Xtian Group Freaks Over New Book

Disney Publishing W.I.T.C.H.

The critical site, ac18.org, claims the books "no doubt will begin a gradual progression toward the occult practice for some young people. Satan wants nothing more than for a person's life to be filled with things that appear to have meaning, but in the end have none and keep a person from tasting the truth. He tries to use a world filled with illusions and fantasies … to fill our lives with things that only deceive and bear no fruit."

Hmm...things like Christianity?

Vague Terror Alerts Issued in Response to Flagging Support for Bush

Attorney General John Ashcroft said at a news conference that intelligence reports and public statements by people associated with Al Qaeda suggested that the terrorist group was "almost ready to attack the United States" and harbored a "specific intention to hit the United States hard."

You know what? If they've got enough information to state with any kind of certainty that al Qaeda is "almost ready to attack the U.S.", then they've got enough information to stop it. These latest warnings are nothing more than political ploys.

"There's no real new intelligence, and a lot of this has been out there already," said one administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "There really is no significant change that would require us to change the alert level of the country."

And yet Asskkkroft has no qualms about using nebulous terror alerts for the benefit of BushCo. Public opinion regarding BushCo flagging? "Look out! Terrorists!" Shit hitting the fan in Iraq? "Look out! Terrorists!"

Asked about the timing of his new warnings about the suspects, Mr. Ashcroft said, "We believe the public, like all of us, needs a reminder."

In other words, "the polls indicate that none of you are remembering that you should be afraid and that the only person that can protect you is Führer Dunderhead!

Mr. Bush's campaign responded by saying that Mr. Kerry "has played politics with homeland security throughout this campaign."

Ha! So, raising concerns over terror threats for which there is no credible evidence after Bush's approval ratings plummet and just as his re-election campaign is kicking off isn't playing politics?

What to do about Israel? Let's consult the Big Black Book of Myths!

What's this? BushCo Middle East foreign policy being driven by end-times theology? Why, who woulda thunk it?

When Pastor Upton was asked to explain why the group's website describes the Apostolic Congress as "the Christian Voice in the nation's capital," instead of simply a Christian voice in the nation's capital, he responded, "There has been a real lack of leadership in having someone emerge as a Christian voice, someone who doesn't speak for the right, someone who doesn't speak for the left, but someone who speaks for the people, and someone who speaks from a theocratical perspective."

Uhhh...I hope he meant "theological perspective"!

When his words were repeated back to him to make sure he had said a "theocratical" perspective, not a "theological" perspective, he said, "Exactly. Exactly. We want to know what God would have us say or what God would have us do in every issue."

Nope, he did mean theocratical. Either that, or he's too stupid to know the difference.

Ship of Fools

At least they named it appropriately enough.

Stories about the trouble Ship of Fools has been having on Yahoo and on CNN. I want to join the fun! Keep an eye out for Cleo-Taurus or B.L. ZeBubb in the pews.

O'Reilly's Take on Things

The reason Kerry is languishing is that he has not put forth a clear war-on-terror strategy and many independent Americans fear the far-left factor.

The what? Oh...Bill means all those evil people who aren't Reich Wing Nazis.

Kerry has to distance himself from the ultra-liberal wing of his party, and so far, that has not happened. Hugging Ted Kennedy in Iowa didn't help.

It would appear that in light of real extremists (namely, BushCo and his cronies), even centrists and moderates seem way far to the left.

Kerry has an even more serious problem on the horizon. Extremist billionaire George Soros is pouring millions into the Democratic cause by funding propaganda Web sites like MoveOn that run anti-Bush ads all over the country. Soros is a scary guy. An avowed atheist, he wants an "open society" where legalized drugs and few limits on private behavior would be policy.

What?! Soros believes in freedom and liberty? That animal! That heathen! That...that...ATHEIST!!! Ooooo, Bill trotted out the boogy man. Scared yet?

He also loves income redistribution through taxation.

There, now, you see? It all depends on how you put it. See...I thought we were helping the "least" among us. It turns out -- according to Bill -- that we're "redistributing income". In other words, stealing from the rich -- who deserve to be rich, by god! -- to give to the poor -- who deserve to be poor, fer Chrissakes!

The majority of Americans may not like the way Bush is handling the job right now, but do they want a guy like Soros having access to power?

Soros is rich, so he has access to power, by default. Isn't that they way things work in BushCo's Amerikkka? What, it's only fair when rich Repugs take advantage of the system? Yeah, that's what I thought.

If he goes down to defeat, it will be entirely on him. You can't blame those who hate him. They've helped him out a lot.

What the hell kind of weird Orwellian double speak is this? If Bush loses, it won't be because those who opposed him beat him, because they're helping him? Dizzying. Stupefying. But that's Bill O'Reilly for you.

The Common Sense of a Bonk Job

Gay Republicans Barred from GOP Convention Of course, it's beyond me why they'd want to be a part of a group that hates them so much anyway. It's like, why is Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter working in Bush's re-(s)election campaign when Bush has vowed to deny civil rights to gays and lesbians.

"We believe that homosexuality is not normal and should not be established as an acceptable 'alternative' lifestyle either in public education or in public policy," the proposed platform says.

What is "normal"? Rigid rules about sex wherein pleasure is never a part of the act (especially for the woman)? A complete lack of sex outside the procreation process? Unhealthy attitudes toward healthy sex lives?

"We need to do everything in this country to promote families and hold families together.

Fine.

A marriage is between a man and a woman.

That's changing.

You can say it comes from my faith, but it is just common sense."

Common sense? Like black people and white people not drinking from the same fountain, or using the same restrooms, or sitting together on the bus was common sense?

Elizabeth Dole

Need another reason to disbelieve the myths about a "liberal" media or the liberal bias in government? Take Elizabeth (Liddy) Dole. Arguably, she's a tougher, more powerful Hillary Clinton. But does she ever suffer the derision leveled at Clinton? Nope. Dole is a U.S. Senator, wife of a powerful politician. So is Clinton. Liddy Dole's husband (Bob Dole) had a sex scandal. So did Clinton's. (The difference here is that Liddy lobbied to keep -- and was succussful at keeping -- her husband's scandal out of the media). As far as the stereotype of "riding her husbands political coat tails for her own gain" goes, the two women should be evenly matched. But I never hear anyone railing against "that bitch Dole", like they do against Clinton. Maybe I should start. =)

So what's the difference between these two women that earns one the hatred of the masses and the other little negative attention at all? I'd wager it's their political leanings. The attack dogs of the Conservative Reich would never bite one of their own. So who's really in control? The "liberal" media that never reported on Bob Dole's sex scandal (and those of many other prominent Conservatives) or the Conservative Reich that raised the issue of lying about a blow job to the level of High Crime?

For more on Dole's skeletons, click here.

Armed Guards -- Not Just Because they're Bonk Jobs...Honest

Church fighting camp licensing installs armed guards

Priest Lake Community Baptist Church officials say that the guards carry their weapons legally and that the state is trying to force an "atheist" view on the congregation by requiring it to register as a day-care provider.

He would not say what types of weapons they carry and exactly how many guards are employed. Bennett said church officials say that the state is overstepping boundaries to exert "power" over the church, including what the church perceives is an "atheist" agenda.

Yes, enforcing laws which forbid weapons around child-care facilities is definitely the atheist agenda. No, wait...that can't be right. We worship the devil and want to kill children in ritual sacrifice to the Prince of the Morning Star.

He said the guards are on the premises "just to have that presence"...

In other words, "they're there because they're there". Thanks for clarifying.

...and also to keep away criminals who would seek to vandalize the church buildings.

Has there been a big problem with vandalism? They didn't mention it, so it would seem the armed guards are just an excuse to get all Montana militia/Branch Davidian.

F U G W

So much for free speech.

Cleavage Cops

Evil harlot sent home from graduation ceremony for...well, apparently having a great rack and refusing to hide it. Uptight, Christians everywhere shudder with fear at the natural beauty of a young woman.

Shutting down the Hucksters

Broadcasters want proof of miracles, hucksters cry foul

Livingspring Chapel International Pastor Femi Emmanuel, whose church has a growing televangelism arm, said: "Miracle is the crux of the gospel. Gospel minus miracles becomes ridiculous. Christianity is the religion of signs and wonders.

"What has the federal government or NBC (Nigeria Broadcasting Commission) against televised miracles? Are they claiming to be in the dark about the mighty moves of God in the land?"

There you have it, right from the horses mouth. Given that these televised "miracles" are nothing more than cheap slight of hand, the gospel is ridiculous. (Of course, I never thought you had to take away "miracles" to find that much of the theology is ridiculous). And no, the authorities aren't claiming to be in the dark about the "mighty moves of God in the land", they're claiming that you're full of shit.

"A man who had been blind from birth suddenly regains his vision and was instantly able to recognise the colour blue, in response to a question from the healing pastor about the colour of an item. Another man who had been crippled from birth, stood up miraculously in an overcrowded arena and ran wildly after his healer - proclaiming the grandeur of the most High.

"The fact is, even if vision is restored by a miracle, recognition of colour is not instinctive, neither can a human being who has never walked before, get up to run without toddling or lurching. These are examples of the conduct of televangelists, who daily take advantage of the desperation of television houses and sacrifice morality in return."

Excellent points. Especially about the color recognition. How does a person who's never before seen blue know what blue looks like?

Not Able to Get Pregnant? Try sex!

On the lighter side of religion induced ignorance, we have this litle gem. I guess they were waiting for the stork to bring their baby.

Aussies export Bonk Jobs to U.S.

Myth-pushers to host "debate" re: creationism and evolution

Ham, a native Australian who now resides near Cincinnati...

Hey, mates...keep your Bonk Jobs, we've got plenty.

He added that the church must take responsibility for allowing the creation world view to be defeated in our culture. It is time, he said, to "equip ourselves with the sword of the spirit, which is the truth of God's word, and enter the science arena to battle for the hearts and minds of the young people of this generation."

Maybe if they had truth on their side, they wouldn't have to do battle. The truth usually speaks for itself.

Wolfe said that he realizes that the creation world view is controversial.

...and based on a myth, and impossible to prove or even test, and completely inflexible, and unwilling to abide by the rules of science.

Sure, blame porn

Scroll down to the section titled "More Christian organizations respond to Abu Ghraib scandal". It seems that the bonk jobs think porn is to blame.

Concerned Women for America has in fact issued two pieces on the abuse, both of which blame American pornography for the soldiers' actions.

Robert Knight, director of CWA's Culture and Family Institute, also blames pornography, which he says gave the soldiers "the idea to engage in sadomasochistic activity and to videotape it in voyeuristic fashion." But he doesn't stop there. Knight also blames "putting women into combat areas," "'gay' publications," homosexuals, gay marriage, "violators of [broadcast] decency rules," school "recruitment schemes into early sex and homosexuality," liberals (whom Knight says are "systematically aiding and abetting the cultural depravity that produced the Iraq scandal"), opponents of courtroom displays of the Ten Commandments, and politicians who have "pressed for higher and higher taxes."

Sort of reads like a laundry list of "things Bonk Jobs hate", doesn't it.

"Iraqi prisoners are being abused? Well, it's the women's fault! And gays! And Howard Stern! And liberals! And taxes!" (Didn't we already go through this once with Falwell and Robertson's list of "reasons God lifted his protective cloak from America"?) Of course, most of the list is completely baseless, but hey, we're talking about the Fundies. They're not exactly world renowned for their firm grasp on reality and logic.

Also, Gary Bauer weighed in on the issue. This ought to be good.

The media and political frenzy over apparent (my emphasis) prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq continued to spiral out of control over the weekend much to the detriment of our nation, the war on terrorism and the 135,000 men and women currently trying to do their job in Iraq.

"Apparent" prisoner abuse? It would seem that there is some doubt in Gary's mind as to the veracity of the abuse scandal. I wonder what would convince him. Hmm...video documentation? No, we've got those and they apparently had little impact on Gary. Photos? Nuh-uh. Too easy to doctor. Congressional testimony? No, we had that, too. I don't know, I guess it must really be only "apparent" abuse, and not actual documented abuse.

If everyone would take a deep breath this reality would emerge: The scandal is being aggressively investigated, the first court-martial will begin in nine days in full public view and everyone from President Bush down is committed to justice being served.

Will the fGoT or Rumsfeld or anyone responsible for getting us into this mess in the first place or for creating an environment in which this could happen be court-martialed? Or even held responsible? No. One or more Patsies will take the fall and the problem will be considered solved without ever taking a deeper look into how it came to pass that these abuses could take place as if there was nothing wrong with it. This isn't an isolated case. Abuse has been ongoing and the defense department has known about it for months, but chose to do nothing (other than launch a smoke and mirrors "investigation" into the allegations) to prevent further abuse.

That should be enough for the critics, but it isn't. Why? Because there are a whole lot of opportunists, as well as outright enemies of the U.S., who want to exploit the problem and harm our nation or use it to serve their own narrow political purposes.

That's right, Gary, this is really not that big of a deal, but it's being blown out of proportion by liberals who hate their country.

...now they are outraged that murderers and thugs have had a bad time of it in prison.

Well that's an interesting way of putting it. Or, it would be, if it were true. Too bad for Gary that the prisoners in Abu Graib aren't murderers and thugs. They're almost exclusively detainees being held for questioning who've done nothing wrong -- aside from being Iraqi, of course.

The politicians are the worst of all. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-New York) filed impeachment proceedings on Monday against Rumsfeld. The senators who are screaming the most are the very ones who adamantly opposed the U.S. liberating Iraq to begin with. Their attacks on Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld are launched without any consideration of how it might harm the nation to fire the Secretary of Defense when we are in the middle of a war.

Yeah, leave the war criminals alone! Let's not upset the Christian war machine mid-stride in it's mission of liberation (read: slaughter) of Iraqis with something as silly as the removal of an incompetent criminal! We're in the middle of a war! Wait a minute...I thought seinen Führer declared the end of the war well over a year ago.

On the far-out left wing of American politics it is even worse. Left-wing Web sites are using the scandal as evidence that all American troops are "baby killers" and "torturers." These people loathe their own country and despise our military. They are willing to believe anything America's enemies say while believing our own leaders are liars!

But they are liars. It's been proven time and again. And one needn't believe anything our "enemies" say or think that all American troops are baby killers and torturers to realize that, in fact, our leaders are a lying cabal of criminals.

Finally, there are bin Laden and the other murderers plotting right now to kill thousands of us and our allies.

Yeah, thanks to seinen Führer Dunderhead and his cabal of greedy, bumbling criminals letting bin Laden go in order to pursue a war for oil and revenge in Iraq.

They must be amazed at our foolishness.

"They" aren't the only ones.

The odds of us being hit before the November election grow by the hour...

Wouldn't that be convenient for the Fear Mongers who'd like to extend their illegal stay in the White House.

But it is ridiculous to suggest that the Bush Administration or military boot camps are responsible for teaching our young soldiers this behavior. We must be willing to look deeper

That's right, anything to keep from pointing fingers at the immaculate, brainless chosen one. It's not Bush's fault! It's not the military's fault! We must "look deeper" (which I think is Bonk Job code for "find someone else to blame") to find that...it's porn's fault! Yeah! And those evil, violent gays! And ~gasp~ Howard Stern!!!

"The tragic photos from Abu Ghraib prison remind us that even a war with noble goals can bring out the very worst in those who fight." --Albert Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

Too bad this war is completely devoid of any noble ambition. I suppose Al thinks that the opportunity to convert hundreds of thousands of Muslims to the real religion of Baptist Xtianity is noble enough.

Guilt by Nationality

I had a thought on this subject as it relates to both Senator Inhofe, and those who beheaded Nicolas Berg. I wonder if the Senator from Oklahoma feels the same toward the Berg situation as he does the Iraqi prisoners in Abu Graib. Because, by the Senator's very own logic that the abuse of Iraqi prisoners shouldn't be a source of concern because they have American blood on their hands, the beheading of Nicolas Berg shouldn't be upsetting because he had Iraqi blood on his hands...just as all Americans do. Considering that the beheading was carried out in retaliation for the abuse of Iraqi prisoners, there's really very little difference between the terrorists who executed Berg and Senator Inhofe. That's not to say that I think Inhofe is a terrorist, but his reasoning is similar to those particular terrorists. He believes the Iraqi prisoners deserve whatever abuse they get because they are Iraqis, and the terrorists believed Berg deserved what he got because he was American.

The wisdom of a 21-year old sandwich shop worker

More Everett X Commandments Monument stuff

But city officials claim the monument recognizes the Ten Commandments as a historical legal document and does not promote religion, unlike the 2 1/2-ton Ten Commandments memorial hauled out of the Alabama Supreme Court's rotunda last year.

Our monument doesn't weight 2 and a half tons, so it's clearly not a promotion of religion. Historical documents are lighter than religious propaganda.

Meanwhile, as the lawsuit heads toward an October trial date, the city cut $3.4 million from its budget this spring, largely because of rising health care costs and falling tax revenues. In community meetings, Mayor Ray Stephanson has cited those factors and legal expenses, including the Commandments case, as reasons for cutting workers.

Among those laid off was city biologist Liz Greenhagen, who was responsible for ensuring construction projects met environmental standards. She said the lawsuit's costs seem frivolous compared to the basic services that were cut.

"The layoff came as a complete shock. I thought I was serving a vital role in the city," says Greenhagen, 59. "If I don't find another job soon, it's going to mean financial ruin for me -- homelessness, bankruptcy. I wasn't prepared for this."

...

"People are too obsessed with getting religion out of government," says Sara Roulston, a 21-year-old sandwich-shop worker. "I think the monument should stay there. It's worth the money."

Tell that to people like Liz Greenhagen.

And then Sara's all, "Like, you want a side of fries to go with my wisdom-that-only-comes-with-years-of-life-experience opinion on what is and isn't, like, worth $100,000? I mean, my gawd, when are people gonna get a clue and see that this is a Christian nation. Ohmygod, I just swore. Ohmygod, I just did it again. Oh, I can't stop!"

There's some fair and balanced reporting for you...go ask a sandwich shop girl her opinion on Constitutional Law.

David Limbaugh gets it wrong at WingNutDaily

Just a few months ago, a California court flagrantly interposed itself in the private, internal affairs of a Lutheran church in Fresno. The conflict began when certain members of the Free Evangelical Lutheran Cross Church there stopped attending church services because they didn't appreciate what the pastor was preaching.

The church elders decided they would revoke the memberships of the absent congregants but would first give them an opportunity to be heard at a formal meeting. Instead of appearing at the hearing, the members filed suit against the church, contesting its right to terminate their memberships.

The court, appallingly, ruled in favor of the members and against the church, basically saying that the church doesn't have the right to enforce its own rules of discipline. (Somehow I doubt the case is as simple as is implied here...and it isn't, more below).

Oh, so now the bonk job suddenly becomes a proponent of the separation of church and state. Apparently, it doesn't matter how often one proposes the hypothetical state religion scenario with, for example, Islam as the official religion, the bonk jobs don't seem to get it. It's not until the government starts to "interfere" with the church that the close-minded open their minds to the genius that is the separation of church and state. Jefferson knew what he was doing; knew that it was a two way street. Separation protects both the state and the church.

They ("secularists") contend that unless we adhere to this principle (of church/state separation), we will forfeit our religious liberties and our pluralistic society will fall prey to religious totalitarians. But the California court's decision betrays both religious freedom and the separation of church and state. Yet we hear not a peep from the secularists about this decision.

I'd bet that if you ask most separationists, they'd agree that the state has no business meddling in the affairs of the church. But the reason there is no outcry from the secular society on this one is likely because they (we) feel it's about time the bonk jobs had a taste of their own medicine. They want this to be a Christian nation. They want the state to behave according to their religious views. Then the state gets to meddle in the affairs of the church. This is what happens when church and state are mixed.

But let's look at how they apply the principle in practice. In public schools, for example, they tell students they can't pray even on their own time and in a nondisruptive manner, such as when a kindergarten teacher prohibited two kindergarten students from praying at the snack table.

No we don't. That would be a violation of religious freedom. Also, I couldn't find any record of this ever happening. I did find record of a teacher stopping a student from passing out jelly beans with prayers attached to them, but that's quite different from disallowing a quiet, on-your-own-time prayer.

Similarly, school officials have enjoined more than one high-school senior from discussing his or her Christ-centered life in a valedictory speech to the student body.

This is an example of a state sanctioned activity and how the student used it to proselytize to a captive audience. Obviously a violation.

In these examples, and countless others, the school administration tells students that they can't freely exercise or express their religion because to do so would be tantamount to the school endorsing the religion. But if that's true, then it's also true that the federal and state governments are endorsing the content of this column by "permitting" me the freedom to express myself in writing.

Nope. The First Amendment guarantees the right to express these views. And they are not given the appearance of federal or state endorsement because 1) we are not a captive audience; web surfers are free to read or not to read, and 2) the views expressed aren't being posted on a government website, or in a public school, or on a courthouse wall, etc.

You can see how absurd that is...

Yes, we can see how absurd an understanding of the First Amendment you have.

Follow-ups:

The case of the Lutheran church that is being forced to reinstate its disgruntled congregants: Limbaugh neglected to point out that the church isn't owned by ecclesiastical order or a denomination, but by its members who stood to lose property rights if they quietly walked away. It turns out the decision isn't as black and white as shown by Limbaugh, but blurs into a shade of gray in the civil court jurisdiction. Details, details, and more details

Bark like a dog!

NPR on New Religions

Part 2: The Toronto Blessing

Bradley Hagerty reports on The Toronto Blessing, the fastest growing Christian church. Pentecostal worshippers display a personal, physical connection with God through manifestations such as speaking in tongues and barking like dogs.

Some things are just too goddamn funny all by themselves.

Still Not Getting It

More Pledge Posturing from the Clueless

'This is something that we should get behind. It doesn't specify a god, it just says 'under God.' That's why our nation is great.

A couple of things here. First, it does specify which god. The "g" is capitalized, which indicates a proper noun. In other words, a name of a specific god. That being, of course, the god of Christianity. It's even admitted as such by people who know the history of the 1954 action which added the phrase to the pledge. It was intended to distinguish this as a Christian nation, opposite to the "godless" communists. And second, even if it really weren't referencing a specific god, the fact that it references any god is a violation of the establishment clause.

Catholic Pot Calls Muslim Kettle "Black"

Marrying a Muslim has risks, Vatican tells Catholic women (Scroll down)

VATICAN CITY — The Vatican yesterday warned Catholic women to think hard before marrying a Muslim and urged Muslims to show more respect for human rights, gender equality and democracy.

Really? I mean, REALLY!!

Calling women "the least protected member of the Muslim family,"...

Yeah, and women are certainly way up there on the Catholic ranking system. Zygotes rank higher than women in the Catholic faith. And don't even try to compare women to men!

Bishop refusing holy, sacred rite of cannibalism for pro-choice myth-believers

No communion for any Catholic voting for a candidate who supports...well, pretty much the rights of people to decide what is best for them.

DENVER — In stark and dramatic language, a Roman Catholic bishop has declared that anyone voting for a politician who supports same-sex marriage, abortion rights, stem-cell research or euthanasia will be denied Holy Communion.

The upcoming presidential election, Bishop Michael Sheridan said in a three-page letter to the Colorado Springs diocese's newspaper May 1, will be one of the most important in history — "critical in the battle to restore the right to life to all its citizens, especially the unborn and the elderly and infirm."

The unborn are citizens now? Really. And I'd say that if we really wanted to give rights to the elderly and infirm, we'd let them decide how and when they wanted to die. Let them have their dignity.

"Any Catholic politicians who advocate for abortion, for illicit stem-cell research or any form of euthanasia ipso facto place themselves outside of full Communion with the church and so jeopardize their salvation," Sheridan wrote. "Any Catholics who vote for candidates that stand for abortion, illicit stem-cell research or euthanasia suffer the same fateful consequences."

Boo! Hellfire! Brimstone! Scared yet by our mythological imagery? No? Hmm... This used to work so well, back in the dark ages.

The letter said nothing about capital punishment, but Sheridan in the past has said the death penalty was not as weighty as other issues.

Typical.

"It's very offensive to find a bishop pushing that kind of perspective and threatening members of his own diocese," said Mary Lou Makepeace, a former Colorado Springs mayor who now heads the Gay & Lesbian Fund for Colorado. "I'd like an equally strong stance against priests who abuse children, who, so far as I know, still take Communion."

Yeah! But, apparently, terminating a pregnancy -- for any reason -- is much worse than raping an actual human child.

They deserve the abuse?

What's this? A Repugnant Senator from the Bible belt who doesn't see anything wrong with abusing Iraqi prisoners? Well, who woulda thunk it?

It began Tuesday morning when Inhofe, a member of the Armed Services Committee, expressed dismay during the hearings on the Abu Ghraib prison abuse. His dismay was not at the treatment of the prisoners so much as at all the hand-wringing it has generated. He called the prisoners "murderers, terrorists and insurgents," many of whom have "American blood on their hands."

First of all, the prisoners are mostly not "murderers, terrorists and insurgents" and don't have American blood on their hands. Most of the Iraqis who've been detained have been released because they had done nothing wrong. And second, even if every prisoner was a terrorist or insurgent or murderer, there's a little something called the Geneva Conventions which, contrary to popular BushCo/neocon belief, the U.S. must adhere to.

"We have seven bad guards," he said. "And I stress that that's seven out of 700 in that prison. They did things they should not have done. They are being punished. And they were being punished long before these pictures came out, so that's all behind us.

Wait a tick...I thought the "good" Senator just said that the prisoners are "murderers, terrorists and insurgents", so how is it that those seven guards (yeah, I'm sure it was only the seven who were caught that were doing anything) were doing anything wrong? Wasn't the implication that the prisoners deserved it? And were the "seven bad guards" really being punished before the pictures came out? No, they really weren't.

"It's been taken care of."

How surprising that this staunch conservative is quoting seinen Fürher.

Is our students learning?

It appears not...at least as far as civics and church/state go.

This is good for a few laughs. Except that it's sad how poorly informed and educated these students are. The last one, however, gives me a little hope.

In the Pledge of Allegiance, it doesn't say "one nation under Jesus Christ" or "Buddha" or "Allah." It doesn't say anything but "one nation under God." Everyone has a god, whether it is the president or their mother (for instance).

I move to strike the phrase "under God" and replace it with "under Rossi". Valentino Rossi is my god.

There are hundreds of different cultures in this country, and not all of them understand that this country was originated on Christianity. This leads them to do stuff their way instead of the American way. Too many people disrespect the flag, when it stands for the country they live in. You should have respect for everyone.

And you should heed your own advice. And read a history book to find out that this country wasn't "originated" on Xtianity.

How to Beat a Ligged Erection

...I mean "Rigged Election".

Disgusting Displays of Idiocy

LOYAL RIGHT WING TRIPS OVER ITS OWN MORALITY TO JUSTIFY TORTURE

But the supreme leader of the right-wing masses, Rush Limbaugh, actually celebrated the torture. He called it a "brilliant maneuver," and also used the hazing comparison. He defended the soldiers photographed in acts of torture as just "having a good time" and "blowing off some steam." Rush told his dittoheads that the reaction to the brutality is "an example of the feminization of the country."

This is the most powerful and influential conservative voice in the nation. His followers hang on his every word like sacred writ.

What, pray tell, will happen when talking heads spew such bile?

I got an e-mail from reader Teri Robertson, who was upset over the column I wrote last week about the prison abuse -- "your trash," as she called it. She then offered a novel thought, which I'll share. "Fortunately for the Iraqis they were tortured by Americans rather than by other countries known for their disregard for humanity," she wrote.

That's what happens. Moron Americans open their mouths and remove all doubt about just how stupid, arrogant, and selfish we, as a nation, have become. Thanks, Rush, for giving the idiots a model after which to pattern themselves.

National Day of Prayer

When Prayer and Politics Intersect

Across America on this official National Day of Prayer, those who normally pray behind closed doors are going to great lengths to be seen and heard by their fellow citizens. Tens of thousands of believers will get plenty of notice as they pray on radio airwaves over Tampa, Fla.; on mountaintops near San Francisco; and on the steps of courthouses, capitols, and city halls from Columbia, S.C., to Carson City, Nev.

Let's see what the Bible has to say about boastful public prayers, shall we?

And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites [are]: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly. Matthew 6:5-6

All followers are encouraged, for instance, to pray for schools to get "back to basics" and stop "teaching homosexual propaganda to kindergartners."

Huh? Ohhhhh...they mean to stop teaching compassion toward others.

"We're praying not only for the troops' safety but for success of their mission in spreading liberty in the world," says Mark Fried, spokesman for the National Day of Prayer Task Force. "Since President Bush is in leadership, we're praying that his cause will be successful."

And if a chimpanzee were in leadership (sorry for repeating), would they pray that its cause would be successful? I can just imagine the prayers..."Dear Lord, we beseech thee that thine will might mercifully find purchase in the soul of intent of our glorious leader that whatever target he doth take aim against, his poop doth hit". When are these people going to start thinking for themselves instead of just blindly following whatever puppet the Reich Wing offers up.

"Prayer is really about the heart, and political life is about thinking and hard choices," he (Wolfe) says. "That's why it's better not to mix these two."

Well, I'm not so sure that political life is about thinking...at least not these days, as witnessed by the current maladministration, but otherwise, Wolfe has the right idea.

A Real Memorial

Cursing, Atheism, drinking, Tillman's Memorial.

We Just Won't Go Away

Trying to Ignore Atheists

The following seems to be a common theme among Christians: they feel that they are persecuted and lacking access to the same rights as the rest of us and they completely misunderstand how rights are granted in this country.

I don't understand why one atheist can get all the publicity he's getting and we, professing Christians, just sit back and let these things happen.

Well, publicity isn't a right.

We have rights, too. (Again, there is no right to publicity.). Anyway, wasn't this country founded to let us live by majority rules?

Ummm, no. We we elect leaders by majority rule (supposedly), but it's not how we are granted our rights. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are what grant us the rights we have and they were written in such a manner that the rights of everyone, especially the minority, were protected.

If anyone doesn't want to say "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, then he or she can just not say those words. He or she has that right.

Unless, of course, you happen to be the Distinguished Gentleman from Washington, Rep. Jim McDermott. In that case, you are, apparently, required to say "under God". And if you don't, you'll be chastized even by your own team (I thought Pelosi was a liberal) and the Congressional record will be modified to indicate that you did say "under God" -- even though you didn't.

I really believe than unless Christians take a stand in matters such as these, we will one day go back to a time where a Christian will be arrested and thrown into jail for our belief.

Huh? When, in this country, has that ever happened? It hasn't. You have to go allll the way back to the days of the Roman Empire, before it was the Holy Christian Roman Empire. But, uhh...I just don't see anything like that happening.

There are some very strong Christians today who set out to prove there is no God but failed in their attempt.

Wow. Now there's a shocker for you. A Christian with strong faith who still believes that God exists? Call up the news stations!

An interetesting read...if you're psy-CHOTIC!

From Wingnutdaily, Jim McDermott: Traitor

McDermott, a 67-year-old wild-white-haired former psychiatrist from downtown Seattle, was one of only seven members of Congress (including Barney Frank, D-N.Y., Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y., Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., Michael Honda, D-Calif., Robert Scott, D-Va., and Fortney Stark, D-Calif.) to vote against a 2002 House resolution reaffirming "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Odd. I was under the impression that the government wasn't supposed to take a position on religion. Seems like the Constitution might mention something about that. So...it would seem the the above list is comprehensive of those federal legislators who did their job in upholding the neutrality of the government in matters of religion.

McDermott himself is not an atheist. He claims attendance at St. Mark's Episcopal Cathedral in Seattle, hardly a Christian church.

"Bitch!"

"I'm not a bitch, you're a bitch!"

"Who are you calling a bitch, bitch!"

~scratch, hisssss~

"Owe!"

Isn't it fun when Christians claim to have a lock on the truth and that even some other Christians aren't really Christians. I love to watch the infighting.

St. Mark's is currently promoting a "Statement of Faith-based support for Same-sex marriage" and preaches almost exclusively about "social justice," "peace," and "diversity" while nary a mention is made of sin and salvation.

What?! A church that preaches peace and love and good happiness stuff? What's wrong with them! They ought to be out scaring the bejesus out of small children with fire-and-brimstone, clench-up-quick-or-you'll-rot-in-hell twisted ideology!

In October of 2002, just months before Operation Iraqi Freedom, McDermott visited with Baath regime leaders and Saddam henchmen in Baghdad.

(So did Rummy, but ~shhhh~ don't tell this guy. It'll blow his whole worldview. Reality is awfully inconvenient to people like this so, unless you want to witness a cranial embolism first hand, better just keep Rummy's trips to Baghdad to sell WMD to Saddam amongst ourselves.) Then again, watching Bonk Jobs' heads split is always good for a bit o' entertainment. Ooo. Violent. Did I just say that?

So, what was Jim up to when he visited Baghdad? Plotting against the U.S.? Re-upping his membership in the Baath party? Nope. Trying to convince Saddam to come clean regarding WMD and give U.N. inspectors free reign so that bloodshed might be avoided. Wow. Fucking traitor. How dare he attempt to take away America's god-given right to bomb the stuffing out of countries full of brown people.

"The president of the United States will lie to the American people in order to get us into this war," McDermott told ABC's "This Week" from Iraq.

Ummm... Bush did lie to the American people in order to get us into a war with Iraq. Aha! So, this is what makes McDermott a traitor! Truth-telling!

Upon his return from Baghdad, McDermott addressed an anti-American rally at downtown Seattle's Denny Park, continuing his diatribe against Bush and justice.

Whoa, is this guy ever gone. An anti-American rally?? Protesting is one of the most American things a person can do! And protesting against Bush is protesting FOR justice.

But it seems Saddam and his buddies considered McDermott a hero in those days before the war. Baath Party documents discovered after the fall of Baghdad revealed that McDermott accepted a $5,000 check for legal reserves from Shakir al-Khafaji, an Iraqi businessman with close ties to Saddam Hussein.

First off, who was it that was selling WMD to Saddam in the 80's? And who met with Saddam personally? Was it McDermott? No, it was Don Rumsfeld. So to quibble over a $5,000 legal fee seems awfully petty -- not to mention misleading, since it was fr legal services rendered to someone with ties to Saddam, not Saddam himself. Second..how, exactly, does accepting a $5,000 check for legal services make McDermott a "hero" to Saddam? The spin here is dizzying and it borders on outright libel.

And when Saddam was captured in his secret lair (ooo...secret lair. Sounds ominous, doesn't it? IT WAS A FUCKING HOLE IN THE GROUND. Ass.) last year, McDermott alleged the entire capture had been staged, coordinated and timed by the Bush administration.

...and the proof that Saddam's capture wasn't staged, coordinated and timed by BushCo is?

It is no surprise that Castro's friend McDermott is a member of the House Progressive Caucus, a corps of 54 congressional communists and socialists led by the candidate for president of the Keebler Elves, Dennis Kucinich.

Actually, I'm kind of getting a kick out of this. Nothing like name calling and belittling, eh? But I wonder. Are any of the 54 members of the Congressional Pregressive Caucus actually communists or socialists? Hmm. NOPE!

Here's the statment of purpose of the Congressional Progressive Caucus:

The members of the Progressive Caucus share a common belief in the principles of social and economic justice, non-discrimination, and tolerance in America and in our relationships with other countries.

We also seek to embody and give voice to national priorities which reflect the interests and needs of all the American people, not just the wealthy and the powerful.

Our purpose is to present thoughtful, positive, practical solutions to the problems confronting America and the world.

In the post-Cold War era, we believe our nation’s priorities must change with the times and reflect new realities. Accordingly, we support curbs on wasteful, inefficient government spending at the Pentagon and elsewhere, a more progressive tax system in which wealthier taxpayers and corporations pay their fair share, adequate funding for social programs that are designed to extend help to low and middle-income Americans in need, and trade policies that increase the exports of more American products and encourage the creation of
jobs and investment in America.

Sound like a dangerous lot, don't they? Threatening the American ideals of greed and screwing the lower- and middle-classes at every chance.

...the truth (ah, the "truth") is McDermott hates America...

Then why does he continue his 34 years as a representative of the people in government? It boggles the mind how a person who hates America can stand to work so closely with the very structure of its workings.

McDermott's Republican opponent in the 2004 election is Carol Cassady, a reflection of the better side of Seattle.

Oh, well of course she's a reflection of the better side of Seattle...she's a Republican! (Pardon me...~wretch~...hmm, must've gotten some bad meat...no idea what could've caused me to suddenly hurl just then).

Carol is a patriotic, faithful Christian citizen activist who, since McDermott went to Baghdad, has become known around the Puget Sound region as Jim McDermott's No. 1 foe. In 2002, Cassady scored the support of one in five Seattle voters in her campaign against McDermott.

Fearsome! Sounds like Jim's got to be shaking in his boots over a "#1 Foe" with enough clout to rally 20% of what Jim can muster.

There are, in fact, conservatives who live in Seattle, but most of them gave up hope long ago and refrain from going to the polls.

Nah, they haven't given up. They live at my parents' house and pass along completely unoriginal, tedious, irritating Reich Wing e-mails.

Thus, I don't expect Jim McDermott to lose his seat in Congress this election year, but I do expect Americans to understand he is a full-throated, maniacal traitor against God and country.

Full-throated? What is that, some sort of gay slur?

Maniacal traitors against God and country unite!

McDermott's Pushing all the "Right" Buttons, Yay!

Falwell on McDermott: It's a doozy.

I imagine that Rep. James McDermott has heard from many of his trendy liberal friends who have been telling him what a brave and courageous soul he is for snubbing the phrase "under God" when he led the House of Representatives in saying the Pledge of Allegiance on Tuesday.

And I'm sure he's heard from ten times as many rabid hyper-Xtians damning him to all hellfire for his devil-worshipping ways.

Today's secularists loathe America's biblical underpinning that served to inspire and motivate our founders to forge a nation that would recognize the value of its religious citizens, even in governmental affairs.

Bwahahahahahahaha

They disrespect our history and seek only to establish an agenda that eradicates our longstanding religious heritage.

Umm...who's history are secularists disrespecting, Mr. Revisionist-man? You do realize that our founding fathers intended a secular government, yes?

Secularists want the American public square to be devoid of religious influence...

No, only some secularists want the public square devoid of religious influence. Others only want the public square devoid of religion, rather than religious influence (a subtle difference). Others still are fine with religion in the public square, they simply want the government devoid of religion and religious influence.

From Ten Commandments monuments at American courthouses, to high school football game prayers, to the brief mention of God in our Pledge, secularists are seeking to enforce their marginal views on the nation

I'd hardly call the intent of the Constitution a "marginal view".

Barry Lynn, president of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, a group that seeks to wholly secularize our nation, admitted to me that he ultimately hopes to purge the words "In God We Trust" from our currency.

Barry Lynn is a minister. He hardly wants to secularize the nation. He only means to keep the government secular -- as it was intended to be.

I wonder if secularists would, given the ability to do so, strike the phrase "endowed by our Creator" from the U.S. Constitution.

Well I know I would, but I can't speak for all of us, and neither should someone as clueless about who we are (and about many other things as well) as Falwell.

Will they take control of our nation's textbooks so that they can cleanse words that chronicle our founders as men of faith who routinely sought guidance from above?

You mean like how Xtian zealots have tried to take control of our nation's science textbooks in order to cleanse them of...well, science? No, Jerry, the fact that some of the founders did have religious faith -- of varying degrees and flavors, I might add -- is all just part of history and most people are intelligent enough to realize that it's got no bearing on the founders' intentions that the government of this country be secular in order that all may enjoy religious freedom.

Will ministers one day be punished for upholding the Word of God in sermons that counter the secularist standpoint?

No, you dumbass, that's what religious freedom is all about and that's what groups like the ACLU are fighting for -- the right of everyone to believe and worship as they please.

Columnist Ann Coulter,...

Buckle up, people, it's gonna get bumpy

...who certainly has a matchless way with words, said recently, "The nation waits with bated breath to see if, this term, the court will strike 'under God' from the Pledge of Allegiance. Liberals are so desperate for this to happen that some of them are actually praying for it."

Meaning, what? That all liberals are atheists? Hardly. What's so shocking about a religious person (a lot of liberals are religious) praying for an outcome that they believe to be fair and correct? It's far less shocking that the myriad of ridiculous things that people like Falwell and Robertson pray for. And it's certainly far less shocking than most things that are spouted by xenophobe Ann Coulter. Take wishing that Timothy McVeigh had bombed the New York Times instead of the Murrah Federal Building, for one. Or that we should "make an example" of people like John Lindh and Jose Padilla in order to scare terrorists straight.

Mr. McDermott will no doubt become the poster child for the effort to thoroughly secularize our nation.

No, Jerry, it's "return the government to its originally intended secular form", not "secularize the nation".

He is already revered (really? revered?) by secularists for his action in June 2002, when the House of Representatives voted to condemn the 9th Circuit Court's ruling that declared the Pledge unconstitutional. With a vote of 416-to-2, the House adopted the measure, with Rep. McDermott voting "present." Then in a March 2003 resolution, Rep. McDermott joined with six other "no" voters in refusing to condemn the 9th Circuit ruling.

Oh. Yeah. How terrible of McDermott to refuse to jump on the bandwagon of pubescent games like "we hate you, stupid 9th circuit court!" that are a huge waste of Congress' time.

Gary Bauer, chairman of the Campaign for Working Families, (yay! Another quote from a Reich Wing nut job) said, "While Jim McDermott may be in the minority in the House of Representatives, he does, unfortunately, 'represent' many on the lunatic fringe of American politics who are increasingly active and energized this year.

Lunatic fringe? Well, I never! Oh wait, he said, "of American politics". Yeah, okay, I have. But, but...takes one to know one! Na-na-na-na-naaa-naaaaaa.

"In the 'civil war' over values, either McDermott's worldview will prevail or our worldview, that recognizes God as the author of our liberty, will prevail."

Oh, come on, Jerry. Just say what you mean. "...or our wordview, the one that's 100% infallibly right,...". Anyway, with Falwell, it's "either/or", "black or white". It's too bad he fails to realize that his worldview and McDermott's worldview could co-exist peacefully in this country...if only we had a truly neutral government in matters of religion. That was the genius of the founding fathers. They knew that in order to preserve the religious preferences of everyone, the government should be secular. That is, it should keep out of such matters.

The chief problem, however, is that those in this lunatic fringe are characteristically portrayed in the so-called mainstream media as holding conventional viewpoints.

What media does Jerry read??! I'd like to get my hands on it -- I could use the validation. Wait. Oh yeah. I recognize this particular brand of propaganda. This is part of that "liberal media" myth. (For more on the "liberal media", see Al Franken's book, "Lies and the Lying Liars...").

Conjecture is treated as truth.

Wait. Did Jerry just change topics and start talking about BushCo's "case" for going to war with Iraq?

The mainstream media hold what have become established views on issues such as abortion, evolution and homosexual rights that counter the mindset of millions of Americans.

Yeah, millions of nutjob Americans, eh Jerry?

But they treat these views as fact, purposely disregarding and discounting as irrelevant the views of those who do not accept these "truths."

And now Jerry's switched topics again to discuss BushCo's views on such things as the environment, global warming, the existence of WMD, the Iraq-Saddam link, etc.

This is how our nation will become increasingly divided -- by allowing me to continue to spew forth my vitriol. It is a tragedy of immense proportions that so many of our fellow Americans simply fall into lockstep with the myth-as-truth mentality.

Sorry. Took a few "artistic liberties" there. Couldn't resist. I mean, ol' Jerry was so close to hitting the nail on the head that I just had to help him along a bit.

That is why it behooves every one of us who loves America and the foundation on which it was built to uphold the legacy of our forefathers by taking a stand for our religious freedoms. (Actually, Jerry means "...take a stand for the Xtian religion...". If he really supported religious freedom (of all religions -- or none at all), he'd support removing references to a monotheistic, and arguably Xtian, god in the Pledge, on our currency, in the openings of the Supreme Court, etc.) Unless we rise up and take action -- a good first step would be to vote out the Jim McDermotts of the day -- our children will one day wake in a vast secularist wasteland that used to be America.

Fearmongering, threats and distortions, oh my!

My twisted sense of humor - making light of a situation which has caused others great pain

This article is sad and very serious and I have no witty or sarcastic comments to make about the content, but the following sentence (obviously butchered in translation) just paints a hilarity I can't contain.

Acid attack on boy who refused sex with a Muslim cleric

"They are either hushed up and sorted out within the confines of school, or parents are pressurised not to report the incident to the media as it would give religion a bad name," said Zia Ahmed Awan, the president of Madadgaar, a joint project of LHRLA (Lawyers for Human Rights and Legal Aid) and Unicef, the United Nations children's fund.

The parents are pressurized?? How does this work, exactly? Pump 'em full of air until every time they open their mouth to complain that their child has been raped and disfigured nothing but unintelligible mouth farting ensues?

Haroon Tanoli, Abid's father, met strong resistance when he tried to take up his son's case with officials at the school.

Yeah, they were waiting at the school with a 30 gallon air compressor and a long hose with a fitting that looked like it meant business. "My son has been raped and disfig--".

"Pressurize him!"

"I despise hypocrites who sport huge beards in the name of religion and hinder the passage of justice in the name of Islam," said Mr Tanoli.

Must be an Islamic cultural thing -- or a really bad translation in to English. "You there! Sporter of overly gigantic facial hair! You, sir, are a hypocrite! I shave in your general direction!"

...and the Cover-up

Congressional record shows that McDermott said "under God", even though he didn't. And people laugh at me and treat me like a fringe lunatic when I say there's a Religioius Reich conspiracy to take over the world. Pshaw!

Misrepresenting Our Rights and Reality

Congressman and Court Are No Help in Religious Issues Really? I guess that depends on your point of view. Oh...the article was written by a columnist in Dall-ass, Tex-ass...if that helps shed any light on the issue.

Judging from a mountain of e-mails, many of you had not heard of him (Rep. Jim McDermott - D, WA) until I focused last week on the transparency of his desire to show every returning casket from the Iraq war.

His motivation was, and is, to subvert war support.

It sounds more like his motivation is the truth. If the Bush maladministration and their talking heads (such as this genius) think that the way to maintain support for the war is to lie and cover up reality, then I say, "Subvert away, Jim"!

It was his turn at a task that is routine yet special: leading his 434 colleagues in the Pledge of Allegiance. And it was in that task that McDermott drew attention to the other thing that defines him these days: his opposition to the phrase "under God" in the pledge.

OK. That's a debate in progress, and people can differ on the subject. But unless those words are removed as surely as they were inserted by Congress a half century ago, the pledge is what it is, and it contains the words "under God." It is the duty of anyone leading a group in reciting the pledge to include them.

Sorry, Bonkjob...wrong again. According to the Supreme Court, it is the right of every citizen to abstain from reciting the phrase "under God" or the pledge in its entirety.

I sent an e-mail to Rep. McDermott congratulating him for standing up for what is right, especially in the face of such opposition from the masses of religious zealots. Given what an uphill struggle doing the right thing regarding freedom of religion has become these days, I encourage you to voice your support for him, as well. I'm sure he could use a few friendly e-mails amidst the guaranteed flurry of "rot in hell you devil-worshipping Atheist" e-mails he'll get from the Religious Reich.

Our Very Own Everett Is Wasting Money on a X Commandments Case

Everett Fights to Continue Violating Separation Clause

Mayor Ray Stephanson has been telling neighborhood groups that one reason the city needs to continue cutting programs and services is because of unanticipated legal expenses, including the Ten Commandments case.

Or -- and this could just be a crazy, off-the-wall idea -- the city could try NOT violating the separation clause of the First Amendment, thereby avoiding having to defend an indefensible position and wasting $100K of Everett taxpayers' money! I know, it's a pretty revolutionary idea, so give it a minute to sink in.

The city maintains that the granite monument, which the Everett Eagles donated to the city in 1959, is a historic landmark that promotes universal values and legal principles, not a particular religion.

The universal value of worshipping no god other than that of Christianity? Yeah. And the legal principal of obeying your parents? Mmhmmm...lots of kids rotting away in the city jail over that one.