This is frightening. One cannot help but wonder if all of our university campuses are infested with these hateful people who do not understand nor care about democratic values such as free speech and respect for others. If this is Islam, heaven help us!
h/t to my friend Bob Poris
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Biblical fanatics ran rampant across the nation
[Image from Newser.com]We've got many religious nutcases in the United States Congress. I'm not sure of the exact number but I'd guess it would be in the hundreds! By nutcases, I mean christianist fundys who have no real knowledge of the Bible but believe all kinds of crap they derive from reading the same or from what their goofy pastors and preachers tell them. These nutcases also inhabit state legislatures around the country!
Here's the most recent example. In the State of Virginia, a Repugnican by name of Mark Cole introduced a bill that was "overwhelmingly approved" by the state House which would forbid "companies from forcing employees to have microchips implanted in their bodies."
Now, on the face of it that sounds like a really good thing and something any liberal would support wholeheartedly. No company should have that kind of power over the body of its employees! Cole, in fact, said, "I just think you should have the right to control your own body."
[I wonder if he feels that way about women and abortion? Probably not.]
But, as you may have guessed there's more to all this. Someone told Cole that in the Bible somewhere "there's a prophecy ... that says you'll have to receive a mark, or you can neither buy nor sell things in end times. Some people think these computer chips might be that mark."
It's very hard to comprehend such incredible gullibility and insane stupidity in the 21st century. This is stuff right out of the Dark Ages! An AOL news story about this states "The Book of Revelation describes the rise of an antichrist figure called 'the beast' as the end of the world approaches and will require everyone to 'receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads.'"
Well, hell, the obvious solution, if Cole and his moronic minions are really concerned about this, is to make sure the microchips are implanted anywhere BUT the right hand and foreheads. Sheesh! Is that so hard to understand?
It must be. Another christianist idiot, Tennessee Rep. Susan Lynn, is sponsoring a bill like Cole's and she says she's a Christian and believes these microchips might be the "Mark of the Beast." Or, maybe it might be a tatoo." Hoo, hoo!
In my opinion, no microchips should be implanted in any human being for any reason and if someone tries to do that to me, he or she is going to be looking at the barrel end of a great big gun!
It ain't gonna happen. Georgia, California, North Dakota, and Wisconsin have already banned such implants. I'd guess other states will do the same.
But please, none of this has a damn thing to do with some religious gobbledygook from the book of Revelation or any other ancient apocalyptic piece of nonsense! There is no antiChrist, these are not the "end times" and Jesus ain't coming back!
There's more here.
Hat's off to Harry Knox
[Photo of Harry Knox from ProjectAtlanta.com]According to Jeffrey Weiss of Politics Daily, there is a petition going around, signed by the House minority leader, weepy John Boehner, to have Harry Knox excised from the Obama administration.
"Knox," says Weiss, "is the director of the Religion and Faith Program of the Human Rights Campaign. He's a former licensed Methodist pastor. He's gay. He's a member of the Obama administration's Advisory Council on Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships."
So why do Weepy and the bunch of Catholic nogoodniks at the Media Research Council (that's the group that sent out a news release about this tempest-in-a-teapot with a link to the petition) want Knox tossed out of Obama's administration?
Well, they say Mr. Knox is a bigot, and anti-Catholic to boot. Evidently Knox once had the gall to question the pope's judgment. He said, "The pope's statement that condoms don't help control the spread of HIV, but rather condoms increase infection rates, is hurting people in the name of Jesus."
Wow! But there's more. Knox also said "The Knights of Columbus do a great deal of good in the name of Jesus Christ, but in this particular case [Proposition 8], they were foot soldiers of a discredited army of oppression."
Heh, heh! Hey, the pope is wrong and the Knights are wrong and Knox is right! And that's just part of it. The Roman Church has been wrong on thousands of issues for the last 2,000 years and it continues to "hurt people in the name of Jesus" every day!
Nothing wrong with being anti-Catholic! If you're going to be Catholic and believe all the crap the Roman church stands for, then be prepared to get blasted and be ready to be offended. You deserve it!
But let's move on. Let's look at this Advisory Council on Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships that has found a seat in the Obama administration. Obama, as I recall, promised to get rid of this faith-based challenge to our Constitution. Evidently, he hasn't done so...just relabeled it a bit to include the innocuous phrase, "Neighborhood Partnerships." What the hell does that mean?
Many of us so-called "liberals" were appalled with G. W. Bushy's outright attack on the doctrine of the separation of church and state when he instituted these faith-based groups. We were angered even more when our tax dollars were found to be funding a bunch of phony christianist fundy operations where the emphasis was not on service but on conversion.
There should be NO faith-based operation in any White House or any administration, be it Democratic or Repugnican! No tax monies of any kind should be given to any religious group under any guise for any reason! I don't care what "good" these religious groups do in a community! They do not deserve tax dollars and must not receive them. That's in our Constitution!
If religious groups of whatever stripe want to serve their communities in non-religious ways, more power to them. But the members of those groups should cough up the bucks necessary, not the U.S. taxpayer!
So, while I say "Hat's off to Harry Knox" for his willingness to stand up and tell the truth about the old celibate prelate in Rome who wobbles about in colorful dresses, I'd also say get rid of the faith-based "Advisory Council" altogether! Which would mean Harry would no longer be part of the Obama Administration, but he could continue with his day job, say what he wants to say, and not worry about offending some religious devotees of what is essentially Christian paganism.
There's more on Harry Knox here.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Rachel Maddow - Medicare, Social Security in GOP cross hairs
If the GOP ever again takes power, they plan to destroy Social Security and Medicare. In this clip, Rachel explains just how insane Repugnican leaders are!
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Rachel Maddow - Global Warming isn't the opposite of snow
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
The Colbert Report - We're Off to See the Blizzard
Or, how to make fun of the peek-a-boo's who deny global warming on FAUX News!
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| We're Off to See the Blizzard | ||||
| ||||
Keith Olbermann - Worst Person in the World - Glenn Beck
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
G. W. Bush is the "gift" that keeps on giving
Consider the effect of the Bush appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Repugnican and Democratic "corpor-rats" are elated these days because their "activist" Supreme Court just handed the reins of the U.S. government over to their corporate owners.
This was made possible by the justices appointed by G.W. Bush to the Court.
(And isn't it interesting that so-called "conservatives," who in the past have railed against the U.S. Supreme "activist" Court, remain silent in the midst of this most tragic recent event? It appears that if the Supremes rule in favor of the poor, or women's rights or justice for the have-nots, they are "activists" ignoring their role as clearly defined in the Constitution. If they rule in favor of the moneyed powers, revoking years of precedent, they are just doing their job as described by the Constitution.)
The Nation had this to say (Feb. 15 issue):
"The Citizens United campaign finance decision by Chief Justice Roberts and a Supreme Court majority of conservative judicial activists is a dramatic assault on American democracy, overturning more than a century of precedent in order to give corporations the ultimate authority over elections and governing. This decision tips the balance against active citizenship and the rule of law by making it possible for the nation's most powerful economic interests to manipulate not just individual politicians and electoral contests, but political discourse itself."
What this decision did, says The Nation, is give corporations the same rights as human beings - citizens!
From the onset of our nation, leaders have warned against such a thing! Chief Justice John Marshall said a corporation was an "artificial being, invisible, intangible." And Jefferson warned that the new nation must "crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." (The Nation, Feb. 15, p. 3)
President Dwight Eisenhower, at the end of his term, warned us of the terrible threat of what he called the "military-industrial complex."
What the Supremes have done is unleashed the money of the corporate world. Prepare for an onslaught. The international corporations control most of the wealth in the world. Money is power. That money will be used to control the U.S. government to an extent never before seen in history!
Again, from The Nation:
"Already the Chamber of Commerce is promising to unleash the 'largest, most aggressive' election-season spending spree in the organization's history. Chamber officials promise to 'highlight lawmakers and candidates' who toe the corporate line, and 'hold accountable those who don't.'"
The foundation of our democracy is in peril!
What can be done? Congress can act. We can enact a Constitutional amendment. The problem is that many, if not most, members of Congress are already bought and paid for by corporate monies and are "toeing" the corporate line.
But not all! Thank the gods for Democratic Congressman, Alan Grayson, from Florida. Grayson says that this decision by the Supremes "is the worst Supreme Court ruling in more than a century. In my opinion, it opened the door to political bribery and corruption on the largest scale imaginable. Corporations, foreign-owned businesses and foreign governments will be allowed to spend unlimited amounts of cash on propaganda to dictate the outcomes of our elections."
Grayson insists that this decision has "put the law up for sale" and awards our government "to the highest bidder."
So, Mr. Grayson has introduced eight bills into the House of Representatives "to prevent a corporate takeover of government in America. ... Each of these bills is clear and concise; none is longer than four pages."
[Which means that even the dumbest in that legislative body, like the moron from Minnesota, ought to be able to read them!]
Here's a summary:
1. The Business Should Mind Its Own Business Act - "Implements a 500% excise tax on corporate contributions to political committees, and on corporate expenditures on political advocacy campaigns.
2. The Public Company Responsibility Act - "Prevents companies making political contributions and expenditures from trading their stock on national exchanges."
3. The End Political Kickbacks Act - "Prevents for-profit corporations that receive money from the government from making political contributions, and limits the amounts that employees of those companies can contribute."
Well, there are five more: The Corporate Propaganda Sunshine Act, The Ending Corporate Collusion Act, The End the Hijacking of Shareholder Funds Act, The America is for Americans Act, and the Pick Your Poison Act, each of which deals with commonsense controls which should have been in place years ago!
Congress can make a difference in muting the terrible effects of the Supreme Court's decision! Unfortunately, there are too few Alan Grayson's on Capitol Hill!
You can read much more about Grayson's proposals here.
No More "I Love You's" - A guest post by Wolynski
A Vegas hooker once told me that the word “love” was invented by men to get free sex. No wonder she’s a prostitute.
Valentine’s Day was probably invented by the flower, chocolate and jewelry industries. A day for showing love? As cynical as that hooker.
“I love you” are the most selfish words in the English language and should never be uttered, unless it’s between a parent and a child. Anytime anyone told me “I love you”, I replied “Prove it”. I knew it was so many meaningless words. If it were true, I wouldn’t need to hear it.
There was a movie, where Gena Rowlands plays a freshly minted, comely widow in rural America. Suitors come calling with flowers, professing their admiration. One day she hears a noise in her front yard. The quiet neighbor (James Garner?) from across the street is chopping her firewood, because it needed to be done. To hell with flowers and fancy words, make yourself useful and indispensable. How are the words “I love you” going to improve my life? It’s merely someone telling me how they feel - it’s all about them, not me. But if they spontaneously start doing my dishes… now that’s got my interest.
In fact, uttering “I love you” has ruined many promising relationships. My gay friend Dana had his eye on a young man - they started going to the movies, dinner and fooling around. Two weeks in, Dana declared his love and the young man fled. I said, you did what? Why did you suffocate a nice thing before it had time to develop? Well, I needed to know where I stood, said Dana. Now that’s pretty selfish. I tell you where you stand - alone. Nobody needs your insecurities.
Anyone can land anyone, regardless of looks, providing they can make themselves indispensable - Yoko Ono is the living proof. Pamela Digby, a homely daughter of a minor baronet, landed Winston Churchill’s son, the dashing producer Leland Hayward and one of the richest men in the world, Averell Harriman. She set her sights, entered their lives and attended to every detail of their comfort - they’d be lost without her. Not for her roses on Valentine’s Day - she had her eye on the entire fortune. Widowed, as planned, she could get her own bloody roses.
On the flip side of romance, I believe that marriage, especially when children are involved, is forever. You found your soul mate, now provide and protect them. Saying you fell in love with someone else is not an option - it’s more like fell in lust. Maybe pre-arranged marriages of yesteryear were more durable - no expectations and no disappointments.
The notion of love is big business, especially for songwriters, film makers and wedding planners. Wedding planners? Most weddings cost more than a down payment on a house. The formal weddings I’ve attended have been stressful and phony affairs - the only happy people were the drunks.
Why do people get so despondent when their loved one leaves them? If you truly loved them and they’re content with someone else, you should be glad for them, not angry.
True love means someone having your back now and forever - anything else is bullshit, especially chocolates on Valentine‘s Day. Diamonds would be better.
Image by Wolynski: only in Vegas could Michael Jordan marry Joan Collins… that can’t be right. And there's a drive-through window.
Our thanks to Wolynski for this guest post. Please check out Wolynski's blog here.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Scott Brown to write memoir
Let's see...Mr. Brown was elected (unfortunately) to the United States Senate by the people of the state of Massachusetts. Mr. Brown is a Republican. His election was considered to be a huge upset, despite the fact that his Democratic opponent was out-to-lunch during most of the campaign.
When Mr. Brown was sworn in as a Senator his first word was "No." He joined lock-step with the other Repugnican nogoodniks in the Senate to vote against President Obama's nominee to the National Labor Relations Board. In other words, Brown jumped aboard the Repugnican bandwagon to nowhere by voting with his brown-shirted brothers and sisters in another attempt to bring our President down!
