What do you do with an uppity nigger? and other songs of the Apocalypse

Jump to Comments

i. you could work for me, boy. wouldn’t that be great for you?

The blog title is not only nauseatingly accurate, but was carefully chosen to frighten off the faint of heart.

Because I’m not going to pull my punches in the face of coded racial epithets. I’m speaking of Jeralyn of TalkLeft, (who, with Taylor Marsh — of Taylor Marsh, Legend in Her Own Mind — and Pamela Leavey of The Democratic Daily — the former Kerry for President official unofficial blog — have been Hillary’s Rush Limbaughs in this campaign): Every fact can be distorted to Hillary’s advantage and turned against Obama because Hillary’s got a vagina and MUST (as metaphoric substitute for possessors of vaginas everywhere) be elected Presidentatrix.

for a much creepier picture, click

These Janey-One-Notes have obsessively spun, distorted and exaggerated EVERY story in this campaign cycle, to almost the exclusion of all else: increasingly out of touch with reality, increasingly shrill, increasingly unbelievable.

Now, there’s nothing unusual in this. We tend to pick our horse, and identify with that horse in the race. It works for political candidates and basketball teams, too. And the fans’ — derived, appropriately, from ‘fanatics’ — justifications of the black/white, good/evil, us/them dichotomy inherent in all such identifications only starts to completely unravel at the edges. For instance, the sports announcer still finding good things to say about the performance of his football team while they’re on the wrong end of a 73-0 shellacking.

These fanatics, these sexists-for-Hillary*, are not, of course, representative of all females, just as Rush Limbaugh can’t be seriously considered representative of all drug addicts. In both cases, the vast majority are far less puerile and puling than their self-appointed spokeserpents.

[* NOTE: There is no need to belabor the idea that sexism is sexism and racism is racism. We judge by who people are, not how they look -- else Washington DC, that Hollywood for Ugly People, would be entirely unpopulated. If not, then we are guilty of the sin of mindless stereotyping in place of thought, which leads to bad results, and hell, we KNOW better. But we do it anyway, whether there's a word in front of the 'ism' or not. Ageism, hating people from the next state-ism, etceteraism, etcetera, etc.]

Jeralyn has finally slipped over the line into blatant racism … boy. And, the first portion of my title is an accurate depiction of the astonishing condescension of this White, Barbie® chick at the uppity nigger who’s dared challenge (and beat) the Putative Presidentatrix — and, indeed, wannabe presidentatrices everywhere:

A Better Role for Obama

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:21:00 AM EST
Tags: Barack Obama

I think Barack Obama’s greatest contribution to America would be as Attorney General in a Hillary Clinton administration.

• He be terrific as head of its civil rights division.
• He’d go after crooked lobbyists and big time corporate offenders.
• He’d have the ability not to charge non-violent drug possessors with mandatory minimum offenses, while pushing Congress to change the law.
• He’d be the best advocate for a congressional end to the unfair disparity in crack-powder cocaine sentences.
• He could refrain from prosecuting federal death penalty cases until an independent commission has established that the death penalty is no longer applied in a racially disparate manner — and in any case in which DNA evidence does not conclusively prove guilt.

In accordance with his expressed beliefs,

• He’d direct federal prosecutors not to prosecute medical marijuana dispensaries or users in states that have passed medical marijuana laws.
• He’d charge and prosecute suspected terrorists in federal courts, eliminating the need for unfair military commissions.
• He could stay tough on meth labs, an issue he’s made a priority.

[More...]

Gee: the nigger could protect his people (”civil rights” as code, folks) and could protect fellow crack cocaine users.

Good fucking Christ! Is ANYONE out there paying any attention anymore? And now, as Hillary’s campaign moves into final meltdown, the fundamental racist, sexist undertones of the “Dream of Barbie®” finally come clearly into view:

I reviewed Camille Paglia’s Vamps & Tramps essay collection for The Kansas City Star a few years back and was struck by her observation of Feminist realities, which I’ve called “Barbie® Doll Feminism,” wherein only the middle class, the proper, the elite and chic and well-connected, yes, WELLESLEY women get to run Feminism, and the rest, the leather jacket types, the rough girls, the non-invitees to the Tupperware™ Party are doomed to Feminist preterition: the passed over, the non-elect, the non-Barbie® Dolls, the un-persons.

And remember, Barbie® is not successful because she’s what little BOYS want, but because she’s what little GIRLS want.

about as blond and white as you can get

And so, Hillary’s followers follow the Ultimate Barbie® Doll down the road that it has finally taken Jeralyn: Barack Obama (who is winning, just BTW) can be the house nigger in Barbie®’s Dream House™. (Or would that be “Barbie®’s Dream White House”?)

In case you wonder: the clear implication that Barack Obama (because of the color of his skin) is obviously sympathetic to the plight of crack cocaine users. (Because you know, BLACKS … )

And, because of the color of his skin, he’d be the PERFECT civil rights division head. (You know, BLACK = CIVIL RIGHTS.)

Hey! While we’re at it, he could undoubtedly PROTECT WATERMELONS!

Could Jeralyn’s slip have been more Freudian? Could we more nakedly reveal the Klanswoman hiding behind the Dream House?

Or, in this case, the House of Dreams?

When you call someone a nigger, lady, have the good grace to say it outright, and not in this bullshit “code.” Now, don’t you have to take off your shoes, get pregnant and start making dinner?

(I am not being, of course, condescending or sexist. Nor ironic.)

Yeah. Right. Sure.

ii. i love you mommy dearest

Pamela Leavey, whilst rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, has decided that the best way to celebrate Mother’s Day is to use it for partisan (e.g. sexist) purposes:

A Mother’s Day Wish

by Pamela Leavey
May 9th, 2008 @ 4:41 pm

One of the reasons I have been so ardent in my support for Hillary Clinton, admittedly is because I, like so many women in America have waited so long to put a viable and experienced woman in the White House. The fact is that women are the core of the Democratic party. As a single mother with a daughter in her first year in college, I view this historic campaign as an inspiration to my daughter and the many young women her age, who should all believe that anything is possible in their future, including becoming the president of the United States.

To clarify, this Mother’s Day will be the first Mother’s Day since 1990, that I will not be spending with my daughter, and that needless to say is a little tough. But with the price of gas, and her being away at college 6 -7 hours drive from home, it’s not feasible this year. A few hours ago, I received the email that the Clinton campaign sent out from Chelsea Clinton about her “Mom” and when I clicked on the link and watched the video at the link, needless to say, I was overcome with emotion (yes, I’m a wuss and the sentimental type).

Here’s the text of Chelsea’s email, please click through and watch the video and sign the card and donate:

You see, it’s about HER. It’s about HER daughter. HER gender. HER weepy crap.

And that is precisely the problem with the hard-core Hillary supporters (hereinafter ‘Hillarrhoids’): Female, 50-something, self-centered, fundamentally selfish.

Over 20 years ago, in the fictionalized memoir that I’ve been unable to get publishers to READ due to their prejudicial objections to its SUBJECT, I wrote this (from Looking For Aphrodite — the posthumous memoirs of Wayne Johnson, Pornographer, Chapter 10, “In Which I Am Inadvertently Made King of All Filth”):

… I will digress a moment, and give you something to chew over. We’ll come back to it later. The Women’s Movement killed the Sixties. Mostly, because their first targets were INSIDE “The Movement” — as everybody called it. It was the non-”Establishment,” non-Warmongering, non-Capitalist, non-Straight crowd. Certainly there was much to complain about, with justification: Rock ‘n Roll was one of the last bastions of true Male Chauvinist Pig git-mah-slippers-bitch! Mentalities, but Underground Comix, Newspapers, and the whole “scene” was, then, very much a “guy thing.”

Most of the ‘Sixties Guys hailed Women’s Liberation, thinking that it meant women would be easier to “score” with if women called up for dates. And, if they were on the Pill. And if they weren’t always looking for that “wedding ring.” But then, to their horror, they found that they were no longer–excuse the expression–”Cocks of the Walk,” and they retreated, by the late ‘Seventies, into public platitudes and silent fuming. Problem was, the “Establishment” wasn’t going to listen to the whining of women, so they started with those who WOULD. And it harmed “the Movement” irreparably before they got around to going after “The Establishment.” The Underground Comix disbanded or lost sales in the wake of Women’s Movement criticism of them for “sexism.”

Whatever Unity was held by the Movement disappeared when Women’s Movement spokespersons began altering language, ways of speaking, of calling everyone who didn’t agree with them “Sexists” and “Male Chauvinists,” (from Chauvin, a fanatical follower of Napoleon), which became “Chauvinists”, and it was pretty much Women who set the agenda for the Seventies.

I was going through my history material: clippings, magazines, newspapers, and I think it’s obvious to a blind man. “The Movement” died in the face of the Women’s Movement.

I point this out, because you need to understand that at that time, every male in the country was scared shitless about saying one word that any Women’s Movement Spokesperson could get upset about.

And, irony of ironies, the Women’s Movement and the Fundamentalists (who would later face off over Abortion) were actually allies against pornography, which was being manned, in the instance we celebrate here, by a bunch of ex-hippie, ex-underground newspaper-sters who wondered where the “Movement” had gone.

If you think you’re confused, imagine their quandary.

And this (from Chapter 15, “In Which I See The Birth of Porn Video”):

At the time, porn was very underground, and a girl once actually walked up to me at an art gallery showing in Beverly Hills, and, having found out I was from [Men's Magazine], said: “My girlfriend thinks what you do is disgusting.” This sort of moral courage is heartening, and I point it out as another example of Feminist Fascism which was then stalking the land. If only we could always remember to tell other people what we think of them, and criticize people we don’t even know, what a wonderful planet this would be.

Now, why do you suppose that I bring this up here? Well, consider the case of David Schuster, who was suspended by MSNBC because Hillary’s campaign took exception to the use of the words “pimped out,” in reference to Chelsea Clinton, whose very presence in the campaign has been an all-worship all-the-time exercise in Feminist Pedestaliaty, as in, she may speak publicly, headline events, schmooze college superdelegates, but may NEVER be approached by the greasy press, or be forced to answer questions as a public figure several years into her majority.

Surely the Second Coming of the Virgin Mary would not be handled with such extreme delicacy and reverence.

Hunh?

What I’m saying, in plain English, is that the hard-core Hillary 50-something feminists were selfish viragos in the first place, and have become so again.

And woe betide the “David Schuster” who says something that offends them. The language police are back.

Barbie® über alles

Which is WHY a signifcant number of voters have rejected a return to the PMS Terror of the 1970s “Me Generation” feminist movement, and its vicious Barbie® dolls. (Now self-anointed feminist saints, a la the Leavey essay above).

iii. the fear of all sums

Here’s labial dissident Taylor Marsh today laying pretty heavy on the labial consonant with whatever the harridan equivalent of false macho bravado is:

05.11.2008 4:20 pm

Yo Teddy, Try Winning in November Without Us

BY TAYLOR MARSH

I was on a plane coming back from D.C. when this blew up. Finally, Rahm Emanuel snapped back at Kennedy’s classless remark. It’s about time somebody did.

“I have a lot of respect for Ted Kennedy, but I don’t know how the hell he comes off saying that,” said Mr. Emanuel, who has ties to Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama and has not endorsed in the race. “The gratuitous attack on her is uncalled for and wrong. He is a better senator than that comment reveals.”

Emanuel to Kennedy: That’s Not Nice

Obama and his team better be careful. If he gets the nomination he can’t win the presidency alone.

[...]

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I’ll work hard for Clinton if she’s the nominee. If Obama wins I’ll work hard against John McCain.

However, Obama better reign in his aides. We’re in treacherous times right now, especially since Clinton is going to hand him his hat in West Virginia and Kentucky. If Obama’s supporters continue to insult Clinton they’ll have a real problem on their hands if they don’t already.

Unless, of course, Obama has decided he can win the general election without us. Good luck with that.

Gee. I didn’t know that Ted Kennedy was an “Obama aide.”

What’s probably MOST interesting here (to paraphrase Tonto’s famed query) is just who exactly does Taylor Marsh consider “us” to be?

(Of course, you can spin it in whatever way you want. After all, that’s pretty much ALL that Marsh — who’s used this campaign to puff up her almost non-existent radio presence and phony blog “prominence” into a “How To” for the most wretched members of that Me Generation to emerge from deserved obscurity — has done for the past several months: spin.)

iv. their fearless leader speaks

And here is the chief Barbie® doll herself daintily lighting the cross on Obama’s lawn:

“I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on,” [Hillary Clinton] said in an interview with USA TODAY. As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article “that found how Sen. Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.”

Do I really have to delineate just how vile this really is? Let me reverse polarities and NOT speak in code.

Er. On second thought, that would probably be a BAAAAAAD idea. You do the math.

Perhaps, one day, the Hillarrhoids will see fit to cede humanity to someone who ISN’T a self-righteous Barbie® doll. My advice? Don’t hold your breath.

v. finally

Oh yeah:

Happy Mother’s Day.

Courage.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized