Thursday, May 7, 2009
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
FAUX News twists the truth, mocks free speech
This project by Media Matters is most important. Please click here to see how you can help by emailing Fox News to insist they cease and desist from what is, in truth, outright lying about those with whom they disagree politically.
Free speech is one of our most precious rights guaranteed by our Constitution. FAUX News, however, makes a mockery of free speech, by distorting that right into baseless propaganda which further twists our democratic process into a mockery of everything for which we stand as a nation.
Where's the FCC when we need them? Is there no agency to deal with creeps like Hannity and Beck and O'Reilly, et. al., who blatantly pervert the meaning of another right, the right of a free press?
Wurzelbacher and queers
[Photo from Huffington Post]Did you know that Joe (Sam), the so-called plumber, is a real Christian who loved Jesus and tries to live a Xtn life?
If only he wasn't so goddamn stupid!
Alex Koppelman noted, in an interview with the fundy rag, Christianity Today, Sam (aka Joe) was asked as to how he felt about homosexuals getting married, you know, just like real folks, and Sam (aka Joe) hiked up his britches, dusted off his boots, straightened both hairs on his head, and said he thought gay marriage should be up the states and the feds should stay out of it.
But as for he and his family, they will serve the Lord! Yessiree. "I personally still think it's wrong," saith Jose the prophet (aka Sam the prophet). "People don't understand the dictionary -- it's called queer."
I knew that was the problem. Us folks who think gays are people, too, just don't understand that damn dictionary. But....but....seems I recall Joe (aka Sam) going into a library once looking for a dictionary and he ended up in the section called "Dichotomy."
Nah, I made that up.
Anyway, the prophet Jose (aka Joe, aka Sam), continued to esplain to us stupids: "Queer means strange or unusual." (He must have had someone read that to him from a dictionary (which you don't find in the dichotomy section of a library!).
But not to worry, because to call someone a queer "is not like a slur, like you would call a white person a honky or something like that." Nosirree! No slur intended, you goddamn queer!
Then, just to show he is a reel profit and knows what God wants, Jose saith: "You know, God is pretty explicit in what we're supposed to do -- what man and woman are for." Yup. I'll betcha old Jose aka Joe aka Sam wouldn't have a freaking clue if you asked him to point out in the Bible where God is "explicit" like that.
Doesn't matter, 'cause Jose the prophet (aka profit) goes on: "...at the same time, we're supposed to love everybody and accept people, and preach against the sins. I've had some friends that are actually homosexual." Notice he said "actually" by which he meant, I suppose, to distinguish between fake homosexuals, or people just pretending to be homosexual.
Now, Joe speaketh in the past tense, too: "I've had some friends..." He doesn't have any homosexual friends anymore, I'll betcha, 'cause "...they know where I stand, and they know that I wouldn't have them anywhere near my children."
Heehaw! Joe, Jose, Sam, plumber or no, prophet or profit, has to be the dumbest ass in the entire world, and he is a perfect example of the Repugnican base today! Stupid is as stupid does.
You can read all of Koppelman's article here.
Gregg and Republican principles
According to E. Thomas McCalanahan at the Kansas City Star, via McClatchy, the Repugnican nogoodnik senator, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, commented to the Wall Street Journal that the Republican Party is "rediscovering its principles," and "is beginning to speak in one voice on its traditional issues," and "a Republican comeback might come sooner than many expect."Dream on, Gregg.
What "principles"? What "issues"? Aha! Want a good laugh? Listen to this: Republican principles include "fiscal responsibility"? Yup. That's what he said. Oh, and the Repugnicans want the American people to "go out and create a better life for themselves," and his one other issue was that Republicans don't think we should apologize for our nation.
Jesus H. Christ! This guy's a senator. This is the asshat Obama tried to use in a bipartisan maneuver by putting him in the cabinet.
First of all, we know the Repugnicans want nothing to do with fiscal responsibility! That's code for allowing their corporate bosses to make as much money as possible while keeping the hoi polloi in their place. It's code for lowering the tax rate on the top one percent of our population. It's code for spending gazillions on the military and not one penny on health care! It's crabbing about a bailout but never bothering to mention it was their lousy Repugnican Party that tossed over a trillion bucks away on an illegal and nonsensical war in Iraq.
Secondly, we know the Repugnicans, no longer how loudly they proclaim their faith, do not really believe in limited government. That's also a code word for allowing them to impose their will on all of the American people, while denying the rights of the minorities in our land.
So, it's perfectly OK for a Republican "big" government to ban abortion and same-sex marriage, to establish faith-based offices in contravention of the Constitution, to turn the military into a Christian evangelical missionary organization, to appoint crusty old farts to our federal courts because they will uphold "traditional values," to be racist so long as you're quiet about it, to allow developers and corporations to have full access to the national resources which belong to the people, etc., etc.
No, the Repugs aren't against big government at all. So long as they're in control, the bigger government and more oppressive the government, the better!
And don't you love the bit about not apologizing for our nation? To the contrary! As a nation, we should put on sackcloth and ashes and beg the forgiveness of the world for electing the two stooges, Bush and Cheney, to our highest offices. Who the hell does Gregg think we are as a nation - some special place, created and blessed by his deity that can do no wrong?
We have a lot to apologize for. We need to apologize first of all to the American people for electing assholes made a mess of the vision for our country as set out in our founding documents. And, as noted, we need to apologize to the world for our bizarre, jingoistic and imperialistic behavior.
To apologize is not, Mr. Gregg, a sign of weakness, but a sign of strength. That's something the Repugnican Party as a whole has never understood!
Go back to New Hampshire, Mr. Gregg. Serve out your time with your mouth shut. Because when you open it and speak, you sound stupid.
Fortunately a slight majority of the American people are smart enough to see through your so-called "principles," and gave you a big thumbs down in November. The only thing that has changed since then is that the Repugnican Party has become even more entrenched in stupidity, racism, hatred, idiocy, fiscal irresponsibility, and is draped in the flag of failure.
That isn't going to change anytime soon because you're marching in the wrong direction to the wrong drummer, Mr. Gregg.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Dom Deluise - RIP
One of my favorite comedians, Dom Deluise, passed today at age 75. May he rest in peace!
Monday, May 4, 2009
U.S. military creating a holy war in Afghanistan - in Jesus' name
Our Constitution, as everyone should know, requires that there be a separation of church and state in our country. The founders of our nation, remembering all too well how oppressive an official religion can be, specifically wrote into our documents the following:
* "no religious Test shall ever be required as a qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." (Article VI)
* "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ..." (Amendment I)
Some of our U.S. military leaders evidently do not take the Constitution of the United States, which is the supreme law of the land, seriously, nor do they bother following the codes of the military under which they serve.
One of those codes (from the US Central Command) specifically forbids "proselytizing of any religion, faith or practice." This is known as General Order Number One.
Al Qaeda has called the U.S. presence in the Middle East an insult to Islam and has urged a holy war to oppose that presence. Al Qaeda has warned the citizens of the Middle East that it is the desire of the Western countries to destroy Islam and impose their way of life (including their religion) on Muslims.
We've written before about the fact that the U.S. military has wrapped itself in evangelical (fundamentalist) christianism; that 2/3rd of the military chaplains now identify as christianist fundamentalists. The top chaplain is a Southern Baptist fundamentalist.
We have written before about how these fundamentalists demand the right to proselytize among our own troops.
Now they've really gone over the fence.
Jeremy Scahill at Rebel Reports (via Alternet) writes that "New video evidence has surfaced showing that U.S. military forces in Afghanistan have been instructed by the military's top chaplain in the country to 'hunt people for Jesus' as they spread Christianity to the majority Muslim population. Soldiers have also imported Bibles translated into Pashto and Dari, the two dominant languages of Afghanistan. What's more, the center of this evangelical operation is at the huge U.S. base at Bagram, one of the main sites used by the U.S. military to torture and indefinitely detain prisoners."
Lieutenant-Colonel Gary Hensley, the chief poohbah of U.S. chappies in Afghanistan, is shown on the video as "telling [the] soldiers that as followers of Jeus Christ, they all have a responsibility 'to be witnesses for him.'"
This story has been picked up by Aljazeera and Aljazeera points out that the chaplains, good christianists they be, have figured out a way to get around General Order No. 1: You don't "proselytize," you give gifts. Like a Bible.
Not only is this kind of crap unconstitutional according to the U.S. Constitution and in violation of military regulations, it is illegal according to the Afghanistan constitution!
Secondly, this kind of crap gives credence to the extremist rant that the U.S. is engaged in a war on Islam, thereby undermining the military effort while strengthening Al Qaeda.
Every one of these miserable "soldiers for Christ," especially the chaplain nogoodniks should be courtmartialed and drummed out of the service.
This is another despicable example of christianist extremism based on the premise that when doing things for Jesus, the ends justify the means.
Read Scahill's article here.
* "no religious Test shall ever be required as a qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." (Article VI)
* "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ..." (Amendment I)
Some of our U.S. military leaders evidently do not take the Constitution of the United States, which is the supreme law of the land, seriously, nor do they bother following the codes of the military under which they serve.
One of those codes (from the US Central Command) specifically forbids "proselytizing of any religion, faith or practice." This is known as General Order Number One.
Al Qaeda has called the U.S. presence in the Middle East an insult to Islam and has urged a holy war to oppose that presence. Al Qaeda has warned the citizens of the Middle East that it is the desire of the Western countries to destroy Islam and impose their way of life (including their religion) on Muslims.
We've written before about the fact that the U.S. military has wrapped itself in evangelical (fundamentalist) christianism; that 2/3rd of the military chaplains now identify as christianist fundamentalists. The top chaplain is a Southern Baptist fundamentalist.
We have written before about how these fundamentalists demand the right to proselytize among our own troops.
Now they've really gone over the fence.
Jeremy Scahill at Rebel Reports (via Alternet) writes that "New video evidence has surfaced showing that U.S. military forces in Afghanistan have been instructed by the military's top chaplain in the country to 'hunt people for Jesus' as they spread Christianity to the majority Muslim population. Soldiers have also imported Bibles translated into Pashto and Dari, the two dominant languages of Afghanistan. What's more, the center of this evangelical operation is at the huge U.S. base at Bagram, one of the main sites used by the U.S. military to torture and indefinitely detain prisoners."
Lieutenant-Colonel Gary Hensley, the chief poohbah of U.S. chappies in Afghanistan, is shown on the video as "telling [the] soldiers that as followers of Jeus Christ, they all have a responsibility 'to be witnesses for him.'"
This story has been picked up by Aljazeera and Aljazeera points out that the chaplains, good christianists they be, have figured out a way to get around General Order No. 1: You don't "proselytize," you give gifts. Like a Bible.
Not only is this kind of crap unconstitutional according to the U.S. Constitution and in violation of military regulations, it is illegal according to the Afghanistan constitution!
Secondly, this kind of crap gives credence to the extremist rant that the U.S. is engaged in a war on Islam, thereby undermining the military effort while strengthening Al Qaeda.
Every one of these miserable "soldiers for Christ," especially the chaplain nogoodniks should be courtmartialed and drummed out of the service.
This is another despicable example of christianist extremism based on the premise that when doing things for Jesus, the ends justify the means.
Read Scahill's article here.
Sen. Ben Nelson & the insurance industry
In an article at The Seminal, Jason Rosenbaum critques Sen. Ben Nelson's (D-Neb) ties with the insurance industry.On May 1, Nelson announced he would oppose any government-run health care plan, and additionally, he intended to "assemble a coalition of like-minded centrists opposed to the creation of a public plan, as a counterweight to Democrats pushing for it."
Notice the use of the word, "centrist." Centrist as opposed to what? Liberal? Socialist? Marxist?
And how does the good Senator explain his own very comprehensive government-run health care plan? Oh, that must be "centrist." It's "centrist" if one is a member of Congress. A plan for the rest of us is not centrist, but some other murky kind of anti-capitalist plot to derail traditional values.
Rosenbaum suggest, however, that there is more to Nelson's centrism. According to Open Secrets, "Nelson received $608,709 from the insurance industry in 2007-2008, making the insurance industry his biggest donor group..."
Rosenbaum goes further, suggesting that all that money plays a part in Nelson's political stance and determines the causes he backs and those he opposes.
Maybe. While it is likely impossible to prove a quid-pro-quo, it is quite probable that an industry contributing over $600,000 to a politician will expect something in return for all that loot.
It appears, on the surface, at least, that Nelson plans to do his best to do the bidding of his insurance industry bidders.
Read all of Rosenbaum's article here.
Another article of interest here. And here.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Obama & Notre Dame - Catholic power does not reside in the poohbahs
You may have been led to believe that whatever ze bishop says, ze parishioners fall in line, kiss his ring and his ass, and cry, "Yes, father!"
Ah...the Catholic prelates wish it were zo. In fact, the biggest poohbah of them all, ze Pope in ze city/nation of ze Vatican wishes it were zo.
It is not zo.
For example, when ze University of Our Mother (Notre Dame) invited ze President (Obama) to speak at its commencement this year, zere was a holy uproar among ze faithful, which ze media tried to imply meant all ze Catholics in ze United States.
Not zo.
Ze so-called "uproar" was a well-orchestrated outcry by Catholic conservatives who don't like Mr. Obama because when it comes to abortion, although he abhors it, he believes women should make that choice and not ze government nor ze Roman Catolic Church.
Catolic conservatives believe every government and every person should abide by Catolic rules for zey are from zair god!
Interestingly, Alex Koppleman at Salon.com tells us a Pew poll which discovered that "of those Catholics who say they've heard about the controversy, 54 percent approve of the school's choice. 38 percent oppose it."
It gets worse for ze Catolic conservatives. Joan Walsh noted that other data indicated 73 percent of Our Mother's students (including 97 percent of its seniors) were in favor of ze president speaking at Our Mother's commencement.
None of this is surprising, of course. For many years, studies have indicated that a majority of Roman Catholics in this country disagree with ze church's teachings relative to birth control, abortion, and married priests.
It seems ze Catolic poohbahs are pissing in the wind.
Jesus is coming soon
Quit your job, sell everything you have, and go await on the nearest mountain! (Oh, and bring your family, too, unless they're a bunch of heathen.)
by Proudfootz
by Proudfootz
Ronald Reagan on torture
Glenn Greenwald, at Salon.com, has a most interesting article entitled "Ronald Reagan: vengeful, score-settling, Hard Left ideologue".Greenwald begins by noting how our thinking on torture has changed dramatically in a mere 20 years, "and how depraved and extremist our political and media classes have become ... "
He quotes what has become a relatively "famous" article by Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post, in which Krauthammer ends up saying that there are occasions when the use of torture is not only acceptable but necessary.
What?
Surprise, surprise! The hero of the Krauthammer's of the world, Ronald Reagan, thought otherwise!
May 20, 1988, when sending the Convention Against Torture to the U.S. Senate to be ratified, Reagan said:
"The United States participated actively and effectively in the negotiation of the Convention. It marks a significant step in the development during this century of international measures against torture and other inhuman treatment or punishment. Ratification of the Convention by the United States will clearly express United States opposition to torture, an abhorrent practice unfortunately still prevalent in the world today.
"The core provisions of the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called 'universal jurisdiction.' Each State Party is required required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution."
Here's what the Convention actually said:
"No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability, or any other public emergency, maybe invoked as a justification of torture...Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law."
Reagan, the "hard-left ideologue" signed the treaty!
Torture can never be justified under ANY circumstance! We are obligated to prosecute our torturers, and if we do not do so, another state may do so.
Welcome, Spain. Have at the bastards!
Greenwald offers much more of importance, which you can read here.
Armed men in la-la land
I am not anti-gun and I own guns. That does not mean I agree with the NRA or the other crazies in the hinterlands who are busy stocking up on ammo and heavy-duty weapons just in case the government decides to put all gun owners in a concentration camp.
Max Blumenthal of Daily Beast fame decided to get a closer look at our gun-loving loonies, and headed off to California and Nevada to check out a couple of gun shows.
He writes, "I came away from these events with a portrait of a heavily armed, tightly organized movement incited by right-wing radio to a fever-pitched resentment of Obama and his allies in Congress."
Blumenthal's referring to such kooks as Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, and the conspiracy fruitcake, Alex Jones. It's because of the ranting of such characters that many of those attending the gun shows have become "convinced Obama planned to usher in a Marxist dictatorship."
The people Max spoke with are typical of some, but not all gun enthusiasts. Unfortunately, the NRA has led too many to believe that sensible laws relative to the sale and possession of certain weapons is the first step toward a Soviet system.
The NRA is big and powerful and has the ability to influence many people with its lies. It defends the most bizarre claims, shrilly crying that any attempt to control gun sales and distribution is an evil, satanic plot.
Thus, Blumenthal says, "At the gun show in Reno, I witnessed the sale of rocket-propelled grenade launchers and bazooka guns; I watched a California dealer demonstrate how rapidly he could field-strip his .308 sniper rifle, then stash it in a deliberately innocuous-looking backpack and a briefcase that 'looks just like a camera case.'
"Nearby, I interviewed another dealer retailing a brand of .50-caliber assault rifle that was banned in California because it could supposedly bring down an airplane. He told me by slightly altering the bullets his gun fired, and by converting the gun from semiautomatic to bolt action, he was able to sell it in California once again."
I cannot think of any good reason why any sane person in this country needs a grenade launcher or a bazooka gun or a .50-caliber assault rifle that can bring down an airplane. And I don't think that by banning such weapons, the interpretation gun enthusiasts put to the 2nd Amendment would be in jeopardy.
Someone needs to stand up and tell the NRA to take its craziness and shove it!
You can read Blumenthal's entire article here.
And just in case you're not convinced, watch this video:
Max Blumenthal of Daily Beast fame decided to get a closer look at our gun-loving loonies, and headed off to California and Nevada to check out a couple of gun shows.
He writes, "I came away from these events with a portrait of a heavily armed, tightly organized movement incited by right-wing radio to a fever-pitched resentment of Obama and his allies in Congress."
Blumenthal's referring to such kooks as Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, and the conspiracy fruitcake, Alex Jones. It's because of the ranting of such characters that many of those attending the gun shows have become "convinced Obama planned to usher in a Marxist dictatorship."
The people Max spoke with are typical of some, but not all gun enthusiasts. Unfortunately, the NRA has led too many to believe that sensible laws relative to the sale and possession of certain weapons is the first step toward a Soviet system.
The NRA is big and powerful and has the ability to influence many people with its lies. It defends the most bizarre claims, shrilly crying that any attempt to control gun sales and distribution is an evil, satanic plot.
Thus, Blumenthal says, "At the gun show in Reno, I witnessed the sale of rocket-propelled grenade launchers and bazooka guns; I watched a California dealer demonstrate how rapidly he could field-strip his .308 sniper rifle, then stash it in a deliberately innocuous-looking backpack and a briefcase that 'looks just like a camera case.'
"Nearby, I interviewed another dealer retailing a brand of .50-caliber assault rifle that was banned in California because it could supposedly bring down an airplane. He told me by slightly altering the bullets his gun fired, and by converting the gun from semiautomatic to bolt action, he was able to sell it in California once again."
I cannot think of any good reason why any sane person in this country needs a grenade launcher or a bazooka gun or a .50-caliber assault rifle that can bring down an airplane. And I don't think that by banning such weapons, the interpretation gun enthusiasts put to the 2nd Amendment would be in jeopardy.
Someone needs to stand up and tell the NRA to take its craziness and shove it!
You can read Blumenthal's entire article here.
And just in case you're not convinced, watch this video:
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Jon Meacham is losing it?
I don't know if Jon Meacham, editor of Newsweek, is losing it in his "old age" but that would certainly appear to be the case. All you need do is reflect on his discussion about whether to prosecute those involved in legalizing and carrying out torture in this country.From The Editor's Desk, Newsweek, May 4, 2009:
"The idea that our only options are to move on completely or to prosecute is a classic false choice. A third way would be a 9/11-style bipartisan commission that would include clear supporters of the Bush administration. Such a panel would meet largely in private, have the power to grant immunity to witnesses and be charged with answering, as clearly as possible, the central question of whether Bush's war on terror in its entirety saved lives. ... [Then he refers to "FBI agent Ali Soufan, who got intel from key terror suspects--without using torture".]
"Still," he continues, "it seems likely that the interrogations, among other things, including surveillance, helped us prevent further terrorist attacks. We may never know for sure--you cannot prove a negative--but the public interest would be served by knowing more rather than less about how the war on terror has unfolded. (With, to be sure, the appropriate caveats about not revealing ongoing sources and methods.)"
That is some of the most specious reasoning I have read in a long time! Was Meacham paid by the Bush people?
First of all, the option of a bi-partisan commission may be new to Meacham, but it has been suggested by several writers in the past few months. Harper's recently carried a long article arguing for just that sort of thing.
Furthermore, the nonsense about Bush's war on terror saving lives is, well, nonsense. The evidence is out there for everyone to see: Bush's war on terror killed hundreds of thousands if not millions.
And what does that have to do with authorizing the use of torture?
Secondly, a lot of people felt and still feel that the 9/11 commission's work was not adequate or complete and we know that its recommendations, unenforceable as they were, were simply ignored by the Bush administration!
Such a commission, infected with "clear supporters of the Bush administration" would likely be bogged down in partisanship and would be unlikely to shed any light on what really went on in the bowels of the Bush White House!
Meacham goes on to suggest, without any evidence, that "it seems likely ... the interrogations, among other things, including surveillance, helped us prevent further terrorist attacks."
Incredible! You might as well say my crazy aunt prayed to Zeus and "it seems likely ... these prayers, among other things, including surveillance, helped us prevent further terrorist attacks."
I agree with Meacham that we need to know more. But we do know quite a bit at this point. And I most emphatically do not agree with him and others who believe we do not "want to open criminal investigations ... and pursue criminal charges against officials at the highest levels ... [this] would set a terrible precedent."
Consider that statement: Seeking justice, indicting criminals for criminal actions that not only led to a number of murders, but severely crippled our nation's self-understanding and standing in the world community, is setting a "terrible precedent"?
What kind of reasoning is that?
Not only so, but we have the "smoking gun(s)." We have confessions! We have reams of material that is self-indicting!
NOT seeking justice; not indicting criminals (it doesn't matter their "level" as no one under our constitution is above the law!) is what would set a terrible precedent. It would say to the world that we are world-class hypocrites, establishing laws for some folks, like at Nuremberg, and establishing another set of laws for our own lawless!
Mr. Meaham is no doubt a fine man. But on this issue he is absolutely and totally wrong!
Federal judge rules against telling the truth
The judge is James Selna; a U.S. District Court judge. Selna was appointed to his judicial seat by then President George W. Bush. So far as I can tell, Selna had no qualifications for the post other than he was a lawyer and a Repugnican.
James Corbett is a high school history teacher. He said something in class that I probably would have said under the same circumstances. He said Creationism is "religious, superstitious nonsense," in a classroom lecture in 2007.
One of his students, a christianist creationist by name of Chad Farnan, sued his teacher claiming that Corbett was consistently hostile toward Christians in class and advocated "'irreligion over religion'" in violation of the First Amendments establishment clause."
Huh? That makes no sense whatsoever. And who said little Christian fundys are to be "protected" against the truth?
The whole thing went to court and Judge Selna ruled, incredibly, that the teacher had "violated the First Amendment by disparaging Christians during a classroom lecture." The Judge said that the teacher had no right to state that Creationism was religious hokum and superstitious nonsense. And further, this should remind all teachers "of their legal 'boundaries' as public school employees."
What?
So, a teacher can no longer tell the truth?
Evidently, Jesus didn't care, as he didn't strike Corbett down to protect the poor frightened christianist student.
