By Debbie Schlussel
Thanks to all the people who voted me “Favourite Gal Infidel Blogger” at the first annual Infidel Blogger Awards. It’s an honor, indeed. Here’s what they said:

In a surprise win Debbie Schlussel takes the category!
Surprising given her retiring manner and penchant for privacy.

Funny. The Judge of the awards noted:

Congratulations, Ms Schlussel. . . . You were voted Favourite Gal Infidel Blogger, by a sound majority.

Check out the other award winners, including the great New York Times Best-Selling Author (and friend) Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch.

(CHRC is the Canadian Human Rights Commission, which censors people and violates free speech principles on behalf of Islam.)

By Debbie Schlussel
It never ends because we continue to let thousands of these people in and then to pander and bend over backward and forward to them once they’re here. Fortunately, the Michigan State Police has a special unit for this kind of fraud, headed by Det. Lt. Marty Bugbee, that is cracking down on this kind of stuff.

A Dearborn couple has pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit food stamp fraud in a scheme that netted more than $1 million.
Advertisement
Fatima Shalhout, 43, and her husband, Wasfi Shalhout, 50, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and money laundering involving a scheme to defraud the United States Department of Agriculture of $1,261,943 in food stamp benefits from May 2005 to February 2008.

Fatima Shalhout was the president of Ranyah Management, doing business as Ann’s Market in Detroit. Wasfi Shalhout was operations and business manager.
The couple illegally paid food stamp users cash in exchange for the food stamp benefits on their debit cards.
Fatima Shalhout faces 46 to 57 months in prison, and Wasfi Shalhout faces 57 to 71 months in prison and a fine of up to $100,000.

Let’s hope they throw the book at these two. But don’t bet on it. I’ve seen so many of these cases, in which the judge has mercy on these Islamist defrauders, who claim they need to stay home to take care of the kids . . . as if no other criminals in America have kids.

By Debbie Schlussel
Several parents with young daughters have asked me whether it’s okay for their young daughters to see “Twilight“, the teen vampire love and adventure movie in theaters at Midnight, Tonight.
I say, take ’em, provided they are twelve years old or older. There is no sex and very little violence. The little blood that there is, is mostly the result of violence that takes place offscreen.
I expected to hate “Twilight”, what with all the hype surrounding it and its teen heart throb star, Robert Pattinson. But it was actually a decent movie, much better than I expected. It was interesting, entertaining, and had its exciting moments. And it had a lot of action and heart-pounding thrills to balance out the chick-flick romance.
The only thing I really disliked about “Twilight” wasn’t the fault of moviemakers. It was an external thing: the non-stop shrieking and audible swooning of tweens and teens in the audience of the special screening I attended for this movie. Girls like these are expected to help this movie clean up at the box office, this weekend and beyond.

I like vampires and thrillers about them, and this more than fit the bill, if it got a few major vampire principles to the (were)wolves. Think “The Lost Boys”, only lighter and updated for the 2000s.
The two things I liked most about the movie are its portrayal of strong father figures in both human and good samaritan vampire families and its portrayal of teen romantic relationships without sex and with the addition of something that has been missing far too often: chivalry and the art of being a gentleman. Author Stephanie Meyer, on whose hit book the eponymous movie is based, is a Mormon with traditional values that she manages to impart to teens in an interesting way through her books and this movie.
The story centers on Bella, who moves from her mother’s and boyfriend’s home, when they go on the road. She goes to live with her father in small town Washington State, near an Indian reservation. At school, she meets Edward Cullen, the brooding, pale, mysterious foster child of a local doctor. When he saves her life, displaying superhuman powers, Bella soon learns that Edward is a vampire. But not the bad kind.
The Cullens are a group of vampires who are known as “vegetarian vampires”, meaning they only drink blood from animals and resist the overwhelming temptation to drink human blood. Edward can’t have sex with Bella or get overly excited, as he’s liable to give in to the temptation to drink her blood. Instead, he focuses on being the perfect gentleman, considerate, manly, and heroic. Together, he and his foster family of vampires fight the non-vegetarian, human-seeking vampires.
Author Stephanie Meyer, on whose book this movie is based, admits she did zero research on vampires. That explains the fact that, unlike standard vampire legend and lore, these vampires can be out in the sun and the daylight (but in sunlight, their skin sparkles like diamonds), why there was no use of garlic or stakes through the heart, or anything like that.
There is also an interesting backstory, that has no background in Transylvania or Van Helsing-dom. The local Indian tribe has a sort of vampire radar (vamp-dar?). Legend has it that the Indians and the vampires, while enemies, have a deal to leave each other alone. But, in author Meyer’s later books, the Indians are actually werewolves, rivals to the vampires. Hmmm . . . think I could write a book about how Muslims are werewolves, and get away with it?
Looks to be an interesting set of future sequels to please the Harry Potter crowd as they age into something slightly more mature, though without sexual adult themes or major violence.
There were a few things about the movie that take away from its luster: some really, really, really, really bad romantic dialogue lines that made me laugh out loud, the obvious fact that the vampires are unnaturally pale and white-faced, and some slow, dull moments. The ending scenes were hokey. And I’m not a huge fan of girlie-manish male lead Pattinson, who has way-too-overdone bedhead hair, way-too-sculpted eyebrows, and looks like he wears lipstick.
But over all, as movies for teens go these days, this was one of the better ones . . . much better.
THREE REAGANS

By Debbie Schlussel
She has the name and braininess, but not the looks, of a porn star. Cherry Jones, who plays the latest incarnation of affirmative-action President on “24” is already campaigning for Barack Hussein Obama’s re-election.
No, she’s not blonde. But she sure sounds like it, as does the writer of this article, airheaded star-struck Detroit Newsistan TV writer Mekeisha Madden Toby (who is big-time in the tank for Obama):

“I want (Barack) Obama to be the president for eight years,” Jones, 51, says. “And even after then, I wouldn’t run. This country needs someone who can balance the national budget and her checkbook.”
But Jones hopes “24” can convince the American public that a woman can be president. After all, actor Dennis Haysbert starred on “24” as TV’s first African-American president and now we have President-elect Barack Obama.
“I don’t want to give our TV show too much credit, but it does help viewers consider the possibilities,” says Jones, who sported a pretty pair of red patent leather heels and a military-style green coat.
Chipper and fun to talk to, Jones has the sort of trusting and kind face a president should have. She thinks the same and more can be said for Obama.
“It’s so nice to have a president who can pronounce countries correctly,” she says. “I love the way he says ‘Pakistan.’ He says it the right way!”

Yeah, and who wants to break bread with Ahmadinejad. GUH-REAT.
The new “24” movie, “24: Redemption–Captured in Africa”, airs Sunday Night. I’m sure it is PC, as usual. Jack Bauer long ago jumped the shark.

By Debbie Schlussel
The mainstream media are very upset by the non-surprising fact that in a video released yesterday, Al-Qaeda mastermind Ayman Al-Zawahiri called Barack Hussein Obama one of the “Abeed Al-Beit“–house slaves (singular would be Abed Al-Beit).
But the mainstream media ignore the fact that Blacks are regularly called the derogatory “Abed” (slave) and “Abeed” (slaves)–the equivalent to the Arabic version of the N-word–in the everyday Arabic and Muslim vernacular. I see and hear it on the streets of Dearborn and on their radio shows here. And I’ve noted this on my site repeatedly over the last decade.

So, tell me, why is it only an outrage when Al-Qaeda calls the Black President-elect a house slave, but not when–every single day–it’s common usage in the Arab and Muslim world, including the American Arab and Muslim world, to refer to Blacks by the term “slave”?
Why is this accepted? Well, we know why. Muslims and Arabs are a political correctness-protected class. They can say and do anything, with impunity, no matter how unacceptable.

by Debbie Schlussel
After I wrote about ESPN’s Chris Fowler and his comments on the air, calling non-Obama voters–55 million-plus Americans–racist, many readers complained to ESPN.
Well, after several days of silence, ESPN finally responded. Here’s the wimpy response ESPN gave:

Thank you for writing, [insert first name].
We understand your concerns. The political reference was an unnecessary addition to the valid point he was making about the lack of diversity in college football coaching. We have spoken with Chris about it. We appreciate you contacting us.
Sincerely,
ESPN Viewer Response Team

Liberal ESPN Fouls on Chris Fowler
Hmmm, let’s guess how the “we have spoken with Chris about it” part went:

Hey, Chris, a bunch of those 55 million racists you exposed on Saturday are angry. Can you believe these right-wing wackos? Anyway, we’re just letting you know. You were sooo right. But it was, ya know, “unnecessary.” Next time, be a little more cryptic so we don’t have to read all of their crazy e-mails.
Love,
the drooling ESPN apologists forced to answer e-mails from the little people
P.S. Chris, You are sooo hot, especially like when you get all political and stuff.

Bottom line. ESPN is not disciplining Fowler, nor are they asking him to make an apology to all the non-Obama voters throughout America, whom Fowler blatantly slandered. Yup, at ESPN, forced apologies are only limited to Rush Limbaugh.
And the network apparently takes the official position that–while over 75% of the positions on the college football field are held by Blacks, and over 80% of college football scholarships are taken by Blacks–the real discrimination is in the head-coaching position.
Here are some of the great letters readers sent to ESPN.
Steve:

By irresponsibly allowing and endorsing Chris Fowler to call me and 55 million other Americans who did not vote for obama, racist as his reasoning and ludicrous claims we would not hire a black coach, is so outrageous, slanderous and defaming.
I DEMAND AN APOLOGY FROM CHRIS FOWLER AND ESPN. MAYBE IT IS ESPN WHO IS RACIST?
How about 55 million Americans slap you with a class-action lawsuit for slander and defamation?
Stick to sports because you all suck at preaching politics!

***
Timothy:

I was offended that your host made the comment that certain people that didn’t vote for Obama are somehow less likely to hire African Americans. He is way out of line. I own a business have great African American employees and would never vote for Obama. Not because of his color, because of his views. Fowler made his own point. People like him judge based on stereotyping people not looking at credentials. Could that be why there are less African American coaches?

***
Leah:

A football game commentator should not dispense political diatribe. Especially when it is ignorant. Chris Fowler’s comments yesterday are beyond ridiculous. Since he is representing your station, can you please tell me if you agree with the comment that 55 million people in this country are racist? Do you really mean to alienate anyone who disagrees with your commentators comments?
In this day and age of easy access, I will no longer be supporting your station. I can watch elsewhere.

By Debbie Schlussel
The reason why many of us oppose so-called “gay rights” laws is not just our opposition to gay marriage, but the fact that these laws don’t so much protect gays from discrimination as they do impose their lifestyle and values on private parties, in violation of our rights.
Yesterday’s settlement between online dating service eHarmony, Inc. and the state of New Jersey is Exhibit A of that. EHarmony was founded and is still headed by Dr. Neil Clark Warren, an evangelical Christian who doesn’t believe in gay marriage or helping foster gay relationships. His company is a private sector company, not a public agency. Yet, because of a New Jersey discrimination law protecting gays, eHarmony must now engage in same-sex matchmaking.

A settlement Wednesday between eHarmony Inc. and the New Jersey attorney general requires the online heterosexual dating service to also cater to homosexuals, raising questions about whether other services that target a niche clientele could be forced to expand their business models.
The settlement stemmed from a complaint, filed with the New Jersey attorney general’s office by a gay match seeker in 2005, that eHarmony had violated his rights under the state’s discrimination law by not offering a same-sex dating service. In 2007, the attorney general found probable cause that eHarmony had violated the state’s Law Against Discrimination.
As part of the agreement, the Pasadena, Calif.-based company will develop and market Compatible Partners, a Web dating service for same-sex couples, and will allow the site’s first 10,000 users to register free. EHarmony will also pay $50,000 to the attorney general’s office and $5,000 to the man who first brought the case.
In a statement Wednesday, eHarmony denied violating discrimination law and said its business had been based on years of researching opposite-sex marriages to understand what makes such couples compatible. . . .
David Bernstein, who teaches constitutional law at George Mason University School of Law, said the discrimination claim “seems like quite a stretch,” but he worried it could encourage similar claims. “If you start a dating service for African Americans, do you need one for whites and Latinos? If you have one for Jews, do you need one for Christians and Muslims?”
EHarmony faces a similar discrimination claim in a California court. It’s unclear if this settlement will affect that case.

