Category Archives: WTF?!

Another slam-dunk case for the Anti-Butthead Act

A bakery near Denver is refusing to make a cake for a same-sex couple.  While this is covered by the state’s anti-discrimination laws, it would also be an excellent case for my proposed Anti-Butthead Act.  According to the Denver Post,

The shop’s owner, . . .  [stated] that he has a strong stance toward the biblical view of marriage between one man and one woman.

I’m wondering if Mr. Phillips checks the Biblical-compliance status of his other customers.  Does he ask his one-man/one-woman couples if they’ve had sex before the marriage.  Awkward!   Adultery and coveting of neighborhood wives?  Also awkward!  Theft?  Does he do a criminal background check?  How about honoring mom and dad?  He needs to check on that, too, right?

This falls solidly within the black letter of the Anti-Butthead Act’s mandate: “Don’t be a Butthead.”  Or, in the words of the colleague from whose Facebook post I blatantly stole this idea, “Just make the fucking cake, you dope!”

More on bicycle totalitarianism (& my first guest post!)

by Sproule Love (in response to my last post about this WSJ video editorial).

I don’t know what’s worse – the giggling sycophantic interviewer opening with a gleeful update about a citibike user getting hit by an SUV, or how out of touch Rabinowitz is with New York. How is this woman in a position of power at a major news outlet, even the Journal? These gems from the video are at the top of my list:

  • “the bike lobby is all-powerful”
  • “every citizen knows, who is in any way sentient, the most important danger in the city is not the yellow cabs, it is the bicyclists”

Is that why the current golden era of cycling infrastructure in NYC took 30+ years of tireless advocacy and has resulted in a 20% decrease in traffic fatalities over the last 10 years? Is that why of the 136 pedestrians killed in NYC in 2012, NONE were reportedly killed by cyclists, but all of the 155 pedestrians and cyclists killed in NYC traffic in the same year (15,465 were injured) were killed by motorists, half of whom got no citation whatsoever, and only one of whom was charged with a serious crime?

To the citibike naysayers, I say don’t knock it ’till you try it, and I much prefer looking at the citiBike rack in my neighborhood over a line of parked cars. NYC is slowly restoring the balance of street use away from just cars, and the change is dramatic. I hope our next mayor doesn’t drop the ball.

Totalitarian bicyclists

New York City recently started a bike-share program.  It’s my understanding that the program is sponsored by Citibank — a capitalist institution last time I checked — and that participation is voluntary, that is, no one is being forced by brownshirts to ride borrowed bicycles.

According to Wall Street Journal editorial board member Dorothy Rabinowitz, I may have this all wrong.*

As helpfully transcribed by Talking Points Memo:

“Do not ask me to enter the mind of the totalitarians running this government of the city,” Rabinowitz said when asked what she thought was the motivation behind the program.

“Look, I represent the majority of citizens. . . .The majority of citizens of this city are appalled by what has happened and I would like to say to people who don’t live in New York that this means something much more than the specifics of this dreadful program. It means: envision what happens when you get a government that is run by an autocratic mayor or other leader and a government before which you are helpless. We now look at a city whose best neighborhoods are absolutely begrimed, is the word, by these blazing blue Citi Bank bikes — all of the finest, most picturesque parts of the city. It is shocking to walk around the city to see how much of this they have sneaked under the radar in the interest of the environment.”

 

“Begrimed”? Is that even a word? And here is the scene that Ms. Rabinowitz finds begrimy:

nyc-bike-share-cropped-proto-custom_28

There are plenty of things in NYC that might properly be called grimy — though it’s possible that Ms. Rabinowitz does not encounter any of them between the limo and the doorman — but this does not seem to satisfy any common language definition of the term.

What this is, of course, is another example of Conservative Linguistic Debasement:  “totalitarian” simply means “something a conservative does not like.”  It doesn’t have to relate to “a political regime based on subordination of the individual to the state and strict control of all aspects of the life and productive capacity of the nation especially by coercive measures.”  It just has to piss off a conservative.

*************

* Having sat through most of the video editorial, I agree with James Fallows: “Henceforth when you read the Journal‘s editorials, I invite you to hear this voice, expression, and tone. . . . Onion writers, watch and weep.”

We need a general anti-butthead law.

With fee shifting.

Consider the following case:

Damian Garcia

A senior at an Albuquerque Catholic high school identifies as a boy and wants to wear a black gown — along with all the other boys — for graduation.  Unfortunately, his birth certificate identifies him as a girl, which is the only criterion his high school considers in dictating that he wear a white gown, the color assigned to girls.

This case, although likely tough to bring under current antidiscrimination law, would be resolved on a plaintiff’s summary judgment motion under the Anti-Butthead Act, the key provision of which reads, “Don’t be a butthead.”  The high school, although fully entitled to implement whatever religious principles it wants,* is being buttheaded about a very simple thing.  Let the kid wear whatever damn gown he wants.

His family says

they’re not expecting the school to change policy by next week, but hope the school would consider eventually having all students wear the same colored gowns to avoid the situation all together.

Laudable non-buttheaded thinking!

**********

*I am completely unqualified to opine on Christian doctrine, but I thought it had more to do with loving your fellow human than what color gown he’s wearing.

One of these is not like the other.

Apparently it’s OK to shoot your sibling or get plastered and shoot your hunting buddy, but not to have a curious and experimental mind.  (I did enjoy the “category” assigned the first article by the Miami New Times.)

 

Florida science experiment

 

 

Gun tragic accident

 

 

turkey camp shooting

 

 

my first rifle

my first rifle 2

Denver Post or The Onion: it’s hard to tell

One of my favorite Onion headlines is

Stereotypes Are a Real Time-Saver

I’m a busy guy. And, while I’d love to, I don’t have the time to get to know every person I encounter in the course of my daily life. So thank goodness I have a handy little device at my disposal that helps me know how to deal with just about anyone I come across: stereotypes. Yes, stereotypes are a real time-saver!

The Denver Post appears to have borrowed this crucial piece of wisdom to guide its journalistic standards.  In reporting the tragic death of Tom Clements, the Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections, the Post added the following pieces of gratuitous, unsupported, speculation to its initial reports:

Clements’ death occurred a week after he denied a request by a Saudi national, Homaidan al-Turki, to serve out the remainder of a Colorado prison sentence in Saudi Arabia.

The article goes on for three paragraphs to describe the al-Turki case — citing no evidence outside the chronology to connect it to Clements’s murder — but does not offer any further gratuitous, unsupported, speculation concerning other individuals of, say, other races or affiliations.
Colorado corrections officials are investigating whether a paroled white-supremacist prison-gang member at the center of the investigation into the execution-style slaying of state prison chief Tom Clements was ordered by the gang to do a “hit,” a source told The Denver Post on Thursday.
No time, funding, or balls for real reporting?  Stereotypes are a real time-saver!
[Updated to note dates of DP articles.]

For the well-dressed mass killer

Am I the last one to notice that Woolrich doesn’t just sell plaid shirts and chinos, but clothing specially designed for concealed carry?*  I get that the world needs hunting clothes:  if you’re going to stalk Bambi through the north woods, you probably ought to layer up.  But concealed carry is about being prepared to take down your fellow human, stealthily.  That is, there is nothing remotely inoffensive about this.   The website is not subtle:

Woolrich concealed carry

Indeed, the “Elite Concealed Carry Chinos” — so not kidding! — have these specifications:

Concealed carry chinos

I’m thinking the “discreet carry options” make the “reinforced crotch” an important feature, lest the amateur concealed carrier shoot his or her balls off.  And when you’re through sowing deadly mayhem, you can just toss them in the washer!

I’m making stupid jokes about this, but it’s really not funny.  We’ve reached the point in our armed society where a major clothing retailer markets “tactical” attire for sneaking firearms into ordinary public settings.  The suburban dad in chinos at the movie theater or shopping mall may be concealing a Glock.  Also, the mass killer in chinos, indistinguishable from the suburban dad.

***********

* A bit of post-blog research reveals that the New York Times wrote about this back in April.  It only came to my attention because we get their catalog** and I was just about to order a couple of pairs of $6 fuzzy socks when I noticed the concealed carry category.

** Yes our taste in clothing is THAT bad.

Email marketing research gone wrong

In my inbox today:

Yachting news

Perhaps some dude with a yacht is getting spam from my favorite publication, “The Smartass Guide to Dog Park Photography.”