Folding, spindeling, and mutilating lauguage for fun since Aug, 2004
Sunday, 27 June 2010

On the way up to the North Shore, Rocky and I recently stopped for gas at a place (I think it was called "Ray's Place", but don't quote me on that).


The gas was horribly over priced, but we found ourselves on the bottom of the tank, and couldn't risk there not being another stop for a while.


I walked in to use the bathroom, and my ears were assaulted by the screaming rage coming from the radio. Some British guy ranting on and on about the "Obama Agenda".


The bathroom was filthy, so I was grateful for the sanitary wipes that moms seem to always need to carry around in their purses.


Then I went to pick up some water and soda. The radio had gone to ads about how our families were under assault, and men need to know what to do and have the right guns to protect their families...the onimous music in the background made it hard to follow the words, so I don't know what the ads were selling besides fear.


As I gathered together the things we wanted to buy, the two people staffing the store were stocking shelves and one guy (Ray, I assume) was ranting and raving about how hard it was to stay in business with the government taking all his money (I couldn't help think that maybe he'd get more business if he lowered his prices to attract business besides those who just happened to get caught in front of his store with an empty tank.)


While I waited at the counter, he held forth on how "nobody wanted to work for a living anymore"..they just wanted a hand-out from hard-working guys like him who actually do all the work in society.


The riff meandered on to "all the damned Mexicans taking our jobs and living on welfare"...He hopped on that dead horse for quite some time. So long, I was waiting in anticipation, hoping that eventually, a Mexican WOULD come along and take his job so I could pay for my darned merchandise.


Eventually, he came over and said "You're too patient and quiet, why didn't you tell me you were ready?"


Retorts such as "I didn't feel like telling you what to do. I'm a liberal, and we like to let people do things on their own." or "Because I figured you'd shoot me" or "No Comprendo Engles."flashed through my head, but I just shrugged and fished in my purse for my wallet. I didn't want to start something with this guy in the middle of nowhere when I had other places to be. We'd gotten going sort of late, and this trip was supposed to LOWER my husband's blood pressure...something that would not happen if he had to pull me out of a fist-fight with a local merchant.


Anyway, he goes on to ask me "You ever get on the Internet?"

"Occasionally". (lol)

"Well, here's some sites you should look at to find out what's REALLY going on in this country."

"You gotta get over there and see THIS GUY . Do it soon, because he's risking his life to get the truth out."

"Risking his life?"

Oh yeah. "The'll kill him for the things he's saying."

The guy is wearing a tee-shirt that compares Obama to Mugabe (I think. Fringe people - right and left- use so much short-hand it is sometimes difficult to understand exactly what they mean) I don't have to ask if he is serious.

I pay and leave.


I was happy to see that Rocky has to go in and use the facilities. Then he would'nt think I'm crazy when I tell him about this guy.


Since Alex Jones is going to be murdered by the Obama administration soon, I guess I better put this up for you to see soon.

UPDATE:  WE went back again this year for a camping trip on Rainy Lake.  We drove past Ray's Place and there was a sign out front that said "Resistance to tyranny is obedience to GOD".  There was a nice, polite girl working the cash register, and she had the radio turned to some inoffensivly bland country music.  The bathroom was cleaned.  I don't think she was Mexican, but hopefully Ray figured out that he should stick with "being a job provider" rather than actually working.  The gass was still horribly overpriced, so we didn't buy any of that, but we got some ice.  That was also over-priced, but you was ice.  There's only so much you can inflate the price on an low-cost item like that, and we only needed a liuttle bit.

Oh, and one thing I forget to mention was still there...a wall fetischizing the local youths serving in the military.  Huge pictures of them in their uniforms with maudlin images of 9/11, flowers, and horrible unimaginative and clunky quotes.

I've seen nice, respectful beautiful rememberances of local youth in the military, and I appreciate them.  This was not one of those.  It looked more like the creepy attic shrines that television stalker/killers build to their victims.  No candles, though.  Just pictures of candles.  Probably the horrible oppressive fire marshal stepped on his rights and wouldn't let him have real ones.

Sunday, 27 June 2010 14:51:33 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  |  |  | #
Monday, 05 October 2009

Duuuuuuudes!  Like, everyone has been down on libs for so long.  Like, harshing our mellow to the max, and all because we're like, lame and stuff.

But don't dispair mon frare...we're back baby!

'cause we totally went back in time and took over the Bible.  We're like rocken spiritual time-pirates.

You thought Bill and Ted had a great adventure?  Nu-uh!  Team lib totally went back in time and snuck the lovey-forgivy-sharey crap into the Bible! 

Uh-huh!  BAM!!  Yeah, take that, in yer face  Mr. Judgy-Mcvitriol Christian guys!

But uh-oh...Andrew Schlaffly's gonna take it back with an army of homeschool kids!  Bogus!


Get back in the funkey time-travel phone booth dudes!  We have to save the wimpy social gospel or we won't get to have a modern government or health care reform!

Monday, 05 October 2009 17:15:08 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  |  |  |  |  | #
Sunday, 04 October 2009

A friend of mine had this silly little "You might be a liberal if..." thing up on her Face Book.  So I made a parallell "You might be a conservative if..."

You might be Liberal if you think:

You might be conservative if you think:

Standards for admissions to universities, fire departments, etc. should be lowered for people of color.

1)      It doesn’t matter if you can do the work.  What matters is how well you fit arbitrary selection criteria that often has no correlation with desirable outcomes.  And even if conditions in the world, and in the field of work or study change, the criteria must always stay the same.  If they changed to more accuratly reflect the actual strengths and necessary skills of a population, they wouldn't be arbirtary anymore, and the people who worked really, really hard to look good on paper would be unfairly disadvantaged.

Bilingual education for children of immigrants, rather than immersion in English, is good for them and for America.

2)        Adaptive learning is evil.  Get rid of ESL programs, no math or science ‘til you learn English.  While we’re at it, those hearing-impaired whiners can learn to lip-read before they get to do math as well.

Murderers should never be put to death.

3)      Murderers should be put to death.  Especially the underage and those with mental handicaps that make them incapable of being responsible for their actions;  or if they had some stupid, trumped up “alibi” like being in jail in another country for unpaid traffic fines on the night of the murder they committed.  Kill ‘em twice if their defense attorney slept through their trial and raised no objections and called no witnesses.

4.During the Cold War, America should have adopted a nuclear arms freeze.

4)      Good thing we didn’t listen to those pacifist liberal wimps when they said it was a bad idea to fund, train, and equip the Taliban, central American drug cartels – uh I mean “Freedom fighters”- and fascist regimes.  Just think about the problems we’d have nowdays if we hadn’t helped Bin Laden so much.  And a nuclear arms freeze? Don’t make me laugh!  If being able to exterminate every single person in the Soviet Union a hundred times over isn’t going to get them to back down, we NEEDED to be able to destroy them a thousand times over.  Worth. Every. Penny.

Colleges should not allow ROTC programs.

5)      Actually, I think it’s just the Ron Paul Conservatives and the Lyndon LaRouch-style Trotskyites that don’t like the ROTC on campus.   ‘course, the Ron Paul conservatives would rather there not be land grant universities for ROTC to be on.  Actually, it seems that the Lyndon LaTouch crowd doesn’t like land-grant universities either.  Ron Paul and Lyndon LaRouch actually agree on a lot of stuff…

It was wrong to wage war against Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War.

6)      Afghanistan was going to be too hard.  If it’s too hard to hit the guy who hit you first, hit the guy next to him instead.  Everyone deserves to get hit for something.  

Poor parents should not be allowed to have vouchers to send their children to private schools.

7)      Private schools are better than public schools.  You can tell, because even though they only take top-performing students, and cost more per student, they have inferior equipment, inferior subject selection, inferior teacher training requirements, and fail to have significantly better outcomes as a group.  And just think how we could increase the number of private school “founders” fleeing with all the cash to the Canary Islands if we funneled more public sector money into private schools!

It is good that trial lawyers and teachers unions are the two biggest contributors to the Democratic Party.

8)      Gigantic corporations are people and have a right to petition their representatives.  Lawyers and teachers, however, are not people and have no such rights.

Marriage should be redefined from male-female to any two people.

9)      Gay people need to remember their “place”.  If they didn’t insist on having all the same rights and responsibilities as real people, there wouldn’t be all this trouble.

10. A married couple should not have more of a right to adopt a child than two men or two women.

10)   Children are chattel to be parceled out as rewards for conventionality.

The Boy Scouts should not be allowed to use parks or any other public places and should be prohibited from using churches and synagogues for their meetings.

11)   Even though the Boy Scouts teach, practice, and enforce discrimination against people based on their personal beliefs and their sexual orientation, they should be given the special privilege to use public places without having to pay the fees that other groups pay.  Yes, they should even continue to be given extra special treatment by having parcels of federal land set aside for their exclusive use.

The present high tax rates are good.

12)   The present high tax rates are terrible!  Course, with the exception of the "W" years, they’re lower than they’ve ever been since I started paying taxes…Reagan’s were higher, but those were GOOD high tax rates.  And taxes were higher under George HW Bush…but those were fine too.  I mean, if they weren’t fine, why would we have beat Clinton up so bad for lowering them?  Obama raising  taxes to the lowest rates under Reagan is just evil and terrible.  It was OK for Reagan to raise them higher ‘cause he was the greatest president ever, no matter what you say.

Speech codes on college campuses are good and American values are bad.

13)   “Speech codes” on campus are terrible.  Well, not really, it would be great if we could have our own speech codes, you know the ones that require Biology professors to say that their entire area of study is completely invalid…or one where a sociology professor can’t cover current research that might indicate that abstinence only education isn’t all we hoped…but “speech codes” that could cause a Geology professor to not be tenured just because he teaches that the Earth is only 6000 years old and admits that he lied on his thesis when he said that the Earth was billions of years old…THOSE are BAD.   Telling the truth and speaking honestly about the state of scholarship in your field is against American Values.  All good knowledge was what we knew in 1800.  We will call our "Speech Codes"  "Academic Freedom" bills, because they are the opposite, and we are all about the irony.  And this isn't like stupid liberal speech codes where people just think your a dick 'cause you use the "N", our speech codes will have the force of law.  Stupid Wimpy liberals.  That'll show 'em.

The Israelis and Palestinians are morally equivalent.

14)   There is only one hope for peace in the middle east.  Israel gets everything, and the Palestinians die. The Temple of Jerusalem has to be rebuilt, and then when Jesus returns in glory, the Jews and most of the rest of humanity will be slaughtered in the final battle, and go to hell. (Rivers of blood!  It'll be so great!)  Then, when we've killed all the unbelievers (including the Jews) we get to go to heaven.  Yeay team Jesus!  I can’t wait.  The only danger is that Israel might get taken over by that one group who thinks that it would be good for people to stop blowing each other up.  Let’s send the side that wants to perpetuate violence lots of money and accuse the other side of hating Isreal.  Just don't tell the Catholics that they are numbered among the unbelievers.  We need them at the moment.  The Mormons too...oh...and the Jehova's Witnesses I guess, but don't talk to them if you can avoid it.

The United Nations is a moral force for good in the world, and therefore America should be subservient to it and such international institutions as a world court.

15)   We created the United Nations, and we have the veto over everything they do and decide.  We owe tons of money to them in dues that we are never going to pay, because they are completely reliant on our goodwill and continued cooperation.  In all the time they've exsisted, we've never done a single thing they've said that we wouldn't have done on our own anyway.  God, will we never be free of their oppression?

It is good that colleges have dropped hundreds of men's sports teams in order to meet gender-based quotas.

16)   Who wants to watch girl’s sports?  Girls are so stupid and weak.  Any girl that wants to play sports is a dyke.  There shouldn’t be girl’s teams, and girls shouldn't get to play on boys teams either.  If a girl wants to do sports, she should move to East German where they like that sort of thing.   If we want to cut funds for education and extra-curricular activities, we should be able to without it affecting our boys sports!

No abortions can be labeled immoral.

17)   Birth control is immoral and the moral equivalent of abortion, because it prevents ovulation so the egg can’t get fertilized.  Moral women who are against abortion should rely on the rhythm method, because it encourages women to abstain until the part of a woman’s cycle when the uterine lining is thinning and resistant to the implantation of a fertilized egg.  Also, using breastfeeding as a form of birth control is moral, because it is lousy at preventing fertilization, but still effective at preventing implantation.  So use the rhythm method and breastfeeding to do your abortions, because all abortions are evil, except the ones God says are OK. 

Restaurants should be prohibited by law from allowing customers to choose between a smoking and a non-smoking section.

18)   I get to smoke.  If my smoke travels over to the non-smoking section and bothers your fragile asthmatic lungs, tough.  Who cares if your stupid, wimpy kid has Cistic Fibrosis, keep him home.  Whatever happened to the good old days when people with freaky diseases remained shut-ins, as God intended.  Get a personal force-field, or re-think your decision to breath, you stupid liberal whiner, you won’t infringe on my freedom with your stupid excuse about dying 5-10 years younger.  I have a right to smoke.  You’re right to life ended as soon as they cut the cord, and you were no longer a pre-born person.  And by the way, just because a place is publically licensed and falls under the legal definition of providing a “public service” doesn’t mean you have a right to go there and not have your health threatened.  This is AMERICA, liberal sucker.  The public can’t make me accommodate black people, or disabled people, and they sure as heck can’t make me address your stupid health concerns.  If you don’t like the way I act in public, stay out of the public.

High schools should make condoms available to students and teach them how to use them.

19)   High Schools should protect children with ignorance and myths.  If they think they can get AIDS from sweat and tear-drops, and if they think that having unprotected sex is less dangerous than using condoms or other contraception, and if they fill in the gaps with stuff they hear from their friends, they will be able to make much better decisions for themselves.  They will automatically come to the correct conclusion that sex is a dirty, disgusting dangerous and degrading thing that God invented because he loves us and wants us to get married really really young so we can stay poor and desperate and have tons of children we can barely afford to raise so that we just spend all our time working and don’t have the time and energy to question, and just do what we are told.

Racial profiling for terrorists is wrong -- a white American grandmother should as likely be searched as a Saudi young male.

20)   Racial profiling of terrorists is the best thing ever.  I mean they’re terrorists.  If they weren’t terrorist, why would they look like terrorists?  Only a very, very foolish criminal mastermind would recruit terrorists that didn’t look the part.  You look like a terrorist, you smell like a terrorist, you’re a danged terrorist.  Maybe your family has lived in Toledo for seven generations and you’ve had ancestors fight in the US military in every war for the past 150 years…but you’re still a danged terrorist.  Now step out of the line, and take off those pants again.  You fly Business class on this commuter flight to Chicago twice a week.  You know the drill Hassim.

Racism and poverty -- not a lack of fathers and a crisis of values -- are the primary causes of violent crime in the inner city.

21)   All conditions in the US at a given time bear absolutely no relationship to past events.  In America, all events happen in a causal vacuum.  So you, see, the effects of slavery and racism disappeared when the institutions that perpetuated them were done away with.  When we stopped the practice of slavery, all of those children who never knew their fathers instantly became familiar with all the details of the European ideal of fatherhood.  The fact that for a time, the best jobs that black men could get to support their families took them away from their families and hometowns didn’t affect any of the kids in the subsequent generations.  The cultural conventions that sprang up to support mothers coping on their own, and the lack of prestige suffered by fathers who stayed around and worked low-paying local jobs in the rural south disappeared as soon as economic conditions changed.  As soon as our culture provided new opportunities, all of the children in the next generation instantly forgot all of the effects of the previous conditions and spontaneously acquired the means and ability to take advantage of the new opportunities.  Anyone who says differently isn’t just describing a cause and effect relationship.  They just want to make you feel badly about yourself.  Don’t let them do that to you.  Remember that you have the right to feel badly about others instead, because this is America.

It is wrong and unconstitutional for students to be told, "God bless you" at their graduation.

22)   Isn’t it terrible how we’ve taken religion out of the schools?  All we have left is “God” in the pledge, and Highschool chapters of Campus Crusade for Christ, and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, and the Guideon Bible Handouts, the and the teachers reading the Christmas story in their classroom for story time, and the personal Bibles that people can bring to school, teachers who can’t be fired even if they physically abuse students because they had a Bible on their desk and they can claim that’s the real reason they are being fired.  Why, I went to my God-daughter’s orchestra concert a few years ago, and only half the music was religiously themed.  Only a handful had “God” or “Jesus” or “Lord” in the title.  My son’s highschool only has ONE Christian club paid for my public funds.  We’re down to just having the school’s volunteer advisor sending kids to church functions to earn volunteer hours for school credit, mandatory assemblies where the presenter preaches in the name of Jesus and makes the Catholic kids cry because he says they’re going to hell.  There was this one girl who had to be kicked off of her basketball team (which I think we established shouldn’t even exist) because she refused to pray in the name of Jesus with her highschool team before the game AS REQUIRED…and the law forced the school to reverse her expulsion!  My youngest sone was assigned a paper about an Episcopalian missionary, and my oldest son is playing Martin Luther as part of a school assignment, and everyone knows that Episcopalians and Lutherans aren't REALLY Christian!  I mean…our schools are practically atheist.

No culture is morally superior to any other.

23)   Western culture is morally superior to all other cultures.  How do we know this?  Why, only Western Culture developed Western morals.  DUH!  I mean, look at all of the things they do differently than we do.  Those things are bad.  The badness of them is obvious to anyone whose moral sense was formed in Western culture.  The things they do differently from us prove that we are superior. 

And then, look at all of the things that they do that are the same as us.  See?  Even they know that we’re right.  The things they do that are the same as us prove our superiority.

Then, there’s the stuff that we do that is bad.  First of all, we always have really good reasons for the things we do that are bad.  Not like other cultures who do bad stuff just for no reason at all at least, not reasons that we care about.  Secondly, the bad things we do are not part of our culture.  They're just human sin and part of living in a fallen world, and totally not our fault.  If the world were perfect, we’d be perfect too…and everyone would be just like us.

Sunday, 04 October 2009 14:53:01 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] | #
Monday, 01 June 2009

You gotta go over to 4simpsons real quick and scan down the front page looking for Neil's "multiverse" post, or google it if it has already rolled off.  I don't want to trigger his paranoia with too many links but this is amazing!

Neil actually thinks that the multi-verse theories were proposed to counter Intelligent Design Theory.

Um.  The Multiverse Theory pre-dates the Intelligent Design political movement.

The Multiverse theory is described by mathematics.  The Intelligent Design political movement cannot be described according to any coherent organizational model.

But theoretical Physicists are just scrambling to scratch up something to answer Intelligent Design with.

Uh huh.  Whatever helps you sleep at night, Neil baby.

But I'd like to point out that the only way that the Multi-verse theories could have been created to respond to Intelligent Design is if the scientists developed them after 1992 (When ID was created) and then went back in time a significant amount, and then introduced a progressive series of theoretical models beginning with when the term was coined in the late 1800.

Of course, the only way that time travel would be even remotely possible is if one of the multiple universe theories were true... (since going back in time and changing events would create another alternate universe, and an alternate time-line).

And furthermore, why are we to believe that scientists are desperately flailing around to discount the arguments of ID proponents when ID proponents seem to have to be always making statements like this?:


[Update]  about not provoking his paranoia:  Too late. Neil is already Jonseing on how persecuted he is that people disagree with him and find his lunacy entertaining.  He only listed three people this time.  Usually he goes on much longer about how important an Godly he must be because people disagree with him.

Monday, 01 June 2009 18:53:06 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [19] |  |  |  |  |  |  | #
Tuesday, 10 February 2009

Dear Food Distributors,


I just wanted to write and tell you that you are not fooling anybody.  We can tell that you are making the packages smaller at the same time that you are inching up the prices on said packages.

We understand that you are in business to make as much money as you possibly can, and we also understand that some of your costs have gone up.  We know that you have to charge somewhat more than you did before for your products, and we understand as well that you simply cannot resist pushing that a little farther than necessary.

That is moderately grumpy-making, but we can handle it.

What I’m calling you out on is your insult to our intelligence.  Yes, we notice that the packages are getting smaller, and we notice that the prices are going up.  We also notice that for businessmen, things like having to re-size all of the products, their packaging, etc. is not too expensive, but keeping them melamine, salmonella and e. coli- free is.

We understand that our economic and physical health are unimportant compared to your profit margin being high enough to give the executives their spiffy bonuses.  We are neither surprised nor are we capable of being particularly grumpy about it anymore.

However,  if it is not too much trouble, do you think you could possibly see your way clear to not act like we are a bunch of pre-operational toddlers who cannot properly process differences in relative size and volume?

That would be great…thanks!


Teresa Lhotka

Tuesday, 10 February 2009 09:41:53 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [20] | #
Thursday, 22 January 2009

He who must not be named has an entry up linking to a story about a Christian ™ woman who is now “ex-gay” and wants to deny her former partner visitation rights to their child.

Naturally, he makes a snide question “But oxymoronic “same sex marriage” won’t have any impact on us, will it?

The question implies that marriage equality will introduce a new condition to marriage.  That of former marriage partners using the children to get back at and punish the other parent by withholding the child from them.  Which would indeed be a terrible consequence.

Imagine!  What a terrible world it would be if heterosexual divorcees started using their children against their former partners!

Of course, what HWMNBN fails to point out is that it is the newly-minted “heterosexual” parent who is using the child as a pawn.

Another question not asked by our intrepid nameless one’s commentary is, why is visiting the still-gay parent suddenly causing nightmares and behavior disruption?  Is this something that never happens to children of heterosexual couples who divorce?  Does the irrevocable dissolution of a family never cause anxiety and distress in the six-year-old children of heterosexual divorcees?  Or is it that the methods and skills for helping them through it are not expected to work if the parents are homosexual?

The WND article caused me to ask some questions as well.  The article makes a big deal about how the couple was never married.  It appears that they had a civil union.  Apparently, the WND believes that a civil union is not enough to legitimate a parent-child relationship.

So what ever happened to the idea that we don’t need marriage equality because gay people have civil unions, and civil unions are just as good?  I must have a different definition of “separate but equal” than your average fundy.

One thing they DON'T say is whether or not the non-custodial, visitation-seeking parent is up-to-date on her child-support payments...

And remember....these are the same people who also consider the rights of heterosexual women to be "separate but equal".  You know, just a little less equal than men:


(Hat Tip: Pharyngula)
Thursday, 22 January 2009 06:40:00 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [10] |  |  | #
Tuesday, 25 November 2008

So I was over a Pharyngula reading a very entertaining piece that handed Deepak Chopra, the rap master of woo, his butt.  (again)

I was reading the comments and enjoying the science-nerd pile-on when suddenly THIS lept out at me:

"Hmmm... Now I know where the really bad, sciency sounding dialog for the character Mohindar Suresh in Heroes comes from."

Dan misses some very important points in this comment:


1) Mohinder Suresh is smokin' hot (see exhibit "A"), and Deepak Chopra is NOT (see exhibit "B").


2)  Mohinder Suresh is a fictional character in a story that specifically suspends the laws of science so that the world can work very differently than it actually does...and to that end there is a need to supply enough technobabble to drum you into a state we call "suspension of disbelief"...whereas Deepak Copra is a real person that is creating a story that specifically suspends the laws of science so that the world can work very differently than it actually does, and to that end there is a need to supply enough technobabble to drum you into a state we call "suspension of disbelief". This will cause you to pay lots of money for him to tell you his pretty pretty story about how you can live forever and be healthy the whole time.

3)Until recently, Mohinder Suresh was a character of unfailing moral fortitude selflessly working to redeem his father's life-work, discover the truth, and benefit all of humanity...and Deepak Chopra writes lots and lots of stuff about what he thinks science doesn't know, and provides PZ Myers with many, many opportunities to point out that just because Mr. Chopra doesn't know how something happens, that doesn't mean that SCIENCE doesn't know how it happens.


4)  Mohinder Suresh's use of eyeliner is organic, subtle, and alluring.  Deepak Chopra's use of eyeliner is heavy, harsh and scary.


5) So, in summation:  LEAVE MOHINDER ALONE!  Thank you, and I rest my case.


Exhibit "A":

(Image from here)

Exhibit "B":

(image from this site)

Tuesday, 25 November 2008 06:19:17 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [10] |  |  |  |  |  |  | #
Sunday, 23 November 2008

When self-lobotomized educated people clash with people who never developed their brains at all:

I'll never be able to respect Ben Stein again...but at least he can still be entertaining:



Sunday, 23 November 2008 22:05:58 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  |  |  | #
Sunday, 02 November 2008

Apparently, the NARN have radio...and they are allies of the Ori.

Actually, it sort of figures.  The Narn always were overly religious and overly drawn to power.

What next?  The BORG?  (If you don't know what I'm talking about, don't worry...there's a whole lot of TV you'd have to watch in order to figure it out.)


So in other news...

Fashion tip:  The crazy "pisseth against a wall" preacher's wife disses Michelle Obama for wearing a sweats outfit.  Apparently, the Dems should spend $150,000 playing dress-up-Barbie like the Republicans...instead of trying to lead the country.

This from a lady who will marry and reproduce five times with a man who will yell the word "piss" from the pulpit...and who thinks God cares if your knees are bent or not when you pee...ooooh  THAT'S gotta burn.

Make a note people...the Ori do not like knit fabrics.

Sunday, 02 November 2008 20:39:35 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] |  |  | #
Monday, 29 September 2008

Here's a picture of what 50% of Americans look like to a conservative.

I think this might be what Robert Beal would say if he was capable of stringing words together that made sense.

It is probably a lot like the opinions held by such "top producers" as Tom Petters.

Seems like something "top producers" William and Shirley Pierce might have taught their students.

It sound like it would be right in line with the philosophy of intelligent, moral people like Fort Mill Mayor Danny Funderburk.  Now THAT'S a guy with a complex mental life who must certainly feel the moral weight of responsibility.

That mean government, always interfering with innocent, hard-working rich people.  Oh!  Those evil liberals who want to burden these bastions of virtue with government interference and regulation!

I think it's great that these poor put-upon assets to our country have someone to stand up and speak for them.


[off-topic update- Rocky just came back from a professional function, and reported that someone told him in conversation tonight that the reason we are in this economic mess is because the Democrats were helping the blacks buy houses.  Wow.  Rocky said he just walked away.  Probably the best response.  Really, the only safe and sane response.  The guy was probably armed.  Our friend Blake was there as well.  It will be interesting to get his take on it.]


[on-topic update] There's little news of this in the conservative MSM, but apparently the good Chrsitian morality says it's OK to gas babies and children if they are Muslim.  Dont you liberals wish that you had that kind of clarity and sanity?  You'd never be able to vote for Obama if you had these kind of rock-solid values.

Monday, 29 September 2008 16:57:09 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [13] |  |  |  | #
Monday, 15 September 2008

CNN advertizing the next episode of Larry King:

"Dr. Phil will be here to tell us why we care about politics."


The economy is in the toilet, economic indicators are plummeting, Osama Bin Laden is still at large seven years after major intelligence failures From highly politicized agencies resulted in 3,000 dead civilians...bail-outs of companies that can't manage to stay afloat despite ^ @! $ !!ing the public for all it is worth, and sticking us with the bill twice after passing laws that make it impossible for us to declare bankrupcy...

And Dr. Phil is going to explain to us why we care about politics?

I want to know, who are these dipshits who give a high-flying rat ^ @! $ !! what Dr. Phil thinks?

Monday, 15 September 2008 22:29:07 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] |  |  |  | #
Saturday, 13 September 2008

Michele Bachmann says that Sarah Palin is the victim of "The biggest hissy-fit of modern times" is "comfortable in her skin" and "represents normal people".



"The biggest hissy-fit in modern times"? Wow...bigger than Watergate? For real? The press is hounding Sarah Palin more than they hounded Nixon? They're spending more time on Palin than they did on the Monica Lewinski thing? Really? The avid coverage of Gerald Ford's gaffs were more fair than criticism of Palins attempts to ban books at her local library and fire the librarian? The press's coverage of the "bunny attack" on President Carter was more relevant than questions about whether or not Sarah's claims about giving back federal money were true? Really? This is the biggest deal that the press has ever made about a political candidate? Wow. Those bastards.


And Sarah Palin is "comfortable in her skin". What does THAT mean? Presumably, she doesn't have any dermatological problems, or what with the press going all ga-ga over her, we'd know about it (along with how "spunky" she is to overcome it, and how much her faith has sustained her through it). That may seem like a strange choice of words, especially for someone like Michele Bachmann, who is more the type to say something less imaginative like "she is comfortable with herself". But in order to properly understand what she means, you have to use the Republican lexicon. See, Barak Obama pointed out that McCain was just recyceling Bush's failed policies and calling them something else...and he called it "putting lipstick on a pig" To the Republicans, Sarah Palin was, at that time, most famous for saying the word "lipstick" "McCain's policies" must have been code for Sarah and that ment that McCain was Sarah's make-up man, and...uh...actually, I'm not sure how the logic train ran...but it started with McCain's policies actually representing Sarah herself and ended with Obama calling Sarah a "pig" because they both used the word "lipstick". So, if you use Republican logic to interpret Ms. Bachmann's words, you can clearly see that when Republicans are backed into a corner where they have to say something nice about Obama or they will look like dicks, Obama is usually noted for being the first Black candidate for President. So "comfortable in her skin", means that Ms.Palin and her family are comfortable being white people. So what Bachmann is REALLY saying is "white pride"! Yeah, it doesnt make any sense, but what can you do? They're Republicans; no attempt to figure out what they're "really" saying makes any sense.


Kind of like what does Bahchmann mean by "normal people"? Well, Ms. Palin represents "normal people". Therefore, "normal people" are White, Protestant Evangelicals who also speak in tongues and roll around on the floor in church, are in the top 1% income bracket and have large quantities of their wealth invested in energy and defense companies. And don't we all live next door to one of those guys?

But then again, Michele Bachmann may not make sense, but she certainly has balls!  Just look at the way she handles a face-to-face confrontation with Lord Voldemort!



I can't imagine how brave she must be to talk over him, falsely accuse him of sexism when he has made legitamate critisms, and generally behave like a deisel-powered, socially inept bulldozer towards him. Michele Bachmann has balls of steel!

She just looked him in his face and said what she thinks;  It is demeaning to women to suggest that there are more qualified women out there than Sarah Palin.  You just can't expect that much from women, you sexist pig.  The only way it would have been ballsier is if she's said it to him in Parseltongue!

Now, stop demeaning women by discussing their qualifications.  Straighten up, fly right, and rally behind a candidate that knows how to treat women!


Saturday, 13 September 2008 07:53:35 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] |  |  | #
Tuesday, 05 August 2008

I have a friend who reportedly once sang "The Rainbow Connection" for Karoke; as if it were being sung by a paranoid schitzophernic.

I had thought that he was just a comic genious.  Now, I know that he is in fact a brilliant intuitive, who saw into THE TRUTH.

Maybe it's that teh gays have already taken over the government, and this is their evil plan.  Maybe it's that the Leprechan agenda is more advanced than we thought.

Maybe Rainbow Bright was just a beachead in our perceptual matrix.

It could be a My Little Pony plot.


Somebody call Michele Bachmann.  Im sure SHE'LL know what to do!  (off topic, but speaking of idiots, Michele Bachmann, who is a Republican politician, and a Minnesotan, can't seem to remember that the Republican Convention will be held in St. Paul.  This is one of the people leading our country...but at least she's a "fool for Chirst"...right?)

[update:  I don't know what's going one, but if you are here and you don't see a video underneath this update, click on the title bar for this post, and one will appear.]

Here's a link straight to the video:




Tuesday, 05 August 2008 06:45:07 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] |  |  | #
Sunday, 20 July 2008

Some of you might remember that terrible abuse of the Christian religion that was the Life of Brian.


And some of you might be aware that the Life of Brian was banned by a God-fearing community...among other places...


Quote from Wikipedia entry:  "It was also banned for eight years in the Republic of Ireland and for a year in Norway (it was marketed in Sweden as '"The film so funny that it was banned in Norway")"


And some of you might know some trivia about a certain actress that was in said movie and is now the mayor of said town.


Now, she apparently wants to abuse her power in a clear conflict of interest to persecute Christians by unbanning the terrible movie that blythely urged a generation to "always look on the bright side of life".


No doubt inspiring other un-Godly sources of a glib and light-hearted approach to the world that lead us down the primrose path.

Will the horror never end?

(Hat Tip: Pharyngula)

Sunday, 20 July 2008 21:46:48 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] |  |  | #
Wednesday, 09 July 2008

Any of you remember Gilligan's Island?  Remember the depictions of simple native "Polynesian-ish" people brought to a roiling frenzy over the violation of some randomly rediculous "sacred object"?

Remember how silly and funny you thought it was when you were little?  Remember how (if you're a liberal) you later felt a little squeemish over someone representing an entire ethnic group as being so stupid and backwards? 

'cause nobody would really assault someone over a simple representational object.  I mean, there's no "primitive", cannabalistic cult on the earth that actually thinks that representational fetisches are their physical God, right?

Wrong.  Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

That said, I don't have a lot of sympathy for Webster Cook either.  Come on, every good country kid knows, you walk past a hornet's nest, you just keep on walking.  You don't put a stick in it and smash it around.  If they fly into your house or come and sting you, you smash them.  Or if they try to build in your barn, you break out the wasp spray...but you don't go into the woods where they have a perfect right to be, seek them out and stir them up.  That's just dumb.

I know that some are saying its a protest against having public money going to hold a Catholic mass on campus.  But that's not good enough.  I mean, I haven't heard anyone say that Catholics are the ONLY ones allowed to have mass on campus, and I hadn't heard that the group was trying to influence the administration or functioning of the college in any way, nor that students were required by the university to attend the mass.

Also, as one poster pointed out on line, if he wanted to show the Eucharist to his friend and explain it's importance, he should have just ordered a box of wafers online.  Then, he could crumble them up into his bathtub and roll around in them if he wanted to, and nobody would know.

(Hat Tip:  Pharyngula)


Wednesday, 09 July 2008 05:51:51 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  |  | #
Thursday, 17 April 2008

So, for those who don’t know about the “Expelled” movie, it’s a movie created by proponents of Intelligent Design intended to do two things.

1)      Promote the idea that God is a fuss-budget failed inventor who has to keep tweaking his creations to get them to work right rather than an all-powerful, all-knowing deity who should be able to get creation right the first time.

2)      Compare tweedy old mild-mannered research biologists to Hitler.

Oh yeah, and one more thing:

3)       Destroy materialist thought and put God back into the center of our social consciousness, and recreate the pre-Enlightenment mindset, where all intellectual effort was required to conform to the religious elite’s world-view.

Three, three things, that the movie “Expelled was intended to do…well, four…

4)      Give an artificial boost to the public persona of several academics who just didn’t have that much notoriety working within the confines of reality.

These four great goals brought forth the movie Expelled…actually, there was the noble goal of having Ben Stein appear in public wearing short-pants…

5)      Get Ben Stein in short pants…oh baby, nothing turns on an Intelligent Designer more than the aging, knobby knees of a Nixon sycophant while his Dulcet voice drones on and on, lifting your spirit heavenward on a cloud of nasal belly-aching about persecution.

Well, it seems that these five noble goals are being shredded, shredded, I say, by the other great materialist evil of our time:  lawyers.  Lawyers and intellectual property laws.

First, the materialists are upset just because we told them that we were interviewing them for one kind of movie concept, for one movie company and then took their interviews and put them in a completely different movie with a completely opposite concept, made by a different movie company.

That’s right! 

And now, these craven materialists are claiming that if you take somebody else’s idea, throw a bell or whistle on it, and then present it as your own…you are cheating!  Can you imagine?  I mean, according to their interpretation of the laws, if I took an iPod apart, built functionally exact but cosmetically different replicas of the workings, and then put it in a different case and called it something else…I’d be breaking the law! 

See, Expelled contains some animation that the Expelled producers made themselves.

It just happens to look almost-but-not-quite-exactly like an animation made by an academic group at a major ivy league university.  It’s purely an accident that the Expelled animation reproduces almost every significant feature of the materialist animation, including significant errors.

But don’t worry, the makers of Expelled are suing the people they copie…uh…independently post-replicated.  We’ll show those materialists a thing or two about reality!  They don’t think it can be bent to the power of human belief.  Boy, are they going to be sorry for their arrogance in persecuting us!  And they would have, too.

They would have persecuted us with a law suit, but luckily, we got to it first, in self-defense.  We’ll see if they back down, or if they are going to further their persecution of us by making us take them to court to defend ourselves against their court case, which we KNOW they would have done, because they are litigious, persecuting bastards.

But they won’t stop!

Now they are claiming that we should have paid money and received permission to use the “intellectual property” of professional musicians!   That’s just silly, besides, there’s no way Yoko Ono would give permission for her husband’s song to be used in a way that shows he is responsible for the crimes of Stalin.

 Disclaimer:  This post, like all of the others on this site, is an act of self-amusement by the author.  It is intended as entertaining parody of the issue, and the unfolding public drama, and is not intended to be seen as making specific charges against specific individuals or entities.

Thursday, 17 April 2008 07:30:32 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  | #
Monday, 24 March 2008

Is the average Joe going to be the death-knell of McDonalds?

Don’t be too sure…

I was greeted with this article this morning over my ordinary cup-a-joe.  It’s all about how McDonalds stock is being dumped by insiders because they are trying to sell better coffee and bill themselves more as a coffee shop where you can get even crappier food even cheaper.

A quote:

Consider demographics and brand personality. Starbucks is urban, born in Seattle, and populated by graduate students looking for single-origin coffees from Africa. McDonald’s is Mainstreet U.S.A., packed full of blue-collar men, moms and kids, and broke teens ordering off the dollar menu. If you can’t picture a truck driver from Wyoming ordering a double-pump vanilla non-fat latté, then McCafé is doomed -- especially with all the competition entering the field.


Obviously, this guy has never been to a Dunn Brother’s in Bemidji and seen a huge guy in Carharts get out of his rusted pick-up, walk back into the store with a stylish paper car cup, and declare that he ordered a skim-no-whip-caffe-caramel-macchiatto, and this one clearly had whip on it.

My neighbor, the professional carpenter and general contractor extraordinaire has a Caribou coffee addiction that rivals his ability to calculate slope, area and volume in his head simultaneously.

I was disabused of this silly notion that the average guy was not into caffeinated novelty drinks when I was in a hotel lobby in Bemidji listening to a trio of hocky dads from the Iron Range discuss the relative virtues of Starbucks, Dunn Bros, and Caribou.

If McDonalds is in trouble, it’s not because the average Joe cannot appreciate the subtle finery of specialty coffee.  

No, I could see an assertion of cultural tone-deafness if they, for instance, insisted on putting little pastel umbrellas in said confections.  There IS some silliness that the Average American Male simply will not put up with.  But adding sugar, cream, and flavored corn syrup to something containing the highest level of caffeine possible simply doesn’t fall into that catagory.

Monday, 24 March 2008 05:40:03 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] |  | #
Wednesday, 12 March 2008

Women!  Take personal responsibility for your own safety.  I know it's tough, but you can do it by starting small.  All you have to do is make some small changes in your dating habits.  Lets start with the easy ones.

1)  Don't date men who describe themselves as "Christian Libertarians". (especially ones who look like they have had someone give their head a bikini wax)

2)  If you do date a self-described Christian Libertarian, and he buys you a diet Coke, assume it is laced with GHB, and don't drink it.  See, a "Christian Libertarian" will view knocking you out and having his way with you as the moral equivilant of stealing a purse you left lying around.  If you are going to date them, it's best to understand their culture and customs so you don't find yourself in situations like this.  See, "date rape" isn't like "Genuine rape".  It doesn't count.

3) Before you engage in innocent flirting, or put on that cute little outfit that shows off all the hard work you did in the gym for the last year, make sure that there will be no Christian Libertarians around where they can see you.  For that matter, consider moving to Berkley or someplace like that where it is toxic for Christian libertarians to live before you join a gym and commit to working out.

4)  Don't flirt with Christian Libertarians.  In their strange culture, flirting is agreeing to have sex...not a preliminary social ritual to gague a potential partner's interest, compatablility, or social acumen.  Also, changing your mind isn't allowed.

5)  Remember, if you put effort into looking good, a "Christian Libertarian" will view it as an invitation to rape you.  See, like the people on the street who overhear your conversation with a friend and interject themselves uninvited, a "Christian Libertarian" doesn't understand that even though you might be sending signals of sexual receptivness, you are not necessarily talking to THEM, and that you do not wave your right to say "no".

6) Actually, if you want to be safe from "Christian Libertarians", forget all of the above.  Just wear a Burqua.

7)  Oh wait, that won't help either.  Then they'll just shoot you.

8)  It doesn't matter what you do, the Christian Libertarians will get you.

9)  It'll be all your fault.

10) They don't need the government or any damn women telling them what to do.  They have all sorts of self-control.

(Hat Tip:

Wednesday, 12 March 2008 09:13:47 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  |  | #
Sunday, 09 March 2008

Uh oh.  I wouldn't want to be in this guy's shoes.

Apparently, he wrote a court decision about a case where he decided that it was a bad idea to let incompetent, abusive, neglectful parents educate their children at home.

And he wasn't careful to word it so that your average homeschooler would understand that it wasn't meant for them personally, just for incompetent, abusive and neglectful homeschoolers.

So they're all up in arms over it.

It's personal now!  I mean, if incompetent, neglectful, and abusive homeschoolers aren't allowed to educate their children at home...where will it end?

I ask you, isn't it time SOMEBODY drew a line in the sand and said "beyond this we shall not pass?"

My goodness, people, if we require parents to adhere to basic state standards for educating their children, if we (as the father so colorfully put it) force the parents to subject their children to educational environments that expose them to "snitches"...

What will the world have come to then?

Well, anyway, don't worry about it, the Govahnatoh is on the case.  He'll put it right.

Here's the offending opinion.  Basically, it says that religious reasons are fine, but you have to meet certain qualifications.  Kind of like avoiding the draft, you can't just say "it's against my religion", and get out of it.

Sunday, 09 March 2008 20:28:26 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  | #
Friday, 07 March 2008

I think this guy is completely missing the point of the verse in question:



I mean, he rightly gets that you're supposed to pee standing up...but then he goes and complains about not being allowed to pee standing up IN A BATHROOM.

Hello?  Doesn't the verse say "pisseth against a wall"?  (First Kings 16:11 - And it came to pass, when he began to reign, as soon as he sat on his throne, that he slew all the house of Baasha: he left him not one that pisseth against a wall, neither of his kinsfolks, nor of his friends)

How many bathrooms have you seen with a pissing wall?  Very very few.  And the kind of hoity toity places that have those water-fall pissing walls are not a place a real man who is under God's direction should be anyway (so I've heard), unless he's "ministering" to drug-dealing massuers.

One time, I saw one - in France - I'm just sayin', is all.

No.  God wants you to pee standing up OUTSIDE.  AND, if you have any friends that sit down, you better get rid of them...just to be safe (read the whole verse, and remember, it's the WORD of GOD.  You've been warned)

You would think that someone who has done all the work to attain the rank of pastor would know that.

This is what Evilution has brought us to, people.  Men who don't act like men.  Men who act like animals...peeing sitting down on a porceline bowl indoors.

It's inhuman.  Go find a tree like God intended.

Whoa.  I just had a revelation!  Here I had thought that The Full Monty was a Godless filthy issue from a decadent movie industry!

And here it was a CHRISTiAN film!

[update:  The pastor's wife wants you to vote Ron Paul]

(Hat Tip:  Monastic Mumblings)

Friday, 07 March 2008 08:09:48 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] |  |  | #
Wednesday, 27 February 2008

Hey guys, do me a little favor - K?

Come up with some good turn-down lines that my fellow Kung Fuer - Maggie- can use.

10 brownie points for the best one.

Stuff like "I'd love to call you on the phone, but for some reason my electro-magnetic fields keep getting reversed, and people's phones get hot and explode when I call them".

Or "No, I can't sleep with you.  I shouldn't even be talking to you.  I have projectile herpes.  Oh!  There goes one now.  Sorry."

or "You want to buy me a drink?  No thanks, .  My last trip to the bar, they were all out of the blood of the innocent."


Wednesday, 27 February 2008 20:00:03 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [8] |  | #
Sunday, 24 February 2008

Theobromophile pointed me to this great spoof called "Abstinance Only Driver's Ed"


Basically, the point seems to be that if kids have access to certain...uh...equiptment...and are simply told not to use under penalty of many grave (but fairly vague and distant) threats, but the inherant rewards of using it are obvious, maybe it's a bad idea to deny them critical information about how that equiptment works, and how to use it safely.


Theobromophile counters with a spoof of her own, and you can see how the opposite side would find it fun, because they accept the characterization of comprehensive sex ed that the spoof relies on, and if thats actually how it would be HILARIOUS.  Well, the spoof would be hilarious.


Personally, the analogies seem a little off to me.


But that could be because I drove cars without training, and without my parent's knowledge or consent long before I got to driver's ed...and comprehensive sex ed clued me in to some things just in time to teach me to make my own decisions based on my own self-interest, and gave me the perspective to be able to say "no" to the advances of adult authority figures.


But I have to say that even though comprehensive sex education helped me a lot, it WAS far from comprehensive.  I mean, sure, they told me "Abstinance is the only way to be completely sure you don't get infected with STDs or pregnant"  However, they never told me "people will know you are not having sex, and you will pay a terrible price."  But my guess is, they didn't want to be discouraging.


I wonder if there is a funny car analogy for everyone knowing you aren't having sex, assuming you are gay, and having straight boys proclaim their determination to "show you the light" some day when you are not expecting them.


But at least abstinance-only education has given us a generation of girls who are afraid to sit on toilet seats, and instead have taken to hovering over them.  THAT'S something we can all be thankful for...row after row of sprinkled toilet seats.  It re-inforces those old-time family values my mom instilled in me:  particularly, "Go to the bathroom before you leave the house!"


And if they think they can get HIV from sweat, I imagine that will make it easier to get on the machines at the gym.


And just a reminder:  If you live in Minnesota, and your kids get quality comprehensive sex ed, it is because your school district told the State of Minnesota to keep their dirty money, and spent their own funds for the curriculum.  So don't forget to thank your local school board and be very sure to vote to re-elect them!

Sunday, 24 February 2008 16:06:35 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] | #
Wednesday, 20 February 2008

I'm trying to figure out if this guy is being deliberatly obtuse or if he really thinks that scientists present evolution as a concious decision to "suck in" legs and sprout fins?

I'm voting for deliberatly obtuse, myself.

Because the alternative frightens me.


I love how he's so indignant about the evilutionists saying that the waters brought forth life...and then reads the Bible verse about how the waters brought forth life.  And then talks about how the scientists are contradicting the Bible.

Is it bad to think that's funny?


Scientist:  "And the waters brought forth life..."

Bible-basher"  "And GOD SAID "let the waters bring forth life..."

Scientist:  "Uh...the waters brought forth life and..."

Bible-basher:  "GOD SAID let the waters bring forth life!"

Scientist:  "Um...sorry, but I see the waters, and I've got a lot of information about waters and how they work, and I see life, and I've got a lot of information about how life works but the whole God thing is lacking concrete data so..."

Bible Basher (bashing Bible):  "It's all in HERE!"

Scientist:  "Oh I see."  (takes Bible, opens it)  put your face in the book..."

Babylon Five fans can guess what comes next.  :)


(Hat Tip:  Pharyngula)

Wednesday, 20 February 2008 21:27:10 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  | #
Tuesday, 19 February 2008

Theobromophile has asked me for some links illustrating the “Neo-Nazi” support that cause me to cast a jaundiced eye toward the possibility of a Ron Paul presidency.

As Reason magazine points out, it’s a little weird that numerous racist statements appeared in Ron Paul’s newsletter, with his name on them, and yet he seems to have been unaware of the content of his newsletters, and unaware of who wrote them.  You don't find a lot of strenuous opposition to Ron Paul there - but occasionally you can find an opinion piece there or two with some tepid dithering about how much the Neo-nazis love Ron Paul, or the theocrats, or racist statements appearing under his name in his publication that he controls.

For instance Ron Paul on Dr. King Then vs. Now

But, even if you accept his assertions that he isn’t a racist, didn’t write the racist literature, and doesn’t know who wrote it…that’s not a ringing qualification for the presidency…then again, given the Reagan presidency, maybe it IS.  Maybe “I didn’t know what was happening on my watch, and I don’t know who did what, and I can’t tell you who is responsible” is a presidential trait. (Some publications have alluded, based on confidential sources that the writer of the racist statements was Lew Rockwell, whose online website Ron Paul has written numerous articles for…and who WAS Ron Paul’s ghostwriter for a time).

There’s no way to know as long as Ron Paul doesn’t know who did it, or won’t say.  Generally, an overview of the comments found on the internet has been a flurry of fingers all pointing different directions.  Nobody who is in a position to know who wrote a number of racist statements over a period of years under Ron Paul’s name seems to want to go on record as saying who did it.  At lease, not that I’ve been able to find.  And who can blame them? Given the calumny and invective directed against anyone who says anything about it?

