Say No More!

I had already written a handful of posts, but wanted to space them out a bit. However, today, this post is the only one needed. The gentleman is Pat Condell, and you can find many videos of his on Youtube. Just one of them has received over a half million views.

I just came across his videos today.. and it's like he's channeling a distilled version of everything I've written the last three and a half years on this blog.

And that's that.

This is Religion

Jennifer has posted about the ongoing debate we've had about "gay marriage". Apparently this is her "final word" on the topic, and that's fine. She's really clear.. and she need not say another word. I completely get it.

The beauty of her post is that it completely captures the essence of "morality" from the Christian point of view. Honestly, I don't think Jennifer is a "bad" person. She's just been handed a rule set and is incapable of coughing up the kool-aid. I get that.. but.. this really isn't about Jennifer, or myself. She's just some person on the internet with a blog.. just like me.. and ultimately these words exist for anyone that wants to read them, who might just think about what they represent in the broader sense.

I've made no bones that one of my goals is to aid in the destruction of organized religion... of all flavors. I'm just a drop of water in a secular wave... and so what I'm doing here is more for me, the few people that read it, and maybe a few other people who stumble in. They can look at the argument and see who makes a more persuasive case.

And in this case, Jennifer has said some stunning things.. and I'm so grateful for that. There are times when I think that I'm being overly harsh about Christians and my desire to see the institutions destroyed. Then one of them says something like this;

To make a long story short, he is angry because he is gay and can't get "married." It's dehumanizing to him. Dehumanizing? There are too many things in life that are dehumanizing but not being able to get married because you are gay is certainly not one of them!! I find that hysterical, truly! Talk about a drama queen.

I've thought about how best to articulate how vile.. demeaning.. dehumanizing that is.. but really, I don't think I need to.

Just read the words...

Fuck.. okay.. a couple words. She finds it hysterical that two human beings who love each other are not allowed to get married and enjoy the support of the greater society around them. Since the beginning of humanity, that has been the only common thread among everyone.. of every race. It is the thing that uniquely defines us as human. Jennifer is baffled that I don't accept the status that her religion assigns to me, and just be grateful.

She finds it "hysterical" that an entire class of people are denied basic human dignity. I am simply in awe at the depravity of her world view. But then, I'm being a "drama queen".

Something I am learning the more I blog is that they do not understand Christianity. They try and explain it, criticize it, twist it, quote it, but deep down they don't have a clue. That is why I pity you, not because you are gay.

I understand Christianity very well. I understand the death and destruction of it.. the rank hypocrisy.. the persecution.. the shear evil. I understand that an old book, and some pastor, tells Jennifer what her view should be, and I'm supposed to just say "Okay! I can't have a marriage? Thank you!."

I quite well understand that you do not think I, or anyone like me, should have the defining characteristic of humanity. I understand that extremely well.

But you don't have to pity me Jennifer. As I've said.. I'm stronger for it.. we're stronger for it.. and I will not allow the ideology of what you represent hold me back from anything. We'll work harder.. be smarter.. more compassionate.. more generous.. more wealthy, healthy and wise..

And we will take what we want whether you like it or not...

It just proves to me that I am a true Conservative and nothing anyone says or calls me, will change that.

Truer words were never spoken.


/update

You need to read the comments on her blog. They are just incredible. I am completely amazed at the level of psychosis that is so vividly displayed.

Douggie Sez

There's two new posts at Douggie Watch, here and here... or just hit the main page.

Accelerating

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Home foreclosure filings jumped 23 percent in the first quarter from the prior quarter, and more than doubled from a year earlier, as more overextended borrowers failed to make timely payments, real estate data firm RealtyTrac said on Tuesday.

One of every 194 households received a notice of default, auction sale or bank repossession between January and March, for the seventh straight quarter of rising foreclosure activity, RealtyTrac said.

Foreclosure filings were far-reaching, rising on an annual basis in 46 states and in 90 of the 100 largest metropolitan areas, to a total of 649,917 properties. The first quarter filings surged 112 percent from the same period last year.

Just an aside.. but as Blogger adds more and more features (some of which are cool), it gets slower and slower. Frequently, it's down right irritating.

Implicit

Does one's job title guarantee immunity from criticism? Perhaps merely having a certain job title means that it is impossible for the office holder to act unethically?

Or.. is it possible that a bunch of retired generals were paid by the media to spin Pentagon propaganda, contributing to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of human beings in a bullshit war?

I keep thinking that at some point there will be a reckoning. However, "we" didn't actually "lose" the war, so no, no one will be held to account.

Centrally Weak

So Obama showed weakness by caving to right-wing bullying taunts (thrilling our political foes), disrespected his base, gave Fox a propaganda victory, exposed his campaign as a bunch of liars who promised something their candidate was clearly incapable of delivering, and defended the Democratic spinelessness that gave us the most ridiculous Supreme Court in generations.

I won't pretend to guess whether this helps him in Indiana or not. It may or it may not. And since I've never put Obama on a pedestal, this doesn't knock him down. What this does demonstrate, and quite clearly so, is that Obama is quite willing to score cheap political points at the expense of his base, regardless how much it might embolden the very same people that are working to demonize him to the American people. - Markos Moulitsas Zúniga

This is the problem I've had with Obama from the very beginning. That, and the health insurance issue.

The Chimp in the Oval Office is at less than 30% approval rating. Obama does NOT need "conservative" support in any fashion. We do not need to compromise, or work in a "bi-partisan" way. We do not need to fear Faux.

Obama's approach may change after winning the general election.. but somehow I doubt it.

This really bothers me.

Where Evil Lurks

In places you might not expect;

FORT RILEY, Kan. — When Specialist Jeremy Hall held a meeting last July for atheists and freethinkers at Camp Speicher in Iraq, he was excited, he said, to see an officer attending.

But minutes into the talk, the officer, Maj. Freddy J. Welborn, began to berate Specialist Hall and another soldier about atheism, Specialist Hall wrote in a sworn statement. “People like you are not holding up the Constitution and are going against what the founding fathers, who were Christians, wanted for America!” Major Welborn said, according to the statement.

Major Welborn told the soldiers he might bar them from re-enlistment and bring charges against them, according to the statement.

Last month, Specialist Hall and the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, an advocacy group, filed suit in federal court in Kansas, alleging that Specialist Hall’s right to be free from state endorsement of religion under the First Amendment had been violated and that he had faced retaliation for his views. In November, he was sent home early from Iraq because of threats from fellow soldiers.

Eileen Lainez, a spokeswoman for the Defense Department, declined to comment on the case, saying, “The department does not discuss pending litigation.”

Specialist Hall’s lawsuit is the latest incident to raise questions about the military’s religion guidelines. In 2005, the Air Force issued new regulations in response to complaints from cadets at the Air Force Academy that evangelical Christian officers used their positions to proselytize. In general, the armed forces have regulations, Ms. Lainez said, that respect “the rights of others to their own religious beliefs, including the right to hold no beliefs.”

To Specialist Hall and other critics of the military, the guidelines have done little to change a culture they say tilts heavily toward evangelical Christianity. Controversies have continued to flare, largely over tactics used by evangelicals to promote their faith. Perhaps the most high-profile incident involved seven officers, including four generals, who appeared, in uniform and in violation of military regulations, in a 2006 fund-raising video for the Christian Embassy, an evangelical Bible study group.

“They don’t trust you because they think you are unreliable and might break, since you don’t have God to rely on,” Specialist Hall said of those who proselytize in the military. “The message is, ‘It’s a Christian nation, and you need to recognize that.’

It's odd.. these attempts at re-writing American history. It is, however, not surprising. Interesting, an officer in the military not understanding that the majority of what are considered American "founders" were not, in fact, Christians at all. The did, in fact, deny the divinity of Christ.

Not so surprising that the Christian freak brigade is hijacking the military and abusing non-freaks.

Jennifer recently posted an item on that very issue. The comments on the blog are amusing. I especially enjoy the comments where they disparage informative reading and critical thinking. It's classic loon-tastic, where they whine about something, and never actually explain what they want.

Long time readers will recall that I've written about this many times; here, here, here, here, and here (comments particularly good).

How sad this "Christian" major threatened to "bring charges" and deny reenlistment for atheist or agnostic soldiers. Sad, yes, but it is the Christian thing to do. This is why the "wall of separation" between church and state is so important. The theocracy would be crushing, as it is in their very nature to persecute the non-believers. They've been murdering innocents in the most heinous ways possible for centuries.

I've also noted not a peep from Jennifer about her righteous bigotry. As I've said, it's fortunate for her that she's so incapable of questioning the dogma of her own religion, so the dehumanizing beliefs are nothing to be ashamed of. On the contrary, it's a Jesus approved virtue!

"Pastor" John Hagee at an anti-gay Christian rally last week.

This is a tremendous social crisis, greater even than the issue of slavery.

But that's not "dehumanizing".. that's just Christian principles in action!! Hagee is the man that John McMaeverick was "proud" to have his endorsement.

So.. which is the greater "crisis" in America? Slavery? Gays? Hmmm.. I wonder..

And you all wonder why I get "angry"? Ya'll (to use the Texas slang) some sick mother fuckers...

"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Martin Luther King Jr.

Uh Huh

NEW YORK - Roger Clemens had a decade-long relationship with country star Mindy McCready that began when she was a 15-year-old aspiring singer and the pitcher was a Boston Red Sox ace, the Daily News reported.

Clemens' lawyer, Rusty Hardin, confirmed a long-term relationship but told the newspaper it was not sexual.

"He flatly denies having had any kind of an inappropriate relationship with her," Hardin said. "He's considered her a close family friend. ... He has never had a sexual relationship with her."

