Monday, February 27, 2006

To a poster on the Mike Malloy board

Conservatives also believe that poverty and social marginalization are serious maladies, for which some external assistance help is needed. But, unlike liberals, conservatives believe personal decisions, rather than external forces, play a greater role in determining one’s circumstances. Consequently, instead of government largesse, they believe government should do all it can to grow the economy, so that more people have employment opportunities and the educational ones that follow from it. They also believe in a value system that encourages personal responsibility and making good decisions that will lead to a more successful life. Believing as they do, conservatives look at liberal philosophy and find it wanting because it would enable people, who purposefully and consistently make bad decisions, by giving them money to dig themselves out of the hole that they, themselves have dug.

Yes, we all know how much tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans have helped the economy compared to raising taxes on the wealthy in the 90s. Wouldn't it make sense that money that comes back to the wealthy in this form isn't really put back into the economy but rather put away into savings accounts or invested?

personal responsibility?! HAHA, OMG! Maybe some of you conservatives do believe in that, but you don't believe in personal responsibility when it comes to businesses and corporations. You don't believe in personal responsibility when it is applied to the rich and the powerful. A factory who pollutes the environment around it should not be held accountable because that would get in the way of profits. You only look at fraud when it's supposedly committed by those on welfare while ignoring corporate fraud which costs the American people much more. A corporation who does not pay its taxes should not be held accountable while those who "run up" credit card bills and file for bankruptcy should. Forget the person may have had a medical emergency. He should pay up while the corporation goes scot free. Why do you conservatives stay silent when we point out that BILLIONS of dollars have been lost due to corporations taking the "personal responsibility" of evading their tax responsibilities?

You think the poor are lazy because they make personal choices to spend time bar-hopping and running up credit card bills not intending to pay them, right? They piss away their money on gambling, right? They piss it away on booze, right? You buy into the myth of the welfare queen that Reagan viciously put into the media, now proven that his welfare queen with the Cadillac did not exist (although there are examples of those who abuse welfare and commit fraud, but they aren't the overwhelming majority as conservatives would love for you to believe). Tell the person who works a full-time job at Walmart and STILL has to apply for food-stamps. You tell them to their FACES that they're lazy and shiftless. You tell those who work for the minimum wage fulltime so they can support their families that they're lazy. You tell them that they made a choice to work at Walmart when our economy is in the shitter that thousands flock to newly-opened Walmarts because they need a job.

Look throughout American history and you'll see that it's not only the poor who take welfare. Corporations have always cried out against government regulation but have had no qualms taking government assistance in the form of subsidies. Yet corporations try to duck their responsibility as taxpayers through tax shelters overseas in the Cayman Islands. Isn't that similar to what you claim people on welfare do?

Look throughout history and you'll see that conservatives always use the myth of the lazy, shiftless whatever to justify keeping those at the top of the economic ladder at the top. This is where the myth of personal responsibility is blown apart. Isn't a part of the personal responsibility myth where it says that through hard work and determination, you can strike it rich too and that must mean you do not have any personality defects.

Take for example, slaveholders in the South. I mean they were rich, weren't they? So it must mean that they worked really hard to earn an honest living, right? Dream on. Many of them thought if they didn't enslave these people, their slaves would just idle away their free time and not work. I found it ironic that slaveholders even while their slaves continued to toil and sweat tears on their plantations deemed their slaves to be lazy and inclined towards being idle while they themselves did nothing compared to the slaves.

Conservatives opposed confiscating the estates of the slaveowner aristocracy and distributing it to the freedmen. Why? They justified it by using the rhetoric of the handout, much like how you conservatives do the same when it comes to welfare. The argument is the same. The slaves need to work for the land instead of having it handed out to them. If we hand out the land to them, they won't work it because they'll just expect more from the government. Ironic isn't it? Those who toiled the land who felt that they rightfully had ownership of the land their blood and sweat and tears made were now being told they had to work for it! In vain did the Radical Republicans point out the obvious fact that these slaves had worked YEARS to earn it. It's simple. Conservatives then feared taking away assets from the economically powerful, those who were more likely to sympathize with their ideology. Now, it's if you give people welfare, they'll expect to get rich. I hear you can make more money on welfare than earning an honest wage through a job!

We have to institute Black Codes or else the slaves will just wander around and do nothing. Never mind that newly-freed slaves wandered around the South to look for their families, a fact that was lost on the family-values people of the day. If we don't have these people work in our sweatshops, they'll just go to the saloons and get drunk. People on welfare abuse the system hoping to strike it rich. You use the term personal responsibility to justify the rich exploiting the poor in a roundabout way. Do you know WHY the Black Codes were instituted? It's because the former slaveholders wanted to tie down the freedmen to the land, not because the blacks were "innately lazy." The myth of the lazy and shiftless, cowardly slave was used to justify a form of slavery in all but name.

You conservatives always promote the Horatio Alger myth. If we work hard, we can pull ourselves out of the working-class and then become millionaries too! YAY! Unfortunately, that dream never existed for the majority of working-class Americans. Once you're born in the middle class, you're more likely to stay there. You use this to delude the working class to vote against their economic interests. How many freepers oppose tax increases on the wealthiest Americans believe they hold on to the delusion that they'll move into the ranks of the top 20% of income-earners?

Take the bankruptcy bill. Those who crafted it used the same rhetoric of personal responsibility that you conservatives do to justify it. The people who file for bankruptcy are lazy and shiftless, charging up credit cards on luxury items like HDTVs and computers while filing for bankruptcy to get out of paying it. You think personal responsibility is the solution to everything? Tell the person who had to file for bankruptcy due to a medical emergency that he or she did not take the personal responsibility of not getting sick. Tell the person who did not have insurance but was involved in a car accident that he or she should have taken the personal responsibility to avoid the freeway if she didn't have insurance.

In fact, let's take this further. Let's tell a woman who was raped that she didn't follow the teachings of personal responsibility. For every priest or minister who orders a raped victim to go do penance, let me ask you this. Was it a choice for the woman to be in a situation that she could be raped? Did she ask for it? Do you think that she should have taken the personal responsibility not to put herself in that situation? Think I'm being asinine? I've had a personal experience dealing with this bullshit and traditionally the clergy have viewed rape as sexual, which leads some of them to cast blame on the victim.

Married (heterosexual) people (43% very happy) are a good bit happier than unmarrieds (24%) and this too has been a consistent finding over many years and many surveys.

Did the poster add the heterosexual or was it actually included in the report? Could this be an attempt to spin the report so it fits his worldview?

Yet there is no better poster boy for liberal neurosis than Mike Malloy. Every day, he broadcasts nothing but negativity and criticism about the current administration. He does this even though he rarely has any facts to back up his claims about the so-called “failures” and “illegality” of the alleged Bush “crime” family. Not once in the numerous times that I’ve listened to him does he speak about anything positive or provide any ideas of his own on how to run the country, even if Bush were to step down. Instead, it’s just a constant, uninterrupted drone of unwarranted and unsubstantiated negativity that he verbally vomits on to the airwaves every week day evening.

At least he is honest and says he isn't here to offer solutions. Perhaps he wants us listeners to come up with our own solutions rather than to have people like Rush decide how all of you are going to think. Perhaps he wants us to be independent thinkers instead of followers. Perhaps, Mike respects his listeners enough to allow them to judge for themselves unlike Rush who respects his listeners that he tells them to suspend all thought and just listen to what he says.

you don't have anything to say about the negativity emanating through right-wing talk radio today. Do you have anything to say about Rush always harping on liberals much as Mike always does to conservatives? Wouldn't that be the same thing? How come one gets condemned while the others don't? In fact I'll take negativity over the "accidental" slip-ups of racism that right-wing talk show hosts spew. ("Take that bone out of your nose and call me back")

Indeed, given the findings of the Pew Research study and his own broadcasts, Mike Malloy is undoubtedly the Crown Prince of Prozac, the Deacon of Depression, the Marquis of Malevolence, the Caliph of Criticism, and the Imperial Emperor of Ill-Will, all rolled into one! In fact, if Mike and Kathy Malloy truly love their daughter, Molly (which I’m sure they do), they’ll spare her the blue-state blues and raise Molly to become a bconservative!

I'm happy as a liberal and a Catholic. Unlike what you conservatives would like me to think, I feel comfortable being both. I feel assured that I won't be going to hell because I'm a liberal. I'll be going to hell because of other things that I don't care to discuss. If there is anything to be depressed about, it's the fact that our so-called president is a disaster in leadership. I'm sure you don't find his handling of the Katrina disaster a failure in leadership. I'm sure you're fine with his misleading the American people to go to war in Iraq. I'm sure you're fine with all that misleading that led up to the Medicare bill. How much did the administration say it was going to be? $400 billion? What's the cost now? $700 billion?

It takes someone who is a follower, who believes everything the media tells them to be happy in a country which is heading towards bankruptcy, which now is condemned for the hypocrisy of its human rights rhetoric, which is being led slowly into a dictatorship in all but name. It takes someone who has the sheep mentality to see that maybe having an ALL-POWERFUL executive branch not accountable to anyone is a good thing. It takes someone who is happy and content to forget all the things being done in the name of the American people like torture. (btw, when does torture work?) It takes someone who is content to see that Bush is a Man of God who can do no wrong just because the churches or the liberal media tell him so.

I would love to see your justification in not helping the least among us. For an ideology which has followers that spout out Jesus as if they owned him, you surely do not have anything to say about charity. You do not help the poor, but rather you spit upon them by pointing out so-called defects in them. Am I to believe that it is only the wealthy who deserve the gates of Heaven? Are corporate crooks like Ken Lay saints while every other crook is exactly, that, a criminal? Sure, you can accuse me of pushing my religious beliefs on you but you do the same. You use Jesus to justify discrimination against gays and lesbians even though there's no reference by him on homosexuals. You use him to justify your platform. Many of you conservatives falsely attribute the quote about give a man a fishing pole and he'll fish to him so you can justify your personal responsibility talk.

But we have charities, you say. Charities can discriminate. What's to prevent a charity tied to the fundamentalist movement from denying someone who happens to be gay assistance? What's to prevent one from denying assistance to people they deem not worthy? Do you think faith-based programs that receive OUR taxpayer dollars have the right to discriminate when they hire against those they deem worthy of hell like gay people?

Why is it that conservatives always complain about how their taxpayer dollars are used as if they are the only ones who pay taxes?

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Proposals in 16 states to ban gays from adopting children

The question is why now? Don't tell me...

How precious! The White House is going to release its own Katrina Report. Let me guess. It was Blanco and Nagin's FAULT! Nuff said. Recommendations? Don't trust the local and state governments to do anything when it was they who clearly failed! The White House's response could have been better but they did the best they could because no one could have anticipated the breach of the levees, but it's still the Democrats' fault anyway. We accepted responsibility alright: the hard responsibility of shifting blame to Democrats! YAY!! See, we do hold ourselves accountable!

Joy, another round of whitewashing going on in the White House.

Bush and the GOP are nothing but whores

A report by the ranking Democrat of the House Rules Committee declares that lobbyists who make up to $650,000 (yeah I read that right) are fucking over Americans while enriching their clients (corporations, go figure). The Republicans gleefully point out that Democrats took more money from lobbyists before they were ousted in 1994 but the Repubs have taken lobbying to a new level (just think Jack Abramoff, bribes, and corruption).

*14.2 million American seniors (including millions of our sickest and most vulnerable seniors) are stuck in a complicated, expensive, and inefficient Medicare prescription drug program because the Republican Congress and the Bush Administration allowed lobbyists from the insurance and pharmaceutical industries to design this program.

*60 million American families who heat their homes with natural gas and 8 million families who heat with heating oil are paying higher bills this winter, even though the Republican Congress recently passed their "national energy plan" into law. Although this plan gives the energy industry billions in new tax breaks and subsidies, it doesn't lower prices for consumers or make our country more energy independent.

*The 150,000 U.S. troops currently deployed in Iraq may not have the equipment they need because of waste, fraud and cronyism by the Republican Congress and the Department of Defense. While Halliburton and other companies with Republican connections get their contracts, our soldiers still don't have the body armor and armored vehicles they need to fight the war.

*750,000 households in the Gulf region are still displaced today, more than 5 months after Hurricane Katrina hit that region, at least in part because the political hacks the Bush Administration put in charge of crucial homeland security functions were not adequately prepared to prepare for or respond to this disaster.

*More than 10 million students and their families will have larger student loans to repay because House Republicans, led by new Majority Leader John Boehner working hand-in-hand with his commercial loan industry allies, cut $12 billion from the student loan program in the recent reconciliation bill and shifted the costs on to students and their families.


EJ Dionne was interviewed by Al Franken yesterday and he talked of the faux populism of the GOP which manifests itself simultaneously as the GOP fucks over those whom they proclaim to support. It's clear from hearing the interview that the American people are so fooled by this that they think that liberals whether they are the intellectual elite or the Hollywood elite look down upon them while conservatives and right-wingers are their best friends. How ignorant can we get? What's the use of George W. Bush going into a Wendy's to talk about his health savings account which only the rich benefit while the poor would get screwed over because they can't afford to put money into those accounts? What's the use of Cheney going to a small Texas paper instead of to the media elite (the New York Times?) when he refuses to disclose what the hell happened in the energy task force meetings which produced an abomination of an energy plan?

What good is denying gays the right to marry when you can't "put food on your families?" What good is banning gay marriage when good jobs are being outsourced and replaced by Bush jobs such as flipping hamburgers and other service jobs? What good is banning gay marriage when social programs and education are being cut so the wealthy can have their fifth tax cut or whatever it is? What good is it when Pell Grants are BEING CUT? At least the queers can't get married, right?

Open your eyes, the GOP Elite doesn't CARE about banning gay marriage other than Brownback or Santorum. They don't care because if they truly were, they would bring up the federal marriage amendment every chance they can get. Don't you get it? They use it to steal the election of 2004, then they say that the amendment is dead in 2005 (non-election year), and now suddenly they're using it again in 2006. Yet you ignorant sheep don't realize that this is a faux populist issue that is designed to cloak what they're doing to the economy by oppressing you so that the "truly-oppressed" (the richest 1% and corporations) can be free to rape our environment and raid our treasury. The War in Iraq? Halliburton is profiting off the deaths of YOUR KIDS even while providing rotten food and putrid water to YOUR KIDS after overcharging the Army.

Bush says he's cutting waste from the budget. Well tell YOUR kids that student loans are a waste. Tell them how cutting $12 billion from the student loan program helps them get through college. Soon, we'll see an America where the only way to go to college is through the military and with the impending wars against Iran and Syria, pray that your son or daughter survives to see that money, because if they die, those promises of $40,000 mean nothing.

Why in the WORLD do we still have tax credits for gas-guzzling SUVs?! It boggles the mind how much people think that Bush is a good steward of the land as he so "eloquently" put it in one of the debates. We need to kick our addiction to Middle East oil and Bush is refusing to completely eliminate this abomination of a tax credit, justifying it with the "small business" line. More faux populism there. Let's help the small businesses while it's really Big Oil who benefits from these gas guzzlers. Tax credit for a hybrid: $3150, Tax credit for a SUV: $25,000, Blowing the oil industry much as Monica did for Bill and knowing you're fucking over the environment: priceless.

You know how they all justify this? Someone on the Mike Malloy board saw it this way and I thought it was brilliant! "Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime." See that quote? Right-wingers like to spin this as one that Jesus said, but in reality it's Lao Tzu i believe. So basically they are falsely attributing words to Jesus in order to justify cutting what they call "entitlement programs." Jesus WANTS us to work hard and not rely on the charity of others. So people on welfare or people who don't make enough money to pay for health care should get another job! Why aren't we surprised? After all, the GOP says it owns Jesus and God. Jesus is a Republican. Jesus loves only Republicans. The most important thing is to spread the Gospel, not live it. This makes it a lazy form of Christianity that only says that you have to believe and that is sufficient enough to get into heaven. Good works don't matter because if you believe, you get in. How lazy is that?!

The days of those dime novels of Horatio Alger, you know the rags-to-riches novels that star a destitute boy who through hard work and determination becomes a millionaire, are over. They were never a part of the American dream but we cling onto it and the GOP nurtures this belief by demonizing those who truly need social programs as lazy and shiftless, condemning them for not "earning an honest living" while forgetting that people who work at Walmart do need the government to help pay for their health care. Freepers who oppose tax increases and rolling back the tax cuts to the richest 1% because they hope that they'll join the 1% club are only fooling themselves while they lose social programs and funding to schools that can only help them. It's a shell game and you get fooled everytime because you're concerned that the gays and lesbians will get married and then an unseen force will infilitrate your minds turning you gay and breaking up your marriages. You get fooled because the GOP has successfully shifted blame from their own economic policies to the intellectual elite and the Hollywood elite for all your problems. It's their fault you lost your job. It's their fault that your schools are so damn crappy. It's their fault that you only make the minimum wage. Please people, wake up before it's too late.

That's kind of a Washington attitude, isn't it — we'll decide for you, you can't figure it out yourself. I think a lot of folks here at Wendy's would argue that point of view is just simply backwards and not true.” - Bush at Wendy's touting his health savings accounts.

Now let's ask you some questions and find out who the true elitists are
  • How elitist is it for a so-called Man of God to continually use Jesus to justify his helping the numerically least of his brothers and sisters?
  • How elitist is it for Cheney to continually stonewall when it comes to disclosing what went on during his energy task force meetings?
  • How elitist is implying that only Cheney and the energy executives know what's best for the country and that you don't have to know?
  • How elitist is this "Trust us, we know what we're doing, but you don't have to know what we're doing so get along with your lives and pay no attention to the Man behind the screen" line the National Litterbox and his minions throw at us everyday?
  • How elitist is that when they project their attitudes in that Wendy's quote to liberals when it is clearly them who say, "we'll decide for you because you're too dumb to figure it out yourself?" How else can you explain them being secretive on everything when it comes to issues such as national security and our energy policy?
  • How elitist is it when their policies only affect positively the well-connected, Wall Street, Big Oil, the Military-Industrial-Media-Thinktank complex, the richest 5%?
  • Why is Hollywood considered a bastion of elitists while Wall Street isn't?
  • Who are the ones who truly look down upon you? Hollywood actors crying out for social justice or those who fool you with a faux populism while screwing you over because they think you're too ignorant or lazy to find out that their populism is a facade?
  • So who are the true elitists?

Sunday, February 19, 2006

Our hands are not clean on this issue

While we rightfully condemn the violent riots sparked by the Muhammad cartoons, we must not forget that our hands are not entirely clean on this issue. Our fundamentalists are just as extreme and violence-prone as they are. But you can't be serious! They were rioting and dozens if not hundreds died already.

What is it about fundamentalists that make them so charismatic? What is it that makes them the loudest voices in religion today? If aliens from a distant galaxy came to the Middle East, they would think that all Muslims were suicide bombers and terrorists. If they came to America, they would think that our Christians support death and destruction, killing abortion-providers and bombing abortion clinics. It's not good for the reputation of religion which can bring people together as a community when its loudest voices are calling for mass death and assassinations of political leaders they do not support.

When Eric Rudolph committed acts of terrorism against abortion clinics, where were the leaders of the Religious Right? Did you hear them widely condemn him as someone who has committed acts of MURDER that they condemn Muslims for? Where was Ann Coulter who would later dismiss Islam as a car-burning cult? In North Carolina where many pro-lifers live, he became an icon, a folk hero defending the rights of the unborn against murderers in the pro-choice movement. In fact, many leaders of the Religious Right expressed their concern for his victims not by condemning him for murder but expressing the fear that he would discredit their movement. Pro-life indeed!

And you know why he bombed the abortion clinic? He believes that the white people are eventually going to be a minority instead of a majority. He believes that you should reproduce and be true to your race. He thought white women should marry white men and black people should marry black people.

He would say we are all going to be one color — and God doesn't want us all one color. He'd be so upset! You know, he's fighting for what he believed in.

What makes him worse is that his concerns about abortion do not stem primarily from the act itself, but his former in-law reveals that it was more from the fear that whites would become a permanent minority. In other words, he's among the hypocrites who say they're against abortion but would have no problems with people with the "right" color skin getting one. In fact that is to be encouraged! Their opposition is limited to whites getting an abortion. I truly wonder what the leaders of the Religious Right would say to that. This resonated well with the White Supremacists of such boards as Stormfront including one who also justified Rudolph's actions with this classic line, ""slaughter of the truly innocent demands a response." Truly, he must have considered himself pro-life which brings me to another point about the movement which seems to condone the death penalty as a way of punishing murder and such.

Now I'm not saying that religion is pure as the snow on the ground but I'm saying that it's easy to look at these fanatical protesters and Christian terrorists in our own country and say that they represent the mainstream here. It does not help when our so-called liberal media calls these voices like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson mainstream CHRISTIANS when they represent a far-right fringe. It's easy when the media gives them hype to see that they are the face of Christianity or Islam. The quietest voices never get heard, although the media thankfully covers the Reverend Barry Lynn when he's pointing out the dangers of the theocracy-minded Religious Right. Even though, if you ask someone in America today, it'll be like ten times more likely they'll know the Religious Right leaders than someone like Lynn or Jim Wallis.

Religion and politics do not mix as one requires absolute truth and the other compromise. Religion hardly ever compromises its own values in pursuit of an agenda. Can you imagine the fundamentalists compromising on their pet issue, gay marriage? Could you imagine them supporting a compromise that requires the government to sanction gay marriages but also forbids them from imposing them on the churches? Can you imagine religious leaders coming forth with gay-rights activists to advance this idea? Of course not. Religion requires it all, which is why the Dominionist movement is so dangerous today.

The Dominionist movement would love nothing better to see a theocracy take hold of this country. Their leaders would also be the leaders of this government as they would be the elites that would make the rules which everyone else no matter what his or her religion is would be mandated to follow them. Would they be subject to those same rules? Perhaps, but more likely, they'll find ways to skirt them. Can you imagine an America whose Constitution is stripped bare of the Enlightenment ideals and replaced with amendments based on the Old Testament? Can you imagine the same oppression Muslim women face today happening here? Can you imagine being stoned for adultery or homosexuality? Can you imagine parents stoning their kids to death because they showed disrespect and talked back? Can you imagine an America where the Bible is used to justify racial discrimination (not completely out of the picture as it is even done so today)?

There is the same problem with Islam today. The same martyr complex, the victimization complex runs through its veins today, although in some ways, there is more justification than the Religious Right's martyr game. There has been much anger at the United States as they see it proclaiming democracy and human rights as if they were America's gift to the world. Problem is they see the U.S. talk the talk but not walk the walk as it supports dictators such as Saddam Hussein, monarchs such as the Saudi royal family and corrupt presidents like Hosni Mubarak. They listen to us portray ourselves as champions of human rights but do not hear because the graphic photos of corpses at Abu Ghirab speak volumes, drowning out our useless attempts to market ourselves as a beacon of democracy.

The "they hate us for our freedoms" line is a simplistic answer that does not even bother to answer the question, yet Bush uses it because it appeals to the masses who do not care for dissertations and theses on why they hate us. They want simple, one sentence answers that reassure them. The Muslim world does not hate us for our freedoms. Quite to the contrary, they would enjoy our freedoms but they see us denying them the same freedoms we supposedly hold dear. It does not help when Hamas wins a democratic election and then the U.S. turns around and questions its legitimacy and is supposedly trying to oust it. We can make all the denials we want, but the Muslim world won't listen because our word means nothing. (I'm NOT defending Hamas here nor do I see this as a positive turn of events as I am skeptical and wary of them, but rather, I am defending the principle of democracy.) It is easy to see why Muslims distrust us when we talk about democraticizing the Middle East when we pull something like this. It is easy to see why the Middle East distrusts its leaders as either despots or puppets of the Great Satan (us). It is easy to see how they see us as hypocrites who pout when we don't like the results of a democratic election.

What needs to be condemned is the way extremists of both religions lash out at the so-called oppressor whether it's stirring up the masses to violently rise up in arms or calling for Hugo Chavez to be assassinated. It's one thing to express your frustrations but another to take them out on others using violence. These people who blow themselves up or blow up abortion clinics and gay bars need to be exposed for what they truly are: abominations who kill in the name of God or Allah. It is not enough to condemn those who commit the acts but those who silently and passively observe, thus making these actions possible. Lincoln said it best asking a revelent question, "Must I shoot a simpleminded soldier boy who deserts, while I must not touch a hair of the wily agitator who induces him to desert?" We must take the same attitude here, condemning those who agitate the populace into committing violent acts whether they are mullahs or our own American Taliban who incite hatred against gays and lesbians.

Friday, February 17, 2006

It's time to watch CORRUPTION GONE WILD!

A GOP Production

From AmericaBLOG (God, I love that site), as the Senate and the GOP budget bills were slightly different versions that passed with slim margins, Democrats cried foul and rightfully raised a ruckus. Pelosi protested that the GOP turned a small clerical error into a major constitutional crisis because the GOP did not want to be upfront with the American people (no shit). The constitution states that the house and the senate must pass IDENTICAL versions of the budget bill and Pelosi is backed by some legal scholars.

The GOP predictably played the obstruction game. Democrats don't want to move this country forward because they're more focused on winning political points by attacking us virtuous Republicans. They don't care about the deficit because it's not our fault spending on social programs is getting out of control. Republicans are going to try to win this issue on a 1892 Supreme Court opinion (obscure) that says minor procedural irregularities can be forgiven if the Speaker of the House and the Senate president say the bills are correct.

This is what happens when one party controls every branch of government, no matter what the GOP wants to think. They want to obscure the fact that Republicans control everything so that when things go wrong, they can blame o yes, Democrats and liberals whether it is Democratic obstructionists in Congress or "liberal activist judges" (notice they never use the word conservative even though studies show that the conservative judges are more likely to overturn earlier cases) in the Supreme Court.

The GOP doesn't want to go through the tenacious battle it fought just to pass this abomination of a budget bill. As John points out, the bill cut funding to the weakest members of our society. I'll add that they cut programs off the backs of the elderly, poor, and students not to reduce the deficit but to justify their cutting taxes to the extremely rich. Notice how conservatives never complain when taxes to the extremely rich are cut because they cling to the discredited trickle-down theory. Of course the tax cuts have not worked. *(Point that out to a Republican and he/she'll blame you for hating Bush) It's no surprise that someday the only college opportunities will be through the military. I heard on Ed Schultz's show from a caller on the massive increase of recruitment posters that said "Join the army and get money for college!" Of course the catch is that if you get killed, those promises of money mean nothing to you. But if you're rich and your parents can afford to buy you that Porsche, then you have nothing to worry about. Welcome to the club! Everyone else can go Fuck themselves.

Monday, February 13, 2006

Rant from an opinionated fool

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) spoke after Mehlman, and he promised that on June 5 he will bring to the floor a constitutional amendment to bar same-sex marriage, and pledged a May vote on eliminating the estate tax, items high on the conservative agenda.

Frist said the amendment is needed to protect the majority of Americans, whom he said oppose same-sex marriage, from "the whims of a few activist judges" who seek to "override the commonsense of the American people." He added, "When America's values are under attack, we need to act."

A similar amendment failed to win the necessary votes in 2004.
Oh wait, is it 2006 yet? It must be because we're hearing about the Federal Marriage Amendment which seeks to protect and save marriage from those godless homosexuals. We all know that allowing gay people to get married means that some unseen force will come into our homes and dissolve the sacred bond between man and woman. Perhaps Eris, goddess of discord will do her dirty work destroying our marriages, after all she helped cause the Trojan War, didn't she?

It is perfect as the Republicans don't have enough votes to get the amendment passed. Then it'll have to go to the states if it were to pass, which is definitely not a guarantee. What can the GOP do with this? That's right, it's time to play, "WHO WANTS TO BE A VICTIM?!" Once the amendment fails to pass, the GOP can turn around and blame godless liberals who want to magically turn everyone gay. The oppressor has struck again, striking down the poor Christians who want to protect their own families and communities from the gay scourge. If it weren't for the fact that the base is brainwashed, the GOP wouldn't dare do this because it's just so obvious. Their strategy is to gain points for effort from their base and if they actually win on this issue, it's just a bonus.

Poor Fundies and Evangelicals. You will never learn that you are second at the trough. You will never know that the GOP is playing a game with you and that the GOP doesn't really give a damn whether gays can get married or not or that if they do, it's not much of a priority. You'll never learn because in the arrogance of claiming that you were responsible for Bush's so-called "victory" when it was the voting machines and voting irregularities, you have been brainwashed into believing that Bush would reward you for your support.

Let's take a look at GOP "victories" (a short list) and priorities
  1. Class Action Fairness Act (Tort Reform), better known as the Cheney the Consumer Act, because we all know people who are exposed to asbestos deserve what they get because they should have taken the personal responsibility to avoid getting into such situations.
  2. Bankruptcy legislation, because we all know those who file for bankruptcy are not affected by medical costs, but in reality are shiftless and lazy Americans who charge everything to their credit card bill and don't pay afterwards even though they run around with Cadillacs and Hummers. The Finance Sector gave $195 million to the Republican Party in 2004. Most of Bush's Pioneers are from this area.
  3. Energy Bill, better known as the Big Oil Welfare Act - provides legal protections for gasoline addictive that contaminates water and billions for the purposes of exploration
  4. The Senate passed $70 billion in tax cuts over five years although it has to be negotiated in the House.
  5. Social SEcurity destruction
  6. Drilling in ANWR
  7. Tax cuts
  8. Big Pharma Subsidization
  10. Repeal of the Death Estate Tax
  11. Drilling in our public lands
  12. Renewing the PATRIOT ACT

Now let's look at GOP "victories" when it comes to "family values."
  1. The Partial-Birth Abortion ban - Surely it means that the GOP has delivered on the abortion issue, right? Nope, they had it all planned out that it would be struck down by the courts because they did not include exceptions for the health of the mother. So cross that one off.
  2. Federal Marriage Amendment (Whoops, that failed to muster enough votes in 2004, haha 0WN3D!
  3. Alito and Roberts on the Supreme Court (Whoops, they're more considered about the rights of corporations although Alito is more in tune to the Religious Right) 0.5 points for the Religious Right there

The Republican Party would be an extreme minority party without the Religious Right marching in lockstep and it's no surprise that the GOP is reaching out to them in an election year. Will Dobson and Perkins and all of the other leaders of the Religious Right understand that they are being played for fools? The GOP thinks that the Religious Right will be satisfied with state amendments defining marriage as between a man and a woman, but the Religious Right is drunk with power and believes that it is their time. This does not bode well for the GOP if the Religious Right alienates the moderates in the center.

Perhaps the fundies should get behind Roy Moore for President in 2008. After all, he is obviously the greatest Christian in America because he supports having the Ten Commandments in every courtroom, truly a sign of being a great Christian, right? Perhaps if they fought this vehemently for the Beatitudes and modeled themselves after Jesus, our country would truly be more compassionate instead of "compassionate." Note the difference. (However, this does not take into account the voting machines which can instantly summon up millions of mythological evangelical voters into supporting the GOP even if someone like Rudy Guiliani is nominated.)

And for my Classics allusion, why is the army still discharging gay people who obviously want to serve their country and protect us Americans? Look back to the days of ancient Greece in the fourth century right before Alexander. What was the greatest fighting force in ancient Greece? the SACRED BAND. What was the Sacred Band? 150 pairs of male lovers who fought side by side. The Thebans believed that these males would not dare to shame themselves in front of their lovers and would protect them at all costs. The Sacred Band has been written into the annals of history at Chaironeia where their last stand cost them 246 out of the 300 perished against Philip of Macedon's army. Today, the Sacred Band would have been discharged without question. Does the army truly want to protect us Americans when it fired 26 linguists including 6 who specialized in ARABIC? Doesn't it speak volumes that these linguists who wanted to help out in the "War on Terror" were not rehired?


Has the National Litterbox Administration gotten so used to death and destruction that they can't even handle a single hunting accident? How predictable is it that they tried to cover it up too? and Why was the guy only sent to the hospital three hours after the shooting happened and why did it take a reporter who covered the hospital to break the story? It's obvious, the White House is so used to covering things up that it has become natural to them, even an incident such as a hunting accident.

Sunday morning talk shows. Imagine if they were all talking about the National Scratching Post shooting someone. How much bad PR they would have gotten.

Sunday, February 12, 2006

The Cats have blessed us with the largest underground tomb found from ancient Greece

Greeks find largest Macedonian tomb of nobles

By Deborah Kyvrikosaios Sun Feb 12, 9:32 AM ET

ATHENS (Reuters) - Greek archaeologists said on Sunday they had discovered the largest underground tomb in Greek antiquity in the ancient city of Pella in northern Greece, birthplace of Alexander the Great.

The eight-chamber tomb rich in painted sculpture dates to the Hellenistic period between the 3rd and 2nd century BC and offers scholars a rare glimpse into the life of nobles around the time of Alexander's death.

"This is the largest, sculptured, multi-chambered tomb found in Greece, and is significant in that it is a new architectural style -- there are many chambers and a long entrance arcade," the chief archaeologist at Pella, Maria Akamati, told Reuters.

Akamati said that the tomb, accessible through a 16-meter long entrance, was uncovered in an agricultural plot bordering the ancient cemetery of the capital city of the Macedonian kingdom.

Until now, the largest chambered funeral tomb found in Greece contained up to three chambers.

Intact, inscribed tombstones, with the names of the owners still visible, and a vast array of rich artifacts including jewelry, copper coins and earthen vases, led archaeologists to the conclusion that the tomb belonged to a noble family.

"This was a very rich family. This is rare as the cemetery is full of plebeians (commoners)," said Akamati. "We actually learned the names of the owners from the tombstones."

Akamati said at least seven to eight family members had been buried in the chambers, but the tomb had most likely been plundered over generations as luxury personal artifacts were missing.

But the painted plaster of the chambers, with red, blue and white dyes, was still evident on the walls, said Akamati.

The ancient city of Pella was part of the Macedonian kingdom, ruled by Phillip of Macedon, and later by his son Alexander the Great, where he was born in 356 BC and spent his childhood years before setting off to conquer the known world.

The tomb dates to the period after Alexander's death, Akamatis said, which was marked by mass power struggles and intrigues by the royal family and Alexander's generals battling for control of his empire.


As you know, Pella was the capital of Macedonia from 400 BC and on as it offered a better means of communication with the north and east. The place is full of mosaics full of heroes, hunts, and battles have been found. Scholars speculate that this was a part of the hero-worshipping elite and debate whether these mosaics have a basis in reality or are just fantastic representations of how the elite wanted to view themselves (Pedley 334).

Saturday, February 11, 2006

I was in the bus the other day and chanced to see a Coast Guard advertisement which said, "Courage, Conviction, and Compassion which got me thinking. Compassion. What does it mean? How many times have we heard this word from the National Litterbox? He uses it so much that the word which was powerful in its own right is cheapened down to a whored-out phrase that earns political points. What did it use to mean now that the word itself has evolved into something very different?

Compassion is defined by as "Deep awareness of the suffering of another coupled with the wish to relieve it."

We show compassion abroad because Americans believe in the God- given dignity and worth of a villager with HIV/AIDS, or an infant with malaria, or a refugee fleeing genocide, or a young girl sold into slavery.

We also show compassion abroad because regions overwhelmed by poverty, corruption and despair are sources of terrorism and organized crime and human trafficking and the drug trade.

yet he does nothing about workers in the Mariana Islands exploited with forced prostitution and forced abortions. Tom Delay, supposedly one of the "godliest" members of Congress today for his stance against abortion is connected to the Mariana Islands sweatshops. Women from mostly China are lured to the islands promised a chance to immigrate to Asia but are forced into 70-hour weeks and when they can't pay off their debts are forced into prostitution. Basically Abramoff met with Tom Delay to kill Frank Murkowski's bill that would have extended U.S. minimum-wage and labor protection laws to the workers over in Saipan. In addition, the workers over there are forced to have abortions. How's that for family values? STOP THE PRESSES! Where are the Evangelicals? Where are the fundamentalist Christians?! Where are Falwell, Dobson, Perkins, and Robertson? Where are the Men of God? Where is the Man of God?

I understand that abstinence is a way to prevent AIDS but he and the Religious Right are not concerned with fighting AIDS. Nope, they are more concerned with regulating what they consider to be morality. It's not our fault that couple over there got AIDS. They chose to have sex and now pay the consequences. A vaccine that would prevent millions of deaths from cervical cancer? Who opposes it? Of course, those who spew out the word compassion, compassion, compassion! because why should sluts who might get the HPV virus that is linked to cervical cancer be vaccinated? Let them die for choosing a LIFE OF SIN!

Let us not forget the aftermath of the tsunami that killed over 200,000 people. Where were the armies of compassion then? Where were the Religious Right groups soliticiting donations from their members? Where were the requests for donations on the American Family Association's webpage? Focus on the Family? I checked their sites after reading Bill Berkowitz's article and all the hype was about the threat to marriage and such.

America is a great force for freedom and prosperity. Yet our greatness is not measured in power or luxuries, but by who we are and how we treat one another. So we strive to be a compassionate, decent, hopeful society.

As we renew the promise of our institutions, let us also show the character of America in our compassion and care for one another.

Unfortunately, America is where greatness is measured by how much money you have and Bush is not lifting a finger to change all of that. It seems that in Bush's America, if you're rich, powerful, and well-connected, you get some. Everyone else (students, those on Medicare, the poor, those who cannot afford to go to college without financial aid, etc.) gets fucked. It is no surprise that this "compassionate" administration's budget cuts what they consider "waste" like health care, child care programs, and student loans while it seeks more tax cuts for the richest Americans. All we hear from this administration is tax cuts, tax cuts, and more tax cuts, clinging to the discredited theory which states that tax cuts help stimulate the economy and provide jobs. You tell me. Which is the party with no ideas?

So in conclusion, Bush has now redefined the term as "Deep awareness of the suffering of the most oppressed of Americans (corporations and the richest 1%) coupled with the wish to relieve it through tax cuts, corporate subsidies, and cuts to programs that benefit the oppressor (the middle class, the poor, US).

Lest I forget, compassion is now also defined as showing a faux compassionate expression on your face in photo-ops after disasters such as 9/11 and Katrina and being photographed with minorities to show that you think of them, come election time. Even then, he isn't good with that and then last, but especially not least, you have Cat Killer's "Get some devastation in the back,"(after his visit to the areas affected by the tsunami).

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Jack Abramoff says Bush knew and often joked with him, even about family details...Who is telling the truth?

Live Vote
Who do you believe is telling the truth? * 11983 responses
Both. They just came away with different impressions from the same events.
Not a scientifically valid survey. Click to learn more.


Tuesday, February 07, 2006

The true sleeper cells

Thursday, February 02, 2006

You may think that your right to free speech is being curbed. I don't care. Not when someone in Massachusetts of all places goes out on a rampage and starts hacking and shooting patrons at a gay bar. You may think the so-called homo agenda is trying to suppress your religious beliefs when it seeks legislation on hate crimes. You may think gays and lesbians are the oppressors while you turn into the victims. You may think that they are seeking to destroy Christianity either by perverting it from within or preaching what you consider a "false message" of tolerance.

George W. Bush should be ashamed of himself, using homophobia as a politically-charged weapon in order to score points when it comes to the elections and the SOTU. He may think he is protecting the nation's morality but I fail to see how inspiring someone to go out to try to kill the patrons at a gay bar is moral. It may not have been his intention nor that of the Religious Right or the GOP but when you imply that gays and lesbians are less than human and are tainted, someone will rise up and do something about it. I fail to see how writing in discrimination into our sacred Constitution is moral. I fail to see how not focusing on the marginalized but instead demonizing them is moral. I fail to see how George W. Bush is the paragon of virtue and morality. If he is, I am a Canine Dominionist and I think cats are the minions of the Antichrist.

Basically what these Christians are doing is turning the political arena into the Colosseum where they bravely stand against the lions (the homo agenda) and await martyrdom with unconquered spirits. They are trying to suffer the martyrdom without actually suffering the martyrdom they say guarantees a ticket in heaven (if that even makes any sense). Basically, my point is that they are trying to be martyrs but are faux martyrs who trivialize the experiences of those persecuted.

Christians are not oppressed here. We should be thankful that we could worship here in peace without having the police force us to go underground such as in Communist China or North Korea. We should be thankful that we aren't taxed in order to continue our faith. We should be thankful that we can even pray in schools, just as long as it's not mandated. What's to prevent a child from praying before he eats his lunch in the cafeteria?

I thought religion was supposed to be a private thing. Did not Jesus tell us not to pray out in the public streetcorners like the hypocrites did? Did he not tell us to fast with a joyful heart for the Father knows your true heart? Did he not tell us to pray in your own room with the door closed so only you and whomever you prayed to hears? Why are these fundamentalists or evangelicals or whoever they are trying to publicize their faith and supposed persecution? Are they not the hypocrites Jesus warned us about? The highly-polished gravestones on top of graves with rotting flesh and bones?

Where we should all draw the line is homophobia. As I have pointed out before, it's alright if you gently discourage your congregation in a private sermon in your own church from engaging in homosexual behavior if you deem it a sin. It's one thing to believe that homosexual behavior is a sin as disturbing as that belief is though. It's another when you start demonizing a people and attempt to deny them rights, especially PROTECTION from being fired on the job simply due to your sexual orientation. People like Ken Hutcherson may profess to hate the sin while loving the sinner, but I fail to see how coming out against an anti-discrimination bill that includes gays and lesbians is loving the sinner. I fail to see what's wrong with ending a practice in 36 states which allows corporations or employers to FIRE someone if they find out he/she's gay. I fail to see how housing discrimination is loving the sinner.

You would think the Religious Right would be satisfied with a compromise situation like that of Canada. OVER there, their Supreme Court ruled that the government must sanction gay marriage as a form of a civil right but simultaneously could not force any religious institution to accept the marriages itself.

I do not buy the argument from conservatives that says that gays and lesbians chose this lifestyle and with that lifestyle come the consequences. I do not buy the argument that says they chose to be gay and "immoral" so they have to pay the price even if it means not getting married or getting fired on the job. Even if homosexuality is a choice, which I am highly doubtful it is, Conservatives have had no problems denying rights to people who could not choose their gender or the color of their skin. They had no problem restricting the right of suffrage to rich white males because apparently these men made the choice of being white and rich *rolls eyes.

If we are so intent on opposing "sin," how come there is not a movement against adulterers? Let's strip their right to not be fired on the job. Let's have corporations pry into our secret lives in order to determine if you've cheated on your spouse. If you have, let them fire you. Let's see how far that'll go in the Republican Congress.

Great goddess, if I have offered the best catnip to you, whose name inspires awe and fear in all living things, dissolve every enchantment and every form of hatred against us, for I conjure you by the great and terrible name which the winds fear and the rocks split when they hear it, the great and terrible name which the raging fire obeys.”

Wednesday, February 01, 2006

SOTU, Part I

As Prepared For Delivery

Mr. Speaker, Vice President Cheney, Members of Congress, Members of the
Supreme Court and diplomatic corps, distinguished guests, and fellow

Today our Nation lost a beloved, graceful, courageous woman who called
America to its founding ideals and carried on a noble dream. Tonight we
are comforted by the hope of a glad reunion with the husband who was taken
from her so long ago, and we are grateful for the good life of Coretta
Scott King.

Lip service to the black community after all, Bush loves black people...which is why he tries to get them riled up on gay marriage and abortion while doing away with affirmative action and putting judges that would side against them in discrimination cases...

Each time I am invited to this rostrum, I am humbled by the privilege, and
mindful of the history we have seen together. We have gathered under this
Capitol dome in moments of national mourning and national achievement. We
have served America through one of the most consequential periods of our
history – and it has been my honor to serve with you.

In a system of two parties, two chambers, and two elected branches, there
will always be differences and debate. But even tough debates can be
conducted in a civil tone, and our differences cannot be allowed to harden
into anger. To confront the great issues before us, we must act in a
spirit of good will and respect for one another – and I will do my part.
Tonight the state of our Union is strong – and together we will make it

You are the BIGGEST hypocrite when it comes to debate. The only form of debate you will tolerate is one side arguing how great you are while the other side attacks the other for not liking the president enough. You stand supposedly above the fray while your minions attack and smear your political opponents. You did it with John McCain in South Carolina, appealing to the racist hicks by a push poll asking if they approved of his "fathering a black baby." You stood by while allowing the Swift Boats to attack John Kerry's record. Don't talk to us about civil tone when you and the Republicans have POISONED THE political dialogue in the United States.

In this decisive year, you and I will make choices that determine both the
future and the character of our country. We will choose to act
confidently in pursuing the enemies of freedom – or retreat from our
duties in the hope of an easier life. We will choose to build our
prosperity by leading the world economy – or shut ourselves off from trade
and opportunity. In a complex and challenging time, the road of
isolationism and protectionism may seem broad and inviting – yet it ends
in danger and decline. The only way to protect our people … the only way
to secure the peace … the only way to control our destiny is by our
leadership – so the United States of America will continue to lead.

Yes, we will lead by example by criticizing countries for human rights violations while we torture "terrorists" at Guanantamo and Abu Ghirab, many who are innocent of the charges. We talk about leading when we replace Saddam's rape rooms with our own. We talk about leading the world when we invade other countries to control the black gold and for hegemony in the Middle East while lying to the world about WMD. Unfortunately for you, you have squandered all the good will the US received after 9/11. Even Iran was sympathetic to us after we got hit.

Abroad, our Nation is committed to an historic, long-term goal – we seek
the end of tyranny in our world. Some dismiss that goal as misguided
idealism. In reality, the future security of America depends on it. On
September 11th, 2001, we found that problems originating in a failed and
oppressive state seven thousand miles away could bring murder and
destruction to our country. Dictatorships shelter terrorists, feed
resentment and radicalism, and seek weapons of mass destruction.
Democracies replace resentment with hope, respect the rights of their
citizens and their neighbors, and join the fight against terror. Every
step toward freedom in the world makes our country safer, and so we will
act boldly in freedom’s cause.

The rhetoric is great, but the actions belie the words. We continue to support oppressive regimes in the Middle East that deprive their citizens of the freedom you so talk about. They don't hate us for our freedoms, they hate us because we deny them the freedom we supposedly consider is America's gift to the whole world. They see our talk about promoting democracy when we support the Saudi Royal family, dictators in Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan, corrupt presidents such as Hosni Mubarak.

Far from being a hopeless dream, the advance of freedom is the great story
of our time. In 1945, there were about two dozen lonely democracies on
Earth. Today, there are 122. And we are writing a new chapter in the
story of self-government – with women lining up to vote in Afghanistan …
and millions of Iraqis marking their liberty with purple ink … and men and
women from Lebanon to Egypt debating the rights of individuals and the
necessity of freedom. At the start of 2006, more than half the people of
our world live in democratic nations. And we do not forget the other half
– in places like Syria, Burma, Zimbabwe, North Korea, and Iran – because
the demands of justice, and the peace of this world, require their freedom
as well.

As we speak, women are losing their freedom in Iraq.

No one can deny the success of freedom, but some men rage and fight
against it. And one of the main sources of reaction and opposition is
radical Islam – the perversion by a few of a noble faith into an ideology
of terror and death. Terrorists like bin Laden are serious about mass
murder – and all of us must take their declared intentions seriously.
They seek to impose a heartless system of totalitarian control throughout
the Middle East, and arm themselves with weapons of mass murder. Their
aim is to seize power in Iraq, and use it as a safe haven to launch
attacks against America and the world. Lacking the military strength to
challenge us directly, the terrorists have chosen the weapon of fear.
When they murder children at a school in Beslan … or blow up commuters in
London … or behead a bound captive … the terrorists hope these horrors
will break our will, allowing the violent to inherit the Earth. But they
have miscalculated: We love our freedom, and we will fight to keep it.

We love our freedom, but according to your logic, we have allowed the terrorists to win by clamping down on political speech, squashing dissent, and spying on our own citizens without a warrant because they do not hold your own political beliefs. You claim the terrorists hate us for our freedom and it does not take a dimwit to realize that we should defend our freedom in order to overcome the terrorists. However, you have turned America into a police state modeled after Orwell's Oceania and that cannot be considered a victory.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?