But even though racist statements appearing on his newsletter, under his name, going without retraction or correction would be sufficient to nail a liberal…the assertion that he didn’t know what was going on, and didn’t know who did it, seems to be enough for his supporters. On maybe it’s just that the people who would care haven’t given it a lot of thought because they don’t think he’ll actually win, they just want him to keep pounding away at whatever issues specifically affect them.

If you read the comments thread here, you can see that the Nazis expect Ron to do it for them.  He has publicly spoken on almost all of their issues, and come out smelling great to them.  The only thing he has NOT come out and said is the magic 14 words.

Orcinus also covers some of the extra curricular activities of Randy Gray, Ron Paul's Midland County coordinator.  You can see a chummy picture of Ron with him there too.  Randy Gray doesn't seem to mind that Ron Paul hasn't said the 14 words out loud in public.  He's all in.

The promotion of Ron Paul by David Duke don’t seem to get any detraction among his supporters, even with authentic pictures of Old Duke as a young man in a Nazi uniform, and his close personal friendship with George Lincoln Rockwell, the founder of the American Nazi party.

It’s difficult to impress conservatives with references to the “codes” employed by Ron Paul to convince White Nationalists to extend to him this kind of ardent support:

After all, many people who oppose “multi-culturalism” have a laundry list of reasons that have nothing explicitly to do with “race”.

After all, going after the Federal Reserve and the banking system is a favorite of conservatives of all stripes…it’s just the Nazis and neo-confederates who think he really means “The Jewish Monetary Conspiracy”.

And being against our involvement in the U.N. doesn’t necessarily mean that he believes that it is secretly run by a Zionist conspiracy like the Nazis do.  So when he talks against the “New World Order” the fact that THEY think they know what he means is not proof that he means it.

And wanting our government to stop supporting Israel isn’t inherently anti-semitic, lots of people what to stop supporting Israel and have a long list of reasons they can give that doesn’t include the fact that Israel is full of Jews.

And refusing to return the Nazi money (he hasn’t yet, has he?) or donate it to some good cause certainly doesn’t seem like the action of a person who wouldn’t be their man on issues important to him, but it can be explained away if you want to explain it away.

Come on, that’s WHY they call it “code” and “pandering”…because you CAN’T pin a specific attitude on someone with legalistic precision.

But don’t take it from me (following quote from Orcinus):

If you doubt that Paul has the support of our proto-fascists, don't take my word for it -- take theirs. This endorsement, for example, recently appeared on national KKK leader David Duke's website. And I'll let an anonymous commenter from Stormfront, the far right's favorite Web watering hole, have the final word:

Anyone who doesn't vote for Paul on this site is an assclown. Sure he doesn't come right out and say he is a WN [white nationalist], who cares! He promotes agendas and ideas that allow Nationalism to flourish. If we "get there" without having to raise hell, who cares; aslong as we finally get what we want. I don't understand why some people do not support this man, Hitler is dead, and we shall probably never see another man like him.

Pat Buchanan's book "Where the Right Went Wrong" is a prime example of getting the point across without having the book banned for anti semitism. The chapters about the war in Iraq sound like a BarMitzvah, but he doesn't have to put the Star of David next to each name for us to know what he means. We are running out of options at this point, and I will take someone is 90% with us versus any of the other choices.

Not to mention if Paul makes a serious run, he legitimizes White Nationalism and Stormfront, for God's sake David Duke is behind this guy!


After all, Hillary’s claim that she can take gobs of corporate money and never give them preference makes me chuckle a wry, mirthless chuckle.  Why should I feel any different about a guy who does not repudiate the ardent support of neo-nazis?

Her simultaneous pandering to the looniest left of the party and to already over-blown corporate interests is CODE for “I’ll keep running things the same way we ran things before” which to me means that and in eight or twelve years we’ll lose the country to an expansionist Republican government again….and it will be because we pandered half-heartedly to the loony left, without fixing the over-reaching by the right…and the middle where all the work is done and where all the bills are paid gets left out in the cold again.

Yeah, I realize that this is circumstantial evidence, and that it wouldn’t convict someone in a court of law, but a person can’t deny that it seems a little cavalier to shrug and say, as I have heard people say “Nazis have a right to express their opinions too.”

Well…of COURSE they do, and I’m glad.  Otherwise, how would we know what they’re up to?  And when they say “This guy stands for almost everything we want”…I get nervous and think “I’m pretty sure that things that give Nazis hope are not things I want in a candidate.”

But as one commenter said here:

So maybe George F. and Lew Rockwell are "anti-state" collectivists, just as Sam Francis, Neo-Confederates and Neo-Nazis are anti-government statists. So what? They are still not individualists, and therefor NO FRIEND OF MINE, despite George F.'s crude "Jedi Mind Tricks" to prove otherwise.

Now are George F. or Lew Rockwell racist or bigots or just pretending to be racist in order to make allies with racists to achieve a political end? Does it matter?

Is Ron Paul accepting the endorsements and money and promotion of Nazis and neo-confederates and the like without repudiation because he agrees with them?  Or because they will support him in his candidacy, and he needs all the support he can get?  Does it matter?

Does Hillary Clinton unapologetically dismiss her huge corporate contributions as not important because she is a corporatist, or merely needs their help to win?  Does it matter?

So anyway, Theo, you asked for my reasons and I’ve given them.  You have no doubt heard all of this before, and you obviously don’t interpret it as I do, but I guess that’s the way our country works.

I’m glad that Ron Paul can run for president, and get in the debate, and hold the ideas up for scrutiny.  And I’m glad that most people look, and go;  “Oh good lord” and  look for just about anyone else.

At least for now.


Tuesday, 19 February 2008 06:50:22 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] |  |  | #
Wednesday, 06 February 2008

Can you believe that some teachers booed a pastor who came to speak at a school?

Poor Ken Hutcherson.

I can’t imagine why they would ever do such a thing to such a nice guy.

After all, he’s just a big bundle of cuddly.

And he has such nice friends, who are also just the sweetest guys.

I can’t believe that the teachers were so brutal, as to “boo” him.  Have they no humanity?  Don’t they know what “booing” can do to a man who is so sensitive and who just wants to be free to work for a world where Christians will be free to preach that it is God’s will for them to kill homosexuals?

I mean, to say “boo” to a guy like that.  It just goes to show what ANIMALS we are hiring to teach our children.  It’s just Christian persecution, plain and simple.

(Hat Tip: One News Now)

Wednesday, 06 February 2008 10:31:17 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  |  |  | #
Sunday, 03 February 2008

Thanks to Erudite Redneck, I don't have to pass on the delicious sugar rush that is Neil Simpson's blog.

Oh, sure, some people find it sacchrine...but not me.

Though Neil asked me to stop commenting on his blog, and though he complained repeatedly about me linking to him, I find that the fascinating blend of "Sound Doctrine" with it's more difficult and disturbing conclusions blunted by a convenient smattering of carefully selected "liberal theology" is also of interest to others! 

Let THEM creep Neil out!

Besides, it's much more fun when he is addressed by theists who disagree with him (and have a big bowl of alphabet soup after their names)

After all, candy is dandy, but soup is just more nourishing. 

Sunday, 03 February 2008 00:20:16 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  | #
Tuesday, 29 January 2008

Geekgoddess gets all whiney about poor injured people getting their money taken away by legal action by big corporations.

I also used to think like her, all commie pinko like that and stuff.

But I've recently had a conversion to free-market capitalism.

Just imagine the great heights that could be reached by our society if we made the dog-eat-dog world of business more prefectly dog-eat-doggier?

Just imagine how great our country would be if ANY paid service could not only charge you for the cost of operating their business, plus a modest profit, but then could ALSO charge you for anything that you got that was, in any way related to their service!

Like, just imagine what a great world we would live in if you rented a car, and they not only got to charge you for the rental of the car, but could also commondere your reimbursement from your employer or your business tax deductions?

Or, just imagine if you hired a cleaning service, and they cleaned your house, but if a friend happened to do a little cleaning for you in special preperation for a dinner party, they could charge you for the work your friend did!

It's genious!  And anyone who doesn't LOVE it is a commie atheist terrorist who hates our freedoms.


Tuesday, 29 January 2008 22:22:48 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [5] |  |  | #
Wednesday, 16 January 2008

Between jjkaiser and Snideblog.

To bad Snide's too busy to post often.

Wednesday, 16 January 2008 10:27:18 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Wednesday, 19 December 2007

Oh no you don't, Media.

You don't get to spend the whole LAST presidential election saying that Kerry would be a bad president because he's a stiff, due to his complete LACK of a sense of humor, and because his penchant for precisely answering the question can be percieved as "waffeling"...

...and then turn around and say Huckabee isn't "Presidential" because he's hilarious and has a shoot-from-the hip style.

Pile on one for being academic and humerless, and then turn around and pile on another because he has a quick come-back for almost everything?  Sheesh.

Huckabee wouldn't make a terrible president because he is funny, quick-witted, charming, and takes rhetorical risks.

Huckabee would make a terrible president because his approach to the world is trapped in the middle ages, because he thinks that he has a little man trapped in a book who will give him all the answers, and because he thinks that Chuck Norris (who, despite being a terrible actor, and a horrible judge of politics, is STILL the guy who I looked up to as a young Karateka) is a cherry political endorcement. 


Wednesday, 19 December 2007 06:08:28 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] |  |  | #
Friday, 07 December 2007

I was over at Uncommon Descent for a little light-headed reading.  I skimmed this silly little number.

It’s not really very interesting, except if you give it a Freudian deconstruction (it’s OK, I’m an English major.  I’m trained for this.  Don’t try it at home.)

Of special interest is this revealing little gem at the end:

“Of special interest would be the flagellar genes.”

Does the obsession with flagellum at the DI seem a tad…well…Augustinian?

I wonder if Dembski et. al. will ever discover tiny biological systems with analogous features to a hair shirt and salt chalice?

If so, it’s possible they’d never leave the prayer closet laboratory again.

Friday, 07 December 2007 22:04:49 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  | #

I was just watching a History Channel special on China yesterday.  I had to laugh out loud when a Chinese Communist Party Official was shown talking about certain economic woes in his province.  He said:

"What we need is some sort of Social Security System".

I had to pause the DVR because I was laughing so hard.

See?  The conservatives are right!  Social Security IS communist! If it weren't Communist, the Communists wouldn't be thinking about maybe someday getting around to having it!

Friday, 07 December 2007 08:29:15 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] |  |  | #
Wednesday, 05 December 2007


A friend recently sent me this picture in an e-mail describing it as "The Eye of God."  The e-mail assured me that if I gazed upon the Eye of God, it would change my life (presumably for the better, in a way that I could understand and appreciate).

Laughingly, I responded:  "In ancient times, if you told someone that they could look upon the Eye of God, they would refuse to do it.  They would be certain that someone would be instantly struck dead for such an offense.  Today, we take pictures of the Eye of God, transmit it to our friends through the internet for entertainment purposes, and use it as a charm for granting free wishes...and they say ATHEISTS are arrogant."  :-)


Wednesday, 05 December 2007 08:54:57 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] |  |  | #
Thursday, 11 October 2007

Some people are apparently a little confused about how I can reconcile my love for Daniel Jackson, and my loathing for Eric von Daniken.

Well, it's easy.

Eric von Daniken lives in THIS world, where the pyrmids were build by extraordinary human effort using advanced, but still ancient and very human, ingenuity, math, technology and skills.  All of which we can abundantly demonstrate that the humans of that time had.  Nevertheless, he believes that alien astronauts came to our planet and assembled the wonders of the ancient world with the magic laser beams.  Despite the inability to support these claims with equally extraordinary proof, he continues to promote his ideas as though they are established fact.


Daniel Jackson lives in a fictional world where the pyramids were ACTUALLY BUILT by extraordinary human effort using advanced ingenuity, math, technology and skills which were given them by ancient astronauts posing as gods in order to obtain hosts for their parasitic selves, as well as intelligent, adaptable and fast-breeding slave armies.  Unlike Daniken, when Dr. Jackson went looking for the alien astronauts, HE FOUND THEM.  Then, they pissed him off, and he tweaked their noses, kicked the asses, rolled them in tar and feathers, and kicked them out of his galaxy...with his brain.  He hardly had to flex those nicely proportional arm muscles at all.


Also, Eric von Daniken is a paunchy, dusty old crank who is technically old enough to be either my father or my grandfather, and he spouts enough unsupportable superstitious B.S. to be my pastor.  Anyone creeped out yet?


