Patterico's Pontifications


Ayaan Hirsi Ali To Joe Biden: Because I Respect The Office Of The Vice-President, I Will Politely And Graciously Refrain From Schooling You.

Filed under: General — Dana @ 11:29 pm

[guest post by Dana]

A funny thing happened when Ayaan Hirsi Ali met Vice-President Joe Biden: he wanted to straighten out her views of Islam.

In a recent interview, Ayaan Hirsi Ali discussed with sharp insight, the left’s willful and subsequently dangerous blindness toward radical Islam and the very real war on women:

They feel all religions are the same, and they’re not. I think if I adopt the position in good faith to multiculturalists and leftists, I would say [they take the position they do] because they see them [Muslims] as victims. They see them as victims of the white man and so they think: ‘Let’s protect them from the white man. Let’s protect them from capitalism.’… That is misguided at best and malicious at worst.

Wherever [Islamists] gain power, you see exactly what they do: The first thing they do is they chase women out of the public space, force them to cover up, beat them up, rape them, sell them into slavery.

Such violence against women needs to be exposed, and Western liberals need to “review their thinking.

Noted Islamic scholar Joe Biden begged to differ:

Hirsi Ali recalled meeting Vice President Joe Biden. He informed her that “ISIS had nothing to do with Islam.” When she disagreed with him, Biden actually responded: “Let me tell you one or two things about Islam.”

“I politely left the conversation at that,” Hirsi Ali said, to laughter. “I wasn’t used to arguing with vice presidents.”

Ayaan Hirsi Ali: steadily provoking liberals and feminists everywhere because girl doesn’t know what she’s talking about.


Mayor De Blasio Alienates NYC Police Officers

Filed under: General — Dana @ 6:19 pm

[guest post by Dana]

Following the grand jury decision not to issue criminal charges in the Eric Garner case, Mayor De Blasio’s comment that he trained his bi-racial, teen-age son to be cautious in dealing with the police has alienated police officers throughout the city:

We’ve had to literally train him, as families have all over this city for decades, in how to take special care in any encounter he has with the police officers who are there to protect him.

Feeling thrown under the bus, the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association has posted a waiver for members wishing to ban Mayor De Blasio and City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito from attending their funerals:

I, [NAME], as a New York City police officer, request that Mayor Bill de Blasio and City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito refrain from attending my funeral services in the event that I am killed in the line of duty. Due to Mayor de Blasio and Speaker Mark-Viverito’s consistent refusal to show police officers the support and respect they deserve, I believe that their attendance at the funeral of a fallen New York City police officer is an insult to that officer’s memory and sacrifice.

De Blasio and Mark-Viverito, seeking to build good will and rapport with the officers, responded in a joint statement:

Incendiary rhetoric like this serves only to divide the city, and New Yorkers reject these tactics. The mayor and the speaker both know better than to think this inappropriate stunt represents the views of the majority of police officers and their families.

And, just throwing the question out there, yet understanding that it’s not an either/or but with many in-between possibilities, will the number of those pursing a career in law enforcement decrease as they witness the lack of morale and respect shown those already on the job, as well as knowing the intense scrutiny and criticism they will be subject to from city, state, and federal officials? Or, as a result of the Garner case (and released video), and the Brown case, will the number of those pursing a career in law enforcement increase because they believe themselves necessary to ensure unbiased, honorable service that protects everyone?


A Look At The Genders

Filed under: General — Dana @ 3:20 pm

[guest post by Dana]

Several non-surprising differences in men and women were observed this week.

First, in a nationwide sex survey done in the magazines Men’s Health and Women’s Health, 1,000 men and 1,000 women were polled to identify their idea of the perfect body in both genders.

Interestingly, women chose the young Ryan Gosling with sensitive looking eyes as the ideal man, while men chose the more mature, but oh, so seriously built Hugh Jackman. (He’s got my vote!)

Regarding the ideal woman, women chose Cameron Diaz, while men chose Kate Upton.

A simple theory: Women do not like other women that they view as a threat or competition. This is nothing new. Women have been jealous creatures since day one. Upton, with all of her robust voluptuousness, is the quintessential threat. Without exerting any effort, she has the natural ability to easily snag the attention of another woman’s man. And that gives her power over him. Women don’t like other women usurping their power over their men. For that, she’s a threat. #WarOnWomen…ByHotWomen! In contrast, Diaz, however, is simply not the threat Upton is. She’s a tomboyish, fun-loving, good-time gal pal who is everybody’s friend. That fact, along with her attainable athletic look makes her enviable, but not a threat.

A second look at the genders this week supported researchers’ theory that “men are idiots, and idiots do stupid things.” This study confirmed that far more men than women have received Darwin awards:

Men tend to take more risks than women do, and they also seem to be ahead of women in engaging in risky behavior that is extremely “idiotic,” according to researchers who revealed in a new study that the majority of the receivers of a Darwin Award are men.

To win a Darwin Award, a darkly humorous honor that has existed for more than 20 years, a person must die in “an extraordinarily idiotic manner,” and thereby protect the human gene pool and improve the species’ chances of long-term survival. For example, one person in the new study was a “terrorist who posted a letter bomb with insufficient postage stamps and who, on its return, unthinkingly opened his own letter,” the researchers wrote.

researchers in the United Kingdom used the Darwin Award database to examine an idea they call “male idiot theory,” to see whether men’s generally higher inclination for risk-taking extends to taking “idiotic risks.” [Macho Man: 10 Wild Facts About His Body]

The researchers reviewed the stories of all nominees for the Darwin Award from 1995 to 2014, noting the gender of the winner. To win a Darwin Award, the story of how the death happened must be verifiable, and the person must have been capable of sound judgment, while showing “an astonishing misapplication of common sense.”

The researchers looked at 332 cases confirmed by the Darwin Awards Committee to be true incidents. For their analysis, they excluded 14 cases of deaths of adventurous couples, leaving them with 318 cases.

Of those, just 36 were women. The other 282 winners, or 88.7 percent, were men, the researchers found.

Of course, both genders have their fair share of idiots. It’s just that the idiocy manifests itself in a different way.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0577 secs.