New York Mag has a nice little roundup today of mayoral hopefuls' reactions to the greatest question facing New York City today: before a mohel completes the "beautiful ancient ritual" of sucking the blood off your baby's weiner, should you have to sign a consent form acknowledging that this practice has led to babies getting herpes, brain damage, and death? Or is a consent form the greatest type of Tyranny our Great Nation has ever known? Let us put on our Talmudic Scholar cap, and suck on this question for a while.
Can one of you New Yorkers write a guest article to explain what the fuck all this shit is about? Living in Northern Cali, I can barely keep track of the politics in LA.
Since NYC has a population greater than one-fifth of the whole state of California (and, therefore, greater than the populations of each of 39 entire states), I feel like I should pay attention. But it is confusing to we lazy left coasters. Is there a good guy? A bad guy? A foreskin?
Editrix, can you commission someone to nyawksplain this?
To be fair (and this is hard for me) to the Grey Lady, the way they did the article makes it pretty fucking obvious. You can't really expect them to explicitly point out the obvious in an article that is supposed to be a review. They've done a lot of worse shit.
It's a good piece, and god knows no one else was going to publish it. But that's what struck me about the article: it was dancing around the race issue in the most blatant way, without mentioning it at all. But there's no reason not to mention it. A quote from someone else mentioning race would preserve the NYT's neutrality: "Some commentators have noted that ..."
Why does the NYT think it's impossible to suggest racial bias on the part of the GOP during the Obama administration? It's not exactly a sektrit. By not mentioning it, the NYT sustains the pitiful (and complicit) illusion that we live in a "postracial" society, whatever the hell that is. It's just weird.
They've gotten away with some outrageous stuff, mostly because they play the "anti-semite" card so well, in a city where it trumps everything else in the deck. I think people have pretty much had enough of it.
Men who are snipped as infants don't recall it being done -- sorry, baby-trauma outrage crowd, but there's just no there there. Seems to me that 99% of the hollering is being done by people who have no skin in the game, so to speak -- it's not as if there are millions of circumcised men out there who wish they weren't.
I still can't figure out how a person can live in the town of St. George on the Island of Staten and still somehow be in a borough of NYC. This is one of those logic fails for which I blame Giuliani, because why not.
Gotta go with Quinn on this one, but I can certainly sympathize with Weiner for not wanting to touch this peener question with a ... er ... barge pole.
Fuck them. Let them move to Westchester and wreck the school system there. Or Israel, and make the lives of Palestinians even more wretched. Oh wait, they've already done those things.
God, why didn&#039;t we let Staten Island secede when it wanted to? We could have <strike>deported</strike> encouraged them all to move there and duke it out with the <strike>made men</strike> Italian American police and firefighter families.
Can one of you New Yorkers write a guest article to explain what the fuck all this shit is about? Living in Northern Cali, I can barely keep track of the politics in LA.
Since NYC has a population greater than one-fifth of the whole state of California (and, therefore, greater than the populations of each of 39 entire states), I feel like I should pay attention. But it is confusing to we lazy left coasters. Is there a good guy? A bad guy? A foreskin?
Editrix, can you commission someone to nyawksplain this?
Oh, come on. <i>Errbody</i> blames Obama.
To be fair (and this is hard for me) to the Grey Lady, the way they did the article makes it pretty fucking obvious. You can&#039;t really expect them to explicitly point out the obvious in an article that is supposed to be a review. They&#039;ve done a lot of worse shit.
It&#039;s a good piece, and god knows no one else was going to publish it. But that&#039;s what struck me about the article: it was dancing around the race issue in the most blatant way, without mentioning it at all. But there&#039;s no reason not to mention it. A quote from someone else mentioning race would preserve the NYT&#039;s neutrality: &quot;Some commentators have noted that ...&quot;
Why does the NYT think it&#039;s impossible to suggest racial bias on the part of the GOP during the Obama administration? It&#039;s not exactly a sektrit. By not mentioning it, the NYT sustains the pitiful (and complicit) illusion that we live in a &quot;postracial&quot; society, whatever the hell that is. It&#039;s just weird.
<blockquote>So blow jobs are right out.</blockquote>
A moment of silence, please. Flags, and other things, will be at half staff for the rest of the day.
They&#039;ve gotten away with some outrageous stuff, mostly because they play the &quot;anti-semite&quot; card so well, in a city where it trumps everything else in the deck. I think people have pretty much had enough of it.
Men who are snipped as infants don&#039;t recall it being done -- sorry, baby-trauma outrage crowd, but there&#039;s just no there there. Seems to me that 99% of the hollering is being done by people who have no skin in the game, so to speak -- it&#039;s not as if there are millions of circumcised men out there who wish they weren&#039;t.
Peen-vampires? Twilight series take note: suck smarter, not harder. Or something
I still can&#039;t figure out how a person can live in the town of St. George on the Island of Staten and still somehow be in a borough of NYC. This is one of those logic fails for which I blame Giuliani, because why not.
With a little luck, you can avoid encountering Hasidim for whole years at a time. Just stay away from Crown Heights, Ramapo, and 47th St.
Oh, and keep some garlic and a vial of holy water in your pocket, just in case.
Well, and they&#039;ve been gunning for Rice since the get-go.
Another argument for modernity. Some super liberal Jews are now performing the ritual entirely over the internet. It&#039;s performed by e-mohel.
It has more in relation with those old Puritan names like Goody Goodwife than anything you are thinking.
I know, I was disappointed too...
Gotta go with Quinn on this one, but I can certainly sympathize with Weiner for not wanting to touch this peener question with a ... er ... barge pole.
Fuck them. Let them move to Westchester and wreck the school system there. Or Israel, and make the lives of Palestinians even more wretched. Oh wait, they&#039;ve already done those things.
God, why didn&#039;t we let Staten Island secede when it wanted to? We could have <strike>deported</strike> encouraged them all to move there and duke it out with the <strike>made men</strike> Italian American police and firefighter families.
We could&#039;ve sold tickets. :-(
This is completely OT but I&#039;m gonna post it anyway because gaaah. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013..." target="_blank">" rel="nofollow noopener" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/30/us/politics/2-d...">http://www.nytimes.com/2013...
COULD RACE HAVE HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS, NYT???? JUST WONDERING.