Daniel, though fictional, is only two years older than me (born THE DAY BEFORE ROCKY), is adorable, and works out on a regular basis.


So, there you have it.  Happy now?

Thursday, 11 October 2007 09:28:48 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [11] |  |  | #
Tuesday, 02 October 2007

Many entities benefit greatly from Global Climate Change Denialism.

Can you tell the difference between two of them?

ExxonMobile and brain-eating ameobas.

(Hint:  Though they both strive to affect your brain, one funds denialist propaganda, and one is an opportunistic parasite).

[Hat Tip:  Pharyngula]

Tuesday, 02 October 2007 06:51:29 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  | #
Thursday, 27 September 2007

So I'm on my way to my Wednesday night class,and I'm stopped behind a Ford Taurus at the stop-light, when I notice the vanity plate:


That's all it says.

So I look at the "Taurus" logo on the back of the car, followed by the "BM" vanity plate...and I think "Bullshit?"

Am I the only one?

Thursday, 27 September 2007 08:34:25 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  |  | #
Wednesday, 19 September 2007

So I'm on the phone with Barb, and we're both drinking.  It's a little thing we do when there's nothing else going on.  She's in Missouri, I'm in Minnesota, so we call each other up at a time when both of our cell-phone plans give us free minutes, and we drink and talk on the phone. 

And Barb starts talking about how one time she went and visited this guy that I had dated, and he was reading her some of his writing and one of the pieces he had written was about me.

And her rememberance of it was that he described me as some sort of epic super-heroin, a cat-like force of nature.  A goddess of potential mayhem and violence.  He just says that because I kicked his ass in sparring.  Repeatedly. Thoroughly. and with more enjoyment than a strictly sane woman would have.

And her response was that this was strange and new to her.  To her, I was just Teresa, who could be sullen and moody; goofy and geeky; a tortured and lost soul with a bit too much drama mixed in to be taken seriously.  I was her kindergarden friend who like playing cars with the boys and moved away and came back years later as a third-grade tom-boy cowgirl with a chip on her shoulder.  The nerdy girl who smoked with the toughies behind the Jet-Mart across the street, and had lots of scary friends, yet never seemed to be scary herself.  Who drank enough to be mouthy when it wasn't wise, but somehow managed to pull off an escape when trouble struck.  Who got arrested on occasion, but was too embarassed to admit it outright and did detention for truancy rather than admit to larceny if she was dragged down to the cop-shop during school hours.  Who showed up at school with spectacular bruises and more spectacular stories that no one really believed or listened to.  Who appeared to make up as much stuff as she told straight, who covered under callousness and carelessness a sense of wonder and responsibilty.

I responded that if she didn't think I was a cat-like super-hero force-of-nature chick, it was probably because she had never been sexually attracted to me, and plus, if she'd never seen me as an epic heroin, she had probably never seen me clean a toilet.

Because me doing battle with the forces of disorder and chaos in a houseful of males is nothing short of the epic battle between Gilgamesh and the Bull of Heaven.  And that goes double after a LAN party where you have at least a half-dozen men who don't live here, have been living on Little Debbies, Doritos and Mountain Dew for 17 hours, and want to get back into play before they get greased by a teenager who has more of a natural tolerance for Little Debbies, Doritos, and Mountain Dew than they do.

Barb called bullshit, as child-hood friends will.  the subject changed, and we moved on.

And I kept my real secrets again.  Hidden in plain sight from those who know me best.

Because you know, don't you dear're only REALLY dead...when they put you in a box.



Wednesday, 19 September 2007 21:50:21 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  | #
Tuesday, 04 September 2007

Meet Justin Taylor.

Neil at 4Simpson’s says he has “a profound understanding of God and his control over all things.”

Don’t confuse him with THIS Justin Taylor.

[Update:  Justin Talyor thanks God for the Ministry of D. James Kennedy and his Coral Ridge Ministries.  D. James Kennedy you ask?  Wasn't he all chummy with R.J. Rushdoony and Gary North?  Well, he might have been, but it doesn't matter, 'cause he's dead now, and so is Rushdoony.  And time isn't exactly going to wait for Gary North, if you know what I mean.]

Justin Taylor was interviewed by a guy named Adrian Warnock.

Adrian was thrilled to be interviewing Justin, because he’s apparently known as “John Piper’s right-hand man”.

John Piper is a bad man.  He’ll tell you so himself:




But don’t take HIS word for it.  Take GOD’s Word for it.  His take on the 35W bridge is that we all deserved to die, and those poor people on the bridge just met their judgment earlier than the rest of us (in other words, they deserved it, and so do we.)

But don’t confuse him with Fred Phelps, whose whole ministry is centered around this idea, and who s completely different because he proclaims the exact same message, but uses vulgarity and unpopular actions to do it.  It’s true that he’s focused on gays,  to the exclusion of other sins, but his essential doctrine, if you pay attention is that we have all sinned, and deserve to die horribly. 

They both profess to believe, at the foundation of their core beliefs, that all it takes is for your existence on this earth as a human being to deserve the weight of God’s wrath.  God caused us to be born, deserving to die horribly so that he can save us, but we have to give ourselves over to him and cease to be human.

Maybe Neil could explain to me the difference in their philosophies (beyond the polished polite veneer that John Piper and Justin Taylor give it…as opposed to Fred Phelps who at least acknowledged its ugliness, looked the flaws in the face and embraced them along with madness.)

He might be able to, but I doubt very much that he will…because if he really looked into it, I suspect he’s smart enough to know, he would risk detecting the flies in the butter.

Until then, I think I’ll just write Calvinism off as a bad idea, thanks.  I’ll leave you with a little quote from one of my favorite Babylon 5 characters:

“Wouldn’t it be much worse if life were fair and all the terrible things that happened to us, come because we deserve them?  So now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the Universe.”

                                                                                                      --Marcus Cole

                                                                                                         Babylon Five

From now on, when people ask me why I don’t believe in the God of the Christian religion, I believe I will answer simply “Because it is better than the alternative.”

Tuesday, 04 September 2007 10:02:20 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  | #
Tuesday, 28 August 2007

Just let them have the damned papers already.


Yes, it's a fishing expidition.  Yes, even if you haven't done anything wrong or embarassing, they will find something that they can make into something they can use (and who really thinks you got where you are by being a saint?).


But either turn the damn papers over or drop out of the race.  Didn't you learn anything from Bill's debacle?


Stalling doesn't help Democrats.  When a Democrat does it it is seen as weak and sneaky.


When Republicans do it, it is strong and decisive.


Because of the liberal media.


If you don't address whatever it is now, people won't be tired about hearing it by election time.  If they don't have something by election time, they'll do like they did to Kerry and make something up, and it'll be too late to disprove it.


I wouldn't care how it affects you either way, but all the talk is splashing over onto any candidate whose not a Republican.


And besides, any papers about the public's business should be available to the public.

Tuesday, 28 August 2007 08:52:50 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  | #
Saturday, 25 August 2007

Gene Chapman was running for President.  He was seeking the nomination of “The Alliance” (Libertarian, Constitution and Southern Parties) nomination for President.

He has since withdrawn.

Which is a darned shame because it has no doubt disappointed a very talented young man who was going to be his “Intellignet Design Advisor”.  R. Josiah Magnuson.

You’ll be happy to know the little trooper took it well.  He posted a nice, polite letter on the internet and has decided to support Ron Paul for president instead. 

It’s nice to know he was able to find a suitable candidate to take second place to Gene.  Let’s not be too hard of Ron Paul, now.  It’s difficult, after all, to fill the shoes of a Gandhi-impersonatin’  failed-self-immolant tax protestor.  After all, the Federal Reserve has got to come down and if Gene’s not the guy to do it, Ron Paul will have to do.

Josiah isn’t daunted.

In fact, he went on to be the finalist in the Answers In Genesis Research Paper Challenge.  I’m not sure what that’s all about, but it appears to be a sort of talent show where homeschoolers compete to show who does the best Ken Ham impersonation.  The girl who won got a $50, 000 scholarship to Liberty University.

It sounds like a lot, but you have to remember the conversion.  Maybe somebody knows the exact exchange rate, but I believe that $50,000 worth of education from Liberty converts roughly to what you learn from a Monday morning conversation over a coffee and bagel breakfast at the student union of a public university…if the conversation is with one of those creepy people who hang out in the student union and strike up conversations about how they quit college to preserve their Christianity, and they would be happy to stop by your house and pick you up and drive you to a Bible study in another town if you just give them your contact information.

But not to worry, those kids will do fine as long as they don’t try to cash out of the system.  If they stay in,  however,  that education can be cashed in for a lifetime of paychecks from a think-tank, and endless speaking engagements funded by various fundamentalist Sugar-Daddies.

The laugh is on the AiG winner, though, because Josiah has leap-frogged her into the realm of involvement with organizations requiring the money of rich fundamentalists.  While some teens in his situation would flounder.  He’s a founder!

Just keep on truckin’ there Josiah!  Remember the Ant and the Rubber Tree plant (if that’s not too secular, if so, I apologize) You’ll have the constitution whittled back down the Articles of Confederation in no time!

Saturday, 25 August 2007 08:02:58 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  |  | #
Thursday, 23 August 2007

The Foo Fighters are HIV/AIDS denialists.

Mother of God!  Will the hurting never stop?

I suppose next I'm going to learn that the band Rush is anti-vaccination, the Dixie Chicks believe in Morgellon's Syndrome, or Queensreich are Holocaust deniers or something.

No, no.  that would be too terrible.  I couldn't bear it.

(Hat Tip:  Denialism. com)

Thursday, 23 August 2007 00:08:22 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  |  |  | #
Monday, 06 August 2007

Continuing the trend of Constitution Party boosters who have needlessly duplicated consonants in their names:

Meet Mary Starrett.

She is anti-choice.  Read the whole article.  I like here answer to the question if abortion could be allowed in the case of rape and incest.  She answers that an innocent child shouldn’t have to suffer for the sins of the father.

Of course, the woman is another story.  It would be interesting to hear what sort of rights a woman has in their world view if a group of cells have more rights because it might one day form a person.  A woman can suffer for the sins of another because she has fewer rights than something that isn’t even a person yet.

Mary Starrett is very cute, smart, educated and articulate.

Why oh why can’t we have Mary Starrett instead of Ann Coulter?  She’d SAY equally entertaining bat-shit insane things, but she’d say them in a way that was actually clever and she’d be easier to look at.  Also, one look at those adorable little grandma chipmunk cheeks, and you KNOW she’d be nicer.

 After all, I think a wholesome, girl-next-door wife, mother and grandmother is more qualified to talk about how important is for women to recognize their proper “place” than a jaded-looking, dried-up, underfed, crabby bitter spinster.

Here is one of Mary’s opinion pieces.  Here is a list of more titles.

Video!  Whose and adorable little conspiracy theorist?  You are!…yes you are…ah-boo-boo-boo.

It weirds me out a little bit that it averages two-to-four sentences on almost any new topic before she gets to a point where I remember she’s lost her mind, though.

For instance, the “fact” that the BBC reported the fall of WTC 7 twenty minutes before it actually fell.  What I find interesting about the conclusions they drew from that, assuming it’s even true and not an urban legend, is that there were TONS of things reported that turned out to not be true.  We had a report of a car bomb on The Mall.  I remember a report of a bomb going off somewhere in Washington, and fires that turned out to be false alarms.  It doesn’t seem like much of a stretch to me to have a report of something happening that turns out to have been a false report, or a report that was prepared ahead of time, knowing that near-by buildings had been damaged (which was mentioned before the collapse of WTC7)  and got aired prematurely, and then the event happens.

 It doesn’t mean the government did it.  Why would 9/11 be an inside job, as Mary says she believes?  What possible reason could they have for doing it themselves when, as anyone in the Clinton administration could have told you it was only a matter of time before something happened.  Were the Republicans poised to take advantage of the tragedy? Oh yes, it would appear to be so.  But why would your orchestrate your own tragedy when it was so clear that one would eventually be provided for you, even if you put your best efforts into preventing it?

I’m sure some of Mary’s fans are a little disappointed at her balking at validating the Zionist Global Conspiracy Theory.  She stopped just short of it, and wouldn’t be budged or nudged into anything more than a polite non-comment.

And I have to say I am a little disappointed that there was no mention of the alien captives in area 51.  Still, we can’t have everything.  But really, a good-old fashioned call for the government to ‘fess up about what REALLY happened at Roswell would have rounded out the roll-call of where-the-fringes-of-the-right-and-left-wings-meet conspiracy theories very nicely.

