HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Mira » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 ... 124 Next »

Mira

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Member since: Thu Oct 21, 2004, 06:06 PM
Number of posts: 19,392

Journal Archives

Paula Dean subject of Satire

Paula Deen Blames ‘the Jews’ For Firing
Jun 28, 2013



Celebrity chef Paula Deen, embroiled in controversy this week over allegations of racism, added two cups of gasoline to the fire this morning when she blamed her troubles on Jewish people.

Deen, 66, was a guest of morning host Dave Garver on Atlanta radio station WTMI when she claimed “Jew executives” deliberately abandoned her in the wake of the controversy, which stemmed from a discrimination lawsuit filed by a former employee against her company.

The Georgia-born Southern-cooking maven is doing damage control in the media after admitting that she had used racial epithets in the past and had once planned a slavery-themed wedding. The ensuing backlash has led to Food Network dropping her show and several sponsors cutting ties.

When Garver asked Deen if she expected to return to the Food Network or to another network once the controversy died down, Deen said, “I don’t know, Dave. The whole situation is very stressful and very upsetting to me.

“I hosted one of the Food Network’s most popular shows. We had great ratings, great cookbooks, the fans loved me. But as soon as this N-word thing came up, the greedy Jew executives at the Food Network dropped me faster than a baked potato on a summer day.”

A shocked Garver responded: “I’m sorry, but did you say greedy Jew executives?”

“Yes I did, Dave,” Deen responded. “I made those Jews all this money and they still stabbed me in the back. As soon as it looked like their profits would be affected, they told me I was no longer needed. That’s Jew loyalty for ya'll.”


for the rest, if you can stomach it:
http://dailycurrant.com/2013/06/28/paula-deen-blames-the-jews-for-firing/

To answer the question: " In the South you just add..."Bless your Hearts"....

BOOYAH! Morgan Freeman Says What Everyone Is Too Embarrassed To Say About Our History.


I needed this refresher course in U.S. history. At 4:33, lotsa celebrities help me remember why we celebrate the Fouth of July. 

And, yes. That is Mel Gibson. I know. It’s ironic that he’s the first to speak up right after Morgan Freeman mentions civil rights movements. Moving right along...

http://www.upworthy.com/you-saw-him-in-shawshank-you-saw-him-play-god-now-watch-him-do-the-declaration-of-independence?c=upw1

God speaking to Governor Rick Perry: WORD

12 Phrases Progressives Need To Ditch (And What We Can Say Instead)

Author: Elisabeth Parker





If we want people to think well of our progressive agenda, then we need to use our own words. (See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil)



(1). Big Business: (Also referred to as: Corporate America; Multinationals; Corporate Interests) When we use any of these words, we automatically sound pie-in-the-sky liberal. People think, “what’s wrong with that?” After all, they’d like their own businesses to get “big” and have no negative associations with the words “corporate” or “multinational” — which actually sound kind of exciting and worldly. Instead, try: Unelected Government. This puts them in their proper context as unelected entities with unprecedented powers, whose actions have immense impact on our lives, and which we are powerless to hold accountable.

(2). Entitlements: I keep hearing reporters from National Public Radio and other liberal news outlets use the word “entitlements” and it makes me froth at the mouth. They’re not “entitlements” — which sounds like something a bunch of spoiled, lazy, undeserving people irrationally think they should get for nothing. Instead, try: Earned Benefits. This term not only sounds better for the progressive cause, it’s also more accurate. Programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Unemployment are all forms of insurance that we pay into all of our working lives — via a percentage of our income — and then collect from when the time comes.

(3). Free Market Capitalism: (Also referred to as: Capitalism, Free Markets, and Supply-Side Economics) Like “Fascism” and “Communism,” “Free Market Capitalism” is a 20th-century utopian ideal that has amply been proven an unworkable failure, and damaging to society. Instead, try: Socialized Risk, Privatized Profits. This best describes the dramatically failed experiment in unfettered capitalism, as practiced in the late 20th century and early aughts.

Read 9 more:
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/02/24/10-phrases-progressives-need-to-ditch/#ixzz2XvCdVJHi

Coming back

I've been gone a bit - pre-occupied as well because I was sick. But now I'm back, as the old German proverb says
"For a number of days the dog was sick, but now she's taking pictures again, thank God"
(slightly modified)

I was out this afternoon and saw this happening at the entrance of the University of North Carolina School of the Arts.
Gotta love it!


What White People Don't Understand About Rachel Jeantel / witness in Zimmerman trial


What White People Don't Understand About Rachel Jeantel
by Rachel Samara for Global Grind Staff

the entire piece is here:

http://globalgrind.com/news/what-white-people-dont-understand-about-rachel-jeantel-trayvon-martin-blog#ixzz2XQSvwPzo




A predominantly white jury is not going to like Rachel Jeantel. Let's just be real here.
The 19-year-old Miami native is an easy target for obvious, yet shallow reasons. But let's not forget why she's actually on the stand in George Zimmerman's second degree murder trial. Rachel was the last person to speak to a living, breathing Trayvon Martin. The guilt, shame and sorrow she must feel is something most of us will never be able to comprehend. You could hear it in her voice, see it in her jittery body language. She is feeling the wrath of this highly publicized case.
Rachel was thrown head first into this murder story, unwillingly. And although she had repeatedly said she did not want to be a witness, did not even want to believe she was the last person Trayvon spoke to, Rachel took the stand for all the right reasons. She was asked to by the family of her deceased friend and feeling part of the burden for his death, she wanted to help.
Rachel was raw, emotional, aggressive and hostile, and she was unapologetically herself.
And if the 5 white jurors (excluding the 1 Latina) are like most white people I know, they are unfortunately not going to like Rachel. They won't understand her, especially not her defensive nature, and this will unfortunately work against her. Even though it shouldn't.
I can imagine George Zimmerman's defense is just hoping some of those 5 white jurors have some prejudices (as most people do), or hell, are even racist, because if they are, their tactic to make Rachel out to be less intelligent, rather than less credible than she actually is, might actually work.
Less intelligent and more confused.

Read more: http://globalgrind.com/news/what-white-people-dont-understand-about-rachel-jeantel-trayvon-martin-blog#ixzz2XR3eYxGr

Take a look: What might be the Republican 4G Network?

What the Supreme Court Doesn’t Understand About the Voting Rights Act Ari Berman

Ari Berman on June 25, 2013



Women vote in the US presidential election in Los Angeles, November 4, 2008. (Reuters/Lucy Nicholson)

No sooner had the Voting Rights Act passed in 1965, after two hundred years of slavery and nearly 100 years of Jim Crow, than Southern conservatives, who failed to stop the law, began to attack it. South Carolina mounted the first constitutional challenge to the law only a month after it was enacted. President Nixon tried to weaken the law take the “monkey…off the backs off the South,” as did Presidents Ford in 1975 and Reagan in 1982. Every effort to gut the VRA failed. Each time the law’s constitutionality was challenged, in 1966, 1973, 1980 and 1999, the Supreme Court upheld the act. Every congressional reauthorization, in 1970, 1975, 1982 and 2006, made the law stronger, not weaker, in protecting voting rights. Each Congressional reauthorization was signed by a Republican president, cementing the bipartisan consensus supporting the VRA. “The Voting Rights Act became one of the most consequential, efficacious, and amply justified exercises of federal legislative power in our Nation’s history,” Justice Ginsburg wrote in her dissent today.

That consensus held until now, with the Roberts Court finding that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional. Section 4 is how states are covered under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the provision which requires states with the worst history of voting discrimination—those who had a discriminatory voting device on the books and voter turnout of less than 50 percent in the 1964 election—to preclear their voting changes with the federal government. Without Section 4, there’s no Section 5. The most effective provision of the country’s most effective civil rights law is now dead until and unless Congress figures out a new way to cover states where voting discrimination is most prevalent that satisfies the Roberts Court.
snip:

Read more:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/174973/what-supreme-court-doesnt-understand-about-voting-rights-act#ixzz2XKQAjAe7

Senate Immigration Bill Collects Votes to Advance

Source: New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/25/us/politics/senate-endorses-proposal-calling-for-extra-border-security-measures.html?emc=edit_na_20130624

BREAKING NEWS Monday, June 24, 2013 7:00 PM EDT
Senate Immigration Bill Collects Votes to Advance
The bipartisan push to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws took a major step forward Monday evening when the Senate endorsed a proposal to substantially bolster security along the nation’s southern borders as part of measure that would provide a path to citizenship for 11 million undocumented immigrants already in the country.
The 67-to-27 vote prevented any filibuster of the plan to devote roughly $30 billion to border enforcement measures, including nearly doubling the Border Patrol force to 40,000 agents from 21,000, and completing 700 miles of fencing. Opponents of the enhanced security questioned whether the steps would ever be taken and said that the legislation should require that the border be secure before undocumented immigrants could begin to seek legal status.
But the solid bipartisan support for the border security proposal crafted by two Republican senators, Bob Corker of Tennessee and John Hoeven of North Dakota, suggested that advocates of the overhaul had the votes needed to clear remaining procedural hurdles and pass the legislation, perhaps before legislators return home during the July 4 recess.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/25/us/politics/senate-endorses-proposal-calling-for-extra-border-security-measures.html?emc=edit_na_20130624



Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 ... 124 Next »