Donate
Yeah, Starman didn't go to the moon. Like Apollo 11 even did...

Fake History purveyor, patriotism scold, and convicted-but-pardoned felon Dinesh D'Souza is VERY UPSET about the latest Hollywood attempt to destroy America and indoctrinate the young: the decision to not include a scene of the US flag being planted on the Moon in the new movie First Man, directed by Damien Chazelle. It also turns out First Man is a Neil Armstrong biopic and not in fact an homage to the ape-person in 2001: A Space Odyssey who learned how to kill with a tapir's jawbone thigh bone, so that's another historical fact the new movie totally ignores.


D'Souza, always on the alert for something to get the culture-war attention coming his way, was simply disgusted Friday.

Yup, the ONE THING we learned from the Apollo missions was that a flag was placed on the Moon for Americans. And the Apollo 11 astronauts certainly believed their achievement was about America, and America First and only, which is why they left that plaque at the landing site reading

Here men from the planet Earth AND IT'S BEST COUNTRY, U.S. AMARACA!!!! first set foot upon the Moon, July 1969 A.D. We came in peace for all mankind BUT MOSTLY AMERICA, DON' FORGET, MAGA!!! [five flag emojis, two of them the Liberian flag]

Now, if you want to get all contexty about it, Gosling is 1) the Canadian (deport him!!!!) actor who plays Armstrong, not the writer or director of First Man, so we have no idea what input he had on the decision, if any, and 2) He said a bunch of other stuff about Armstrong and the whole "One giant leap for mankind" leftist brainwashing the astronauts were spouting at the time. He

argued that the first voyage to the moon was a "human achievement" that didn't just represent an American accomplishment, and that's how Armstrong viewed it.

"I think this was widely regarded in the end as a human achievement [and] that's how we chose to view it," Gosling. "I also think Neil was extremely humble, as were many of these astronauts, and time and time again he deferred the focus from himself to the 400,000 people who made the mission possible."

Gosling added, "He was reminding everyone that he was just the tip of the iceberg — and that's not just to be humble, that's also true. So I don't think that Neil viewed himself as an American hero. From my interviews with his family and people that knew him, it was quite the opposite. And we wanted the film to reflect Neil."

See? Talk about a movie that's simply dripping with poisonous contempt for the Best Country on Earth, which actually OWNS THAT MOON. D'Souza's mentions were full of people insisting they would boycott the film and probably take their kids out of school because teachers won't even tell children the TRUTH about the moon or any US history, and also there is a secret Democrat Plantation up there on the moon that Hillary Clinton built as a way station for her George Soros Sex Camps On Mars, too.

Also, yes, yes, we KNOW the space race was more than all the inspiring, look at Earth from Apollo 8 and you don't see no countries blather it's often portrayed as -- of course it was a cosmic dick-swinging contest between cold warriors. But that reality isn't likely to vanish into history if one Hollywood movie takes the more Carl Sagan-y sensawonder Pale Blue Dot approach, either. Both of those coexist, if sometimes uncomfortably.

Besides, if anyone really needs 20 minutes of a close-up on a flag, with patriotic music and fireworks, they can always watch D'souza's crappy America: Imagine A World Without Her, which pads out its running time with such glurge. Or maybe it was his dumb Hillary movie, we forget -- he basically just makes the same movie over and over.

As for his own politics, Neil Armstrong probably said all he needed to by refusing to run for office on the basis of his fame. He was probably kind of a libertarian, but very privately. One of his few open political statements? He really hated Congress treating NASA as a political football, a stance that liberals can embrace as pro-science but conservatives can just as well spin as in favor of Big Tech and Big America. We bet he'd be annoyed by D'Souza running his mouth more than anything, though he'd leave the punching to Buzz Aldrin, regarding other conspiracy theorists.

In conclusion, we would like to thank Dinesh D'Souza, who is a complete idiot, for at least reminding us of at least one great American tradition: Late August truly is the Silly Season. How easy, in these turbulent times, to forget that.

Especially since the Silly Season is now year-'round. At least we're able to say Merry Christmas again, and to play Gill Scott- Heron whenever we need.

There are other videos, like this one with spaceships, but this recording is best, because it includes the preface where Scott-Heron reminds us "it was inspired by some whiteys on the Moon."

When the going gets weird, Yr Wonkette keeps you going. Click here to keep US going!

[Business Insider / Some hyperventilating dipshit on Twitter / ABC News]

Doktor Zoom

Doktor Zoom's real name is Marty Kelley, and he lives in the wilds of Boise, Idaho. He is not a medical doctor, but does have a real PhD in Rhetoric. You should definitely donate some money to this little mommyblog where he has finally found acceptance and cat pictures. He is on maternity leave until 2033. Here is his Twitter, also. His quest to avoid prolixity is not going so great.

$
Donate with CC

OOH BOY HOWDY, The Federalist is on fire this week! Just this morning we told you about the hilarious Federalist column where one neo-Nazi's mom and dad are Democrats, ipso facto QED NEO-NAZIS ARE THE REAL LIBERALS, FUCKERS! Is America's dumbest woman whose name doesn't rhyme with Cara Snailin' over there being a total fuckin' Mollie Hemingway right now? Sadly, she blocked us on Twitter, so how could we possibly know? The answer is WE DON'T CARE.

