Condemning Glenn Reynolds for not reading him, my favorite satirist, Howard Veit, now claims he “scooped” a story about EU tariffs “targeting states that were marginal for Bush” on November 11.
Without getting into the definition of the term, here is the supposed “scoop”:
Oh those clever Europeans: Note that the retaliatory tariffs are all aimed at products produced in states Bush MUST win in ’04; Florida, Texas (citrus, not cotton yet), Kentucky, and North Carolina. One would think they were given the data by the DNC, but that’s impossible. Nobody would be that low. But because the steel workers Union called Bush an unacceptable candidate, you can bet the U.S. will cancel our steel tariffs. The whole purpose was to buy votes and it didn’t work.
Not so!
The story was reported by the BBC on November 10, the day before.
The European Commission has drawn up a hit list of US imports worth about $2.2bn a year – including Harley Davidson motorcycles, citrus fruits and textiles – which will be targeted with retaliatory sanctions.
‘Re-balancing measures’
The hit list is said to have been calculated to inflict maximum pain on states whose support will be crucial to President George W Bush’s re-election campaign next year.
If writing about this a day after the BBC wrote about it constitutes a “scoop,” then I think I’ll tell you what happened yesterday in the Massachusetts Supreme Court.
No I guess I won’t. Howard has already beaten me to it, arguing that it was “great for rug munchers and shit stabbers, but nobody else.”
Do the “rug munchers” know about this judicial jackpot? Last time I looked, the vast majority of them were heterosexual men!
Wow, that is a scoop!
I take everything back!
(I’ll leave the “scoop” about “shit stabbers” out of this, because I believe in maintaining at least a semblance of dignity in this blog.)
Comments
4 responses to “Making a stab at a “scoop””
Move over a little, Fred Phelps, John Derbyshire, Santorum-and-dog. Harold Veit now has a new bedmate, one Pieter Friedrich. Pieter is a 5-point Calvinist who thinks “sodomite” is a neutral term and that homosexuality is not only an abomination and should be illegal but should be punished by death. And yet he loves homosexuals enough to preach to them to show them the error of their ways. He protests what he calls “political correctness” but advocates a theocracy in which free speech would only be allowed so long as it is not “anti-Christian”. Here’s the Raving Atheist’s take on him:
http://www.ravingatheist.com/archives/thank_you_pieter_friedrich.html
By the way, Veit’s condemnations of “rug munchers”, i.e., Lesbians (cunnilingists), confirms something else I’ve been thinking for some time: While there is some truth in the stereotype popular among many gay (andro) men, that their enemies are gynosexual men who are turned on by Lesbianism, the leaders of the ChristiaNazi movement in America actually suppress their selfish gynosexual desires and condemn Lesbianism along with androsexual maleness. They condemn _both_ on the grounds that neither androsexual men nor gynosexual women renounce their selfish desires and reproduce children to serve Church and State. The ChristiaNazis are consistent, based on their premises, suppressing all sexuality that does not serve the collective.
By the way, according to Pieter Friedrich, homosexuality is “a hate-filled lifestyle”:
http://pieterfriedrich.com/blog/entries/00000255.htm
I did not mention that Pieter Friedrich also admits that, when he is evangelizing to a homosexual to get him/her to change, he does not disclose the fact that he plans to have all homosexuals executed when he takes over.
Interesting — but not terribly surprising.
This Pieter (who lists the Holocaust denying, death-to-homosexuals guy — R.J. Rushdoony — as a favorite author) also favors slavery:
http://www.joshclaybourn.com/blog/archives/001447.html
Do you think he may be biting off more than he can chew?