The Smarmy Carny

Money Flies

This alarming news arose a couple days ago and caught my attention. The G8 decided to consider imposing a levy on airline tickets to finance extra aid for African nations. This came shortly after G8 agreed to forgive the debts of poor countries. This seems to happen every few years, and it makes me wonder why countries keep loaning them money. Perhaps it's the thought of "If we gave you the money, we wouldn't get to forgive your debts later and look so overwhelmingly compassionate."

You don't have to go far to find people confused about this move. One of my favorite quotes on the matter is that it's "hard to see why aid for small business in Mozambique should be funded in part by a family travelling from Glasgow to Malaga for a holiday." A spokesman for easyJet said that "There would be no side-benefit for the environment as the tax would not give any incentive on people to alter their behaviour."

Not to fear, though, if you're American. U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow made clear that Washington has opposed this in the past and that our position had not changed. Ron Paul (R – TX) brought forth House Amendment H.AMDT.271:

An amendment numbered 10 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit any of the funds in the Act from being used by the U.N. to develop or publicize any proposal concerning taxation or fees on any United States person to rause [sic] revenue for the U.N. or any of its specialized or affiliated agencies.

Read more about the levy at Reuters AlertNet and also about Paul's amendment at The Sierra Times.

As if there weren't enough reasons to object to this silly idea, you should know that the two primary supporters of this levy are France and Germany. I know . . . I was shocked to find out, too.

Example of a Retard

A couple weeks ago, I wrote an article about Timothy Shortell. For those who don't know, he gained recent popularity after he became the chairman-elect of Brooklyn College's sociology department. Well, perhaps it was the fact that he also said that Christians will "just as soon kill you." When I wrote the article, I noted that Brooklyn College was tiptoeing around the issue.

Surprisingly, Shortell was pressured to drop his bid for the chair. According to the New York Sun, he "sent a bitter e-mail on Monday to several departmental heads saying he had decided to step down as chairman-elect and claiming he was a victim of a political attack."

The New York Sun article continued:

"If he's dropping his bid, it would be the first recent wise move on his part," a member of CUNY's board of trustees, Jeffrey Wiesenfeld, said. "While he's entitled to his voice, the school is certainly better off served by a different chair."

Brooklyn College deserves some positive recognition for this. Despite my assumptions, the administration surprisingly took action and did what should have been done.

If you're interested in reading the piece that some of his most offending quotes came from, check it out. It is titled "Religion & Morality: A Contradiction Explained."

. . . and Padraig, don't bother posting any comments here. Your intentionally inflammatory comments and self-image of intellectual superiority aren't required here.

Example of a Retard

This month, Brooklyn College's sociology department elected Timothy Shortell as its chairman.

Normally, this would be a case of "So What?" This time around, however, the chairman has caused an uproar.

As you read these Shortell quotes, keep in mind that, as chairman, he carries some weight when it comes to each professor's tenure at the college. I won't really comment much about this. I'll just let Shortell speak for himself:

On a personal level, religiosity is merely annoying — like bad taste. This immaturity represents a significant social problem, however, because religious adherents fail to recognize their limitations. So, in the name of their faith, these moral retards are running around pointing fingers and doing real harm to others. One only has to read the newspaper to see the results of their handiwork. They discriminate, exclude and belittle. They make a virtue of closed-mindedness and virulent ignorance. They are an ugly, violent lot.

In the heart of every Christian, though, is a tiny voice preaching self-righteousness, paranoia and hatred. Christians claim that theirs is a faith based on love, but they'll just as soon kill you.

Modern religion is a fundamental belief in magic.

I have been attacked recently in the New York newspapers. We laugh at our critics. We will behold with joy their silly tantrums.

This sort of fodder is expected when dealing with anonymous jerks on the internet, but not generally when dealing with people who are not anonymous and who hold a prestigious position at an educational institution. Furthermore, his pseudo-taunts in the last of the quotes sounds malformed and childish, much like the taunts we hear coming from the extremists in the Middle East. I was surprised that he didn't end that one with "the streets will run with blood." That would lower him to the literary genius of Assam the American.

If you're interested in reading the piece that some of those quotes came from, check it out. It is titled "Religion & Morality: A Contradiction Explained."

As usual, we're seeing typical unbalanced treatment of Shortell's comments. Not surprisingly, Brooklyn College seems to be tiptoeing around this one. I like this quote from The New York Sun:

If a professor had spoken of, say, gay persons or Jews as moral retards, it's a safe bet that things would not be dealt with quite so delicately as they seem to be on Brooklyn College's campus at the moment.

Remember, some children just demand more attention than all the others.

Lars Von Triers called our President names and uttered anti-American sentiments. Is anyone surprised?

Mr Bush is an a**hole. So much in Denmark is American. We are a nation under influence.

America fills about 60 per cent of my brain. So, in fact, I am American.

But I can't go there to vote and I can't change anything, because I am from a small country. So that is why I make films about America.

Oh, come on in, Lars. Go ahead. Since you think about America so much, you're allowed to vote in our elections! That's perfectly fine. Of course, if he moved here, he'd probably move to a state with few electoral votes, and then he'd say that he can't change anything because he is from a small state, and that is why he makes films about America.

The entertaining line from this article is that his comments "shocked crowds" at Cannes. I'm not familiar with contactmusic.com, but clearly this author is not very familiar with the movie industry, politics in Cannes, or Lars Von Trier. I'm sure that roughly 0% of the crowd was shocked. Of course, I always wonder how the American actors and directors present react to these comments. Granted, most of the American movie industry are anti-Bush, America-hating celebrities to begin with — especially those who are present at Cannes — so there probably isn't much response from them.

There are plenty of stories about the politicizing of Star Wars Episode III, and I generally scoff at these. I scoff equally at boycotts of such movies.

I just read an article at NYT (shaddap, it was linked from Drudge!) titled "Latest 'Star Wars' Movie Is Quickly Politicized." It discusses the politicizing of the movie before its release. Of course, it attempts to minimize any boycotts of the movie, but at least this time, they are correct.

Regarding this whole debacle, I agree with Peter Sealey, who likened the political interpretations of the movie to a Rorschach test.

Still, there's something of note. The typical Hollywood crowd takes a left turn again, as Lucas makes some DNC Donkey-headed comments:

And just what was Mr. Lucas – who could not be reached for comment Wednesday – thinking when he told a Cannes audience that he had not realized in plotting the film years ago that fact might so closely track his fiction?

Alluding to Michael Moore's remarks about "Fahrenheit 9/11" at Cannes a year earlier, Mr. Lucas joked, "Maybe the film will waken people to the situation."

Apparently in all seriousness, though, he went on to say that he had first devised the "Star Wars" story during the Vietnam War. "The parallels between what we did in Vietnam and what we're doing in Iraq now are unbelievable," he told an appreciative audience.

Spongebob is F. U. N.

The TV Guide folks haven't been paying very close attention. Hopefully they are just lazy at fact-checking. After all, they are just a bunch of couch potatoes.

You may or may not have read some of the articles claiming that Dr. James Dobson (of Focus on the Family) said that SpongeBob SquarePants was a gay character. Dobson never said anything of the sort, of course. As if the usual media slander wasn't enough, even TV Guide jumped in on the game and attacked Dobson. Not only was he jeered in the Cheers & Jeers section, but the listing stands out, thanks to a large picture of SpongeBob punctuating the entry.

Here's an entry in their Cheers & Jeers section:

Jeers to Focus on the Family's founder Dr. James C. Dobson for putting the squeeze on SpongeBob SquarePants. The conservative activist claims the cartoon character promotes a "pro-homosexual" agenda. We always thought sponges were asexual creatures. Maybe Dobson found out about SpongeBob's torrid fling with Tinky Winky.

I frequently feel like writing in and replying to this sort of obfuscation, but I rarely ever do. Generally, others are more than willing to express their opinions and mail them in. This one just pushed the right buttons, though, and I decided that this time I will be one of those "others" willing to express my opinion. Clearly the author and editor(s) of the Cheers & Jeers section wasn't too interested in fact checking this week. I simply had to send in a comment to their Letters department at letters@tvguide.com. I suggest you do the same.

If you're interested in what Dr. Dobson actually said, read his article at family.org about "Setting the Record Straight." Here is an excerpt:

The video, which millions of children will soon see, features nearly 100 favorite cartoon characters that kids will instantly recognize, including not only SpongeBob, but also Barney the Dinosaur, the Muppets, Dora the Explorer, Bob the Builder, Winnie the Pooh, Clifford the Big Red Dog, Jimmy Neutron and Big Bird. The video itself is innocent enough and does not mention anything overtly sexual. Rather, it features the children's cartoon characters singing and dancing along to the popular disco hit "We Are Family."

But while the video is harmless on its own, I believe the agenda behind it is sinister. My brief comments at the FRC gathering were intended to express concern not about SpongeBob or Big Bird or any of their other cartoon friends, but about the way in which those childhood symbols are apparently being hijacked to promote an agenda that involves teaching homosexual propaganda to children. Nevertheless, the media jumped on the story by claiming that I had accused SpongeBob of being "gay." Some suggested that I had confused the organization that had created the video with a similarly named gay-rights group. In both cases, the press was dead wrong, and I welcome this opportunity to help them get their facts straight.

If you're feeling sadistic, you might then want to read how the media interprets his comments about the video. Typical losers CNN and MSNBC had their say, of course. MSNBC refers to him as "A man named Dr. James Dobson," as if he had never been in the news before, or as if he was some unknown making wild comments. What fun.

SpongeBob isn't gay . . . but that Tinky Winky still freaks me out!

Note: My letter will surely not be published, but I can only imagine that someone's letter on this topic will be printed. I will post it here when that happens. As I mentioned, I suggest you write in as well and voice your opinion at letters@tvguide.com