Anybody that have called the help line of some companies and ended up being answer from India is like trying to decifer some animalistic mumbo jumbo


by Ted Grant

Lest anyone be inclined to think that it’s only the politically conservative blogs that attract more than their fair share of idiots, liberal blogs get them from time to time as well. Take, for example, this article from Towleroad about a new ad campaign in India:

India is the filthiest country in the world.To bathe and drink in a river were corpses are burned and dunk is about as disgusting as one can be.Imagine swimming and a rotten arm hits you in the face,uhg.Besides that indian skin color is king of yukky.It is not black,brown or white is so sickly purple.Base on all the above they have to be envious of everybody and have to lash out to make themselves feel a little better.Anybody that have called the help line of some companies and ended up being answer from India is like trying to decifer some animalistic mumbo jumbo.And at the end they are as helpful as a headache.



The first and most obvious reason is “they have it Europe.”


by Charlie Bebattica

Stuff White People Like is a site premised upon taking the hoary “white people go like this/black people go like that” routine and cutting out the “black people” part. After reading several of the site’s posts, I couldn’t shake the feeling that there was something off about the entire venture, which seemed to be a series of snarky jabs against facile targets, passed under the guise of self-effacement or as simply “telling it like it is.” (Never a good sign, that.)

Also telling is the site’s choice of subjects to mock, “straw liberal” clichés like San Francisco, having gay friends, and the Toyota Prius. Oddly enough, given the site’s name, there are no entries for Ayn Rand, Larry the Cable Guy, or NASCAR, despite their well-documented appeal to the melanin-challenged sector of our society. Funny, that.

Then again, I thought perhaps I was reading too much into things…until this post, #94 Free Healthcare, which is the equivalent to that dreaded point in a conversation when you realize that you’ve spent the last hour talking to a Ron Paul supporter and start formulating a rapid exit strategy.

It begins thusly…

In spite of having access to the best health insurance and fanciest hospitals, white people are passionate about the idea of socialized medicine. So much so that they have memorized statistics and examples of how for-profit medicine has destroyed the United States.

If by “access,” you mean “it’s out there, though beyond the financial reach of many people, including those who work full time,” then the opening statement is almost correct. You know what else is correct? If you’re trapped in a tunnel with a vending machine full of Dasani, you will die of thirst if you don’t have change to put in the damn thing.

So why do white people like free healthcare?

Firstly, because they’re a bunch of feckless Europhiles:

The first and most obvious reason is “they have it Europe.” White people love all things European, this especially true of things that are unavailable in the United States (Rare Beers, Absinthe, legal marijuana, prostitution, soccer).

…and secondly, because these supposed “white people” (who bear no resemblance to any ones I’ve encountered in real life) are a bunch of bohemian slackers:

But the secret reason why all white people love socialized medicine is that they all love the idea of receiving health care without having a full-time job. This would allow them to work as a freelance designer/consultant/copywriter/photographer/blogger, open their own bookstore, stay at home with their kids, or be a part of an Internet start-up without having to worry about a benefits package.

The Europeans, lazy bohemians… that’s two conservative shibboleths invoked, all we’re missing is Michael Moore:

These desires were only heightened in 2007 when Michael Moore released “Sicko,” a documentary that contrasts the health care industry in the United States with that of Canada, France and Cuba. As a general rule of thumb, white people are always extra passionate about issues that have been the subject of a Moore documentary. As a test, ask them about 9/11, Gun Control, or Health Care and then say “where did you get that information?” You will not be surprised at the results.

YES, WE HAVE A RIGHT-WING TALKING POINT HAT TRICK! WOOOO! Because when you’re a uninsured college student or low wage worker with a painful and potentially deadly intestinal obstruction, it’s not about a hard choice where well-being has to be weighed against a possibly crushing financial burden. It’s all about being a slacker Scandophile fan of Roger and Me and ignoring the fact that the streets in this blessed nation are simply paved with affordable health care plans.

And, of course, it wouldn’t be complete without a jab at typical straw liberal “white people” hypocrisy:

They love the idea of everyone have equal access to the resources that will keep them alive, that is until they have to wait in line for an MRI.

Ah, yes, projecting one’s sense of crapulence onto others, that’s certainly something white people like.

Oh, did I say “white people?” I meant “over-entitled douchebags.”



The whole argument about how Hasbro Toy movies suck?: Two words… Transformers/ Amazing. You all can suck it.


by Kevin Church

Latino Review reports that Brendan Fraser and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson will appear in cameos in the Sommes-helped live-action adaptation of GI Joe.

This, of course, means that the people at ComingSoon.net are angry.

Both are incredibly poor decisions for those roles…this is disappointing…


That’s right, casting two well-known and well-liked actors in cameos in your movie based on a cartoon and comics series based on a toy line is a bad idea. Just look at the people lining up to agree with empirical evidence!
I agree both are very disappointing. Last good film Rock has done was Doom and as for fraser UMH…. I can”t think of any good films he’s made. He pretty much sucks as an actor.

Stephen Sommers is an infuriating hack with no respect to the characters he brings to the screen. Anyone who can seriously allow such a disgraceful abomination such as Van Helsing to be distributed to unsuspecting movie goers across the world has lost their soul. This will be no different.

wow - this brings the crap factor of this movie up by 10,000 crap-points on the crap scale - who in their @#$@#$ right mind thinks these guys will actually improve the movie!!!

Of course, there’s a dissenter who has clear, cogent points to use to counter the tide of negative opinion:

Hey ok here’s the lowdown:

Stephen Sommers: He can direct (the Mummy Films).

Van Helsing: Disappointing but it was still ok.

Brenden Fraser: Can act. Crash anyone? George Of The Jungle?

The Rock: Doom sucked we know. The Rock CAN act. He just chooses **** movies to star in.

The whole argument about how Hasbro Toy movies suck?: Two words… Transformers/ Amazing. You all can suck it.


Someone with the delightful (no, really) moniker of The Critic’s Lunch isn’t buying it, though.

Aside from Ray Park and Dennis Quaid, this movie has been handled just afwul. The Rock as Shipwreck? That role is perfect for Lost’s Josh Holloway.

G.I. Joe!! A REAL UNITED NATIONS WHO DON’T DO ANYTHING TO HELP ANYONE HERO!!

Sucks.


Apparently he also has problems with the rumored international flavor the film will have. You know, because America’s so beloved in the world right now that a studio shouldn’t have worldwide box office concerns in mind.



Anything is better than a lying white woman.


by Manhandle

If you’re interested in the upcoming presidential election, CNN.com is as good a place as any to visit. If you’re interested in filling yourself with despair at the state of the American electorate, CNN.com is an awesome place to visit.

CNN’s political ticker, where they track the ebb and flow of this seemingly endless campaign, offers readers the opportunity to leave comments about each piece. The comments are usually more entertaining than the actual articles – if you find idiocy, poorly informed opinions, and bigotry entertaining, that is.

Let’s take a look at the following article on the Political Ticker, dated April 3rd:

GROWING NUMBER SAY COUNTRY READY FOR BLACK PRESIDENT

Reader Bon gives us a global perspective on why black people are unfit to lead:

Show me a country run by a black president and I’ll show you a place plagued by corruption, violence and general mismanagement.

Absolutely, But Not Obama is confused:

hey what happened to my comment?

We’re reading it, dumbass.

Meanwhile, Vig thinks the whole thing smells fishy and is willing to get all Dirty Harry on your ass:

Well, here’s another Obama favoritism - did they poll people to see if they are ready for a woman president? Well, did you punk?

Actually, Vig, if you had bothered to read the article you might have noticed this passage:The poll also suggested more Americans think the country is ready for a black president than a female president. Sixty-three percent of those surveyed say the country is ready for a female president, 13 points lower than those who say the country is ready for a black president.

Big K gets a dig in at all the descendents of slaves who might happen to be reading:

If Obama loses the election, will he ask for reparation? I’ll stick with Senator John.

Debra is just as pissed as Vig, but not nearly as tough. She’s just upset that there wasn’t a reseach:

Why no Research about gender? How many Americans are ready for a female President? I guess that the porcentage might be lower, but it dosn´t matter. There should have been a reseach!

Actually, Debra, if you had bothered to read… ah, skip it.Robert, IL (typical white male) is ready for a black president! Because…

Anything is better than a lying white woman.

Spoken like a true redneck divorcee.Bill from Covington has confused the headline of the article with the poll itself:

’Growing number say country is ready for a black president’ I notice they say “country” why not name the country. If you ask is the United States of America ready for a black president, what would be the answer? Quit playing games with polls, we all realize how easily they can be manipulated.

Yes, you horrible headline writers! Quit playing games with polls that you have nothing to do with!

Dallas thinks the entire thing is MISLEADING!

Very MISLEADING Is there a poll asking if the country is ready for a female president, to be fair?”

Actually Dallas, if you had bothered to read…

Will is another “typical white person” with an opinion:

I don’t think so. I am a typical white person, and I will not vote for that black racist, along with probably 70% of typical white people will not vote for Obama. Chew on that.”

Well, now that we’ve heard from the official Ambassador of Typical White People, let’s end things with some wisdom from Jimmy, who brings a certain pop cultural wisdom to the world of politics:

But we are not ready for a woman president. Look at that commander and chief show with Geena Davis - cancelled. On the other hand there have already been 2 black presidents on 24. Co-incidence? I think not. Hillary is fighting an uphill battle. May be in 4 years.

America is totally doomed.



Now, I realize that not all gay people behave inappropriately.


by Ted Grant

The tax-filing deadline is fast approaching, and gay couples face a particularly unique hurdle, what with the patchwork of state and federal laws regarding gay marriage, civil unions and domestic partnerships. A good tax preparer is essential. Which is why it was so surprising when one couple discovered that the at-home, on-line tax prep software from H&R Block doesn’t support a joint tax return function for civil unions in Connecticut, a state where such unions are legal and those in them can file joint state returns.

Let’s see how the commentators at The Consumerist took that news, shall we?

i don’t support civil unions either. go H&R block!

You know, for a site allegedly devoted to detailing consumer rights issues, the readership seems to side with corporations an awful lot of the time…

Oh, shut up. Fact is, this is the first time in our nation’s history that our government has legislated protection for a behavior. If homosexuals didn’t advertise their sexual tastes, they wouldn’t need legislative protections. I don’t walk, talk, and dress in a manner that screams, “Overweight women with big floppy breasts get me off.” That would be inappropriate. Equally inappropriate are flaming gay men who act like little girls to ensure everyone around them knows exactly how they like to take it in bed, and I take great offense to being told by my government that I have to pretend this is acceptable. It isn’t.

Look, I don’t care if gay people want to live together and be gay together. More power to them, this is a free country. I do mind being forced to financially support their homosexuality in the form of benefits for “partners.” I’m not saying they can’t be gay, just saying I want nothing to do with it.

Yes, God forbid you have to be reminded who a gay man is sleeping with. As opposed to the exhaustive coverage the media devotes to which famous straight person is sleeping with who.

Of course, you had to bring race into this. You people always do and it’s clear what you’re doing - trying to paint me as a racist bigot since you can’t win your argument without attacking my character. The comparison is invalid, and I’ll tell you why: A black man can’t help that his skin is black. Anyone who sees him will immediately know he is black and there’s nothing fair he can do about that (clearly asking black people to bleach their skin is barbaric).

A gay man, on the other hand, can very well help his behavior in public. He does not need to behave in a manner that informs everyone what type of sex he likes and it’s perfectly fair for others to ask him not to advertise what turns him on. This is what I, and for that matter most of the rest of the American population, find offensive. The stereotypical homosexual behaviors - limp wrist, dressing outrageously, giggling like a schoolgirl, etc - can be controlled and we should not have discrimination laws that protect these controllable behaviors. Note that I feel the same about heterosexuals who dress, talk and/or behave in a manner that advertises their sexual desires.

Now, I realize that not all gay people behave inappropriately. I work with and have friends who are gay and I like them all just fine. What they do behind closed doors is no more of my business than what sexual positions my wife and I use is of theirs - and that’s the key: The gays I like and respect don’t advertise their sexual desires. In fact, you’d never know they were gay until you really got to know them.

Ah, the old “I know a gay guy, and I don’t beat the crap out of him every time I see him, therefore I can’t possibly be a homophobe” arguement…



I’ll be over at Aint It Cool News where the right to free speech is still enforced. You cocksm’kers! Get the duck sauce out of your ears.


by Brought to you by Carl's, Jr.

It’s true that established film critics are slowly losing ground as print publications’ markets shrink. One of the latest to get the axe is Newsweek critic David Ansen, a truly sane and entertaining voice that will be missed by many. I saw this announced on Rotten Tomatoes, a site I hardly ever visit, and, because I’m a moron, I decided to check the comments.

Now instead of getting a boring old 2007 BMW they can now afford the 2008 series.

Kind of an obtuse line. The OP misinterprets:

he point is not that he’s being replaced by a “2008 series” but that his position and that of tons more critics around the country is being eradicated. It won’t be upgrading an old model, it’ll be making everyone (readers) drive the exact same car.


Okay, a simple misunderstanding. Happens all the time. But the internet wouldn’t be the internet if it couldn’t turn an acknowledged misunderstanding into an instantly over-the-top flamewar.

you two no speaka english…I make interesting comments that add fuel to the fire not this boring politically correct disney sh’t, please! When I said they can afford the 2008 series I mean’t Newsday, Newsweek and village voice execs not the critics that got booted, who gives a sh’t about them! I can watch movies on my own and make my own opinions and not rely on people like Mr. Ansen here. I’m my own man I don’t need this guy telling me what’s good! I’ll be over at Aint It Cool News where the right to free speech is still enforced. You cocksm’kers! Get the duck sauce out of your ears.

Why a person who doesn’t give “a sh’t” about movie critics feels the need to visit and comment on a site like Rotten Tomatoes—and raise a voice in support of critics—is something that goes unasked and unanswered.

Wait, he’s back!

Minderbinder here’s another fagg’t. Did I hurt your feelings? You remind me of my girlfriend when she’s on her period. Wahhhh! I can’t post on RT cause this kid is annoying WAHHHHH!!! Get over it’s a silly bullsh*t forum board. You come here to talk sh”t and say what you want. And Dahluzz i don’t even know you but if you want to be down with these fagg’ts then f’ck you too. You muthaf’ckas can’t be us or see us. East side! Peace bitches

And now you know why I would rather chew my own testicles off than visit Ain’t It Cool News. Imagine an entire board… of that.



Necromancy, which is what John Edward practices, falls into the category of witchcraft.


by Ted Grant

Most rational people, when faced with an obvious charlatan and con-man like John Edward (the “psychic” not the former Presidential candidate), have no problem with openly laughing and mocking his claims to possess magical powers. But, what if you’re a right-wing Christian fundamentalist, with a vested interest in preserving the idea that people do, in fact, have magical powers?

Well, you accuse John Edward of being in communication with demons, that’s what:

Perhaps John Edward is a fraud and a brilliant con man. Then again, it’s entirely possible that he does, in fact, receive information from the spirit world. My question for those who believe he’s for real, and that he actually communicates with spirits of the dead, is this: What if the info that’s piped into the medium’s mind comes from another sort of spirit, a spirit not from a deceased loved one, but from a demonic spirit?

God’s Word tells us that there are dark powers lurking in the unseen world. One such spirit is the fallen angel, Lucifer, AKA Satan, also the Devil.

Hey, I wonder if we can squeeze in any pet smear tactics of the American right-wing into this piece?

Last year I wrote a piece on Oprah’s endorsement of the self-help manifesto The Secret, “Is Oprah Peddling Snake Oil?” In it I said,

“Oprah Winfrey’s message comes straight from the pit of hell. Think about that for a moment. Who else but Satan would be behind such a diabolical movie? Why would any serious follower of Jesus Christ worth their salt waste his or her time watching Oprah’s show? Christians (wittingly or unwittingly) are entering into practices that are contrary to the Word of God. Whether they know it or not, their actions are counterproductive to the cause of Christ. My love and concern for them is what drives me to speak the truth in love.

Is there anything Oprah isn’t involved with?



There’s 1488 comments, most of which are spam, so here’s the best one.


by Kevin Church

Cracked.com is the sort of obsessive-compulsive’s version of The Onion, with lots of lists that are supremely easy to submit to Digg and Stumbleupon that alternate wildly between “very funny” and “dear god, shoot everyone that signed off on this.” Being a fan of hyperviolent shoot-em-ups films, I was very interested to read their list of 5 Kick-Ass Action Movies That Are Pure Propaganda and while the writing was sharp (frequently finding very leftist messages in films that purport to have AMERICA! FUCK YEAH! at the core), the comments were a minefield of idiocy and spam. Here’s the single best one, which made my jaw actually drop from the stupidity on display:

and farenheit 9/11 wasn’t on this list?! really? ya know, my dad once told me something he heard in the army, you don’t realize when you’re watching the best forms of propaganda, because the best propaganda is so entertaining that you don’t notice. or something like that…

Yes, that spectacular action movie, Fahrenheit 9/11. I understand that over 2700 people died making that movie, that’s how realistic it was.



I do like the flambouyant ways of most homosexuals. Hetros such as my self don’t have x rated pride parades.


by Ted Grant

In case you’re not sick of hearing about it by now, the web-site Stuff White People Like (though, really, it should probably be named Stuff Upper Middle Class College Educated White Liberals Who Live on the East Coast Like) frequently features down-right cringe-inducing stereotypes. And yet, the comments are usually worse…Take a recent post about how white people like having gay friends…(that sound you hear is every gay man in America laughing derisively at this notion):

I am not homophobic by any means, I just don’t have enough in common with gay people develop a friendship. You take it up the ass. I don’t. End of story.

Dudes don’t like being hit on by other dudes. OK, I realize turning a straight boy is the ultimate gay fantasy, but back the hell off. Also, there is no such thing as bi-curiosity with dudes. You don’t get to try dick. Once you’ve had one in your mouth, your gay. It’s OK for chicks, though.

Any red blooded white American male would want nothing to do with a male gay friend. Fuck that! It’s ok for women to have gay shopping buddies, but the day that I legitmize myself by having a fag friend is the day I run head first into traffic.

I’m homophobic and don’t give a fuck what any of you think about me. I cringe at the mere thought of a man touching another man in a sexual way. Dicks are for chicks.

Faggots burn in hell. End of story. No one should acknowledge they even exist, well actually it would be better if they were round up and shot but the American Government is to pussy to do it.
I’d gladly do it.

Homos are quite the disgusting bunch. That photo of the two acting all normal and family-like is a joke. Imagine the disgusting things the two of them do to get off. The human body was not meant for such acts.

‘Brokeback’ hurt the gay propaganda effort more than it helped. You pillow-biters need better advsiors!!! ha

PS I have rarely met gay person that isn’t a raving hateful anti-Christian bigot.

(Well, except maybe a few gay pedophile priests, who are basically liars anyway.)

Does anyone want to count the number of times the STD-carrying, depressed, anti-Christian bigoted, hetero-hating gays have used the term “homophobic on this thread?

It would be appreciated.

Gays really do need a better retort and more clever hate speech. The term is old and overused.

You white traitors will be the first to be to be raped and shot down by Negroes who could care less about your stupid politics.

(Yeah, I’m…not sure what that one’s doing in this thread, but there you go…)

straight white people don’t like having gay friends. i ain’t trying to hang out with any of them faggots

Well, maybe you fags could stay out of our TV sitcoms that kids watch, stay out of our school boards, keep your Christian-hatred out of our politics? Leave the US military alone? Realize that “marriage” is for child-bearing families, not a front for “activists” and haters?

PS you guys made a BAD move taking in “T” into your LBGT axis.

I’m white and I don’t approve of people who define themselves publically by what they do with their genitalia. Most especially homosexuals. I also do not understand why men with same sex attraction have to act effeminate. Is this a prerequisite to being a male homosexual? Does it mean they actually want to be the opposite sex? It is confusing and insulting to masculinity. I am friendly with homosexuals but I do not approve of them nor do I have “White Guilt” over the poor oppressed people who run around telling others that the habits they engage in with their genitalia and the genitalia of others are “Important”. Clueless heterosexual men and emotive white women can go around parading their progressiveness all they want. Go dig a ditch you bunch of relativists

I do like the flambouyant ways of most homosexuals. Hetros such as my self don’t have x rated pride parades. We don’t recruit queers. That is why we don’t like them. We are certainly not afraid of any limp wristed, perverted, pillow biter, they just make us sick!! Just like all you east and left coast self righteous, self loathing, think you’re better than any one else pricks do!!
As for our hatred of learning, those commie istitutions that you call schools don’t teach, they indoctrinate.

Ps. What white people don’t like is, people ashamed of their whiteness acting like they speak for us all. The right kind of white people are proud of their history and whiteness. I don’t hate any race, but I’m not ashamed of being white, except that you people share my skin color.

This is B.S. !!!
MOST White people do NOT have, like, or want GAY friends.
Gay is perverted and disgusting.
I have showed this article to lots of friends of various backgrounds and they all laff at the obsurdity of this comment…

Get it right!!!
Gay is not the the norm for Most people.. of any color!!!

Apparently, white people also like being collossal dick-heads on the internet…



…Does anyone really support reparations? This is the same thing.


by Sluggo, Agent of N.A.N.C.Y.

One of the great screwings in the history of the comic book industry is that of Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, the creators of Superman. Selling their creation for a pittance in 1938, the two lived in near-poverty for decades while watching their brainchild rake in millions for the publisher, DC Comics. It wasn’t until the late ’70s, when the big-budget Superman movie was about to be released, that DC, afraid of a public backlash against the film if it were found out how Superman’s creators had been treated, finally was shamed into paying both Siegel and Shuster a yearly sum.

Recently, after many a hearing and court session, the copyright to the very first Superman story in Action Comics #1 was awarded to Siegel’s surviving family, which will likely lead to even more money going in the direction of the creator, or at least his estate. This is a Good Thing, another step in redressing the treatment of the men who essentially created the modern comic book industry.

Of course, some fans think otherwise. Like this fella:

…Oh boy. Another disaster brought on by Siegel heir greed. The last money grab they pulled off resulted in Superboy getting axed, now I can see DC panicking and start monkeying around with the Big Red S to change him enough so that he’s no longer anything that resembles Superman.

Enough is enough. Get a judge in on this mess that understands a) copyright law, and b) the fans are more important than a couple of greedy grandkids!

And there are a few folks in this comics blog discussion who also believe those two guys got more than enough from their creation, and should certainly not have been concerned about providing for their families:

Why they sold the rights they shouldnt get anything.

They shouldnt even get royalties they gave up that when they signed over the rights.

THEY SIGNED THE RIGHTS AWAY NOT WITH A GUN TO THEIR HEAD AND NOT ONCE BUT TWICE WHEN THEY SETTLED IN COURT IN 1948. ENOUGH ALREADY.

Gimme a break. They were paid in 1938. They were paid off in 1968. Again in 1978. They kept taking the money and suing again, Time Warner will keep this tied up for decades and that’s good.

As the end consumers.. we will be the ones paying for this. Keep this in mind next time comics prices rise, or your favorite book gets cancelled because it’s not selling well enough (less profit = less flexibility), or when they decide that making a Superman Movie or cartoon is not financially viable because of ‘licensing’ fees.

Superman
Created by Siegel and Shuster
Raised by DC
Killed by the Siegels

How greedy are the Siegels anyway. What they’re doing is killing the character that their father co-created. Yes, Siegel and Shuster should have been taken care of WHEN THEY WERE ALIVE. They’re not. Why should their kids be profiting off of their deceased parents?

Someone threw out the ’slave argument’ but at the risk of getting politically incorrect, does anyone really support reparations? This is the same thing.



« Previous Page — Next Page »