Just like he never took steriods or HGH.

They don't call him 'The Rocket' for nothing.

Glenzilla

I suppose it's not a surprise that the media used Pentagon spokesmen as their "military analysts" during the run up to, and post Iraq invasion.

The media passed them off as "independent analysts", when in fact they were working for the Pentagon. The Pentagon got caught.. and..

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The Pentagon has suspended a public affairs program that has come under fire for using retired military "media analysts" as surrogates to get out its messages on the Iraq war, a spokesman confirmed Monday.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the program was undergoing an internal review following criticism that the retired officers offered Pentagon talking points as their own during the run-up to the Iraq invasion and thereafter.
...
He said the Pentagon also interacted with bloggers, corporate leaders and education leaders as part of the effort to reach out to the public.

I like that, "reach out". LOL

They were willfully misleading the media in order to push the Bush narrative on the war. It's pretty simple actually. It's what we call "propaganda".

And now it's all fucked up. Go figure.

Hey.. I know.. we need another "orange alert".. or whatever the fuck colors they were using. Remember the summer before the '04 election, that fucking thing was going up and down more than a drunken Paris Hilton..

Duct Tape!!!!!

Islamofacaterraistas in the streets!!!

Pathetic

Failed

KABUL, Afghanistan – President Hamid Karzai survived an assassination attempt at a military parade in central Kabul on Sunday, when suspected Taliban insurgents fired mortars and bullets at the dignitaries assembled in the spectator stand.

One person was killed and 11 injured in the incident, Gen. Zaher Azimi, a military spokesman, confirmed soon afterward. Two parliamentarians in a section of the stands not far from the president were seen falling from their chairs on television footage as gunfire rang out. Loud explosions could be heard some distance from the parade ground.

Once again, how was invading Iraq a good idea? Not only has it been botched, but the diversion of the military from Afghanistan has left it a war torn mess as well.

If you don't stand behind the troops, feel free to stand in front of them?

So.. tell me again.. who is it that doesn't "support the troops" - and are you fuckers going to go stand in front of them now? By all means.. enjoy.

Smear

It's rather odd, this fixation on creating baseless smears that the right wing constantly uses in politics. We've seen Doug do it.. the whole Faux News treatment. Remember that ALL-CAPS slime-fest? He posted that approvingly..

The question I have - and I would dearly love for Doug to answer it.. because Sean Hannity sure as fuck is not going to.. Why do you do that?

What's the deal with highlighting Barack Obama's middle name?

What's with the pictures of him in traditional African garb?

I mean.. just why? Are you inherently dishonest that way? I ask that rhetorically, of course. They are, after all, only interested in propaganda.. and I laugh and laugh when Doug says something like this;

He's one of the few liberals I talk to that discusses the issues, rather than being in attack-mode twenty-four/seven like some that I know.

Wouldn't it better to criticize Obama's policy positions? You know.. the ones he actually holds? You can go to Obama's web page, to see what his positions are. Maybe write a thoughtful post on why he's wrong? I've linked directly to his issues page.

But, this Doug Gibbs, Faux News type baseless slandering has clearly lost it's effect. If that's all they've got, this election is going to be cake.

While I was getting the link to Obama's web site, I gave him another 50 bucks.

Contribution Processed
Thank you for your generous contribution. Want to get more involved? Head over to My.BarackObama.com where our growing set of tools can help you get organizing:

http://My.BarackObama.com

/update

For fucks.. sake. Doug just posted a video attacking Obama for not, as the video describes "voting to expand the death penalty for gang murders".

*sigh*

Gang murders are somehow different than regular murders?

The video goes on to claim that because of Obama's purported opposition to whatever the fuck that video is claiming - "when the time came to get tough, Obama chose to be weak".

Are they all a bunch of fucking apes that just want to solve problems by "getting tough" and killing more people? Ya.. that'll solve all the issues. I suppose anyone opposed to the death penalty is unqualified to be president, including all the Catholics..

I swear to god, I can't imagine how stupider these people can be.. baseless innuendo.. insisting on emasculating every Democrat.. and continually playing on people's fears that we're all going to die if we don't "get tough".. Get tough? What the fuck?

Did you all write your policy proposals with a crayon? That's the basis of your criticism? Is that the best video you can come up with?

That's right wing propaganda in action.. stupid as fuck it may be.. and stupid as fuck the people that keep pushing it... Here.. see for yourself.




Losers..

The Oppressed Normal

Mullet Jesus.

(my view is that Jesus is a fictional literary character, and so any sort of making fun of it is the same as making fun of.. say.. Batman)

...

I was going to leave this just as a comment in this thread, but as usual, what started out small turned into a long rant.

Steve and Dan have explained it pretty well.

It's just a reflexive thing.. this difference in terms. Jennifer just believes it should be called a "civil union" for a reason.. and that reason is the dehumanizing factor.

If I go on much more, I'll just be repeating myself.. but the arguments are word-for-word identical to those used to oppose inter-racial marriage. I think maybe I'll look up the transcripts from Loving v. Virginia to pull out the relevant passages that match.

As I said before... I don't particularly give a shit what it's called.. as long as it's called the same for everyone. They got it right in Massachusetts.. in Canada.. in many European nations..

But.. it is dehumanizing because it legitimizes the bigotry.. and your list of horrors is quite irrelevant.. as if only a physical assault can cause incredible pain. You really have no idea, and this belittling of what so many people have gone through is such a classic "conservative" trait. This is why I disdain that type of thinking, and those that are completely incapable of understanding why they are simply vile human beings.

You have no idea what Christianity.. what religion.. has done.. None. And you make religion a central part of your life, and devote every part of yourself to it.. and you are completely incapable of questioning it. Then you make up different rules for me, and then wonder how I can think your brand of Christianity is just like all the others? It is by definition the same.

If you lost your faith, you'd lose that which you think keeps you sane. That's why you can never face up it.. to question it.. to let it sink into you.

Look... you just don't get it.. I hope your son turns out gay so you might be forced to deal with it.. and think beyond that retarded rationalization that always gets thrown around... just as Dick Cheney had to do it.. and Dick Gephardt.. and the millions of other parents around the world. Ultimately, I think you'd harm your son's psyche just as you do your part of harming the psyche of all of us by your participation in societies debasement of gay men and women.

Your thinking will eventually be seen exactly as the "separate but equal" of the civil rights era.. and fortunately for you, you'll likely have no remorse for it.. but in the meantime, I make sure that I'm doing everything that I can to see that irrational style of thinking finally comes to an end.

And this is to say nothing for the Douglas V. Gibbs of the world... sick mother fuckers that they are. You at least get to think that you're somehow enlightened becuase you support "equal rights" even if it's a different set of rights for me.

I do have a lot of hope for the younger generations.. I know quite a few and I find them much more interesting then religious people.. who get bent about f-bombs and "angry" rants.. and who basically had their identity handed to them instead of deciding on their own.

Wednesday was "administrative professionals day", formerly secretaries day.. and John arranged to take his staff to a high-end restaurant.. and they asked him to bring me along.. They're great kids.. all less than 25 I think.. John is putting one through the college courses to get her real-estate license.. paying for the books.. everything.. and he'll teach her how to make a fuckload of money if that's what she wants to do. It never even occurs to them that there is something wrong with us.

Last Christmas, John bought her 4 kids the best holiday they've ever had, and it was a "secret" thing and to this day she doesn't know where it came from.

That's what we do for people who simply treat us like human beings. The rest can fuck off.. you won't get the benefit of being associated with us. It's not just about the money.. it's about doing the right thing by and for people.

When somebody tells me that the rules for them are different than the rules for me.. then my rules for them are quite different as well... and it's your fucking loss..

And that's really all I have to say about this. I don't like writing about gay issues, to be honest. I shouldn't have to. Once the law is the same for everyone.. once the bigotry dies.. then there's no reason to even have the discussion. Still, it just a small piece in the larger puzzle.

Holy Shit

Check it out.

That's just the funniest shit ever.. You're a real piece of work Doug... but I thank you for advancing the cause of progressive politics. Without the stupidest of loons, it would be slightly more challenging.

/edit

just saving this so I can gloat over it later..

John Murtha is going down!!!!
Douglas V. Gibbs | Homepage | 04.24.08 - 7:47 am | #

Ya!! he's going down like Mark Foley on a teenage page!!!1

Vile

I'd love to meet PZ Myers.. I get the sense that we'd get along famously.

He's picked up on the story of the Catholics digging up Padre Pio and putting him on display..

As Myers sez..

Christianity is a creepy death cult. Worshipping a rotting corpse is revolting.

Yeesh. They dug up the decayed body of an old fraud, dressed it up in a mask and fancy clothes, and parade it around and worship it…and use it to bilk desperate, sick people out of money? That's just vile.

Morbid freaks indeed.

I still want to see the Parade of Dead Popes!! I swear.. I'd pay money.. and video the whole thing. It would be great.

Not Exempt

OCALA, Fla. - After haggling with revenue agents, criminal investigators and eventually U.S. prosecutors for almost a decade, Wesley Snipes finally caught them by surprise.

Hours before he was to be sentenced Thursday for failing to file income taxes he insisted he never had to pay, the action star cut the federal government three checks for $5 million, delivered in court.

So taken aback were prosecutors that they first declined the cash. But by the end of the day, the government took the money and more — a maximum three-year sentence for its highest-profile criminal tax target in decades.

The action star of the "Blade" trilogy, "White Men Can't Jump," "Jungle Fever" and other films hasn't filed a tax return since 1998, the government alleged. Snipes and the IRS still must determine how much he owes, plus interest and penalties. The government alleged Snipes made at least $13.8 million for the three years in question, owing at least $2.7 million in back taxes on them alone.

At first I thought this was simply a case of a dumbass not paying his taxes.. but then..

Kahn was the founder of American Rights Litigators, and a successor group, Guiding Light of God Ministries, that purported to help members legally avoid paying taxes. Snipes was a dues-paying member of the organization, and Rosile, a de-licensed accountant, prepared Snipes' paperwork.

The very first thing I'll do in office when I am elected President.. is to have Congress send me a bill that removes tax-exempt status from all religious organizations.

Hit them where it hurts.. what they value the most.

Quote of the Day

Despite this, Obama is still the clear favorite for the nomination. But if he is the nominee, and runs this way in the general election — if it’s about the candidate’s awesomeness, not about why progressive policies make peoples’ lives better — it’s a formula for defeat. - Professor K

Stimulating

WASHINGTON - President Bush said tax rebates will start going out Monday, earlier than previously announced, and should help Americans cope with rising gasoline and food prices, as well as aid a slumping economy.

"Starting Monday, the effects of the stimulus will begin to reach millions of households across our country," Bush said Friday in remarks on the South Lawn of the White House.

"The money is going to help Americans offset the high prices we're seeing at the gas pump, the grocery store, and also give our economy a boost to help us pull out of this economic slowdown," Bush said.

"It's obvious our economy is in a slowdown. But, fortunately, we recognized the signs early and took action," Bush said.

That 300 bucks is going to make a HUGE difference for me.. you know. How much did I pay in taxes last year? It was something like 15k.. and now I'm being stimulated because that fucking chimpanzee of a president we have is giving me back $300 of my own money.. and somehow that's supposed to do something?

I think I'll buy some stuff from over-seas with it just to spite the bastards.

It all fails basic math. The fed taxes us, cause you know government has to be paid for (that's the theory anyway).. and then they turn around and spend millions of dollars to give us back a pittance of what we've already paid them.

And then the fucking leader of the free fucking world says that it'll aid with buying food.. buying gas.. and aid a "slumping" economy.

You know what it's going to do? For the vast majority of people, it's going to go towards paying debt, because the vast majority of people are IN debt.

The other thing that bugs the shit out of me is this idea that because I'm not married and I don't have kids that somehow I shouldn't get back the same amount of my own money that other people do. Talking about redistribution of wealth.. this is distributing wealth from the single child-less people to the breeders.

It's all so monumentally stupid.. and reason #425,231,545 why virtually every aspect of Conservative ideology is just fucking retarded. They fucked up the economy, and now want to give us all a piece of our own money to fix it?



Thanks for the check.. jackass. On second thought.. maybe I'll just give it to Barack Obama.

Bad Policy - Yet Again

WASHINGTON - The government's plan to crack down on illegal workers could cost employers more than $1 billion a year and legal workers billions in lost wages, a study commissioned by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says.

Those costs are enough to trigger a federal law that would require the Homeland Security Department to analyze more thoroughly the effect of its proposal, said Richard Belzer, a consultant hired by the chamber to do the study. It was made available to The Associated Press on Thursday.

The department's proposed "no match" rule would require employers to fire workers who can't resolve mismatches between their name and Social Security number. The chamber opposes the proposal.

Belzer's study will be among public comments submitted to the Homeland Security Department on the proposal. The department could adopt the proposal after reviewing the comments. The deadline for comments is Friday.

Belzer, a former economist with the Office of Management and Budget, looked at overall costs and multiplied the average costs by the number of employers in each category. He also used the Homeland Security's estimates that 2 percent of legal workers a year would lose their jobs because they can't resolve the Social Security mismatch.

That adds up to between 37,000 to 137,000 unable to get work. Belzer estimated their lost wages would be from $8 billion to $37 billion.

Is there even one "conservative" policy position that does NOT wreak havock on everything it touches?

Out of their fucking minds insane.

Asshat Quote of the Day

You play the victim very well. - Jennifer

Being upset at the dehumanization of an entire category of human beings.. millions and millions of them.. is "play(ing) the victim card".

Obviously she cannot be reached.. but when I get some more time (I've already posted too much today), I'll take apart the whole thing, for the benefit of those whose characteristics are not defined externally, and by something completely devoid of any rational thought.

For what it's worth.. and as much as I bag on religious people and conservatives.. I really don't think they can help it. It's simply a condition of one's own makeup. Just as one person can comprehend and appreciate a chamber piece from G.F. Handel, some prefer Achey Breaky Heart.

I still can't get over how John looks identical to Handel - minus the funky wig.

So Not Kidding

Yow..

Falling U.S. home prices and a lack of available credit may result in foreclosures on 6.5 million loans by the end of 2012 ...

The foreclosures could put 12.7 percent of all residential borrowers out of their homes ...

Credit Suisse expects home prices will fall by 10 percent in 2008 and 5 percent in 2009, before rebounding.

The pace of foreclosures is still accelerating, and there are quite a few years before it settles back into it's normal rate.

Deep Thought of the Day

The arguments that Christians used in defending laws prohibiting inter-racial marriage are exactly the same that they use to defend laws prohibiting same-sex marriage.

The Supreme Court struck down those laws in 1968, in the case of Loving vs. Virginia. At the time, over 70% of the American population were opposed to inter-racial marriage.

They didn't get to vote on it.

The Racial Integrity Act began to crumble on June 12, 1967 when the United States Supreme Court decided Loving v. Virginia. The portion of the law which had prohibited marriages between "whites" and "nonwhites" was found to be contrary to the guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

In 1975, Virginia's General Assembly repealed the rest of the Racial Integrity Act. In 1979 the Sterilization Act was repealed. In 2001, a bill (HJ607ER[22]) passed by a vote of 85-10 in the House and 40-0 in the Senate. The bill expressed the General Assembly's profound regret for its role in the eugenics movement. On May 2, 2002, Governor Mark Warner issued a statement also expressing "profound regret for the Commonwealth's role in the eugenics movement," specifically naming Virginia's 1924 compulsory sterilization legislation[23].

But don't expect any "profound regret" from the Christians any time soon.

Extinction?

WASHINGTON - Human beings may have had a brush with extinction 70,000 years ago, an extensive genetic study suggests.

The human population at that time was reduced to small isolated groups in Africa, apparently because of drought, according to an analysis released Thursday.

The report notes that a separate study by researchers at Stanford University estimated the number of early humans may have shrunk as low as 2,000 before numbers began to expand again in the early Stone Age.

"This study illustrates the extraordinary power of genetics to reveal insights into some of the key events in our species' history," Spencer Wells, National Geographic Society explorer in residence, said in a statement. "Tiny bands of early humans, forced apart by harsh environmental conditions, coming back from the brink to reunite and populate the world. Truly an epic drama, written in our DNA."

Well, that can't be true because we know evolution is a myth.. and besides.. the Bible tells us that mankind dates back 6000 years.. so there was no "human population" 70,000 years ago. That's what Doug tells us.. and Jesus tells us that too.. and mankind lived with the dinasaurs.. and DNA analysis and carbon dating are tools of the Devil..

and I give up on trying to make the loons realize how in-fucking-sane they are.. Let's just make fun of them.

*Sigh*

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Programs teaching U.S. schoolchildren to abstain from sex have not cut teen pregnancies or sexually transmitted diseases or delayed the age at which sex begins, health groups told Congress on Wednesday.

The Bush administration, however, voiced continuing support for such programs during a hearing before a House of Representatives panel even as many Democrats called for cutting off federal money for so-called abstinence-only instruction.

"Vast sums of federal monies continue to be directed toward these programs. And, in fact, there is evidence to suggest that some of these programs are even harmful and have negative consequences by not providing adequate information for those teens who do become sexually active," Dr. Margaret Blythe of the American Academy of Pediatrics told the committee.

This isn't just about sex-ed.. it's about Conservative ideology. It fails.. over and over and over.

This is also directly related to why some people's heads explode when they see "profane" language and are instantly repulsed by "anger". They interpret sex the same exact way.. as some dirty little secret.. and they can't have kids knowing about sex because they assume every kid is just as dysfunctional as they are.

Ultimately, Bush funneling "vast sums of federal monies" to religious freaks. That's the whole point of "faith based initiatives". It's all a big failure. What's it going to take for you nuts to realize that you're voting against your own self-interests when you vote Republican?

Is this is reason #2,421 why "average Christians" are dangerous.. and why religion is dangerous. It has a negative impact on the health of children..

Some "family values" you got going there.. loons. Isn't it just typical of Bush to ignore the results of his failed policies and continue them anyway? It's no wonder that Bush is the most despised president in 70+ years. That's Conservatism for you..

/update

Rep. John Duncan, a Tennessee Republican, said that it seems "rather elitist" that people with academic degrees in health think they know better than parents what type of sex education is appropriate. "I don't think it's something we should abandon," he said of abstinence-only funding.

For.. fucks.. sake.

Aren't the conservatives completely embarrassed with the level of stupidity?

Stupid As..

A fifty stone bear described by his owner as "the best-trained grizzly in the business" has killed one of his handlers during a rehearsal for a film stunt.

Rocky, seen wrestling with Will Ferrell in the recent movie Semi-Pro, was with three trainers when he suddenly lunged at 39-year-old Stephan Miller.

The 7ft grizzly clamped its jaws around Miller's neck and sank its teeth into him.

"It's ... killing me. We were brothers," Randy Miller said, close to tears.

Could it be because.. a bear's natural instinct is to kill you? Maybe that's it?

I find it amusing when people put themselves in mortal risk of wild animals for the purposes of entertainment and making a buck. Nominate that yahoo for a Darwin award.

A while back I watched a documentary called Grizzly Man - based on the life of Timothy Treadwell. Story goes like this.. Weird guy is into bears.. hangs out near them for 13 years in Alaska.. and one day he and his "girlfriend" are eaten by some bears.. all recorded on tape. The end.

It's sad and LOLtastic at the same time.

/update

Scott Adams points out a story of a priest who tried to set a record for balloon powered flight. He hasn't been heard from since.

As Adams puts it;

But a balloon ride, way up there next to heaven? That’s total smite bait.

Reminds me of Padre Pio.. they could.. you know.. dig up all the Pope's and affix them to balloons and float them around the world.

Pray to the Dead Body

SAN GIOVANNI ROTONDO, Italy (Reuters) - The exhumed body of Padre Pio, a saint considered a miracle worker by his devotees, attracted thousands of pilgrims on Thursday when it went on display 40 years after his death.

Padre Pio is one of the Catholic Church's most popular saints and during his lifetime the Italian monk was said to have had the stigmata, the bleeding wounds of Jesus' crucifixion on his hands and feet.

The economy of this southern town revolves around the cult of Padre Pio and heaving crowds waited to see his body, displayed in a crystal, marble and silver sepulcher in the crypt of the monastery where he spent most of his life.

His face was reconstructed with a lifelike silicone mask of the type used in wax museums because it was apparently too decomposed to show when the body was exhumed.

"He seems like he is sleeping. Even if they had to re-do the face, its better remembering him this way than looking at a slab of cold marble," said Domenico Masone, deputy mayor of Pietralcina, the town where Padre Pio was born.

Some 15,000 devotees attended a Mass said by Cardinal Jose Saraiva Martins, head of the Vatican department that oversees the Catholic Church's saint-making process, before the body went on display in the afternoon.

"He knows what I want from him," said Antonio Zimbaldi, 19, who attended Mass with his face, except for his lips, covered with white gauze.

"I have been devoted to him for as long as I can remember." Zimbaldi's entire body was burned in a fire caused by a gas explosion two years ago.

The body of the bearded Capuchin monk was exhumed from a crypt on March 3 and found to be in "fair condition" after 40 years. Since then a team of medical examiners and biochemists has worked to preserve and reconstruct the corpse.

How extraordinarily sad.. for the conditions that cause people to think a dead body is going to do something for them..

The Catholic's have to have their "stars" you know.. just like a baseball team.. and if you have to dig them up to get people interested again.. then that's what you do.

Wonder how much the church is collecting in "donations" to see a decomposed body? If it goes well, they should dig up the last dead Pope, prop him up in the Pope-Mobile, and drive him around asking for more money.

Heck.. why not a Dead Saints exhibition?

/update

Police in Congo have arrested 13 suspected sorcerers accused of using black magic to steal or shrink men's penises after a wave of panic and attempted lynchings triggered by the alleged witchcraft.

As Myers says..

Unfortunately, it's not very funny since deluded people are blaming their tiny, impotent penises on random people and beating and lynching them.

..reason #42,313 why religion is dangerous.. some random guy with a tiny dick might beat you to death.

/update 2

Science proves that astrology is a crock of shit. However..

Some of the most popular figures in the field, such as Russell Grant, Mystic Meg and Shelley von Strunckel, can earn £600,000 or more a year.

A single profitable astrology website can be worth as much as £50 million.

Like religion and other similar types of "belief", it's all about the money.. big money.. and a lot of people are too stupid to understand that. Or maybe they're just desperate.

John once dragged me to see John Edward.. I felt dirty afterwards.. John just wanted to hear from his dead mom, and I understand that.. but Edward is a fraud.. and worse, he's knowingly stealing money from people. Doesn't mean that John's mom, or mine for that matter.. is not somewhere else, soul intact. It just means that John Edward is not going to be channeling them anytime soon.

He's the Biggest Douche in the Universe.

Shove it Down Their Throat

Sully:

The chatter suggests that California's State Supreme Court may mandate equal marriage rights in June. The governor has said he'll abide by the court; the legislature has already voted to extend civil marriage to gay couples twice. But those who believe that gay couples are a threat to social stability and to heterosexual families have managed to get enough signatures to get a measure on the ballot this fall that would ban all such marriages. It would effectively forcibly divorce all those gay couples who got married in June by November.

In the middle of this campaign, we could be facing a major civil rights battle - in which all the major candidates oppose equality for gay couples. Those of us who do not believe that our relationships are evil or destructive of society had better get our armor on. The attack is imminent.

No reason to be "angry" if you are forced to get a divorce. You chose to be that way, after all.

I wouldn't pull you out of a burning building..

at least not right at this moment

McMaverick

April 23 (Bloomberg) -- Republican John McCain, saying the nation is in a recession and ``families are hurting,'' retraced Lyndon Johnson's steps in eastern Kentucky and pledged to mount a war on poverty different from that waged by the former Democratic president.

Interesting.. "Conservative Republican" policies created this "recession", and more "Conservative Republican" is the key to fixing it?

Well, that's just retarded.

I'm sure Doug is going to be very upset to see that McCain gives a shit about people living in poverty. I mean.. if somebody actually cares, that means the poverty stricken people won't have any reason to show any personal responsibility.. it'll be like rewarding failure.

Thank Gorak I'm a Liberal.. this shit is just so easy...

Coming soon (but maybe not until next week), a series of reports on the superiority of Liberalism versus Conservatism.

I will highlight every major quality-of-life factor.. and rank them by state.. in order to compare and contrast blue (liberal) states versus red (conservative/religious) states.

Guess which wins, by every single measure?

``Government has a role to play in helping people who, through no fault of their own, are having a hard time,''

Holy Fuck.. Doug is going to faaarrraaaaeeeeeeek!!!

/update

Woah..

The television advertisement you are planning to air degrades our civics and distracts us from the very real differences we have with the Democrats. In the strongest terms, I implore you to not run this advertisement. ... There is no doubt that we will draw sharp contrasts with the Democrats on fundamental issues critical to the future course of our country. But we need not engage in political tactics that only seek to divide the American people. Once again, it is imperative that you withdraw this offensive advertisement.

They're going to keep running it..

It's a smear job, typical of that type that Doug likes to use with Obama. I'm going to post more about this Republican desperation tomorrow.

What a lovely bunch.. these conservatives... so fine.. and upstanding.. and righteous in Jesus name.. you can just see the morality..

They aren't the biggest bunch of hypocritical jack-asses that have ever disgraced American politics. Oh no.. by definition, because they stuck their head up Jesus' ass.. they're are righteous!

Win Ben Stein's Stupidity

Nice review of Expelled, here.

There were many nations, such as Brazil, where Darwinism led to no political ideology. There were some such as Britain which embraced Darwinism but saw a considerable number of their population killed trying to eliminate Nazism. There were other nations, such as the Soviet Union, where Darwinism was seen as so dangerous and subversive to state sponsored dreams of social engineering that those who espoused it were killed or exiled and a complete biological fairy tale, Lysenkoism, put into classrooms and agricultural policy ultimately leading to the deaths of millions from starvation.

Over and over and over.. religious viewpoints leading to millions of dead. It goes on and on and on.

But.. that's not the New and Improved Vastly Superior I'm Not Hateful version of Christianity that we have today.. Oh.. the new flavor is completely different than the old flavor.. they have nothing in common what-so-ever... and there's no reason at all to be angry about all the millions of people killed in the past. The past is the past and it's not like that anymore!

Myers has a story of a science teacher evangelizing in a public school.. who will no doubt be fired.. and who will no doubt claim persecution.

The issue isn't his religion, but his behavior. I love the part of the teacher demonstrating electrical reactions by burning a cross into his student's skin.

As Mysers says;

And the cross thing is just plain bizarre. Burning religious symbols into students' flesh is not a way to teach them about the physics of electricity; what next, will he teach about the chemistry of oxidation reactions by burning heretical students at a stake? Even religious parents in the community are disturbed by this kook:

My mama always said.. crazy is as crazy does.

Lot of crazy fuckers, even in public schools. I'd be very wary if I had a child in public school.. but.. you know.. The fine Christians of Texas don't think I'm human enough to adopt and raise a child... no reason for me to be angry or anything about it... right? John and I could afford every advantage.. private schools.. the very best colleges.. any sort of private instruction.. inheritance of a highly successful business..

but the Christians of Texas think it's better if a child remain uncared for, parentless and left to fend for themselves.

But I'm not angry...

Ultimate Fighting Jesus

Driscoll put this bluntly in his sermon "Death by Love" at the 2006 Resurgence theology conference (available at TheResurgence.com). According to Driscoll, "real men" avoid the church because it projects a "Richard Simmons, hippie, queer Christ" that "is no one to live for [and] is no one to die for." Driscoll explains, "Jesus was not a long-haired … effeminate-looking dude"; rather, he had "callused hands and big biceps." This is the sort of Christ men are drawn to—what Driscoll calls "Ultimate Fighting Jesus."

If he's so eager to die for the Action Jesus, with Kung Fu Grip.. would be nice if he just got on with it.

This sort of thing is why I say that most Christians are not really Christians. They're just really violent freak type, hyper-masculine, uneducated bozos.

.. which brings me to PZ Myers. Myers is one of those "liberal elite" that dominate University life, and brain wash the nice Christian kids.

By the way.. when somebody says that "evolutionary theory" is just a "theory".. you can remind them that gravity is just a "theory" as well, and ask them to demonstrate their "faith" by leaping off a tall building..

As I've said many times.. I consider myself a "Deist". The short of it is, I think that every reaction has to have a cause and whatever the cause was that spun existence into being is my "god". I call it Gorak.

This god may or may not be self-aware. Nobody can know. And that's it.

Normally, I make a distinction between spirituality and organized religion. I find the former mostly benign and the latter the greatest evil ever visited on the human race. Myers, on the other hand, finds any form of spirituality not only inane, but dangerous. I can see his point.

"Faith" requires a person to believe something is absolutely true just because they are told it is, completely devoid of any compelling evidence. That sets a dangerous precedent where we, as humans, actually value a person's willingness to believe in made up shit. Not only do they believe it, they make it a central theme of their life and feel a compulsion to tell other people about the made up thing that they believe. We're supposed to think "wow, that's awesome.. you totally believe that's true and live your life by it and think everyone else should as well.. totally awesome!!". Uh.. no.

That is how people end up believing Iraq had WMD's and Saddam had something to do with 9/11. That method of thinking leads to death and destruction. That's an extremely persuasive point that Myers makes. I think the skepticism is a better value than faith. Demonstrable truth is better than rhetoric and fiction.

When somebody makes an argument about something, and after thinking about it their view makes more sense than mine, I'll adopt their view.. and I'm going to adopt Myers point of view on that one. He's simply right.

So.. where does that leave me with Gorak? I don't think there is a contradiction - because I don't ascribe any nature to Gorak. I just think every action has a cause, and that is just one of those universal truths.

I don't want to get into the chicken/egg debate because that just makes my head hurt. It's like pressing two mirrors close together and expecting to see only one image. If Gorak is a cause, what caused Gorak, right? Gorak can be the infinite cause, and apparently there is no first cause.

The point is, I don't have to have a definition because there can be no rational definition for something that completely lacks in compelling evidence.. so I don't think my personal view of "god" validates believing in made up bullshit.

Jennifer asks in a comment;

I have a question for you. What has my religion done to hurt anyone? I am not talking Islam, or the religious extremists, but simply me and my beliefs. Have I ever called you "sick" because your gay. Have I ever said that you are a horrible person, or that you don't deserve equal rights. I can truly see your hatred for some of the evangelists or extremists but what about the average Christian?

Asked and answered.. as the lawyers would say..

I did answer the question, here... in that "morals" post, but I'll expound on the theme by demonstration how morally abosolutist views dehumanize people.

Jennifer honestly seems completely confounded how anyone could draw a parallel between her religion and the rain of blood that religion has caused through history.

A quick aside.. I've been watching The Tudors on Showtime.. and it's great. It's a drama based on the life of Henry VIII. It's estimated that Henry had 75,000 people executed during the Reformation. Henry was not a Secular Humanist.

Getting back to Jennifer - what Jennifer calls "extremists" is simply what religion is. Her brand of so-called "peaceful" religion is the anomaly, not the blood soaked variety of most religious adherents. Ultimately, the way of thinking is the same - and so the pain that is caused is the same.

People like Jennifer are absolutely convinced that Islam is different than Christianity.. it's different than the Crusaders.. or the Inquisition.. or any number of religious atrocities. Heck, Jennifer even further sets herself apart from Christians like Doug because she won't call me "sick".

.. but she still doesn't think I'm fully human because she doesn't think I should get married.. and STILL thinks that somehow she is different than all the rest.

no no.. it's all the same.

Your way of thinking enables the atrocities. It legitimizes them... and I can't fathom how anyone could possibly call themselves a Christian after the centuries of horrors that it has caused. Short memories perhaps?

What about the average Christian? Well, it's the same as the average Muslim, or the average Hindu.. they are morally absolutist, and are actively harming society. It's harming me, and people I care about.

So. the "gay marriage" issue then..

Doug is lying when he claims that being gay is a "choice". It's just like being left-handed, or having green eyes. Therefore, whatever justification you use to exclude gay people from any of societies institutions is exactly the same as if you said a left-handed person is excluded. Imagine.. everyone with green eyes is not allowed to get married? Nice..

There's a chance that one of Jennifer's children may be gay. There's a chance that Doug's daughter might be a lesbian. I take great solace in these possibilities because I love the emotional turmoil it causes them. The greater the pain, the better.. because their way of thinking has caused even greater pain on the rest of us.

Different freaks handle it differently. Dick Cheney simply keeps his mouth shut. In 2000, his daughter Mary and her partner were not allowed on the stage at the Republican Convention. His other daughter, the straight one, was.. with her husband and children. Why not Mary? Christianity. It's Jennifer's way of thinking. It's just another form of torture - this one mental... and Christians know all about torture. That's their specialty.

The weird thing is that Mary Cheney continued to work for these people. That's what I refer to as the gay "Jews for Hitler". I don't get it. They demean Mary Cheney, and she's quite willing to be nice and take it... and even work to support them.

I'm not.

What kind of morally bankrupt individual, like Dick Cheney, can exclude his own daughter from the activities of his life that he includes another daughter? The immorality is stunning...

Doug is all proud that he's going to have Alan Keyes on his "show". Alan Keyes' daughter, Maya, turned out to be a lesbian - much to the chagrin of her father. Again, Doug thinks she just "chose" to be a lesbian, just like Mary Cheney. (have I said that Doug is one of the dumbest people on the face of the planet lately?). Anyway.. Alan Keyes, the "Christian".. threw his daughter out of his family, stopped talking to her, stopped paying her college tuition.. and left her stranded. He is, after all, a very devout Christian. I know Jesus would have played it exactly the same way.

Imagine the psychic horror of having your own father do that to you, simply for being as you are. This is the same psychic horror (albeit a bit toned down) that every gay person feels when people like Jennifer tell us that we cannot participate in the greatest institutions of love that mankind has.

Many young gay people take their own lives every year, rather than live with the shame and humiliation and degradation.. from people like Doug.. and people like Jennifer. It's all a result of religion.. and Jennifer wonders "what about average Christians?" A small amount of the dead's blood is on your hands. A small part of the degradation of our own humanity, that every single gay person feels, is on your hands.

And Doug thinks people "choose" to put themselves through that.. stupid fuck.

This is why "average Christians" are dangerous. They have absolutely no idea what they are doing. You don't think for yourself when you decided if gay people should be able to marry. You let Christianity answer that question for you.. and you're completely oblivious to the moral implications of that.

And that's why PZ Myers is correct. The valuing of "belief", as opposed to rational thought will always lead to destruction.. be it wars.. or the casting out of a young daughter, scaring her for life.

And this is why I will not lift a finger to help you.. because I know what it's like to be hated.. to be scorned.. to having the barrel of a .357 magnum in my mouth when I was 17 years old.. because people like you think there's some reason why I'm not like other people.. why I'm not human..

And to top it off.. you wonder why I get "angry". Do you have any idea how many of my friends died from AIDS, and because of people like you, their partners couldn't even be by their side when they died? People like you think they brought it on themselves and people like you think they somehow deserved it?

You probably love your husband.. and it has never occurred to you what it would be like if the citizens of your own country told you that you couldn't marry him.. because you have curly hair.. or whatever stupid fucking reason they come up with. And you're supposed to be nice to them when they say it?

No.. you work to destroy the reasons why they say it.. because you know in your heart that it is evil worse than death.. it's dehumanizing.

The nice thing about the United States is that despite people like you, I can make my own way. I can be with who I want despite you.. and I can finally come to realize that I'm perfectly normal (although far more intelligent than you).. and while you can use your majority of hatred to keep us from having hospital visitation rights.. or inheritance rights.. or any of the other 1000+ benefits of federal law that you take for granted.. I can be better than you despite that, and because of that. I can be more understanding.. more compassionate.. more generous.. more moral.. more human.. but ONLY for those who include me, and the people I care about, fully in the human race. The rest of you can fuck off.

Why the fuck should I even bother trying to "persuade" these people of anything? They don't deserve it after what they've done. Other people disagree with me on that one.. and if they want to try and change somebody's mine.. fine.. but not me. I wouldn't try to change their mind any more than I would try and change the mind of a Klansman.. Fuck 'em.

I know there is nothing wrong with me, despite you. Some gay people never come to that realization, and carry shame and humiliation with them their entire lives. They'll beg and plead to be recognized and treated fairly. Not me. I take what I want regardless what you think of it.

Just like a good Christian.. you have absolutely no idea what you have done. That's why I'm so excited to see your political movement being destroyed.. and your religious movement swept into the dustbin of history.

And if all else fails.. we'll just buy some nice property somewhere in Europe and have a grand time.

Personal Responsibility

I'm thinking of creating a new blog, to move off these posts that I write about Doug from this blog. I'd call it Douggie Watch, in honor of Sully Watch, a now-defunct blog documenting the literary atrocities of Andrew Sullivan. My Doug posts tend to get really long, and sort of distracts from the tone of the rest of what I'm doing here. It's something I'm thinking about anyway.

I do want to touch on Doug's latest post, which is an exploration of his daughter's academic performance. The details are irrelevant, but I've noticed yet another Doug arguing methodology.

All that, just because she decided to take personal responsibility. Amazing what self-reliance can accomplish.

He is simply in love with analogies, and uses them constantly. The point is to create the impression of a different ideological viewpoint about the topic. In this case, he demonstrates that "working hard" is the path to success. The implication is that this is a "Conservative" principle, as opposed to "Liberalism" that does not support that principle.

I often accuse Doug of arguing against a point that nobody has raised, and this is a classic example. The idea that liberals are opposed to effort and achievement is quite silly. I don't know anyone who views apathy or ignorance or laziness as a virtue.

You really want to talk about academic achievement? Why do you think Universities are considered to be dominated by the "liberal elite"? Is it because liberals cheated their way through college?

Does Doug and his wife want to compare academics and success with me and John? That would be a really amusing comparison... and we're pretty damn liberal. I think John's business card has something like ten acronyms appended to it, separated by commas. I'm employed as a professional engineer for the federal government.

Doug admits he was not very good at math.. I completed 26 semester hours of differential calculus, matrix algebra, advanced engineering mathematics, 18 hours of advanced physics, including statics, dynamics, and thermodynamics... and numerous other courses, and this was just for the CORE of the program.

I just got a call from John.. He made $45,000 today. His 1.4 mil listing closed this morning. He wanted to let me know that he's taking his staff out to dinner tomorrow night.. so I wouldn't stuff myself at lunch and not be hungry.

I'm not writing this as some sort of one-upsmanship. I'm not bragging. It's just the facts of the matter, in the context of Doug's insistence that liberals do not value achievement and success. Doug claims that liberals have some disdain for wealthy people - and we ARE the wealthy people.

The difference is, we don't disdain people who are not able to go to college, or own a successful business. People are not worth less because they don't fit Doug's ideal. People do the best they can, and sometimes could use a hand to get on their feet, or even to just get something to eat. Those of us that are incredibly fortunate to be in the position we are have an obligation as human beings to contribute to the greater welfare of our nation and the world.

We do NOT assume the worst of a person.. we do NOT assume they are just lazy.. we do NOT assume they are just trying to "get something" from the government. There ARE provisions in the administration of all government entitlement programs to investigate fraud and abuse.

What perplexes me is that so often, Conservatives vote against their own self interest.

I got this picture from John the other day. He was attending a foreclosure eviction - with the constable. The owner of the house stopped paying the mortgage, and had a couple of months warning of the foreclosure. Most times, people who get foreclosed on make an arrangement with the bank that owns the property to vacate the property in exchange for compensation. It's called "cash for keyes". This individual chose to ignore all advanced warning, and so had to be escorted out along with all property.




It's hard to see in the pic, but the bumper sticker says Bush/Cheney. This is the same Busy/Cheney team that pushed the bankruptcy bill through Congress.. which limited a debtors ability to declare bankruptcy.. bankruptcy which could exclude a person's home from foreclosure.

I just don't get why anyone supports a "Conservative" agenda, when unless you make a shit-ton of money, you're voting against your own interests. Is it just stupidity?

/update

And Shazaam! Douggie Watch is born.

Video of the Day

An engineer's guide to cats..

Brilliant!

Gotta love the Brits;

A CHARITY set up by an ardent Christian to fight slavery and the opium trade has identified a new social evil of the 21st century - religion.

A poll by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation uncovered a widespread belief that faith - not just in its extreme form - was intolerant, irrational and used to justify persecution.

Pollsters asked 3,500 people what they considered to be the worst blights on modern society, updating a list drawn up by Rowntree, a Quaker, 104 years ago.

The responses may well have dismayed him. The researchers found that the “dominant opinion” was that religion was a “social evil”.

Many participants said religion divided society, fuelled intolerance and spawned “irrational” educational and other policies.

One said: “Faith in supernatural phenomena inspires hatred and prejudice throughout the world, and is commonly used as justification for persecution of women, gays and people who do not have faith.”

Many respondents called for state funding of church schools to be ended.

The findings contrast with Rowntree’s “scourges of humanity”, which included poverty, war, slavery, intemperance, the opium trade, impurity and gambling.

Poverty and drugs remain, but are joined by issues such as family breakdown, young people’s behaviour and fears over immigration.

Tom Butler, the Bishop of Southwark, rejected the indictment of faith. He said: “People meeting together, week after week, for worship, support and education in church, synagogue, temple, gurdwara and mosque can not only help people build local community but can teach children to become good citizens.”

However, Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, said he was “extremely pleased”.

“Britain has had it with religion,” he said.

I am extremely pleased as well. The decline of religion is an unstoppable trend, and as usual, it's the Europeans leading the way.

I'm just floored that so many of the English "get it" - with respect to the danger of organized religion, even those that insist they are "not like that" over and over.

I'll have more to say about this, in the context of "gay rights" later this week. In the meantime, we'll just bask in the glow of the realization that the "worst blights" of the world are plainly recognized for the evil they represent.

God's Solution

My inner conservative, after a long absence, has made an appearance. He's pretty angry, but in a Godly and wholesome way, so it shouldn't offend anybody.

/update

Reading the RWL blog again, I'm reminded of this. I wonder, has it happened yet Doug? I suppose it's like Armageddon.. you can't really know when it's going to happen, just that it is.

As I stated in a previous post, Islamic Coalition, with Russian Support, is ready to launch an assault against Israel, I firmly believe that Iran, Syria, Russia, and a few other key players, are going to launch an attack against Israel in the effort to wipe her off the map, and the coalition will lose badly.

Quote of the Day

Here, Bullet

If a body is what you want,
then here is bone and gristle and flesh.
Here is the clavicle-snapped wish,
the aorta's opened valves, the leap
thought makes at the synaptic gap.
Here is the adrenaline rush you crave,
that inexorable fight, that insane puncture
into heat and blood. And a dare you to finish
what you've started. Because here, Bullet,
here is where I complete the word you bring
hissing through the air, here is where I moan
the barrel's cold esophagus, triggering
my tongue's explosives for the rifling I have
inside of me, each twist of the round
spun deeper, because here, Bullet,
here is where the world ends, every time.

-- By Brian Turner (A poem currently being passed around among American soldiers in Iraq)

The Great Wall of Text

We must remember, too, that the conflict in Iraq is but one battle of many in a much larger war against the Islamic Jihad. In the five years we have been in Iraq we have lost a little more than 4,000 soldiers. Tens of thousands of Iraqi's and insurgents have died, a vast majority as a result of in-fighting and foreign trained terrorists trying to seize control of Iraq and return it to a terrorist state. The total death toll in Iraq according to many liberal sites is slightly over 90,000. Of course, these numbers anger the liberal left. They anger me too. If the Islamic Jihad did not declare war on us, we would not have to lose our young men and women while fighting this war. The liberal left fails to recognize that the Holy War was declared against us! And they fail to see that in any other war we have participated in the death tolls were in the millions, not tens of thousands as in the case of the Global War on Terror. Also, we must realize that compared to the number of deaths we would have lost in more attacks against the U.S., of which we have not suffered because of us taking the fight to the enemy, this number is relatively small. Remember, 3,000 American lives were snuffed out in one single day by the Islamic Jihad on 9/11. Had we not responded, how many other attacks claiming thousands of innocent Americans would have followed 9/11?

Well.. you know who. It's a two-for type of day. It's been a long time since Doug has pissed himself that badly.

First point I would make; learn to use paragraphs. Please, in the name of all that is holy (that would be Gorak), please do not abuse the senses of those that dare look into the abyss and suffer the onslaught of run-on-sentences and massive paragraphs of disjointed concepts.

Quite simply, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. They had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda. They had no WMD's. There was no "Islamic Jihad" in Iraq.

Doug does not substantiate his claim that "Tens of thousands of Iraqi's and insurgents have died", and "The total death toll in Iraq according to many liberal sites is slightly over 90,000."

Whenever somebody uses the word "many", that's a tip-off that they're pulling it out of their ass.

The Lancet study's figure of 654,965 excess deaths through the end of June 2006 is based on household survey data. The estimate is for all excess violent and nonviolent deaths. That also includes those due to increased lawlessness, degraded infrastructure, poorer healthcare, etc.. 601,027 deaths (range of 426,369 to 793,663 using a 95% confidence interval) were estimated to be due to violence. 31% of those were attributed to the Coalition, 24% to others, 46% unknown. The causes of violent deaths were gunshot (56%), car bomb (13%), other explosion/ordnance (14%), air strike (13%), accident (2%), unknown (2%). A copy of a death certificate was available for a high proportion of the reported deaths (92 per cent of those households asked to produce one)

The act of 19, mostly Saudi, men, acting together, killing a large number of Americans in a terrible act constitutes a "holy war"? Entire religions at war? Umm.. okay..

Doug conflates many issues into one over-arching goal; the "Holy War". In that sense, Afghanistan and Iraq are just stepping stones into Iran, Syria, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. Their goal is a much broader conflict than we see today. He's going to be very upset when the conflict does not escalate, because you can't have Judgement day without the Armageddon, right? I might have the terms of the bizarre "end days" thing mixed up..

Doug also likes to use slogans, such as "taking the fight to the enemy". I'm surprised he didn't use the "fight them there, so we don't have to fight them here" slogan as well.. as if the "Jihadists" flypaper theory actually makes the least bit of sense. Ask yourself, if you were a "Jihadist" hell bent on the destruction of America, would you go to Iraq to fight the most powerful military in the world, or would you just do like the "illegal immigrants" do and find some soft targets?

There is zero evidence that any military action has been deterrent to further terrorists acts in the US. It's simply impossible to draw that conclusion.

It's also worth noting that the "liberal left", by over whelming numbers, supported the campaign in Afghanistan, to dismantle the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. Iraq has been a diversion from that, and the fact remains that Bin Laden is still at large.

The liberal left seems to think that the Islamic Jihad against The West is somehow America's fault, or it is a minor thing that we need not trifle with. The leaders of the Democratic Party, and the anti-war groups that receive the media's attention, have determined that if we simply pull out of the region all bye-gones will be bye-gones, war around the world will suddenly stop, and then we can all get together, hold hands, and skip through fields of posies singing "Imagine" by John Lennon, or kumbaya.

Nice straw man argument again Doug.. It's silly.. simplistic, propagandist.. inane.. and on and on.

It's like you typed that paragraph with a crayon.

The "liberal left" quite well understands the implications of radical Jihad, and we're quite aware that Iraq had NOTHING to do with it, despite whatever wacky web sites you can link to.. or assertions that you can make that Iraq's WMD's were somehow shipped to Syria - or any of the other bizarre claims that try and create a link, that even the president has said doesn't exist.

Liberals also understand that terrorism isn't a zero-sum game. If you kill one terrorist, that doesn't mean there is one less. You may create two by that action. Effective and mature reasoning would indicate a vigorous intelligence and precautions, while at the same time resolving central conflicts that create the dissension. United States foreign policy is not completely benign, but it is not a justification to violence either. The English did suffer the "terroism" of the Irish Republican Army, but then the English did invade and occupy Northern Ireland.

How do you think they resolved that conflict? Did the English finally manage to kill all the IRA members?

In Doug's mind, there can be no resolution other than continual conflict (which he's not involved in) because he is convinced that Islam is a giant monolithic entity that is trying to take over the world and destroy everything we hold dear.

Hell, he even thinks that the "terrorists" are laying in wait, in American cities, for the signal from the mothership to start the Jihad in American streets.. where we would be fighting Red Dawn, not against the Russians, but against the Islamic Jihadists.

That is a hallucination of a disturbed mind - but it is what it is. You might want to check out your Muslim neighbors because they might just come cut your head off once the mothership gives the grand signal.

Ultimately, the issue is not a military one. Iraq has proven that, and the sooner we get our troops out of there, and as we go back and finish in Afghanistan, the better off we'll be. We can live in fear of the Islamic boogie man. We can give up all our civil rights, suspend the Constitution, torture prisoners, sacrifice thousands of American lives, kill thousands and thousands more innocent lives..

Or.. we can live unafraid, and fight this war the smart way.

That "relatively small" number of dead is all well and good.. until you, or somebody you love, is one of the dead.

Keyboard Commandos

You'd think I'd tire of doing this sort of thing.. but Doug keeps writing the dumbest shit.. and so, once again, a parsing is in order.

It really must be read to be believed. In one post, Doug slags on a news paper, a veteran, FDR, government entitlements, me, and wraps it up in a nice narcissistic rant. After all, it's always about Doug.

Naturally, I corrected the most blatantly false factual assertion Doug puts forward in slandering the news paper, via a comment on his blog.. which he deleted. What a coward - again. But then he came here to respond, and posted it in the wrong fucking post, and was wrong about his facts again. That can be read here.

I find it hilarious that Doug is trying to salvage some sense of credibility by offering up a few links, but he's just so stupid he doesn't even understand what he's arguing against, and completely misses the point of how he's completely wrong once again. It's becoming difficult to "debate" Doug because he doesn't understand the basics of the argument.

In most debates, there is an agreed factual foundation and a person would describe their opinion about the implications of these facts. That doesn't happen with Doug. I spend more time correcting his assumptions then actually explaining why his ideology is a failure. Maybe they go together. Maybe his ideology is a failure because it consistently draws from factual inaccuracies. Perhaps Doug should simply stick to innuendo and slander, without basing it on any particular event because invariably, he's going to botch the facts.

Before we get started, I find this funny. I really don't give a flying fuck, because it's an insult by it's very nature, but I still get a nice chuckle from it.

Anyway.. let's begin the shredding.. shall we? I do enjoy it so much. The foundation of the issue is the soldier asked to redeploy to Iraq after being classified with a disability by the VA. I wrote a short bit about it here. I'm not going to quote every word Doug wrote this time, because his mechanics have slipped again, and he's very repetitive. I will not, however, paraphrase anything.

The Leftwing Blogosphere and Leftwing e-mailers went ballistic on this. My cousin immediately sent me an e-mail stating that this kind of suffering and unfair tyrannical military actions are a direct result of Christianity, because if there was no Christianity, there would be no Islam (idiotic, I know but that is what she says).

I need to come up with a name for this tactic. Doug likes to use it fairly frequently. The process entails picking out something that someone on the "left" said in an inarticulate fashion, then paraphrasing it, and then call it "idiotic". Apparently Doug thinks this is an effective debate tactic, as if he can demonstrate to his readers how "idiotic" the left is - by cherry picking less than well thought out opinions.

An astute observer might note that I do the exact same thing, but only to a point. Doug is the perfect foil of "conservative" because he says the dumbest shit, consistently gets his facts wrong, and his conclusions are borderline hallucinatory. The difference is, I don't cherry pick, and I don't paraphrase. It's much more effective to demonstrate the "idiocy" of the conservative ideology by highlighting the exact words, rather than arguing against the stawmen that Doug lives by.

In this case, Doug's cousin probably didn't literally mean that Islam would not exist if not for Christianity. The point is, and I support this argument, is that religion, by it's very nature, is antagonistic and violent. Religion leads to violent confrontations, and if not for organized religion, there would not be these religiously themed conflicts that we see around the world today.

Clearly, Doug's worldview is defined as "us vs them". Everything he writes is centered around his philosophy of "winners and losers". Liberals tend to view the world as if we all have an equal stake in it, and we all are more alike than different, and we all can "win", together. A good start would be to finally get over this mass hallucination that so many people are suffering from.

Obviously, that's an idealistic approach, but ideals do matter. You can't achieve great things without envisioning them as possible in the first place. Conservatism, and Doug's entire being, is pessimistic, fearful, and violent.

Tom the Neurotic Liberal Blogger said, "And the f***ers that cheered this on.. and the f***ers that think they deserve an opinion.. and the f***ers that didn't suit up and risk getting blown to pieces.. can f**k off. The vast majority of the "right wing Loon-o-sphere" sure can type a mean game.. eh?"

How curious the asterisks. That's a strange mechanic that loons use, and I can't for the life of me understand why. Do they think that people can't understand what the actual word is? I've seen Doug use acronyms for "profane" words before, as if a different way of writing the profane word means it's not profane anymore.

Clue for the loons.. "phucker" and "fucker" is the same fucking thing, just as "bullshit" and "BS" are the same fucking thing... just as "f***kers" and "fuckers" are the same fucking thing. It's weird how their sensibilities can be offended by words, and in this case, letters.

The conservative morals are just twisted around backwards. Doug can post a picture of a nuclear detonation, in reference to turning Iraqi "cities to glass" - which of course is the vaporization of thousands and thousands of human beings, men, women, and children.. and that's A-OKAY!!11 but you can't see all the letters of the word "fuck" because that's immoral.

From the beginning we should have gone in with guns blazing, destroyed a few cities, turned some sand to glass, allowed for collateral damage, and showed the world that if you screw with the United States your nation is going to suffer. We should have went in from a position of strength. We should have went in as the Superpower that we are.

And that's why I use "profane" language.. because I like to highlight the twisted world view and complete immoral functioning of the right wing Christian movement in the United States.

Nuking cities = Good
fucking = bad
Doug = certifiably insane

Wow, now that one is pure idiocy mixed with out-of-control anger . . . perhaps he needs to be lying on a couch explaining himself to a shrink.

I addressed my "anger" here.

Stating that people have no business supporting a war effort without joining the military is like arguing that people don't have a right to be against illegal immigration if they never served as a Border Patrol Agent, or that I have no business supporting a politician if I've never been in politics. That argument by the left is pure lunacy, and proof that rather than argue the issue, they would rather go into a finger pointing, name calling fit.

That characterization of the conservative ideology is "proof" in Doug's mind. Problem is, Doug doesn't even understand what "proof" is, and once again he reverts to analogies that do NOT fit the issue being discussed.

Is there an equivalence between the border patrol and 30,000 casualties in Iraq? Is there and equivalence between politics and 4000 dead Americans?

And once again, Doug bemoans the "finger pointing" and "name calling" in the same exact post he points his finger and calls names. You are singularly the stupidest fucking hypocrite on the face of the planet Doug - with bonus points for being oblivious to it.

Irony again abounds when Doug claims that liberals will "finger point" rather than argue the issues. I like to think I'm good at both. I can use "name calling" at the exact same time I'm arguing an issue, because I'm just talented that way.

How the fuck can a person that deletes every competing argument on his own blog even muster up the balls to claim that said liberals don't "argue the issues"? Jesus Fucking Christ on a stick, I just can't get over how stupid he is. Doug, you don't even argue issues, you argue points that nobody made, because you're paraphrasing everything, and getting it all wrong in the process. This blog is a towering monument to that.

Argue issues? Are you fucking kidding me?

Ages ago, Glenn Greenwald wrote a very detailed explanation why the failure of the conservative movement ideologues to actually participate in the Glorious War to Subjugate the Brown People actually matters. I went to his blog to find it, rather than have to write it out myself - and because Greenwald articulates the view far better than I could, and imagine what I find as the latest post on his blog.. a blistering indictment of pro-war (from a distance) neocon Bill Kristol. What Greenwald says about Kristol is true for every cheeto munching, mother's basement living, right wing freak that's avoided any responsibility for the carnage they've helped unleash.

As Greenwald says;

There are few more reprehensible traits in American political culture than the constant exploitation of the glories of "sacrifice for freedom" by war cheerleaders like Kristol who ensure that only others sacrifice and neither they nor their families ever do. What "sacrifices for the sake of freedom" has Bill Kristol -- the prime poster child of nepotistic protection -- ever made in his entire life? He really is someone who never ceases demanding that more and more people around the world be slaughtered, that more and more of the tiny sliver of his fellow citizens who serve in the military be separated from their families and die in wars that he cheers for, all the while telling them that it's their moral, patriotic and religious duty -- but never his or his family's -- to "sacrifice for freedom." Is it even possible to conceive of behavior more self-absorbed, dishonest, and repugnant than that?

So much worse, not only does Bill Kristol never endure any "sacrifices" himself, he benefits wildly from the sacrifices of others that he urges. People continue to be slaughtered and Americans sent to die so that his ideological dreams of an America-dominated Middle East and an Israel unconstrained by anyone or anything can be realized. As the wars and "sacrifices" rage on, his career as a War Commentator consequently flourishes, with more appearances on Fox, more readers for the war-loving Weekly Standard, and now even a column in the New York Times, itself the by-product of nepotistic connections, from which he preaches to the little people of their need to continue to sacrifice for his wars.

That really sums it up quite nicely. That's why the "left" gets so "angry" when a discharged soldier with a disability is called up once again to go face potential death in Iraq - while assholes like Kristol and Jonah Goldberg simply ask for more death and destruction.

We need a draft.. of every member of the "young Republicans" and both of the Bush daughters.. and bring home those soldiers that have done their part.

Or.. you know.. bring them all home and let the Iraqis sort out their own issues. What's going to happen in Iraq is going to happen regardless.

As for the article about James Raymond, there may be an error in the article. The article states that the "Department of Veteran's Affairs determined that he was 10 percent disabled, enabling him to receive $120 a month for the rest of his life."

There is no "error" in the article. As I pointed out, the article says;

In September 2004, he was given an honorable discharge and the Department Department of Veterans Affairs determined he was 10 percent disabled, enabling him to receive $120 a month for the rest of his life.

I spent about 20 seconds to find the VA disability metrics at the military's web site, here.

Doug insists "we are both partially correct", when Doug is only correct in arguing against a point that nobody made. His mind works tangentially, and the tangent he ran off to is "military separation" and the article did not mention anything about that. It quite clearly states "Department of Veteran's Affairs determined".

Doug went off on that tangent because of his rampant narcissism, trying to inject his own experiences into the argument. The story was not about Doug. It was about an Iraq war vet, over 3 years discharged from the military, rated as disabled by the VA, and asked to return to a combat zone. It was all plainly detailed in the news report, however, Doug immediately thought he found an "untruth" in the "liberal media" report.. because he was biased to think it had to be there.

So, with an error like this in the article, I wonder how many other untruths there are in it.

I wonder, Doug, with an error like you just made (VA disability benefits), I wonder how many "untruths" there are on your blog?

Answer - a fuck load of them.

I wonder, considering you were completely wrong, yet again, while attempting to discredit the Buffalo News, are you going to correct the post?

As the article in the Buffalo News explains, in addition to a service member's active duty commitment, there is a four year inactive reserve commitment in effect after a service member separates. Any disability that is less than 30% normally does not exempt a veteran from being later deployed during this period of Inactive Reserve. I learned quite a lot about this when I looked into re-entering the military service after the act of war against the United States on 9/11/2001, but because of my percentage, I am undeployable, therefore, unfit to serve.

Bummer he was about 6 months from completing the "reserve commitment".

Again, Doug's narcissism requires that he let us know he tried to re-enlist, lest he be referred to as a "chicken hawk". It's unfortunate (in a sense) that I'm scrupulously ethical, lest I take a peek in the VA patient file to see what Doug's disability rating is. Not that it maters in any case, it's not about Doug, no matter how much he wants it to be about him. It doesn't matter.

The central issue is that most Americans are unaffected by the war. There is no national "sacrifice" - it's just an abuse of the Americans that did sign up. They get shot up in an unjust war, while ill equipped to begin with, and then come home to a system that abuses them.

James Raymond did his part. He was wounded in combat. He was trying to build a life, and now he's being sent back again while so many of these right wing assholes sit in their mom's basement cheering it on.

I understand the injuries that Raymond have incurred. I am deaf in my left ear, as is Mr. Raymond, and I have tinnitus (constant ringing in that ear) that is sometimes so loud I can't hear what people are saying in my other, still functioning, ear. And, like James Raymond, I have a damaged knee, one that the doctor's seriously wondered whether I would ever be able to use again. I was in a wheel chair, and graduated to a cane (twice), until I was finally able to walk fairly well, as I do now, with occasional bouts of pain that cause a visible limp. In addition to that, I incurred various other injuries during my time as a sailor, enough, apparently, to make me undeployable.

More narcissism.. and it's really awful the way that Doug draws an equivalency between his injuries on a ship during peace time, to a combat soldier that was fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Nobody gives a shit about your injuries. It's not about you. It's about this young man, and countless other's like him. Christ..

But when I consider my disabilities, and then consider what I read about James Raymond's, I wonder. I am ready to return to service (or course it would be amidst objections by my wife) if ever they were willing to take me. But he, with less disability than myself, is crying foul.

Crying foul? How you can put yourself on the same level as this young man, is narcissistic in the extreme. You're not going back in the military. You're not going anywhere. Who the fuck do you think you're kidding?

When James Raymond, like all other people who enter the U.S. Military, took that oath to defend this nation, he signed a contract. The contract included the inactive reserve period that he is now a part of. It is his obligation to fulfill the contract he signed. Or does the liberal left not place importance on contracts anymore?

It wouldn't be a Doug post if he didn't try to tie the issue to the "liberal left" one paragraph after he accused a decorated combat veteran of "crying".

Not one single person has claimed this has anything at all to do with commitments or contracts, you stupid fucking moron. This is about the conditions that caused this young man to get called up again. This is about YOUR fucking failed ideology that must send him back into the meat grinder again... while so many like you narcissistic fucks sit back and claim he's "crying" or trying to skirt his duty.

He did his fucking duty, asshole.

Perhaps this is just more evidence of our Society of Dependency. Don't get me wrong, I understand that there are those cases where there are people that find it very difficult to fully participate in the rights that the Creator has endowed them. I recognize that there are some Americans that find themselves in such situations due to no fault of their own. These cases are rare, however, and should not dictate the direction of our society.

Holy fucking tangent Batman. What the fuck?

Oh yes.. this is all the fault of "liberals" and "welfare". Jesus fucking Christ, the stupid it takes to connect government entitlements to this solider getting redeployed is monumental.

While Doug "recognizes that there are some Americans" - he never explains who the "some" are, versus the ones that somehow are undeserving, nor does he actually explain what entitlements he wants to do away with. It's rather exegasperating.

The current societal trend is to create dependency through a welfare state that perpetuates poverty. There are no rewards for getting people off of federal programs and no rewards for getting people back into the community with full-time jobs and independent lives.

Ya, Jennifer.. you slacker.. You've got no incentive to get a fucking job you freeloader.

As a result of this welfare society that has been created, originally by Franklin Delano Roosevelt's unconstitutional "New Deal" which actually failed seven years after it had been originally put into place, and only succeeded because of the industry created by World War II, not because of his "socialized" government programs, our poorest neighborhoods are more violent and drug-infested, and the remainder of society has begun to believe that somehow the government owes them something.

Holy fucking run-on-sentence Batman!

So now.. this soldier is being re-deployed to Iraq because of FDR.

Did your post actually make sense in your own head when you wrote it Doug? They have medications that can help with that now.

The New Deal was not unconstitutional - it's just a characterization from a movement that want's to dismantle Social Security and Medi-Care. Americans happen to like those programs, and they do a pretty good job. The loons have been propagandizing a "crises" for ages. There is no crises.

Why even argue it? Americans really like those programs, and there is absolutely no way they will be dismantled without suffering a popular revolt from the population.

And again, and I've had to do this before, I'll point out that FDR guided America from a isolationist position to global super power, and victory in WWII. That's Liberalism for you.

This "What can I get out of government" attitude is most apparent in stories we come across about people who take the "dependency" approach to life.

Look, Doug.. you're a really fucking stupid, uninformed dumbass. You don't know a fucking thing about "welfare". You don't understand the rules, the qualifications, the justifications, the necessity, or the people who are assisted.

You really want to go down that road? You really want to post some annecdotal examples of people who abuse the system, and then try and extend the analogy to create the impression that it's the norm in the system? You really want to do that? Apparently so.. he did post a couple of analogies. Wow.. that must be the way everyone is, right?

Are you finally going to accuse Jennifer of trying to "get something out of the government"? I'd like to see that.

Or maybe, it's okay for Jennifer.. but not somebody else? Are you the arbiter of who gets a food stamp and who goes hungry?

The logical flaws in your argument are stunning.. completely incoherent rambling and ranting about the abuse of welfare. I suspect you're just regurgitating something you've read on other right wing blogs. You really don't have much capability in terms of independent thought, so I suspect that's the case.

Substantiate your argument Mr. "Argue Issues". For fucks sake..

In the end, the article in the Buffalo News is not about poor James Raymond who must place his life on hold, and go out on the battlefield with a bum ear and a less-than-100% knee.

First he was "crying" and now he's "poor"? How dare he be upset having to once again go into combat?!?

Fuck you, you fucking douchebag asshole.

I'm going to stop quoting Doug now, because he just goes on for more paragraphs, accusing the soldier of being some sort of snivelling baby.. and accusing him of being a threat to unit "morale". I just find the whole thing disgusting. Doug isn't fit to carry that man's jock... all the while whining about his own situation and his own condition, lamenting his inability to rejoin the military - as if anybody is actually going to buy that argument.

Oh poor Doug.. waa.. waaa. waaa



That man is an American hero.. and fuck those assholes who think they have even a single right to say a fucking single thing about him.