About her theories on Waco:  It might be that the Branch Davidians were all about peace and fluffy puppy love…but read up on Jonestown sometime.  Read up on the lovely, intelligent, talented, giving people who were members of Jim Jones’ cult.  Read about what a caring and visionary leader Jones himself was.

 Nobody who was in his church in the early years, or who knew many of his followers would have predicted the sudden shift in paranoid militantism, the sexual abuse, or that those people could be convinced to hold down their fellow cult members, plug their noses, and force cyanide-laced Kool-Aid down their throats at gun-point.

Sorry, but given the various histories of cults like this, like the Hale-Bopp cult as well…I am more likely to believe the government line that the cultists preferred to take their own lives and the lives of their fellows rather than be arrested.

Not because I inherently trust the government, but simply because in this case, it seems more consistent with reality than that somehow the government just decided to butcher a bunch of people for no reason.  Nobody has ever given me one good reason why the government would take the actions they are accused of taking.

There is a certain pattern to government malfeasance that just doesn’t fit the Waco conspiracy theories, whereas the pattern of a cult gone to the point of self-destruction because it’s ideology has reached a point of madness where they realize they can no longer exist within the confines of reality is much more consistent with the facts.

Had the government done nothing in Waco, I think we would have had another Jonestown…only this time it would have been on American soil, and do you know WHO people would have blamed?  The government, of course.

But this is the essential fact I see in the Constitution party’s platform.  The government is to be shrunk down to where it has no power at all, and the church will move in to fill the gaps.  ‘Course, what they DON’T say is that the church, being the most powerful civil institution, would pretty much be able to put whoever they want into the government as well.

And do you think the big business guys that they complain about will miss a beat?  I don’t think so.  Just look at all the money they unload on religion already.

The third-largest party in the U.S. is rooting for a theocracy, buttressing their arguments with conspiracy theories that have long ago passed the dead-horse stage, and arguments of inference and paranoid over reason.

God help us all if this is our best “alternative”.

Monday, 06 August 2007 12:35:37 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  |  | #
Saturday, 04 August 2007

Meet Christian Exodus:


They are big supporters of the Constitution Party:



From the Christian Exodus FAQ on their website:


Is your organization a part of the Constitution Party, or it's Platform? If not, have you heard of the Constitution Party based in PA? They are a Party running on Christian Beliefs.

All of our Board members are Constitution Party members, and approximately 2/3 of our membership. Certainly the Constitution Party shares our beliefs and principles more than any other political party, and Christian Exodus will work diligently to promote and support the Constitution Party.


Check out their Position Statement.  Just in case you decided not to follow the link, here’s a couple of things you shouldn’t miss:


We hold that the power to enact uniform naturalization rules rests with Congress as specified in Article 8 of The Constitution. We also believe that the various States retain the right to restrict and control immigration into the State as had been exercised under the Union until 1875. No person residing in a State contrary to the laws and regulations of that State attains the expectation of rights, privileges or immunities held by citizens.

The 14th Amendment: holds that the 14th Amendment was enacted rather than being properly ratified. The history of this amendment is fraught with scandal and unscrupulous actions. The Amendment was properly voted on and properly rejected; only after the dissenting states were not allowed a vote was the Amendment passed.

This fraudulent act redefined the Federal government and its relationship to "The People". We hold that it is the right of the various States to nullify this Amendment and all laws and court rulings arising from it.

16th Amendment:

We hold that the various States should repeal the 16th Amendment, which grants Congress the power to directly tax the people. Direct taxation of the people is contrary to the original intent of the Union and deprives the States of a powerful check on federal excess.

17th Amendment:

We hold that the various States should repeal the 17th Amendment, which provides for the direct election of Senators. The manner in which Senators are elected or selected is a matter that should be left to the States as the original Constitution intended. Direct elections have resulted in a marked reduction in the power of the States to influence Federal actions and policies.

Check out their plan of action.


Here’s what FOX News says about them.  Imagine the treatment they would get if they were a LIBERAL organization that had secessionist leanings.  Also note that they are too extreme even the Bob Jones University.

Here’s a Testimonial from a true believer

And another blog passionately about the world they are leaving and the world they will create.

Don’t miss that last link…really.  He hits every note in the Conservative scale.  If he doesn’t write for, he should.  He's a very articulate, expressive, and orderly communicator, expecially when compared to Devvy Kidd.

I might point out that the referance to the Book of Exodus in their name implies that they believe that they are fleeing slavery and oppression in America (which they as much as say in their website.  Remember what the people in the original Exodus did to Egypt?  I wonder what plagues the people of the Christian Exodus have planned for us?

Saturday, 04 August 2007 07:55:42 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] |  |  | #

It’s time to meet some of the more well-known boosters of the Constitution Party.  Just my little helping hand to Mark…who seemed a little grumbly about having to look into it more deeperer on his own.

Of course, being a free-thinker, Mark will also have to double-check the information that I provide*…but  hey.  It’s just the cost of being a responsible member of society that you find things out for yourself.

So, without further ado…let’s take a look at today’s profiled Constitutional Party booster:

Devvy Kidd is a writer writer and speaker.  In addition to an apparent fondness for randomly doubling consonants, she seems to be an advocate for the Constitution Party.

Quatloos!  Featured Devvy Kidd on their website, focusing on her apparent insistence that the 16th Amendment is illegal.

The World Net Daily seems to believe her.

Somehow, the Courts beg to differ (below copied from the Quatloos website link provided above):

Miller v. United States, 868 F.2d 236, 241 (7 th Cir. 1989) (per curiam) - the court stated, "We find it hard to understand why the long and unbroken line of cases upholding the constitutionality of the sixteenth amendment generally, Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Company . . . and those specifically rejecting the argument advanced in The Law That Never Was, have not persuaded Miller and his compatriots to seek a more effective forum for airing their attack on the federal income tax structure." The court imposed sanctions on them for having advanced a "patently frivolous" position.

United States v. Stahl, 792 F.2d 1438, 1441 (9 th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1036 (1987) - stating that "the Secretary of State's certification under authority of Congress that the sixteenth amendment has been ratified by the requisite number of states and has become part of the Constitution is conclusive upon the courts," the court upheld Stahl's conviction for failure to file returns and for making a false statement.

Knoblauch v. Commissioner, 749 F.2d 200, 201 (5 th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 830 (1986) - the court rejected the contention that the Sixteenth Amendment was not constitutionally adopted as "totally without merit" and imposed monetary sanctions against Knoblauch based on the frivolousness of his appeal. "Every court that has considered this argument has rejected it," the court observed.

United States v. Foster, 789 F.2d 457 (7 th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 883 (1986) - the court affirmed Foster's conviction for tax evasion, failing to file a return, and filing a false W-4 statement, rejecting his claim that the Sixteenth Amendment was never properly ratified.

(copied from the Quatloos! Website)

Check out Devvy’s reading list for becoming an informed citizen.  Of course, when you are done, you will believe that the Illuminate are out to kill you…

Devy Kidd endorses El Doroado Discount Gold, Inc.  You can count on an internet sales site like ElDorado Discount Gold inc.  Especially if someone as sane and well-balanced as Devvy endorses them.  After all, she’s one smart cookie.  She isn’t fooled by the Shriners’ helping treat all those kids with disabilities.

Devvy Kidd was the Freedom Drive Manager for We The People; a grass-roots organization determined to defend honesty, integrity and legality and….uh…


Oh yeah, if your head is still spinning from her insistence that the 16th amendment isn’t legal, how about her apparent insistence that the local county sheriff can legally refuse to enforce Federal laws?

And check out this jeremiad. If America’s schools were ACTUALLY anything like Devvy describes, I would want to abolish the Department of Education too.  Of course, if schools were as bad as Devvy says they are, it would also explain the lack of focus and coherence in her essay.  But when my kids come home and I say “What did you learn today?”…they have never answered “Sodomy, Communism and America Hatin’!!”

Sigh.  Oh well, at least I can go to bed tonight secure that Devvy Kidd is out there fighting tirelessly for my right to join an armed compound with my Sheriff’s support, make sure my kids have a ignorant terror that gay people will convert them, and selectively decide which constitutional amendments I’ll observe.  Vote Constitution party!

*         You should be aware that this is a capriciously written narrative intended to connect the dots of various things I’ve found on the web, and is NOT intended to inform you in anyway about Devvy Kidd.  The “facts” are unchecked.  As is always the case, the commentary provided by me is intended to entertain (mostly myself) rather than inform, and the conclusions drawn are not necessarily carefully considered.

Saturday, 04 August 2007 06:51:15 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] |  |  | #
Friday, 13 July 2007



Much is being made of this video.  Some people think that it is a bunch of rude, obnoxious, theocratic extremeists trying to silence a religious blessing upon our government from a holy man from a significant minority group who contributes greatly to the richness of our society.


Nothing could be further from the truth.  The truth is that our Deist founders who didn't believe in organized religion, nevertheless decreed that the United States was a Christian nation.  Sure, natural law was a good enough way for them to live THIER lives, but for the country, they thought that bronze age morality was the cure and they said no other religion could be practiced publicly.

And don't quote me Jefferson's letter to the Baptist convention about the "Wall of Seperation" malarky.  That was just a ruse to lull the non-Christians into a false sense of security.

Anyway.  What's going on here is that the Christians are exersising both their RIGHT to use their free speech to silence other religions, and their SACRED OBLIGATION to harass non-Christian in the country.  And by non Christians, I mean non- Protestants.


Protestants are the REAL matter what the Pope says.


I mean, who does this Hindu holy man think he is anyway?  What makes him think that we WANT to ask to be guided by the supreme deity who created and runs the universe, and have our deliberations and decisions and actions subject to his laws?  What makes him think that we have any obligation to remember that we are part of a country that is part of a planet, that is part of a universal system whose reality we are subject to, and whithin which we are called to function with the best possible expression of our nature?


Oh. Wait.  I guess this must explain something that someone has called to my attention:  Some Christians think that liberal Christians are actually Hindus.  LOL.  Maybe we should re-think the percentage of Hindues that make up the population.  Maybe we need to add more Hindu chaplains.

It seems almost futile for religion to call people to humility anymore.

(double Hat Tip:  Eclecticsanonymous)

Also, Jason Bock has commentary on this.

Friday, 13 July 2007 06:11:24 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [5] |  |  |  |  | #
Monday, 25 June 2007

Oh good lord.


I totally suck as a parent.


No really.  I probably ruined my children for life.

Forget about how reading them Lord of the Rings will teach them Satanism, or letting them play D&D will turn them into blood-drinking disciples of Marilyn Manson. (and don’t think J.R.R. Tolkien can’t turn your children to Satanism.  He’s very persuasive.  He persuaded C.S. Lewis to convert to Christianity.  And don’t think for a minute that the whole initial thing was C.S’s idea.  No.  I’m surprised he didn’t invent a second middle name just to be more like his mentor.  THAT’S how effective J.R.R. Tolkien’s influence is) Insidious, isn’t he?

No, I did something, much, much, worse.

I read them the “children’s book”    If You Give a Mouse a Cookie.

Turns out, it is an eerily prescient account of how human/mouse Chimeras will eventually take over the world, making humans into slaves to their will just because they look adorable in blue cover-alls.

Forget about how Harry Potter is a cultural retro-virus designed to insert the cancerous code of witchcraft into your child’s social programming.  THIS IS MUCH WORSE!!!

If you give a mouse a human brain and a cookie, the chain reaction will be unstoppable!


And I read a story that makes my kids think it’s “cute”.


Oh!  The humanity!


Worse, they have also been exposed to Mrs. Frisbee and the Rats of NIMH.   NOW I realize why Jerry Fallwel didn't want us to read science fiction!


This reminds me of another personal story.

It begins at the Minnesota Zoo.


I was there with a friend I have known for a long time.  We have kind of a strained history, and the reasons for it will become apparent as the story rolls onward.


We were at the Minnesota Zoo with another mutual friend.  We were in the barn area and there were some new-born calves in a pen.  They were adorable.  Just sweet.  I grew up helping on my grandparent’s farm, and one of the things I got to do every morning I was there was help feed the calves.  It was good messy fun, and they were always happy to see me.  I love calves, and I understand them.

Anyway, my friends and their daughters rushed the calf pen, and stood around “ooohing”  and “awwwwwing”.  The little critters were ADORABLE.


They couldn’t gush enough about them.


Of course, I’m the observant one.  I noticed the sign above the calf pen identifying the calves as clones.

The nice part of me wanted to just wanted to let the happy mommies continue with their adoration of the little miracles of nature.  I knew how both these women felt about anything “unnatural”.


But the Imp of the Perverse had claimed me long ago, and I could not resist.

“They’re clones”  I said.  With perfect timeing.  Just as the rapturous adulation of the miracle of nature’s bounty  reached its crescendo.


“They’re clones.”  I repeated, pointing at the sign.

The mommies’ eyes tracked from the calves to the sign, and back again, making the round trip several times in a few seconds.

“That’s just creepy”, said one mom, and they both marshaled their children and hurried them away from the offending freaks of nature.

My boys and I lingered a few more moments.  “Isn’t that just cool?”  I asked.

“Yeah.”  My boys said.


And that, my friends, is why the meek shall inherit the Earth.  The rest of us will don our best blue cover-alls, gather up our adorable, demanding, cookie-scarfing  mouse-human chimera friends, and go to the stars.


(Hat Tip: Pharyngula)

The original article PZ was commenting on is here.  To be fair, it says nothing at all about the story If You Give a Mouse A Cookie that was Prof. Myer's very apt addition.

Monday, 25 June 2007 20:32:02 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [7] |  |  |  | #
Sunday, 24 June 2007

I was taking an inventory of my baking supplies recently, and it struck me:


Doesn't "Imperial Brown Sugar" sound like the greatest drag queen name ever?

Sunday, 24 June 2007 08:40:24 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  | #
Wednesday, 06 June 2007

With a power vacuum left by the steady descent of Pat Robertson into irrelevancy and senility, Mike S. Adams has made his move and grabbed the religious pundit’s position as the head of the Feminist movement.

While Adam’s move to gain control over setting the agenda was bold and groundbreaking, the agenda we can expect him to set has been  a rather tepid facsimile of Robertson’s more bold agenda.

Far from introducing anything new to a membership that has been straining to make headway in the areas of social justice, human rights, rape prevention, health care, reproductive rights and economic justice,  Adams has instead declared a narrowing of the original Robertson approach.

While Robertson declared the goals of the feminist agenda along a number of lines;

 “[Feminism is] a socialist, anti-family, political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.”

Mr. Adams has, in fact narrowed the focus to simply being the murder of children.

While the membership of the Feminist movement is happy to say good-by to the mandatory socialism, lesbianism (although 1/10 seems fine with it), witchcraft (3/4 feminists don’t like touching desscated newt eye), the destruction of capitalism (nearly 1/5 say “Capitalism worked for me…why destroy it?”) and those polled asserted 100% that they were against the murder of children (+/- a margin of error of .5%), there is some disappointment that the agenda wasn’t expanded to include more practical matters germane to the welfare of women.

 There seems as though there is little reason to expect rape prevention, parity in education, economic achievement and health care to see any movement forward.

When asked about it, Adams mumbled something that sounded like;

“The membership may not like it, but what can they do about it?  After all, they’re just women.  Don’t worry, they’ll have a big hysterical moment and then they’ll get together, have a good cry in front of Lifetime with a bowl of ice cream.  After they’ve had a hot bath and a nap, they’ll be right as rain again.  We’ll have ‘em back on the streets bludgeoning school children to death in no time….and for much less money than it would cost to get men to do it.”

Wednesday, 06 June 2007 07:59:24 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  |  | #
Sunday, 03 June 2007

The Taliban military likes to bomb Buddhist monuments.

The U.S. military wants to bomb fossils.


See?  Challenges to your ideological blinders CAN be effectivly addressed by heavy weaponry.  It’s nice to see two so-different governments able to come together on common ground.

Sunday, 03 June 2007 12:16:27 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  |  |  |  | #
Saturday, 19 May 2007

It’s the answer!  All we have to do is wait until the “right” smears, defames, harasses, and sets their troll posse out with threats against the children of all the conservatives in the country.  The answer is so obvious.  Unleash Bill O’Reilly  and Bill Donohue, and let them do their damage.  One by one, people will wake up when their little liberal child is the one standing in the crosshairs of a fallafel-weilding maniac. I just don’t know if the country has time to let them completely discredit themselves.

The Daily Kos has more about the strange case of Amanda Marcotte.

Her parents didn’t know what to do, either. "It was interesting to see, because they’re Fox News-watchers; they buy into the whole thing," Amanda says. "So I don’t think it ever occurred to them, the human face of someone Bill O’Reilly will slander for political gain. They didn’t stop to consider how much he slants things, and lies, until it happened to someone they knew."


Plus, if they keep this up, they are going to do real number on the state of morality in this country by forcing them out of their jobs:

Today, Marcotte is unemployed and—since she gave up her apartment for the abortive move to North Carolina—without her own place. But she’s doing alright. She recently signed a contract to write a book for Seal Press, called Not Your Darling (due out in Spring 2008) and has moved in with her boyfriend — who agreed to support her for a year while she writes. (The catch: she has to do the same for him next year). In the meantime, you can find her on

Saturday, 19 May 2007 22:41:25 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [7] |  |  | #
Sunday, 06 May 2007

Taking a page from a certain High School English teacher, who used grammar exercises to promote his conservative political opinions, I have come up with a little activity for any of you who wish to attempt it:

 Identify the similes and metaphors.

1)       I’d be all over that like Michelle Malkin on a new justification for the Japanese-American internment in WWII.

2)      The air was as thick with tension as Rumsfeld’s press conferences are with folksy affectations.

3)      With the rainfall and precipitous drop in temperature, the road became as slick as Wolfowitz’ comb.

4)      Dinesh Dsousa’s writing is a thundering rain of self-serving incivility.

5)      Hubris fills the holes in Wolfowitz’ socks.

6)      The flaws in the pre-Iraq justifications were as apparent as Ann Coulter’s knobby shoulder bones.

7)      The Discovery Institute is an actor that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.  Sorry Bill.  (Shakespeare, not Dembski)

8)      The sentiments in Ann Coulter’s columns are a confusion of angry bees in the middle of an episode of Colony Collapse Syndrome.  Each buzzing off in its own direction for no apparent reason.

9)      Knut is like the whole question of man’s impact on the environment.  One we can feel slightly guilty about, and yet embrace with warm fuzzies at the same time…and then let someone else worry about it until we need to blame them for the outcome later.

10)   Bill O’Reilly is the “eccentric” uncle at the family picnic that everyone secretly waits to see what he’ll do next, but nobody wants to talk to.

Sunday, 06 May 2007 09:20:59 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  |  | #
Friday, 04 May 2007

Yes, Mark, This one’s for you.  J  Please don’t take it personally, as I am only poking fun.  And after all, you DID call me a socialist.  More than once.  Kind of like being called a dyke, I don’t really take it as an insult…it just doesn’t really fit.  And if it is clearly meant as a jab (even a good natured one, which I take yours as) I feel almost obligated to jab back.  Plus, I enjoy our little chats too much to let it sit.

As you may have guessed, I threw out the previous Quote of the Day to give you a chance to get your rhetoric on a little bit…but then I remembered that you had never heard of Grover Norquist…so I went to find an article about him so I could make it easy to find out about him.

Then, I read the article.

Up until then, the only link I had between Anti-Tax activists and terrorism was that one creepy neighbor back in the Northern Minnesota countryside with the two VERY quiet little girls and the wife we nicknamed “Mrs. Frankenstein” because of her salt-and-pepper bouffant and ugly temper.

Nobody did anything when she got on the school bus and threatened the bus driver’s life because she felt her children were not being treated properly.

Then, one day, the FBI showed up and hauled lots and lots and lots of military weaponry from his property.  The good stuff, too.  Let’s just say, that the kind of deer you would need this sort of arsenal for would spit running chainsaws for their opening act.  He was an anti-government tax evader.  And he was SERIOUS.

As the years went by, I began to think of anti-government tax protestors as being more like Kent Hovind (AKA Dr.Dino).  You know, sort of a crazy old crank with a cheap rip-off tourist trap creation museum and an argument that, because he is a servant of God, he doesn’t have to pay any taxes.  You can read his prison blog here.

And, of course, there’s Grover Norquist.  Other than his attempts to use his national organization to affect local politician’s decisions regarding taxes(which have nothing to do with HIM), and his super-chummy associations with the power-elite of the Republican party, you wouldn’t think there was that much amiss about him.  But then I came across this little gem in the article linked to for Mark’s edification about a major leader in a cause he feels so strongly about:

During the second half of the 1980s, Norquist detoured from his tax work to engage in a series of safaris to far-off battlegrounds in support of anti-Soviet guerrilla armies, visiting war zones from the Pakistan-Afghanistan border to southern Africa. Working alongside Col. Oliver North's freelance support network for the Nicaraguan contras and other Reagan Doctrine-allied insurgencies, Norquist promoted US support for groups like Mozambique's RENAMO and Jonas Savimbi's UNITA in Angola, both of which were backed by South Africa's apartheid regime (Norquist represented UNITA as a registered lobbyist in the early 1990s).

“In support of anti-Soviet guerrilla armies”  What guerilla armies were operating along the Afghan-Pakistan border?  Wasn’t it *gasp* the Taliban?  Grover Norquist supported terrorism?  Say it isn’t so!

Information on RENAMO (those of you with an aversion to Wikipedia, don’t worry, just follow the links to their citations.)

Information on UNITA (repeat of Wikipedia disclaimer above)

I especially liked this little line here:


As Savimbi gained ground despite the forces aligned against him, American conservatives pointed to his success, and that of Afghan mujahideen, both of which, with U.S. support, were successfully opposing Soviet-sponsored governments, as evidence that the U.S. was beginning to gain an upper hand in the Cold War conflict. Critics responded that the support given Savimbi and mujahideen, which came to be known as the Reagan Doctrine, was inflaming regional conflicts at great expense to these nations and even risking the potential of nuclear war between the superpowers. (The bolding is mine, for emphasis.)


So, in Grover Norquist’s mind, it appears that spending tax dollars arming and training terrorists warlords freedom fighters that we will have to go back and spend even more money defeating two decades later is a GOOD use for American tax dollars, while spending it ensuring a decent education and welfare for trailer park kids in some rural backwater so that we won’t have to spend a lot more imprisoning them two decades later is a BAD use of tax dollars.

By the way, what is one of the best places for American “patriot”  skinhead  neo-nazi terrorist organizations to recruit new members?  Prison.

Don’t even get me started on the discovery that Norquist’s organization Americans for Tax Reform allegedly served as a conduit for some of Abramoff’s dirty money to astroturf grassroots lobbying efforts.

Friday, 04 May 2007 15:49:14 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [11] |  | #
Tuesday, 01 May 2007

The Mandarin Chinese word for “I” is “Waa” with a falling/rising tone.  Grasshopper and I had trouble remembering the tonal component, (as Americans often do).


Until I remembered Jon Stewert, and his trademark response to some woefully stupid or incomprehensible action/statement/position by a politician or media talking-head:




Forgetting the tone of that word is no longer a problem.


Jon Stewart.  Cute, funny, impeccably well-dressed, and the best darn mnemonic device out there for the Mandarin personal pronoun.


There should be some sort of award.

Tuesday, 01 May 2007 16:12:06 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  | #
Tuesday, 24 April 2007

argh.  shortbread cookies, with a chocolate layer on top.  I am powerless before them.

They are my Jadarite.

(Hat Tip:  A Blog Around the Clock)

Tuesday, 24 April 2007 21:17:06 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  |  |  |  | #
Sunday, 22 April 2007

OK, I'm not someone who is hung up on how people express their gender identity.  If you're a man and you feel feminine, do what you have to do to resolve that.  I'll be OK.  Butch female?  No problems, people have made disparaging comments on their perceptions of my lack of "femininity".  I'm not about to judge someone else.  We all try to get through this life the best way possible.


Am I the only person having trouble processing the new peanut commercial on TV now?  "Mr. Peanut", with his monocle and cane has never really struck me as anything but a slightly stuffy male peanut character.

But suddenly here he is strutting his stuff and using his hourglass-form "peanut" body like a female dancer's hips and shoulders.  And I'm having trouble with that.  I'm used to Mr. Peanut being a man, and now he's different. The Mr. Peanut I grew up with is very different and the changes are sudden and unexpected. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to respond to him, and not having those handy consistent gender-based references makes me uncomfortable. 

Sorry, Mr. Confusing Transgender Peanut, you need to give me a little time to work this out.

Sunday, 22 April 2007 09:29:06 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] | #
Admin Login
Sign In
Pick a theme: