Republican Congressman Kingston May Have to Work

Crooks and Liars has the story of the true work ethic of our Congressmen...(ok, just some of them). A dude from Georgia named Kingston says its an outrage he should have to work instead of being back at home with his family.....

The story reports that Kingston flies home on Thursdays and stays until Tuesday. Overall it is said that when this 2006 session of Congress ends, the folks will have worked seven days less than the "do nothing" Congress of 1948.

Well, I don't know anything about them, but I do know that Rep. Kingston ought to be ASHAMED. His constituents work at LEAST five days a week. They would LOVE to spend more time with their families, but that's not the way the real world works.

In the real world we all work until late May JUST TO PAY OUR TAXES. By the way, Kingston, thats not a two and a half day work week. That's five and six days a week.
I don't have a problem with taxes. I'm in favor of them. I'm a liberal, so I like the idea of helping those who can't help themselves....of building infrastructure...of funding an assortment of worthy programs.

But I'm also offended by this Republican jerk for being so out of touch with the real world.

If you don't like your job, get a trust fund. (As if you don't already have one with that attitude.)

How Republicans Trick Us With Language

A great blogger named Kelly Gorski introduced me to an absolutely incredible piece of writing called "Don't Think of an Elephant" by George Lakoff.

Give yourself some time to read it...its 36 pages in pdf. It concerns Republican strategies, social theory and framing language (much like this book recommendation I posted previously.

Here is the link: Don't Think Like An Elephant.

(I probably haven't made it sound all that exciting...but if you are a person who continually wonders why people vote for Republicans NO MATTER what they do, you need to read this article!

Abortion & Queers: Surely Its All That Matters

Seems that the Rev. Joel Hunter has proven to be a man of principle. Doesn't mean he isn't heavily in favor of outlawing abortion and queers...but...but...wait for it....

For this Christian evangelical pastor, there are actually MORE things on a Christ-centered agenda than JUST abortion and queers!

Well, of course, the bad news is that Pat Robertson and the rest of the Christian Coalition couldn't jive with that, so Hunter resigned.

Does Pat MAYBE think this looks a bit bad? Might a FEW of the CC members see that Hunter quit because he "hoped to include issues such as easing poverty and saving the environment". (Hell, no wonder the Coalition didn't want him. Think how many blow jobs might be perpetrated while we're out there FEEDING SOME KID. The nerve of these liberals.


Now listen to what the CC told Hunter when he had the nerve to mention those snot-nose poverty people. ""They pretty much said, "These issues are fine, but they're not our issues; that's not our base,' "

Our base.

Its not our base, see?

You know...from the Greek word alkjoivuw,mn,mdlkuu, right? Where Jesus said, "feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the prisoner, yadayadayada.... but jab them fags in the eyes too, and get out the vote to make women drive to a different state for them abortions. And most of all, understand your base."
(Why is Jesus so misunderstood? Those instructions are pretty clear, right? The only way they would be more simple would be if he LEFT OUT EVERYTHING AFTER THE "PRISONER"!)

Our base simply looks toward the queers and the baby-killers. Full time job though it is. And don't get us wrong. There are tons of organizations who do that poverty stuff. We're all for em. But look...we didn't build this place on the boring issues. Look, just that Sodomy Series on CD alone built that steeple over there.

Enough for now. I have a lot more to add to this story, but I may go have gay sex and an abortion, just to get the taste out of my mouth from this putrid story. Ok, so I can't stomach sex with a guy, plus I can't get pregnant....so I'll do neither. But by golly I threatened to.

Free Republic Blogger Arrested for Terrorism

(Originally published on November 13, 2006)

Who is surprised by this?

A 39 year-old self-described conservative, who claims to "worship" Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, and Michelle Malkin, mailed "white powder" to several celebrities and broadcast journalists.

His victims included Keith Olberman, Jon Stewart, David Letterman, and even NANCY PELOSI, about to be third in line for the Presidency.

What is "terrorism"? Many people believe it is simply killing or injuring people. It is more than that. It is, per Wordnet:

the systematic use of violence as a means to intimidate or
coerce societies or governments

Sending white powder to the most powerful woman in America is an attempt to coerce and intimidate our government. Sending white powder to television personalities who have the ear of the country is an attempt to intimidate and coerce the SOCIETY.

THIS GUY, if he is guilty, is a terrorist. Is the point of this post to pile on a poor conservative? NO. The reason this story is important is because right-wing Americans are posting all over the internet about how "America is finished" and "the terrorists have won" and "We will be speaking Arabic very soon".


This doomsaying nonsense is SO prevalent on the internet that I really don't think its disengenuous partisan bullshit. I think they honestly believe this. Rush and O'Reilly have succeeded in making these people actually believe that people in the middle east could successfully stage a Normany-style invasion of Virginia Beach. And after they pull that off, they somehow have the ability to occupy every corner of America and install a Muslim state.

How ridiculous is this belief? These people are scaring their children, and my children, and they are just plain WRONG. Yes, we have to carefully and expertly manage the nuclear abilities and activities in the world....JUST like we have had to do since the late 40's. This HAS NOT CHANGED AND WILL NOT CHANGE. (Except for the NEW terrorists we have created by invading Iraq, which was no help at all to this task.)

But to believe that somehow radical Islam will "take over America" is stupid...and to further that bullshit IS TERRORISM IN ITSELF.

Where did this worshipper of Coulter and Malkin get his ideas of who "deserved" his white powder? I think we all know the answer. And how often do these folks hawk the war (and the defense industry and the military machine) by painting the picture of Arabs feeding lions with Christians in Texas Stadium?

Well, if you read the message boards of both left and right websites, you know they must paint these pictures VERY OFTEN.

Here's the deal, America. Iraq is a fraction of the size and a fraction of the population of the USA. WE have the strongest military in the world by twenty or thirty times the second place runner up. And yet....the BEST we've been able to do is hold onto a few blocks, called the Green Zone, in the capital city.

We have the BEST MILITARY IN HISTORY, and that is the best we can do. And these wingnuts really, REALLY believe that someone is going to occupy US one day? Folks, the only enemy who should be feared that seriously is the enemy of division here at home. The way things are going, one of these days, a sitting President is going to say, "well, things are too unstable in the world for me to step down. I'm calling off the election". And when that happens, we are changed forever.

And EVEN THEN, our own military could not control us, even if they supported this rouge President. There is no way to control guerrila tactics in a country our size.

In summary...this dude wanted SO BADLY to continue the hysteria of terrorism, that he became a terrorist himself. Chances are, whoever committed the Washington white powder crimes a few years ago was from a very similar vein.

Let's please stop the hysteria. It is good to be prudent. But for 50 years prudence meant relying on our military, CIA and FBI to manage the threat of nuclear holocaust and violent crime from outside our borders. We must continue to fund these sources of our protection. And THEN WE MUST ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT JOB. Hysterical message boarding is no help to anyone....it is simply a form of terrorism.

"Purity Balls"; Dobson, Daddy, and Disgust

How I missed this, I'll never know. Paragon shares this video of Purity Balls, and Feministing adds that this gets federal funding.

Here's what the clip shows: Girls apparently between 2 and 17 go to this Prom-of-sorts with their fathers. It says they get dressed up and some arrive in limos. There's a voice-over by James Dobson (Ted Haggard's "scared straight" coach.) He tells the story of a 17 year old girl who says that she doesn't desire boys the way all her friends do. According to Dobson, this is because she is sitting on her father's lap, and therefore HE is fulfilling "every girls desire for the affection of boys" or something like that.

Then the video shows the dads and daughters reciting and signing these covenants, in which the dads vaguely promise integrity, while the daughters promise to abstain from sex until marriage, so as to give yourself as a wedding gift to her spouse.


Type rest of the post here

Haggard's "Choice" for a Blow Job

Originally published on November 8, 2006)

Here's the latest on Pastor Ted Haggard from Salon.

I've avoided this issue, for no other reason than its on every blog on the internet. Also, I knew the real story would be how the fundamentalists spun things.

Would they realize that homosexuality is a genetic reality? That the reason homosexual clergy in homo-unfriendly denominations are a reality is that they were once young men who felt they could hide from their true self if only they became ministers?

No. Instead they are putting Ted Haggard in what the communists would call a re-education program, under the leadership of James Dobson.


James Dobson is a demigod where I come from. People swear by him and finance him. That's fine....people do need to "focus on their family". But the belief that gayness rubs off on people is simply wrong.

Look, if it were contagious, I woulda caught it. I've worked closely with some great guys who were gay, and I've gone out drinking with them, and talked politics with them. Here's the scoop, folks: I could be at the bar after five beers and four months without sex (which is usually), and I'm STILL LOOKING AROUND APPRECIATING THE FEMALES IN THE ROOM. That is who I am.

(And by the way...they are smart enough to know that, so Dobson should know that these folks aren't "recruiting" anybody, EVEN IF that were possible.)

A couple of issues here, and I'm not going to try to document any of this, so you'll have to search for the supporting research.

First, I'm beginning to believe a premise I first heard from an Episcopal priest, a heterosexual I respect greatly. He believes that every person has within their genetic makeup SOME formation of BOTH homo- and hetero- attraction genes. This wouldn't be on a bell curve distribution, because it appears obvious that hetero behavior, not in small part due to procreation, is the predominate preference.

But when you look at people like Ted Haggard, who have five kids, it would support the notion that he would sit somewhere in the middle of that distribution. A "flaming queer" on the other hand, would safely fall on the homosexual end of the scale. And me? Well, I'm in the George Castanza category.

Remember that episode of Seinfeld, when George got the massage from a man? It moved. The fact that it moved convinced George, to his holy terror, that he was gay. Like George, my homo genes are rather non-existent. It would take my back being turned on the massage table for "it to move", and the movement would stop suddenly once I turned around.

Men don't do it for me, therefore I can't be recruited. Therefore I have no stake in voting for anti-gay laws rather than electing officials who will care for my safety and economic well-being.

Second Issue: If you think the above might be true, it would stand to reason that SOME homosexual experiences do amount to a choice by people, no different than any sexual one-night stand is a choice. So yes, probably there are teenage boys (and probably more girls) who are doing same-sex stuff because it is counter-culture and cool. Perhaps the battlefield that James Dobson has made this issue is the REASON it is counter-culture and cool. However, I can tell you that when I was in college, the only thing that would have made me try it would have been a large handgun aimed at me....therefore I still say its about the genetic makeup that would even make it possible. Just as a "flaming queer" would have never been able to stomach experimenting with the opposite sex.

Which brings me to this: If you read the Salon story, or just the quote issued by Haggard's overseer, what do you notice. Let me post it:



"I am a sinner. I have fallen," Haggard wrote. "The fact is, I'm guilty of sexual immorality." Mike Jones' allegations, the pastor insisted, are not all true, but "enough of them are true."

"Part of my life is so repugnant and dark," Haggard said in the letter Stockstill read. "I've been warring against it all my life." He told of how he had sought counseling to address his sexuality, which he said cured him for spells. But then, he wrote, "the dirt I thought was gone would resurface ... the darkness increased and dominated." Haggard asked his congregation for forgiveness for him, and also for his accuser, who he suggested was inspired by God to reveal his "deception and sensuality."

What do you see about illegal drug use, adultery, or paying someone for sex? Nothing. Why would that be?

Its simple. Gay sex is the end-all, be-all sin these days. I'll never forget in about 1984 a girl asked me out to homecoming at another university after she saw me in a play. I gladly accepted.

I drove down there and went to the game, and then came the time for "what do you want to do now?". This question was posed to me, since I was the guest. I suppose I answered nervously with the usual choices, which led her to ask, "you aren't gay are you?".

Being only 19 years old, I didn't have the self-understanding and presence to say, "no, not at all. I just come from a very conservative upbringing, which can be very tough in the guilt arena, and on top of that, I'm a little afraid of a girl this aggressive, cause I've never met one."

A few hours later, after things obviously went her way, I rationalized the guilt with the argument, "I damn shore proved I wasn't gay!".

What does this have to do with the topic? That was over TWENTY years ago. Admittedly that was a time that "are you gay" would have been the ultimate insult. But even then I had justification for meaningless hetero sex, DUE TO the gay issue.

What about kids today? Don't you think their young horny minds can build those rationales even stronger? Look again at the Haggard quote and ask yourself.

What about committed married men today? How long will it take someone to go on a business trip and meet someone and think, "well, pastor Ted's sin was queerness...what's the harm in hiring one of these poor whores as long as its a she?"

What about that married woman who gets so little real conversation at home? How easy today is it for her to say, "My husband is probably gay anyway. I need attention, and there's nothing wrong with this."

Now I'm one who believes that the mind will come up with rationale for sex if the body wants it bad enough, but still....does the evangelical church REALLY want to continue this process of RANKING sins like this?

We must get past this issue in America, just as we had to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1969. Homosexuality is no more a choice than race. If it were, Pastor Ted would have NEVER chosen a man for a massage and a blow job.

Sex Is Still All They Got, President Clinton

Originally published on November 7, 2006)

If you want to know what thrills an old man of 41, I'm about to share it with you:


Click here for video
Unfortunately I don't know how to post a click thru image to YouTube. If anyone knows, please tell me.

Now....go watch that clip.

Here's part of the transcript...but reading it absolutely can't describe the genius of Bill Clinton:

The campaign that has been run against Jim Webb is just the sort of most grotesque example of this formula they're running all around the country. It goes something like this. This is their message, pretend I'm their guy: 'OK, we really messed up. I mean, this Iraq deal didn't work out too good and now we put Afghanistan at risk. And we probably shouldn't have put that horse show association guy in charge of FEMA... And you know, it was embarrassing when our senior White House aide that dealt with Mr. Abramoff had to go to prison. But Karl Rove didn't know him very well, he only had 485 contacts with the White House. And he's shy, Karl Rove, you've got to know him 486 times before he knows you. Yeah, we've got a lot of problems but you've still got to vote for us. 'Cuz my opponent is a slug. And they're going to tax you into the poorhouse. On the way to the poorhouse you'll meet a terrorist on every street corner. And when you try to run away from that terrorist you're going to trip over an illegal immigrant. You can't vote for 'em. I mean, is that it?'

(Credit to lowkell at Daily Kos for the transcript.)

I overstated, right? This doesn't REALLY thrill a man of 41.

Actually it did thrill me. I realize I'm a person watching life from the sidelines if life involves anything outside my children...which is rather sad. But Clinton's words, and more so, his abilities, produce joy and sickness at the same time.

Its a joy to watch a true extemporaneous speaker (a key requirement in my own job) craft his art.

Its sick to realize what we lost in Clinton and what we gained in Bush. And I love comments to my blog, but PLEASE don't leave the tired message, "At least Bush didn't shoot off on a blue dress."

At this point, I would be in favor of allowing Clinton to have "Fireside Jerks" on CSPAN if we could get our war dead back...if we could un-create all the terrorists we have created....if we could help the people of the Gulf Coast...if we could regain our stature as the world's MORAL AND FAIR leader.

Yes, I know Clinton's speech is partisan. That was his job last night. But is he wrong? "My opponent is a slug". That's a campaign?? "The terrorists will get you". HOW? HOW will they get me ANY different if a Democrat is making cash deals to give away control of ports instead of Republicans???

Let's all just wait about five or ten years. At that time, we'll see if Bush will be able to stand on his own two feet and make even an AVERAGE speech without five teleprompters. We'll see in another ten or twenty years how Bush is remembered (Nixonesque?) and how Clinton is remembered (the last person to deal with deficit?).

For now....we must each do all we can, and vote is all we can do. Today I will vote against two Republicans who have no chance of losing. But I go out in the rain for two reasons (other than my own conscience):

1) Because I've never missed a chance since my oldest was four of taking my kids to the polls. And by the way...she is 13 now, and a STAUNCH Republican, although she is beginning to doubt due to Iraq. I don't try to change her mind on that...on the contrary, I am proud I have helped her to be interested and informed. (Alas though, for all my Episcopalian leanings, she is all Baptist.)