This is ridiculous. If gays want to be matched, why don’t they star their own online matchmaking service, instead of imposing their beliefs on unwilling parties?
Well, the bottom line is that the phrase “gay rights” isn’t about just equal rights, it’s about militance and imposition and force upon others.
Just ask eHarmony, which will be playing a lot of Elton John-, George Michael-, and Clay Aiken-style harmony these days.

By Debbie Schlussel
Remember Sister Souljah (real name: Lisa Williamson), the early ’90s hip-hop “artist” who urged the murder of White people?
In what became known as “a Sister Souljah moment”, in his 1992 Presidential campaign, Bill Clinton used her to show White voters he was distancing himself from this stuff, even though his was and remains the party of hip-hop and racism. Speaking the Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition, Clinton told the Black audience that it was wrong for them to embrace the likes of Sister Souljah, who said,

If Black people kill Black people every day, why not have a week and kill White people?

Extremist Makeover: Sister Souljah
So, what is Sister Souljah up to now? Promoting Islamic values to Black American kids in her hit urban lit books and arrogantly comparing herself to Shakespeare. You knew this was coming–all of the hip-hop cretins from the ’80s and ’90s (and 2000s) eventually embrace Islam, the religion which claims to embrace modesty, but is really the Religion of American Cultural Depravity.

These days, she prefers talking about her best-selling novels, The Coldest Winter (1999) and its new prequel, Midnight: A Gangster Love Story (Atria, $26.95).
Both are raw cautionary tales about drugs and violence in New York. She calls them “literature. Period.”
“Shakespeare wrote about love. I write about love. Shakespeare wrote about gang warfare, family feuds and revenge. I write about all the same things.”

Yeah, when I think of Sister Souljah, I think “Shakespeare.” Yeah that’s the ticket.

Her publisher says The Coldest Winter has 1 million copies in print. Midnight made its debut on USA TODAY’s Best-Selling Books list last week at No. 31. This week it’s No. 54.
Souljah isn’t surprised her new book is selling. For nine years, her readers have been asking about Midnight, a handsome, fiercely proud Sudanese immigrant who had a supporting role in her first novel.
“Some girls even wanted his phone number,” she says. “I had to tell them, ‘He’s fictional.’ ” . . .
In the novel, Midnight, who immigrates to New York at 7, comes of age, struggling to uphold his Islamic values amid urban violence. Souljah wrote it to explain “how he was raised and got to be the man he is.”

As opposed to the Islamic values that create mass violence–mass murder, mass rape, and mass torture of Blacks–all over Sudan, from where her character emanates, and to which she’s quite obviously oblivious.

She praises President-elect Barack Obama for his “intelligence and endurance.”

Of course, now, with President-Elect Barack Obama and First-Lady-in-Waiting Blackie O, there aren’t any “Sister Souljah moments”, only a Sister Souljah Presidency for at least the next four years. The Sister Souljahs of the world haven’t been marginalized by Black America, they’ve overtaken the American culture and helped elect a mysterious, red-flag laden President with Marxist leanings.
Congrats, America. We are now a Sister Souljah Nation.

By Debbie Schlussel
This is Robert Pattinson. If you have a teen or tween daughter in America, you probably know who he is or should. He plays a teen vampire in “Twilight“, which comes to theaters at Midnight, Thursday Night. I’ve seen it and am prohibited until then from reviewing the movie, which is based on the best-selling Stephanie Meyer series of novels.
But, if you’ve watched any variety news shows or entertainment shows, you’ve no doubt seen the Beatles-sized mobs of young girls who’ve swarmed this guy wherever he goes. He’s the teen idol flavor of the moment. He was profiled on ABC News’ “Nightline”, a few nights ago. The report is funny to watch:

While I understand the excitement about the movie and the huge readership of Stephanie Meyer’s books, I don’t understand the attraction to this guy–this actor, Pattinson (and the shrieking, which I heard last night at the screening). I was never this bad when, as a teen girl, I liked Rick Springfield, Dennis Quaid, and guys like that. I think these girls are confusing the book character, chivalrous vampire Edward Cullen, with the Englishman who plays him. This guy looks like he wears red lipstick and has been ever since he was a little girl. And he has carefully shaped eyebrows that look a little too feminine.
But there’s a trend here that’s been going on for the last decade-and-a-half or so. The male heart throbs, like Pattinson, are more girlie-manish than ever. The more masculine idols of yesteryear are permanently a thing of the past. And female fans are getting more and more aggressive–a male trait.
The blurring of America’s gender roles continues.
Stay tuned for my review of this interesting movie, tomorrow. In the meantime, here’s the trailer:

By Debbie Schlussel
On Friday, I wrote about ESPN’s racist, bigoted casting call for a commercial. Then, on Monday, I wrote about how, on Saturday, ESPN’s middle-aged pretty boy Chris Fowler told the “College Game Day” audience that they’re racists if they didn’t vote for Barack Obama.
Well, ESPN doesn’t like it when it gets called on a foul. This popped into my e-mail inbox, and I’ve posted the ensuing exchange:

From: Coleman, Tilea Tilea.Coleman@espn.com
Date: Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 3:46 PM
Subject: ESPN Casting Call Posting
To: “writedebbie@gmail.com” writedebbie@gmail.com
Hello Debbie –
I recently read one of your postings entitled: “They Owe Limbaugh an Apology: Liberal ESPN’s Racist, Bigoted Casting Call.” You stated in your blog that “ESPN–in a memo–set forth bigoted stereotypes against Jews, Blacks, Asians, Middle America, Southerners, you name it.” On behalf of ESPN, I wanted to make it clear that we (ESPN) did not author the memo that was distributed, as you suggested in the aforementioned statement. It came from an outside casting agency.
Here is our official statement as it relates to this matter: “Our marketing department just learned of this casting call today (Wednesday, Nov. 12),. The language and approach reflected in that document were not approved by us and in no way represent ESPN or the respect we have for the college community.”
Debbie, thanks for your understanding and please feel free to contact me should you have any questions.
Best, TC

Do you really believe that ESPN hires an ad agency and lets the agency come up with the ad and start spending money on it and casting before ESPN execs approve it? Dream on.

From: Debbie Schlussel writedebbie@gmail.com
Date: Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 4:00 PM
Subject: Re: ESPN Casting Call Posting
To: “Coleman, Tilea” Tilea.Coleman@espn.com
So, is it ESPN’s normal practice not to know about what kind of commercial the network is running? You had no idea what the commercial was about and yet it was already in the casting stage? Please respond.
Also, how do you explain Chris Fowler calling all of us who did not vote for Barack Obama “racist”? Why on earth was he allowed to do this on “College Game Day”? Here’s the post about that:
https://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2008/11/hypocrite_espn.html
Please respond. Please also tell me if ESPN agrees with Fowler’s claim. If not, what is ESPN doing to discipline Fowler? Will we hear an apology from him to the 55 million plus Americans who did not vote for Obama? If not, why was Rush Limbaugh forced by ESPN to apologize to a single solitary pro football player?

***

From: Coleman, Tilea Tilea.Coleman@espn.com
Date: Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 6:17 PM
Subject: RE: ESPN Casting Call Posting
To: Debbie Schlussel writedebbie@gmail.com
ESPN was aware of the campaign, but was not aware of the casting call document. Again, the language and approach reflected in that document were not approved by us.
I’m looking into the Chris Fowler remarks and will get back to you.
Thanks, TC

Ah, I get it. ESPN knew they were making a bigoted ad, but they simply didn’t approve of it being put down in writing on the casting call sheet. That makes it so much better.
I have yet to hear back from her on Fowler’s comments about us “racists”, and I’m not holding my breath.