Tuesday, December 29, 2015

ISIS Tells Its Members to Be Nice When Raping Sex Slaves

I just read a bizarre story about ISIS, or the Islamic State, enacting laws to protect its sex slaves.

These sex slaves have been taken over the course of ISIS’ conquering rampage. They’ve seen their husbands and fathers and brothers murdered. They’ve been torn away from mothers and sisters and friends.

And then, they’re raped. Repeatedly. Sometimes it’s by one man they’re sold to. Sometimes it’s by multiple visitors to the brothels they’re sent to. But regardless, they’re being raped.

Not to be crass, but that’s kinda the definition of a sex slave. Forget all those idiotic fantasies about harem girls and bared bellies and willing seductions. Sex slaves exist to be raped.

So making laws about how they can be raped is just weird. And pointless. And illogical.

Yet that’s precisely what ISIS theologians have done. According to Reuters, the rules include banning fathers and sons from raping the same female slave, and men from raping both a mother and daughter. They have to choose one or the other. Also, anyone who shares a slave “are similarly enjoined from intercourse because she is viewed as ‘part of a joint ownership.’”

I don’t understand that last one at all, just for the record. Nor do I get the command to “show compassion towards [a sex slave], be kind to her, not humiliate her, and not assign her work she is unable to perform” or sell her to someone who will do any of those things.

In order to follow that last set of rules… THEY CAN’T HAVE SEX SLAVES AT ALL!!!!!!!!!

But somehow, someway, according to ISIS, it’s perfectly possible to have a sex slave and treat her with dignity. Sharia Law tells it so. (I’m not being funny here. That’s really its rationale.)

On the same level of stupidity is Professor Abdel Fattah Alawari, dean of Islamic Theology at Al-Azhar University, which Reuters describes as “a 1,000-year-old Egyptian center for Islamic learning.” Professor Alawari says that, from a religious perspective, ISIS is full of it.

According to him, “Islam preaches freedom to slaves, not slavery. Slavery was the status quo when Islam came around. Judaism, Christianity, Greek, Roman, and Persian civilizations all practiced it and took the females of their enemies as sex slaves. So Islam found this abhorrent practice and worked to gradually remove it.”

Since when, genius? Most of Mohammad’s however-many wives were obtained through wars, wars and more wars. And today, women are mutilated and sold like chattel as “wives” by Mohammad’s religious descendants to Mohammad’s religious descendants.

Nor is that the exception in many Islam-centered places. It’s normal!

It’s nothing short of delusional to claim otherwise.

Wednesday, December 16, 2015

Guns and the Background Scene I Saw Shooting House of Cards

They’re filming House of Cards at my office building this week. I haven’t watched the show in a while, since it got too offensive for me in Season 2, but I think I might have to watch the Season 3 finale just to see the first two floors of where I work featured on a Hollywood drama.

Then again, the last few days have been interesting enough on their own. I haven’t gotten so much as a glimpse of Robin Wright or Kevin Spacey, but I have seen dozens of crew members, including security personnel…

Who are armed. To the teeth.

Yesterday, I went for a walk with one of my coworkers, and when we came back, we were temporarily barred from entering the building because House of Cards was shooting a scene. That left Ali and I loitering in the basement foyer with seven big, burly guards.

Each had at least one sidearm on him, and there was an array of assault rifles lying close by like they were protecting the real president of the United States instead of a Hollywood fake.

At one point, the only non-armed individual in the room (other than Ali and I) leaned over to whisper at us, “There are a lot of guns in this room. Are you okay with that?”

My first reaction was to wave his concern away and verbally assure him I was fine, which I did. My second was an amused “Oh, sweetie, I’m good. I’m a Republican,” which I kept to myself.

If only he knew.

Truth is I’ve shot guns before. I’ve even fired a high-powered rifle like the ones laid out on the table. And I hit my target. On the first try. From a decent distance. I hit it the second time too.

Again, I’m a Republican. I have no fear of guns unless they’re in criminal hands (government or otherwise). But Hollywood isn’t Republican. Hollywood is about as far left Democrat as you can get. Hollywood is the epitome of closeminded liberal. And closeminded liberals hate guns.

So what in the world is Hollywood doing with so many of them?

Protecting itself, clearly. And being a giant hypocrite.

Like government, it wants the protection that firearms offer. For itself though. The rest of us don’t deserve Second-Amendment consideration.

We would if we were the president of the United States or played one on TV. But until we get a starring role on House of Cards, we’re apparently supposed to be afraid of guns… and give them over to the big boys.

The people who matter. Like Hollywood.

Monday, December 14, 2015

He Who Lives by the Obnoxious Dies by the Obnoxious

You know the Biblical saying, “He who lives by the sword dies by the sword?” Well, we’re seeing something very similar play out in today’s political scene.

Not that people are going around cutting each other to pieces in a physical sense. Unless they’re Muslim. Or Baltimorean.

It’s more they’re being absolute, inconsiderate, obnoxious jerks, and it’s breeding more of the same.

Now, this country is practically founded on political obnoxiousness, with patriotic mobs tarring and feathering anyone who supported King George III’s taxes. And even right after the Revolution, political parties took turns savaging each other in the papers whenever a vote was up for debate.

Going overboard with our “freedom of expression” is a longstanding American pastime. I can’t even say the quality of what’s being said has become more obnoxious over the last decade. It’s only the frequency that’s changed.

The liberal left has doubled – maybe even tripled – down on its rhetoric the last four presidential terms, disparaging George W. Bush and glorifying Barack Obama to kingdom come.

Bush kept quiet under that onslaught. Obama encouraged it. There have been very few, if any, public addresses where our current president hasn’t thrown in some barely hidden or downright blatant barb against his political opposition.

Since he gets a lot of facetime, that’s an overwhelming amount of obnoxiousness.

When you’re obnoxious so consistently, one of two things is going to happen: The opposition either ends up trying to lick your boots or kick your butt.

Donald Trump and his followers are an example of the latter.

There’s no way someone with Donald Trump’s level of obnoxiousness would be anywhere so popular unless people were retaliating against perceived or real obnoxiousness themselves. Right or wrong (and I think they’re wrong), his supporters feel as if they’ve been lambasted enough to justify being jerks to those who were (perceived or real) jerks to them.

The problem with that mentality is that it’s only going to breed a retaliation round by liberals, just like it backfired on them to begin with.

So conservatives, here’s the moral of the story: No matter how much fun it feels to give them a taste of their own medicine in the moment, it’s no way to usher in lasting change.

Not unless we want to end up dying by the obnoxious sword ourselves… and deserve it.

Wednesday, December 9, 2015

Coca-Cola Gets in Trouble for Its “White Savior” Christmas Ad

Coca-Cola has annoyed me for a while with its delusions of glory. The brand’s commercials are always so sanctimoniously stupid…

Drink a Coke and save the world!

Drink a Coke and spread good will to all!

Drink a Coke and fulfill your every longing in life!

They’re ridiculous on every single level, including from a health standpoint, since soda is anything but the best thing to put into your body.

Well, this holiday season, according to the liberal left, Coca-Cola finally went “too far” with its Kool-Aid-style propaganda. Which cracks me up, since the liberal left is what Coca-Cola is trying to impress with its hippie nonsense.

In what’s being called the “White Savior Ad,” the company pretended to care about Mexico’s indigenous people, of whom 81.6% feel like outsiders because they don’t speak Spanish. In order to supposedly make them feel better, a bunch of Coked-up white college students travel down to some indigenous-people-filled Mexican City to build them a giant monstrosity of a wooden and Coca-Cola-cap Christmas tree with a giant holiday sign in their own language.

This prompted me to ask…

How is putting an indigenous-language sign in an indigenous-people-filled village going to combat racism?

Why do those white college kids look like they’re high? Is this commercial promoting the original Coca-Cola?

How much original Coca-Cola does the company drink at its advertising meetings to think this will make me want to drink its product?

That’s what went through this conservative chick’s brain when she watched it. What went through liberal’s minds was more along the lines of whitewashed rage.

I guess that’s one way to have a white Christmas.

Under an onslaught of negative attention from angry white people who cover up their own racism by accusing others of it (and at least one indigenous Mexican lawyer), Coca-Cola apologized and pulled the ad.

For which I owe the angry, white liberal left a huge “thank you” for one less Coca-Cola commercial I have to watch.

Friday, December 4, 2015

Dear Men, Stop Acting Like Little Girls

Men aren't men these days. They're little girls.

No, I take that back. Little girls are cute. Which means men aren't little girls. They're teenage girls. The kind that complain about everything, since like, omg, their lives are sooooo difficult, but wow, like what do you think of my new top. Isn't it totes Gucci?

Yes, "Gucci" is what the cool kids are saying these days. As opposed to Wal-Mart. You apparently don't want to be Wal-Mart.

Why am I comparing men to that level of pathetic?

Because one of my male coworkers ordered a suit for the company Christmas party, had it delivered to the office, and then asked whether he should go try it on for us to ooh and ahh over him.

I'm. Not. Kidding.

I would have felt like an idiot asking my coworkers if I could model my party dress (which is totes Gucci, btw) for them. He should have too.

But he didn't. Because men aren't men these days.

In their defense, feminist culture has been telling them to act more like women for decades. Not in their defense, they should have stuck to being men, since they make really bad women.

I mean, some female characteristics can be annoying, but feminized men take them to a whole new level of obnoxious.

Guys, I’m sorry. It’s just not attractive when you take Yoga classes, get more offended than us about “women’s rights” and think you have a prayer of looking prettier than we do.

Please go back to wearing pants. You don’t have the legs for skirts anyway.

Thursday, December 3, 2015

Is Terrorism the New Norm?

Terrorism is getting boring.

That’s a horrible thing to say after the terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California, yesterday. But that’s how I feel nonetheless. And I don’t think I’m alone.

If I was personally caught up in a terrorist attack, or if I knew someone wounded or killed in one, obviously, I would feel differently. Yet hearing about it happening to others, even Americans, doesn’t really phase me anymore.

It’s getting commonplace. Just like hearing how Baltimore’s murder rate keeps climbing every week doesn’t make me bat an eye anymore.

People are suffering, dying and devastated… but because I’ve somehow accepted that this is just the way things are, I feel next to nothing.

When I read about yesterday’s mass shooting, my first thought was a question: “Is it terrorism?” But there was no horror in the question. Only weariness, and barely even that.

When I saw the headlines guessing that it was terrorism, my first thought was “Go figure.” I think I might have grimaced.

And when all the articles started coming out that it was, in fact, terrorism – that the two suspects killed were 28-year-old Syed Rizwan Farook, a devout Muslim who recently took a trip to Saudi Arabia, and 27-year-old Tashfeen Malik, his wife of two years – I went back to my previous activities in an appallingly short amount of time.

Maybe two minutes. Maybe.

Whatever happened to the horror we felt during 9/11? Or the national outrage in 2004 when that American journalist – whose name I’ve apparently lost in the long list of terrorism victims – was beheaded on video? I felt sick to my stomach for days after that, and I didn’t even see the footage!

But that was a lifetime ago. These days, we hear about terrorists beheading people all the time, sometimes even in America, like at that Oklahoma food distribution center last year. American Military institutions get shot up by terrorists often enough, and everyone now kind-of expects our marathons to be bombed.

So 14 people dying and 17 more getting injured in a terrorist attack here at home barely feels newsworthy.

It’s a really bad commentary for our national security – and a bad sign for our national mindset –when American citizens can sigh and shrug and then go on about their lives like terrorism is the new norm.

Wednesday, December 2, 2015

My Latest Experience With an Obnoxious Conservative

I do a lot of complaining about how obnoxious liberals are. But the truth is that conservatives can be just as bad, and it isn’t any prettier when we are.

For example, my company published an article yesterday that had all of my liberal coworkers freaking out.

And I can’t really blame them for it.

The piece began by rightfully deriding Warren Buffett for being a big, fat hypocrite on tax policy, since he touts raising taxes but pays very little himself. But then, in the most unintelligible comparison ever, it went into defending Tiger Woods’ cheating habits.

If you’re confused, you’re not alone.

If the author had just left it at a single mention, it might not have been so offensive. Instead, he went on to tell men they couldn’t judge Woods because they’ve never been rich and famous with women throwing themselves at them. As for any female readers, he told them to pipe down too, since he’s never met a woman who could resist a plate of chocolate chip cookies.

I. Kid. You. Not.

I have no problem with generalizing women as liking the tasty treat. It’s more that eating cookies and cheating on one’s spouse is even less comparable than Warren Buffett and Tiger Woods. Meaning that we can chalk this author up to being both obnoxious and stupid.

And for what? I mean, seriously… Why?

Admittedly, some people are naturally unpleasant. Everyone has their personality flaws, and for some, it’s being a jerk. For others, it’s a tendency to gossip, lie or cheat.

But I think, more often than not, people develop obnoxious tendencies as a defense mechanism against other people who have been jerks to them.

For example, liberals feel judged by conservatives and end up lashing out as a means of justifying themselves. This goes on until conservatives sound like the minority and get snippy right back, offending the liberals, who retaliate by offending conservatives, who retaliate by…

It’s a vicious cycle.

It’s also obnoxious, not to mention ultimately worthless. It accomplishes nothing.

So stand up for your beliefs. Tell it how it is, and call out Warren Buffett for being a hypocrite.

Just do it with some dignity. Otherwise, conservative or liberal, you’re only harming yourselves.

Tuesday, December 1, 2015

What My Liberal Friends Don’t Want to Consider About the Syrian Refugee Crisis

A liberal friend of mine and I recently got into a discussion about the Syrian refugee crisis.

Normally, whenever my liberal friends bring up topics I know we’re going to disagree on, I keep my mouth shut. But with the Paris terror attacks still fresh in my mind, I told her what I really thought. That the United States shouldn’t be so quick to accept outsiders when:

·         That’s what got France into trouble in the first place.
·         We have a whole heck of a lot of humongous problems to deal with here at home before we can even think about helping anyone else.

As I spoke, I watched an almost tangible gate slide shut over my liberal friend’s face.

She wasn’t hearing a word I spoke. She didn’t want to hear a word I spoke. In her mind, whether she recognizes it or not, I’m a conservative Christian and therefore my opinions aren’t valid.

Sound harsh? It is. But it’s also true. That same evening, she also told me she firmly believes “Christians are responsible for the majority of the world’s atrocities throughout history.”

Again, this is right after the Paris terror attacks. Which were perpetuated by Muslims. As usual.

She went on to send me an immigration expert’s perspective on the refugee acceptance program, which explained how many more women and children are accepted than grown men, and how long of a process it is from start to finish.

There’s some truth to that. The typical acceptance program policies are pretty exclusive.

But there are loopholes when you have a powerful person on your side. Like President Obama, who has been very vocal about bringing over 10,000 Syrian refugees next year.

As for 2015, CNS News reports, “Since the Paris terror attacks on November 13, the State Department has admitted 132 Syrian refugees into the United States, and all 132 are Sunni Muslims.

“No Christian, Druze, Shi’ite, Alawite, or member of any other religious minority in Syria has been admitted over that period, according to data from the State Department Refugee Processing Center.”

Moreover, 72 – so well over half – of them are male. 39 of them are males 14-50.

Sorry to sound like a bigot (which my liberal friends automatically take me to be), but that’s 39 potential or realized terrorists brought over in less than a month.

Sound harsh? It is. But it’s also true. If you don’t believe me, just ask France.