts to host the prom.

"I think the community as a whole is probably in support of the school district," Walker said of the town of about 4,000.

Itawamba County is a rural area of about 23,000 people in north Mississippi near the Alabama state line. It's near Pontotoc County, Miss., where more than a decade ago school officials were sued in federal court over their practice of student-led intercom prayer and Bible classes.

A couple of students had different reactions to the decision.

Anna Watson, a 17-year-old junior at the high school, was looking forward to the prom, especially since the town's only hotspot is the bowling alley, she said.

"I am a little bummed out about it. I guess it's a decision that had to be made. Either way someone was going to get disappointed — either Constance was or we were," Watson said. "I don't agree with homosexuality, but I can't change what another person thinks or does."

McKenzie Chaney, 16, said she wasn't planning to attend the prom, but "it's kind of ridiculous that they can't let her wear the tuxedo and it all be over with."

So... damned... stupid...

[Surgo]

I don't use the word often, but whatever group runs that school district is a bunch of douchenozzles.

[Crissa]

That's what they did when they were told they couldn't keep black students from attending the prom.

Why doesn't the news mention that part?

-Crissa

[RobbyPants]

As much as conservatives complain about the "liberal media", I'm surprised about how much damning evidence the media chooses to leave out.

[RobbyPants]

Double post

[RobbyPants]

Tripple post?

[Starmaker]

I don't agree with homosexuality

What sort of language is this? I don't agree with aluminum, and cream cheese, and sage grouses, and purple, and seven.

Say instead, "I'm a bigot. I don't like homosexuals: I am uncomfortable being around them / I won't hire one / I wish they were dead; underline the relevant." That'd be honest.

[mean_liar]

http://www.somethingawful.com/d/dungeon ... -gygax.php

Headlines scream: Five Unloved Odd Bodies Dead in Farty Basement Following Marathon Hobgoblin Pogrom

[Maj]

What sort of language is this? I don't agree with aluminum, and cream cheese, and sage grouses, and purple, and seven.

Whoa... That's prime parent language right there. There are lots of times when a child does something that their parents don't like or approve of, but that - in NO way - means that the child isn't loved. And it's not just for parents.

I disapprove of my best friend in high school marrying a guy who already had a kid by someone else, and giving up a four year scholarship to any state school she might have wanted to attend, but that doesn't mean I don't like her or wouldn't hire her for a job.

It is an important lesson that too few people learn - dislike/disapprove what a person does, but not the person themselves.

[The Lunatic Fringe]

What sort of language is this? I don't agree with aluminum, and cream cheese, and sage grouses, and purple, and seven.

Whoa... That's prime parent language right there. There are lots of times when a child does something that their parents don't like or approve of, but that - in NO way - means that the child isn't loved. And it's not just for parents.

I disapprove of my best friend in high school marrying a guy who already had a kid by someone else, and giving up a four year scholarship to any state school she might have wanted to attend, but that doesn't mean I don't like her or wouldn't hire her for a job.

It is an important lesson that too few people learn - dislike/disapprove what a person does, but not the person themselves.

There is a really serious difference between being gay and giving up a scholarship. Namely, homosexuality is not a choice. Disapproving of someone's gayness is tantamount to disapproving of them, as sexual orientation is very much part of one's identity.

[Crissa]

Saying 'I disapprove of homosexuality' is fine, though. It's possibly bigoted, but it's at least good grammar.

'I disagree with homosexuality' or 'I don't believe in homosexuality' is both bad grammar and bigoted.

-Crissa

[Maj]

Namely, homosexuality is not a choice.

There are a lot of people who don't believe that. I'm not trying to say that they're right, but in their minds, they do see it as a choice - and the way they treat people is a reflection of that.

'I disagree with homosexuality' or 'I don't believe in homosexuality' is both bad grammar and bigoted.

I'm not willing to call someone a bigot because they clearly don't have a perfect mastery of the English language. Seriously... The girl speaking is a 17 year old junior in high school in a place where it's better to cancel a senior prom than it is to let another girl go dressed up in a tux with her girlfriend. I'm not willing to attribute maliciousness to stupidity.

Now maybe if Anna Watson had said Constance should have been the one to suffer because she was gay - I'd totally be there with you. But there was nothing in what she said that indicated that sort of mentality at all.

[The Lunatic Fringe]

Namely, homosexuality is not a choice.

There are a lot of people who don't believe that. I'm not trying to say that they're right, but in their minds, they do see it as a choice - and the way they treat people is a reflection of that.

There is easily available research documenting the fact that homosexual (and heterosexual) people do not have a conscious choice about their sexual orientation. If someone - such as a parent with a gay child or a member of the Mississipi school board - is involved in the making of important decisions regarding a gay person, they have a duty to become fully apprised of the facts. Remaining ignorant when faced with responsibility is not just lazy and stupid, it is immoral.

[Crissa]

Seriously... The girl speaking is a 17 year old junior in high school in a place where it's better to cancel a senior prom than it is to let another girl go dressed up in a tux with her girlfriend. I'm not willing to attribute maliciousness to stupidity.

At no point in its definition does bigotry require malice or physical threats.

-Crissa

[Ganbare Gincun]

There is easily available research documenting the fact that homosexual (and heterosexual) people do not have a conscious choice about their sexual orientation. If someone - such as a parent with a gay child or a member of the Mississipi school board - is involved in the making of important decisions regarding a gay person, they have a duty to become fully apprised of the facts. Remaining ignorant when faced with responsibility is not just lazy and stupid, it is immoral.

In the minds of these people, you either choose God, or you choose to be a homosexual. There is no middle ground. And it's Mississippi - they'd go in and rape/kill all of the gays, enslave/kill all of the non-whites, and hoist the Confederate flag high at the capital tomorrow morning if they thought they could get away with it. And when you get down to it, most Red States aren't really that different. *shrug*

[Ganbare Gincun]

It's Official: The Pope Is Down With The Boyfucking

Texas: Exporting Conservative Ignorance To Schools Everywhere

Court Upholds "Under God" In Pledge Of Allegiance