Folding, spindeling, and mutilating lauguage for fun since Aug, 2004
Saturday, June 30, 2007

God did it. (link to Pharyngula)

God reached in and futzed around with this researcher's randomized binary code so that the results came out looking much like the results we would expect from "Darwinism".  He will stop at nothing to get them to disbelieve in Intelligent Design.

 

Wait 'til the punch-line though.  When these scientists get to hell and God says "Ha!  Psych!  it was me all along!  Fooled you!  Boy I really had you going there!  Enjoy your Brimstone.  Don't forget to tip your tormenting demon."

 

That God.  What a card.

 

 

Saturday, June 30, 2007 7:01:16 AM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Friday, June 29, 2007

http://www.petfinder.com/photoView/photoView.cgi?petid=8673474

 

I went to the dog park a couple of weeks ago and I met Zoe.  She entered the park and ran right up to me, sat down with one whole side of her body pressed against my leg, put her head on my lap, and looked soulfully up into my eyes.

The human with her informed me that she was a rescue dog up for adoption.

I wanted to take her home that very moment.

I can't get her out of my head.  She's that sweet, and she's beautiful and well socialized.  She's had all her shots.  She deserves a good home.

But my husband had to go and be all practicle and point out that we already have a huge monster dog and another one would be unmanagable.

Whaaaa!  I want this dog!!!!  Somebody HAS to adopt her and love her.  And send me pictures and tell me how she's doing.

Friday, June 29, 2007 6:47:10 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] | #
Thursday, June 28, 2007

By now you've most likely all heard about Ann Coulter's continued douchbaggery towards the Edwards family, and complete lack of ability to understand a simple request to focus her message on the issues without resorting to douchbaggery.

You also probably realize that Ann's response makes it clear that her political message IS douchbaggery itself, and has nothing to do with the issues.  She as much as says that she can't write books without acting like a douchebag, so Elizabeth Edward's request that she do so is essentially the same as asking her not to write books at all.

So, no need to harp on that.

Instead, watch this cool conflagration. 

 

 

(Hat Tip:  Jason Bock)

Thursday, June 28, 2007 11:06:10 AM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] | #
Wednesday, June 27, 2007

 

He sure seems to.

You can judge the level of douchbaggery yourself.  I post.  You decide.

I thought CNN could stoop no lower than exploiting Nancy Grace's need to broadcast her pain and rage at the nation's accused criminals and their defense attornys.  I guess I was wrong.  They added Glenn Beck.

The below video is a little disturbing.  Mostly for the statements made by Glenn Beck, but Kucinnich's adoring fans also weird me out a little.  But at least they are humerous and...um...how do I put it?  Oh yeah. NOT VISIBLY ENGAGING IN DOUCHBAGGERY.

grump.

 

Oh yeah, and aren't these the guys who are supposed to RESPECT marriage?  I'd like to know how same-sex marriage supposedly defiles marriage, but looking at another man's beautiful wife, and conjecturing that their marriage is based on drug-assisted rape is RESPECTFUL of it.

 

I bet God just looks down at some of his "followers" and wishes he could sleep so he could cry himself to sleep at night.

As is often the case: (Hat Tip: Pharyngula)

Wednesday, June 27, 2007 7:07:43 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  | #
Tuesday, June 26, 2007

I KNOW I was supposed to "heel".

And I KNOW mom yelled "NO!" at me to remind me.

But that doesn't mean she has to laugh at me and tell everyone about me "attacking" a little stone bunny garden ornament.

I mean, I didn't exactly "attack" it, I just sort of charged it and swatted it with my paw.

 

Also, I don't think it was right for her to laugh so hard at me freaking out over the swimming buoy in the lake.  I'd never seen one before, and you have to admit, they look like something that should be barked at.

And pounced on when they don't respond.

And run away from when they duck you under the water, and then come up under your belly with the rope.

 

I'm not sure my dignity can survive another walk with mom.

Tuesday, June 26, 2007 8:21:11 AM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] | #
Monday, June 25, 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.

“WHAT???!!!”

“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, June 25, 2007 8:32:02 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [7] |  |  |  | #

Grasshopper passed his first degree red sash test with flying colors!

He was very focused, and got very high scores, even from Shifu, who is quite picky and spareing with grades above passing.

