Zicutake USA Comment | Search Articles

#History (Education) #Satellite report #Arkansas #Tech #Poker #Language and Life #Critics Cinema #Scientific #Hollywood #Future #Conspiracy #Curiosity #Washington

#Funny News

#Funny News

Kellyanne Conway HAMMERS “Smart Ass” Jim Acosta

Posted: 08 Jan 2019 03:19 PM PST

This woman just identified as a smoldering fire of holy crap. Kellyanne Conway was asked some questions by CNN’s lead douche, Jim Acosta, specifically on the truthfulness of Trump’s statements in tonight’s upcoming address. Kellyanne had zero time for Jim’s shenanigans.

Live shot of Kellyanne:

glory fire

Sometimes the best way to “own the libs” is to call them out for the absolute shitfaces they are, right to their faces. Not in a car on a smart phone, but right to their pathetic little faces, without even raising your voice.

Next round of wine is on me, Kellyanne.


Bryan Cranston Defends His Portrayal of a Disabled Character: “Actors Act!”

Posted: 08 Jan 2019 03:01 PM PST

Bryan Cranston

Breaking Bad is one of the best television shows of all time. In my opinion. So Bryan Cranston, who played the lead of Walter White, the chemistry teacher turned methamphetamine king pin, has made it into iconic actor territory. But so stupid are the times in which we live, Cranston had to defend himself, an actor, for portraying a character which isn’t what he really is in real life for the movie The Upside. Stupid times indeed.

First, look at this writeup from Sky News:

Cranston, who is able-bodied, spoke out about his latest role as debate continues in Hollywood about parts for minority groups.

“Cranston, who is able-bodied.” I want to see the writeup for Jason Momoa next. “Momoa, who is not a fish mutant…”

Sorry, let’s get to Cranston:

“I think being cast in this role as a quadriplegic really came down to a business decision.”

Duh, the man was freaking Heisenberg, say my name, I am the one who knocks.


“As actors, we’re asked to be other people, to play other people. If I, as a straight, older person, and I’m wealthy, I’m very fortunate, does that mean I can’t play a person who is not wealthy, does that mean I can’t play a homosexual?”

Does this mean when Batman gets recast, he can only be played by a billionaire? So instead of Ben Affleck… Mark Zuckerberg? Elon Musk? BILL GATES?

“I don’t know, where does the restriction apply, where is the line for that? I think it is worthy for debate to discuss those issues.”

There shouldn’t be a line. Dustin Hoffman killed as a cross-dresser in Tootsie. We shouldn’t remake the movie with a real tranny. Morgan Freeman was the shizzle in Bruce Almighty, in which Freeman played God. We shouldn’t remake the movie and hope God actually plays God. Brad Pitt was seven layers of HAWT as Achilles in Troy. We shouldn’t remake that movie and hope a person who was dipped in the River Styx as a child, held by his heel, be cast in the lead.

Good luck casting any role of a non human, by the way. Since all we have on Earth are actual humans. Watch out, Zoe Saldana.

Also, did Robert Downey Jr. ever go to Afghanistan to have his insides blown up? Because if not, how dare he play Iron Man. Get a real vet who’s been to war and had his insides torn up into that role. My God. Real veterans are under represented in Hollywood. I just can’t even.

Actors play roles. Emphasis on play. Emphasis on roles. Further, movies are in the business to make money. Emphasis on business. Emphasis on money. Bryan Cranston is hot property since the success of Breaking Bad. Just as all the actors I listed above were hot property at the time they were cast for their roles. It doesn’t make sense to hire a nobody who may have experience being that of their character when you could hire an expert actor who draws an audience.

We shouldn’t have to explain this.


Psychologist Group Says Masculinity is a Problem for Men and Boys. Wrong.

Posted: 08 Jan 2019 02:12 PM PST

men and boys APA guide

The American Psychological Association recently released a paper titled “Guidelines for Psychological Practice With Boys and Men,” which aims to tackle the problems of the modern man. Specifically how he’s too masculine, and this masculinity leads to high suicide rates, higher incarceration rates, and a higher probability of being the victim of a violent crime. Not listed was how masculine men are also at higher rates of attracting hot ladies. Maybe it’s in the footnotes. Anyway, the paper is essentially a treatise on toxic masculinity, with all the predictable leftist clap trap about how toxically masculine men negatively impact society after first negatively impacting themselves.

I’ll be honest, after reading the guide it does seem as if the group is trying to figure out how to make men happier on the whole… which they utterly failed simply because they’ve got it all backward. Men aren’t unhappy and committing suicide at higher rates because their masculinity makes them unhappy. Men aren’t unhappy because society has failed to play Mighty Mouse, rescuing them from their “toxic masculinity.” Let’s dive in, shall we?

APA's new Guidelines for Psychological Practice With Boys and Men strive to recognize and address these problems in boys and men while remaining sensitive to the field's androcentric past. Thirteen years in the making, they draw on more than 40 years of research showing that traditional masculinity is psychologically harmful and that socializing boys to suppress their emotions causes damage that echoes both inwardly and outwardly.

See, the premise is wrong. Firstly, 40 years of research about men being men is hardly a comprehensive spectrum of manliness. Men have been masculine for far longer than 40 years, and I’d note the past forty years excludes many great feats of mankind. And I do mean mankind.

Secondly, the premise that men suppressing their emotions is what causes men great damage is poppycock. There are many reasons for unhappiness, but the cure to depression isn’t always sitting in a group with a talking pillow, expressing emotions using nothing but feeling words. Yet this is the constant thru-line in the APA’s guide on the problem of masculinity.

The main thrust of the subsequent research is that traditional masculinity—marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression—is, on the whole, harmful. Men socialized in this way are less likely to engage in healthy behaviors. For example, a 2011 study led by Kristen Springer, PhD, of Rutgers University, found that men with the strongest beliefs about masculinity were only half as likely as men with more moderate masculine beliefs to get preventive health care.

Emphasis mine. The “thrust” of this guide is to link “healthy behaviors” to “getting therapy” or else “talking about our feelings.” Which is often what women do to great success. Women here being not men.

As I find myself typing near daily now, men are not women, women are not men. They have different needs and different drives. Just as it’s wrong to apply masculine values to women, so it’s wrong to apply feminine values to men.

But here’s another problem: there’s nothing wrong with stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression when properly channeled. Just as there’s nothing wrong with displaying emotion, being compromising, or submitting to leadership when properly channeled. It’s called the balance of life, and we cannot socially engineer it out of men and women, nor should we. We’ve tried, and look where it’s gotten us?

But let’s get back to the paper at hand.

The paper also makes another false assumption, that somehow society teaches men to be masculine, instead of men just being masculine and society trying to punish them for it. Which is, in my opinion, the actual problem.

"Because of the way many men have been brought up—to be self-sufficient and able to take care of themselves—any sense that things aren't OK needs to be kept secret," Rabinowitz says. "Part of what happens is men who keep things to themselves look outward and see that no one else is sharing any of the conflicts that they feel inside. That makes them feel isolated. They think they're alone. They think they're weak. They think they're not OK. They don't realize that other men are also harboring private thoughts and private emotions and private conflicts."

Remember when I wrote the paper did seem like it was aiming to make a difference in men’s lives? The above pull quote is, to me, evidence of that. I think the aim here comes from a genuine place: wanting to convey to men their struggles and feelings are valid and they’re not alone in this big bad world. There’s nothing wrong with the sentiment, per se. Women are, by and large, very good at seeking each other out for comfort and support. Men not so much. Why?

Well, what’s happened in the last few generations?

I happen to think men need safe spaces. And guess what, up until recently, men had them. They certainly had them more than 40 years ago, before this very paper started its research on the problems of masculinity. Men were free to go to their men’s only clubs, to attend boy’s only schools. They were free to bond with other men without being shamed, or told they were part of some big powerful patriarchy which busied itself with ruling the world and raping women.

wonder woman gif

For you guys I give you this gif of a hot lady. No reason.

Then a small cadre of violently shrill feminists dropped a bloody tampon in the works, insisting women be allowed into these men-only safe spaces, under the guise of “equality.” But just as women need to bond with other women, so do men need to bond with other men.

There’s nothing unhealthy about a man being a man, about being masculine. He shouldn’t be shamed for not sharing his feelings. He should be free to find a group of men with whom he can bond, and they can share experiences together. And if the topics of their lives come up, they’re free to discuss them. If they don’t, they’re free not to discuss them. This isn’t hard.

Which it seems like the paper kind of understands. Then again, blows itself up:

Clinicians should also understand broader institutional issues and support educational systems responsive to the needs of men. Boys who drop out of school are more likely to be unemployed than those who get to high school or college graduation, so addressing school-related challenges early can head off lifelong problems, according to the guidelines.

Great! Agreed! Let’s make schooling more friendly to boys, because as it is, the modern classroom caters to how girls learn. Let’s maybe reintroduce the idea of letting boys and girls have their own schools or at least classes, where boys can be taught in favor of how boys learn, and girls how girls learn. FINALLY!

But wait…

Mental health professionals should strive to reduce aggression and violence and to understand the precursors to substance use and suicide.

Mental health professionals shouldn’t strive to reduce aggression and violence. They should strive to channel those drives into positive endeavors: sports, accomplishments, conquering tasks. Better idea: let boys outside to play. Allow them time with each other, to play as boys do. Don’t shame them for wanting to play war. Give them plenty of outlets for their imaginations and energies. Boys are physical, rambunctious, loud. Let them be, give them outlets just as we give girls outlets for their feminine pursuits and drives.

Remove the stigma associated with “masculinity” and allow men to be freely masculine, to channel what they naturally are. Read also Screw Off, Feminists: An Open Letter To Men From A Real Woman.

The “problem” (please note the quotation marks) of the modern man isn’t his masculinity, it’s the constant shaming of it. (Related: Enough Already! James Bond is a Handsome Straight Man and Will STAY THAT WAY!) The problem modern men have is not in being men, but in the shame society casts on them for wanting to be men. Then issuing patronizing guidelines on how men should be more like women.

Masculinity isn’t the problem. Society trying to diminish, punish, and drain men of it is. Until we figure that out, until we reverse course to right the ship, we’ll continue having miserable men.

~Written by Courtney Kirchoff

British Satirist Jonathan Pie: Not Everyone Who Disagrees with You is a Nazi [VIDEO]

Posted: 08 Jan 2019 10:31 AM PST

The word “Nazi” is literally the most misused word in the English language. Except for the word “literally.” The siren song of the left is to call anyone who disagrees with them a Nazi. Leftists are also the worst abusers of the word “literally.” I don’t think that’s a coincidence.

Calling everyone a Nazi has caught the anger of Jonathan Pie (see NAILED IT: British Satirist Slams 'Snowflake' Students Who Hate Free Speech… and Hammer Meet Nail: Internet 'Satirist' Rants About Why Americans Hate Liberalism).

My favorite line:

A Nazi is not someone who believes the ideology of Islam has some dodgy bits.

I wanted to follow this with a .gif of Natalie from Love Actually talking about living in the dodgy end. Sadly, the internet failed me.

Here’s the thing about Pie: I’m fairly certain the comedian isn’t going to be asked to speak at CPAC soon. As far as I can tell he’s anti-Brexit, anti-Trump, and I’m fairly sure he and I have different opinions about gun rights. The same can be said about Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson, albeit with different issues. But because the left, which Pie admits to being a member of, has gotten so batsh!t crazy, it’s creating allies where there normally wouldn’t have been allies. Mainly people who do not endorse batsh!t crazy.

In the olden days, we could agree on economics while disagreeing on social issues. It was an excuse for Republicans from New York and Texas to find common ground. But I’m sensing a trend that people from all ideologies are switching to disagreeing on policy as long as we line up on the same side of the culture war: I can disagree with you on effective health care policy, as long as we’re allies on the First Amendment.

Agree? Think I’m trying too hard? Comment below.


A GoFundMe was Set Up to Impeach Trump…by Pablo Escobar’s Brother

Posted: 08 Jan 2019 07:23 AM PST

pablo escobar brother trump

If I’m Donald Trump and ready to address the nation on illegal immigration (see Powerful GOP Video: These Families Were Violently Impacted By Illegal Immigration and Dan Crenshaw has a New Name for Open Border Democrats, and It’s Perfect), I’m sending Pablo Escobar’s brother Roberto an Edible Arrangement to show my gratitude. Robert just set up a GoFundMe to raise $50 million so that Trump can be impeached.

For those frowning at the name Pablo Escobar because you don’t know who he is and haven’t watched Narcos, have you heard of cocaine? Pablo built that.

The brother of the deceased Colombian drug kingpin, Roberto (aka El Osito), has started a GoFundMe campaign seeking at least $50 million in donations to bolster his company’s efforts to impeach the U.S. Prez. Sounds totally legit … we’re listening.

Roberto and his associates at Escobar Inc. are soliciting anyone and everyone to kick in cash toward their crowdfunding page to finance “intelligence research, lobby firms and lawyers” that could ultimately lead to Trump’s downfall in Congress.

Ignore that the Democrats have been doing the same for the past two years and have come up with bupkis. Now we have the brother of cocaine’s version of Mark Zuckerberg raising money to make it happen. Okay.

Roberto claims he’s already got dirt on Trump from previous alleged business dealings between DT and the Escobar company … among other things. Roberto says his dirty secrets on Trump are something Special Counsel Robert Mueller would wanna hear.


This quote is everything.

“I am the brother of a Latino hero…”


If I’m Donald Trump, I’m inviting the brother to be my guest at the State of the Union. Because when one of your enemies is the brother of one of history’s most notorious baddies, you gotta play that up. Sit Roberto in the Democrat wing. Give him a fun cocktail in a cup shaped like a block of powdered coke. Have him sit down whenever the Democrats sit down and stand to applaud whenever Nancy Pelosi applauds. Make it happen.


Powerful GOP Video: These Families Were Violently Impacted By Illegal Immigration

Posted: 08 Jan 2019 06:14 AM PST

President Trump is addressing the nation Tuesday night to discuss the shutdown and illegal immigration (see Officer Ronil Singh, a Legal Immigrant, was Killed by an Illegal Immigrant and Illegal Immigrant Released by Sanctuary City Goes on Shooting Spree). This is the president’s chance to make the case for his wall to the American people.

The GOP released this video ahead of his address. Focusing on families who have had their lives impacted by illegals. In most cases, violently.

Yes, you and I know how serious a problem illegal immigration is. Donald Trump needs to make the case to the many voters who checked the D candidate in the midterm election this past November. Trump needs to explain why exactly Democrats are keeping the government shut down, and that the Democrats are working against the safety and interests of all Americans.

There’s also a rumor Trump may declare “a national emergency” so the military will start building the wall whether the government reopens or not. Before you start pumping your MAGA hats, imagine President Beto declaring a “national emergency” over climate change. Using it to ban cars. Or meat. Or having more than two children. “Hey, we’re like in a national emergency or something.” Trump needs to think long and hard if this is a precedent we really want to set.

This is a YUGE moment in the Trump Presidency. One that will define the next two years. Let’s see what version Trump shows up tonight.