Is there a more disgusting vicious vile political operative alive than Mary Matalin? Despicable shitbagges like her make me want to believe in god, heaven, and hell.
I have to say, I am fucken shocked that the Rays are pretty much out of it, and the Orioles are taking it down to the wire with the Yanks. One month ago, I would have bet strongly on the opposite. Although I guess this was sort of predictable with the Rays very shallow batting.
The subclass of the very rich who mooch the most via the tax absurd treatment of capital gains and carried interest, such as hedge fund managers, venture capitalists, and other “investors”, have captured *both* political parties. The only way the capital gains tax and carried interest exemption will ever be made fair by treating those sources of income as no different from wages is for the rich who *do* make their income from wages and are taxed accordingly–such as professionals like doctors and lawyers, real businessmen who actually operate busineses that provide goods and services to customers, etc–to put their money where their mouths are and stop politically supporting the mooching and looting of their rich “investor” pals.
If you want to talk about real takers and makers, this is a class division *within* the 1%. Those who actually work for a living and make their income “the old fashioned way” are the makers, and those vultures and parasites like Romney and his buddies are the takers. The only hope for a reconfiguration of the tax system so that the burdens of running a complex developed society like the United States are shared equitably is for the makers of the 1% to put their collective feet down and tell the greedy moocher and looter 1%ers (really more like the 0.01%ers) that they have had enough and they can go fucken pound sand: they are gonna pay normal tax rates.
Historiann is posting an interview she conducted with women’s history great Mary Beth Norton (third part to be posted tomorrow). The whole thing is worth reading for a fascinating account of the early days of the development of women’s history as a subfield of history and of women’s fight to break into the history profession sausage fest.
One of the details of Norton’s own history that is particular interest to me is the scholarly reinvention of herself from a historian specializing in the loyalists of the American Revolution to a women’s historian. And this reinvention did not occur without pushback. As she relates in the interview:
My focus on women at such an early stage in the evolution of the historical study of women made me stand out from the crowd in the 1970s, not always in a good way. Some people were very skeptical about what I was doing and its value. One senior historian I knew rather well said to a female friend of mine (who was then still a graduate student and reported the comment to me): ‘why did she have to switch to women? Loyalists were perfectly OK.’
I am quite fascinated by the concept of scholarly reinvention. While some scholars make huge contributions focusing on the same subject matter employing the same methods for their entire careers, for others sporadic–or even regular–reinvention has clearly been instrumental to their success. What I now understand about myself is that I need to continuously incorporate (or devise) new approaches into my research program, and about every ten years I need to enter subfields that are new to me. Mostly I think this is because I have a short attention span and easily get bored, and complementarily one of my greatest intellectual strengths is the ability to enter new territory and rapidly master its conceptual and methodological frameworks.
In common with Norton, I have on occasion had more senior scientists express their “concern” with this predilection, and treat me as if it were something unseemly and impudent. Fortunately, both my pre-doc and post-doc mentors effectively inculcated in me a robust “go fucke yourself” attitude towards this kind of squelching, and my current understanding is that it represents the understandable fear of the dinosaur for the mammal.
Whatte the fucke is uppe with this right-wing loonie obsession with Obama’s college transcript? These deranged wackanauts seem to think they contain some kind of MASSIVE BOMBSHELL THAT WILL DESTROY THE LEGITIMACY OF THE OBAMA PRESIDENCY. What do they think? He got a C+ in freshman calculus or something?
Can someone please explain to me what the fucke possible positive purpose could ever be served by fucken FOREIGN SERVICE DIPLOMATS spewing gibberish on goddamn motherfucken twitter????? I mean seriously. Isn’t the basis of diplomacy that you communicate using carefully worded detailed statements arrived at only after careful deliberation? And isn’t the entire purpose of twitter to completely prevent the use of carefully worded detailed statements and to absolutely destroy any notion of deliberation before emitting speech?
Is there something I am missing here?
Here’s a nice one. Clueless racist misogynist white d00d “libertarian” asshole high-school debate-team CHAMPEEN! Here is a sampling of his debate-team CHAMPEEN rhetoric:
We are great at tearing down our opponents’ arguments.
Was I being unreasonable? Please let me know.
Huh, I know a few black people.
Again, if you’re disallowed from doing the work you want, you are a slave to the system that restricts you.
How did you so violently miss the point? Seriously. Are you being willful about this or are you just obfuscating?
Prejudice? Perhaps the word you’re looking for is “presumptuous?” I understand they both start with P but come on.
If you’re not allowed to peacefully use your body how you wish to use it, then you’re probably a slave to someone.
Wait, only black people were ever slaves? WTF is wrong with you? Are you being willfully stupid?
You need a basic premise before you move onto further steps, no? First, take a stance, then act, etc.
And these are just from the last half day! As you can see, this is just a game for people like this who–for whatever reason–lack actual productive outlets for their rhetorical energies, and so use atheism/libertarianism/whateverism as an opportunity to live out their high-school debate-team CHAMPEEN Walter Mitty fantasies on the Internet.
These ineffectual people are afraid of atheism+, exactly because it threatens their pretend privileged status on the atheism debate-team CHAMPEENSHIP playground, and threatens the real privileged status of the “famous” white d00d atheists they identify with to control discourse and the allocation of resources to real advocacy operations.