Adventure Boy has to make up four items from his red sash test...but the things he passed, he did very well on.  As he was testing at the adult level, the test is very grueling.  He accidently left out a coupld of moves in his form, he couldn't complete the 15 fingertip push-ups, and the judgest felt that two of his kick combinations needed improvement.

He will be able to finish those up on the next test.  These are all things he can do, when he's not already exhausted.

He did very well defending himself against three attackers in a two-minute round.  :-)

Monday, June 25, 2007 2:24:35 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] | #
Sunday, June 24, 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, June 24, 2007 8:40:24 AM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  | #
Friday, June 22, 2007
What's My Blog Rated? From Mingle2 - Online Dating

Mingle2 - Online Dating

 

I'm just going to protest this by quoting a signature in my High School Yearbook.  Yearbook:

"Teresa, you're rude, crude, and obnoxious.  You're a gutter-mouthed-fight-picking drunk.  You have all the qualities I admire in a person."

This is my friend and she was being COMPLIMENTARY.

How did this happen?

I've obvously strayed too far from my roots.

Friday, June 22, 2007 7:41:04 AM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [6] | #
Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Amanda Marcotte at Pandagon

 has a fun entry about a conservative having a melt-down because single moms can get a Hallmark card on father’s day.

Pandagon got the link  from an entry on Alicublog.  Take a look at that one as well.

That conservative is Heather McDonald.  Here is the original article.

 

Of course it’s another “conservative” lament about how our society is disintegrating, how it’s deteriorating, how it is going to hell in a hand basket.

Call me crazy, but doesn’t it seem that in the last throws of a declining civilization, where all human values have been lost, where we wander through a desolate social landscape bereft of morals and decency…

…doesn’t it seem that Hallmark would be, um, irrelevant?

Somehow, I find it difficult to believe that a child showing gratitude to her mother for doing the job of two parents year around, year in and year out is one of the preliminaries to the apocalypse.

 It’s difficult to mourn too much for a society that raises children who, instead of being bitter and resentful at not having a father in their lives, can seek out a card to show gratitude for the mother that they have.

Color me confused.

Wednesday, June 20, 2007 9:04:01 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  |  | #

Spoof of a conversation I’ve had too many times.  Maybe some of you will recognize it.

 

Believer:        “I read your blog.  You’re really angry at God.”

 

Me:                  “I’m not angry at God.”

 

Believer:          “Then why do you hate the church so much?”

 

Me:                    “I don’t hate the church, but I also don’t think the church represents God.”

 

Believer:            “You must have been really hurt by some false teachers.”

 

Me:                     “Yes, but you see, in a way, I’m glad I encountered them because they caused me to ask

                             questions, and those questions lead to me unraveling the shackles of religion and find

                             an approach that is better and healthier for me.”

 

Believer:            “See?  You’re so hateful and angry.”

 

Me:                    “Only when the religion is hurting people, or being used as a political tool to re-write

                            science, education, history, and law to the likings of people who yearn for the middle

                            ages.”

 

Believer:            “Wow, you must have been very badly hurt.”

 

Me:                    “Um…yeah, but I’ve moved on now, and I just don’t like to see religion misused as tool

                             for subverting the political process.  That’s bad for both religion and government.”

 

Believer:             “I just can’t talk to you anymore.  You’re just so angry and hateful.  I’ll pray for you to

                              find some peace, though.”

 

Me:                      “But I don’t want to be at peace with bad religion being used for bad purposes to do bad

                               things to people.  I am at peace with religion in general.  I’ll go to church with friends

                               and family, you know.  It’s kind of pleasant.”

 

Believer:              “Please stop shouting, you’re  just so shrill and angry.  I hope God heals your heart.”

 

Me:                       (shouting now)  “Oh my GOD!  I’ve told you and told you I’M NOT ANGRY!!!  WHY CAN’T YOU PEOPLE GET A F#$%^%ING CLUE.

                             I’M. NOT. ANGRY.”

 

Believer:               “That’s right, let it out.  Jesus can heal you.”

Wednesday, June 20, 2007 7:49:16 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] | #
Monday, June 18, 2007
Monday, June 18, 2007 10:11:28 AM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [11] | #
Friday, June 15, 2007

In my webly wanderings, I came across this little bit about Ms. Knippers:

In 1995, for example, syndicated columnist Cal Thomas cited Knippers’ critique of an NCC “laying of hands” ceremony intended to strengthen President Clinton’s resolve in preparing the federal government’s annual budget. This was, said Knippers, “a disturbing misuse of prayer for blatantly partisan purposes.”

And I can't help but think about that scene in Jesus Camp where the crazy Jesus lady has the children prostrating and praying at a cardboard cut-out of President Bush.

But I'm sure THAT's just peachy keen with the old IRD.

Friday, June 15, 2007 10:41:36 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] | #

My friend Barb just reminded me of a story from when Adventure Boy was little.

We'd been out to the zoo, and AB had been a total little twerp.  He'd whined and complained, threw temper tantrums, been mouthy and generally a pain in the pattotie.

We were tired, hungry, and crabby.  I was at the end of my rope.

I reportedly declared:  "I need ice cream.  We're getting ice cream."

So I bought us ice cream, and Adventure boy looked at his before eating it and said: "How come you bought me ice cream?  I've been so bad today.  I don't deserve it."

And I said: "Sometimes you get ice cream, and sometimes you don't.  Whether you deserve it or not, that's just how it is."

Adventure Boy said "Oh." and ate his ice cream.

Apparently, Barb saw in this an important life lesson of great profundity and amusement.

I don't know why.

But just in case, I thought I'd let you all know too so you can profit from it if you have a brain like Barbs.

Friday, June 15, 2007 10:32:18 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  | #
Thursday, June 14, 2007

Neil has claimed that the IRD has a perfect right to send in their operatives and disrupt churches because the churches are not following the denominational rules and therefore their clergy were either lying when they took the orders, or became apostate later and lied in trying to continue in the ordination when they clearly could not conform to the tennents of their faith.  Steeplejacking, of course, gives us an example of how it's really the fundamentalists that do this when they infiltrate denomonations that have been historically liberal from their inception, such as the United Church of Christ.

 

As the famous theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, who was instrumental in the establishment of the United Church of Christ, once wrote: "We in the Evangelical Synod heritage are informed by a theological tradition that might be best defined as a liberal evangelicalism...There are no fundamentalists among us. (P. 92)

 

The authors tell the story of one George Dohm, who graduated from a UCC Seminary.  His first church, where he served as pastor, had been infiltrated by proponants of the Biblical Witness Fellowship.  Dohm and these BWF activists managed to work the politics such that eventually the church voted on wether or not to stay in the UCC.  The chruch voted to stay, but lost 1/3 of it's membership.  Anyone who has ever been a member of a church will know that this is not a healthy situation for a congregation.

 

Dohm's second call was to a church where he was asked to leave after removing the denominational logo from everything connected with the church.

 

Dohm's third assignment also ended due to what appears to be conrtol freak behavior;  He took the Director of Youth ministries job as well as the job of pastor.  He couldn't handel it, and had to resign.

 

Despite his "official" departure, Dohm continued to meet with the leaders of the church - who referred to themselves as Georges Disciples" - which is considered an ethical violation in most Protestant church organizations.  Under his guidance, the leadership pushed for the church to leave the denomination, in the process spreading the usual lies and innuendo throughout the congregation. (p.114)

 

Among those lies, the authors describe the leadership as spreading the rumor that in order to get denominational funds to help with the pastoral transition, the church would be required to accept gay members and affirm their lifestyle as well as being required to call a gay pastor.  This was untrue, but the damage was done.

 

People within the church who did not want to leave the UCC began to take action to save their church.  They came to the authors of the book and were coached on how to counter the well-prepared steeplejackers.  They kept track of everything that was happening in the church, wrote to members of the congregation to inform them what was going on, and invited speakers to talk about the UCC and it's values and teachings.  Georges Disciples also invited speakers, one of them was George himself.  During his speech he told a story containing an analogy that the UCC was dog excrement contaminating the brownies of Christianity.

 

I will quote some more of the story here, because it is so evocative of the sort of damage these IRD tactics do to congregants.

