The Social ETWN Network

A very fucking special review of The Social Network:

Justin Timberlake was born in 1981. Sean Parker, whom he portrays, in 1979. Jesse Eisenberg, who plays Zuckerberg, was born in 1983. Zuckerberg in 1984.

Chiara Luce Badano was born just seven years before Zuckerberg in Italy. Sept. 25 of this year, she was beatified. She was an athlete who wanted to be a flight attendant, but after she felt a sharp pain during a tennis game, it was discovered that she had cancer. Her subsequent pain became a service of love to those around her who were inspired by her faith and joy. She is said to have said to her mother: “I’m not asking Jesus to come and get me to bring me to Heaven anymore, because I still want to offer him my pain, to share his cross with him.”

“This is our time,” Timberlake as Parker declares in a now-famous nightclub scene in “The Social Network”. Something about that line struck me, I heard Luke recounting Christ: “This generation is an evil generation; it seeks a sign, but no sign will be given it … she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and there is something greater than Solomon here.”

This generation doesn’t have to be lost. So many don’t want to be. They’d love to be inundated with the good. Instead, frequently badly catechized, they get to college and are inundated with something else. And the technology that made Zuckerberg the youngest millionaire [sic] in history can be used in God’s service.

Why won't Jesus respond to my friend request!?!

If only Mark Zuckerberg hadn't been frequently badly catechized, he'd be a cancer-ridden flight attendant for God.

A Shonda For The Human

For those who like their bigotry larded with shtick, I give you the second-most loathsome Levin in wingnuttia:

"I was in the middle of eating a kosher pastrami sandwich,” Rabbi [Yehuda] Levin said. "While I was eating it, they come running and they say, 'Paladino became gay!' I said, 'What?" And then they showed me the statement. I almost choked on the kosher salami."

Insert Ed Koch joke here.

A Target Rich Environment

Just a short notice: Comments are finally coming to the Corner, tomorrow if all goes as planned. As always, we welcome your feedback.

We'll be the judge of that, Rich.

Grand Old Police Blotter Update: To Catch A Fox and Friends Predator Edition

It's beginning to look like Charles Leaf won't be resuming his career as mosque-basher anytime soon.

Leviticus, as Translated by Carl Paladino

Do not lie with a man as you do with your horse, that is an abomination.

Howad Kurtz demonstrates his continued commitment to serious journalism by giving an entire segment of his CNN show to the Salahis, who, of course, are media owners and publishers as well as leading journalists and political figures.

Howie can't be bothered to educate himself about Martin Peretz because his pants are constantly down around his ankles.

Live Free and Kill Your Child

I love it when the Reasonoids apologize for alleged child abusers on libertarian grounds. Seems they have learned nothing since they got in bed with child-rapist and murderer David Koresh and begged for his not-so-tender mercies.

Here's the 411 on the latest Reason poster children for gubmint tyranny:

According to the affidavit, a judge determined that Irish abused Taylor's two other children. She is still married to the father of those children, though Taylor said yesterday that her husband has refused to accept her divorce petition for the past two years.

The affidavit also says that the police in Rochester report a "lengthy history of domestic violence" between Taylor and Irish, and that she accused him of choking and hitting her on more than one occasion. According to the document, Irish failed to complete a domestic violence course as ordered by the state, and that a hearing was held last month to terminate Taylor's parental rights over her two older children.

Irish denies the allegations, which, according to the authorities, were in part made by the child's own mother. (They would say that!) If it's improper for a state to protect a defenseless child from someone who is accused by the child's own mother of brutality, then there's no fucking reason for any government whatsoever.

Reason assumes without evidence or investigation that the man is a victim of a big gubmint conspiracy, and then whines about being "misled" when some inconvenient truths come out, as if it has the moral obligation to take the anti-government view without knowing any of the facts.

The good news is, Reason has located its next Nick Gillespie:

"The family should be left to resolve it on their own," Biondolillo said. "Or private enterprise - private companies can contact the family and say, 'We heard you were hitting your kids. Can you stop that?'"

Brilliant! And not even the geniuses at Reason thought of that elegant, free-market solution. Surely the infant child could earn enough to buy her own gun in case she fails to persuade in the family's marketplace of ideas. Give Ms. Biondolillo some that Stagliano/Koch money, fast!

And here's some important information that Reason didn't think you (or it) needed to know before claiming victimhood:

Taylor says her two sons were removed from her care in 2009 because of abuse by a caretaker.

...

Child protection matters are confidential. But Lorraine Bartlett with the Division For Children Youth And Families said a child cannot be removed based on a parent's affiliation with an organization.

