By Debbie Schlussel

So, now, that Barack Obama has drawn a line in the sand that his ass can’t back regarding a Russian-Ukraine issue in which the United States has absolutely no national interest (other than not backing neo-Nazis and proud grandchildren and other descendants of actual Nazis), I have a few questions. Such as . . . how are we going to get to the International Space Station? In case you don’t know, NASA relies heavily on Russia for this, as we have stuck our space exploration tail between our legs and emasculated the US space program. Our military spy satellites and other important military ops rely on Russian engines, too.

Space.com reports that our silly war of words and threats against Russia regarding Ukraine will not affect our space relations according to Obama’s fantasy-dominated NASA chief Charlie Bolden, but I don’t buy it. And in case you forgot, Bolden’s the moron who said the new mission of NASA is Muslim outreach. ‘Memba him? How can our tough talk against Russia in Ukraine not affect our reliance on the Russians in space? I doubt the Russians will leave the two U.S. astronauts, who went to the International Space Station aboard a Russian Soyuz, in outer space. But ya never know. (And then Sandra Bullock can star in “Gravity Dva ["two" in Russian]: Putin’s Revenge.” And, anyway, that’s beside the point–whether or not Russia will retaliate via the space program. We rely on the Russians to take our astronauts up there. Think they’ll continue that with Obama threatening and cajoling? Don’t bet on it.

Tensions between the United States and Russia are heightened, but that shouldn’t affect operations on the International Space Station, NASA chief Charlie Bolden said today (March 4). NASA’s Mike Hopkins, Russia’s Oleg Kotov and Sergey Ryazanskiy are scheduled to fly back to Earth aboard a Russian Soyuz spacecraft Monday (March 10). NASA officials are confident that the landing will not be affected by the current political climate. . . . Crews on the space station have weathered political situations like this one before, Bolden said. Read the rest of this entry »

By Debbie Schlussel

Oh, no. Liberal, intelligentsia “bible,” the pretentious New York Magazine, doesn’t like my critique of the Oscars. (The Oscars column in question is here.) In a nonsensical, unfunny (like Oscar hostatrix Ellen) “parody” of how the New York Times would have covered the Oscars and “12 Years a Slave” in 1853 (when there was still slavery), writer Jonathan Chait is upset that I pilloried the PC, race-obsessed Oscars. Scorned by the liberal faux-intellectuals? Uh-oh, whatever will I do?! One thing I can’t do is get the humorless liberal rag and Chait a sense of humor. It’s something ya either got . . . or you don’t (as in Mr. Chait’s case). Beyond fixing. Don’t forget that this is the mag that did pages and pages and pages of Obama lusting, issue after issue and declared Barry O “The First Jewish President.”

You see for the conniptive left, like New York Mag, the Oscars wasn’t left wing enough. They wish that the movies winning Oscars were Five Years a Knave (a/k/a “Our Savior, Obama”), ObamaCare Buyers Club, and Blue Statesmen. Read the rest of this entry »

By Debbie Schlussel

*** SCROLL DOWN FOR UPDATE ***

A number of readers are asking me what I thought of last night’s Oscars. Actually, I don’t think about it much–a national celebration of mostly garbage and unimportant stuff. I was only half-watching the Oscars, but here’s my reaction, mostly a summary of my few tweets on the yawnfest (follow me on Twitter).

The Oscars were predictable. The winners fit the usual fave Hollywood victimology narratives. Up front, there was the slavery from over a century ago (“Twelve Years a Slave”–read my review) and the never-ending cries of racism that justify Obamaphones, Obamacare, welfare, minority set-asides, affirmative action, and every other form of reparations now plaguing America. Race merchantry lives on at Oscar. So predictable the odds in Vegas need to be adjusted.

Then, there are the new perceived “victims” of sexual racism and forced wedding cake-bakery in Colorado, the Northwest, and now Arizona: transvestites, gays, and AIDS–thus the Matthew McConaughey win for a movie (“Dallas Buyers Club,” or as I call it, “Brokeback Mountain 2.0″–read my review), in which he plays the typical hated bete noire of the left, a right-wing Texas cowboy who hates gays and Muslims, but is forced to partner with a transvestite after being stricken with AIDS. And what was up with McConaughey’s conceited, rambling speech? “Who is my hero? Me in two years.” Huh?

Ellen wore more tacky tuxes than a cheap Vegas lounge act. She looked like she emerged from “My Cousin Vinnie’s” mariachi band (yes, I know there was no mariachi band in “My Cousin Vinnie,” but if there were . . . ). And while she tries her darnedest to look and dress like a man, she has a lot more in common with every other chick comedienne: she ain’t funny. You’d think a woman who tries too hard to look male wouldn’t dare call a manly looking woman who tries her best to look feminine (Liza Minnelli), “a female impersonator.” But you’d be wrong. Ellen called her that, and it didn’t go over well. Chutzpah is what doubles for “funny” with Ellen. Here’s a tip: it ain’t. So, whaddya do when you don’t have the funny? You rely on dumb Twitterbomb photo stunts. Read the rest of this entry »

By Debbie Schlussel

Another disappointing weekend at the box office. I did not see “Son of God.” Here are the movies, new at theaters this weekend, which I did see.

* “Non-Stop“: As I’ve told you in the past, actor Liam Neeson said he considered converting to Islam and claimed that the lion in “The Chronicles of Narnia” and “The Lion, Witch, and the Wardrobe” movies is Mohammed (and not Jesus, which author C.S. Lewis specifically wrote the lion to represent). And, most recently, Neeson said the only reason he did not convert to Islam is that the people in his native Irish hometown of Ballymena, Co Antrim wouldn’t like it (they probably wouldn’t have had a problem with it–it’s Israel Ireland doesn’t like; Islam it’s embraced quite warmly, and it’s the fastest growing religion on the Emerald Isle). And this movie is consistent with Neeson’s multi-orgasms for Islam. In other words, you know who the villain probably isn’t.

Given that, you know that this hijacking movie, in which Neeson stars as a Federal Air Marshal, isn’t going to make the Muslim the hijacker. And if you know that, you are right. But the identity of the hijacker(s) in this movie and their motive is so absurd–so outrageous!–that it makes the rest of the movie absurd. The first 1.5 hours of this movie is okay, until the identity and motive of the villain(s) is disclosed. And while a good mystery/thriller gives you some hint of who the villain is and his/her motive, this movie gives almost none. Read the rest of this entry »

By Debbie Schlussel

How much should a violent woman be paid for the virtual “holocaust” of having her weaved-in artificial braids cut off by police?

A Detroit suburb just paid a woman $75,000 for this crime against humanity, despite the fact that hair extensions can be used to strangle cops and prison personnel and can also be used in prison jailhouse suicides.

Black History Month: Charda Gregory Gets the Most Expensive Haircut in Michigan History . . .

Let’s say you’re a violent woman. Let’s say police arrest you. Let’s say you were arrested at a very seedy motel. Let’s say that after you were arrested at said seedy motel, you also kicked out the rear window of a police car, not easy to do. And let’s say that you were so violent, so crazy that police felt it necessary to protect themselves and you from yourself and, so, they cut off your hair extensions, known among other things for their possible use in strangulations, hangings, and nooses. Should you be rewarded with Seventy-Five Grand? That seems like a pretty generous payday for you and your greedy lawyer.

But Charda Renee Gregory was the beneficiary of that generosity for taking a haircut, after the city of Warren, Michigan paid her $75,000. And we were down on Bill Clinton for his $200 haircut. Not only that, but all charges against Ms. Gregory, who is most certainly a criminal and definitely violent and dangerous, were dropped. Nice (non-)work if you can get it. The race card is expensive. Don’t leave home without it. Read the rest of this entry »

By Debbie Schlussel

It’s scary that a major nationally syndicated radio show constantly plays host to the most anti-Semitic, crazy whack jobs on the right and presents their nutty anti-Semitic world views as “expertise.” But that’s what’s happening more and more on Michael Savage’s nationally-syndicated show on Cumulus’ ABC Radio stations. Today, Savage hosted anti-Semite Paul Craig Roberts, who is as loony as they come. Savage said nothing as he let Roberts go on and on and on about how U.S. foreign policy is run by “neocons many of whom have dual Israeli citizenship.” He included in this group, Obama far-lefty Susan Rice.

Susan Rice is a neoconservative? Only if you are clueless. She has dual Israeli citizenship? Really? That’s funny, since she’s extremely anti-Israel. But that’s what happens when a talk show host with no scruples has no prob presenting a former Assistant Treasury Secretary for a very brief period of time in the first Reagan Administration as a foreign policy expert when he has no foreign policy expertise whatsoever, unless you count “Blame the Jews!” as a foreign policy. It’s even scarier that Roberts has a nationally syndicated column from Creators Syndicate to spout this stuff on a weekly basis around the world. That is the same organization that syndicates Michelle Malkin’s column. Ask her why she’s never said anything about her neo-Nazi colleague. (Well, with her, as I’ve noted before, it’s always, “no dolla, no holla.”) And it’s disturbing that neither Savage, nor Creators, nor Malkin cares that Roberts also writes a syndicated column for Iran’s Press TV. Yup, the Shi’ite Al-Jazeera only far worse. And that’s not to mention Roberts’ column on the openly anti-Semitic, far left, deceptively named “Veterans Today” website. He wrote in his syndicated column, “When the world looks at America, what it sees is an Israeli colony.” Does Michael Savage endorse this crap? Yes, and he’s given it a frequent forum on his show.

And since Roberts claims that the neo-cons who run U.S. foreign policy have dual Israeli citizenship, I’d like him to name one who does. He cannot. Along with Susan Rice, he named misguided Iraq war supporters Paul Wolfowitz–who does not have Israeli citizenship but does have a Saudi Muslim girlfriend–and Douglas Feith, who also doesn’t have Israeli citizenship. But both of ‘em possess the real characteristic Roberts was getting at and which he despises: they are Jews. Jews In Name Only. But Jews nonetheless. And he has a prob with the Jews, a problem now apparently endorsed by Michael Savage. It’s obvious and well known to anyone who’s read a sampling of Roberts’ stuff. Here’s who also controlled U.S. foreign policy: George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, etc. And guess what? No Israeli citizenship. Just Israel-hatred on the part of the latter two.

This isn’t a first for Savage on the Jew-hating front. Read the rest of this entry »

By Debbie Schlussel

**** SCROLL DOWN FOR UPDATE ****

I guess we’re making progress because a Kennedy who drove while under the influence is actually facing trial for it (and she didn’t even drown anybody!). But blaming your drugged driving at age 53 on your father’s death when you were eight? Come on. On the other hand, when you’re dealing with Kennedys, they always play the “Assassinated Kennedy Dad (or other Kennedy Relative) Card.” And so did Kerry Kennedy (formerly Kerry Kennedy Cuomo, when the two Dem Mafia families were briefly linked) yesterday at her trial for taking Ambien and then driving. She had every excuse in the book. They all do.

“B-b-b-b-b-ut I’m a Kennedy!” . . .

Follow Me on Twitter . . .

Within minutes of taking the stand today Kennedy invoked the name of her late father, Robert F. Kennedy, and told the jury that he was killed while running for president. Kennedy’s famous lineage has been a focal point for the defense as they’ve tried to present her as an upstanding citizen with no drug or alcohol problems. Read the rest of this entry »

By Debbie Schlussel

John McCain and Kelly Ayotte want America to get into the fight by Ukrainian protesters against Putin and Russia. And Barack Obama’s sayin’ the same stuff. It ain’t our fight. And it certainly isn’t America’s fight to side with neo-Nazis, who are at the core of what’s going on in Ukraine. Yes, neo-Nazis, many of whom fought with and on behalf of Chechen Muslims. You know, the Boston terrorists’ homies. In case you don’t remember, Ukrainians were among the most brutal, ferocious Nazis. See John Demjanjuk. And they taught their children and grandchildren their Jew-hatred. Ask any Jew from Ukraine (I have several friends who fit that description) why they left, and they’ll tell you about the extreme anti-Semitism endemic there for what seems like forever.

Right Sector Leaders @ Independence Square in Kiev – Note the Muslim Keffiyeh . . .

Hmmm . . . Vladimir Putin, a once, always, and forever KGB chief, versus neo-Nazis and Islam-enablers? While it’s kind of like Alien v. Predator, I think I’ll stick with Putin. Or, better yet, stay out of it . . . which is absolutely what America should do. We definitely should NEVER side with neo-Nazis. Ever. And don’t put any faith in the Klitschko Bros, including boxing champ, Vladimir, who are trying to lead Ukraine. They proudly hang out and appear with the neo-Nazis. (And do you think it’s “just a coincidence” that the Pussy Riot Russian band of flasher chicks protested in solidarity with the Ukrainians, last week during the Olympics, by wearing masks that looked exactly like those worn by the Munich Olympic Muslim terrorists who murdered the Israeli Olympic team?)

First, there’s Aleksandr Muzychko a/k/a Sashko Bilyi. Head of the leading Ukrainian nationalist group, Right Sector–the most prominent group in the Ukraine protests, he says he’ll “fight Jews and Russians for as long as blood flows” in his veins.

Back in 1994, Muzychko, aka Sashko Bilyi, arrived in Chechnya to join separatist forces. [DS: that means Muslims, including the Tsarnaeve Bros of Boston Marathon fame.] He took part in numerous battles with federal troops, mainly in the capital Grozny, and personally knocked out three tanks, six armored personnel carriers and a SP vehicle. Read the rest of this entry »

By Debbie Schlussel

Openly gay college football player Michael Sam didn’t do well at this week’s NFL Combine, a meat market where possible draft picks show what they can do. In fact, he performed terribly. And this is what many of us warned that Sam’s coming out party was really about. It was all about hedging his NFL bets with political correctness, not about civil rights for men who have oral and anal sex with other men.

When Missouri football player Sam declared he’s gay just weeks before the NFL combine and the later NFL Draft (which I call, the “Beauty Pageant for America’s Next Top Bankrupt Multi-BabyDaddy Crack Dealer”), some (including myself) speculated that this was to extort a better Draft position because he’s a mediocre athlete. If he doesn’t get picked high enough (and/or if he got cut during NFL preseason camp), he can whine that it’s “because I’m gay” and blackmail teams to draft him higher and keep him on the payroll even if he doesn’t perform. And, now, USA Today football writer Brent Sobleski is confirming that. Sobleski reported on Sam’s terrible performance at the Combine and names Sam as the Combine’s Number One disappointment.

The NFL combine is a chance to impress teams. Players have an opportunity in front of them to perform at a high level and improve their status for the NFL draft. Not every prospect performs well — and some really struggle. Unfortunately, the stock of three particular players may have dropped a round or more during Monday’s combine drills:

1. Michael Sam

The biggest obstacle for Sam isn’t his decision to announce he’s openly gay. It’s how he projects to the NFL. And he didn’t perform well in front of NFL decision-makers Monday. Read the rest of this entry »

By Debbie Schlussel

Syrian and Iraqi Muslims seeking asylum in the United States via Mexico are getting 100% approval from the Department of Homeland Security and being granted green cards, even AFTER they were rejected for tourist visas to the U.S. by U.S. Embassy officials in their native Muslim nations. It makes you wonder why we even have this process. We might as well just open the floodgates to anyone seeking entry to America. That’s basically what is happening for those who know how to game the system.

The New “Americans” . . . Courtesy of President Obama . . .

Check Out the Percentage of Muslim Asylum Seekers Granted a Golden Ticket Into the U.S. . . .

Recently, I told you about the increase in juvenile illegal aliens caught at the Southern border with Mexico and “reverse escorted” into the northern U.S. by ICE agents who are ordered to do this. The aliens know what to say and how to claim asylum, and if they don’t, they are lawyered up, once they are put in pro-illegal alien charity “shelters.” And, as I’ve noted, the Obama Administration has made it much easier for those seeking asylum to remain here and game the system forever. And, now, Muslims have learned to similarly game the asylum system from Mexico. If they are rejected by the U.S. Embassy in their home country, they know that trying it from Mexico is the charm.

In 2012, after being imprisoned and beaten [DS: how does the WSJ know this is fact? Were they there to verify? Nope.], a Syrian dissident named Mohammad fled to neighboring Lebanon, where he applied for and was denied a U.S. tourist visa. Intent on rebuilding his life with family in California, he flew to Mexico City and then Tijuana. There, he crossed the U.S. border illegally and handed himself over to a customs official, seeking asylum. Last month, the U.S. granted him that status. In a year, he will be eligible to apply for permanent U.S. residency.

With the three-year-old Syrian conflict raging on, and U.S. embassies in the Middle East increasingly denying tourist visas, more Syrians are arriving in Mexico on tourist visas and using the country as a gateway to possible U.S. asylum. A Mexican embassy spokesman “had no comment on this matter.” Some say the phenomenon underscores the need for a more coordinated international response to the Syrian crisis, while others worry it may offer too easy a path to U.S. residence for potential terrorists, given al Qaeda’s rising presence in Syria. Read the rest of this entry »