 

In a final effort to keep the church within the denomination, a team of concerned covenantal partners in the St. Louis area met with the congregation to remind them of the values they shared with the wider church, and to help them see that the United Church of Christ was something more than just dog excrement ruining the rest of Christianity.  During the course of one of these meetings, a frail, elderly woman stood and spoke to the crowd, addressing "Georges Disciples" in particular, though she did not call them that.  "You people scare me," she said.  "I have been a member of this church all my life, and for the first time I am afraid to speak in my own church." Later, as we were leaving, another elderly woman stopped us and asked, "What do I do if they take this church from me?  My husband is buried here.  My child is buried here.  Where do I go?" (pgs 177-118)

 

Back to summarizing, the vote to decide to stay in the UCC or leave was scheduled three times, and delayed twice.  In the end, they chose to disassociate by five votes.  I'll go back to quoting the book, because this is just a powerful example of the psychological damage that funamentalists are willing to do to their children in the name of acquiring church property.

 

A tape was made of the congragational meeting at which the vote was taken.  At one point during the deliberations, an eleven-year old boy, the son of one of "Georges Disciples", spoke.  Half-choking as he sobbed, he addressed the leaders of the congregation. "I don't know...how we...can even think...about being part of a church...that does not believe in Jesus...I don't know how...we can think...about being a part of a church...that does not believe in the Bible."  It was truly frightening to hear this child speak, and to wonder what had been done, or said to him, that would lead him to believe and repeat these lies about the denomination. (p. 119)

 

[UPDATE: Here is the link to the SPLC report on the Chalcedon's vow to "convert" fundamentalist churches to Christian Reconstructionism]

Thursday, June 14, 2007 7:46:26 AM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] | #
Wednesday, June 13, 2007

Already all of us must have heard about the people who call themselves the Fundamentalists.  Their apparent intention is to drive out of the evangelical churches men and women of liberal opinions...We should not identify the Fundamentalists with the conservatives.  All Fundamentalists are conservatives, but not all conservatives are Fundamentalists.  The best conservatives can often give lessons to the liberals in true liberality of spirit, but the Fundamentalist program is essentially illiberal and intolerant.

 

                                                                                     Rev. Dr. Harry Emerson Fosdick, preaching at the first Presbyterian

                                                                                    Church in New York City in 1922 on the topic "Shall the Fundamentalists win?"

                                                                                    (as quoted in Steeplejacking)

 

Another quote comes to mind:

"...but how little MAN HIMSELF has changed."

                                     Kahn Noonian Sung

                                     "The Wrath of Kahn"

 

Neil often refers to "orthodox Christianity", implying that Biblical inerrancy and related doctrines are the original and/or proper approach to scripture.  This gives the IRD the right and license to enforce Biblical adherance as they interpret it upon "liberal" and mainstream churches.

 

The above quote disputes that, showing in 1922 that it was quite a novel set of concepts.

 

Here are some more quotes that dispute that view here are three excerpts from this article:

(by Robert Wuthnow

Robert Wuthnow is a Century editor at large and a member of the faculty at Princeton University. This article appeared in The Christian Century,, April 22, 1992, pp. 426-429. Copyright by The Christian Century Foundation, used by permission. Current articles and subscription information can be found at http://www.christiancentury.org. Article prepared for Religion Online by Harry W. Adams.)

 

Most histories of American fundamentalism (including the valuable section in this volume written by sociologist Nancy T. Ammerman) trace its roots to Princeton Theological Seminary in the 1880s. There, Archibald Alexander Hodge and Benjamin B. Warfield defended biblical authority against the challenges voiced in the name of science and historical criticism. Warfield's successor, J. Gresham Machen, became a prominent figure in the fundamentalist-modernist debates of the 1920s, having moved by that time to Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia following a dispute with Princeton colleagues to his theological left. The work of Hodge, Warfield and Machen built a solid if narrow intellectual foundation for what is still probably the most cherished doctrine of fundamentalism: the inerrancy of Scripture.

This doctrine has been interpreted variously in subsequent decades, but generally it holds that the written text of the Bible was inspired by God, that the Bible is thus a record of the actual, words of God, and that it therefore can be trusted to be infallible in all its details. Inerrantists differ in how they reconcile scientific and historical problems in the text, but most agree that the scribes and those who determined the canon did not (either accidentally or intentionally) introduce errors into Scripture. Portions of the Bible have figurative meanings, inerrantists usually recognize, but they warn against taking liberties with such an interpretive principle. Fundamentalists consider inerrancy to be a common-sense understanding of the Bible. How widely this doctrine is currently held can be gauged by the results of a recent national poll in which 47 percent of active Protestants agreed with the statement that "everything in the Bible should be taken literally, word for word." In the same study, 48 percent of active Protestants disagreed with the statement that "the Bible may contain historical or scientific errors."

Only after 1919 did fundamentalism become an organized movement. That year 6,000 people attended the first World's Christian Fundamentals Association conference in Philadelphia. The following year a coalition of fundamentalists formed in the Northern Baptist Convention, and about the same time a similar coalition emerged among Presbyterian conservatives. Increasing numbers of fundamentalists also began to oppose the teaching of evolution in schools; their struggle culminated in 1925 with the famous trial of John Scopes in Dayton, Tennessee. Paradoxically, it was the opposition in these years of liberals and modernists such as pastor Harry Emerson Fosdick and the American Civil Liberties Union that did more to crystallize the identity of fundamentalism as a single movement than any of the efforts of its own leaders.

Wednesday, June 13, 2007 9:54:44 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [6] |  | #

Neil from 4Simpsons.com says in my comments that we should judge the IRD by their actions, and not by the fact that their money comes almost exclusively from far-right-wing anti-democratic, anti-civil-rights, anti-social justice and anti-woman sources.

 

Fair enough.  How about this?

 

From the book Steeplejacking (pages 40 -41):

 

     The IRD also had no problem resorting to appeals to racism to further its agenda against mainline denominations.  In the early to mid-1990s, a string of arsons swept across the southern United States, with over fifty churches being torched.  Congressional hearings were held on the incidents, and President Clinton himself declaired the fires "morally unacceptable and reprehensible."  In order to help the destroyed churches rebuild, the NCC initiated a fund-raising drive, taking in over $9 million. Instead of affirming the generosity of the NCC, the IRD, in its typical fashion, found conspiracy, with Diane Knippers stateing that "the NCC is pushing the church-arson story to justify its thesis that America is on the verge of a race war," topping that with the assertion that "black churches burn more frequently than white churches to raise money for [their] leftist political agenda."

 

In the above quote, the NCC is the National Council of Churches.  The IRD is the Institute on Religion and Democracy.  Diane Knippers was the president of the IRD.

 

Is this the sort of thing we can judge the IRD on?

 

But back to the funding/alliances thing.  Here's a nice quote from pages 44-45:

     And in these efforts, the IRD has recieved the substantial financial support of billionaire Howard Ahmanson, whom Time called one of the twenty-five most influential evangelicals in 2005. Ahmanson is a disciple of the late R.J. Rushdoony, the driving force behind Christian Reconstructionism, a version of Calvinism which advocates replacing democracy in the United States with strict Biblical law.  In addition to arguing that the Bible should be the sole guiding priciple of American life, Christian Reconstructionism espouses capital punishment for a wide variety of "Crimes," including abortion, abandonment of the faith, heresy, blasphamy, witchcraft, astrology, adultery, homosexuality,incest,juvenile delinquency and sexual relations before marriage (women only).  For many years, Ahmanson served on the board of Rushdoony's think tank, the Chalcedon Foundation, and donated over $1 million to the organization.  In addition, Ahmanson's wife, Roberta, serves on the board of the IRD and he has given several hundred thousand dollars to the organization over the past fifteen years, as well as donating over $1 million to the American Anglican Council.

The American Anglican Council was co-founded by the late Diane Knippers, who, it was mentioned before, was the president of the IRD.

Wednesday, June 13, 2007 7:36:13 AM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [19] | #
Sunday, June 10, 2007

Majickthise has a blog entry about a new book Steeplejacking.

I know a lot of religious liberals, and most of them refuse to criticize their conservative brothers and sisters in Christ.  Which I think is very noble of them.  After all, they are all one family and should stick together right?

Too bad their religious brothers and sisters aren't above a little "Fratricide".

What's really funny about it, is the allegations that this is somehow the fault of the secular left.  *shakes head*

[update: heres is a list of the IRD's funding organizations: http://www.mediatransparency.org/recipientgrants.php?174]

Link dump:

More Rev. Chuck Curry

 

Sunday, June 10, 2007 9:34:58 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [11] | #
Saturday, June 09, 2007

Do not ever say that the desire to "do good" by force is a good motive. Neither power-lust nor stupidity are good motives.

                                                                                                                                                                     ~Ayn Rand

 

Statism needs war; a free country does not. Statism survives by looting; a free country survives by producing.

                                                                                                                                   ~Ayn Rand

Be not dumb, obedient slaves in an army of destruction! Be heroes in an army of construction!

                                                                                                                     ~Helen Keller

 

Non-violence is not inaction. It is not discussion. It is not for the timid or weak... Non-violence is hard work.

                                                                                                                              ~Cesar Chavez

After victory, you have more enemies.

                                       ~Cicero

 

War should be the politics of last resort. And when we go to war, we should have a purpose that our people understand and support.

                                                                                                                                ~Colin Powell

 

It is part of the general pattern of misguided policy that our country is now geared to an arms economy which was bred in an artificially induced psychosis of war hysteria and nurtured upon an incessant propaganda of fear.

                                                                                                                                    ~General Douglas MacArthur

 

Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor - with the cry of grave national emergency.

                                                                                                                                   ~General Douglas MacArthur

 

All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.

                                                                                                                                       ~George Orwell

 

Military justice is to justice what military music is to music.

                                                             ~Groucho Marx

 

I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.

                                                                                                                                 ~Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

Quotes selected from this page.

Saturday, June 09, 2007 10:28:42 AM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] | #
Friday, June 08, 2007

I just got a letter from my aunt, "Squeak's" mom.  It reads in part:

 

"We recieved [his] footlocker today - still expecting a priority mail package.  He is on his way to getting home! When? I guess when he calls us or appears in our bedroom at 5:00AM some morning and say 'Hi Mom, Hi Dad' like he did last time (Sept.)"

 

Yep, That's "Squeak", alright.  Glad he gets to stay home a little longer this time! Glad he's coming home in one piece.

 

More story on Squeak, showing why it is a good thing he is coming home in one piece.

 

Squeak with his “gameface” on.  Terrorists beware!

 

Squeak’s bad-ass rat tat.  You’d never know he was a nice Catholic school boy just a few short years ago, would you? (Speaking as a person who held him as a days-old baby…that thing is just God-awful)

(Hat Tip:  All links "sixty-six")

Friday, June 08, 2007 2:23:08 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] | #
Thursday, June 07, 2007

Pray for Daylight will be playing at the Riverview Theater in Minneapolis, MN

 

Thursday, June 28th at 5:30 PM.

 

I admit, it isn't an easy day/time to get into Minneapolis...but it's FREE FREE FREE!

 

Featuring original music from local music phenomenon Jagged Spiral. (I just want to hear what Conrad Zero says about being called a "Phenomenon" chances are, something acerbic.  Just guessin')  Oh!  and Conrad of Jagged Spiral also plays "The Vampire Most Likely to Freak You the Hell Out! In phonetic Serbian!"

 

And it's not every day you get to see Rockford Lhotka playing a menacing Serbian gypsy guard.

 

And I'm in it, playing the role of "Most Usless and Pathetic Vampire EVER!"  (Tony thought it would be funny, since I was the fight choreographer)

 

So get your cookies down there and take a gander.  I guarantee the quality will impress you much more on the big screen than it does on Google Video.

 

I'm going to be there, as are many of the cast/crew.

 

Come and see what a bunch of geeks can do with too much time on their hands and a digital camera.

Thursday, June 07, 2007 9:23:56 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] | #
Wednesday, June 06, 2007

Karen sent me the full article.

I love this line;

"I have come to the firm conclusion that I’ve not been nearly harsh enough in my treatment of feminists. And today I plan to start treating them the way they deserve to be treated."

Oooohh.. Mikey REALLY get's off on "puttin' his thing down" doesn't he.  He sounds like he got done writing that article and had to go find a woman to beat just to reach the climax of "getting his man on."

And he can't imagine, for all the world why his speech might turn a conservative woman feminist?  Because he is graphically illustrating why women feel the need to protect themselves from anti-social psychos who get off on being the testosterone avengers bringing the rightous wrath of God down on a woman who dares to pay her own bills?

Nothing will put a chill up a woman's spine faster than hearing some man tell her he's "going to give her what she deserves."

Mr. Adams should be aware that some of us are armed, dangerous, and perfectly capable of giving any offending man "what he deserves."

I'd say he should check in with his pastor as well, but chances are, his pastor is who he got his attitude from anyway.

Wait.  What was that queasy feeling of disorientation just now?  I think it just might have been the sensation of turning feminist.

Wednesday, June 06, 2007 2:12:25 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [7] | #

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, June 06, 2007 7:59:24 AM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  |  | #
Tuesday, June 05, 2007

Would someone who is not banned from viewing Townhall sites for mysterious and completely insupportable reasons please check and see if Mike S. Adams actually said this?

"Feminism is a minority social movement, whose members murder innocent children in order to obtain sexual gratification."

The quote is from Pharyngula, and I THINK prof. Myers would be reliable, but this seems just a little too weird and much be checked out.

I know the Townhall crowd has it's peculiar psychology and all, and I assume he's talking about abortion and not actual infanticide...but nobody actually thinks that abortions cause sexual pleasure for women...right?  I mean, I would think that a person would actually have to have a mental illness involving a phobia of women and doctors and possibly pregnancy in order to believe that.

Anyway, I copied the link from Pharyngula...here it is: http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=a_new_definition_of_feminism&ns=MikeSAdams&dt=06/04/2007&page=full&comments=true

I'm starting to think they decided that the remaining 20-30% just don't need that much effort to keep churning along.

Tuesday, June 05, 2007 11:04:47 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [7] | #
Monday, June 04, 2007

For a little background on what I’m talking about…read this link. (culled from the comments section of a Pharyngula post.  Actually, go and read this as well.  It’s important.)

 

OK, now for the summary: 

1.       Link number one is about how a bunch of brain scientists measured brain activity during a bunch of moral mental experiments.  They concluded that moral dilemmas are in part due to different areas of the brain having an argument.  Also, when we do something we know is good…our brain gives us a warm fuzzy chemical bath in our blood stream (actually more complicated than that.  Go read the article.  I’m just the wise-ass telling you about it.  Don’t count on my summaries I might accidently leave out important stuff, like the involvement of the area of the brain that responds to s-e-x).  They also conjecture that these reactions are more or less consistent throughout humanity regardless of culture, language, religion, etc. (in other words, the much maligned “we’re not as different as we think” sentiment is about to make a come-back, much to the chagrin of its detractors)

2.       Link number two is about PZ Myers mocking Michael Egnor and giving him a verbal spanking.  Don’t miss it.  Particularly, The good Prof. points out that we KNOW that people who suffer particular brain injuries can become incapable of empathy and altruism.

3.       Link number three is Michael Egnor whining about how altruism CAN’T be a function of the brain because you can’t bend a spoon with your mind.  Therefore, the mind can’t interact with matter.  Or something like that.  Mike can be quite obtuse.  What I DO know from reading his essay is that I would rather he not operate on my brain. I can see it now:  “Oh, don’t worry, I cut away a little extra in the frontal lobe area, it’s not like you NEED sociability and self-control.  God will provide”.

This is the great battlefield of our time.  Science verses superstition.  I don’t mean science verses faith or piety or veneration of and gratitude toward a creator.  I mean Science versus the insistence that the evidence before us, provided all around us by creation MUST NOT BE SO because it is in opposition to pet dogmas and prejudices.

Interesting.  If I were a brain scientist right now, my next project would be to get a bunch of fundies in a room and tell them that their brains are great-big chemical-electric computers that make them believe they have a soul…and measure the brain activity, and see if an electromagnetic image emerges of the researcher being hauled around by a flaming pitchfork up her nose, wielded by a little spike-tailed devil.

After further consideration, that’s probably why I’m not a brain scientist.  That, and my math grades.

[New improved UPDATE:  NOW! WITH LINK FEST IN PROGRESS!!!]

BioBlog - Ineresting in that it addresses some objections to this information, for in stance, the fear that if psychopathic murders can be shown to merely have malfunctioning brains, we will be obligated to allow them to roam freely to kill again because they can't help it.  Obviously, we can't do that.  We still have to restrain them because they cannot restrain themselves.  Still, it challenges us to be more compassionate in our moral judgements.

The Design Interference - Slime molds display acts of self-sacrifice despite being un-aware.  I wonder.  Is God making them do it to make us less special?

Denialism.com - Yeah...what ABOUT LSD?

Arbitrary Marks - Did he just argue himself out of his own argument?  Michael Egnor:  Breaking the wind he's p***ing into.

Tired of the Egnor flavor?  A Blog From Hell slices and dices (just like Julia Child!) a little brain-related Chopra Woo to cleanse the pallet.

Monday, June 04, 2007 8:57:43 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [5] |  | #
Sunday, June 03, 2007

Who said it?  Do you know who made these statements?  There are three people quoted below.  See if you know or can guess who they are.

 

 

“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”

“These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert, to fleece the people.”

“Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor.”

“I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.”

“Merchants have no country. The mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains.”

“When a man assumes a public trust he should consider himself a public property.”

“Nothing could be more unjust than agrarian law in a country improved by cultivation; for though every man, as an inhabitant of the earth, is a joint proprietor of it in its natural state, it does not follow that he is a joint proprietor of cultivated earth. The additional value made by cultivation, after the system was admitted, became the property of those who did it, or who inherited it from them, or who purchased it. It had originally no owner. While, therefore, I advocate the right, and interest myself in the hard case of all those who have been thrown out of their natural inheritance by the introduction of the system of landed property, I equally defend the right of the possessor to the part which is his.

Cultivation is at least one of the greatest natural improvements ever made by human invention. It has given to created earth a tenfold value. But the landed monopoly that began with it has produced the greatest evil. It has dispossessed more than half the inhabitants of every nation of their natural inheritance, without providing for them, as ought to have been done, an indemnification for that loss, and has thereby created a species of poverty and wretchedness that did not exist before.

In advocating the case of the persons thus dispossessed, it is a right, and not a charity, that I am pleading for. Nor it is that kind of right which, being neglected at first, could not be brought forward afterwards till heaven had opened the way by a revolution in the system of government. Let us then do honor to revolutions by justice, and give currency to their principles by blessings.

Having thus in a few words, opened the merits of the case, I shall now proceed to the plan I have to propose, which is, to create a national fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of fifteen pounds sterling, as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property:

And also, the sum of ten pounds per annum, during life, to every person now living, of the age of fifty years, and to all others as they shall arrive at that age.”

Sunday, June 03, 2007 10:58:54 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] | #

A glimps into a dark, desperate, and demonic world.

Follow the link...if you DARE!

http://www.cybermoonstudios.com/8bitDandD.html

(Hat Tip:  Pharyngula)

Sunday, June 03, 2007 3:28:17 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] | #

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, June 03, 2007 12:16:27 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  |  |  |  | #
Friday, June 01, 2007

Here is one of our very first films.  It is called "The Thing That Happened".  It is based on the experience one sometimes has when watching some pretentious foreign language Art Films that, as our website says "make you cry a little bit inside".

I did Kraft Services for this (make-your-own taco buffet...which I am told sounds dirty, but hey, it was a taco buffet I can't think of another way to say it.  So there you are.  Any dirtyness you percieve is purely the result of your filthy mind.)  I also was part of the crowd beating up the guy at the end, and I am reflected in the window in one of the scenes...a shadowy figure holding a sword.

 

 

enjoy.

 

 

Oh yeah, and the "film flaws" were added digitally for artistic effect. The movie was filmed digitally.

Here is a link to our feature film on Goggle Video:  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3432819586728848049&hl=en

Here's a link to the  movie Trailer:  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2766270342322118914&hl=en

Friday, June 01, 2007 1:22:43 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #

Pray for Daylight got a good review from Rogue Cinema!

 This is the movie in which I was the Fight Choreographer, Stunt Coordinator, bit player, and one of several Dolly-cam luggers (beasts of burdon affectionatly referred to as Dolly Llamas)

I also played cello in one of the bits of music.

 

This was such a fun piece to work on.

Friday, June 01, 2007 11:00:05 AM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Search
Archive
Links
Categories
Admin Login
Sign In
Blogroll
Themes
Pick a theme: