Archive for December, 2008

In Which I’ll Say Something Nice-ish About christcons

December 29th, 2008 No comments

Oh,!  Not only does your URL sound stupid but you’re quickly approaching WorldNetDaily as my favorite christo-fascist “news” site.  Really “One News Now”?  What does that even mean?  As opposed to multiple news whenever you want?  “One” is in “jesus is the One” or as in the Orleans song “Still the One”?  Or like the anagram of Neo from The Matrix?  Back to the drawing board for a new name, fellas.  You can always write a re-direct.

I thought I’d written about this but I guess maybe not.  On 12/18/08, the wonderfully moral truthtellers over there put out a story called “Obama planning billion-dollar ‘bailout’ for abortion industry” that contained the follow suspect paragraph

Last week, the Obama-Biden Transition Project posted a report on its website that calls for dramatic policy reversals on abortion, including $1 billion in taxpayer money for international abortion groups like Planned Parenthood. The report, titled “Advancing Reproductive Rights and Health in a New Administration,” also calls for a 133-percent increase in funding for the Title X program, which funds Planned Parenthood clinics across the country.

Really?  A $1b bailout just like they did for the banks and the auto industry?  Shocking!  Obama probably posted it himself, right?  He just loves dead pre-borns.

Naturally, it’s got almost nothing to do with Obama.  It’s a third-part position paper advocating for reproductive rights.  You’ll also notice that the bit talking about “on  its website” links to and not the actual report itself.  Mostly, because if they linked to the report itself John And Mary Godliness would know right off the bat it’s far less ominous done-deal than it sounds.  Imagine if someone had posted a position paper called “Foreign And Domestic Terrorism: Peace Through Free Ice Cream” on bush’s pre-inaugural website and claiming that’s what he’d do.

In one of those acts of futility I engage in occasionally, I wrote to the “editor” (which you may or may not call “god”) to point out that, as christians, jesus wouldn’t much care for misdirection/ends justify the means kinda thing.  Oddly, I didn’t hear back from them and the article remains on the web.

So, imagine my surprise when my daily digest came in with the following title, “Abortion industry asks Obama for billions in funding“.  Even more surprising was the following paragraph

Over 50 pro-abortion groups have submitted a 55-page wish list called “Advancing Reproductive Rights and Health in a New Administration” to the incoming Obama administration. Jim Sedlak of American Life League’s (ALL) Stop Planned Parenthood, or Stopp International, has tallied the cost.

Huh?  Wow.  I don’t mean to take credit but they actually reported the story correctly and characterized the report as a “wish list”.  Even the title reeks of…um…lack of hyperbole.  So it seems somewhat uncharitable to carp about repeating the story (albeit, correctly).  However, they still, for some [sarcasm] unknown reason [/sarcasm] won’t link directly to the report and declining to even link to

Still, good for them.  Baby steps.  Perhaps one day they’ll get to the part where god gives us free will to make our own decisions and that only he can sit in judgment of them.


In Which You Can Change Your Mind About A Girl

December 28th, 2008 1 comment

Via Right Wing Watch’s post about the WSJ’s piece about Sarah “16 Minute” Palin you can find out about bush as “The Dark Knight” but, even more amusing, Palin is actually Margaret Thatcher!


Level 1 Funny: The title of the piece is “Conservative Snobs Are Wrong About Palin”.  Given that true Buckley conservative power brokers (you know, the ones that would get her into the White House) wouldn’t be caught dead drinking domestic beer or living in Alaska, the title truly sounds like…well…putting lipstick on a pig.

Level 2 Funny: John O’Sullivan makes a big deal quoting these “snobs” as saying Palin is “no Margaret Thatcher”.  I don’t pretend to be totally jacked into the political grid but this was a new one on me.  So, off to Google where a search of palin “no Margaret Thatcher” netted a paltry 959 hits.  By contrast, bush “the dark knight” nets 2.8m+.  Nothing like using an example that no one cared about to begin with.

Level 3 Funny: I’d like to posit that sexism is a form of snobbery.  By denigrating a woman with terms like “sweetie”, “baby” and “puppy lips” a man effectively negates a woman’s power.  Oh, and using the term “girl” does the same thing.

Second, Margaret Thatcher was not yet Margaret Thatcher. She had not won the 1979 election, recovered the Falklands, reformed trade union law, defeated the miners, and helped destroy Soviet communism peacefully.

Things like that change your mind about a girl….

Really?  A “girl”?  The head of Great Britain should be referred to as a “girl”?  A vice presidential candidate should be refered to as a “girl”?  HI-larious!

Level 4 Funny – Faulkland War!!

Leve 5 Funny –

Though regularly pronounced sick, dying, dead, cremated and scattered at sea, Mrs. Palin is still amazingly around. She has survived more media assassination attempts than Fidel Castro has survived real ones (Cuban official figure: 638).

Wait – let’s keep our heroes and villains straight here.  Palin=Castro?  BWHAHAHAHA!

Level 6 Funny:  Admitting defeat

But she has plenty of time, probably eight years, to analyze America’s problems, recruit her own expert advice, and develop conservative solutions to them. She has obvious intelligence, drive, serious moral character, and a Reaganesque likability. Her likely Republican rivals such as Bobby Jindal and Mitt Romney, not to mention Barack Obama, have most of these same qualities too. But she shares with Mrs. Thatcher a very rare charisma. As Ronnie Millar, the latter’s speechwriter and a successful playwright, used to say in theatrical tones: She may be depressed, ill-dressed and having a bad hair day, but when the curtain rises, out onto the stage she steps looking like a billion dollars. That’s the mark of a star, dear boy. They rise to the big occasions.

WHOA!  Back up!

“But she has plenty of time, probably eight years…”  Eight years?  So, you’re ceding that Obama is a two-term president and you’re screwed for 2012?  NICE!  Obama hasn’t even been sworn in and you’ve given up.

That’s kind of snobby, isn’t it?

In Which Some Letters Are Better Than Other

December 27th, 2008 2 comments


Sorry about  this, but here goes – When you get to the point where you have to write it “LGBT/GLBT” then you need to move to a deserted island by your self where no one will EVER make you sad ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever again.

Seriously – when does it fucking stop?  When do you stop labeling?  When do you just flip a coin, stick with the decision and stop changing what you call some thing/one just because some little asshole got bent out of shape because S/HE calls them eyeWHISKERS instead of eyeLASHES because “lashes” implies a pro-slavery/pro-capital punishment imagery.  (AND THEN, of course, some BDSM lobby cries foul because they are, ONCE AGAIN, being oppressed and their lifestyle choice denigrated.)

From Negro to colored to black to African American back to black…where next?  Seriously – where next?

Yes, yes, I understand how, as a white man I’m not allowed to comment on race/creed/color stuff because I cannot possibly understand what oppression means…outside of the 6 years I spent being called faggot, homo, queer etc in pre-college.  I’m not approaching this as a white man’s burden kind of thing.  I’m approaching this as people relating to people.  I’m looking at this from a practical standpoint.

If you want to invite me to your non-straight/non-white dance – wonderful.  I’d love to go but, frankly, I’m not sure I want to because I’m afraid that I’m going to make some kind of slip-up like saying “African American” when I should say “black” or LGBT when I should say GLBT.  I’ve gotten screwed by this before.  “Even thought everybody else here says it, you’re not allowed to say ‘faggot’ or ‘nigger’ because your honorary membership is not valid in this specific clique”.

Oh.  Do please forgive me.  How about if I just call you a fucking asshole instead for 1) needing to label yourself as different from me so you can 2) despise me for being different from you.

I’m not saying I’m perfect.  Yes, there are times I slip back into the patterns and prejudices taught to me by my parents.  I’m doing my best to not pass those on to my children.  To (as I’m led to believe) teach them that we are all equal.

What I’m saying is to stop insisting on equality by inventing new labels.

LGBT/GLBT?  How about “Paul”?  Or “Jane”?  Or “Chet”? Or “Kiwmabechocula”?

How about we toss out the labels?  Or does that make an anti-labelist?

Tweetin’ 2008-12-20

December 20th, 2008 No comments
  • we’ll see if this storm hits boston or not – i have my doubts #

Powered by Twitter Tools.

Categories: Tweets Tags:

Tweetin’ 2008-12-19

December 19th, 2008 No comments
  • on rick warren – “he’s really just falwell in a hawiian shirt” HAHAHA! #
  • we’ll see if this storm hits boston or not – i have my doubts #

Powered by Twitter Tools.

Categories: Tweets Tags:

In Which I’m Rubber And They’re Glue

December 19th, 2008 No comments

Hysterical!  The christcons just confused the living hell out of a lot of people.  See, “hate crime” is a bad thing…or rather bad phrase…or rather…well, putting it in context explains it better.

USUALLY, “hate speech” is used to strike fear into the hearts of people hate gays – i.e. – “‘Bible as hate speech’signed into law“.  Bible as hate speech?  Yes.  It means that standing up in public and proving that god does, indeed, hate fags (Leviticus, John) would be illegal which is the first step towards criminalizing christianity.  It also mean that liberal judges can interpret anything christians say as hate speech.  Witness anyone who tried to call Obama black…well, you get the gist.

So if “hate speech” is bad, you’d think christcons would avoid using the term earnestly.  Not so much.  OneNewsNow has an article (much belated) about how no one’s talking about how burning Sarah Palin’s church is “hate speech”.

Mattingly contends news outlets need to probe whether the fire at Palin’s church was a hate crime, considering an Alaska statute “criminalizes destruction of real or personal property belonging to religious or charitable organizations.”


Categories: Navel (Gazing At) Tags:

In Which Change Is Subjective

December 19th, 2008 2 comments

So, Obama continues to piss off the base.  I hope I’m not the only one that saw that coming.  After eight miserable years of idiocy, incompetence and and downright evil, it’s understandable that Americans (especially of the liberal persuasion) would go ga-ga over the first person to promise an end to the madness.  They/we wanted the anti-bush.  Sadly, no one understood the actual anti-bush was Dennis Kucinich.  Happily, they realized that Hillary was pretty much bush in drag when it came to admitting mistakes.  She never apologized for her Iraq War votes and I’m not sure she really apologized for outright lying about how the bible her mother gave her saved her life by stopping a bullet when she visited Bosnia.

And thank GOD John Edwards dropped out. (I wonder if there’s a “Stupid Politicians Club” where Edwards, Spitzer, Hart and the other knock back brandys and laugh, laugh, laugh.)

But, my Democratic friends, let’s congratulate ourselves for not screwing this one up.  Sure, it was touch and go, but in the end Obama is going to the White House.

Which means the knives come out all around.

Let me step back for a moment and say that while I consider myself PDL (Pretty Damn Liberal), I know that my agenda is not America’s agenda.  Legalizing drugs, national healthcare, gay marriage and abolishing the speed limits on all primary, secondary and tirtiary roads won’t fly for the rest of the country.  I have my ideal vision of the USA and then the pragmatic vision of it.

Every single politician every elected promises change so much so that it should be the fourth big lie.  The other three, of course, are – the check is in the mail, I’ll respect you in the morning and I promise not to cum in your mouth.  bush promised to unite.  Clinton promised it.  bush I…blah, blah, blah.  “Change the culture of Washington…make the government work properly”.  Then they came in, appointed their best buddies and together hitched up the gravy train.

I don’t have time to turn this into a full critique but thus far, Obama seems to be including a decent range of views in his cabinet picks.  Let’s not forget that ultimately Obama makes the decisions.  You don’t like Gates?  Fine.  He still knows more than most about Iraq even if it’s not the kind of knowledge you appreciate or approve of.

The decision to invite Rick Warren to give the inaugural invocation sparked a mini firestorm and, for me, provides the best insight into Obama yet.  Personally, I think it’s a bad choice but, as I said earlier, I don’t expect America to go for my agenda.  My liberal brethren feel betrayed.  I don’t.

I don’t like Rick Warren.  Someone called him “Fallwell in a Hawaiian shirt”.  Yes, but it’s a little worse than that.  As you know, I follow the extreme christians (small c because Jesus wouldn’t recognize what they believe as His thoughts) and they hate Warren to the point where some believe he’s the anti-Christ…that is when Obama’s unavailable to carry that mantle.  Their beef (outside of not being intolerent enough) is that he’s turned christianity into a Las Vegas-style stage show complete with wide screen TVs and, in one case, trapeezes.  Warren’s christianity is not as much about Jesus as it is market share.  I follow some of his acolytes on twitter and when you see a request for car chase video for Sunday’s sermon…well, why not just stay home watching TV and turning Hannah Montana into an allegory of the life of Jesus?  You’ll save money, too.  The Mega-Church movement, from my non-religious perch, is about as against Jesus as you can get.  You end up more concerned about paying the bills than about preaching the word.

Yes, Warren is anti-gay marriage but, guess what, so is Obama and you voted for him.  “Gay friendly” is not necessarily “pro-gay”.  Making an argument that the Warren pick means Obama betrayed his base is simply wrong.  If you’re gay and voted for Obama because you thought that, despite the fact he blatantly stated he didn’t believe in gay marriage, he’d usher in gay marriage then find a good co-dependency group and/or start your local Kucinich 2012 chapter.

That said, a lot of American’s buy into Warren’s christianity-lite product.

Let me tease that out  – a lot of AMERICAN’S  buy into Warren’s christianity-lite product.

Obama’s “change” is NOT about pushing a liberal agenda that I support and the hell with everyone who disagrees with me.  It’s not the radical change that ‘licans tried to scare America into voting for McPain with.  It’s the change that every politician from the beginning of time promises – to represent the country as a whole and not just their own party.  To bring the country together.

Listen closely to this – you don’t bring the country together by telling evangelicals to go fuck themselves.

Change is a two-way street, folks.  We need a truce in this fake culture war that both sides play an active role in. Yes.  Both sides.  Because what did the LGBT community offer up as a “better” choice for the innovacation?  Gene Robinson, the gay Episcopal bishop that’s caused an old-fashioned schism in the Episcopal church.  Sorry.  That’s just not helpful.

We need to figure out how we’re all going to live together without the South or San Fransisco seceding from the Union.  Tolerance is tolerance.  It’s that simple.  You don’t have support Rick Warren.  You don’t even have to like him.  You can think he’s the biggest asshole on the face of the earth.  I do.  But I also don’t have ban him from my lunch table.

Obama is doing what he promised to do – literally reach across the metaphorical aisle to bring the country together.  We’ve tried it the other way.  Let’s try it this way.  Isn’t that what “change” is?

Categories: Navel (Gazing At) Tags:

Tweetin’ 2008-12-18

December 18th, 2008 No comments

Powered by Twitter Tools.

Categories: Tweets Tags:

Tweetin’ 2008-12-16

December 16th, 2008 1 comment

Powered by Twitter Tools.

Categories: Tweets Tags:

In Which Hallmark Is On Line 2

December 16th, 2008 No comments

My shockingly seasonal new twitter icon has provoked rumors of an ABC Holiday special.  Let me just say I’m open to it.  As proof of concept, here are some cheery and festive holiday treats to put into your stocking and then step on

The Gift of the Magi – An update of O. Henry’s classic tale in all its horrible, horrible futility

Help The Heathen Foundation – Third runner up for worst charity ever

Christmas Tragedy – Because it’s not Christmas on CNN if you’re not pointing out how lousy someone should be feeling

Bum Fight Christmas – Because it’s not Christmas without the little bummer boy and…well…just because

Categories: Navel (Gazing At) Tags: