American Media is Dying

Too often we fall under the presumption that the pearl-clutching market has been cornered by conservative blowhards, eager to shriek at the sight of nipples, vulgarity and (gasp) Holiday Parades excluding Baby Jesus. But it's worth remembering that even left-leaning so-called progressives still retain the capacity for fanning themselves and falling over at the sight of a stray "fuck."

In case you aren't up to date on media gossip (I suspect you aren't), former Politico contributor and fuck-slinger, Julia Ioffe, has been relieved of her position for a tweet she sent containing the words "fucking" and "Donald Trump's daughter" in them. You can guess where this is going. The tweet was deleted, but because this is the internet, not really.

@juliaioffe @ErikWemple So @TheAtlantic Do you stand by your new employee tweet? pic.twitter.com/keIvLCyTxs

— nymjr7 (@nymjr7) December 14, 2016

Yikes. But also, as Ioffe later notes, doesn't Trump imply the same thing fairly regularly? Sure, it's not...great. But is it a fireable offense? Politico seems to think so.

Scolding message from Politico's leadership on Julia Ioffe's Trump tweet from today: Contract terminated immediately. pic.twitter.com/Zz8fGfmukr

— ErikWemple (@ErikWemple) December 14, 201 

It's worth pointing out that Ioffe was already ending her tenure with Politico and moving on to The Atlantic, a publication who, like your cool parents, will let you cuss so long as you don't do it in front of your grandmother. This sort of renders Politico's cutting of ties as more of a "you're not breaking up with us; we're breaking up with YOU!" than anything else.

Of course, I'm being glib. I suspect the real reason Politico broke ties with Ioffe has less to do with the word "fuck" (though that plays a part) and more to do with her insinuation that Donald Trump would have sexual relations with his daughter. They say as much when they note that:

Gratuitous opinion has no place, anywhere, at any time - not on you Facebook feed, your Twitter feed or any place else. It has absolutely zero value for our readers and should have zero place in our work.

Okay, sure. That last point I can get on board with. Politico should probably not run a headline that asks, "Is Donald Trump Fucking His Daughter?" because they are not the National Enquirer. But let's not forget that the National Enquirer was once nominated for a Pulitzer. Also, gratuitous opinion is certainly of value to your readers. In an age where everyone and his brother can blog about what happened, the cold hard facts have become less of a commodity and more of a free-flowing river. Everyone can take a dip. It's what people say about the river that matters these days. And true, Ioffe's opinion was worded in a way seemingly unbecoming of someone who calls herself a professional, but "professionalism" more and more these days reeks heavily of being unoffensive for the sake of preserving readership.

The notion that writers and contributors for Politico shouldn't share their "gratuitous" opinions on Donald Trump ANYWHERE is fucking ridiculous. Namely because it's an impossible wink-nudge sort of request that the editors have to know is neither possible nor probable. But also because it undermines the spirit of journalism. As Gawker once reported (in response to Trump's criticism of Politico no less), media is bias. Reporting the news is only half the job. Disseminating and, yes, offering opinion on the news is the other half. And lest you fall under the spell of Politico's strategically worded criticism that Ioffe's opinion are "gratuitous," remember that this is, in and of itself, an opinion.

What qualifies as gratuitous really depends on the beholder, as it were. That Ivanka Trump is getting her own office in the White House (the fact that started all of this) IS worthy of speculation of nepotism. The inclusion that it might also be because she's fucking her dad is, while incendiary, also a point of speculation. Is it true? Probably not. But to dismiss it because it's vulgar is to subvert the entire notion of journalism. And one has to wonder how much of a part the wording of Ioffe's tweet played in Politico's opinion of it. Would she have been fired if she asked "Does Donald Trump have a 'special relationship' with his daughter?" The whole thing is remarkably arbitrary and centers a whole lot around old ideas of public decency and respect, two things the President-elect has quite thoroughly quashed all on his own.

I want to be clear. I'm not advocating for a fuck-frenzy revolution amongst old guard media outlets, speculating wildly left and right about the proximity of Trump's tiny hands to his daughter's nether regions. What I am saying is that the minute we start firing our reporters and writers for offering gratuitous opinions, we lose some of the power that journalism holds. We erode the confidence in the idea people have on the free market of opinion, and we give power to people who once feared being exposed for the monsters they are. Firing Ioffe does nothing but play right into Trump's pleas that the media be nicer to him. Rather than give him what he wants, it's important, now more than ever, to reject that.

Calling a Spade a Nazi

There's been a recent and inexplicable resurgence in media dilly-dallying as writers/news commentators across the land have heralded the age of the new "alt-right" movement. First of all: you're late to the party. When you have a room full of people "sig heil"-ing to Donald "Don't Call Me Responsible" Trump, it's pretty clear that whatever white nationalism is currently boiling to the surface, has been around for some time now, festering in a collective and racist hatred for Barack Obama and his ilk.

But instead of calling it what it is, media outlets have resorted to mumbling "alt-right," in lieu of the more incendiary (but accurate) titles: white nationalists, Nazis, racists, bigots and Hitler fanboys. Granted, there is a movement currently happening to change that, led in part by ThinkProgress who has publicly denounced the use of the term alt-right and will no longer refer to it on their site, except in quotation.

The point here is not to call people names, but simply to describe them as they are. We won’t do racists’ public relations work for them. Nor should other news outlets.

 This is good. Phenomenal, actually. Because they're right, of course. In the article they cite Richard Spencer, leader of the white nationalist think tank, National Policy Institute, as coiner of the term "alt-right," essentially saying that we've all been duped by a guy who still thinks Hitler may have had a point.

It took a video of a bunch of these assholes (accompanied by Tila Tequila??) all throwing up Nazi salutes in a hotel in D.C. for Donald Trump to disavow them, and even then it was a pretty soft disavowal.

Trump gets asked again about the alt-right conference. 'Boy you are really into" this issue, Trump replies. Then disavows again.

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) November 22, 2016

Trump on alt-right supporters: "It's not a group I want to energize. And if they are energized I want to look into it and find out why."

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) November 22, 2016

Ok. But this is also the guy that apparently slept next to a book of Hitler speeches and whose slogan "Make America Great Again" has drawn comparison to his equally follicularly ridiculous counterpart's insistence that his countrymen needed to "Make Germany Great Again." This is the guy who was endorsed by the aforementioned Richard Spencer and assembled Nazi bretheren and David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the KKK and member of, you guessed it, the Nazi Party of America

I hesitate slightly to attribute Trump's rise to power solely to white nationalists, but only slightly. Perhaps I'm being optimistic, but I'd like to believe there are at least fewer than 50 million white nationalists living in the United States. But that's not to say that their existence and being provided a media platform is not still harmful and dangerous. Because they did, in some part, contribute to the slow march that led us here, the terrifying world we live in today where a man with recorded evidence of bragging about sexual assault is our next President.

The problem lies in our response to racism and our weirdly prideful insistence that it is less prevalent than is often noted by the people experiencing it. Most people responsible for the dissemination of news and information are, in fact, middle to upper-middle class white people, for whom racism is a fun buzz word to drop whenever you want to seem #edgy. It's not a real threat and it's something more akin to a tsunami in Japan. Horrible, but not personally threatening. And so it's pawned off by well-meaning (arguable) white folks who, because they are not racist themselves (also arguable), insist that racism must not exist. It's a thing of the past, typically seen depicted in history textbooks as a bygone product of the 1800s.

But it is still here, and our depictions and descriptions of it have softened to a flimsy description that gives racists the benefit of the doubt and allows for a narrative that this is all some sort of harmless nostalgia. Nazis were from Germany and they were defeated in the 1940s! We had a trial and everything! But they miss the fundamental point: Nazism and white nationalism are not stuck in one point in time any more than capitalism, communism or hare krishna is. They are part of an ideology that propagates racism, no matter what age of history it exists in.

Attempting to sideline these people as fanatics and allowing them to define themselves is bad news for a country already heading into a time of unprecedented (or maybe precedented) division and hatred. There's a lot to be said for ignoring and refusing to give them a stage, but it would do us no good to dismiss them and pretend that they don't exist. Especially for those particularly affected by their rhetoric and, eventually, actions.

So, please, when you see someone use the term "alt-right," correct them and make sure they're aware that although Nazis are no longer goose stepping through Berlin, they're certainly not gone, and racism is by no means dead.

Most of You Need to Fuck Off

Well that was a clusterfuck. There's not much that hasn't already been said, and far better than I could ever say it myself. So let's just jump right into it.

First of all, I'm going to go ahead and redact my previous blog post. This election definitely deserves to be discussed further. I originally wrote that post with the expectation (along with many others) that this election would go to Hillary. Quite unfortunately, I was wrong. Silly me.

The election, instead, went to recycled pile of old leather wallets doused with liquified orange peels brought to life by necromantic means, Donald Trump. Excuse me, President-Elect.

But fuck that. The refrain of "not my President" rings true today as Americans (roughly half, but likely more) find themselves staring at their hands in the hopes that they'll become robotic spiders and crawl away, ensuring that this is all some sort of horrible dystopian nightmare. But it's time to dispense with our coping and begin the process of moving forward, I guess. This post isn't really about that yet, though. Because honestly I'm still coping.

I don't know what to say. This blog is typically reserved for measured thought and calm reflection, but I'm beginning to think that I might be full of shit and that maybe we should just say fuck it and yell at the top of our lungs for a few months. Or four years. Which brings me to some of you on Facebook. A lot of you, actually.

There have been several variations of people in the wake of the news of Donald Trump's victory, with many leaning towards awful fuckwits hellbent on lording Trump's victory over the rest of us. To you, I have little to say, as I imagine not much will change you mind. The insults are mainly for my own self-satisfaction.

It's those of you taking a sort of passé apathetic approach to the whole thing that are so irksome. Congratu-fucking-lations on being born into a situation where you can afford a lack of feeling about the whole ordeal. The rest of the country is meanwhile scrambling to figure out how to proceed with their lives from here. If you are still saying that this is just as bad as if Hillary had won, then you're actually a fucking moron. Because you fail to recognize, as is wont to happen among the portion of the population most prone to self-advertised apathy (white dudes), that it's not just about how you fucking feel about things. It's also about how the others (women, PoC, LGBTQ+, Muslims, etc.) live and breathe. Which is decidedly not well, after last night.

And those of you who are still blaming the Democratic Party or Hillary's voice or whatever the fuck dumbass shit you've conjured up to delude yourself out of responsibility: well, also fuck you. We did this, together. Men and boys. White guys who hold social issues at arm's length in order to keep everything as abstract as possible. Living by an ideology is fine, but separating yourself from it is, frankly, cowardly.

I am to blame for this. In some part, at least. And to my fellow Americans (and, let's face it, citizens of the world) who will be far more affected by this than I: Um....sorry doesn't cut it. I owe you far more than an apology. I don't know what I'll do yet, but I'm not going to sit back and pretend like this is happening without my input. All I can do at the moment is urge my fellow fuckwits to try and do the same.

And that's it. No clever sign-off. This really isn't fun nor funny. If you wrote Harambe in, please jump into a gorilla cage and join your chosen candidate's brethren. That's it. G'night.

What Will We Talk About?

So, it's almost all over, thank GOD. Tomorrow we'll found out who gets to sleep with the nuclear codes and we can go back to just being existentially angry. Problem is: what the hell will we talk about? Up until now, we've spent the past >year (Jesus...) filling dead air with inane openers designed to steer conversation towards "So this election, huh?" But when it's all said, done and bitched about, what will we do?

Okay, well first: Let's dispense with the idea that discussion of the election will immediately dissipate post-tomorrow. I give it a good several months more of think pieces and unbearably long essays contemplating the notions of power before we finally settle back into our normal state of mind. What is that again? I can't remember a time before this election, can you? We can be glib and pawn it off as a sort of post-election mindset shift, but that's probably horseshit. As unique as this election was, it certainly didn't awaken a portion of ourselves that wasn't already there. And to say otherwise is to be remarkably narcissistic. Who really cares how you feel about this election? Don't worry, the question is directed right back at me too.

No, we're still the same self-absorbed, morality-hawking, human Bluetooth speakers connected to our subconscious that we were pre-election. We've just had a convenient and relevant vessel to distribute our anger through for the past year. But after? I don't know, I guess we'll complain about Game of Thrones spoilers and the occasional hour-long bump in social justice interest on Twitter. That's fine, I guess. Here are several other things you could talk about, though:

• California's drought 
• The Rock's movie career 
• Millennials 
• Westworld season 2 
• How cool Obama was
• A new Drake record, probably 
• Something Kanye did 
• Ken Bone (it'll be retro by then) 
• Whether you should buy a dog 
• Yourself 
• The North Dakota Access Pipeline (this is the right answer, btw) 
• This blog (this is the wrong answer) 
• Me (???) 
• Where your keys are 

And if none of those tickle your fancy, you could always just talk about nothing. In fact, that might be preferable.

Good luck, America. 

Making a Meme

At this point, it should be obvious that presidential debates fall more on the side of theater than they do actual policy talk. They aren't really interviews, and they certainly aren't conversations. They're an exercise in talking in circles until one person either concedes (highly unlikely) or slips up (unlikely, but fun to watch).

Last night, both candidates literally walked and talked in circles in an awkward town hall-style debate wherein audience members and moderators asked them questions and gave them two minutes (or however long they needed to fit in their campaign slogan) to talk. Included in this bit of theater was an on-camera studio audience that sat mere feet away from the two candidates the whole time, holding back sneezes and really debating on whether that butt itch is worth it. Naturally, the internet latched on to these people. One guy in particular stoked their fire.

Ken Bone is a guy from Missouri who wore a red sweater on national television. He also asked a pretty contentious question about energy. This would turn out to be the least compelling bit about him. The internet à la Twitter would go on to immortalize Ken Bone the only way they know how: by pointlessly and inexplicably collating around him in some strange cult ritual of fame-making.

Tweets lauding Ken Bone as the debate's winner began flooding the Internet and pictures of his affable face nestled in his comfy red sweater became instant Facebook fodder. Why? Why does this ever happen? More importantly: why does this always happen?

Since the dawn of televised anything, people have magnetized to strange things, often exclusive from the intended draw. In sitcoms and television dramas, they're called breakout characters (see: Frasier and Barney Stinson). In the news, they're granted an archetype, indicative of something larger in the universe (see: Joe the Plumber). But what about the middle-ground? Where news and drama meets?

This is the place the internet occupies. A self-professed, but oft-unspoken ironic indifference to the goings-on of the world, save for the strange pockets of humanity that sometimes seep through the television. Ken Bone, for better or worse, hitched a ride on one of these moments and came to life quite dramatically over the course of a single night. He became a breakout star and an archetype for the people simultaneously. He's been featured on almost every single major news site.

What is it? Is it the sweater? The question? The name? (It's most certainly the name) It's a bit of everything, I suspect. That last article I linked is a New York Times article seriously speculating on Ken Bone's indecision. And perhaps this is what the media is trying to turn Ken Bone into: the model of the undecided voter, trapped in between two sordid candidates. Undoubtedly, they will say this. But Ken Bone is far more than that. Ken Bone is the model of American popular culture. Our ability to pluck galvanizing inspiration from normalcy and create a star, if only for a moment.

The internet in particular has become a jumping off point for fame, its own chaotic Hollywood system, producing without regard for camera-friendliness or perpetuity. It has allowed society to create a consensus machine, sending odd bits and ends through the grinder, and resulting in strange unfathomable creations. Such as Ken Bone's newfound media attention.

So what is it? What isn't it? It's America. It's the internet. It's fame, poverty, suffering and confusion. It's the media. It's the people. But, really, it's just Ken Bone.

The Problem With the Free Hugs Guy

God, I feel like the guy who shit in the Christmas stocking. I say "the guy" like there's a designated dude who does this. Did he not visit you? Maybe this year. It certainly wouldn't be out of line for 2016. In that particular theme of shittiness, I'm here to take away something you love. The Free Hugs guy. Or me, if you really aren't convinced, I suppose.

The Free Hugs Project was started by Ken Nwadike. It was a direct response to the tragedy that was the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings. Wearing a black t-shirt that says "Free Hugs" and accompanied by a cameraman, Nwadike goes all over the country giving out free hugs. It's a fairly simple premise that hopefully doesn't require any more explanation than that.

Long story short, this guy grows more and more famous as time goes on, netting all sorts of media attention and countless YouTube views. Everyone, for the most part, loves this guy. He's giving out free hugs! He's promoting peace! What's not to like there? It's a pretty neutral message, when you come right down to it. Not really something that anyone in good conscience can say they disagree with. The notion that everyone deserves love is a hard thing to sneer at, even for the most ardent of cynics.

And yet.

Nwadike, presumably upon hearing of the recent protests in response to the police shooting of a black man in Charlotte, NC, donned the black shirt and headed to North Carolina. He was not received well.

In case you skipped watching the video, because you're a lazy piece of shit with something BETTER to do with your Friday night (you fucking animal), Nwadike hugs a police officer and the crowd of protesters immediately turn on him, calling him a "pussy nigga."

The semantics of that particular phrase aside, the crowd sort of had a point. What the fuck was this guy doing? Granted, the facts surrounding the shooting are still foggy. Mainly because we have a justice system that likes to keep it that way for the sake of anti-transparency and shrouding any and all police activity in mystery. But still. Should we hate these particular cops for the shooting of Keith Lamont Scott? Maybe not.

But also, maybe we shouldn't be hugging cops and espousing their humanity in the face of tragedy carried out....by the cops. It's a fine line between respect and adoration, and Nwadike's embracing of the police officers as part of an attempt to "humanize" them is giving them far more of a benefit of the doubt than has ever been given to the protesters, who have been called any number of racist and dehumanizing things. It's hard to say that we shouldn't respect the idea of peace and humanity in all people, regardless of station. But it's also irresponsible to attempt to elevate people who are already on the top floor looking down.

What Nwadike misses in his uplifting diatribe about the humanity in all of us, is that he's literally preaching to the choir. The entire point of the protests are to establish, in the face of widespread ignorance and hatred, that black men and women are human beings, worthy of the same respect and consideration granted to other, less marginalized people. And one could argue that Nwadike is attempting to educate his own community of black men and women on the inherent decency that should be granted to all of us, regardless of position. One could argue this, perhaps, if Nwadike's primary audience was black men and women. But, by my count (and this is admittedly flawed), people who are absorbing Nwadike's message the most, are white people who don't want to feel guilty about being complicit in systemic racism.

Indeed, much of the problem with Nwadike's video is less about him (although he is problematic) and more about the people sharing it. It allows a certain creeping sleeper-racism in the form of pseudo-acceptance. It really says something that when presented with the tragic death of a black man, white people are sharing a video of a black man hugging the cops. You can almost feel "one of the good ones" on the very tip of each of their tongues. It's that same "All Lives Matter" rhetoric that has so thoroughly already been proven as racist bullshit.

So the Free Hugs Guy, while seemingly nice, is problematic. It's a hard pill to swallow. No one will blame you for having trouble with it. But it's important to note that just because the package comes in a nicely wrapped, beautifully worded peace offering, doesn't mean it isn't still full of shit.

Pat McCrory Stands Amongst Crushed Beer Cans

Complex amalgamation of reanimated human parts, Pat McCrory, took time off his busy bathroom inspection schedule to toss around the ol' pigskin in Boone this past Saturday. Under the guise of being there to watch the football game, McCrory bravely met with his most critical constituents: football fans.

McCrory managed to net a few pictures with nondescript white folks while he was there, prompting anyone nearby to scatter for fear they might be roped in next. Here are a few embarrassing pictures of McCrory with several people he later consumed for energy.

"Help ussssss"

"Please. He's....growing...too...powerful..."

But the picture that really says it all is the above shot of McCrory posing with a football amongst a field of crushed beer cans. The beer cans, in this case, are a metaphor for North Carolina. First of all, though, who decided that THIS was the shot? You have the governor, presumably the most respectable office in the land, and you take a picture of him weakly holding a football in between emptied cans of Miller and PBR?

I guess it isn't particularly surprising that a guy made famous for opening his mouth and releasing a pound of bullshit every time doesn't really take PR into account. After all, McCrory is a man of the people. He wears a yellow polo! He doesn't need your stinkin' advice on relating to the public.

I don't know if McCrory stayed for the game, but if he did, I imagine it involved a big cheesy smile and diving for the microphone whenever it was up for grabs. The reality is that McCrory's primary directive has only ever been to make himself look good, at the expense of having to answer for his own assclown-ery. One need look no further than...last Thursday. McCrory, answering questions at an event, decided that journalists were too mean and instead fielded questions from the much nicer members of his staff.

We'll see how well this goes in his concession speech in November.

Player Protest Pretty Pitiful

When I was a kid, we used to set off little (legal) fireworks in the driveway. They were fun and the anticipation of lighting them and then running away to watch them go off was about 50% of the fun. Every once and a while, though, one wouldn't go off. It would just stand there like a fucking idiot and I'd be left sort of empty, the momentum of the anticipation gone in an instant.

The Seattle Seahawks had big plans for Sunday. Which made sense, considering it was a big day. It was the 15th anniversary of 9/11, the first big home game of the season and a chance to add to the conversation started by Colin Kaepernick. Posting on Twitter, Seahawks wide receiver, Doug Baldwin, started the big rollout with this cryptic tweet:

To express a desire to bring people together, our team will honor the country and flag in a pregame demonstration of unity.

— Doug Baldwin Jr (@DougBaldwinJr) September 8, 2016

Initial rumors started spreading that the Seahawks were planning a team-wide protest for the game. Reports said that the players were going to link arms during the national anthem. Doug Baldwin, now being hailed as the "de facto Seahawks spokesman" sort of confirmed this with a sappy video posted to Twitter the day before the game.

Martin Luther King Jr. once famously said “Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”#BuildABridge pic.twitter.com/n1qP5c2RGM

— Doug Baldwin Jr (@DougBaldwinJr) September 10, 2016

In essence, there was a lot of PR buildup towards....something. We weren't really sure. I didn't go to the game, despite living about five minutes from the stadium, but that doesn't matter because I effectively received the same message. Which was jack shit.

Granted, they did link arms (while standing, that is) and, as Baldwin said on Friday: "We never said it was a protest." Sure. Whatever. That's actually not the point. The point is that you used the momentum, knowing full well what people would perceive it as, for your own gain. As part of some toothless act of "building a bridge." The obvious stank of All Lives Matter bullshit aside, this pledge of unity didn't really say anything at all. Maybe that the Seahawks want to build more bridges? Did they mean literal bridges?

Look, it's fine if you wanted to stand in unity for the victims of 9/11. That is A-okay. And, hell, it is fine if you don't want to sit down or kneel in support of Colin Kaepernick (though it should be noted that Seahawks cornerback Jeremy Lane sat during the anthem before the preseason game against Oakland a couple of weeks back). It's really your prerogative. But, again, using the national atmosphere and teasing a big protest that ends with you rattling off vague statements like "listen to our message" is kind of shitty. Also, what message?

In contrast to the hullabaloo started by Baldwin, several members of the Miami Dolphins (the opposing team during yesterday's game) kneeled in solidarity with Kaepernick and his (actual) message.

Gary!

Libertarian Party presidential nominee and cool-guy dad, Gary Johnson, took time off from smoking pot in the garage with your friends to appear on Morning Joe yesterday. It did not go well.

“And what is Aleppo?” Gary Johnson asks https://t.co/po7gg7UPWi pic.twitter.com/FnMf65IN6o

— POLITICO (@politico) September 8, 2016

Apparently still high, Johnson was stumped by MSNBC panelist Mike Barnicle's question about Aleppo.

“And what is Aleppo?”

The hottest club this side of the Mississippi? Cholesterol medication? A type of fancy cheese?

"You’re kidding."

No, Mike. Stop being a dick and tell us already!

"Aleppo is in Syria. It's the epicenter of the refugee crisis."

Ah. Hm. Well, I can confidently say that many of us probably wouldn't know the answer to that question.

Many of us are also not running for president. :/

Tomi Needs a Time Out

Tomi Lahren, America's angriest child, is mad again. This time about sitting. You see, Tomi stayed up (presumably past her bedtime) to watch the latest 49ers game wherein quarterback, Colin Kaepernick, did not stand for the National Anthem. Because he's a communist? He was wearing red. Hmmmm.

Actually, Kaepernick was making a statement about race relations and the systemic oppression of people of color. Tomi, waving a chubby finger at the screen and teetering on her tiny, still unformed legs, was not amused. She managed to make her way to her Fischer Price telephone and dial the number of several camera people who, apparently, were okay filming a child's temper tantrum. Anything for money, right?

Tomi, in a fit of rage and child-like confusion, babbled for a good three and a half minutes about Kaepernick and his anti-America sentiments. Rumor has it that, instead of playing Mozart, Tomi's mommy played old tapes of Joseph McCarthy while she was pregnant. Adorable!

Tomi's deconstruction starts strong, promising to "eviscerate this mouth diarrhea, sentence by sentence." Same, Tomi. Same.

Dangling candy from behind the camera, producers caught these next few lines on camera:

I support the first amendment. I support your right to freedom of speech and expression. Go for it, bud. It's this country, the country that you have so much disdain for that allows you the right to speak your mind. It protects your right to be a whiny, indulgent, attention-seeking crybaby. It also protects my right to shred you for it.

Shred! Bud! Disdain! Tomi's vocabulary is impressive, considering she emerged from the womb not six months ago. But with precocious verbosity comes great confusion in the undeveloped mind. Evidently, wires crossed and Tomi began her rant by addressing herself. Tomi! It's a camera, not a mirror. They're still working on identifying objects with Tomi.

They have not, however, worked with Tomi on her geography. Or history. Or political science. Or economics. Or sociology. Or psychology. Or manners. And what do we all do when we don't know something? We imitate! Tomi, pulling from the deepest evolutionary well inside of her, imitates her conservative colleagues and whips out the sickest burn since 1776.

If this country disgusts you so much, leave!

And don't let the door hit you on the way out! Hahahahahaha. Oh, Tomi. You always know how to make me laugh. And I know how to make you laugh when I hide my face behind my hands and then show it again. Peekaboo always makes Tomi giggle uncontrollably. But she usually needs a nap afterwards. Anywho, Tomi goes on to sputter out some silly daydreams she's been having where the whole world is banging on the door to the United States to get in. I'm so proud of how creative Tomi is becoming. 

Is our country perfect, Tomi asks. No, she concedes, holding back tears. "But what have you done to make it better?" she asks. "What's your contribution? Sitting there like a fool?" Yeah, you're right little tyke! People who sit and contribute nothing of substance are the worst. You're growing up so fast.

You can't see it, but at this point there's a subtle break in the video where they had to stop filming to change someone's diaper. Apparently someone got a little worked up. I'm being told that someone is working on their self-control.

Getting back into the groove of things with a brand spankin' new set of Huggies to boost her confidence, Tomi stumbles on to another stray thought just banging around in her tiny, soft, delicate head. If Kaepernick hates white people so much, why is he white? Tomi, I think you're misunderstanding something here, but it's okay. You're a literal child so I wouldn't expect complex racial relations to make sense. Go on with your speech.

But Tomi is not finished. Why is Kaepernick getting a paycheck from the white owner of his team? And what about those rich white fans, buying all that merchandise? Why can't Kaepernick see how great it is that white people have money? :(

Tomi really shows her age with this next point, though, asking: "Who's getting away with murder? I'd like to see some evidence to back that up, because that's a pretty strong claim." Whew. Tomi, do we have some news for you. Alright, we were going to wait until you were older, but...

Pictured: someone who got away with murder :/

Oh no. Now she's asking more questions. Tomi wants to know what happened in the past six years to make Kaepernick "resent his country." Yeesh, Tomi. Um, this might take a while. Maybe just start by Googling "Ferguson" and move forward from there. That's the Sparknotes version, at least.

Tomi gets confused right about here and after asking Kaepernick to please tell her why he's oppressed, answers her questions with statistics about black homicide rates, dropout rates, unemployment rates and food stamp percentages. Yeah, it's pretty bad, Tomi! So glad to see you did your homework.

Then she blames Obama. But that's okay. I didn't like Bill Clinton when I was a child either, Tomi. Mainly because the grown-ups near me pointed at a screen and said that he was a bad man. Are the grown ups around you saying bad things, Tomi? Blink once for no and repeatedly for yes.

Okay, I see. She says some other things, but it's drowned out by a sudden bout of vomit. Producers scramble to Tomi's side to clean off her face. This does not sit well with Tomi. She clenches her fists into tiny, tiny little balls and scrunches up her face, adorably, and lets loose her first "no-no" word. She says "damn." Granted, it's nestled inside of the word "responsibility" but I'm sure the irony is lost on her. Hey, she's a baby remember? Give her some credit for even making it this far without falling off the stool and giggling at her own toes.

The video continues on. Yada yada, "reverse racism." (Not a thing, Tomi!)

Tomi ends her session, winded and probably a little confused by all the lights (babies don't have great memories), by telling Kaepernick that he sucks. As if she doesn't remember what the prior three minutes were about. Don't worry though, Tomi. We got it all on tape.

It Was a Wild Ride

He awakens to the sound of harps. They are being played in the far-off distance, but it makes no difference. The sound carries unobstructed and soothes his ears as if they were right next to him. He looks at his hands first, the skin as taut as the day he turned eighteen. He can hardly believe it and, when he reaches for his phone to check his face, he finds nothing. Because he is wearing nothing.

Naked and confused, he observes his surroundings. White billowy clouds rest beneath him, impossibly holding him up and emitting a low hum. It is comforting, he decides. There is a stream that cuts through the middle and fish of all different colors jump and frolic. As he nears them, they do not slow their play and regard him without fear. Curious, he thinks.

He can feel a cool breeze between his thighs, an experience he had long forgotten, and years of embarrassment and shame seem to float away with it. He reaches a raised mount of clouds, no taller than he, but too thick to see over. He pushes his hand forward into the cloud and it parts for him, revealing a gate a few yards in front. It is pearly.

Guarding this gate stands a sentry, dressed immaculately. In his opinion, overly so. The sentry is neither male nor female, but visibly human. It extends a hand to him and lowers its eyes to meet his. It is tall, much taller than a human should be. He stares for some time before shrugging and accepting the sentry's hand. The hand is warm to the touch. He is not surprised.

The gates open and a burst of light emits from within, threatening to blind him. He tries to turn away but the sentry tugs at his arm and he understands that he must keep staring ahead. His vision goes white and it is as if his eyes melt away to reveal an entirely new pair. He can feel their freshness and they experience their first tears.

He sees for the first time. He sees everything he has ever wanted. And he lives happily ever after.

-For Gene 1933-2016

Conservatives Still Hate Appalachian State

I know, I know. I don't even go here. But that doesn't mean that stupidity has halted its evil crusade. This week in the Idiotic Global Tour 2016-Indefinitely, people got mad about paper. Namely, paper that insulted their fragile egos. Indeed, the privilege board, made popular by last year's brush with fame and fire, is back on campus and this time, it's front and center.

Ostensibly. I'm not actually there, so I can't really say for sure. But neither can the writers doing all the complaining. Campus Reform, a website dedicated to eradicating liberal intellectualism and (probably) nude art modeling, has taken the summer to replenish their tear ducts and come back to Appalachian once again to cry about the horrible shame foisted upon Appalachian's privileged many. 

"Appalachian State University students must walk past a 'privilege board' denouncing their white, male, able-bodied, Christian, or cisgender privilege any time they enter the Student Union. 

The bulletin board is located in Plemmons Student Union (PSU), which the school calls 'the centerpiece of the Appalachian campus,' and was apparently put up by a student group last semester, but has been allowed to remain in place to date."

It's all in the rhetoric here. Students "must walk" past the board translates roughly to: LO AND BEHOLD, SHEEPLE, FOR THE CRYOGENICALLY FROZEN BOLSHEVIKS WE ALL FEARED HAVE COME ALIVE AND THEY SEEK RETRIBUTION. KNEEL BEFORE YOUR SOCIALLY AWARE GODS AND LOOK UPON YOUR FATE!

"The PSU Mission Statement currently states that it is 'run by and for students,' and 'exists to create a safe and inclusive environment in which the Appalachian community strives to enhance students' academic achievement and social experience.'

The facility also maintains a web page outlining its advertising policies, which includes specific sections for banners, bulletin boards, marquees, and display cases. Registered student organizations are allowed to post banners and marquees advertising upcoming events for up to one week prior to the event, and may reserve display cases 'for event promotions' for up to two weeks. 

Similarly, the policy on bulletin boards states that 'advertisements must be for public events or membership recruitment functions held on campus, but cannot advertise weekly meetings,' and stipulates that 'flyers must be no larger than 11”x17"'"

I would honestly kill for the sort of coverage that the PSU bulletin board policy page is getting. Investigative journalism like this only comes around every decade or so. Speaking of journalism, the decidedly anti-journalism boys over at Breitbart News couldn't pass up the opportunity to get in on the action.

"A prominently displayed bulletin board at Appalachian State University has been taken over by campus collectivists in an effort to encourage certain students to 'check their privilege' during their daily walk to class.

The board is displayed in the Plemmons Student Union building, which ASU calls 'the centerpiece of the Appalachian campus.' The board contains various different posters that condemn white, male, cisgender, heterosexual, Christian, and able-bodied persons who are unaware of their inherent societal privilege."

Sound familiar? That's because it's pretty much THE SAME OPENING PARAGRAPH as the Campus Reform article! And that isn't even the most damning thing about it. The Breitbart writer takes on a far more pointed argument against the board, opining on the nuance of privilege and how, in the end, we're all minorities or something nearly as stupid as that. Aside from the use of the word "subgroups," other notable head-scratchers include:

"What the political right and left fail to realize, is that it is horribly unjust to rob individuals of their natural right to live freely, unmarred by judgments based on subgroups with whom they may or may not consciously have chosen to associate."

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

That's fairly rich all things considered. Stephen K. Bannon, chairman of Breitbart News, was recently (four days ago) hired by none other than Donaldus J-us. Drumpfus to be his new campaign chief, a move heralded by David Duke, former Klan leader and current racist. Duke praised the move as part of the takeover of the Republican Party by he and his ilk. That vitriolic racists didn't already have control of the GOP is the real story here, I guess.

I digress. Pointing out wildly inconsistent ideologies held by a group of people grasping at electable morality is futile. The umbrage isn't that young white males may find themselves wetting their pants at the sight of their own privilege. Nor is it about violating the student union's bulletin board policy. It's about a bunch of thin-skinned whiners who are finding it harder and harder to be offensive dicks.

This privilege board has been a bee in conservative writers' bidets for some time now, and it is precisely what fear-mongers like Andrew Breitbart and Alex Jones (of Infowars) have been frothing at the mouth about for years. It is the supposed indoctrination of America's youth. But America's youth are the ones who put the board up in the first place, and much like me, they think your Campus Reform/Breitbart article is full of shit.

RIP Gawker

Gawker, for those of you that don't know, is ceasing operations after 14 years of operation. Gawker, for those of you that REALLY don't know, is a NYC-based media-gossip site and an unwitting party to the creation of this blog. The purview of this space has always been to analyze pop culture, media and politics with a side of snark, a model perfected by Gawker Media. So you'll have to forgive me beforehand, but it's hard to talk about Gawker's end without talking about my beginning.

I started really writing this blog around the same time that I discovered Gawker. It provided me with an example of writing that I had, at that time, not seen anywhere else. It was funny and sardonic, but it was also smart and well-researched. The writers injected attitude into otherwise dry proceedings. I had no idea writers were allowed to do this. It could actually be fun to write about the news.

This blog, for better or worse, was started with Gawker's philosophy in mind: is it true and is it interesting? I err on the side of truth, but I've always attempted to make it fun. To make it palatable for an audience that doesn't want to slog through the painfully dry and the suspiciously inaccessible.

Perhaps it's uncouth to say so, but I learned a lot about what I know about the media and politics via Gawker. I learned about social justice and privilege. Gawker Media, often via their site, Jezebel, was incredibly vigilant when it came to pointing out "lapses in judgement" (read: ignorant shit) by everyone from corporations to politicians to universities (including mine). I wouldn't be half as aware, woke or otherwise in-the-know about what's going on socially if it hadn't been for Gawker.

Gawker wasn't just knuckle-rapping, though. Writers routinely kept up with consistent problems (worker's rights and sexual assault allegations among them), and held those responsible accountable. Was it gossip? Yes. Was it also journalism? Of course.

What Gawker did well, it did incredibly well. Gossip, an oft-pejorative term for frivolous crap, was what they thrived on. Sometimes it was frivolous, but more often than not, it was entrenched in something deeper. They went after stories that old media would never touch, and confronted powerful people on things that many publications were too afraid to ask. Notorious for raising two hundred thousand dollars to get their hands on a video taken of then-Toronto mayor, Rob Ford, smoking crack, Gawker brought the late mayor's sordid dealings into the light.

Of course, when a website's main goal is to scrutinize those with the strongest desire not to be scrutinized, trouble is inevitable. Such is the doomed case of Gawker Media. After outing Facebook angel investor and co-founder of PayPal, Peter Thiel in 2007, Gawker was put in Thiel's sights. But this didn't come into the light until, mid-trial over Gawker's publishing of Hulk Hogan's sex tape, Thiel reveled himself as the financier of the case against Gawker and announced his years-long vendetta to take the website down. He has since succeeded, with Hogan winning the case and Gawker Media filing for bankruptcy.

Which brings us to today. Several of the higher-traffic Gawker Media sites (Jezebel, Deadspin, etc.) have been purchased by Univision, but Gawker.com, the flagship site, has been relegated to its grave. The site will cease operations by the end of the week and so too shall its revolution. Many in the media far better versed in Gawker's rise and fall will have surely written any number of thinkpieces and essays, and I urge you (should you have any interest) to read them. But as for me, I just have fond memories and a will to write. The latter of which might never have existed had it not been for Gawker.com. I still believe in the principles of "is it true and is it interesting" and standing up to outdated ideals. Gawker may soon be a thing of the past, but hopefully we can preserve some of what it introduced to the world.

Rest in peace, you snarky sons of bitches.

Angry Blogger Confused By Silence

Professional celebrity blogger and Microsoft Paint amateur, Perez Hilton, simply cannot abide silence. This is evident by the fact that he has a podcast, which is essentially blogging with your mouth. Hilton, in the wake of the tragedy in Orlando, has called out several famous people for not giving their internet condolences to the victims. This, he says, is bullshit.

Via an email sent to Broadly, Hilton further cements his anger about several ultra-famous people not taking to their keyboards:

"[Pop stars] may claim they don't have to comment on social events. Or every social event. Or they may think it's too political to touch. And to all that I say: Bullshit! This is a human and a global issue. They don't have to mention guns or laws. But I believe that every single person that uses social media on the regular—famous or not—has a responsibility to this world to speak on this atrocity! We must all speak on it!"

Excuse me. I misspoke. Hilton is mad at everyone who has not updated their Facebook status. A tragedy on top of a tragedy. In a fit of journalism, Broadly decided to take this confusion and run with it, dedicating an entire article to documenting pop stars who have failed to react to Orlando and how they've reacted to other tragedies in the past. I can smell the Pulitzer.

So, what I've learned is that you don't really care about a tragedy unless you talk about. And really only if you talk about it via social media. You see, in 2016, our moral compass is entirely guided by celebrities and their opinions via Twitter and Facebook. If a gunman walks into a club and shoots dozens of innocent people, and Taylor Swift isn't around to Instagram about it, did it really happen? How will we know how to feel?

Hilton asserts that pop stars are inherently imbued with the duty to comment on tragedies. Why? He doesn't really say. Just that we should all follow their lead and comment on things. Hilton says little of whether or not you should actually DO anything, or help in any way. Just that you should talk about it. But not really talk about it so much as make a self-congratulatory status that elevates you above your peers because you're "aware" of current events. It's what the cool kids are doing. (Or what they should be doing! *shakes fist at cool kids*)

Whenever you think that perhaps adding another navel-gazing unindented paragraph to the mix of other similar Facebook posts might not be a good nor useful idea, you should fucking check yourself and listen to Perez Hilton. The man himself. The public servant of trite observations about people who make a lot of money. You should comment on it.

Make a fucking difference.

Plz Vote For Hillary

Hi, how are you? Long time since we talked, I know. Why don't you have a seat? So look.....how do I put this? You know Hillary Clinton? Former Secretary of State? Yes.....yeah, the Benghazi one. Ok but sh-......yes, the email one.

LOOK.

I understand she isn't, well, ideal. In fact, she's fairly far from ideal. I know we were all like "Bernieeeeeeee!" Shit, I still am. Bernie Sanders was a great display of grassroots support and an indication that, at least to some extent, American politics can be put back into the hands of American people. Additionally, the same was shown to be true for the other side. Donald Trump's ascension to the "presumptive" Republican nominee for President is, whether you like it or not, an incredible showing of the will of, well, SOME of the American people.

Unfortunately, conservatives have always been better at rallying around mindless rhetoric and made-up problems than liberals have (though we sure do try our best!) so Trump did a bit better than his liberal counterpart. This is truly unfortunate. But, I'm afraid this is the world we live in.

So, uh, I know you're really not going to like this, but: Please vote for Hillary. I get it. We spent all this time coming up with all sorts of fun (and, in retrospect, a little sexist) nicknames for her to get across our point that we do not want to see her in the White House. But, guys, she's our best bet at this point. The "lesser of two evils" approach is a sorry way to decide the future of a country, but times is hard.

You don't have to get all hyped up about it. You don't even have to post anything on the Internet. So, you know, at least one really good thing will come of this.

I could sit here all day and tell you why Bernie isn't going to win the nomination. Some of it does have to do with corruption. Although corruption is a strong word. I'd go with "unfair collusion" more than anything. Does the DNC favor Hillary? Yep. Can we do anything about that? Not really. It's sort of the Democratic party's prerogative to choose the candidate they want to throw support behind.

Could Bernie still win? I mean, shit, I guess so. Fuckin' Ralph Nader could theoretically win, but I doubt he will. The fact of the matter is, Bernie Sanders appeals to you and me because we are firmly in his base. White, middle class and college educated. (I assume this is my audience?) Bernie appealed to us months ago and has continued to do so since. We've mistaken our own momentum for a rolling snowball of support. It was probably more like a wooden wheel. For clarification, wood does not collect other wood while rolling down hills. At least not to my knowledge.

POINT BEING: Bernie appealed to a large group of people, but not large enough to win him the nomination. He was never able to secure the black vote, which is why D.C. is going to be a bust. He could hijack the convention, but it's unlikely. But hell, if he does secure the votes at the convention by some miracle, by all means throw support behind him. I would expect nothing less than the rallying of the entire Democratic party behind their nominee.

No matter who it is. This includes Hillary Clinton. Please, for the love of God, vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination. Because there is, realistically, only one other option. And he's really fucking dangerous.

It's really easy for us, as white, middle class, college educated "idealists" to give symbolic votes to Bernie for the sake of progress, the future and other shit we can afford to bask in. Unfortunately for the millions of undocumented workers/people/terrified shitless human beings in America, a symbolic vote for Bernie will do little for their current crisis of "Holy shit, is this loud orange American really going to throw us out?"

So, again, VOTE FOR HILLARY. Just do it quietly. You don't have to tell anyone. I'll keep your secret. You can still keep all the Bernie stickers and shit, I imagine. Like, I don't think he's going to ask for it back.

Barack Obama just endorsed Hillary Clinton. Remember Barack? Cool guy. I really like him. So do millions of young and black voters. She's pretty much secured this shit. It is what it is. Bernie has opened some exciting doors and some great dialogue, but now it's time to stop something very bad from happening. Don't stop supporting Bernie, but stop not supporting Hillary.

Plz?

Supporters of NC Bill Remain Stupid, Unjustified

I don't typically like to dwell on topics, particularly if I've dedicated blog space to them in the past week. But sometimes things are just too important to pass up. Or, in this case, too stupid. Maybe a little bit of both. I don't know. If you seriously aren't up to date on the current situation, here's a recap, I guess:

North Carolina. Bill. Anti-anti-discriminatory. Bad! McCrory. BAD! LGBTQ. Angry. Rightfully so. Other states. NC = Stupid. People = Stupid. Rightfully so.

Somehow, over the course of human history, the gene that produces unbelievably stupid thoughts has managed to survive, thereby maintaining the primordial ooze coating the bottom of humanity's barrel. Unfortunately, it has been given voice over time as well, allowing it to spout trite and moronic statements about people, cultures and ways of life it knows nothing about. Even more unfortunate, with the advent of Facebook and Twitter, that voice has been given an amplified sound room inside which it may vociferate endlessly.

In light of just about every single level-headed human in the country asking North Carolina what the fuck happened, those in support of the bill have responded with characteristic poise and, let's face it, indifference.

It’s a whole lot of hullabaloo from the LGBT community and the Human Rights Campaign about something they either haven’t read or have chosen to blow up into an election-year issue. All’s the bill did was protect women and children in bathrooms.

That would be your Lieutenant Governor, Dan Forest (Lt. Dan), speaking to The Hollywood Reporter. Forest, who is arguably the craziest of the bunch, is keen on reminding people that "the South is a great place to live" and that it just gets "a bad rap" from people (like Rob Reiner, evidently) that don't understand it. Forest also goes on to shrug off complaints from the Human Rights Campaign ("I guess the HRC is trying to tell people we were putting one over on them, but that wasn’t the case at all."), Hollywood ("If Hollywood doesn’t like that, I’m sorry. But the reality is, Hollywood hasn’t read the bill."), the NBA ("I guarantee you the NBA doesn’t know anything about this. They never do.") and LGBTQ activists ("I put them with the HRC and other folks who are clamoring for equality, knowing that it’s not really what they want. They’re looking for their demands to be met and they don’t care about the others in the state who don’t agree with them.").

To Forest, everyone is clamoring over nothing. Why can't they understand that we're helping, Forest wonders. Indeed, this narrative pervades throughout his Conservative base, with many people taking to Facebook to air their grievances with an unsurprising lack of thought and consideration.

The central, and perhaps most problematic, point that keeps circling back around is that the bill is the only thing standing in the way of a free-for-all sexual assault-fest in bathrooms across the state. People who probably didn't give two and a half shits about the prospect of women and children being assaulted before are now gathering around the moronic notion that opening up bathrooms to people of all identities will release the floodgates of rape. Evidently, rapists and sexual predators have been waiting on the edge of their seats for legal allowance to carry out their crimes. Because, if there's anything we know about sexual predators, it's their capacity for restraint.

Somehow, in the wake of one of the most sweeping discriminatory acts against the LGBTQ people in history, the Republicans of North Carolina have managed to spin this as gay activists trying to strong-arm the government and get their way. As long as they can continue churning out rhetoric like "religious freedom" in opposition, they will frame one of the most marginalized groups in the state as power-hungry thugs, intent on dismantling society as we know it.

And people are listening to this rhetoric. And buying into it. Which is sad, really. Because it means that it's convincing enough for free-thinking individuals to go along with. I joke that stupidity is what's grinding these ideals forth, but that isn't fair. It's ignorance; ignorance guided by malicious manipulation. On the bright side, ignorance can be cured. It's a long, bloody and irritating process, but it is possible. I challenge you to do that. Wherever you see it, I imbue you with the power to cure ignorance with facts and logic. Don't worry, you are in surplus here.

People will urge you to be respectful and nice to others who challenge your ideals. Fuck that. Shout about it. Make a scene. Take your pants off and spin them over your head whilst reciting your opposition to discriminatory practices. You don't owe bigotry a conceded floor because it already owns the floor. You aren't pleading a leveled defense to an open-minded court. You're trying to get through to some asshole with his fingers in his ears. So be a little ornery and don't hold back. We want them to hear you.

North Carolina Overturns Anti-Discrimination Ordinance, Etc.

Sometimes, news fills you with joy. It inspires you, drawing upon that font of pure positivity that too often lies dormant in your heart, swelling to incredible sizes and bringing back that twinkle in your eye.

And sometimes, news makes you want to gouge your eyes out with rusty nails. I'm afraid this is a case of the latter.

On Wednesday, henceforth known to us as Inexplicable Bigotry Day, North Carolina lawmakers came together to ensure that anti-discrimination laws would no longer plague the state. And in record time! Indeed, over the course of (LESS THAN) nine hours, a law making body wrote and signed a bill into law, something which only occurs if the building is infested with blood-sucking snakes or a group of scheming ne'er-do-wells wants to score cheap political points with their Conservative base. This instance demonstrates a little bit of both.

The bill, signed into law by B-movie extra and combover advocate, Governor Pat McCrory, in addition to overturning Charlotte's anti-discrimination ordinance, "prevents any local governments from passing their own non-discrimination ordinances, mandates that students in the state’s schools use bathrooms corresponding to the gender on their birth certificate, and prevents cities from enacting minimum wages higher than the state’s."

Not only can businesses return to turning away customers based on gender identity or sexual orientation, but McCrory has now successfully barred any legislative bodies from fighting back against him, rendering them impotent. As a representative of a party that so often screeches about the overuse and oppressive nature of big government, McCrory seems out of step with this oppressive piece of legislation. How can someone who ostensibly creams his pants at the sight of "Don't tread on me" be so willfully authoritarian? Well, by appealing to fear of course!

Indeed, like any good fear monger, McCrory has gleefully played on the anxieties of parents of schoolchildren by ensuring that this new bill would combat the numerous sexual assaults and privacy concerns he has conjured out of thin air.

"I have signed legislation passed by a bipartisan majority to stop this breach of basic privacy and etiquette which was to go into effect April 1."

The implication being that opening up bathrooms to people who identify as the vague little human drawn on front, biology be damned, will result in mass chaos and the destabilization of society as we know it. Now where has that bullshit logic been used before...

McCrory is a jackass, plain and simple. But the Republicans and Democrats in the General Assembly and in the Senate that allowed and voted for this to happen are even worse. Because people expect a governor of a certain stripe to show his true colors and flaunt them proudly. But someone given the task of legislating and deliberating over said legislation have the duty, nay the moral obligation, to assure that the rights of ALL people within the state they preside over are protected.

Buying into the absurd narrative that gay activists are coming to demand entitlement from small businesses and force their views down people's throats has led to an overwhelmingly stupid conclusion. But stupidity, at least is forgivable. This has done real damage. This will affect the lives of LGBTQ peoples who, even when given the right to marry, still struggle every day to be accepted by society. It will affect the integrity of a system that, while corrupt on a statewide level, at least had pockets of progressive sanity to keep it afloat. And, honestly, worst of all, it will affect children who, looking to live the normal lives their peers enjoy, will be barred from that normality and forced to languish in a place of confusion and fear. Where they will be forced to listen to grown men and women tell them that what they are is abnormal and unworthy of protection under the law. Where they will continue, as has been the case for many before them, to look in the mirror and wonder, "Why won't society accept me for who I am?"

You can read the bill here.

Roy Cooper Best Option For Less Embarrassing NC

Although yesterday's news cycle was mostly dominated by news casters bloviating on Clinton, an arguably more important event was taking place closer to home. Roy Cooper, North Carolina's Attorney General and Ralph Lauren catalog model, clinched (as they say) the Democratic nomination for governor.

Well known for his role in the Duke lacrosse case of 2007 and generally not being an insufferably conservative blowhard, Cooper is NC's best shot at removing Pat McCrory from office. McCrory, who likes to play footsies with Duke Energy and who Queen of the Damned, Ann Coulter once proposed as an ideal VP for a Trump presidency, has also won his party's nomination, unsurprisingly.

Now, it's a vicious cage match between the two veteran politicians. A spokesman for the Republican Governor's Association has already taken a shot at Cooper, calling him “an out-of-touch career politician … with a consistent record of supporting bigger government, higher taxes, more regulation, expanding Obamacare and other liberal job killing policies.”

Needless to say, the GOP is ready for a fight. Luckily, Cooper is too. During his victory speech last night, he pledged to put North Carolina on "the right path" and urged votes to "come together and get ready for the battle ahead in November." Additionally, he took the chance to tie McCrory to America's least effective toupee model, Trump (née Drumpf). Unreliable sources report that, upon hearing this, McCrory replied, "Who, me?" while fanning himself and sighing forlornly out the window.

Beating an incumbent is hard, as history shows, but Cooper has demonstrated a real fighting chance, raising $5.7 million to McCrory's $4.3 million. Setting aside the fact that Cooper is a relatively moderate democrat (except in the eyes of foaming-at-the-mouth conservatives who think that any time the government farts, it's exercising its control over small business), he is the ideal candidate in this race, PURELY because he is not McCrory. Not typically one for opting for an "anything but ___" mindset, I can confidently say I would rather have anything but a Republican governor in office right now. Especially if that Republican governor has a history of questionable dealings and firmly rooted ties to corrupt organizations.

We have a real chance to shake off the irritatingly red monkey currently digging its claws in our back right now and elect someone who will, at the very least, put North Carolina back into the same sentence as "progressive." Also, he seems nice.

Vote Roy Cooper: Better to Look At; Better to Lead

Margaret Spellings Found to Be Overwhelmingly the Worst

Noted homophobe and former Bush crony, Margaret Spellings, will be ascending to the position of UNC School System President this coming Tuesday, putting the final nail in the coffin that now holds the brittle bones of North Carolina's progressive movement. Spellings, who is the worst, is slated to accept changes made by the Republican-run UNC Board of Governors with gusto and regularity, because the checks-and-balances system of government is dead. 

Momentarily dismounting her broom and stifling a cackle, Spelling had this to say (as reported by The Daily Tar Heel) about the role of politics in her position:

"These are all political settings ... and that's the fun of it."

Because the budding futures of our young minds should always be a fun political game. Other games enjoyed by Spellings have been the implementation of Dubya's infamous No Child Left Behind Bill and being paid exorbitant amounts of money to sit on the Apollo Group Board of Directors, the company behind the University of Phoenix.