Damn that nanny state, refusing to admit that it the source of all evil!

Update (10/10): Its Koresh-sense tingling overtime, Reason also sniffed that the FBI brought bomb sniffing dogs "to the protest." In fact,

About the time of the protest, an FBI agent and a state bomb-sniffing dog team did a sweep on the hospital property in response to threats made to the hospital, said Kieran Ramsey, supervisory special agent to FBI officers in New Hampshire.

Ramsey declined to discuss the nature of the threats.

The hospital "felt that at the time the threats warranted some precautionary measures and getting law enforcement involved," he said.

The search of the hospital grounds turned up nothing, said Pamela Puleo, the hospital's vice president for community affairs. Staff were told of the search so as to allay any fears of visitors or patients, she said, and there have been no problems since.

"Things are pretty quiet as compared to (Friday)," Puleo said. "We worked hard to make sure everybody's feeling reassured and safe and calm."

The dry cleaning bills for removal of urine stains at Reason HQ must be astronomical.

Achtung, Alchy

Ann Alchouse, who has never allowed herself to be photographed wearing an Eva Braun costume in public, is outraged at the liberal media for reporting that RepublicBagger House candidate Rich Iott previously pranced around the fields of Ohio in an SS uniform. Alchouse outrage focuses on the fact that Atlantic reporter Joshua Green doesn't place one of Herr Iott's "defenses" -- the claim he has also dressed as an American doughboy and a Union solider -- high enough in his report to suit her tastes.

No, seriously.

Of course, Iott also fails to mention this defense in his own defense. But Ann's willing to call Green out for the dirty Simon Weisenthal reenactor that he is.

You see, Green hasn't done enough digging to find the exculpatory evidence and turn it over to Herr Iott, who is at a decided disadvantage in explaining his own acts. Alchouse wonders aloud, "Who decides, when war reenactments are done, which side somebody plays?" It would be sheer speculation to assume that a millionaire who has his own tailored SS uniform wasn't forced into the Nazi role by, say, a billionaire who called dibs on the role of a Nazi opponent. Surely he picked up his SS kit at the local Life Uniform outlet because the U.S. Paratrooper costume didn't come in 2XL. And if Herr Iott played a Minuteman twice for everytime he dressed as a Nazi, then Alchouse can't fault him for swinging both ways.

Of course, Alchouse can't refute the facts, and doesn't find any factual errors in Green's reporting. As noted, Green publicized a supposed "defense" by Iott that Iott hasn't bothered to publicize on his own website. It's the only way Alchouse would know abut it. Green also prints Iott's other defenses in paragraphs three, four, five, nine, ten and eleven of his article, so he has to be faulted for not prioritizing Iott's excuses according to Alchouse's peculiar tastes.

Alchouse sees lefty bias like some people see a giant pink rabbit -- if it doesn't appear on its own, she knows what to do to make it appear.

(If you're interested in some truly shitty reasoning, Alchouse's heavings are found here. I've "buried" it at the end of this post because you have already stopped reading, you mental defective, you.)

Grand Old Police Blotter: FOX and Friends Edition

MYFOXNY.COM - FOX 5 reporter Charles Leaf has been arrested. Leaf is charged with one count first degree aggravated sexual assault, one count second degree sexual assault and one count second degree endangering the welfare of a child.

Prosecutors say Leaf sexually abused a four year old girl, described as an acquaintance, at his home.

The Bergen County Prosecutor's Office says Leaf was arrested at his Wyckoff, N.J. home Thursday following an investigation by the Sex Crimes and Child Abuse Unit.

The 40-year-old Leaf was taken into custody without incident. He's being held on $250,000 bail in the Bergen County Jail. His arraignment is set for Nov. 4, 2010.

A station spokesperson says FOX 5 management is aware of the matter and is reviewing it.

Though not an employee of Fox News Channel, as noted by Gawker, Mr. Leaf featured prominently in the channel's efforts to peddle the "Ground Zero" mosque controversy to its pinhead viewers. Perhaps someone will ask Gretchen Carlson, Brian Kilmeade and the mentally-challenged weatherman their opinions on the appropriate distance between Ground Zero and an alleged child molestor.

At this time, of course, Mr. Leaf is not guilty of anything besides shitty reporting.

Even if the story damages Whitman -- and it's a bit hard to see what she did so wrong in a) hiring a maid she thought was legal and b) firing her when she found out she'd been deceived -- ...

Kaus is a true IOKIYARer. Because Meg's a Republican, Kaus can't even comprehend the possibility that her story's pure bullshit. No sane person believes Whitman's efforts to blame her husband -- what married couple wouldn't discuss a notice that a household employee (and a supposed close friend) was an undocumented worker? Kaus probably also believes his career success is due to merit.

The Beast With Two Hacks

Of his new role at The Daily Beast, [Howard] Kurtz said, “I've wanted to work with Tina Brown forever -- well, for a long time -- and I'm incredibly impressed by the energy and creativity of The Daily Beast staff. After a lifetime in newspapers, I'm ready for the challenge of fast-paced online journalism.”

Will the WaPo hire el-Brent Bozell to maintain Howie's high standards?

I guess "swamped starting a new blog" and "learning to post video" were Kurtz's euphemisms for fetching T-Brown's drycleaning.

P.S. to T-Brown: I don't imagine the WaPo will miss Kurtz, but swiping Howie's headshot from the Post might get their lawyers involved.

Actually, the headshots of Kurtz and Brown at the link would make a great "Seperated at Birth." The hairstyles are eerily similar.

The Standards of Howad Kurtz

I missed this whining defense by Howard "Howad" Kurtz of his refusal to inform himself about Marty Peretz' bigotry:

I've been criticized a few million times for things I have written and said. That's fair game.

Now I'm being slammed for something I didn't write or say.

I am, according to Columbia Journalism Review, remaining "silent." (Don't I have that Fifth Amendment right, like you see in the movies?)

My sin is that I have not denounced Marty Peretz. More on that in a moment.

The reason I have not weighed in is--boredom alert--I have been swamped. I cling to the old-fashioned belief that I ought to know what I'm talking about before I pop off. I put a lot of research, and thought, into what I write and say.

In recent weeks I've been swamped with launching and maintaining this real-time blog, including such mundane tasks as learning how to post video. I've also been traveling quite a bit. So I did not believe the world was breathlessly waiting to hear what I had to say about Peretz.

What the owner of the New Republic wrote, in a blog post, was this: "Frankly, Muslim life is cheap, especially for Muslims." And he questioned whether "these people" were worthy of First Amendment protection. I find those to be outrageous and unacceptable statements. You can say that about some Muslim terrorists, and you can criticize some Muslims for failing to speak out against violence, but how do you libel everyone who follows Islam?

...

I guess we live in a culture where everyone, including media critics, is supposed to have an instant response to everything that happens. But I'm going to resist that urge.

Note that Howad thinks it's just peachy to criticize Muslims for not speaking about violence they had nothing to do with -- for their "failure to write or say something" -- but it's beyond the pale to notice that Howad is failing to do his job, which involves pontificating on everyone else’s journalism, including that of the editor-in-chief of the New Republic.

No one can accuse Howad of having a double standard. He has no standards.

Howard's "not my job" defense is particularly pathetic when you compare his coverage of Rick Sanchez' bigotry to his coverage of Marty Peretz' bigotry -- the latter of which was only coverage about how mean everyone is to Howad.

And Howad's claim that he likes to think before speaking is belied not only by his Twatterings but, more significantly, by the fact that Peretz's bigotry has been on display for years and years, while Sanchez only spouted off two days ago. Kurtz had plenty of time to learn about Peretz' vile views if he had any interest in doing so. That being his job and all.

Howad's plea of ignorance as to Peretz' racism may or may not be true. In either case, the follow-up should be, "Then why should anyone give a fuck what Kurtz thinks about anything?"

Kurtz On O'Keefe

Greasy-wigged wingnut Howard Kurtz finally gets around to mentioning the latest capers of Breitbart Slim:

KURTZ: Time now for the "Media Monitor," our weekly look at the hits and errors in the news business.

Here's what I liked.

CNN's Abbie Boudreau, reporting a documentary on conservative activists, tried to arrange an interview with James O'Keefe. He, of course, the guy who dressed up as a pimp to run that undercover sting against ACORN, and then was arrested for infiltrating Senator Mary Landrieu's office.

Boudreau discovered from a woman working with O'Keefe that he was planning a hidden camera sting against her and CNN. The setting? A boat filled with sexual props such as dildos and fuzzy handcuffs.

Apparently this is the first time Howie the Putz has mentioned a dildo outside the presence of Jonah Goldberg.

More substantively: Of course, Howie can't avoid repeating the lie that Breitbart Slim dressed as a pimp while "running" his "sting" of ACORN. O'Keefe dressed as a pimp to promote his smear, not during his encounters with ACORN employees. No matter how hard he tries -- or doesn't -- Howie just can't quit rightwing scripts.