Saturday, June 17, 2006
To vote against the measure, you also had to vote against the part that said that the House "honors all those Americans who have taken an active part in the Global War on Terror, whether as first responders protecting the homeland, as servicemembers overseas, as diplomats and intelligence officers, or in other roles."This is nothing more than election year politics and the Rethugicans know it. Instead of offering viable solutions to better protect our troops and to further our counterterrorism efforts, the Republicans can only offer a resolution devoid of all aid which spits on our troops by offering faux support and nothing more. Republicans are probably going to have their way on this, but the Democrats have proof that they need that the Republicans are politicizing the troops. In order to honor the troops, they must be provided the best equipment and treatment if they should come home with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Many of the GOP could care less about our troops beyond the fact that they consider the troops useful tools for photo-ops and campaign tools. Many of the GOP could care less that troops are coming home stressed, depressed, or even suicidal. That’s why the GOP offers meaningless resolutions designed with the 2006 elections in mind. That’s why the GOP offers resolutions that offer “support” to the troops, but not beyond rhetoric. To a Chimpevik neo-con, a soldier with PTSD should just suck it up and hold it in so that he could return to the killing fields in Iraq. Some morality there from people who supposedly call themselves pro-life.
But you know what? If they want to play hardball, we can play it too Perhaps, what the Democrats should do is to call for rescinding the tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans to pay for the troops’ equipment and armor, perhaps a raise in their danger pay, to fund VA services and hospitals, treatment for PTSD. Perhaps the money that would be saved this way should go to Operation Helmet which is donating money to modify our troops’ helmets so that they would be able to better absorb the shock resulting from a bomb blast. Perhaps they should offer an amendment that does exactly that to every bill that will be discussed in the House or however it works. Perhaps they should make the Republicans feel uncomfortable just like the Republicans are attempting to do with the Democrats. Of course the Republicans will sanctimoniously proclaim that the Democrats are exploiting our troops, forgetting that they are doing it themselves for political reasons and yes, I understand the media will trumpet that talking point, but we have to try something. Yes, I know the odds are stacked against us but if Ghana can upset the #2 team in the world today, then we can overcome this too.
That would go far more in supporting the troops than a mere campaign prop designed to discredit the opposition at the troops’ expense. But do you hear about the Republicans’ attempts to cut back funding for the Veterans’ Administration? Of course not, because the media buys into the myth that the Republicans are the only ones who support our troops while the Democrats are giving Bin Laden and whoever’s in charge of Al Qaeda in Iraq aid and comfort. Never mind that the Republicans are only interested in enriching their cronies in the defense industry. Never mind that the Republicans are only interested in using the troops for propaganda purposes and to drum up support for their failure of a war. If that is supporting the troops, I don’t know. If that is not treasonous by the media, I don’t know what is.
If you look at the Majority Leader’s memo that recently went out, it clearly shows the Republican’s playbook for 2006: EXPLOIT 9/11 mercilessly while claiming that Democrats are the one politicizing the tragedy. Project your faults and shortcomings unto the Democrats. Apparently these days, to question the Administration on the “War on Terror” and Homeland Security is to politicize 9/11, to use the deaths of the gallant fallen to attack the president baselessly.
It isn’t the Democrats who are politicizing 9/11. Apparently it’s not okay for the 9/11 widows to support the Democrats because they realize that the GOP has nothing new to offer in protecting our country besides getting into wars designed to maximize the profits of corporations. However, it’s ok for the White House to show United 93 in the White House itself to further its propaganda campaign to show us their version of the events that happened that tragic day in which Bush is a resolute leader who had his finest hour instead of the commander-in-chief who was motionless for the first few minutes while his country needed him the most. It’s ok for the GOP to connect 9/11 to Iraq and Saddam to falsely justify going to war to enrich their corporate buddies. It’s ok for the GOP to cry out 9/11 to justify anything from tax cuts to Halliburton’s contracts to the quagmire in Iraq, but it’s not okay for the Democrats to ask questions in where this administration’s policy is going, because nowadays, you’re supposed to follow in lockstep with the Dear Leader and not question him because he is the Man of God, whom God talks to, whom God has sent to save the world from itself.
Is there any wonder that Congress has an extremely low favorable rating in the 20s?! Is there any wonder that people figure that Congress does not have their best interests at hand? Murtha was correct in saying that it is our troops who fight the war while these bastards in Congress with their air-conditioned chamber politicize them by using them as political props to score points against the Democrats so that they could distract the American people away from their fuck-ups and incompetence that isn’t just incompetence but criminal in nature. Tragically, this will probably work because the media is on their side and the liberal media bias is nothing more than myth. (If you need proof, look at this article where it points out that liberal cartoonists have been censored while there has been NO censorship of conservative cartoonists anywhere.)
The lesson here is that if you're a Republican you can do anything you want and the media will give you a pass. If you're a Democrat or a liberal, you'll get pounded even if you had the best intentions in mind. Time to bring back the Fairness Doctrine.
Friday, June 16, 2006
Look closely at his new pick to head the Mine Health and Safety Administration (MHSA). Look at who he is: a coal industry executive. Isn't this a common feature in the Litterbox Administration? Consider that every regulation agency including this one is now run by Trojan Horses from the very industries they are supposed to regulate. Smarter regulation, my ass. It is meant this way so that these agencies become the fox guarding the henhouse.
I suspect that the provision in the bill that "requires" the government to study whether rescue chambers are placed in mines is only meant for show and does not show a serious attempt to further mine safety. Common sense dictates that since these chambers helped save the lives of 72 Canadian miners trapped in a mine, every mine should be required to place them. What is there to study? The impact on mine profits?! Yeah, some good that will do. It will probably not be recommended in the name of profits and competition, showing that how much these mine executives value the lives of their workers. For an administration that gives pocket change as fines to show that at least they're on the side of the consumer, it won't press mine owners to provide this safety net because it would cut into their profits. If Bush were truly pro-life instead of pro-profit, he would use his bully pulpit to DEMAND that the owners go the extra mile to ensure that every miner has a chance to survive.
To Bush, this is another photo-op to show that he cares, he really feels empathy just like President Clinton did back in the day. This is only to show that yes, he really cares for the common man, the miner, the average joe whom he loves to portray as his base. This is another attempt to show that he is the Father Figure who knows best and that we are only children who don't need to be in the know, that we should all just go about in our daily lives playing while Father goes through our rooms to protect us. Father knows best...and if Father wants a mine executive in charge of miner's safety, then so be it because who are we, the children to complain about anything just as long as we have our games and our celebrities making news on tv.
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Gay Marriage and Classics Departments?!
I fully agree with you that the greatest threat to our society is the rising, insurgent homo agenda. While people may point to our liberal media or Hollywood’s obsession with gays and lesbians as evidenced in the movie, Alexander and other shows like the infamous Will and Grace (by the way it is not helping that most of the queers are so damn hot) and Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, I would like to point to a more insidious source which will not surprise you, o Supreme Leader Bush: Classics programs found in many of our liberal traitorous institutions of higher learning, our universities infested with liberals, Al Qaeda sympathizers and adherents of the homo agenda which threatens to engulf the country like swarm of illegal immigrants (we’ll get to that later).
The basic class in any Classics department and a highly popular one is Mythology. Unfortunately for those opposing the homo agenda, this class isn’t exclusive to Classics majors but is offered as a general education course in virtually every university. It is not 100-150 students who take this per year per campus, but rather 1000-1500 throughout the course of one year. To emphasize my point, this is not the whole country we’re talking about but one campus. Surely is this not a plot by evil Classics professors to twist and pervert the minds of our youth by reaching out to countless majors who might not take the class if it didn’t help them to graduate? Are these mythology courses nothing more than their weapons of mass destruction to brainwash our children into thinking that gay marriage and homosexuality are perfectly legitimate?
The Federal Marriage Amendment’s detractors may point to Zeus’ various extra-marital affairs with mortal women but this is not the point here. Sure Zeus may have seduced or even raped 166 women but what should raise a red flag is the episode concerning Zeus and Ganymede. After all, did not Zeus stay married to Hera? Did not Hera decide not to leave Zeus? Surely, this must mean that extra-marital affairs as long as they are heterosexual do not destroy the institution of marriage. No, Ganymede is not a woman. No, he was an attractive Trojan who caught the fancy of Zeus. Ironically, since the Greeks destroyed that Sodom, Troy, it must have been Zeus and Ganymede’s fault since gay marriage and/or homosexual relations are the downfall of our society. To those who say divorce is the main enemy against marriage, I say to you that many of our divorcees are getting married twice or even more. There’s even one of our own who was married to more than one woman at the SAME TIME! Surely this must mean that divorces lead to more marriages which means that the institution of marriage is strengthened. I always say strength in NUMBERS, because they say old marriages never die, they just fade away!
To those who point out the hypocrisy of the GOP which is full of “adulterers.” I point out that our motives when committing adultery are more noble and just, the only instances when this sin is justified. For when we cheat on our wives, it is not for reasons of pure lust like that unnamed president I do not care to mention (For every time you mention his name, a catastrophe happens. Hell, Robert Jordan should have named Shai’tan Clinton or something.). Rather, it is to spread the joys of marriage around so that we may inspire our girlfriends or boyfriends to get married themselves. By seeming to destroy the institution of marriage, we are actually strengthening it by inspiring more to partake in its blessings so the accusations of hypocrisy are unfounded. Ergo, I praise these prominent representatives of the GOP for risking their reputations and becoming the butt of jokes everywhere in the liberal community just for protecting the sacred institution of marriage.
Of course, everyone knows if you allow gays to get married then what’s to stop a man from marrying a pig or a woman a bull? Surely it has never been thought of before! Alas, we now turn to an episode in Greek mythology infamous for its immorality and as we remember Pasiphae and the bull she had intercourse with! It is obvious that since Greek Mythology is polluted with instances of homosexual love, it must also be tainted with bestiality which means they automatically lead to one another. Take heed, America of this lesson for we shall lose our country once gays get married and people start marrying bulls, horses, pigs, and God knows what! We do not need animal-hybrids running around feasting on the flesh of man as our glorious Leader has pointed out before. Also, since Teiresias said himself that women enjoy sex more than men so that must mean that when men sleep around, it’s legitimate but when women do, they’re immoral. This is about the only thing that Greek mythology got right, but I guess even a broken clock has to tell the time correctly once in a while.
The horrors do not end there. Take the Sacred Band. Everyone knows that queers cannot fight and are nothing more than what the Governator (not the Gropinator, you damn liberals! Now that’s a man’s man for you) calls “girly men.” Therefore, tales that they defeated the manly Spartans at Leuktra are obviously false. The Spartans were an ideal of masculinity and would have never lost to such women. Perhaps the Spartans were tired that day or simply felt sorry for these effeminate men. If the Spartans lost to the Thebans at Leuktra, then the most effeminate of all, those Persians defeated the Greeks during the Persian Wars. What kind of message does this send to our troops who constantly have to worry about the enemy in the front lines and in the rear as the most holy Jerry Falwell has pointed out? What kind of message does this send when Classics professors point to the Sacred Band as one of the greatest fighting forces in ancient Greece before Alexander’s time? What kind of message does this send when our men are fighting for their lives? That it’s okay to be feminine?
Why stop at military history and mythology? Take the art of Ancient Greece. Why are the Greeks portrayed in the nude while fighting? Why are we allowed to look at nude flesh? This obviously must be a conspiracy by Greek liberals who undoubtedly knew that they would be studied in our universities to corrupt future minds and convert them to the cult of homosexuality. Also, that dying warrior in the West Pediment of the Temple of Aphaia? Why is he smiling? Is it because he is dying and is anxiously waiting for the homosexual orgy in Hades? So many answers, so many things to be suspicious of. After all, these are Greeks we are talking about. Also those koiroi. Why were the Greeks so obsessed about creating giant statues of nude boys and men? If our youth were exposed to them in our museums, what is to prevent them from looking at, o I cannot finish this sentence, such is the horror of the thought. Pat Robertson’s brain might explode, that is if he does not hurl them like a discus far far away before that happens. Are we to send our children to Hell in the name of art appreciation? I think NOT!
Even the Romans were not fully without blame. I was at a fundraiser for you when I heard one of my colleagues bemoan the fact that his son was learning Catullus at his commie-pinko university! Did you know that Poem 16 starts off with the unholy phrase, “pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo?” Do you know that this phrase can cause the minds of angels to explode? Do you even know what that means? If you don’t then don’t look them up! A true patriot refers to it as Clintonizing which reminds me to thank you for not dragging our country into the fiery gates of hell like he did. I truly fear for that virtuous child as since he is learning about buggering, he must get the urge to go bugger someone or even worse get buggered himself!
In fact, my suspicions were confirmed as my colleague reported that he caught his son in a gay chat room! Next thing you know, the dad finds out that his boy has registered as a Democrat and has joined Human Rights Campaign’s mailing list. (Therefore we must also monitor all internet activity, FOR THE CHILDREN’S SAKE!) He has also donated to Francine Busby’s campaign, that uppity bitch who praised a teacher who had CHILD PORNOGRAPHY on his computer (This is PROOF that Democrats support child pornography. Yes we do have our bad apples but I emphasize that these are an extreme minority who look for the chance for redemption and forgiveness!)! I mean why Busby? Why not Bilbray? I blame Catullus as I am sure you would for this sheep being led astray. The heartbreak on the poor father’s face cannot be described with mere words, dear Supreme Leader. Oh the horror! See what a Catullus class can do to the young minds of our country?
Surely this must mean that Catullus is connected to child pornography even though the liberals are trying to paint us as hypocritical child molesters ourselves. Surely, if the FCC is handing out indecency fines, surely you can investigate the universities for these corrupting Catullus classes, which brings me to my point about abstinence-only programs! I thank heaven every day that you are promoting these programs because if we teach our children about the dangers of sex and the effectiveness of condoms, they will just go out and have sex. If our children want Roman lyric poetry, they should turn to Tibullus and Propertius for at least they wrote about their lovers even if they weren’t married to them. That’s okay because it does not destroy marriage like gay marriage would. Anyways, please pray for this lost soul as I fear it may be too late unless you step in to intervene with your holy powers. In addition, we must ban Sappho because any girl reading her poems will instantly be enthralled by Aphrodite and become a lesbian even though lesbianism is more acceptable because it's so damn hot!
I long for the days of ancient Rome where fathers had absolute control over their families. If a son talked back to him, then the paterfamilias could order his son killed! Brutus, that honorable man ordered his sons executed when they were exposed as traitors collaborating with the Tarquins to restore the Roman monarchy. Oh, if we had multi Bruti today to deal with those traitorous liberals who undermine the war on terror by protesting against this constitutional amendment? Brutus would not stand idly by while liberals take the side of Osama Bin Laden who obviously wants us not to pass this Federal Marriage Amendment because if we do not, then
I can go on and on but I fear that I would cause your precious mind to explode, o Supreme Leader Bush and if that would happen, who would lead our country? If you were not there, surely the homo agenda forces would attack us in the rear just as the Persians did at Thermopylae (O if we only had the Tribulation Force at our side). Perhaps I shall send you another letter continuing this discussion if you can follow me. I know you’re a busy man and contrary to what those liberals say you are too busy protecting the country from the homo agenda to worry about reading, not because you are stupid. How dare they say that about you, the Man of God, the Augustus of our time? Please read this letter for the fate of Western Civilization counts on it. Already I can feel the homo agenda’s grip pollute my thoughts as I am desperately trying to fend off their propaganda with a pure-hearted mind like the mind you have.
And to those who say that this is a distraction, a wedge issue meant to turn out the Religious Right vote in droves, I recite the immortal paean first chanted by a true Christian, which reaches out to the heavens and bestows upon the angels their wings whenever it is heard, “GO FUCK YOURSELF!” It is obvious that your friend does not know you as well as this godly dittohead who can peer into your soul and see the true goodness there with a gaze that transcends mere words which are like leaves cast away in the wind, not to be remembered as the truth. The liberals say you sounded bored today when you came out in favor of the Federal Marriage Amendment and this must mean that you were doing this not out of sincerity but political expediency, but I refuse to believe them. After all they are liberals and when have they ever told the truth about anything? You must have been exhausted, worrying yourself sick about the greatest homeland security threat our nation has ever faced.
OH GOD! I JUST REALIZED THAT MAN IN LATIN IS HOMO! WE’RE DOOMED! Therefore, we must ban Latin Masses in addition for Latin must be stamped out from the earth. Our children must not be allowed to substitute homo for man. Homo is only reserved for those who truly deserve it: liberals and their gay, homosexual base.
In conclusion, most holy light of the world, a shining beacon in the darkness that shrouds our nation, the one who can tear the world asunder with one word, we must ban the liberal subversive Classics departments in our nation because they threaten the very fabric that holds our country together. Countless tales have been told of Classics majors who engage in fornication and unholy Bacchanalias after learning about the Bacchants in your average Roman Civilization class. The annals of our history are written with accounts of Classics majors researching homosexuality in ancient Greece and in ancient magic when it is clear that the Greeks were nothing more than decadent faggots who were conquered by the virtuous Romans. What kind of message are we sending our children when the very institutions that are supposed to educate our students in being productive and godly members of our Christian nation are nothing more than Trojan Horses meant to destroy our country by crumbling our most sacred institution, marriage? As they say, “Beware Greeks (in this case, Classics departments) bearing gifts.”
Obviously this is satire, but I hope I have not offended anyone, especially with the use of the F word and the blatant sexism concerning lesbianism. I was trying to impersonate a Religious Right fanatic.
Saturday, June 03, 2006
Bush's speech (with his true thoughts added)
Marriage is the most enduring and important human institution, honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith. Ages of experience have taught us that the commitment of a husband and a wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society (but it's alright to divorce as long as you were in a heterosexual marriage because well yeah it might hurt the children but at least they won't turn gay or somethin'. A small price to pay. Gee I better not mention divorce or else I'll lose the fundie vote). Marriage cannot be cut off from its cultural, religious, and natural roots without weakening this good influence on society. Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all (corporations and the top 5% of the country).
In our free society, people have the right to choose how they live their lives (except if you're queer). And in a free society, decisions about such a fundamental social institution as marriage should be made by the people -- not by the courts (but it's ok for the courts to make decisions kow-towing to corporations, my true base). The American people have spoken clearly on this issue, both through their representatives and at the ballot box (thanks to us fear-mongering and implying that gays will kidnap their children and brain-wash them into turning homosexual). In 1996, Congress approved the Defense of Marriage Act by overwhelming bipartisan majorities in both the House and Senate, and President Clinton signed it into law (about the only thing he did right). And since then, voters in 19 states have approved amendments to their state constitutions that protect the traditional definition of marriage (the voters finally did something right for a change. I guess in some rare cases, you can trust the people to do the right thing). And today, 45 of the 50 states have either a state constitutional amendment or statute defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman (Because if we let the gays get married, who knows what might happen? People might start marrying pigs or dolphins!). These amendments and laws express a broad consensus in our country for protecting the institution of marriage.
Unfortunately, activist judges and some local officials have made an aggressive attempt to redefine marriage in recent years (damn liberals! they control EVERYTHING). Since 2004, state courts in Washington, California, Maryland, and New York have overturned laws protecting marriage in those states. And in Nebraska, a federal judge overturned a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
These court decisions could have an impact on our whole Nation (because if the gay agenda comes forth, our nation will crumble to the dust, but that might not be so bad...because Jesus will come and smite down the queers and all heathens and rapture all us good Christians up). The Defense of Marriage Act declares that no state is required to accept another state's definition of marriage. If that act is overturned by activist courts, then marriages recognized in one city or state might have to be recognized as marriages everywhere else. That would mean that every state would have to recognize marriages redefined by judges in Massachusetts or local officials in San Francisco (I'm surprised God hasn't told Pat Robertson that an earthquake or meteor swarm will destroy our Sodom and Gomorrah), no matter what their own laws or state constitutions say. This national question requires a national solution, and on an issue of such profound importance (o yeah, we all know that gay marriage is the biggest threat of terraism that we face today. Hell for all I know, the homo agenda might be in league with what's that guy's name again?), that solution should come from the people, not the courts.
An amendment to the Constitution is necessary because activist courts have left our Nation with no other choice. (Only they were following the will of the people when they appointed me to the White House, yup, no judicial activism there, just good ole democracy working hard) The constitutional amendment that the Senate will consider next week would fully protect marriage from being redefined, while leaving state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage (I know it won't pass but Karl tells me it'll bring out the fundies, the rednecks, and the bigots to the polls). A constitutional amendment is the most democratic solution to this issue, because it must be approved by two-thirds of the House and Senate and then ratified by three-fourths of the 50 state legislatures.
As this debate goes forward, we must remember that every American deserves to be treated with tolerance, respect, and dignity (as long they agree with my political views). All of us have a duty to conduct this discussion with civility and decency toward one another, and all people deserve to have their voices heard (as long as they are on my side, everyone else can go fuck themselves). A constitutional amendment will put a decision that is critical to American families and American society in the hands of the American people, which is exactly where it belongs. Democracy, not court orders, should decide the future of marriage in America (except when it comes to stealing elections and giving corporations their just due).
Thank you for listening (ya dumbfucks. O wait, did I say that out loud?).