The failure (and inherent systemic racism employed by) the No Child Left Behind Bill and corruption of for-profit universities aside, Spellings's appointment is a not-very subtle political move by the growing right-wing presence of North Carolina. The remarkably red Board of Governors is, unsurprisingly, elected by the unremarkably red General Assembly of North Carolina (headed by everyone's favorite Lieutenant Governor, Lt. Dan). Pardon me whilst I untangle myself from my string-heavy wall of conspiracies.

It doesn't take a tin foil hat wearing, jet fuel to steel beam ratio measuring, birth certificate enthusiast to smell the bullshit underneath Spellings's nomination. If Pat McCrory's election as governor has taught us anything, it's that conservative lobbyists are very good at keeping a foothold in the South. While North Carolina's urban areas (namely the Triangle) are widely known for being weird liberal pockets, there is a wide swath of the state that still leans heavily red. This isn't because rural people are inherently stupid; rather, it's that they're inherently gullible.

With "fear for our country" currently in vogue, conservative groups and media have been waving the false flag of revolution in a sly attempt to "take back the government" from the morally corrupt. It's sort of like a serial arsonist making a citizen's arrest of a fire marshall. Lobbyists and their talking heads trump up the notion that the country is in danger of vague demons (freedom-hatin' gun-thieves) and convinces people that voting in the flag-bearing, Bible-thumping freedom fighters will turn the country around and improve their stations in life.

This is, presumably, the political fun espoused by Spellings and it's no wonder why she finds the idea so appealing. As UNC System President, she will have a major deciding factor on how the state's massive college and university system shall be run. Being that colleges and universities are one of the last bastions of collective liberalism within North Carolina, this is a terrifying prospect.

Admittedly, much of this is speculation, but with people like Pat McCrory and the Art Pope-run John William Pope Center shilling for you, it's hard not to see the clear and intended trajectory for Margaret as she slithers her way through our educational system.

What should you do about it? I guess just stop going to college and form communes deep in the woods until we emerge decades later to find Trump's preserved head and a committee made up of lifeless piles of money stuffed into suits running our country.

Bernie's Reparations Problem

White people love Bernie. Other people love Bernie too, but white people (namely, liberalbros) LOVE him. I should know, because I am a white dude that loves Bernie. I think he's cool. He likes the same people I do. He appeals to my proclivities. He was a candidate made in my vision of heaven. Great! What a catch!

Sometimes, white people take their love of something, and impose it on everyone else. They've done this, oh, for about as long as they've loved things. We get really excited! We want to share our love of shit with all of you other people. And when the shit we love is seemingly beneficial to marginalized groups and individuals, we REALLY love it because then we can sleep soundly at night knowing that we contributed something good to the world. Bernie Sanders is the collective attempt by white people to wash our hands clean of all the horrible shit we've done. Because saying sorry to each and every one of you is, like, really hard. Why not build an effigy made incarnate by an elderly Jewish politician with the intention of apologizing on a federal level? He wants to end banking....or something, right?

The bush has been beaten around. Bernie Sanders is flawed. If you gasped, scowled or in any way just pooped yourself a little bit, you need to revert back to early teachings and understand that human beings are flawed. No one is perfect. I really hope this doesn't need further explanation.

Being flawed does not preclude being great. Hell, if anything, it is further proof that this person is not, in fact, a Terminator robot, but a human with human feelings and a hunger for human food. We like humans! We like Bernie! But that doesn't mean we have to regard everything he says, does or sneezes as divine creed and unquestionable. If anything, Bernie is the one we should be directing our toughest questions at.

Ta-Nehisi Coates likes Bernie. Probably doesn't love him, though this is up for debate. Coates thinks Bernie could use some work. Coates is a very smart guy. Smarter than me and probably smarter than you. He wrote an article for The Atlantic about Bernie and his problematic views on reparations. It's a short one, so go ahead and give it a look-see before continuing on. Seriously, go read that.

You're back! Yay! Look at you, reading of your own volition. Looks like 2016 is gonna be a great year for you.

Coates makes the point that Bernie's "radicalism has failed in the ancient fight against white supremacy." He also mentions Bernie's various shows of support for activities that would, presumably, reduce the level of racism black people face on a daily (dare I say, hourly?) basis. So what's Coates' beef? Why is he poopin' on the party? Why can't he just LEAVE BERNIE ALONE?

I don't know, necessarily. Sorry to disappoint. I don't know Coates, unfortunately, so I can't really give you his concrete reasoning. I can presume, though. I can presume that Coates likes Bernie and sees him as a step in the right direction. A STEP. Not the whole fucking staircase. Coates probably thinks Bernie is the best person to lodge a complaint against, because many people are under the false pretense that Bernie is "perfect."

The problem with many internet-dwelling BernieBros is that they have trumped (ha) their preferred candidate up to a point of flawless and pristine divinity. Their logic follows: Bernie says mostly good things so he must be allowed to say bad things without critique. Which is, in essence, bullshit. And privileged bullshit, at that.

No, there is no other current (popular) presidential candidate that even comes CLOSE to reaching Bernie's level of pro-marginalized people rhetoric. Yes, Bernie seems to honestly believe in the fight for leveling the playing field and ending systemic racism. But making strides towards a goal is not the same thing as, you know, realizing it. Bernie is, like many of us, still learning the depths of racism in our country. And I can't fault him for not knowing everything that's gone wrong in the past several hundred years. Our government, media and general populace has done a bang-up job of whitewashing history, downplaying the long-term effects of slavery and pretty much ignoring any evidence that today's black communities are directly affected by their ancestors.

Bernie does not support reparations. Coates argues that this is a problem. The question of how/what/where/when reparations will come about is, decidedly, irrelevant in the current discussion. The problem lies in the outright refusal by Sanders to accept reparations as a viable solution. Moreso, the problem lies with Bernie supporters who, in defense of their white knight of progressivism, silence black voices by trumpeting the age-old argument of "this is the best guy for you; why are you complaining?"

Jason Parham, another smart writerly fellow, wrote in response to white criticism of the Black Lives Matter protest that shut down Bernie's speech last August. Here are some very smart words he wrote:

"Call it the politics of civility. It is the practice—and the person-to-person negotiation of this practice in relation to others—of being told how to properly act or express yourself by someone who does not inhabit the same cultural space as you.

Let’s talk about what it means to be black in a society that, for generations, has insisted on your civility. And not just any society, but one, in fact, that has profited from the suppression of your collective power through the dismantling of voting rights laws, redlining, the denial of access to wealth, and the creation of the prison industrial complex, among other horrors.

'Civility,' begins Hua Hsu, 'is invoked as a method of discipline, as a way of sanding down the edges of a conversation.' Thus: Civility is discipline. Discipline is control. Control, in the context of being black—or, more generally, any non-white individual at the edges of society who lacks not just tools, but the access to tools, to fashion a better life for his or herself—in a country that continually insists on your civility even as it offers none in return, is white supremacy."

You can love Bernie and still take issue with his words. You can actively support him as a candidate for president and still take some time to examine his policies and statements. There is nothing wrong with liking Bernie. There is something very wrong with adhering to him blindly and brushing off criticism because you think that it will detract from more "important" things. The problem is, the Bernie Train is very white. And due to this, issues of importance to black people are often brushed aside for issues that are of importance to white people. White folks think we're doing a grand old job of helping black people out. We are under the impression that Bernie's racial platform is enough and that anything else is just beating a dead horse. This is because we're ignorant, though not mean-spiritedly so. We don't have to live under the thumb of white supremacy day in and day out. We forget that, oh yeah, many black people have to live through hell every day.

If there's any point I am trying to cough up, it's that all things should be examined wholly, even Bernie Sanders. And that if you truly believe in the man, you should feel comfortable questioning his policies and making an attempt to guide him in the direction of true equality for all. We should not just stand idly by when something Bernie says does not quite line up with the feelings of those who, let's face it, need change more than we do. We should, instead, criticize and do so openly. Don't kill your darlings, but certainly interrogate them. Do not let your cultural view of the world exclude the cultural realities of others. Because if we fail to hold Bernie to our highest standards, then this whole fight was for nothing.