But now we have a gem of the Federalist genre, an article written by a whiny-ass gay quisling conservative, who would like to chew on his blankie and whine about how much harder it is out there for a conservative than it is for a gay person. This is a subject we happen to have some knowledge about, because we are super gay! And we know a lot about conservatives, both firsthand -- being subjected to them every single one of our almost four decades of life -- and also from covering extremist right-wing Christians for a very long time. Particularly the kind that tell young, impressionable, vulnerable gay kids that they need to pray away the gay if they want Jesus to exercise some self control and refrain from sending them to a fiery hell for all eternity.

We clicked on the article with high hopes. See if you can spot why:

Keep reading... Show less
$
Donate with CC
pic via Glamour Shots, we mean this dude's old website

The House Education and Workforce Committee was all set to have a hearing today all about the horrors that a higher minimum wage would wreak on the economy. Horrors like rich people being slightly less rich. Horrors like business owners claiming they will have to fire people and charge $15 for a McChicken if forced to pay workers a living wage, which they won't actually do because no one will buy a $15 McChicken and they would go out of business if they tried that, and they already don't hire more people than the bare minimum they can get away with. Horrors like poor people not being "motivated" to work harder and get better jobs that do not pay them an amount no human being could possibly live on.

Alas, as Politico reports, it was not to be, as committee members discovered their big witness for the hearing, San Diego State University economist Joseph Sabia (pictured above in a Glamour Shot from his archived website), was kind of a wacko.

Sabia, as it turns out, once had a blog called "No Shades Of Gray," in which he wrote many columns of an extremely homophobic and sexist persuasion. In one of these columns, in 2002, Sabia was very mad about one man's lawsuit against several fast food giants for contributing to his health and obesity problems by failing to disclose the nutritional information of the food they sold. In retrospect, I think most people are now on board with these chains being required to post calorie counts and other nutritional information, but in 2002, Sabia was convinced that requiring them to do this would be an assault on freedom for all Americans everywhere. His response to this was to try and attempt a Jonathan Swift posture and suggest taxing gay sex, which he claimed leads to "disastrous health consequences."

Because sure, that's the same thing, basically.


In gay sex, we have an activity that is clearly leading to disastrous health consequences. What rational person would engage in this sort of activity? There is only one solution - let's tax it.

"Come on, Sabia," you say, "how are you going to enforce these taxes? Are you going to send government officials to peep into everyone's bedroom?"

Eventually. But first we have to mount the assault on Big Gay (no, I am not talking about Rosie O'Donnell). We can tax gay nightclubs, websites, personal ads, sexual paraphernalia, and so forth. Talk about a sin tax!!! We can cripple gay-related industries and get them right where we want them. All gay clubs will have to feature huge, flashing warning signs like "CAUTION: Entering this nightclub may increase your chance of contracting STDs and dying."

Big Gay clearly lures people into trying their "product" without discussing the risks to mind, body, and soul. The average Joe on the street does not understand all of the possible bad outcomes. I can almost hear him now:

"They said '100 percent hotties.' I thought that meant it was fun. I thought gay sex was OK…Now I have all these diseases. Big Gay has wrecked my life."

In the immoral words of Warren G, "Regulators!! Mount up!"

EXTREME SHUDDER.

In another 2002 article, classily titled "College Girls: Unpaid Whores," Sabia laments that feminists have led college girls to stop trying to be like the Holy Virgin Mary and instead to aspire to be more like that hussy Ally McBeal.

No, really.

As women have strayed from the church, they have replaced what is holy with what is temporally pleasing. For Catholics, the model woman is Mary, the virgin Mother of God. She is beloved by the faithful for her unflappable devotion to and trust in God, her nurturing of the Son of Man, and her deep love for all humanity.

Today's college girl looks to Ally McBeal, the trollops of Sex in the City, and the floozies on Friends to set their moral compasses.

The sad truth is that college girls are so desperate to find love that they are willing to degrade themselves to get it. But true love can only be understood in the context of the Word of God. Any other notion of "love" is secular and, by definition, limited and finite.

Not only that, but instead of going to college to find a husband, they have boyfriends. Boyfriends they have S-E-X with. And sometimes, not even that. Sometimes they have sex with people just because they want to have sex with people, and not even in exchange for Valentine's Day cards or money!


Additionally, other sex-based relationships have become commonplace. In recent years, a new and disturbing arrangement known as "friends with benefits" has emerged. In this arrangement, men are not even forced to perform the normal duties of boyfriends, i.e. flowers, Valentine's Day cards, rides to the abortion clinic, etc. Instead, girls consider these guys "just friends" whom they happen to screw every now and again. No strings, no attachments, no dinners. Just sex when they feel like it.

This type of arrangement is the next logical step in the direction that young women have drifted in the last few decades. These women have become unpaid whores. At least prostitutes made a buck off of their trade. These women just give it away.

How cute! He was like the ur-incel, basically.

Anyway, following the discovery of the posts, the House Education and Workforce Committee's GOP communications director Kelley McNabb told Politico that "members were uncomfortable moving forward on the hearing." A more optimistic person might think this was a step forward, that maybe those committee members actually thought it was bad to suggest that being gay means being a disease-ridden monster or that college girls are whores, but it's probably more to avoid embarrassment than anything else. Guess they'll have to start from scratch and find a crappy economist who will tell them what they want to hear about the minimum wage but who doesn't have an embarrassing Geocities blog in their past. Good luck with that!

[Politico]

Wonkette is independent and fully funded by readers like you. Click below to tip us!

How often would you like to donate?

Select an amount (USD)

$
Donate with CC
Donate

How often would you like to donate?

Select an amount (USD)

Newsletter

©2018 by Commie Girl Industries, Inc