Paula Deen's No Rebel Flag, But She's Not Worth It Either

A good friend has taken to Facebook to stand up for Paula Deen and her son Jimmy, after an ill-advised costume-party photo was posted on her Twitter account.  My buddy and others think Paula Deen's many critics are just bunch of stupid, thin-skinned, over-reacting PC police who need to get a life, leave poor Paula alone and stop being so darn sensitive.

I will respectfully disagree with that viewpoint.  (And instead of an FB flame-fest, I'll settle for doing it here.)

The ambitious, attention-craving Mrs. Deen has taken herself, and us, down this path before.  With her, it's not media "negativism", it's not "hyper-sensitivity", and it's not a "who's offended next" contest.  It most definitely has nothing to do with being a "proud American."  It's that Paula Deen still doesn't get it.  She still has a blind spot -- at least to the extent that her idiot social media media manager saw fit to tweet out the photo of mother and son as Lucy and Ricky.  (Yes, the photo was a couple years old, but given Paula's history of racism, what the hell was this guy thinking?  And given her history, why wasn't Paula monitoring her own Twitter feed with more scrutiny?)

That Paula Deen and her son and others still believe that this sort of casual, "fun" racism is acceptable and reasonable serves only to illustrate that we have a long way to go.

There's been no huge outcry against her, no undeserved "attacks",  just a weary disappointment that her brand of doltishness still exists.  If anything is hyper-sensitive, it's the reaction of the folks who feel the need to defend Paula Deen.  If anyone is stupid, it's the Deens.  They've had way more than their 15 minutes.  Now they're the past, not the future.  Paula Deen isn't worth it -- let her fade away now and we'll all be just fine.  Just hang onto her recipes!
____________________________________

Note to my white-people readers:  Al Jolson is dead, and dressing up in blackface (or brownface, redface or yellowface) is just not cool anymore.  If you're thinking of being Mr. Bojangles this Halloween, think again.  And note to Jimmy Deen:  Desi Arnaz was not a dark-skinned person.  Not even close.  So WTF?  You look like the Oompa-Loompa version of Ricky Ricardo.  Why?       

  

A Little Algebra Humor

A classic "Pogo" cartoon by Walt Kelly, circa 1969

Symbol-Minded

Today, they began debates in the South Carolina legislature to decide if they should remove the Confederate battle flag from atop the statehouse.  If they have any sense at all, that nasty rag is coming down quickly and for good.

In related news, the TV Land cable network has pulled reruns of "The Dukes of Hazzard".  And for some people, oddly, this is the move they felt went too far.  The actor who played "Cooter" the mechanic on the decades-old series said, "Our precious symbol is under attack."  Precious?  (Turns out the guy who played Cooter is the national spokesman for the Sons of the Confederacy.  Great.)

Friends and acqauintances took to Facebook (uh-oh) with comments such as:
"Might as well ban the song 'I Wish I Was In Dixie.' "
"People need to quit blaming objects."
"These symbols are history, and we must be willing to study our history."
"This is stupid."

For the record, the well-known "Dixie" song was the de facto anthem of the Confederacy.  It was traditionally performed by blackface mistrels, with the main singer's voice that of a freed slave now in the north, but supposedly homesick for his former slave life back on the plantation.  Oh yes, who wouldn't long for the good old slave life?  Catchy little tune, but c'mon -- these days, who needs it?

No one is "blaming" a flag for anything.  It's just piece of cloth.  It didn't do anything.  But it stood for something.  It is indeed a symbol of a part of our history -- an ugly, hateful part.  Just like Germany doesn't need the swastika to remember the Nazi era, the U.S. doesn't need the Confederate flag appearing every-damn-where to "study" and understand our history.  The image and the history will linger, no matter what.  But we can learn about that history in any number of ways besides a sit-com stunt car with the Stars and Bars on it.

Learning history by watching "The Dukes of Hazzard"?  Now that's what would be really stupid.  Because that show sucked!  All you're learning is the history of bad TV.

It's way past time to pull the rebel flag from all government buildings, and stop profiting from it via TV and merchandising.

They Don't Understand Law Or Religious "Freedom"

After the Supremes legalized gay marriage (not full equal rights, mind you, just marriage), conservative Christian right-tards got all confused and started bitching about how this was somehow an assault on their First Amendment rights of religious freedom and free speech.

Let me tell you something -- all these southern AG's and pinhead county clerks and Bible-beating blockheads at various bakeries, hardware stores and pizza parlors have it all wrong.  The law impacts civil servants and public places.  It does not dictate what churches must do.  Your precious religious "rights" are still right there where you left them.  A virulently homophobic preacher can still refuse to perform a gay marriage at his church without fear of consequence.  (But really, who except for a very few devout crazoids would want to be married by such an asshole in the first place?)  A county clerk, however, must issue the license and the judge or the justice of the peace must perform the civil ceremony.  Their personal, private religious beliefs are immaterial and simply do not trump the law, and they could be held legally liable for failure to follow the law.  Similarly, a retail business owner operates a public establishment, not a church, not a club.  Refusal to serve the public -- all of the public -- could easily be found to be illegal discrimination.

We are all welcome to our individual religious beliefs, or lack thereof, but religious "freedom" does not mean we live in a theocracy.  And it does not mean you can break the law in the service of your religion.

This seems an opportune time to remind everyone of a timeless truth:

    

Cost-Benefit Analysis

Not too long ago, after much study, the EPA issued a new rule to reduce (not eliminate) toxic mercury emissions at our nation's coal-fired utility power plants.  Seems like a pretty good idea to me -- myself, I'm not keen on inhaling or ingesting too much mercury, but that can happen when you burn shit-tons of fossil fuels like coal.

True to form, the utility industry sued the EPA in an attempt to reverse the ruling.  The power company plaintiffs claimed that the EPA did not "initially" consider compliance costs to utility companies when making it's decision.  Their suit made it all the way to the Supreme Court.  In a 5-4 call, The Robes agreed with the utility companies -- before reducing the poisonous pollution power plants are allowed to spew into the air, we must first ask what it costs.

As Justice Kagan pointed out, the EPA certainly did consider costs, initially and for many years after, until it rendered its ruling.  More to the point, what is the cost of inaction?  What's the cost of the status quo?  Is cost really more important than public health?  I'm real sorry, utility companies, but you're the ones who built these coal-burning plants ages ago.  If your technology is outdated and toxic, that's your problem.  Stop acting like you have a right to poison us just so you can burn cheap, dirty coal for a while longer.

"Hey, Vern!  It's your ol' buddy Earnest.  You care about pollution, and smog, and burning coal, and the EPA and all that, Vern?  Me neither, ol' buddy.  Cost is all I care about.  Long as my bills don't go up too much, the future can go piss up a rope.  Can I offer ya some more mercury, Vern?"            

Sounds like a whole bunch of jiggery-pokery to me.

Three More Stooges

Attack of the governors!  Christie has just announced, Kasich and Walker will follow suit shortly.  There are so many GOP presidential candidates, I can't possibly make fun of all of them.  But these three stooges will have to do for today.

Ohio Gov. John Kasich is seen by some as a sort of kinder, gentler Republican.  Those people need to check their prescriptions.  Kasich is a typical right-wing ideologue:  He cuts public education, privatizes state agencies and property, supports unconstitutional abortion restrictions, has regressive tax policies, thinks fracking is wonderful, and famously tried -- unsuccessfully -- to break Ohio's public employee unions.  He concedes that gay people are probably here to stay, which makes him a "moderate" Republican.  Sure it does.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is a younger Kasich clone, a winking, pointing, frat boy dick without any pretense of moderation.  He holds all the same positions as Kasich, and then some.  Walker adds the preacher's-kid fake piety on top of the usual GOP greed and malice.  He is an obvious puppet of billionaire business interests.  Also famously tried and succeeded in breaking Wisconsin's public employee unions.  Barely survived a recall.    

New Jersey Gov. Chris "Caldera" Christie is a scandal-plagued bully with anger-management issues.  Showed one brief moment of mensch-hood by hugging Obama in the wake of Hurricane Sandy, but is an otherwise hot-tempered, caustic, confrontational, belligerent, abrasive SOB.  His Heftiness is a smoldering volcanic eruption waiting to happen.  Christie's bluster is almost the equal of Trump's.  Funny -- they're both from New Jersey.  Coincidence?  I think not.



These are three candidates born to be slaughtered in a general election.  Why do they bother, and how many more clowns will there be in the GOP circus?

Faithful Reader Calls B.S. On Ohio Legislature

A faithful reader vents his spleen about the weed legalization movement and calls B.S. on the Ohio legislature.  Indeed, his email to me arrived under the subject of:  Bullshit!  Good call, my friend.  Happy to share your thoughts on Buster's Blog.

Background in a nutshell:

Responsible Ohio is a group which advocates for legal marijuana in Ohio.  They just turned in almost 700,000 signed petitions from all over the state.  Their Constitutional amendment initiative will appear on the November ballot.  If passed, it will establish a taxed, for-profit system, with investors and about 1100 retail and medical outlets across Ohio.

Our gerrymandered, jury-rigged Republican-dominated state legislature is living in the past and still fighting Richard Nixon's War on Drugs.  They hate the idea of legal weed, so they've come up with their own Constitutional amendment to legally ban such a system, which Senate president Keith Faber calls a"monopoly." (Puh-leeze!)

Both amendments will appear on the November ballot.  You can vote for the marijuana legalization issue and vote for Faber's B.S. anti-monopoly issue.  If you do, here's the kicker:  Our state R's, in keeping with their most devious traditions, have inserted a clause into their amendment which will invalidate the weed issue if both should pass.

That's when my faithful reader friend blew up:
________________________________________

This is one of those things where I feel compelled to write a letter to the Douchepatch or an FB post, but I dare not.

This Ohio legislature is so full of crap. If the representatives & senators cared so much protecting Ohio's constitution why didn't they pursue a legislative ballot issue after the casino initiative passed?  'Cause they didn't!  Only when Responsible Ohio presented a cannabis initiative did these so called forthright outstanding representatives of the people take the pen to hand primarily to block this attempt to legalize cannabis!  This is clearly an attempt to continue the criminalization of cannabis, and against the public's will!  If they're so interested in protecting the public from abusive substances they should unwrap their hands from their alcohol-filled glasses!  I'm convinced cannabis is no more dangerous, and maybe less so, than the real gateway drug, alcohol.

Ohio Senate President
and heinous ass-hat
Keith Faber (R-Celina)

When Keith Faber makes his run for Govenor, I will actively campaign against him!  Have said that for years, starting back when --  of all things -- he made the ODNR & OEPA come up with a way to allow condos be built at the dam at Grand Lake St. Marys!  Can you imagine?!

Phew, got that of off my chest, kind of.

Your pal, . . . 

_________________________________

So the only reasonable solution is to vote for the marijuana ballot issue and against Faber's ridiculous alternative.  That will fix his wagon.