SUBSCRIBE:

Megan Fox

Megan Fox is a stay-at-home mom, blogger, radio-talk show host and conservative folk-singer. Visit her at www.intolerantfox.com.


Subsidize This: The Truth About Corporate Welfare for Big Oil (True Twit, Part 23)

2011 May 18

I am always skeptical whenever anyone uses phrases like “big oil” or “big business” which are just code words for “evil capitalists.” Notice, those phrases never get used when talking about teachers unions (which actually give more money to lobbyists and political campaigns than “big oil”). The newest talking point to run around Washington D.C. and the cable networks has to do with “oil subsidies.” Rachel Maddow sternly rebuked the evil oil executives claiming they need to give up these lucrative subsidies and a cacophony of similar demands is rising from the Left and the Right. read more…

Magical Thinking: The Left’s Belief In The Gun Control Fairy (True Twit, Part 22)

2011 May 15

Originally published on May 11, 2011

If there are any certainties in life, among them is determining people’s character by examining the company they keep. Rachel Maddow considers it her mission to have as many nationally known “Republicans” on her show as possible. Of course, the only “Republican” she regularly chats with is Michael Steele. Steele is well-liked but clearly not very conservative and was unable to hang onto his position as the head of the RNC. Under his watch, they almost went bankrupt.

But guess who showed up last week to join the Twit for her Republican/Crazed Leftist love fest? None other than the legendary Meghan McCain. (And by “legendary,” I mean her legendary lack of conservative chops.) While Maddow patted herself on the back for deigning to rub elbows with a nasty Republican, I found myself remembering Meggie Mac’s infamous Sarah Palin bashing. Let’s see, McCain is pro-gay marriage, pro-feminist, pro-global warming alarmism, and pro-flash-your-boobies-on-the-internet (sorry Meg, you posted the photo). The most conservative thing about this girl is her father and he’s not exactly a shining star of conservatism, so you can understand my snickering when Maddow referred to her as a “nationally recognized Republican.”

However, I got to thinking I might have to take back all the ungenerous things I’ve ever thought or said about McCain when she took Maddow to the NRA convention. read more…

Pages: 1 2

Homophobic Barbarians: 10 Reasons Every Gay American Needs to Support the War Against Islamofascism

2011 May 15

 


This list post was first published in March here.
al-Tirmidhi, Sunan 1:152 – [Muhammad said] “Whoever is found conducting himself in the manner of the people of Lot [homosexuals], kill the doer and the receiver.

For all the screaming about intolerance and bigotry against gays here in America — driven by many people’s objection to changing the definition of the centuries-old institution of marriage — many so-called liberals don’t seem to notice the actual intolerance and murder being meted out on gays in Muslim countries. Homosexuals living in Muslim countries suffer dire consequences for coming out including whipping, banishment, humiliation and even death by stoning, hanging or familial stabbing in accordance with Islamic law. Homosexuals in the Muslim culture are encouraged to commit suicide rather than bring shame on their families.

While the biggest argument regarding homosexuals in America today revolves around which political party gets to invite them to gala events, gays in the Muslim world are fighting for their very lives. Instead of rallying against the Islamization of the West and the homophobia that comes with it, the Left spends its time identifying conservative “hate groups,” none of which include Muslims who hate homosexuals.

There is always the possibility that American gay rights activists haven’t heard of the many atrocities perpetrated on homosexuals by Islam due to the deafening silence of the old media on anything that can be construed as criticism of the ‘religion of peace.’ I aim to change that. The following are ten reasons gays need to join the fight to beat back the growing Islamofascist threat.


10. Bangladesh refugees

Many gays living in Muslim countries have tried to claim refugee status in free nations with tolerant attitudes toward homosexuality. Unfortunately, more often than not, they are denied and told to act less gay to avoid problems in their home countries. An unidentified gay couple from Bangladesh who had been stoned, whipped and threatened with death if caught, tried to seek refugee protections in Australia but were turned down.

When the review tribunal rejected their application for refugee status last year, it said the couple had “lived together for over four years without experiencing any more than minor problems … they clearly conducted themselves in a discreet manner, and there is no reason to suppose that they would not continue to do so if they returned home now.”

Minor problems? I’ve heard Australians are tough, but how much more than stoning, whipping and fatwas on your head do you have to go through before they call it a major problem? For whatever reason, the government of Australia doesn’t have much sympathy for gays in the Islamic world. The question is, will they have any sympathy for Australian gays when the Islamists come for them?

Next: Organizing a gay parade in Bosnia is risky business…

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Top 10 Hoaxes Perpetrated by the Left and Trumpeted by a Complicit Media

2011 May 14

NRB Archives. This list post was first published in January here.

There’s nothing the left loves more than a victim. Our entire victim-culture can be summed up into one Oprah Winfrey Show, complete with boxes of Kleenex and clichéd advice about “moving forward” and “finding one’s inner beauty.” Admittedly, it’s tempting to get sucked in. Who doesn’t feel the heart strings tighten when a true story of hardship is presented, complete with video clips of beach walking and wailing orchestral instruments? But “victims” have become entertainment that equal big ratings and instant stardom. As such, one must always be on the lookout for the big hoax.

Surfing Drudge the other morning I ran across an article on some books at Harvard which had been peed upon. These weren’t just any books, but all of them were books with gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered themes. Reading the article and the outrage from the Harvard librarians about “bias crimes” got my hairy eyeball twitching. The word “hoax” came to mind immediately. And sure enough, it has been discovered not only was it not vandalism, but an accident brought on by one of the library’s own staff members. There are questions, however, like why was there a bottle of urine sitting on a shelf in the LGBT section in the first place?

All I’m saying is, it stinks. And it’s not just the urine. It’s not like it would be the first example of a fake crime intended to bring attention to a societal “problem” in the eyes of the vandal. Perhaps someone should investigate the librarian to find out if one of his/her pastimes is inciting unrest. The following are examples of the worst hoaxes committed by radical leftists in the name of social justice.

And we’re starting with a college professor who spray-painted her own car, and then pretended she was the victim of a hate crime: Kerri Dunn.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Magical Thinking: The Left’s Belief In The Gun Control Fairy (True Twit, Part 22)

2011 May 11

If there are any certainties in life, among them is determining people’s character by examining the company they keep. Rachel Maddow considers it her mission to have as many nationally known “Republicans” on her show as possible. Of course, the only “Republican” she regularly chats with is Michael Steele. Steele is well-liked but clearly not very conservative and was unable to hang onto his position as the head of the RNC. Under his watch, they almost went bankrupt.

But guess who showed up last week to join the Twit for her Republican/Crazed Leftist love fest? None other than the legendary Meghan McCain. (And by “legendary,” I mean her legendary lack of conservative chops.) While Maddow patted herself on the back for deigning to rub elbows with a nasty Republican, I found myself remembering Meggie Mac’s infamous Sarah Palin bashing. Let’s see, McCain is pro-gay marriage, pro-feminist, pro-global warming alarmism, and pro-flash-your-boobies-on-the-internet (sorry Meg, you posted the photo). The most conservative thing about this girl is her father and he’s not exactly a shining star of conservatism, so you can understand my snickering when Maddow referred to her as a “nationally recognized Republican.”

However, I got to thinking I might have to take back all the ungenerous things I’ve ever thought or said about McCain when she took Maddow to the NRA convention. read more…

Pages: 1 2

10 Leftists Who Need Condolences on the Death of their Hero Osama bin Laden

2011 May 6

Inevitably, following the general pleasure at the news the Osama bin Laden is finally residing in Hell, it will come to light that certain members of the Left are quietly miserable over his passing. They are the ones for whom evil is not really definable, terror is in the eye of the beholder and America is always wrong. In other words, most of the hard Left and virtually the entire media elite. That’s a pretty big list, so I thought I should narrow it down to the ones who will be the most despondent over this delightful news for America.

In accordance with the new tone of civility, NRB suggests you send a personal sympathy card to each grieving individual on the list. You can click here and email this highly appropriate condolence with just the right touch of maudlin snark. (Contact information will be provided.) read more…

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

10 Leftists Who Need Condolences on the Death of their Hero Osama bin Laden

2011 May 4

Inevitably, following the general pleasure at the news the Osama bin Laden is finally residing in Hell, it will come to light that certain members of the Left are quietly miserable over his passing. They are the ones for whom evil is not really definable, terror is in the eye of the beholder and America is always wrong. In other words, most of the hard Left and virtually the entire media elite. That’s a pretty big list, so I thought I should narrow it down to the ones who will be the most despondent over this delightful news for America.

In accordance with the new tone of civility, NRB suggests you send a personal sympathy card to each grieving individual on the list. You can click here and email this highly appropriate condolence with just the right touch of maudlin snark. (Contact information will be provided.) read more…

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Liquor? I Hardly Know ‘Er! Lawless Left Appalled by Legal Republican Tactics (True Twit, Part 18)

2011 April 27

Rachel Maddow got very giggly and over-amused last week reporting that some Republicans offered to buy shots in exchange for signatures on a recall petition. She seemed to think it was illegal, or something. Unethical, maybe. Illegal? No. Alcohol is a legal substance and the people offered it were of age. Was it the best strategy? Maybe not, but I’ll give them points for creativity and a go-get ’em attitude!

What struck me as uproariously funny here is that Democrats invented and perfected bribing people to win elections. That Republicans are finally taking note and getting in the game is only evidence of their arrested development in creative strategy. For decades we’ve been plodding along playing fair and whining when the ballot boxes get stuffed and buses of homeless people are shuttled to the polls and dead people rise from the grave to vote for their favorite Democrat. read more…

Pages: 1 2

10 Reasons Public School Teachers and Unions are Failing Children and Bankrupting America

2011 April 23

This popular list post was originally published on March 14 here.

Corruption, greed, incompetence, bureaucratic bungling: Those are the things most likely to be found when the charade of public union outrage is peeled back to reveal the inner workings of collective bargaining. There is no doubt America is engaged in an ideological battle. On one side are the public sector unions and “workers” demanding the taxpayers cough up more to fund their fat paychecks and bloated pensions. On the other side are the majority of Americans who work in the private sector, fund their own retirements and health care, and have no entitlement programs they haven’t designed themselves. The public sector is asking for more blood while the private sector is beaten unconscious and bleeding from every major artery. read more…

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Selling Sexy, Taliban-style: Wear a Hijab or Die

2011 April 23

This popular post was originally published on Tuesday, April 20.

Violent threats are the soup du jour for most Islamofacists. It seems to be the only way they know how to communicate their terrible ideas, such as that women should be wrapped up in sheets and if they refuse they should be buried in the ground and stoned. An Asian woman working in a pharmacy in England was threatened with death if she continued speaking out about the harassment she receives for not wearing a burka.

An Asian woman who works in a pharmacy in east London was told to dress more modestly and wear a veil or the shop would be boycotted.

When she went to the media to talk about the abuse she suffered, a man later entered the pharmacy and told her: ‘If you keep doing these things, we are going to kill you’.

It’s a public relations nightmare. For a religion which wants to dominate the world and convert the masses, they might want to consider that death threats might not be the best strategy. At my church, we bribe people with free coffee and pastries. Since Muslims have been living in the West for a considerable time now you would think they would have picked up on how easy it is to sell an idea, especially to Western women who are notoriously swayed by every new fad no matter how nuts. Western women will wear turkey feathers on their heads if that’s what Heidi Klum says is a must have for this season.

Clearly, Islamofascists need to start selling the burqa as sexy. The good news for them is the American feminist Left has already started doing that for them. Naomi Wolf thinks shrouded women living under suffocating rags is dead sexy.

When sexuality is kept private and directed in ways seen as sacred – and when one’s husband isn’t seeing his wife (or other women) half-naked all day long – one can feel great power and intensity when the headscarf or the chador comes off in the the home.

Excuse me? Since when do the “feminists” value private sexuality? Visit any one of their websites and you’ll be treated to PowerPoint demonstrations depicting the steps to take to reach your g-spot. Never in my life have I heard a faux-feminist come out on the side of propriety or self-restraint when it comes to sexuality. It seems they only value it when it concerns the sacred religion of Islam. Ask them how they feel about similarly modest Pentecostal women or Mormon women and watch their attitude change (and fangs come out.) Modest women of the Christian faith are simply repressed with no power or “intensity” in the home. Also choke-worthy is this tidbit from Wolf.

I learned that Muslim attitudes toward women’s appearance and sexuality are not rooted in repression, but in a strong sense of public versus private, of what is due to God and what is due to one’s husband. It is not that Islam suppresses sexuality, but that it embodies a strongly developed sense of its appropriate channeling – toward marriage, the bonds that sustain family life, and the attachment that secures a home.

Is she kidding? Since when do feminists care about intact families and what is due one’s husband? That kind of talk will get your run right out of the National Organization For Women. On any given day on the Huffington Post you can find articles about why divorce is so much better for children than stable families! But perhaps the most galling is the common belief among feminists that most women choose the veil.

Indeed, many Muslim women I spoke with did not feel at all subjugated by the chador or the headscarf. On the contrary, they felt liberated from what they experienced as the intrusive, commodifying, basely sexualising Western gaze.

Even with stories surfacing about the persecution of formally free women in Western societies, the Left refuses to believe their favorite religion, Islam, is a dangerous beast. Feministing joins the chorus defending misogynistic theologies of death.

I am so tired of having to read the qualifier from mostly white Western feminists before any discussion of the veil ban that “the veil is sexist but…” In the context of global patriarchy doesn’t this qualifier belong in front of, like, everything? It seems to me we have a lot easier seeing -isms in a cultural context different from our own, and a lot harder time seeing agency. To veil or not to veil is a question to be navigated by Muslim women.

Except it isn’t a question being navigated by the women of Islam, but a directive being issued by the men against women by threat of violence or death. And yet, our American feminists support this ancient symbol of male superiority. These are the same women, by the way, who support the choice for a woman to embrace a patriarchal, misogynistic, female-stoning religion, but if a woman should come out in favor of saving unborn women, she’s against women. These are the same women who say there isn’t anything a woman can wear or do that encourages rape but will allow women who feel completely opposite to sit at their table simply because their belief is an Islamic one. A Muslim “feminist” blog waxes poetically about the “sexy hijab” and even more disturbing, encourages the view that uncovered women are looking for rape.

All uncovered women are immodest and “are asking for it.”

Imagine the outcry from the femisogynists  if Pat Robertson had made that statement. What we have here is hysterical blindness in a group of women who claim to be for all women, but who are blatantly ignoring the violence against women in Islam. They want to take each instance on a case by case basis so they can determine whether or not the woman in question wanted to be abused and oppressed or not. Using that kind of logic they should also support the rights of women who want to stay with abusive husbands, but wisely, no one supports a decision so fraught with danger for the victim. Why is it they can’t see the similarity between the two?

The “feminist” position on Islamic oppression of women is completely unsupportable. Just because a woman wants to wear a visible sign of her oppression by men does not make it acceptable! And as we are seeing in London, the longer we continue to hem and haw on this issue because of our fear of insulting someone, the more the danger grows for women. Are we going to wait for women to actually be killed over the veil in the West before we speak out against the evil the veil represents?

Selling Sexy, Taliban-style: Wear a Hijab or Die

2011 April 20

Violent threats are the soup du jour for most Islamofacists. It seems to be the only way they know how to communicate their terrible ideas, such as that women should be wrapped up in sheets and if they refuse they should be buried in the ground and stoned. An Asian woman working in a pharmacy in England was threatened with death if she continued speaking out about the harassment she receives for not wearing a burka.

An Asian woman who works in a pharmacy in east London was told to dress more modestly and wear a veil or the shop would be boycotted.

When she went to the media to talk about the abuse she suffered, a man later entered the pharmacy and told her: ‘If you keep doing these things, we are going to kill you’.

It’s a public relations nightmare. For a religion which wants to dominate the world and convert the masses, they might want to consider that death threats might not be the best strategy. At my church, we bribe people with free coffee and pastries. Since Muslims have been living in the West for a considerable time now you would think they would have picked up on how easy it is to sell an idea, especially to Western women who are notoriously swayed by every new fad no matter how nuts. Western women will wear turkey feathers on their heads if that’s what Heidi Klum says is a must have for this season.

Clearly, Islamofascists need to start selling the burqa as sexy. The good news for them is the American feminist Left has already started doing that for them. Naomi Wolf thinks shrouded women living under suffocating rags is dead sexy.

When sexuality is kept private and directed in ways seen as sacred – and when one’s husband isn’t seeing his wife (or other women) half-naked all day long – one can feel great power and intensity when the headscarf or the chador comes off in the the home.

