Meet the Press

Last night’s press conference was, to be kind, a disaster. The press actually asked some questions vaguely resembling hardballs (although I dearly wanted someone to take the opportunity to ask Bush about Tom DeLay after he asserted he is “proud of [his] party,” but perhaps that’s expecting too much of sleepy bears coming out of their cozy hibernation). The president dodged the toughies, although not terribly adeptly, and was clearly agitated, even as he repeatedly said he “appreciated” various questions. (I began to wonder if “I appreciate that question” was some sort of codespeak for “Karl Rove, please have this reporter killed.”)

Perhaps my favorite part of the entire thing was Bush’s patent refusal to endorse the “judicial filibusters are an attack against people of faith” storyline.

I think people are opposing my nominees because they don't like the judicial philosophy of the people I've nominated.

[…]

I view religion as a personal matter. I think a person ought to be judged on how he or she lives his life, or lives her life. And that's how I've tried to live my life, through example. Faith-based is an important part of my life, individually, but I don't -- I don't ascribe a person's opposing my nominations to an issue of faith.

[…]

The great thing about America, David, is that you should be allowed to worship any way you want, and if you choose not to worship, you're equally as patriotic as somebody who does worship. And if you choose to worship, you're equally American if you're a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim. That's the wonderful thing about our country, and that's the way it should be.
Got that, Bill First? Got that, Dobson? Got that, Freepers?

That last paragraph sounds like something I’d say. I question whether the president believes in the sentiment quite as passionately as I do, but I’m sure glad he said it nonetheless. The dominionists must be stewing in their own juices at that one—hoo boy!

Salon’s War Room also reports today that the mainstream press seems to finally be catching on that this guy isn’t real popular anymore:
Forget the analysis pieces, almost all of which focus on the sorry shape of the president's second-term agenda; notice the hostile tone in the straight news stories today.

Under a front-page headline that reads, "Bush Cites Plan That Would Cut Social Security Benefits," the Times says Bush's press conference "represented an effort to regain control of the national dialogue at a time when Mr. Bush is struggling to push his Social Security plan ahead on Capitol Hill, his approval ratings are falling, the economy is showing signs of slowing and Democrats have become more combative."

The Washington Post leads with the headline, "Bush Social Security Plan Would Cut Future Benefits," and its main news story describes a president clamoring for relevance. The press conference "came at a time of uncertainty for a president facing sagging poll numbers, a slowing economy and general unease about his domestic agenda," the Post says, citing White House aides who say Bush is "concerned his agenda is being eclipsed by congressional bickering."

The Boston Globe says Bush met the press "amid an array of problems, including the stalled nomination of some of his judicial nominees, and of John Bolton to become US ambassador to the United Nations, ethics questions surrounding a key ally, House majority leader Tom DeLay, a sliding stock market, continuing violence in Iraq, and record energy prices."

And the Los Angeles Times headlines its coverage, "Bush Recasts Message on Social Security," then ticks off a litany of problems for which the president apparently has no plan: "The nation's economic growth has slowed. . . . The price of gasoline has soared. . . . Bush's overall popularity has sagged in public opinion polls. . . . The president acknowledged no anxiety over those trends, beyond his concern over gas prices and the economy. 'I'm an optimistic fellow,' he said."

If Bush continues to get coverage like this, he'd better be.
Ouch. I gotta tell ya, Bush looked like a half-cooked goose last night. When the only major policy that is regarded as even remotely successful (No Child Left Behind) is brought up in a question about a teachers’ union filing a lawsuit against it because of its massive funding problems, you know he’s a done tom turkey. (Forgive the mixed fowl metaphors.)

As a side note, the lively discussion in the Big Brass Blog chat room last night was fun. Thanks to Pam for moderating throughout the press conference, and for everyone who joined in. We’ll have to do that more often.

Open Wide...

The Realm of the Clueless

I heard a promo for "American Dad," the new show by the creator of "Family Guy" on the radio this morning. We've been anticipating it in Spudville, as the husband is a rabid "Family Guy" fan. A quick blurb from the show was played (I may have the dialogue wrong; doing this from memory):

Dad: "Eat your peas."

Daugher: "Why?"

Dad: "So you'll be big and strong enough to fight off Bill Clinton's sexual advances!"

I'm sure I'm wording it incorrectly, but that was the joke. Hearing it made me think of "All in the Family," and the country's reaction to Archie Bunker.

Carol O'Connor was an excellent actor, and a very good man. He was a staunch liberal in real life; I remember reading how distressed he was that this bigoted character was becoming so popular with real bigots! A testament to his acting ability, I suppose, that the character they were mocking became a hero to so many.

Anyway, the father in "American Dad" is a caricature of an ultra right-wing conservative. But with jokes like the one above, I wonder if he'll become a hero to the right? Will we start seeing "American Dad" shirts sold on Little Green Hateballs?

Will they "get it?"

Somehow, I doubt it. As we've said before, subtlety ain't their strong suit.

(Cross-posted from my blog.)

Open Wide...

Friday Limerick

Last night the pres took to the stage,
Which he hasn’t done in an age,
To answer the press;
His responses? A mess!
He came off as both lost and enraged.

(And for another great limerick, see this comment thread for a Dark Wraith original, which depends on the context of the whole thread for maximum appreciation.)

Open Wide...

Friday Blogrollin’

Not only are all of the following Shakers, whose contributions regularly grace the comments threads around here, but they are also each great bloggers in their own right. Check ’em out!

Daily Mendacity

Frogs and Ravens

WordWhammy

Shades of Gray

The Evil Petting Zoo

Local Tint

Pandora’s Blog

A Little Leeway

(By the way, I know my toggling menus aren't working for FireFox users. It's beyond my ability to sort out, so the Dark Wraith and Rook have both generously offered to take a look and see if they can figure it out. Hopefully, they'll be working soon. I apologize for the inconvenience. And thanks to everyone who's let me know.)

Open Wide...

Friday Blogwhorin'

Your chance to promote your blog, other blogs, and various things of interest.

What's going on?

Open Wide...

Question of the Day

[UPDATE: I'm moving this back closer to the top for a bit, because there have been some really lovely contributions in the comments that deserve more attention, and to encourage others to contribute their stories, too.]

In his acceptance speech for the 1993 Best Actor Oscar for Philadelphia, Tom Hanks noted:

I would not be standing here if it weren't for two very important men in my life. Two that I haven't spoken with in a while but I had the pleasure of the other night: Mr. Rawley Farnsworth, who was my high school drama teacher, who taught me to act well the part, there all the glory lies. And one of my classmates under Mr. Farnsworth, Mr. John Gilkerson. I mention their names because they are two of the finest gay Americans, two wonderful men that I had the good fortune to be associated with, to fall under their inspiration at such a young age. I wish my babies could have the same sort of teacher, the same sort of friends.
And the movie In and Out was born. But that’s not the point of this post.

It’s easy to forget that it was still fairly spectacular in 1993 to hear someone like Tom Hanks warmly acknowledge and express gratitude to gay mentors so effusively, although that it is still stuck in my memory is some indication of its import at the time.

When considering the legislation being presented in Alabama to ban gay-authored books (and those with even the remotest gay content), I was thinking about the priceless and unquantifiable contributions made to the arts by the LGBT community, and I was reminded of Tom Hanks’ speech, which celebrated the influence of two gay men on his life. I've had the fortune of being positively affected by a number of people, many of whom were gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered—teachers, friends, coworkers, mentors, artists in various disciplines, all of whom have inimitably enriched my life, though perhaps none quite so markedly and lastingly as Mr. Furious.

My friendship with Mr. Furious, which began half my life ago, has taught me about love, loyalty, pride, self-worth, self-expression, and communication, just for a start. He is a true soul mate, who knows me and understands me wholly—and generously accepts my flaws, even as he has seen me at my very shameful worst. We’ve studied, worked, written, made films, published underground newspapers, set poetry to music, laughed, cried, struggled, and succeeded together; I have few brilliant memories that don't include him. One of the best gifts I have ever received was a CD he burned for me on my 30th birthday last year, featuring a compilation of songs that evoked shared memories and accompanied by his written recollections of what each song evoked. They are songs that I love, because they remind me of him, but also because we love the same music, like we love the same movies and books. We have in-jokes that are almost old enough to drive.

I really can’t imagine what my life would have been like without him.

So, today’s question, as a counterpunch to the attempts to silence the voices of gays and lesbians, is this: how has a gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered person touched your life? Whether it’s someone famous, perhaps one of the writers whose work was mentioned in the post below, or someone you know, what has that person meant to you?

(I love ya, Mr. F.)

Open Wide...

Chat Invitation

As Paul noted earlier today, President Bush is doing a news conference tonight, his first in a long time. (8:30 EST)

During the news conference, Pam will be moderating a chat in the Big Brass Blog chat room, the link to which can be found in the far right sidebar. Since my television is upstairs and my computer is downstairs, I will be joining in after the broadcast (or perhaps during, depending on how long I can stomach it). I hope you’ll join us!

Open Wide...

Last Chance Saloon

As many regular Shakers know, we have a troll in our midst by the name of G.C. who likes to antagonize by saying things like, When was the last "straight pride parade"? Yesterday, I challenged G.C. to do the right thing and leave this site of his own volition, because he has repeatedly proven himself disrespectful (which he admits purposely being), ill-informed (the latest admittance of which can be found here), and deceitful (proof of which can be found here where he claims that I believe “other opinions must be stopped,” in spite of my having allowed everyone (including him) to express whatever they want and having never banned a single commenter from this site). In the past, it should be noted, I had to force G.C. to apologize to Ms. Julien after he had been so thoroughly rude and insensitive that I was prepared to ban him should an apology not have been forthcoming.

Instead of being a stand-up guy, and recognizing that his contributions here are unwelcome, because of both their tenor and lack of factual basis, G.C. has chosen instead to accuse me of shutting him down because of his dissenting political views.

Most recently, G.C. has asserted in his defense:

The "straight pride parades" comment was meant to make a point. I (and many other citizens of this great country) find "gay pride parades" very inflammatory and offensive, but that's life. Get over it.

Yes, I admit that I did not know of any such "straight" parades. I stand corrected.

Why is it that if any counterpoint to a "gay" topic comes up people shout "you are out of line. I find "gay marriage" equally lambasting the straight community. I think that is out of line. The argument can go both ways. I'm sorry for the ill-informed comment, but the point still stands.
Here is my response:

A) How is a gay pride parade inflammatory and offensive?

B) Why do you repeatedly accuse me and my readers of being ill-informed when you have yet to catch me reporting any unverifiable information, and yet I have on many occasions forced you to admit you "didn't know about" something?

C) Gay marriage cannot "lambaste" the straight community. (Do you even know what lambaste means?) Here, let me help you out:

lam·baste

1. To give a thrashing to; beat.
2. To scold sharply; berate.


To say a straight pride parade is about lambasting the LGBT community is to suggest that it is organized with the express purpose of berating gays and lesbians. The parade itself does not lambaste; the people involved do. Concepts and institutions, like gay marriage, cannot lambaste anything.

D) You seem to be resolutely confused about the concept of open debate, complaining about having people respond to your “counterpoints” with counterpoints of their own. You have expressed on a gay-friendly blog that you are against gay marriage and, in fact, any expression of gay pride and solidarity. What do you expect? That people return with an argument to your beliefs is not an attempt to squelch dissent, but a key component of debate. If you want to be able to express your views without anyone expressing an alternative opinion, then you need to start your own blog and disallow comments.

----------------

There are two reasons I am posting all this on the main page. First, because I want it clearly noted that I do not resent G.C. sharing alternative political views; it is the means by which he expresses them that I find objectionable. Secondly, I want G.C. to take this opportunity to mount his defense in this comment thread, because it is his last chance to convince me and everyone else at this blog that I should continue to allow him to be here.

I have been asked to ban him, and until this point I have not, because I do believe in free speech and because I pity him; he’s obviously a very lonely and unhappy person, and I’m not sure he has much meaningful connection with other people. But in addition to my belief in free speech, and despite my feelings of sympathy, I also believe strongly that this blog is a community, and when there is a disruptive element in any community, it is the job of the community leader to take action to protect it. Opposing political views are welcome; people who intentionally hurt feelings and act in a manner contrary to the goals of the community are not. So we have reached the Last Chance Saloon.

G.C., this is it, buddy. Give me a reason to let you stay, or you’re gone.

Open Wide...

The Disappointment to My Parents Meme

Ahh! I’ve been tagged!

Before I plow onward, I have to admit, that I don’t really “get” this meme, which is admittedly probably quite stupid of me, so I tried to trace it backwards the source. After awhile, though, I got distracted or bored or something, so I don’t know who wrote it originally, and I don’t know why they “couldn’t” be these things. I’d prefer to be saying, “If I were a doctor…” etc., since I could have been one, but I prefer to examine weird body growths from a safe distance—approximately the distance between my couch and the television, with an added layer of protection from too much horror provided by the Discovery Health Channel editors.

Anyway, in the spirit of fun and trying to ignore my penchant for pedantry, here are my responses:

If I could be a scientist... Well, I am a social scientist—does that count? I apply all my learnin’ in the field of sociopolitical anthropology to this here blog, instead of getting a doctorate and going to live among and study the Kayapo Indians of Brazil. And good thing, too, or else I’d never have the time to write piercing political commentary about overzealous trouser designs.

If I could be a musician... I’d do whatever it takes to be controversial enough to irritate Bill O’Reilly, so that when Pepsi offered me a contract, he’d declare a pox on my family, which might be the only thing to convince my dad to stop watching his show.

If I could be a doctor... I’d be Dr. Dre. See previous answer.

If I could be a painter... I would be an antisocial graffiti artist, get terminally addicted to drugs and booze, never make a penny while I was alive, and make sure that the millions my work garnered after my untimely demise would be left to radical lefty causes. Believe me, that would be a big disappointment to my parents.

If I could be an innkeeper... I would certainly keep my eyes on any pregnant women and their damn husbands who show up at my door on donkeys.

Tag, you’re it:

Pam, because she shares my strange addiction to the Discovery Health Channel, Ms. Julien, and Waveflux. Off you go!

Open Wide...

Holy CRAP!

Bubble boy is temporarily leaving his bubble.

WASHINGTON -
President Bush is ready to begin talking with Congress and the public about specific steps he supports to ensure the future of
Social Security and will announce his ideas during a prime-time news conference Thursday.

Bush was also using the formal question-and-answer session with reporters — his first in the evening in over a year — to talk about skyrocketing gas prices. The White House asked television networks to broadcast the news conference, scheduled for 8:30 p.m. EDT in the East Room of the White House.


Took him long enough. Gee, do you think reporters will take this opportunity to ask him real questions? Or are they just going to Gannon it, and let him slide by?

Chimpy hasn't spoken to a real audience in so long; if the questions get difficult, he's sure to get spooked. I haven't seen that since the first debate, and THAT'S entertainment, folks...

Open Wide...

Time Really Sucks

Skippy writes another letter.

Last time on this issue, I noted:

This is the problem with a media that refuses to do its most basic homework—the damage gets done, and unless all (three) of the Left’s media personalities collectively scream about how the mistake is part of a vast rightwing conspiracy, no one will be the wiser.

The thing is, I don’t think Time really is part of a conspiracy. I think this mistake is just typical of the assortment of lazy, complacent, imprecise, conscienceless, bottom-line driven, easily intimidated and manipulated twats that are collectively known as our mainstream media. Which, frankly, isn’t really any better.
Well, I stand corrected. The cropping in their print version seems pretty darned deliberate. Looks like in addition to being lazy, complacent, imprecise, conscienceless, bottom-line driven, easily intimidated and manipulated, they’re also crooked. Nice going, Time. Your determination to create a photo finish in the race to bottom is really paying off.

Open Wide...

Also in Texas…

Houston has banned people with offensive odors from public libraries.

On Wednesday, the City Council passed a series of library regulations that some say are an attempt to discourage homeless people from visiting the public buildings.

[…]

"I understand what they're trying to do, but when you start targeting a community like the homeless, I think that's poor policy," council member Ada Edwards said.

Mayor Bill White said there have been several complaints from the public about abuse of the city's libraries.
Right. I’m sure it has absolutely nothing to do with preventing recent history in Austin from repeating itself in Houston.

Open Wide...

A Must-Read

In posting about another discrimination lawsuit brought against Denny’s, this time because one of their franchises refused to serve a group of men of Middle Eastern descent, who were also called “bin Ladens” by the manager, Pam includes some Freeper quotes regarding the story. They are truly sickening.

"We fear your kind...car bombs, hijacked airplanes, bulking belts, beheadings, honor killings, all are associated with Islam and Muslims....so yeah...I'm gonna look twice and the second look ain't love."
That isn’t even the worst of it. I really can’t even begin to imagine how to combat such visceral, vengeful racism.

Open Wide...

The Sistine Chapel is Totally Gay

Mr. Shakes has an interesting question for Alabama lawmaker Gerald Allen: Should the Sistine Chapel be burned to the ground since it’s graced with over 300 figures painted by raging homosexual Michelangelo?

Open Wide...

Meanwhile, in Texas…

While Alabamans argue over banning books authored by gays or featuring gay characters, the school board in Odessa, Texas (the town featured in the book and film Friday Night Lights, the town that values football over book-learnin’) has voted unanimously to add a Bible class to its high school curriculum.

Barring any hurdles, the class should be added to the curriculum in fall 2006 and taught as a history or literature course. The school board still must develop a curriculum, which board member Floy Hinson said should be open for public review.

The board had heard a presentation in March from Mike Johnson, a representative of the Greensboro, N.C.-based National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, who said that coursework designed by that organization is not about proselytizing or preaching.
Of course, a look at their website reveals some interesting assertions, the first being, “The program is concerned with education rather than indoctrination of students,” which is immediately followed by, “The central approach of the class is simply to study the Bible as a foundation document of society, and that approach is altogether appropriate in a comprehensive program of secular education. The world is watching to see if we will be motivated to impact our culture, to deal with the moral crises in our society, and reclaim our families and children. Please help us to restore our religious and civil liberties in this nation.” (Emphasis mine.)

Okay. So if it’s not meant to indoctrinate students into a particular belief system, then why on earth does bringing Bible classes to high schools have anything to do with moral crises, not to mention the nebulous concept of “reclaiming children”? I think their goal is perhaps better stated as being “concerned with the covert indoctrination of students, rather than anything too obvious that will immediately get our asses taken to court by the ACLU.”

Whatever.

Oh, and by the way, my favorite rationale for this decision?
"How can students understand Leonardo da Vinci's 'Last Supper' … if they don't understand the reference from which they came?" Johnson said.
Uh, you know, Mike—I’m not so sure it’s a good idea for students to be studying that faggot anyway. You have a thing or two to learn from Alabama, it seems.

Open Wide...

Oh my god, this is awesome

Whoops. Should have secured that domain name.

Nothing combats bigotry and hatred like subtle humor.

(Tip 'o the Energy Dome to The Liberal Avenger. Cross-posted from my blog.)

Open Wide...

Unmitigated Bigotry in Alabama

Oh, this really takes the fucking cake:

Republican Alabama lawmaker Gerald Allen says homosexuality is an unacceptable lifestyle. As CBS News Correspondent Mark Strassmann reports, under his bill, public school libraries could no longer buy new copies of plays or books by gay authors, or about gay characters.

"I don't look at it as censorship," says State Representative Gerald Allen. "I look at it as protecting the hearts and souls and minds of our children."

Books by any gay author would have to go: Tennessee Williams, Truman Capote and Gore Vidal. Alice Walker's novel "The Color Purple" has lesbian characters.

Allen originally wanted to ban even some Shakespeare. After criticism, he narrowed his bill to exempt the classics, although he still can't define what a classic is. Also exempted now Alabama's public and college libraries.

Librarian Donna Schremser fears the "thought police," would be patrolling her shelves.

"And so the idea that we would have a pristine collection that represents one political view, one religioius view, that's not a library,'' says Schremser.

"I think it's an absolutely absurd bill," says Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

First Amendment advocates say the ban clearly does amount to censorship.

"It's a Nazi book burning," says Potok. "You know, it's a remarkable piece of work."

But in book after book, Allen reads what he calls the "homosexual agenda," and he's alarmed.

"It's not healthy for America, it doesn't fit what we stand for," says Allen. "And they will do whatever it takes to reach their goal."
Who does this motherfucker think he is?! Censorship isn’t healthy for America. Bigotry isn’t healthy for America. Small-minded, sanctimonious, ignorant, prejudiced, witch-hunting, piece-of-shit dirtbags who bloviate about a fictitious “homosexual agenda” while simultaneously managing to find homosexual undertones in everything he reads aren’t healthy for America.

I love these fucking cretins who go on about how gays will do “whatever it takes to reach their goal” without the slightest trace of irony or the merest glimmer of recognition that the goal is simply to have the same goddamn rights as everyone else. How shockingly radical!

And who is it really that’s willing to do “whatever it takes” to reach their goal? When was the last time, in the name of pursuing equality, the LGBT community and their supporters asked that any piece of literature be banned? In other words, when have the LGBT community and their supporters ever championed ignorance? And that’s really what Allen is doing—he’s fighting for ignorance. He’s arguing to take some of the most amazing literature ever written in the English language—Tennessee Williams, Truman Capote, Alice Walker—and make it unavailable to children because he’s afraid they might learn to be tolerant, instead of a hateful, piggish malcontent just like him. He’s arguing to hide the timeless, breathtaking beauty of works like The Glass Menagerie, A Streetcar Named Desire, Sweet Bird of Youth, The Grass Harp, Breakfast at Tiffany’s, The Color Purple, and You Can’t Keep a Good Woman Down because they may open the minds of their readers to the idea that gays are people, too. And those are just works from the three authors mentioned. Look at who else’s work Mr. Allen would be willing to get rid of, all in the name of preventing literature from doing what it does best—teaching its readers about how wonderful the world is, and the people in it:

Plato
Oscar Wilde
Alice B. Toklas
Gertrude Stein
Henry David Thoreau
Virginia Woolf
Hans Christian Anderson
Walt Whitman
Proust
Willa Cather
Somerset Maugham
W. H. Auden
Lord Byron

And that’s just off the top of my head.

At least this explains their aversion to the Socratic method.

I wonder that Mr. Allen would have to say about this book I read once. It was about a dude who traveled around with 12 other guys and a prostitute, and they ate together, and slept together, and washed each other’s feet, and the main dude was always talking about how you’re supposed to treat other people like you want to be treated and all kinds of other liberal hippy shit. I dunno. It seemed pretty gay to me. We’d better ban that book, too.

Open Wide...

I Love Al Gore

I don’t know if I’ve ever really mentioned that, but I do. I love him with all my heart. When Bill Clinton got the democratic nomination in ’91, I said at dinner one night, “I hope he picks Al Gore as his running mate.” I was 17 at the time, and I think my dad was seriously concerned for my social future that I was focusing my energies on knowing the politics of Tennessee Senators. But I knew about Al Gore, and I wanted Clinton to pick him more than I can describe, because I wanted Al Gore to be my president someday. I still do.

Our founders understood that there is in all human beings a natural instinct for power. The Revolution they led was precisely to defeat the all-encompassing power of a tyrant thousands of miles away.

They knew then what Lord Acton summarized so eloquently a hundred years later: "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." They knew that when the role of deliberative democracy is diminished, passions are less contained, less channeled within the carefully balanced and separated powers of our Constitution, less checked by the safeguards inherent in our founders' design, and the vacuum left is immediately filled by new forms of power more arbitrary in their exercise and derived less from the consent of the governed than from the unbridled passions of ideology, ultra-nationalist sentiments, racist, tribal and sectarian fervor -- and most of all, by those who claim a unique authority granted directly to them by the Almighty.
Go read the rest of this speech. Lament the leadership we have lost.

Open Wide...

Freedom, Freedom, Freedom- OY! Freedom, Freedom, Freedom- OY!

This is just incredibly appalling. When the headline is "Abu Ghraib was just the "tip of the iceberg"," my stomach sinks.

It's driving me absolutely insane that this is being ignored by the MSM. This is one of the biggest, if not *the* biggest story to come from this war. For all of our flag waving, for all of the overuse of the words "freedom" and "liberty," this is the actual face we're showing to the rest of the world.

Thugs. Criminals. Torturers. Sadistic, evil monsters.

Terrorist attacks are at a record high, and we're lucky we know this, since Condi tried so hard to stop the whole thing. The report, not terrorism. Our actions are creating more terrorists daily; and daily we are losing support from the rest of the world. Who can support our actions when it's painfully obvious that these horrible actions are not the work of "a few bad apples?" (And can we please stop using that phrase? No one believed it when these stories first came out.)

I don't want to hear one more word about "Saddam gassing his own people" while we STILL haven't released detainees that have been held because of their knowledge of WMD's that have been proven not to exist, and when we have engaged (and probably still are engaging) in horrific torture of innocents.

And what, you ask, was the lead story on the news last night?

"Watching T.V. on your cell phone! Is it worth the high cost for such a little picture? Or is this the new 'Must Have Gadget? (tm)' "

What was ABC's special report last night? An hour long show?

"Demonic Possession: Some people say they're possessed by Satan. Is it real? How do they expel their demons?" With charming footage of people vomiting into buckets and dancing around with snakes.

I'm ashamed, and I have nothing to do with any of this. Seriously, how do these people live with themselves?

(Cross posted from my blog)

Open Wide...

Recommended Reading

Pam has posted a really excellent piece on eugenics that I highly recommend. It’s unbelievable how recently this kind of shit has gone on, which gives one pause in considering how readily that means some people would be willing to return to such an idea.

And Ms. Julien says:

STILL Not Concerned??

Three words:

K. Street. Project.
Follow the link. Grim stuff.

Open Wide...