Folding, spindeling, and mutilating lauguage for fun since Aug, 2004
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] |  | #

Adventure Boy is home from school today.  Classes were cancelled because of an alleged threat against the High School.

So far, that's all we know.  Probably, that's all we're going to know for a while.

He's downstairs working on some homework right now.

When I told him he was indignant, and a little outraged.

Rocky's not happy.  When he was a kid, his school was closed several times due to bomb threats.  Looks like we're headed into the '70s again whether we like it or not.

Wednesday, 27 February 2008 08:57:05 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] |  | #
Tuesday, 26 February 2008

NSFW:  Warning, doods homophobes.


Tuesday, 26 February 2008 15:57:44 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] | #
Monday, 25 February 2008

And there's no denying it...Captin' Jack is just Hot.


Monday, 25 February 2008 08:01:42 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [7] | #
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] | #
Saturday, 23 February 2008

Me:  "Hey!  Did you know that Paul Dorr used to own a business called "Back Dorr Friends Pantry"?

Rick:  "What?!?  Holy #^%$)^#$"

Me:  "And his current business is "Copperhead Consulting".

Scott:  "The Copperheads were Northerners who where anti-abolitionists and Southern sympathizers."

Me:  "Well, since he's from Iowa and appears to have neo-confederate sympathies, I guess it's apt."

Rick:  "Either that, or that's what he calls his trouser snake." 

Scott (laughing):  "How big can one man's closet be?"

Me:  "Pretty big, from the looks of his picture."

Saturday, 23 February 2008 19:22:20 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] | #

All my students passed with flying colors!

Saturday, 23 February 2008 16:45:37 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #

Volume I:

Chapter 1:  Life story, lots of whining and bragging about how tough and smart his dad was, and how tough and smart he was.

Chapter 2:  Says that as a Christian, he had a hard time accepting anti-Sematism, but then started to read the works of REAL CHRISTIANS ™ and  came to understand that it was his Christian duty to oppose the Jews and their Marxist plot to destroy humanity.  He also says he  figured out that the secular Jews were only pretending to oppose the Zionist Jews and they were all actually in cahoots together.

Chapter 3:  He says reason Germany was great was because there were mostly just Germans there, the reason Austria was having so much trouble was because of cultural pluralism and liberal acceptance of other people’s and cultures and languages.  Germans should have been running things in the German language, and all other ethnic groups should have been educated into a German identity and required to conform to German norms.

Also, it was a bad idea to let everyone vote.  Representative government is a big joke, because everyone gets to talk.  In a representative government, great men are always burdened by what most of the people want.  Real leaders can’t really express themselves fully with the great mass holding them back.

The Liberal Press fools people into thinking representative government is good, when it is really just a way to avoid personal responsibility.

The Pan-German movement failed because it tried to defeat representative democracy from within, when it should have been trying to destroy it at it’s foundations.  Also, it tried to win over the middle class when it should have exploited the Proletariat.

The Christian Social Movement was successful because it properly exploited the lower class,  and won over the Catholic Church.

Chapter IV:

He says that God has created nature such that it is essential for the survival of a group to have numerous offspring.  Any attempt to limit the number of births is a crime against God and nature.  God has shown us through his creation that the strong produce many offspring, and then they over-run the resources, and have to struggle with other groups for resources.    Eternal struggle is God’s way of increasing the human race.  Attempts to try to help the unfit survive, attempts to manage resources for the future, or to limit population within the bounds of resources will end in the extinction of “our” race.  Also, it is an unpious attempt to thwart the will of God.

Refers to a person who interferes with God’s plan as a”dear little ape of an almighty father”.  In other words, such a person thinks he’s an ape and he thinks he’s God all at once.

The German policy of “internal colonization”…that is, encouraging German people to move to other areas of Germany to provide labor for agriculture and to shore up ethnic German presence in areas dominated by other ethnic groups is short-sighted, because it implies that Germany can secure its survival through work and not through conquest.  Other European countries make the mistake of creating far-flung empires around the world which are difficult to maintain, and expend too much effort for the gain they provide.  If would be more efficient to expand German territory to neighboring countries.  Expresses admiration for America's position as having enough land-mass to expolite for quite some time and grow strong before having to join the struggle.  Notes that America had no need of colonies, because they could efficiently expand into their own land mass.

He says that a leader should embody the religious values of his people.  If he can't do that, he should be a religious reformer. 

Chapter V:  Contempt for pacifism.  Contempt for international commerce.  Contempt for social doctrine stressing pacifism.  Expresses happiness about the Boer War, because it is a “heroic struggle”.  Describes relative peace as “morbid decedance”.  Favores isolationism and expansionism.

Expresses joy at the outbreak of WWI because now Germany could (in his view)fight for its existence without limiting its consumption to the limits of its borders, or gaining the difference through trade.  Celebrates the end to peace efforts  as salvation for the German people.

“And if this struggle should bring us victory our people will again rank foremost among the great nations. Only then could the German Empire assert itself as the mighty champion of peace, without the necessity of restricting the daily bread of its children for the sake of maintaining the peace.”

Describes his transformation into a battle-hardened soldier, and expresses his contempt for “politicians” who were talking about peace, and “the press” who were, in his mind, dampening the citizens zeal for war.

“Shortly after our first series of victories a certain section of the Press already began to throw cold water, drip by drip, on the enthusiasm of the public. At first this was not obvious to many people. It was done under the mask of good intentions and a spirit of anxious care…Instead of catching these fellows by their long ears and dragging them to some ditch and looping a cord around their necks, so that the victorious enthusiasm of the nation should no longer offend the aesthetic sensibilities of these knights of the pen, a general Press campaign was now allowed to go on against what was called ‘unbecoming’ and ‘undignified’ forms of victorious celebration.”

Expresses contempt for “Marxist” (Jewish) intellectuals who had been preaching the liberal ideas to people.  Rejoices that they had to retreat in fear at the uprising in national pride.  Laments that they were not rooted out and killed while public sentiment would have allowed it.

He advances the idea that the only way to completely eliminate a world view (in this case, what he describes as the Jewish Marxism; pacifism, population control, resource management, commerce, diplomacy) is to kill every last person who adheres to the world-view.

But in order for it to work it has to: 1) have a spiritual and moral basis to get the support of the people (already established earlier that the moral basis should be the prevailing religion of the people, and the most fundimental doctrinal foundation should be stricktly adhered to). 2) advance a positive message of self-defense and talking about what is being preserved more than what is being destroyed.  People need to know what they are fighting against, but they should be kept more aware of what they are fighting for. 3) the movement to eradicate the world-view must be absolutely consistent, and there must be NO ideological compromise with the enemy, no room for moral confusion, no grey area, and no hesitancy.  There must never be a show of weakness, indecision, or error.

Saturday, 23 February 2008 07:56:40 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  | #
Friday, 22 February 2008

I got a call from my mom and sister today.  My sister got up in the middle of the night to use the bathroom, and she tripped over an ice auger that her husband had left in the kitchen (don't ask).


Anyway, she fell and broke her arm.


Her husband took her to the local ER, and they had to call a doctor in to look at her arm.  He was cranky, and brusk, manipulating her arm around and crabbing at her when she reacted in pain.  She asked him for pain medication, but he continued manipulating her arm, and told her that if she didn't "shape up" he was going to go home without doing anything for her.


Finally, after getting tired of hearing her express her pain, he gave her a shot, and did an x-ray.  She has a horizontal fracture near the middle of the humerous, and a vertical fracture nearer the shoulder.


Later, she found out that the doctor had written in her records that she was "under the influence" and uncooperative (both untrue).


He made a crude sling out of gauze, and sent her home with no pain medication.


For two days, she and her husband tried to call to be seen for the break, and let them know that my sister was in a lot of pain.  They were put off repeatedly.


Finally, they drove 2.5 hours to Bemidji, and were seen in the ER.  A proper sling was put on, and pain medication issued.


Later, the local hospital called to do a follow-up on my sister, and asked if she still had pain or any concerns about her condition.  She replied that she had gone to Bemidji to have the break looked at.  The person on the other end responded "Oh!  Your arm is broken?"


Apparently, the doctor had merely noted that she came in "under the influence", was uncooperative, and complaining of shoulder pain.  Not mentioning the break at all.


This was the same crack medical team that failed to diagnose a cancerous tumor in my grandfather's colon...and instead concluded that he had a heart condition.  (a different hospital actually did a hemoglobin test, which I would think would be a standard procedure in someone suffering from weakness and dizziness...and discovered that he had a hemoglobin count of 3).


My in-laws drive down to the cities to get care for my MIL now, because someone in the hospital near THEM let my MIL go through a whole course of chemo therepy without adding one of the perscribed active ingredients.


I'm collecting a string of anecdotes that adds up to "God save me from having to get medical treatment in a rural hospital".


Some places in America have the best health care in the world.  Others have something that is marginally better than the 3rd world.


But don't let those "liberals" tell you there are "two Americas".




Oh, the punchine?  My sister makes her living as a violin teacher.  Let's just say, that it would probably be better for her family and for the taxpayers if her arm got proper treatment so it could heal properly, so that she could continue to earn a living.

Friday, 22 February 2008 13:06:07 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [6] |  | #

"Darwin defended slavery"


(I took the following quote from this site)

On the 19th of August we finally left the shores of Brazil. I thank God, I shall never again visit a slave country. To this day, if I hear a distant scream, it recalls with painful vividness my feelings, when passing a house near Pernambuco, I heard the most pitiable moans, and could not but suspect that some poor slave was being tortured, yet knew that I was as powerless as a child even to remonstrate. I suspected that these moans were from a tortured slave, for I was told that this was the case in another instance. Near Rio de Janeiro I lived opposite to an old lady, who kept screws to crush the fingers of her female slaves. I have staid in a house where a young household mulatto, daily and hourly, was reviled, beaten, and persecuted enough to break the spirit of the lowest animal. I have seen a little boy, six or seven years old, struck thrice with a horsewhip (before I could interfere) on his naked head, for having handed me a glass of water not quite clean; I saw his father tremble at a mere glance from his master’s eye. These latter cruelties were witnessed by me in a Spanish colony, in which it has always been said, that slaves are better treated than by the Portuguese, English, or other European nations. I have seen at Rio de Janeiro a powerful negro afraid to ward off a blow directed, as he thought, at his face. I was present when a kind-hearted man was on the point of separating for ever the men, women and little children of a large number of families who had long lived together. I will not even allude to the many heart-sickening atrocities which I authentically heard of; - nor would I have mentioned the above revolting details, had I not met with several people, so blinded by the constitutional gaiety of the negro, as to speak of slavery as a tolerable evil. Such people have generally visited the houses of the upper classes, where the domestic slaves are usually well treated; and they have not, like myself, lived amongst the lower classes. Such enquirers will ask slaves about their condition; they forget that the slave must indeed be dull, who does not calculate on the chance of his answer reaching his master’s ears.

It is argued that self-interest will prevent excessive cruelty; as if self-interest protected our domestic animals, which are far less likely than degraded slaves, to stir up the rage of their savage masters. It is an argument long since protested against with noble feelings, and strikingly exemplified, by the ever illustrious Humboldt. It is often attempted to palliate slavery by comparing the state of slaves with our poorer countrymen: if the misery of our poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin; but how this bears on slavery, I cannot see; as well might the use of the thumbscrew be defended in one land, by showing that men in another land suffer from some dreadful disease. Those who look tenderly at the slave-owner and with cold heart at the slave, never seem to put themselves into the position of the latter; - what a cheerless prospect, with not even a hope of change! Picture to yourself the chance, ever hanging over you, of your wife and your little children - those objects which nature urges even the slave to call his own - being torn from you and sold like beast to the first bidder! And these deeds are done and palliated by men, who profess to love their neighbors as themselves, who believe in God, and pray that his Will be done on earth! It makes one’s blood boil, yet heart tremble, to think that we Englishmen and our American descendants, with their boastful cry of liberty, have been and are so guilty: but it is consolation to reflect, that we at least have made a greater sacrifice, than ever made by any nation, to expiate our sin.


                                                                                                         --Charles Darwin

                                                                                                             The Voyage of the Beagle     


(Hat Tip: Pharyngula)                                                          

Friday, 22 February 2008 09:29:40 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  | #
Thursday, 21 February 2008

I took Adventure Boy to school today.  He had some last-minute stuff to do, and would not have gotten to school on time if he had tried to walk.  On the way, we saw his two best friends, and picked them up so that they could not freeze as well.

As we approached the final turn near the High school, we witnessed an accident.

This intersection is atop a small ridge that runs for several miles, winding through Eden Prairie.  So the road we were waiting to turn onto has a steep incline on either side.  There is a yellow double line for "no passing" down the middle of it on both sides.

Of course, someone JUST HAD to try to pass the person in front of them.  After all, who wants to be stuck behind someone doing the speed limit in a school zone?  THIS IS A FREE COUNTRY after all, and if you can't speed while passing in a "no passing zone" in the middle of an intersection...well then, the terrorists have already won.

Naturally, this being rush hour near the largest high school in the state, there was a car coming the other way.

The jackass thankfully avoided the impending head-on collision by swerving into the guy next to him...forcing him to collide with the car on my street that was waiting to turn left, and effectivly bunging up the whole intersection.  All three vehicles sustained a surprising amount of damage.  One of them lost a wheel.

I eased into the right-turning lane, and took an alternate route.  I got the boys safely to school just in the nick of time, and then drove back, intending to offer my witness information to the responding officer.  However, there was not yet and officer on the scene, and I saw at least two subsequent fender-benders as hurried and inattentive drivers failed to realize that traffice was impede at that intersection.

I decided that the only value I could add to the situation would be negative.  Normally, I'm all about offering witness information if I have it because when I was in my accident, it absolutely in no uncertain terms helped me refute the other person's account, and saved me a lot of trouble.

However, in this case, it just would have added to the snarl.  Besides, It's a slam-dunk as to who is at fault.

But one thing I will carry away from this today:  No matter what happens to me today, no matter what befalls me, nor how many mistakes I make nor how many things I say which I might regret later... least I can go through my day knowing that I'm not a selfish prick with a high-end SUV who thinks nothing of risking other people's life-and-limb pulling multiple bone-headed traffic violations.

And that ain't nothin'.  It's only up from there!

Thursday, 21 February 2008 08:28:09 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  | #

I have a crazy person e-mailing me.

I've had angry people e-mail me, and I've had nice correspondence with people asking if they can use a blog entry or just to comment to me directly on an entry, without wanting to seem rude or critical in public (a high percentage of my tiny number of readers are fellow Minnesotans know the type.)

But I've got a bona-fide dyed-n-the-wool crazy person now:


Oh yeah...aint that special?

Now, this person claims to be an atheist and talks as though he's offended by my religious sentiments.  I can only assume he is insane or deficient.

To all the Mother-Theresa haters out might not have liked the things she did, or the decisions she made, or the resaons she made them...but until you come up with a solution to the problem of poverty in India, I suggest you put your energies into that or at least into seeking mental help for yourself.

I understand people being frustrated by most of her money staying in the church, while her charges were given minimal care; her accepting "humanitarian" donations from really bad people who created their share of misery, among other things.

But honestly, I don't know how brow-beating a midwestern houswife through e-mail is going to change that.  If you think you have something important to say on a subject, I'd expect you'd at least want to say it in public.

Even the Paulanistas know THAT.



Thursday, 21 February 2008 06:17:14 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [5] | #
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] |  | #

Read him the Bible.

My mom gave Grasshopper an edition of the NIV of the Bible for Christmas.  She smiled as she said "I have to warn you, that this is a very dangerous book.  it is very subversive and will give you many dangerous ideas."

So Grasshopper, who is very interested in things spiritual asked me to read it to him.  So I read a little every night.

We began in Genesis.

We recently finished the story about how Lot's daughters got him drunk and comitted incest with him, after they escaped the city God destroyed, where Lot offered to let a crowd "do whatever they wanted with them".

He was also not too impressed with Abraham repeatedly lying about his relationship with his wife to save his own skin such that she ended up being claimed  (however temporarily) by other men.

Revolted, Grasshopper said "I see what Grandma means about this being a dangerous book."

LOL!  I'm certain that's not what she meant...but I think HE'S getting the right idea.

Wednesday, 20 February 2008 11:29:23 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #

...I think my molocules have stopped moving.

Grasshopper and I wait outside in the -30+ windchill for 20 minutes.  Then I made a rude gesture in the direction the bus SHOULD have come from and went to warm up the car.

It took three minutes to warm up the car, twenty minutes to drive to the school, five minutes to wait in the traffic circle, and another 20 to drive back.

The cabin of the car never got warm.

I can't feel my feet.

One thing you can say about the weather in @#)%*$#% keeps the riff-raff out.

[Update:  My mom just called from "up nort".  There, it is -35 WITHOUT factoring in windchill.  They watch the neighbor girl in the mornings when her mom is at work.  They drove her to the bus stop this morning, obviously.]

[Update II:  The benefit of having a home office is more than just the nice commute past the coffee pot.  When you're stuck in an office and you are cold, you are out of luck.  It's just plain COLD.  Suck it up for 8-10 hours.  When you are at home and your cold, you can get some bread baking in the oven and the house is warm again.  Plus - bread.  mmmmmm...fresh baked bread.  The downside is, of course, good luck finding 8-10 hours of work everyday.]

Wednesday, 20 February 2008 07:58:23 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [10] | #
Tuesday, 19 February 2008


Those Gosh-darned pesky educated predictions backed up by research and facts.

How can Intelligent Design hope to compete?

Oh yeah.  They have Ben Stein.  Never mind.  His powers of snidely droning on and on about liberal fascism will prevail.  No one can withstand the power of his droll and slighly pouty drone.  The only people who listen to facts are effete snobs with alphabet soup after their names, and they will be the first ones up against the wall when the revolution comes.

(Hat Tip: Jason Bock)
Tuesday, 19 February 2008 14:54:47 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  |  | #

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] |  |  | #
Sunday, 17 February 2008

Ever ask what the form of vengence God will visit on us for daring to teach children about preventing pregnancy, providing people with cheap birth control and allowing women to get abortions for any reason at all?

Fundies are generally vague about the punishment, but usually they point to hurricanes and floods and earthquakes and planes flying into buildings.

One thing you have to say about Hitler, is that he was direct.  He just came right out and said it.  God had built-in punishment for the people who control the birth rate.  For the crime of thwarting God's plan, God would use nature to destroy any people who did so.  Hitler's description of "nature" sounds a lot like descriptions you hear fundies give about "Darwinism".  Of course, as I've previously pointed care, small birth rates, altruism and yes, care for even the weakest in a group are all "fitness" traits.  They are not counter to nature, they are obviously not counter to the will of God who created nature.

But I guess you can see how the fundies think that Hitler was a "Darwinist" as his descriptions of nature are as off base (and in the same way) as the Fundie's descriptions of evolutionary Biology.

Anyway, quote follows below:

But what was the reason for forming the alliance at all? It could not have been other than the wish to secure the future of the Reich better than if it were to depend exclusively on its own resources. But the future of the Reich could not have meant anything else than the problem of securing the means of existence for the German people.

The only questions therefore were the following: What form shall the life of the nation assume in the near future – that is to say within such a period as we can forecast? And by what means can the necessary foundation and security be guaranteed for this development within the framework of the general distribution of power among the European nations? A clear analysis of the principles on which the foreign policy of German statecraft were to be based should have led to the following conclusions:

The annual increase of population in Germany amounts to almost 900,000 souls. The difficulties of providing for this army of new citizens must grow from year to year and must finally lead to a catastrophe, unless ways and means are found which will forestall the danger of misery and hunger. There were four ways of providing against this terrible calamity:

(1) It was possible to adopt the French example and artificially restrict the number of births, thus avoiding an excess of population.

Under certain circumstances, in periods of distress or under bad climatic condition, or if the soil yields too poor a return, Nature herself tends to check the increase of population in some countries and among some races, but by a method which is quite as ruthless as it is wise. It does not impede the procreative faculty as such; but it does impede the further existence of the offspring by submitting it to such tests and privations that everything which is less strong or less healthy is forced to retreat into the bosom of tile unknown. Whatever survives these hardships of existence has been tested and tried a thousandfold, hardened and renders fit to continue the process of procreation; so that the same thorough selection will begin all over again. By thus dealing brutally with the individual and recalling him the very moment he shows that he is not fitted for the trials of life, Nature preserves the strength of the race and the species and raises it to the highest degree of efficiency.

The decrease in numbers therefore implies an increase of strength, as far as the individual is concerned, and this finally means the invigoration of the species.

But the case is different when man himself starts the process of numerical restriction. Man is not carved from Nature’s wood. He is made of ‘human’ material. He knows more than the ruthless Queen of Wisdom. He does not impede the preservation of the individual but prevents procreation itself. To the individual, who always sees only himself and not the race, this line of action seems more humane and just than the opposite way. But, unfortunately, the consequences are also the opposite.

By leaving the process of procreation unchecked and by submitting the individual to the hardest preparatory tests in life, Nature selects the best from an abundance of single elements and stamps them as fit to live and carry on the conservation of the species. But man restricts the procreative faculty and strives obstinately to keep alive at any cost whatever has once been born. This correction of the Divine Will seems to him to be wise and humane, and he rejoices at having trumped Nature’s card in one game at least and thus proved that she is not entirely reliable. The dear little ape of an all-mighty father is delighted to see and hear that he has succeeded in effecting a numerical restriction; but he would be very displeased if told that this, his system, brings about a degeneration in personal quality.

For as soon as the procreative faculty is thwarted and the number of births diminished, the natural struggle for existence which allows only healthy and strong individuals to survive is replaced by a sheer craze to ‘save’ feeble and even diseased creatures at any cost. And thus the seeds are sown for a human progeny which will become more and more miserable from one generation to another, as long as Nature’s will is scorned.

But if that policy be carried out the final results must be that such a nation will eventually terminate its own existence on this earth; for though man may defy the eternal laws of procreation during a certain period, vengeance will follow sooner or later. A stronger race will oust that which has grown weak; for the vital urge, in its ultimate form, will burst asunder all the absurd chains of this so-called humane consideration for the individual and will replace it with the humanity of Nature, which wipes out what is weak in order to give place to the strong.

Any policy which aims at securing the existence of a nation by restricting the birth-rate robs that nation of its future.

                                                                                                --Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol I Chapter IV

Sunday, 17 February 2008 22:03:03 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #

The anti-environmentalist thread over at the fundie site I was just referring to in this post has taken an interesting turn.

The host is complaining about a poster that he has had to repeatedly ban because he says wild things like asserting that Stalin was an anti-Darwinist.

I find that funny, because Stalin WAS an anti-Darwinist.  He actually rejected Darwin for many of the reasons that Fundies reject Darwin.  Namely, the misapplication of a scientific description of the world, and imposing on it social and moral implications that just don't fit into it.

Fundies give, as a reason for rejecting Dawin, that "survival of the fittest" dictates a morality of rugged individualism and dog-eat-doggery that will result in the highest moral law being that of survival.  Which would make it "immoral" for a "Darwinist" to rescue a drowing child, or give money to feed a starving person, or what have you.

Stalin rejected Darwin because he also felt that "survival of the fittest" dictated a morality of rugged individualism and blah blah blah...which was in direct opposition to his political philosophy which is why he rejected Darwin and embraced Lamarkism (called Lysinkoism because it was named after the Russian who revived it).  Basically, Stalin's misunderstanding of the theory led him to believe that Darwin was saying that those who were at the top of society belonged there, and any attemps to manage society for the benefit of everyone was contrary to natural law.

Of course, evolutionary biology recognizes collective action, caretaking, and providing for others in your group as a survival it's just silly to say that "darwinists" don't believe in taking care of others, or the ability to put the well-being of your group above your own well-being.

Kind of like the claims that Hitler was an atheist.  Please.

Hitler believed the God dictated nature, and that nature dictated that there should be no restriction on birth of a species or "race" because it was only by over-running and over-burdoning their environment that a "race" would come into the necessary conflict that would cause the mass death that would make a race stronger.

In Mein Kampf, he makes it perfectly clear that he believed that attempts to live within the confines of a people's resources (such as birth control), attempts to limit population, and to manage resources, would lead to the death of a people...and that it was GODS WILL that they should be whiped out if they did such a thing.

He believed in unrestrained birth for the unborn and unrestrained struggle and death for those who were born (I still get chills when this philosophy is echoed by Scar in The Lion King.  Scar's "Be Prepared" interlude is one of the most chillingly evocative description of Hitler's mindset that I have seen.)

This is not the sort of thing Darwin talked about as a matter for social policy.

Of course, evolutionary biology recognizes that some species have a fitness adaptation of limited or small birth rates with a higher level of nurture and resource investment in the resulting young...and some have a fitness of adaptation of astronomical birthrates with little or no nurture for the resulting young.  Both are adaptations that make a given species succeed or fail in a given niche and condition.


It's depressing to me that such a potentially intelligent guy as this Fundy only feeds his mind with Coulter-crap and the like.

I suppose it's the liberal's fault.  We no doubt banned some chemical that makes reading high-quality material too expensive.


Sunday, 17 February 2008 15:18:08 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  | #


That is all.


Sunday, 17 February 2008 11:01:11 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] | #
Friday, 15 February 2008

Just a quickie, as I have a lot to do today!

I just read on another website about how environmentalism kills 2 million people per year because environmental hysteria caused the banning of DDT.  I'd give you link, but it bothers the guy when I link to him.

Just in case you have been exposed to this myth, or know someone who has, here's some facts.

The DDT Ban Myth  (quote from this site follows):

Several anti-environmentalists have claimed that public concern over the effects of DDT after the publication of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring led to a ban on the pesticide in some third world countries in the 1960s.  This ban, it is claimed, led to a resurgence in malaria, resulting in thousands of deaths.  But in accounts of the war on malaria, such as in Laurie Garrett's The Coming Plague,  it is clear that the suspension of spraying programs was unrelated to any environmental concerns.  In fact, DDT continued to be the insecticide of choice in the battle against malaria as recently as 1994, some 30 years after the alleged ban, in areas where it was still effective (Curtis). Before considering what actually happened, let's see how some anti-environmentalists described the alleged ban.

Here's a quote from the Wikipedia entry:

The World Health Organization estimates there are between 300 million and 500 million cases of malaria every year, resulting in more than 1 million deaths,[63] with about 90% of these deaths occuring in Africa, mostly to children under the age of 5.

Most prior use of DDT was in agriculture, but the controlled use of DDT continues to this day for the purposes of public health. Current use for disease control requires only a small fraction of the amounts previously used in agriculture, and at these levels the pesticide is much less likely to cause environmental problems. Residual house spraying involves the treatment of all interior walls and ceilings with insecticide, and is particularly effective against mosquitoes, which favour indoor resting before or after feeding. Advocated as the mainstay of malaria eradication programmes in the late 1950s and 1960s, DDT remains a major component of control programmes in southern African states, though many countries have abandoned or curtailed their spraying activities. South Africa, Swaziland, Mozambique and Ecuador are examples of countries that have very successfully reduced malaria infestations with DDT.

Indeed, the problems facing health officials in their fight against malaria neither begin nor end with DDT. Experts tie the spread of malaria to numerous factors, including the resistance of the malaria parasite itself to the drugs traditionally used to treat the illness[64] and a chronic lack of funds in the countries worst hit by malaria.

The growth of resistance to DDT and the fear that DDT may be harmful both to humans and the environment led the U.N., donor countries, and various national governments to restrict or curtail the use of DDT in vector control. At the same time, use of DDT as an agricultural insecticide was often unrestricted, and restrictions were often evaded, especially in developing countries where malaria is rife, so that resistance continued to grow.[14]

[UPDATE:  the same blog entry that discusses how "harmless" DDT is has now spawned derisive comments about how evivormentalists are forcing poor people to eat Twinkies because they made apples expensive by banning Alar...another chemical that they claim is completely harmless.]

Here are some real facts about Alar.

But if your one of the people that think that Alar and DDT are prefectly safe, and that people don't have any choice because fresh fruit costs more than Twinkies...and it's the evil liberals fault...don't worry.  The brave Libertarians over at Center For Consumer Freedom are protecting you.

They mock the "Alar Scare" all the time, referencing it to deride every concern about nearly every food danger that comes down the pike.  They are also defending you from "fat nazis" who want to take away your freedom to eat guilt free:

No's the title of the article:

Preserve right to eat without guilt: Don't post calories of fast-food dishes

Friday, 15 February 2008 11:45:40 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #

"Our struggling economy:  If I had a dollar for everytime someone mentioned a recession - I'd convert them to Euros!"


                                                                                                -Steven Colbert

Friday, 15 February 2008 10:28:59 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #

I didn't buy these arguments when the Discovery Institute used them against Darwinism...

But you know, for some reason, when you use the same rhetorical tactics agaist just unravels. 



But I DO think that it would have been better produced if they had gotten Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron to do it.

(Hat Tip:  Pharyngula)

Friday, 15 February 2008 07:58:09 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  | #
Thursday, 14 February 2008

Check out Monk-in-Training's history of St. Valentine.

Paula tells a personal story, and story-telling is what Paulas do best.  Plus, there's sonnets involved, and who doesn't like that?

What is with these people with an Epicopalian History and their literary/scholarly ability?

If I could believe the things you have to believe in order to call yourself a Christian...I'd want to be an Episcopalian...but I'm not sure I'm smart enough or well-read enough.

And for those of you who don't want to think about romance and human love today, I bring you a story about the healing power of the love of DOG.


Oh and , Happy Valentine's Day!!


Thursday, 14 February 2008 07:23:24 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] | #
Wednesday, 13 February 2008

Wednesday, 13 February 2008 11:17:51 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] | #

1.  Once I start reading a book, I HAVE to finish it, no matter how bad it is.  It's a compulsion that will not let me rest.  I have one or two books that I never finished.  Years later, I still own them, and the book markers are still in them.  :-)  I will have no peace until they are done.

2.  I hated being pregnant, and the Lamasse classes were like torture to me, listening to everyone talk about how wonderful it was, and thinking there must be something wrong with me that I didn't like being sick and sweaty and having poor digestion, back and knee pain, and chronic headaches.

3. When I was pregnant, the smell of broccoli was so repellant to me that I found grocery stores almost unbearable.

4. My kids call me "Darth Mom".

5. I was very low in my High school class rankings, but in the 97th percentile on the SATs.

6.  I didn't learn to read until 3rd grade.

7.  Once I start watching a movie, I have to finish it, no matter how bad it is.  Except for "Me, Myself and Irene".  I never looked back.

8.  I'm a lame fangirl for Dr. Daniel Jackson.

9.  I can't stand the sensation of stepping on paper in stocking feet.  It makes my skin crawl.

10. When I was a kid, we used to love to play "tag" with BB guns (rubber BB's) and bottle rockets.  I'm afraid to even say out loud the different ways we played with fire.


(Hat Tip:  Mommy Zabs)

Wednesday, 13 February 2008 10:37:19 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] | #
Monday, 11 February 2008

Guess who?

But from another viewpoint also it would be wrong to make religion, or the Church as such, responsible for the misdeeds of individuals. If one compares the magnitude of the organization, as it stands visible to every eye, with the average weakness of human nature we shall have to admit that the proportion of good to bad is more favourable here than anywhere else. Among the priests there may, of course, be some who use their sacred calling to further their political ambitions. There are clergy who unfortunately forget that in the political mêlée they ought to be the paladins of the more sublime truths and not the abettors of falsehood and slander. But for each one of these unworthy specimens we can find a thousand or more who fulfil their mission nobly as the trustworthy guardians of souls and who tower above the level of our corrupt epoch, as little islands above the seaswamp.

I cannot condemn the Church as such, and I should feel quite as little justified in doing so if some depraved person in the robe of a priest commits some offence against the moral law. Nor should I for a moment think of blaming the Church if one of its innumerable members betrays and besmirches his compatriots, especially not in epochs when such conduct is quite common. We must not forget, particularly in our day, that for one such Ephialtes,  there are a thousand whose hearts bleed in sympathy with their people during these years of misfortune and who, together with the best of our nation, yearn for the hour when fortune will smile on us again.

(Hint:  the same person also said this):

To a political leader the religious teachings and practices of his people should be sacred and inviolable. Otherwise he should not be a statesman but a reformer, if he has the necessary qualities for such a mission.

Monday, 11 February 2008 18:50:16 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] |  | #

I came across this blog story about a mother who forewent treatment for liver cancer so that she could give birth to her baby.  That's what choice is all about.  Your body, your life, your choice to sacrifice it to another or not (also, your right to weigh the chances of the other person living even with your sacrifice, versus your chances of surviving if you end the pregnancy).  Kudos for her in her act of love.

What bothers me is the first comment in the blog where I found this:  Where the commenter says "we need more people like this".

Um.  If you had more people like'd have just as many people like that as you do'd just have more bodies.

And anyway, what the pro-life movement wants is not MORE beautiful loving choices and selflessness...they want legislated policy that values the life of the baby over the life of the mother...wether or not she is spiritually capable of deciding to risk or even outright sacrifice her life for the life of another...regardless of probable outcomes, or the intricaies of individual cases.

In other words, they want more people to choose to die and they want to rob the beauty of an act of love and turn it into an act of coersion...and they call themselves "moral".



Monday, 11 February 2008 12:45:42 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] |  | #

A while back, I wrote a story that was inspired by something a friend of mine told me about her childhood.

I never published the short story, because it was so completely personal to her, and I took a few liberties with details to fit it neatly into the short story form, and also to set the story in a time closer to the time-period I was most familiar with.    This woman was about ten years older than me, the youngest of several children in a Catholic immigrant family.

The family was from Poland.  My friend was the youngest because her mother had died while giving birth to her.

The father’s sister came from Poland to care for the children and help their father run his household.

This aunt was apparently a perfectly sufficient care-taker for all of the other children…but she believed that my friend was touched by evil, and possessed by demons, which had killed the mother.

So she tortured the little girl for the duration of her childhood.

I only learned of this story because of my blundering and often insensitive big mouth.

My friend had lost her first child in utero.  She had given birth to her second child with great difficulty, and he was three weeks pre-mature and struggled through infancy.  Her third child came along and this is where the story actually picks up.

My friend’s little toddler had fallen face-first into the wading pool while her back was turned.  Only the quick action of the older child (who was all of four years old) saved the little girl.  It was one of those momentary lapses that every parent has, every parent knows they have, and every parent know it is only by luck or provenance (whichever you prefer) that it turns out well.

There were a few other small bizarre mishaps, which I don’t even recall exactly what they were now, ten years later.

A few months later, my friend was stalled in a residential neighborhood.  Her old van had stopped running, and she had no idea why.  Her two children were sleeping in the back seat, and there was a house right there.  So my friend decided to ask to use the phone.  (this is before cell phones were as ubiquitous as they are now)  The woman who answered the door said “Is that your van that’s burning?”

My friend turned, and sure enough, there was smoke and flames shooting out from under the hood of her van.

She managed to pull her children out, they were treated and released from the hospital, the fire was put out, and except for some minor concerns associated with smoke inhalation, the kids were OK.

I couldn’t believe her run of bad luck.  We were sort of sitting around doing the “Now that everything’s OK, let’s try to make light of it to make ourselves feel better” thing, and I said “If I didn’t know better, I’d say there was some supernatural force after your kids.  It’s like the last few months it’s been one freak accident after another.”

She looked as though I had slapped her hard across the face.

Now, in my defense, this was completely in keeping with the tone of “I can’t believe it, how bad can my luck get” quipping that SHE had set for the conversation, and I had never had an inkling that she was tortured by a religious nut for her whole childhood…

…but the whole story came pouring out then and there.

Some of the most horrifying things I’d ever heard.  And the last thing was that apparently this evil aunt had told my friend that if my friend died first, the aunt would urinate on her grave…and if the aunt died first, she would haunt my friend and make her life miserable because of the pain and evil she had brought to the family.

So, you can see why it sort of bothers me to read this story.

The punch-line is, of course, that my friend’s husband is a Protestant Fundamentalist, and they send their kids to a Catholic school.

I don’t understand people sometimes, and I don’t know why someone who was tortured by religion, who’s misery was caused by superstition, who felt shame and terror over some bizarre belief that she was responsible for something she had no control over, would ever subject her children to the same philosophy and raise them with the same view…

…or why huge segments of the population would turn away from reason and make a mad-dash back to the Demon-haunted world.

Then again, some run the other way, and thank goodness for that.

Monday, 11 February 2008 08:07:12 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  |  |  |  | #
Sunday, 10 February 2008

Ya'll know I'm not a fan of Hillary...but I have to say I respect her defense of her daughter in this.  More presidential than McCain's reaction to the Bush campaign's treatment of HIS daughter.

I got this story from OneNewsNow.  For extra fun, note the typical "christian" reactions to the story in the comments.

Sunday, 10 February 2008 11:07:04 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Saturday, 09 February 2008

When you're a State Representative, and you have to apologize for calling single moms "sluts" in just might be a Republican.

LOL!  I like that he apologized publicly with this little number:

"The derogatory term I used was offensive and inappropriate, and I would like to apologize for using it," the Colorado Springs Republican said in a statement. "Because of my unfortunate choice of language, the message that I was trying to get across about personal responsibility and parental responsibility has been overshadowed.

"I certainly regret using the term I did," he said.


Of course, having spent about the last twenty-five years listening to politicians, and knowing the Republican philosophy as I do...

I can translate it into normal person language quite easily:

"I'm sorry I used words to accuratly represent what I really think.  It's unfortunate that I can no longer pawn off my hostility to harm-reduction efforts as frienliness toward "personal responsibility".  People will always be able to point to this quote and show that my real attitude is one of enjoying seeing women and their children suffer as retribution for their lack of submissivness to the patriarchy."

You know, it just seems like those Muslim fundies have it easier.  You don't see THEM having to bow and scrape and, the WOMEN do all of that, when they appear in court.

Gee, it just sort of makes you long for the ideal, Republican America, doesn't it?  Where Abortion (and birth control as soon as they can swing it)is illegal, and all of the government aid is regulated by "Faith-based initiatives" that see things the way old Larry Liston does.  Then, he could call them sluts, and who would care?  Nobody, that's who.  Because if there was one thing Jesus would never have stood was an unwed teenaged mother.

Saturday, 09 February 2008 19:50:37 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  | #

Well, sometimes...


(Hat Tip : Dracut)


1) If you could get a crowd that size together in one place in Bemidji, that's what they would look like.

2) If you could get Northwoods Norwegians to dance...that's what it would look like.

3) Rural Ojibwe, rural Norwegians and rural Swedes and rural Germans are not really that big with the running and screaming.  They are most likely to give a put-upon-sounding "yup" or "oofda" that sounds sort of like a sigh...and then blow your head off.

4)If there were a place where werewolves ran around in bright sunlight, it would be Bemidji.


Saturday, 09 February 2008 09:49:40 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [5] |  | #
Thursday, 07 February 2008

Since I didn't have a class to teach tonight, I was not going to be driving up to Plymouth like I usually do, and taking a dozen or so laps around their indoor track to warm up for my I schlepped on down to my local community center and checked out the new facilities.


Like...NICE nice.

There's a wonderful hip abductor machine that I guess is a normal, standard hip abductor machine...but I've never been a member at a gym that had one.  I am going to be able to stop charging rinos with my side-kicks.

You watch and see.

Bigger space, more machines, better lighting, clean, new carpeting...ROWING MACHINES and, maybe not the most important feature, but significant...bigger cup-holders in the tread-mills.  I can finally bring a quart bottle in and have enough water for more than an hour of running...without having to stop and re-fill.

I got a lot of "Hey!  Where have you been?"  People don't seem to realize that there are other ways/places to work out that sometimes fit into a schedule better for varying periods of time.

Especially not OCD lady, who was still there on schedule, her regular work-out apparently not affected over-much by the changes.

Anyway, it's good to be back, and even though our membership fee will be three times as much, I'd say we're getting much more than 3X the value.

Thursday, 07 February 2008 21:53:31 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
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] |  |  |  | #
Tuesday, 05 February 2008

Martians are just so NICE!  They obviously want us to "Have a nice Day"

Darned nice of them to think of us considering they have that whole "nonexsistance thing" going on.  What a bummer, and they do something thoughtful like this...

...It just sort of makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.  I mean, when you look at that how can you even THINK that it happened by RANDOM CHANCE?!?  Obviously, it was DESIGNED...designed by a giant five-year old with a Martian Magna-Doodle.

(Hat Tip: Jason Bock)

Tuesday, 05 February 2008 22:31:16 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  | #
Monday, 04 February 2008


Just saying that you don't need religion to be a good person and live a good life is intolerance agains Christians!

I want you all to know this so that you don't go around being intolerant!  If you don't need something, and you make a public statement about not needing it, you are being intolerant.

So, no saying you don't need alcohol to have a good time!  It's intolerant to say that!

Don't tell the nice visiting Mormon missionaries that you don't need a copy of the Book of Mormon!  You would be being intolerant!

Don't tell fussy old anut Ida that you don't need to get married to feel completed as a human being!  That's intolerance of marriage!

If someone offers you a cigarette, be enlightened and accept it!  Saying you don't need one is intolerant!


So...anyway, I'm off to show my tolerance and acceptance of caffeine by admitting that I cannot function without it.  Se ya'll later.

(Hat Tip:  Pharyngula)

Monday, 04 February 2008 08:38:35 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  | #
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] |  |  | #
Admin Login
Sign In
Pick a theme: