Is this person serious?

.... "It is gratifying to answere the phone and hear a good old boy on the line and I know he's getting maybe $6 an hour with a boss hovering over him. Lost that high paying manufacturing job overseas? Also quite gratifying to walk into a store and seeing a not so young man working the cash register. At maybe minimum wage. Meanwhile I'm my own boss. The tide's turning guys. Too bad." -- No Name Given

Because that is the most pathetic admission on Broadsheet in at least a week.

Joe is right. And the only way to get through to Big Media is to hit 'em where it counts: the budget. Find out who is advertising on these programs, shop elsewhere. Inform like-minded individuals about the rhetoric they might inadvertantly be supporting when making purchases. Few advertisers would risk alienate 10% of potential customers to support childish, hateful rhetoric. Truly, if businesses felt they could jeopardize the Democratic 50% by patronizing hate-radio, these shows would be broke.

If you are sick of the daily hatred being generated towards you, your family, and your principles, then you know what to do: find out who's behind it all and stop consuming. It's really that simple.

Media Matters has a list of outrageous, hateful comments by Michael Savage:

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/people/michaelsavage

There's no question about it. Savage is a hatemonger.

"Shit storm"? You're not allowed to say shit storm. You get paid to write. You need to adhere to standards of professional conduct and must come up with a suitable non-profane metaphor like "flurry of contraversy." Leave the profane discourse to the comments section. We've got it covered.

The Media obsession with white women has been noted before. I liked the overview from SomethingAwful.com

http://www.somethingawful.com/index.php?a=2961

Dear Reader:

Your genitals are a special place. You should feel good about them and feel good about sharing them with others. To answer your question: no, you are not obligated to remove your hair. However, I encourage you to regard your bush as your canvas and to express yourself however you wish.

It's great that this woman has found a path to spiritual fullness, but the lessons learned here aren't about Islam. The unlikely interpretation of Islam as 'feminist' and Jihad as the 'peaceful struggle for social justice' is the convenient product of a UCLA undergrad hoping to resolve conflicting instincts: a synthesis of progressive ideals, third-world reverence, and spiritual longing.

Consider the Muslim world. The author would have you believe Islam is basically a UCLA Workers' Rights group with some group prayer mixed in there. In reality the Islamic world is a world mired in hatred and poverty. It's not even comparable to, say, the modern-day "Catholic" world. You know why the Islamic world is worse? Because unlike modern Catholics, Muslims still take their religion seriously, too seriously to even allow the necessities of a progressive society like science or freedom of speech. Meanwhile, the fact that Muslims take their religion seriously is exactly what attracted the author to Islam in the first place.

But hey, I'm in favor of a propagating a watered down version of Islam that is basically progressive politics with a spiritual patina. If the author can convince other Muslims that the faith is in fact about social justice, then more power to her. Good luck!

The preference for males among Chinese is not as simple as it has been made out to be. There is a strong desire for a male heir, particularly among couples who have already given birth to a female. Among these couples with a firstborn female there is a far greater likelihood of their next child being male. However couples that produce a male as their firstborn prefer females. Among couples with a firstborn male the likelihood is high that the next child is female.

Hey look guys! Hoyer has posted this handy "fact sheet" so we can educate ourselves about the "numerous concessions" he achieved in the FISA bill!:

http://majorityleader.house.gov/docUploads/FISA-Senate-Comp-Comparison.pdf

Golly! What a great compromise!

I too am a young person on a life journey in which sexuality is something to be explored and sex is a fascinating element of the continuum of human experience. So many of our friends in the comments section still have this latent understanding of sex as a precious, precious commodity and believe that when women just give sex away for free then they are shallow and foolish. This commoditization of sex is a holdover from our agricultural predecessors to whom women (and the rights to fuck them) were property to be bartered for and fought over.

Lately I've been thinking a lot about (what I term) the pervasive anti-slut bias of America. I've been drawing a lot of parallels to homophobia. If you like getting fucked and you're a man, then a you're a fag. If you like getting fucked and you're a woman, then you're a slut. Both forms of bigotry are fundamentally misogynist. And the most ardent supporters of both the anti-fag and anti-slut campaigns are the Religious Right.

Here's my hypothesis: We currently know the most homophobic people are men who are arosed by gay eroticism. In my experience the people that are by far the most likely to use slut as a derogatory term are a certain class of women. I suspect that the genesis of slut-hatred among women (and men) is the extremely common combination of sexual frustration, and sexual repression.

So my advice to Tracy is to not sweat the bile flung at her from the depths of cyberspace. And my advice to her critics is to stop taking out your sexual issues out on Tracy and to instead focus your energy on getting the sexual gratification you deserve.