BizarroIndustries

As someone with a tenuous grasp on the very notion of goodwill, I believe I have a rather unique perspective when making that claim. Reading firsthand accounts of the Boston Marathon Bombing reminds me of how little I understand of the very idyllic and what I view to be very American concept of goodwill – the friendly supportive camaraderie and exuberance at the accomplishment of others, even people you don’t know.

Every story from Boston today begins the same, with unbridled goodwill – a wife for a husband – a supportive group of friends for a runner’s “finale” marathon – I’m sure a number of formerly overweight individuals and their cheering families beaming with pride.

I don’t understand the appeal of it – or really the relevance of those particular achievements – but I can recognize and grasp the significance of that whole overwhelming atmosphere of goodwill. Almost as much as the significance of a father who won’t be able to teach his daughter how to ride a bike, or the mother who will never again be able to hug her son before he goes to sleep.

The tragedy is not simply rooted in the death and mutilation resulting from this act of terrorism, consequences that have irreparably devastated dozens of families tonight.  These things occur to hundreds of families around the world on a daily basis, and they are no less significant to those individuals and the ones who love them.

What strikes me so poignantly in this situation is the emotional significance of the target. The Boston Marathon is not just about the personal accomplishment of the individuals who cross the finish line. It’s also about the seemingly limitless, collectively colorblind outpouring of sheer goodwill and support of the family, friends and entirely unacquainted onlookers and strangers in the crowd.

Such an American thing, needlessly tarnished.

The truth of the attack won’t be known for weeks, or even months. The lasting impact – not on the the families effected, which will obviously last lifetimes – but the social and legislative impacts, are of course yet to be seen. Needless to say, this event will make all of our lives a little more complicated, as we will all victimized by the zealousness (justified or not) of the inevitable government and regulatory response. My thoughts tonight are with the families, because that is a loss I at least have the ability to understand.

It has been harder to come up with blog posts since I started working a lot more. I think it’s equal parts lack of time to absorb media and just a lack of ire arousing incidents. There just hasn’t been much that makes me see red recently. But I wanted to complain about something this week and Obama’s same sex marriage revolution is a decent target. Two things about this, Obama was openly pro-same sex marriage prior to his run for one of Illinois’ senate seats. He wrote “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages,” in 1996. After he decided to run for a statewide office he dropped the support for gay marriage. Merriam-Websters defines evolution as ‘the process of change in a certain direction.’ It’s not evolution if you go forward, then backward, then forward again, its only evolution if you are moving in one direction.

Right after it came out that Obama was going to announce he was pro-same sex marriage the Washington Post released this article detailing Romeny’s rebilious pranks nearly half a century ago. Probably not a bad idea for the left. It is long as hell though, so it must have been in the works for awhile. I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if they were holding it back for a day when Obama stepped in something like gay marriage. Anything to take the heat off their messiah. Thankfully the teeth were largely knocked out of this slam piece by Breitbart’s minions.

The most shocking thing in the article was a story about Romney and his gang of stuck-up rich kids holding down a fellow student named John Lauber, who they thought was a homosexual, and cutting off his hair. It does sound horrifying and awful, I will wholeheartedly agree on that. And it’s hard to believe Romney doesn’t remember that particular incident, because I can’t imagine taking part in something like that and not remembering it forever. So it kind of bugs me that Romney won’t admit to what he did and apologize. But anyways, it was 50 years ago, and the Washington Post article made Lauber sound like a wreck of a human being after that, as if he struggled professionally and peaked as a sous-chef for military contractors before his death a few years ago. Apparently the image of a sad broken man the Washington Post painted was slightly less than accurate.

Tonight, Christine Lauber, John Lauber’s sister, said that she didn’t know anything about the bullying incident. More importantly, she said that the story had factual inaccuracies. Betsy Lauber, another of John’s sisters, told ABC News, “The family of John Lauber is releasing a statement saying the portrayal of John is factually incorrect and we are aggrieved that he would be used to further a political agenda. There will be no more comments from the family.” Said Christine, “If he were alive today, he would be furious [about the story].” Jason Horowitz, the reporter on the Post story, did speak to both sisters and quoted them in the story – but apparently still botched the facts.

Here’s another article about another quote that turned out to be incredibly misleading. When I read Stu White’s comments in the Washington Post article I thought this was a guy who had been haunted his whole life by what he and Romney had done. But apparently his comment was taken entirely out of context, and not only was he not present at the incident, but he didn’t know about it until the Washington Post reporter contacted him for a comment.

I know it’s inconvenient when there aren’t any witnesses around who will spin you the exact story you want to tell, but that doesn’t give you the right to twist the truth and to misconstrue what actually took place. You might think Romney is a monster, but the ends do not justify the means. Anyways, after an ABC interview, and a few bloggers picked up the inconsistencies, the Washington Post went and changed their online copy of the article, but didn’t print any kind of online retraction.

Here’s another particularly telling quotes from the article  Big Journalism ran to debunk the Washington Post piece. They blow some pretty massive fucking holes in the Washington Post article, and I just want to personally extend my gratitude to that whole network of journalists for being a voice for integrity in the press.

But Lauber, at least according to his obituary in the South Bend Tribune, led an incredibly full life. He graduated from Vanderbilt, became a member of the British Horse Society, had his seaman papers, was a licensed mortician in three states and head chef at the Russian River Resort in California, and even served as a civilian contractor to the troops in Iraq. This does not sound like someone crippled by a supposedly crucial incident back in high school.

There are only two things I want to say in this post. One, there’s a double standard applied to misogynistic comments in the press. Two,  Sandra Fluke’s testimony to congress was a gross exaggeration of reality and deserving of ridicule. I wont even go into freedom of the media aspect of this sideshow.

Lets just get Ms. Fluke’s testimony out of the way first. Cathy Ruse, a graduate of Georgetown’s Law School, and the former chief counsel of the House Subcommittee on the Constitution,  summed up the facts in her op-ed today.

It’s a fantastic opinion piece but here’s the quote I think everyone should read…

In her testimony, Ms. Fluke claimed that, “Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school.” That’s $1,000 per year. But an employee at a Target pharmacy near the university told the Weekly Standard last week that one month’s worth of generic oral contraceptives is $9 per month. “That’s the price without insurance,” the employee said. (It’s also $9 per month at Wal-Mart.)

This has been completely lost in all the talk about Rush Limbaugh calling some girl, who supposedly needs $1,000 a year for contraceptives, a slut. I’m not big on censorship. I say offensive things on a daily basis. And so do liberals.

In fact liberal columnist Kirsten Powers wrote an opinion piece on exactly that. I was actually astonished by some of the examples she had. I didn’t even realize how mysoginstic guys like Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews and Bill Maher actually were. It is hilarious that they get a free pass because they just happen to be on the left side of these partisan issues. Astonishing. Again if you don’t want to actually read the opinion piece here’s the accompanying interview.

Oh and just to be clear I try to avoid using stuff from Fox News and MSNBC but in this case no one else is even pointing this hypocrisy out so I’ve got no choice.

And you know what, one more thing. Rush Limbaugh hates my kind of conservatism. He’s one of those guys who thinks Republicans are only Republicans if they buy into the whole package, social and all. I of course say “Take your government control over any personal choices we make as individuals over to China where they belong.” Despite all that I’ll defend his freedom to speak his inflammatory rhetoric all day long, and be happy he is able to do so.