Excuse me? Since when do the “feminists” value private sexuality? Visit any one of their websites and you’ll be treated to PowerPoint demonstrations depicting the steps to take to reach your g-spot. Never in my life have I heard a faux-feminist come out on the side of propriety or self-restraint when it comes to sexuality. It seems they only value it when it concerns the sacred religion of Islam. Ask them how they feel about similarly modest Pentecostal women or Mormon women and watch their attitude change (and fangs come out.) Modest women of the Christian faith are simply repressed with no power or “intensity” in the home. Also choke-worthy is this tidbit from Wolf.

I learned that Muslim attitudes toward women’s appearance and sexuality are not rooted in repression, but in a strong sense of public versus private, of what is due to God and what is due to one’s husband. It is not that Islam suppresses sexuality, but that it embodies a strongly developed sense of its appropriate channeling – toward marriage, the bonds that sustain family life, and the attachment that secures a home.

Is she kidding? Since when do feminists care about intact families and what is due one’s husband? That kind of talk will get your run right out of the National Organization For Women. On any given day on the Huffington Post you can find articles about why divorce is so much better for children than stable families! But perhaps the most galling is the common belief among feminists that most women choose the veil.

Indeed, many Muslim women I spoke with did not feel at all subjugated by the chador or the headscarf. On the contrary, they felt liberated from what they experienced as the intrusive, commodifying, basely sexualising Western gaze.

Even with stories surfacing about the persecution of formally free women in Western societies, the Left refuses to believe their favorite religion, Islam, is a dangerous beast. Feministing joins the chorus defending misogynistic theologies of death.

I am so tired of having to read the qualifier from mostly white Western feminists before any discussion of the veil ban that “the veil is sexist but…” In the context of global patriarchy doesn’t this qualifier belong in front of, like, everything? It seems to me we have a lot easier seeing -isms in a cultural context different from our own, and a lot harder time seeing agency. To veil or not to veil is a question to be navigated by Muslim women.

Except it isn’t a question being navigated by the women of Islam, but a directive being issued by the men against women by threat of violence or death. And yet, our American feminists support this ancient symbol of male superiority. These are the same women, by the way, who support the choice for a woman to embrace a patriarchal, misogynistic, female-stoning religion, but if a woman should come out in favor of saving unborn women, she’s against women. These are the same women who say there isn’t anything a woman can wear or do that encourages rape but will allow women who feel completely opposite to sit at their table simply because their belief is an Islamic one. A Muslim “feminist” blog waxes poetically about the “sexy hijab” and even more disturbing, encourages the view that uncovered women are looking for rape.

All uncovered women are immodest and “are asking for it.”

Imagine the outcry from the femisogynists  if Pat Robertson had made that statement. What we have here is hysterical blindness in a group of women who claim to be for all women, but who are blatantly ignoring the violence against women in Islam. They want to take each instance on a case by case basis so they can determine whether or not the woman in question wanted to be abused and oppressed or not. Using that kind of logic they should also support the rights of women who want to stay with abusive husbands, but wisely, no one supports a decision so fraught with danger for the victim. Why is it they can’t see the similarity between the two?

The “feminist” position on Islamic oppression of women is completely unsupportable. Just because a woman wants to wear a visible sign of her oppression by men does not make it acceptable! And as we are seeing in London, the longer we continue to hem and haw on this issue because of our fear of insulting someone, the more the danger grows for women. Are we going to wait for women to actually be killed over the veil in the West before we speak out against the evil the veil represents?

Herding Cats: Why Rachel Maddow and the Left Cannot Understand the Tea Party (True Twit, Part 16)

2011 April 20

On April 15th of this year, for the third year in a row, the Tea Party gathered nationwide. This year, the turnout was much lower than in previous years.  Rachel Maddow would have you believe that it’s because the Tea Party has peaked and the members just aren’t that into the message anymore. She delighted in showing footage after footage of poorly attended Tea Parties that all save one happened in the freezing rain. And still, in the freezing rain, hundreds of people showed up.

After the attempted Tea Party smear, Maddow turned her show to focusing on the enormous numbers the government unions have produced at their rallies and I found myself snickering. It’s easy to get hordes of people to show up when you’re paying them to be there and providing transportation, free t-shirts, lunch and pre-printed signs!  Steven Crowder once made a hilarious video where he went undercover and applied for a job as a professional protester. They offered him $33,400 per year with full benefits and profit sharing! read more…

Pages: 1 2

Copyright 2018 NewsReal Blog

The Theme Foundry