CotD: a certain kind of homophobe

Commenter Glen Tomkins, over at Lawyers, Guns and Money, discusses what’s behind Michael Medved’s homophobia:

It’s inaccurate and misplaced to speak about these homophobes from the point of view of sexuality being about attraction. Straight men who feel uncomfortable at the very idea that men they work with might look on them as potential sex objects are telling us that their experience of being sexually active men is that sexuality for them is essentially a way to express domination and aggression, rather than affection. They aren’t worried that gay co-workers will find them attractive. That would be flattering. They’re worried that gay men are really the same as they are, that sexual attention from a gay man indicates his desire to dominate. Of course they don’t want to be dominated, even if they are just fine with dominating the unfortunate women in their lives themselves. That’s what women are for, in their worldview. It’s in the Bible, or something.

Heeere’s Hitchy!

Imagine waking up and finding an irate Hitchens on your doorstep

The many and various Ann Althouses at Sadly No should take note that at least one wingnut is prepared to come round to your house and give you grief if you use his name as a pseudonym. He’s British, so no immediate worry, but he is Christopher Hitchens’ brother so you never know, this sort of thing could spread.

Like his brother Christopher, it seems Peter can’t take a joke, according to Guido Fawkes:

Peter Hitchens Stalking The Hitch

Something about the zeitgeist this month means that every successful blogger has to acquire a stalker. The Hitch has surpassed Guido in this sense. Whilst Guido has cyber-stalkers and comment trolls galore, the latent tension between “the real” Peter Hitchens the controversialist right-wing writer and the Peter Hitchens that writes for the Mail on Sunday is reaching hysterical levels. It was funny first time, but this round is bonkers.

First Hitchens complained to Yahoo that the Hitch was using the name Peter Hitchens in his Yahoo mail address. The complaint resulted in Yahoo removing his service. So he simply re-registered as therealpeterhitchens@… Then Guido got a phone call from the Hitch – “Peter Hitchens has just cycled up my drive”.

On his blog he elaborates –

I didn’t answer the door for a few reasons.
1, He didn’t ring the bell
2, I was wearing nothing other than my underwear
3, I thought “Fucking no way is that Peter Hitchens”

Having put a pair of pants on and gone to the door he was gone, If he hadn’t I would have invited him in. I have to say I admire his balls for doing it, the man has made a career out of touring some of the scariest places on earth and confronting far nastier folk than your humble blog host.

This “Hitch” admires the other “Hitch” but thinks he is a bit up himself and should lighten up, having said that , as long as he keeps threatening me he can fuck off and I will ratchet this up as high as he likes.

At first Guido thought the Hitch had been at the sherry, but no, he claims Peter Hitchens is moaning and making vague threats via email continuously. It is hard to see what course of action is open to him in law. There is no law against parody. In fact it seems to Guido if anyone is guilty of anything, it is Peter Hitchens for having a total lack of a sense of proportion. Cycling around peering through people’s letterboxes, he should be charged with travelling without a sense of humour. That’s stalkers for you…

American readers will know drunken popinjay and neocon journo Christopher Hitchens well – who can forget that lovely takedown of the former Lunchtime O’Booze by George Galloway? The Hitchens’ name has become a byword in the US for the louche Brit journalist abroad, but what you may not know is that Christopher also has a brother, Peter, who though once a red-shirted International Socialist organiser is now a paid demagogue for the UK’s rightwing, asylum-seeker-obsessed Mail on Sunday. Sample P. Hitchens headline: “Is this what they mean by ‘Muslim tolerance’?”. The other Hitchens also appears on numerous tv and radio current affairs programmes pontificating loudly and obnoxiously on terrorism and against Moslems and foreigners.

It’s this Hitchens that’s turned up on his imitator’s doorstep peering through the letterbox. So far this phenomenon’s confined to London, but in light of this new development in blogging the denizens of S,N might want to think about Althouse-proofing their homes and mailboxes.

I Suggest They Question Jeremy Clarkson

Clarkson pied, Oxford

When is a bombing campaign not terrorism? When it’s likely to be white people doing it. Duh.

Funny how I’ve read lots of the reports of these bombings and pretty much all that I’ve read scrupulously fail to mention the word terrorism.

Nothing to see here, move along.

Letter bomb injures DVLA worker

Police have placed a cordon around the area
A woman has been injured by a letter bomb which exploded at the main DVLA centre in South Wales, police say.

The attack, which happened shortly before 0930 GMT, is the third of its kind on motoring-related companies in three consecutive days.

Police said the latest blast happened in the post room of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency in Swansea.

An accountancy firm in Berkshire was targeted on Tuesday, and the central London offices of Capita on Monday.

I guess the ‘T” word only applies when it’s brown people and non-Christians doing the bombing. White drivers’ bombs are just an annoying inconvenience. Apparently these incidents are being investigated by something called the ‘Domestic Extremism Unit”. What were the tube bombings then, if not domestic? Or did I misundetsand that the bombers were from Yorkehire… like er, Jeremy Clarkson?

Seriously, they really should question Clarkson under caution, scour his newspaper columns and subpoena Top Gear’s message boards: every week on national television and in the columns of a national newspaper Clarkson notes examples of ‘direct action’, like blowing up speed cameras, wiith smug approbation. Let’s face it, Clarkson’s objectively in favour of terrorism.

Send him to Gitmo.

Sucky Sucky

What a catty little bitch of a genocidal wingnut welfare queen Michelle Malkin is. I wouldn’t normally take any notice of her, being as she is on the lunatic fringe of wingnuttia, except that she’s gratuitously attacked Amanda Marcotte.

Her nasty little video hit-piece is typical Malkin high-school bullying nastiness at it’s most infantile and childish. It sucks ass as a video too.

I wasn’t madly keen on Amanda working for Edwards, and said so at the time, and I also pointed out that when you join the political establishment you take what you get.

But this isn’t political – oh no, this is personal.

Envious much, Michelle? No Republican presidential candidate asked you to be their pet blogger? Ohhh, poor darling, you’ve tried everything including making your ‘O’ face on national TV, and still they don’t want you. What’s it going to take, pulling a train with the uncloseted members of the RNC?

And don’t anyone give me that reasonable, liberal ‘we’re all sisters under the skin’ crap. Fuck sisterhood. It doesn’t count for genocidal rightwing harpies.

If Malkin thinks the entire liberal blogosphere is just going to sit back and see one of its own abused in this way by such an unworthy heifer of wingnut-paid pundit she can think again, if her pretty little ventriloquist’s dummy airhead is capable of that without Jesse’s hand up her back.

Jesse's girl

If Ms. Malkin thinks liberal women are uncivil… oy, we haven’t even started yet. Ad feminam? You betcha.

Malkin the alleged ‘journalist’ may be on tv and may well be making a nice living but let’s face it, tv quality has declined markedly in recent years and she’s on Fox, which says it all. It barely qualifies for the name ‘news’. Any reasonably pretty woman (non-white for preference, that way they can point to their token ethnic to deny accusations of racism) who can rant rightwing talking points to camera will do for Fox. What else would explain the appearance of this ranting harpy on our screens?

Michelle Malkin is a no-talent, ethically-challenged, liar and Auntie Thomasina of an anchor baby who can’t write and who trades on her looks and the sexual fantasies of her wingnut admirers to make money from the rightwing crap her bad-tempered and reportedly violent husband can’t get published unless it has a exotic Asian babe fronting it. Eliminationist poison sounds so much nicer when there’a purty lil’ mouth spewing it.

But that’s right-wing women all over: small minded, petty jealous cows who’d tread on anyone in their discounted-wholesale Jimmy Choo knockoffs if they thought it’d get them more attention from the guys and/or push their ‘careers’. (And there was I thinking they should be at home ministering to their husbands needs and popping out sprogs by the dozen, like they want the rest of us to. Silly me.)

I predict Ms. Malkin, wannabe Bitch-Queen of All Wingnuttia, is going to wish she hadn’t made that video very soon. A lot of people like Amanda, but many more most assuredly loathe Michelle.

Pass the popcorn.