Here's what an incredulous PZ Myers had to say at Pharyngula:
"I am astounded that Corbett was found guilty of anything.
"First of all, he told the truth: creationism is religious, it is a product of superstition, and it is nonsense -- it doesn't fit any of the evidence we have about the history of the world or life on it. ...
"Secondly, we are being told over and over again that Christianity is not equivalent to creationism. This teacher specifically said that creationism is nonsense, and the judge has equated a dismissal of a weird anti-scientific belief with making a rude remark about Christianity. So...where are all the Christians rising in outrage at the slander of their faith?
"Thirdly, and this must be said, Chad Farnan is a self-righteous moronic creationist wanker who deserves to have his stupidity pointed out publicly, in the classroom and out of it, far and wide. Spread the word."
And all the people said, Amen!
Orange County Register article here.
The judges 39-page ruling here. (PDF)
More on the judge here.
PZ Myers' article here.
If, perchance, you think creationism is not specifically Christian, watch the video. Have a barf bag close by!
James Corbett is a high school history teacher. He said something in class that I probably would have said under the same circumstances. He said Creationism is "religious, superstitious nonsense," in a classroom lecture in 2007.
One of his students, a christianist creationist by name of Chad Farnan, sued his teacher claiming that Corbett was consistently hostile toward Christians in class and advocated "'irreligion over religion'" in violation of the First Amendments establishment clause."
Huh? That makes no sense whatsoever. And who said little Christian fundys are to be "protected" against the truth?
The whole thing went to court and Judge Selna ruled, incredibly, that the teacher had "violated the First Amendment by disparaging Christians during a classroom lecture." The Judge said that the teacher had no right to state that Creationism was religious hokum and superstitious nonsense. And further, this should remind all teachers "of their legal 'boundaries' as public school employees."
What?
So, a teacher can no longer tell the truth?
Evidently, Jesus didn't care, as he didn't strike Corbett down to protect the poor frightened christianist student.
Here's what an incredulous PZ Myers had to say at Pharyngula:
"I am astounded that Corbett was found guilty of anything.
"First of all, he told the truth: creationism is religious, it is a product of superstition, and it is nonsense -- it doesn't fit any of the evidence we have about the history of the world or life on it. ...
"Secondly, we are being told over and over again that Christianity is not equivalent to creationism. This teacher specifically said that creationism is nonsense, and the judge has equated a dismissal of a weird anti-scientific belief with making a rude remark about Christianity. So...where are all the Christians rising in outrage at the slander of their faith?
"Thirdly, and this must be said, Chad Farnan is a self-righteous moronic creationist wanker who deserves to have his stupidity pointed out publicly, in the classroom and out of it, far and wide. Spread the word."
And all the people said, Amen!
Orange County Register article here.
The judges 39-page ruling here. (PDF)
More on the judge here.
PZ Myers' article here.
If, perchance, you think creationism is not specifically Christian, watch the video. Have a barf bag close by!
Lent2
Lent is, of course, over for this year. But it will return. What will you give up for Lent the next time it rolls around?
Who the hell is Lent?
Courtesy of Atheist Cartoons.
Cheney, the criminal - a danger to our nation!
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Pew Poll on Churchgoers and torture
Nuts to this poll! I don't think it "proves" much of anything about church going and torture.
In a nutshell: The Pew Research Center surveyed 742 adult Americans. The poll analyzed "white evangelicals, white non-Hispanic Catholics, white mainlines Protestants, and the religiously unaffiliated" ...
First off, the sample size is ridiculously small compared to a population of 300 million plus people.
And from that small sample, the Pew Research Center found that "White evangelical Protestants were the religious group most likely to say torture is often or sometimes justified -- more than 6 in 10 supported it. People unaffiliated with any religious organization were least likely to back it. Only 4 in 10 of them did."
Those who attended religious services at least once a week -- 54 percent -- thought "the use of torture against suspected terrorists is 'often' or 'sometimes' justified. Only 42 percent of those who 'seldom or never' go to services agreed."
From what I've read, some of my friends believe this proves something: like the more religious a person is, the least moral that person is.
Maybe. I think much more extensive research is needed before one can draw that conclusion, however.
What really cranks my gears is that anyway you look at it, we've got too damn many people in this country who don't have a problem with torturing the "enemy." How can this be? Torture is not only illegal in the United States and has been "officially" illegal for over a hundred years, but the ideals we espouse preclude the use of torture.
Other countries, under despicable dictators, may torture their perceived enemies, but not the United States. When our soldiers were tortured in World War II and Vietnam, the American people went ballistic! As Americans, we stand against torture. WE are different! WE don't believe in cruel and unusual punishment! WE don't torture! WE are the humane ones! WE are people under the law and the Constitution!
So, what's happened?
Be damned if I know, but eight years under the criminality of the Bush/Cheney gang may well have twisted the easily twistable minds of the rank and file who seem to have a hard time thinking clearly under the best of conditions.
It's getting hard to recognize this country that I once loved and at one time was proud of! And to all the so-called "patriots" who take issue with that statement, I say "Go to hell." I'm not proud of my country simply because it's my country. I'm proud of my country when it behaves in humane ways and when it reflects the values and ideals represented in our founding documents.
When Barry Goldwater ran for president, his supporters plastered bumper stickers on their pickups which read, "My country, right or wrong!"
Wrong! If my country is right, OK. If my country is wrong, not OK. Wrong needs to be righted!
[It might be helpful to remember that Goldwater was buried in a landslide in 1964!]
I cannot be proud of a country that has become known for its illegal actions and for signing statements whereby a president proclaims he'll obey the law only if he feels like it.
That's why President Obama needs to bring action against those involved in torture. He needs to ensure they are brought before the bar of justice. They need to be tried by a jury of their peers. Torture, which is illegal, they have admitted to. They've confessed. If they must spend time in prison, so be it.
Then we can all be proud of our country once again. And the next president, and the one after that, and the one after that, etc., will know that if he or she breaks the laws of these United States, he or she will be held accountable!
In a nutshell: The Pew Research Center surveyed 742 adult Americans. The poll analyzed "white evangelicals, white non-Hispanic Catholics, white mainlines Protestants, and the religiously unaffiliated" ...
First off, the sample size is ridiculously small compared to a population of 300 million plus people.
And from that small sample, the Pew Research Center found that "White evangelical Protestants were the religious group most likely to say torture is often or sometimes justified -- more than 6 in 10 supported it. People unaffiliated with any religious organization were least likely to back it. Only 4 in 10 of them did."
Those who attended religious services at least once a week -- 54 percent -- thought "the use of torture against suspected terrorists is 'often' or 'sometimes' justified. Only 42 percent of those who 'seldom or never' go to services agreed."
From what I've read, some of my friends believe this proves something: like the more religious a person is, the least moral that person is.
Maybe. I think much more extensive research is needed before one can draw that conclusion, however.
What really cranks my gears is that anyway you look at it, we've got too damn many people in this country who don't have a problem with torturing the "enemy." How can this be? Torture is not only illegal in the United States and has been "officially" illegal for over a hundred years, but the ideals we espouse preclude the use of torture.
Other countries, under despicable dictators, may torture their perceived enemies, but not the United States. When our soldiers were tortured in World War II and Vietnam, the American people went ballistic! As Americans, we stand against torture. WE are different! WE don't believe in cruel and unusual punishment! WE don't torture! WE are the humane ones! WE are people under the law and the Constitution!
So, what's happened?
Be damned if I know, but eight years under the criminality of the Bush/Cheney gang may well have twisted the easily twistable minds of the rank and file who seem to have a hard time thinking clearly under the best of conditions.
It's getting hard to recognize this country that I once loved and at one time was proud of! And to all the so-called "patriots" who take issue with that statement, I say "Go to hell." I'm not proud of my country simply because it's my country. I'm proud of my country when it behaves in humane ways and when it reflects the values and ideals represented in our founding documents.
When Barry Goldwater ran for president, his supporters plastered bumper stickers on their pickups which read, "My country, right or wrong!"
Wrong! If my country is right, OK. If my country is wrong, not OK. Wrong needs to be righted!
[It might be helpful to remember that Goldwater was buried in a landslide in 1964!]
I cannot be proud of a country that has become known for its illegal actions and for signing statements whereby a president proclaims he'll obey the law only if he feels like it.
That's why President Obama needs to bring action against those involved in torture. He needs to ensure they are brought before the bar of justice. They need to be tried by a jury of their peers. Torture, which is illegal, they have admitted to. They've confessed. If they must spend time in prison, so be it.
Then we can all be proud of our country once again. And the next president, and the one after that, and the one after that, etc., will know that if he or she breaks the laws of these United States, he or she will be held accountable!
Friday, May 1, 2009
Meaghan McCain to Rush Limbaugh...
The boss of the Repugnican Party, Rush Limbaargh, was having at Arlen Specter for defecting to the Democratic Party. As did others, the fat man implied that Specter had always been a closet Democrat.
Then this: "A lot of people said, well Specter, take McCain with you, and his daughter. Take McCain and his daughter with you."
Ha, ha.
Meaghan McCain, "his daughter," has, for some time, taken names and gone after the craziest of the crazies that make up the Republican Party, including Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham.
So, when she heard about the fat man's latest rant, she didn't actually say he could stick it up his ass, but close. Here's a paraphrase, plus my reading between the lines: she's not leaving the Republican Party; she loves the Republican Party; she's going to work to change the Republican Party so big fat, stupid, blowhards like Limbaargh will have less of a say.
Isn't it interesting, though, that in fact Rush Limbaargh is the "boss" of the Repugnicans. He has become the arbiter of what constitutes a Republican. Those who disagree, do so at their own risk. Those who dare counter his rabid ravings, soon come crawling on their knees begging forgiveness.
That's how low the Repugnican Party has sunk.
In the following video, Rachel Maddow interviews Meagan McCain.
Then this: "A lot of people said, well Specter, take McCain with you, and his daughter. Take McCain and his daughter with you."
Ha, ha.
Meaghan McCain, "his daughter," has, for some time, taken names and gone after the craziest of the crazies that make up the Republican Party, including Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham.
So, when she heard about the fat man's latest rant, she didn't actually say he could stick it up his ass, but close. Here's a paraphrase, plus my reading between the lines: she's not leaving the Republican Party; she loves the Republican Party; she's going to work to change the Republican Party so big fat, stupid, blowhards like Limbaargh will have less of a say.
Isn't it interesting, though, that in fact Rush Limbaargh is the "boss" of the Repugnicans. He has become the arbiter of what constitutes a Republican. Those who disagree, do so at their own risk. Those who dare counter his rabid ravings, soon come crawling on their knees begging forgiveness.
That's how low the Repugnican Party has sunk.
In the following video, Rachel Maddow interviews Meagan McCain.
Condi Rice - No moral base
This video will help confirm that many of our top leaders during the Bush years simply lacked any moral or ethical base. The theology under which they worked was built on the notion that they were doing God's work, therefore the ends justify the means.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Torture in Poland
You probably thought the title of this post referred to Bush giving a speech to the people of Poland.
Not so. Although it does have to do with Bush, it refers to his actions, not his speeches. His speeches were often filled with flowery phrases like "axis of evil," "democracy is us," "we is learning now Saddam had WMDs" -- things like that. None of which meant anything.
But when it came to torture, Bush meant every word!
So, under the authority of Bush/Cheney, the CIA set up secret prisons in Europe to which the US of A (the great moral leader of the world) would rendition prisoners caught in the so-called, misnamed "war on terror" and torture them.
At least one of these secret prisons was in Poland. An intensive investigation is going on in Poland now to find out how this happened; who knew about it; and who authorized it.
John Goetz and Britta Sandberg, writing at Salon.com, describe how, back in March of 2003, a CIA plane flew Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, "the architect of the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington", who had been captured in Pakistan, to a special CIA prison in northeastern Poland near the Szymany airport.
There he was tortured. Waterboarded, in fact. Up to eight times a day.
Other prisoners were brought to this CIA prison to be tortured. Which was and is, illegal! Thus "Flight routes were manipulated and falsified for this purpose and, with the knowledge of the Polish government, the European aviation safety agency Eurocontrol was deliberately deceived."
All of which has led Warsaw public prosecutor to investigate "former Polish Prime Minister Leszek Miller's government on allegations on abuse of office." That investigation within Poland, along with other investigations into the role Polish intelligence played in Bush's tortureland, are ongoing.
Goetz and Sandberg have much more to say which you can read here. As you do, remember they're writing about deeply religious people, self-proclaimed Christians, one of which claimed to hear God talking to him, who think it is just hunky-dory to torture people if torture "works." Actually, even if it doesn't. 'Cause it might. Right, Dicky?
Not so. Although it does have to do with Bush, it refers to his actions, not his speeches. His speeches were often filled with flowery phrases like "axis of evil," "democracy is us," "we is learning now Saddam had WMDs" -- things like that. None of which meant anything.
But when it came to torture, Bush meant every word!
So, under the authority of Bush/Cheney, the CIA set up secret prisons in Europe to which the US of A (the great moral leader of the world) would rendition prisoners caught in the so-called, misnamed "war on terror" and torture them.
At least one of these secret prisons was in Poland. An intensive investigation is going on in Poland now to find out how this happened; who knew about it; and who authorized it.
John Goetz and Britta Sandberg, writing at Salon.com, describe how, back in March of 2003, a CIA plane flew Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, "the architect of the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington", who had been captured in Pakistan, to a special CIA prison in northeastern Poland near the Szymany airport.
There he was tortured. Waterboarded, in fact. Up to eight times a day.
Other prisoners were brought to this CIA prison to be tortured. Which was and is, illegal! Thus "Flight routes were manipulated and falsified for this purpose and, with the knowledge of the Polish government, the European aviation safety agency Eurocontrol was deliberately deceived."
All of which has led Warsaw public prosecutor to investigate "former Polish Prime Minister Leszek Miller's government on allegations on abuse of office." That investigation within Poland, along with other investigations into the role Polish intelligence played in Bush's tortureland, are ongoing.
Goetz and Sandberg have much more to say which you can read here. As you do, remember they're writing about deeply religious people, self-proclaimed Christians, one of which claimed to hear God talking to him, who think it is just hunky-dory to torture people if torture "works." Actually, even if it doesn't. 'Cause it might. Right, Dicky?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)