That shouldn't surprise anyone, for this mess from Mass is a cookie cut from the same dough as the rest of the Repugs in the Senate...you know, he's agin national health care reform...but that don't mean he don't love all the peeple - dontcha know he drives a pickup truck jest like real folks!
Now, Mr. Brown believes himself to be such a goddamn hero he's going to write an "inspirational" memoir.
Heh, heh!
Let's hope the national media starts digging around in Mr. Brown's past; from what I've heard he's got quite a history; something about posing semi-nude for Cosmo? Read this. And of such are Repugnicans made these days.
Oh, and you'll be interested to know that he's on about the same intellectual plane as Sarah Palin...he's a history buff! Watch:
When Mr. Brown was sworn in as a Senator his first word was "No." He joined lock-step with the other Repugnican nogoodniks in the Senate to vote against President Obama's nominee to the National Labor Relations Board. In other words, Brown jumped aboard the Repugnican bandwagon to nowhere by voting with his brown-shirted brothers and sisters in another attempt to bring our President down!
That shouldn't surprise anyone, for this mess from Mass is a cookie cut from the same dough as the rest of the Repugs in the Senate...you know, he's agin national health care reform...but that don't mean he don't love all the peeple - dontcha know he drives a pickup truck jest like real folks!
Now, Mr. Brown believes himself to be such a goddamn hero he's going to write an "inspirational" memoir.
Heh, heh!
Let's hope the national media starts digging around in Mr. Brown's past; from what I've heard he's got quite a history; something about posing semi-nude for Cosmo? Read this. And of such are Repugnicans made these days.
Oh, and you'll be interested to know that he's on about the same intellectual plane as Sarah Palin...he's a history buff! Watch:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Chris Matthews - Palin an empty vessel
What follows is from Crooks and Liars:
For the second night in a row Chris Matthews expresses just how much Sarah Palin scares him to death, this time with the admission that she's just as much of an empty vessel as George Bush.
MATTHEWS: I wouldn`t be afraid if either of those guys were president. I might not vote for them, but I wouldn`t be afraid of them. I`d be afraid of her because I think she`s an empty vessel, ready to be filled by ideology she doesn`t even understand. That is really scary. We saw that with Dan Quayle. We saw that with W. Nothing is more frightening than an empty vessel in power.
Well Mr. Matthews, if this is what you really believe about George Bush, can we get you to quit fawning over him in his flight suit?
Transcript via Nexis Lexis.
MATTHEWS: Well, Chris Wallace asked her how hard President Obama would be to defeat in 2012. Here`s what the governor said. Let`s listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PALIN: Say he played the war card. Say he decided to declare war on Iran or decided to really come out and do whatever he could to support Israel, which I would like him to do. But that changes the dynamics in what we can assume is going to happen between now and three -- I think if the election were today, I do not think Obama would be reelected.
CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: You`re not suggesting he would cynically play the war card.
PALIN: I`m not suggesting that. I`m saying, if he did, things would dramatically change, if he decided to tough it up and do all that he can to secure our nation and our allies.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTHEWS: She`s frightening. Mark, that is frightening stuff. Frightening. First of all, presidents do not declare war. Anybody knows that in high school. Congress has to declare war.
To declare war in Iran -- I don`t think the most far right Middle East hawk would talk about declaring war on Iran, a country of 70-some million people, with an advanced air force. A war like that, between the United States and Iran, would be so costly, an actual all out war. Why does she talk like that? Is that coming -- where do people get talk -- I mean, I was kidding last night. Is Michael Ledean (ph), a real hawk, writing this stuff for her? I don`t know anybody as far right as that, besides him.
HALPERIN: She is out there free-lancing and flailing and relying on what`s gotten her this far. I don`t think you can overstate the extent to which she is the dominant figure in the Republican party today, for 2010 and 2012. I also don`t think you can overstate the extent to which answers like that, she`s lucky they`re not worse because she`s obviously flailing.
She`s spending time traveling, making money, giving speeches, going on Fox. She`s not spending time doing what she should do. Again, I would say even if she`s not running for president, be a serious person. Learn what you need to learn. She said in the interview with Chris Wallace, she knows more now than she did when she was governor of Alaska. Answers like that do not manifest that that is true.
MATTHEWS: Great example, Greta Van Susteren was interviewing her on Fox. Greta`s a serious person. She`s asking serious questions as if -- and they`re very friendly to Governor Palin -- asking her a serious question with the idea she might be able to give serious answers. Nothing comes out. Nothing -- she says nothing spontaneously when you ask her a serious question.
KORNBLUT: What`s more interesting -- that may be the case. I didn`t actually see that interview.
MATTHEWS: It was stunning. If I was Roger Ailes watching, the head of Fox, I would say this is a mistake on my part to pay her any money, except for show business purposes. She has nothing going on mentally.
KORNBLUT: Yet, Chris, what`s happened, as Mark said, accurately, she is the leading figure in the -- if she were to run tomorrow, who would challenge her for this kind of attention?
MATTHEWS: These guys are so boring. Isn`t there any -- just a minute, Mark. You`re a reporter and you`re a reporter. Is there anybody in the Republican party who could debate her right now and out-shine her?
KORNBLUT: I think Mitt Romney --
MATTHEWS: He could outshine her?
KORNBLUT: I think it`s possible. I think it hasn`t happened yet.
MATTHEWS: Mark, your thoughts? Who could out-shine her right now? She`s got nothing going on right now mentally.
HALPERIN: Hailey Barbour and John Kasich both could. But neither of them -- no one in the party has shown the courage to take her on and say, Governor Palin, we like how you excite the base, but tell us one specific thing you`re for, even in the area of energy, her supposed area of expertise. Just tell us one thing you`re for specifically that would make America better.
MATTHEWS: I wouldn`t be afraid if either of those guys were president. I might not vote for them, but I wouldn`t be afraid of them. I`d be afraid of her because I think she`s an empty vessel, ready to be filled by ideology she doesn`t even understand. That is really scary. We saw that with Dan Quayle. We saw that with W. Nothing is more frightening than an empty vessel in power.
Thank you, Ann Kornblut and Mark Halperin.
Rachel Maddow - Taking names on GOP hypocrisy
It's the same old story. The GOP has only one goal - to take down President Obama. Meanwhile, Republican hypocrisy reaches new heights. And these creeps claim to be "patriots." What is patriotic about continuing to obstruct all attempts to stabilize our country?
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Keith Olbermann - GOP "bipartisanship"
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Sarah Palin and the Israeli flag
[Photo from the Christian Science Monitor]I wouldn't have noticed this, probably.
But others did. Glenn Greenwald, writing in Salon, notes that on the night Palin did her shtick at the tea-party "convention," she was wearing two flags on her lapel - the U.S. flag and the Israeli flag.
Greenwald says:
"... Along with the fact that she remains deeply popular with most Jewish-American voters, Palin's flamboyant display of her so-called love for Israel -- she previously boasted that the Israeli flag was the 'only' one she kept in her Gubernatorial office -- is almost certainly grounded in her creepy desire to mold America's foreign policy to fit her evangelical belief that God demands that 'Israeli land' be unified under Israeli control in order for Jesus to return and sweep all the good Christians up to heaven in Rapture (while banishing everyone else -- including the Jews she loves so much -- straight to hell forever).
...
"Is there any other nation in the world where a leading politician can appear in public -- without controversy -- wearing the flag of a foreign country? ... Why should an American political leader be wearing an Israeli flag?"
Sarah Palin is crazy. She is certifiable. She's also ignorant and stupid. These are very dangerous combinations. She is also THE candidate of the far-right christianist pentecostals who believe in demon possession, spirits, spiritual mapping, praying away evil, etc., who further believe they have been called by God to take over the US of A and reform it in "his" image as they understand it!
Sarah Palin is a card-carrying member of these moronic bozos.
This fact should be front and center in every article written about her and in every television program that mentions her. Her religious beliefs are not peripheral, they are what drive her! This is why she can lie with such a straight face, and why it bothers her not at all to have no moral or ethical standards - as with most christianists of this ilk, the ends justify the means!
She said, in a recent interview, she thinks it might be time for another "divine intervention" in this country. I think she thinks she would be that "divine intervention." But, believe me, whatever she meant by this, it wouldn't be good for the common weal!
And our Fourth Estate should take her to task for flaunting an Israeli flag in her lapel. That is not only ludicrous but borders on treason. The US and Israel are not one nation nor are they bound together. Both are independent, sovereign nations that stand alone. If her loyalty to the US is somehow tied to her loyalty to Israel, she's got a big problem, and we ought to know about it.
She should be lambasted for her religious views relating to Israel. She is not Jewish! But rather, like all the christianists on the right who claim to love Israel, she doesn't give a goddamn for the Jews; they are merely pawns in her sick, violent, mythical end-world scenario.
If you wonder what Palin would be like in the Oval Office, think Dick Cheney, magnified a hundred times!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)