2) Because today all across the land, people whose vote MATTERS need desperately to get out in the rain and stand in line and VOTE. I stand with them in my own line, even though my vote is a hoax in Mississippi.

And I must say: If I have a hero alive today, it is William Jefferson Clinton. (And yes...I do happen to like big girls with dark hair. I'd actually take Monica out in public.)

Get Your Very Own Presidential Pardon

Look, we all make mistakes.

And for those of you who have accumulated enough wealth, there's no longer any reason to fret about the consequences.

Visit Bush's Prez Pardon Site to get all the details.

But see the FAQ's for information on prepayment options, wire transfers, and accepting Jesus Christ as your personal Savior. And if you order today, you can get an 8X10 of Barney, the First Dog.

The Legal Drug Debate

Salon had a humorous article today, about an African-American professional helping her aged mother with her ballot. On the ballot was an initiative concerning marijuana.

In short, her mom said, "Jesus didn't smoke no weeds"....which was all she needed to know. Thus, her vote was no.

Well, I happen to believe that legalizing AT LEAST marijuana is one of the most important steps we could take in 1) reducing the deficit, 2) getting people out of jails who don't belong there, and 3) stopping crooks, black marketers and terrorists from profiting in this trade.

PROHIBITION DOES NOT WORK, AND IT WILL NEVER WORK!

Anyway....what I wanted to share was this response to the article. The following paragraph states my fundamental opinion on this better than any I've ever seen:

I am sure most of the posters could care less about those folks. A not too wise man once said "George Bush doesn't care about black people." The truth is most of us really don't. If we did then we would not turn so many of their neighborhoods into war zones so that fewer of "us" run the risk of addiction.

The reason this is SO powerful is because this response is written to LIBERALS who read Salon. Many of the responses were from liberals who simply wrote off and discounted legalizers as "dope addicts" and "justifiers of their own addiction".

I must say now that I have never inhaled. (As a matter of fact, I've never even held a joint or pipe or whatever. I'm not a saint...I've been known to partake of hydrocodone recreationally, but I've never even seen marijuana outside of "drug education".

Forget the scientific evidence of how much safer weed is than alcohol (and tobacco). Forget the tax dollars and ridding us of crime. Just think about this man's point:

We care so little for black people that we are willing to turn their neighborhoods into war zones, JUST cause our own white folks MIGHT be less likely to try it.

How powerful.

And yet....we've already HAD an experiment in prohibition. Far as I know, there's NO proof whatsoever that fewer people TRIED alcohol, LIKED alcohol, or GOT HOOKED ON alcohol back in the days it was illegal.

The only difference was the supply and demand realities: Crooks, politicians, bureaucrats, policemen...many of them were the ones who profited. And even sadder....the ones who were HONEST were in more danger in their jobs. Its the same today.

I believe that if drugs were available in the same way that alcohol is available, that crime in this country would decrease by 70% at a minimum.

And believe me....me, my family, my friends....we are ALL more likely to be a victim of CRIME than we are a victim of drug abuse in today's world. You know why?? Because IF WE'RE GOING TO BECOME A DRUG ABUSER, WE CAN DO THAT JUST AS EASILY NOW AS IN A LEGAL DRUG ENVIRONMENT. The only difference is the crime and who profits.

I'm for the crime to go away.

Diebold & Repubs; Arms Length?

(Originally published on November 6, 2006)

The War Room reports on a troubling communication from Ken Mehlman to his flock. I've already reported satirically on my opinion of voting machines, and this seems to reinforce my fears.

Here's the story: Taegan Goddard reports the following:


The RNC just sent out detailed talking points about how unreliable exit polls have been over the past several elections. The key arguments are that exits polls typically have a Democratic bias and have wrongly predicted Democratic victories in recent years.

According to a source, the RNC expects leaked exit polls to show Democratic victories and do not want the news to discourage Republican voters from going to the polls late in the day.


Ok, so let's examine. Some believe that once the winner is obvious, people will just stay home from the polls. I think this is over-stated.

The two Democrats I look most forward to voting for are running against Trent Lott (MS Senate) and Roger Wicker (MS House). I don't even know those Democrats' names, and I DO know they are going to lose. But I can't wait to vote for them.

People who care vote. (Some of them even know the candidate names, unlike me.)

So is there another reason for the "talking points memo"?

Well, remember 2004? Exit polls showed significant victories in Ohio for John Kerry. When the voting machines tallying the "actual" vote count, he lost.

Do exit polls "favor Democrats"? Or do those voting machines favor REPUBLICANS?

How do exit polls favor Democrats, by the way? Is this yet another racist and elitist argument? Sounds like they're implying that "the smarter, whiter Republican voter is smart enough to lie to those librul exit pollers. The poor, dumb, minority libruls are honest."

Yes, honesty is such a Right-Wing Christian trait until libruls ask questions (or until a male prostitute outs you.

Maybe there's another reason that asking people questions "favor" one side or another....but take out pure lying, and I can't figure out what it is.

I'm concerned about this....I really am. Have we seen ANY sign that people are NOT willing to rig an election to hold office? Have we seen ANY sign that other people wouldn't take 20 or 30 million bucks to reprogram a computer program? No to both. And 20 to 30 million is chump change for what's at stake here. (Disclaimer: Yes, Democrats have people willing to cheat, just as much as Republicans. I'm just not sure Dems know any computer literate people. Just kidding.)

Look, Diebold is a company that 1) has an interest in Bush's tax cuts, and they ain't worried about the deficit, just their own stock price, and 2) Most of their bucks come from the banking business historically. Now what party do you think the banks are all for? (Hint: They ain't worried about the deficit either. They need the artificial prop-up in housing prices to stay put for as long as possible.)

Virginia Sheriff & Deputies Busted

CNN reports that about 14 people are a part of this deal.

Its pretty simple. The "good guys" confiscate the drugs on the taxpayers dime. Then the "good guys" sell the stuff out the back door.

SOME of the stuff they sell could get confiscated three or four times....thus sold three or four times. Its genius. And the folks getting arrested during all this are eating meals on the Virginia taxpayer.

The ONLY answer for this madness is to STOP THE WAR ON DRUGS. Legalize. Educate. Tax. Cut out the crooks profit margin.

Read a nice article on legalization here.

Plus, read the next article for another "War On" which can't be won.

Americans are so gullible....and as much as I love my own church, I can't help but believe its the churches that are perpetuating this "prohibition" thinking. I've got nothing against saying "hocus pocus" and making all the substance use and abuse go away. But here's the thing: IT AIN'T HAPPENING. And Prohibition proved a FAILURE 70 years ago!

Olbermann's Transcript on Kerry Apology

Here it is along with the video at Crooks and Liars.

My reaction to this is so odd. When Keith gets real like this, I'm amazed at how genuinely shocked and nervous I feel...for him...for myself...for America.

And then I think about how Rush and Hannity and Coulter have been ranting freely for years in subjective, one-sided spin zones, calling out Clinton and the libruls.

But it feels different, doesn't it? There's just this overwhelming sense that this government of Cheney, Rummy and Bush won't tolerate Olbermann's courage.

As to the Kerry issue, here's what he said, and without question ALL he did wrong was leave out ONE TWO-LETTER WORD in his statement. You can even see him look down at his notes at this very time, seemingly a bit lost. Now watch what the missing two-letter word does to his speech:

Leading up to the actual sentence, here's what happened, to quote Olbermann:

With bitter humor, he told the students that he had been in Texas the day before, that President Bush used to live in that state, but that now he lives in the state of denial.

So we have Texas, Bush's home state, and he's now in the "state of denial". Then follows the infamous quote:

"if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you can get stuck in Iraq."

Now add the one word: US. US. As in WE. You can get US stuck in Iraq, Mr. President. Alternatively he could have said "America". "If you don't, you can get America stuck in Iraq".

Kerry was talking about a President who has gotten by on anything and everything but studying. On anything and everything but making himself aware of the issues, of the cultural and religious realities of the Middle East. On anything and everything but the history of that region and why it will NEVER be a democracy.

But he left out one word. Now he's been forced to apologize.

Let me ask one question as food for thought:

How many misguided or mistaken quotes do we remember from the Vietnam War? How many politicians are remembered for one sentence they uttered concerning soldiers or marines or sailors or the Presidency during that war? None.

Yet how DOES history remember that war? Remembers it loud and clear.

Even if this quote of Kerry's does keep the Republicans in power, it won't be remembered. It is this war that will be remembered by the next generations. This will be especially true when the next generation of terrorists attempt over and over to strike us again...because perhaps of the parents or siblings they lost in Iraq in the early years of this century.

(If you or a loved one is in the military and you think I am slamming you, I hope you will take my word that you are mistaken. Just as I love the mentors in my life who fought in Vietnam, I will love you. You have done your job as you were trained, professionally and nobly. You have no power over the politics of the cause or the psychology of Islamic freak jobs. Hear this: Just as the "War on Drugs" can't be "won", neither can the "War on Terror". Israel is about as big as a New England state, and if a nutjob wants to strap a bomb on himself and push the button, there's not a damn thing they can do about it. No more than the police can stop every cocaine deal. Only human psychology and education can fight drugs, and the same is true of fundamentalism and violence. As soon as they stop believing in the 50 virgins, and start believing that their real life sex drive is normal, they will stop. We must find a way to further that message.)

Here are my predictions for the elections:

The Democrats will gain no more than 15 seats. In the Senate, the Republicans will definitely keep the majority.

And I say it doesn't matter much either way. The Bush Administration runs this country, and Nancy Pelosi is ill-equipped, if equipped at all, to fight the true problems this administration has created.

In short...it is too late. Our scars from Iraq, our place in the world, our deficit, and our polarization nationwide are all embedded now. We will see no improvement in any of these for at least ten years.

My Dad is 68. He is approaching a stage in his life that is very reflective. Three times now in the past couple of months, he has said, "I don't know what my grandchildren are going to face, but they will not live in the world that I knew. We threw away our super-power status, and they will live in a third-world country."

The thing he is saddest about, I can tell, is that he is powerless to change it, and guilty that he is leaving them behind to face it. He is so focused on this, I think, that each time he doesn't remember that he's already said these things to me out loud.

I feel guilty about it too. I voted for Bush in 2000.

CNN Profiles "Hell House"

(Originally posted on October 31, 2006)

I wish I could link to this, but the feature is not on their site at this time.

The Hell House they visit is in Plainview, TX, and its rife with high budget horror costumes and special effects.

Its also rife with different "sin" rooms. The first one, for example, shows a demon leading a gay marriage. He says that being gay leads to death by AIDS and an eternity in hell. Apparently it didn't get any better from there.

To say the least, this disturbs me, a Christian. Obviously there are a world of things wrong with this, but I just want to cover one particular question I have:


If they scare these people into "accepting Christ" on the basis that they will get to avoid hell, is that really a Gospel principle, as the pastor claims in the piece?

Did Jesus really say He wanted us to follow Him for the purpose of staying out of hell? Certainly Jesus said there would be a judgement. But I'm not sure He gave this as the REASON to follow Him.

The Gospels don't report that Simon and Andrew or James and John followed Jesus after He said, "Follow me or I'll strike you dead"....or even "Follow me and I'll give you mansions in heaven". Jesus just said "Follow me". Or "Follow me and I'll make you fishers of men".

Seems to me if I follow Him because I'm only interested in avoiding punishment or gaining heavenly rewards, then I'm missing the whole point of the very selflessness He taught.

I suppose it is easier to get a 12 year-old to walk down the aisle if you appeal to their emotions, especially if you show them a visual of them burning in hell because they drank a beer.

But I honestly don't see a whole lot of difference between this and converting someone to Islam by the sword in the middle ages. A person converts for all the wrong reasons. And a person, for the rest of their life, perceives God as a maniacal dealer of fiery death to 80% of all the people He ever created.

You may not believe in God.

I may not believe in a God who burns 80% of His creation.

But you and I should both realize that some things are real whether we believe them or not. So God could certainly turn out to be the Being that some fundamentalists believe He is.

If that be the case, I hope you live in the Southern United States and dropped by a Hell House or a Tent Revival at some point in your life, and then repeated the correct words they taught you.

If you are one of the other 4 billion people who haven't heard it explained in that particular theology, (or if, like me, you disagree with that theology, even though we've experienced Fear Evangelism), then I don't know what will happen to us.

As for me, I depend on the true grace of God to be infinitely greater than these people believe it to be. And I depend on Jesus' death and resurrection to be accomplished for infinitely more of God's creation than these folks dream.

Voting Machines

(Originally posted October 29, 2006)

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but during the last presidential election I began to get suspicious about the Diebold voting machines and how easy it would be to rig an election.

Now there's another angle on this. News broke yesterday that a California company is being investigated for connections to Venezuela and their menacing little dictator.


I wonder if there's been a poll on this? I wonder if Americans favor automating elections to the point that one bright programmer could choose the winner?

Now I've got a strong feeling that people are already screwing with electronic results...or at least fondling or heavy petting them. But won't it be funny when all this comes to fruition in about 2008? Can't you see Diebold "closely watching" the blue states, while Chavez puts it to the reds? Here's Wolf Blitzer on election night: "Well, contrary to our exit polls, it appears that Mississippi has gone for Hillary Clinton and Barrack O'Bama, while New Jersey has solidly gone for Jeb Bush and Bill Frist."

Is this not just another example of our lethargy? What would have to happen in this country to make people say, "hey...wait a minute"? Could Dick Cheney hold a press conference today and say,

"Thank you for joining us today, ladies and gentleman. I won't take any questions, but I want to lay out a few changes we will instigate in future elections, beginning immediately. This will save the taxpayers billions and will allow all of America to openly observe the process, exclusively on Fox.

"On the first Tuesday in November, we will invite a select group of citizens to Rootenpoot, Arkansas. These will be Americans who will go through the same fair and balanced selection process that we use to admit people to appearances by President Bush.

"We will subsequently have Bill O'Reilly as a guest moderator. He will verbally call the name of each candidate, and then say, 'All in favor, say Aye'. Mr. O'Reilly will then respond with 'The Ayes have it', and our great country will have its next generation of leadership.

"If you have any questions about the minor details of the process, tune in to Sean Hannity tonight, and he will tell you why its the only way to go. Thank you and good night."

O'Reilly in Birmingham

So last night I arrived at my hotel in Birmingham, the Sheraton-Civic Center, and the first thing I see is a poster trumpeting the live appearance of Billy "Loofah" O'Reilly at the hotel.


He was there to speak to the Alabama Business Council, or something like that.

Its really hard for me to imagine a group paying him to appear...for two reasons.

First, his lies are well documented. By Al Franken, George Clooney, Keith Olberman, and many others. NOT just because they "are out to get him"...because they can so easily expose the lies. Its not like these guys like Hannity either, but you can't find pages and pages of flat out lies all over the Internet, because Sean is a little more careful, and a WHOLE lot smarter than Bill.

Second, I thought SEX was the mamma jamma moral no-no to trump all no-no's to the people who would want to pay a right-wing keynote speaker?

I mean, don't most Southern Republicans think Bill Clinton's shot on the blue dress to be thousands of times worse than the WMD in Iraq debacle?

Aren't Mark Foley's CONVERSATIONS food for much more public concern and interest than the much more serious scams of Abramoff, Valerie Plame, and prisoner torture?

So then, why is it that Bill's phone sex advances to a subordinate are totally overlooked by groups like the Bama Business people?

I'm serious. Is sex the ultimate unforgivable nastiness or is it not? Bill was reportedly married when he asked this subordinate to shower with him. Is marriage the ultimate Sanctity, does that only apply to homosexuals?

Sex is really not a political issue for me. Nor is it a phobia, which is the real root of the problem for many. But I really believe more than anything it is a myth that sex and marital sanctity matters to most of these "social conservatives".

My theory is that sex was the only hole the Clinton-haters could find in an otherwise brilliant presidency. Therefore, we still, to this day, hear "at least Bush can keep his pants on", as if that is somehow compensation for this global MESS.

So sex matters for Clinton....for Barney Frank...for Harold Ford, Jr. and white women.

But sex doesn't make a damn when the doer is a shill promoting the hard right's agenda.

If everything has to be a religious and moral debate, let's be consistent, or else be willing to be open to cries of hypocrisy.

A Prayer for Owen Meany

This book is on my recommended list. I got to thinking about it due to the column I just linked to by Fred Reed. In it, Fred said this:


So many of the Jewish crimes popular on the email circuit don’t stand up to examination. For instance, I hear repeatedly that during Vietnam America won in the field but that Jews stabbed Our Boys in the back by means of the anti-war movement, thus seeking to promote godless atheistic communism.

Not quite. The leadership of the anti-war movement was heavily Jewish. The movement itself was overwhelmingly Christian. At the conservative Southern college I attended, the studentry to a boy wanted no part of the war. It wasn’t because of Jewish anything. It was because they didn’t want to get shot. Their girlfriends didn’t want them to get shot, nor did their parents.




This made me think of the title character of John Irving's classic.

Owen Meany, who ended up volunteering for service in Vietnam, said that anti-war protesters were wrong about one thing: The Draft. He said the draft was the only chance the US had of getting out of Vietnam.


Why? His quote is something like, "Unless Americans are affected with their health or their wallet, they don't care enough about anything to rise up against it."

In other words, without the draft there would have BEEN NO anti-war movement.

How relevant this is for today. Don't you know that college campuses everywhere would be in a MUCH larger uproar over the constantly changing "reasons" for the Iraq war if THEY thought they might have to go?

So would parents of teenagers....middle America across this country. They would be doing more than answering polls negatively about Bush and Congress. They would be in the streets if their sons were being drafted, or about to reach draft age.

I'm convinced this is the reason there hasn't BEEN a draft. Dick Cheney knows this simple fact. Even if the volunteer army is too small to ever win, he can't afford a draft, because then his war would be stopped dead in its tracks.

Every man should read "A Prayer for Owen Meany". And every woman I know who has read it also loved it. At the Episcopal school my parish is associated with, every senior boy is required to read it.


This article was chosen to be a part of the Decline of Democracy, a service of Ken Goldstein and Blog Carnival. Check it out.

Fred Reed

I don't know much about Fred Reed. But I did really enjoy this column about his response to people who want him to blame the Jews instead of referring to "Hollywood and New York" cryptically. (Thanks to Sanity Inspector once again in intro'ing me.)

The other day he quoted Reed, and I definitely disagreed, however. It was a bit of a rant about why women shouldn't be school administrators. (Cause they don't want boys to play football.) Good Lord.

Can we generalize any more in this country?

Anyway....point is, I'm not recommending this guy, but I did enjoy his Jewish column.

Slutoweek (Slut-o-ween?)

(Originally published on October 22, 2006)

Good articles and discussions on this topic at Salon's Broadsheet today.
After reading all the comments, I can't really decide where I stand on this one, except that girls shouldn't wear this stuff. Problem is, how do you prevent that, when so many of the college-age and young adult women wear them?

I figure this is causing some terrible brawls between 15 year-olds and their mothers this week.


One comment that really made me shake my head. Here's an anonymous poster responding to other comments:

Actually, many women do dress as slutty as possible because it gets male approval and attention. It's a western version of the taliban telling women to completely cover. Once women hit middle aged, they are expected to fade into the backround and go away. If men had their way, women and girls would walk around completely nude until they were about 30, then put on a burqua. That would be a male dream. If men had their way, women would still not be allowed to vote or drive or attend universities. That way, they could get all the resources for themselves but still get cleaning services and p***y from women.

I remember being encouraged to dress slutty as a young woman by guys and criticized for not partying enough. But I wasn't about to let men waste my time. I'm glad, because once I hit middle age I found myself invisible. I have been laughed at in the face several times by even offering a neighborhood "hello" while walking down the street in broad daylight by men who assumed I was hitting on them. Middle aged women in this country don't have to wear a burqua to be invisible, we already are, which doesn't bother me a bit. But girls at an increasingly younger and younger age are coerced into being sexual way to young, or even if it doesn't match their personality. If you have a personality like say J.Lo that wants to exude sexuality, fine. But many conservative, scholarly sorts are bullied into being what they are not just to be accepted.

Ladies, don't waste your time and energy looking for male approval. Men aren't worth it. Be true to yourself. We should encourage young women to focus their time and energy on themselves, through sports, musical or academic interests. Are boys encouraged to be hypersexualized at 13 to make themselves acceptable for older women? Hell no. Don't abuse females in this manner. There is an overemphasis on sexuality in this culture. So much of it exploitative and coerced.



Bless this woman's heart, as we say in Mississippi. Can you imagine having this drastic worldview and being this unhappy? Can you imagine REALLY believing this perception that men have laughed in her face because she told them "hello" because they thought she was hitting on them? I really hurt for this person.

I'm in airports, hotel lobbies, and restaurant bars every week, and people don't act like this, either in a "laugh in your face" way, or in believing that "hello" means "hitting on". "Hello" is simply a greeting, admittedly not always getting a response, but usually so.

In no way do I believe that in her own neighborhood, therefore, that she has been laughed at overtly on multiple occasions. Is she therefore "lying"? No...that's the pitiful thing...this is her perception...and perceptions can lead to terrible fears, sadness, and even death.

This is why I've always worked to think through and manage my perceptions.

What does this have to do with Slutoween costumes? Perhaps the foundation of this entire issue is perceptions. The perceptions of those who wear the revealing outfits, those who view them, and those who judge them as "slutty".

And one last very important point: The most revealing look into this lady's psyche is her belief that THIRTY is the age of initial irrelevance for women. What a load of crap.

I'm 41, and this 22-to-26 crowd who buys the largest number of these costumes gets nothing from me besides a totally surface glance in appreciation for the female anatomy.

I would be shocked if I were to ever choose a dance partner under the age of 30. Perhaps that group is more ready, willing, and able...I don't know. But in my view, you can't beat the beauty of a WOMAN. Nor can you beat the mind of a woman, and a recent college graduate has not had the experiences to develop that great mind.

And lastly, not to get graphic, but aging has led me to one last observation. Women "learn" what truly pleases them after 30, and in any true intimate experience, that is the ultimate factor in real passion....the pleasure of the woman.

Damn, how did the cat costume get me going on that???

Book Recommendation 1

How Postmodernism Saved My Faith by Crystal L. Downing

I have a crush on the author, and I don't even know how old she is.

This professor of English at Messiah College on the west coast has taken the difficult philosophy of Derrida and others and made it palatable.

If you hear "Postmodernism" tossed about as the scourge of our day, this is the book you should read. Not that it will change your mind, but it will, I think, show you how a questioning, cognizant individual can still be a committed Christian as Dr. Downing most certainly is.

(She doesn't say she is Episcopalian, but I'm betting on it.)

Speaking of the crush, does anyone else do this? I never get a crush on someone I SEE as a normal human being might. Instead I notice those women who are well spoken, well read, and well credentialed.

There was a story yesterday in the Atlanta Journal Constitution (I think) about how traditional thought said that high achieving women turned men off, but the research says the opposite. I can't link the story, cause I can't find it.

Is this news to anyone? Who WOULDN'T want a wife with a brain and a million dollar salary?

Dr. Downing, I likes ya, wherever you are.

Keith Olbermann has brass balls

Somehow in my travels this story escaped me.

Certainly if you aren't a completely lop-sided Republican, Bill Clinton's sheer intellect should amaze you. But it shouldn't surprise you. Olbermann's courage to expose Fox and then to put Bush on the carpet almost brought tears to my eyes.


Don't tell me that Keith doesn't leave the office now with more than a modicum of concern for his health and that of his family. He knew that when he wrote the editorial and when he delivered it. THAT is courage.

In thinking about how dangerous it is now to speak our minds in a "FREE" country, it made me truly appreciate those journalists past and present who have stood up to the establishment in countries that aren't free.

I remember when I was in college and Keith and Dan Patrick were an everyday addiction on Sportscenter. His unique self-confidence, laced with world-depreciating humor, were part of why ESPN thrives today.

And think about one more thing when you consider what Keith has done:

He has relegated himself to a limited career path for the rest of his life.

Now don't get me wrong...we desperately need "neutral" fact-based and uneditorialized journalists more than EVER. But I think Keith decided he couldn't be the person he is if he sugar-coated the things he's witnessed from Fox News for years. Therefore every future job consideration for him will have to carry the discussion of "he's just another James Carville. We can only hire him for opinion and analysis".

So now we finally have someone who will call them on their propaganda and Clinton-blaming, Clinton-hijacking machine.

I appreciate it.

Memphis Airport

(Originally published October 17, 2006)

Two quick notes:

Until the rules change, Memphis seems to be the worst of any airport for the "Quart-sized plastic bag" edict.

I even went through LAX last week, and there was no Bag Police. But at MEM there's an actual person who must feast his/her eyes upon your baggie before you get to the machines.


Gallon sized baggie? Oh my, that won't do at ALL. You'll either have to throw the shit away or go ask for your checked baggage back and store the shit there. I'm not exaggerating. One of my friends from New Orleans went through a few days ago on her way back home, and she was so pissed she asked to see the supervisor. The super wouldn't budge, even though my friend had been through eight different airports lately who aren't giving this nearly so much structure.

Also:

If you are going thru the B gates at MEM on busy days, don't wait in the security lines if they are long. Simply walk left to A or right to C and enter there. Then you can take the moving sidewalks back. It can be MUCH faster most days.

Update/10-27:

Patrick Stewart at Salon has now done a story on the baggie issue.

It makes me feel a bit better that Memphis isn't the only one with Baggie Obsession. However, I note that the airport he went through only had a TSA dude yelling at him to put the baggie through the maching.

Not in Mempho. Nope. You don't even get through TO the bins until you get your baggie measured. The Baggie Policeperson in Memphis stands next to the ladies who initially look at your license and boarding pass. If you go through Memphis security, you'll recognize these ladies by their fingernails.

Several of them have nails that are literally four inches long. Imagine the extra time it takes them to palm your paperwork, due to a slight manual dexterity obstacle. Can you see this discussion in the nail salon?

"Gurl, where can we work where people will see these beauties?"
"How bout them folks who handle 50,000 plane tickets every day over at the airport?"
"Sounds good, but you reckon the TSA will hire us?"
"Gurl, you kiddin'?"