NRO's The Corner: Rolling Bile, Spit, and Gnash Thread

The comments on this article are astonishing:

"Many of my conservative friends — who oppose both civil unions and gay marriage and object to rampant promiscuity — often act as if there’s some grand alternative lifestyle for gays. But there isn’t."

Not sure I agree that celibacy is impossible (some of us manage it at times, whether we want to or not). But even conceding that point, so what? You don't have a normal mating instinct? Tough. You're SOL. Just like the woman who wants to be in a marine infantry unit, or the man who wants to work at Hooters. To ask that society re-define itself to accommodate your condition, consequences to society be damned, is outrageously self-centered. And to claim it as a matter of right is beyond the pale.

astonishing and appalling. their befuddled logic makes my head hurt.

You very much underestimate the harm that gay "marriage" will do to marriage it will make the term meaningless and useless. Exactly what we don't need right now.

Would you like this situation to play out in a bar one day...good looking man, "Would you like to get a room."

person being hit on, "Ahh I am married you know..."

good looking man, "I am not sure what you mean by married is it just a friendship thing or what?"

That would be a sad world to live in.

Jonah is such a weasel/that column is pure disingenuous hater-bait.

man you ain't kidding, those comments are wild

some dude quotes an anti-gay marriage book:

"[The origins of] close-relationship theory...can be traced back behind the likes of Alfred Kinsey or Margaret Mead to Friedrich Engels...it interests itself in gratification, not renunciation. In short it offers a radically different account of the nature and function of marriage, and so also the politics of marriage."

the book itself has a great title tho

http://www.amazon.com/Nation-Bastards-Essays-End-Marriage/dp/0978440242/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1293629066&sr=8-6

Would you like this situation to play out in a bar one day...good looking man, "Would you like to get a room."

person being hit on, "yes I would like to share a room. Hotels are very expensive in this town. Do you like playing card games? I love Crazy 8s!"

good looking man, "wait I was trying to hit on you."

person being hit on, "oh I thought you were just being friendly."

That would be a sad world to live in.

http://www.alternativeright.com/main/the-magazine/chestnuts-and-silver-bells/

oh god just read the whole thing

merry christmas, from steve sailer

Be Good, Members
January 4, 2011 10:33 A.M.
By Kathryn Jean Lopez

It is a good move by John Boehner to have nothing to do with tomorrow night’s swanky, PAC-sponsored LeAnn Rimes concert to raise money for the reelection of some freshman Republicans. Among other things, someone clearly didn’t learn from the recent Shape magazine controversy over Rimes. I’m a huge fan of redemption — it’s my only hope — but freshmen coming to Washington and celebrating with a star most recently best known for adultery isn’t quite coming to town on the right foot.

Saying no to a drop-by, on the other hand, is. Declining a reception invitation is something congressmen ought to feel completely comfortable doing. Hitting the cocktail circuit may not be the best use of their evenings — for their constituents, for their family, for their moral health.

Bobby Jindal has some advice for Washington — and all of us — in his new book on leadership: “All people — regardless of their job or role in society — have the responsibility to notice when they are viewed as a role model and live up to that responsibility. No excuses. That admiring kid of today could be a political leader, athlete, parent or teacher of tomorrow.”

god help me i just looked up what the leann rimes shape magazine controversy is

I didn't know there was a controversy!

someone clearly didn’t learn from the recent Shape magazine controversy over Rimes

clearly. clearly.

a star most recently best known for adultery

Like these people ever thought twice about giving column inches or web space to Newt Gingrich or any other serial adulterer from the GOP.

Jonah Goldberg write: "I’ve been reading the instant-reaction on Twitter and on the web and I’ve been trying to filter out the urge to vent my rage at those who immediately shoe-horned these awful crimes into their ideological prism."

I wrote a comment to respond which I have no idea if they'll approve but I wanted to share it here:

"When someone decides to commit a violent act against anyone they are generally circumscribing themselves outside the normative socio-political arena. No one in the standard political discourse would ever dream of assassinating a politician, so these individuals are already outside the ideological prisms of Democrat (or liberal) and Republican (or conservative). Yet if we pretend like our normal discourses have absolutely no affect on these non-normative actors then we give up any responsibility (and agency) in the kind of community and culture we live in. Did using bullseye icons in a political map convince this man to attempt this assassination? I don't know. But I don't think the question is inappropriate. If that question is inappropriate, we might as well never ask about the influence of the things we write and discuss on the culture. And if the things we write and discuss have no effect on the culture than places like NRO are just a waste of space and time. Alternatively, these forums are worthwhile and can impact the culture both positively and negatively. And when something negative occurs, it is our duty to ask why and how we may have contributed to it (just like we might celebrate when we see a positive correlation)."

can you link to the goldberg post

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256671/horror-day-jonah-goldberg

obv the real problem is that Jonah's response to something like this is smarmy self-righteousness. he can't even express sympathy without lashing out ideologically (lol irony).

Your comment is there, and it's obviously caused the other commenters to be more reflective. Like this guy:

"There's something to note in the reaction of the Left to this incident. If the dead were white store clerks, the Left would have nothing to say. After all, white store clerks have no value to them.

The victims were Democrats. They have value to the Left, not as real flesh and blood people, but as political tools. Therefore, they make for a useful corpse.

It is in times like these the cold blooded materialism of the left shines through. Human beings only have value if they serve a political purpose. If not, living or dead, the Left has no interest in them."

Message to the world’s Krugmanites: Get used to it. We’re on the march, we’re targeting you, you’re in our crosshairs, and, no, this is not an incitement to “hate” or political divisiveness: It is what politics in a democracy is all about.

http://www.nationalreview.com/sites/nationalreview.com/files/10.jpg

meanwhile, Nordlinger descends further into senility

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256694/again-and-again-jay-nordlinger

amazed by the indignation on NRO @ liberals "slandering" right-wingers over the AZ shootings. OTT even by the corner's standard. they feel defensive & yes GUILTY is what i think.

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/256955/term-blood-libel-more-common-you-might-think

lol that URL

Today's been fun!

oh god I just stumbled across Goldberg's post about Mein Kampf

ain't he smart?

I liked this comment in the 'blood libel' post

Regardless, Palin's speech was far from classy or honest or decorous, as one poster wrote. Her statement can be boiled down into three simple parts
1. Criminals are 100% responsible for their acts and rhetoric can't affect what they choose to do.
2. All this left-wing rhetoric is inciting criminals to threaten me and my family, despite what I just said.
3. Because you see, the real issue in this event is how much of a victim I am.

bgates
01/13/11 16:11

I don't recall the pleas for civility or hand-wringing over allusions to historical slanders against the Jewish people during the "Pontius Pilate was a governor" phase of the campaign a few years ago.

anti-semitic but pro-israel

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201101130016

how many words do you think palin could get through without mentioning "supporting Israel" if you asked her about Judaism? over/under gotta be ~6.

Limbaugh v. Krauthammer apparently:

‘I was going to name my first child Krauthammer, even if it was a girl, but no more.’
January 14, 2011 2:03 P.M.
By Charles Krauthammer
So said Rush today (reports Kathryn Lopez) after our disagreement over the Tucson speech.

Now you know why I returned Rush’s volley on Fox last night: I’ve just saved that poor little girl a world of hurt.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/257281/mlk-american-hero-laureate-jay-nordlinger

imagine if MLK had lived...to regret saying mean things about Barry Goldwater!

lol

it is true that goldwater believed in the freedom to be oppressive, rather than the fascism of the feds forcing them not to

comments there are particularly amazing

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/257410/unions-v-management-jonah-goldberg

jonah g. in "smug asshole" shocker

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/257366/sinner-re-soccer-jay-nordlinger

some excellent comments on that one

u mean like "I do firmly believe that there is a leftist interest in establishing soccer in the U.S. in an attempt to remove yet another thing that sets my country apart from the rest of the world"

communist kickball!

[Limbaugh v. Krauthammer apparently:

‘I was going to name my first child Krauthammer, even if it was a girl, but no more.’
January 14, 2011 2:03 P.M.
By Charles Krauthammer
So said Rush today (reports Kathryn Lopez) after our disagreement over the Tucson speech.

Now you know why I returned Rush’s volley on Fox last night: I’ve just saved that poor little girl a world of hurt

lol @ the idea of Rush spawn

vom @ the idea of Rush spawn

hoo-wee

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/257658/black-abortions-forbidden-topic-peter-kirsanow

yeesh

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/258427/aborting-race-card-kathryn-jean-lopez

K-Lo is still a naive idiot i see

i don't think this is as flattering as Nordlinger assumes (David Pryce-Jones can't even speak Arabic)

I’ve noticed something the last few days — something that gives us a human lesson, I think: Those who know the most about the Middle East are saying the least, when it comes to the turmoil in Egypt. Or they are speaking most cautiously. They’re quickest to say, “I really don’t know. I don’t know the exact nature of this, or how it will turn out.” They seem to be humblest, about what can be known, now.

I’m talking about Bernard Lewis, David Pryce-Jones, Amir Taheri, Fouad Ajami — people like that. These are men who have spent years and years in the Middle East, studying its politics, peoples, and languages, taking in everything possible. Those who know less speak in far more confident tones. They are even cocksure. I’m not sure we should trust anyone who speaks in those tones, just now.

also bernard lewis is a racist dickhole so the less he talks the better off we all are

he was the guy fantasizing about what HE WOULDA done during the va tech shooting, right? because that was also a good human lesson.

that mighta been derbyshire, they all look alike ¯\(°_°)/¯

Maggie Gallagher's National Organization for Marriage site misunderstands cartoon, steals bandwidth, gets trolled.

also bernard lewis is a racist dickhole so the less he talks the better off we all are

I don't think this is true at all fwiw

I mean between him and Edward Said I'm pretty firmly in the middle (Lewis is overly stuffy and Said's a bit of a jackass), but Lewis' ideas/comments tend to get distorted/misused in the political arena

cool