Attention Conservatives: Bunch Up Your Panties

Michael Schiavo has started a PAC.

But now, as the one-year anniversary of Terri Schiavo's death approaches, Michael Schiavo is changing his approach and preparing to enter the political fray. Terri's fate has already been decided. Now her husband wants to claim her legacy. "For 15 years, I have been watching the politicians working their ways into my case. I felt I needed to do something when this was all said and done," Schiavo told Salon on Tuesday. "I didn't ask for this fight, but now I am ready."

This week Schiavo will roll out a new political action committee, called Terri PAC, with the hope of raising money to defeat the politicians who tried to intervene in the legal battle between Schiavo and Terri's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler. "Whatever I can do, I am going to do," says Schiavo, who works as a nurse in the Pinellas County Jail in Clearwater, Fla. Starting in January, he plans to change his work hours to three 12-hour shifts a week, allowing him more time to work on politics.


Cue the Radical Right accusing Schiavo of doing exactly what they did: Exploiting his wife for political gain.

Gee, I predicted that even without a crystal ball.

(Cross-posts are big, yeah yeah yeah... they're not small, no no no...)

Open Wide...

The "Drag Queening" of Christmas

Seriously, you need to go watch this clip right now. Olbermann barely keeps a straight face.

I've always said... the best way to deal with these ridiculous fundies and conservatives? Laugh at them.

Open Wide...

What Lurks Below

After Paul’s post yesterday about David Neiwert’s critique of Michelle Malkin’s new book Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild, I read through the entire six-part series. (Part One, Part Two, Part Three, Part Four, Part Five, Part Six.) It’s really quite amazing. I was especially interested in it having just posted about the KU professor who was physically attacked after having made disparaging comments about conservative fundamentalists. In that piece, I requested a modicum of perspective on who is really being attacked, citing liberal hunting licenses, Ann Coulter’s suggestiong that a baseball bat is the most effective way to talk to liberals, and Bill O’Reilly’s offering up San Francisco to terrorists, among others. Neiwert has plenty more examples (which I’ll get to in a moment), but also says something rather useful about projection, and conservatives’ predilection for it.

We've known for some time, really, about the right's propensity for projection. I mean, who can forget the claims in early December 2000 that it was Al Gore who was trying to steal the election? Malkin's thesis that the left has been taken over by a cast of eye-rattling loons is of a piece with this: You can always get a good idea where the right is headed (if it's not already there) by what it's currently accusing the left of doing.
An ingrained reaction to project one’s own nefarious motives, methods, and assumptions onto their opponents is inevitably wrapped up in shame and repression. To wit, many of the most anti-gay crusaders among the GOP’s ranks are closet queers. Last night, Mr. Shakes and I watched a great documentary on transsexual and intersexed people, and one of the most interesting segments dealt with a study in which self-identified heterosexual men were monitored via a sensor on their penises for their physical reactions to gay porn. The men were divided into two groups—those who held homophobic (or homobigoted) beliefs, and those who were comfortable with homosexuality. Those who were comfortable with homosexuality did not get aroused watching gay porn. Those who had indicated, through questioning, a fear or hatred of gays before being tested did become aroused, and in spite of knowing they had been monitored, all claimed they had not.

Projection and conservatism are inextricably linked, as shame and repression are key components of the lives of conservatives.

Malkin’s book, and all the howling complaints we hear regularly from conservatives that they are under attack, whether it’s the war on Christmas, the need for protection against dangerous liberals, or activist judges, are nothing more than a massive, collective projection—“defending” themselves against the very extremism that is most evident within their own ranks, and directed squarely at liberals. Throughout his series, Neiwert identified and thoroughly debunked one of Malkin’s most outrageous claims, rooted in this very issue:

"[T]he truth is that it's conservatives themselves who blow the whistle on their bad boys and go after the real extremism on their side of the aisle."[p. 9]

And while conservatives zealously police their own ranks to exclude extremists and conspiracy theories, extremism and conspiracy theories have become the driving force of the Democrat Party. [p. 169]
In fact, not only do conservatives not go after extremism on their side of the aisle, they have an entire network of operatives whose primary function is to serve as extremist apologists, normalizing the radical, and, worse yet, as conduits between extreme conservative elements and mainstream conservatives.

By absorbing so many extremist elements, the conservative movement has itself become more extremist. Many of these elements -- particularly the racists and neo-Confederates -- would eventually wither and fade from society if they weren't being sustained. And what's sustaining them is the access to power and influence they enjoy within the conservative movement. Moreover, that access is growing. And that's bad news for everyone (except, of course, those extremists).

The work of "transmitters" like Malkin, Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh in bridging the former gaps between extremist elements and the mainstream right is essential in creating the opportunities for that access. Their role is to provide media cover -- a constant barrage of talking points, wielding words as weapons in a propaganda war -- for the advance of this extremism.
Most concerning is that this propaganda war has escalated to the point where there are a shocking number of examples of eliminationist rhetoric. In addition to those I mentioned above, Neiwert has a compiled a disturbing collection. A selection from Ann Coulter:

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."

"We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed too."

“In [Clinton’s] recurring nightmare of a presidency, we have a national debate about whether he ‘did it,’ even though all sentient people know he did. Otherwise there would be debates only about whether to impeach or assassinate.”
A classic from Rush Limbaugh:

"I tell people don’t kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus -- living fossils -- so we will never forget what these people stood for."
Another fun one from Bill O’Reilly:

Everybody got it? Dissent, fine; undermining, you're a traitor. Got it? So, all those clowns over at the liberal radio network, we could incarcerate them immediately. Will you have that done, please? Send over the FBI and just put them in chains, because they, you know, they're undermining everything and they don't care, couldn't care less.
From the blogosphere:

At LGF, for instance, you can regularly find comments that call both Muslims and liberals "vermin" and "subhumans" and say that "targeted genocide ... will become necessary." At the Rottweiler, you can read threats of violence against other bloggers, as well as assassination threats against John Kerry. Misha, the site's proprietor, has posted himself in support of the notion that antiwar dissenters were asking to be lynched.
And this morning I read that Michael Reagan, radio show host and son of the former president, has suggested that Howard Dean should be hung for treason:

Michael Reagan, son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is blasting Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean for declaring that the U.S. won't be able to win the war in Iraq, saying Dean ought to be "hung for treason."

"Howard Dean should be arrested and hung for treason or put in a hole until the end of the Iraq war!" Reagan told his Radio America audience on Monday.
This kind of rhetoric is incredibly alarming, and its intensity is escalating as conservatives see themselves losing their stranglehold on unilateral control. Consider for a moment that I have only scraped the surface of the eliminationist rhetoric spewed for public consumption—and that this is what’s being said while they’re in power. Any thought that things will “get better” if Democrats regain control of the House, the Senate, or the Presidency is foolish at best. We’ve only seen the tip of the iceberg. I dread what lurks below the surface.

Open Wide...

Help Give Bill O'Reilly an Ulcer


Because you are all good Shakers, and because your Uncle Spud loves you, he has put together an ongoing Holiday Present just for you. Think of it as a bizarre musical advent calendar. I'm not sure how this "linking to posted files" thing works (is it multiple-link friendly?), so I won't crosspost them. You'll just have to head over to Spudville, you little dickenses.

Open Wide...

Blech

Currently suffering from the misapprehension that elaborate beard-growing can garner a guy an Oscar—a theory disproved in 2000 by Tom Hanks—Mel Gibson, foremost purveyor of religious gore-porn and son of Holocaust denier Hutton Gibson, has been tapped to develop a mini-series for ABC about the Holocaust.

Mr. Gibson's television production company will base the four-hour miniseries for ABC on the self-published memoir of Flory A. Van Beek, a Dutch Jew whose gentile neighbors hid her from the Nazis but who lost several relatives in concentration camps.

The project is in its early stages, so there is no guarantee that it will be completed. Mr. Gibson is not expected to act in the mini-series, nor is it certain that his name, rather than his company's, will be publicly attached to the final product, according to several people involved in developing it.

But Quinn Taylor, ABC's senior vice president for movies for television, acknowledged that the attention-getting value of having Mr. Gibson attached to a Holocaust project was a factor.

"Controversy's publicity, and vice versa," Mr. Taylor said.
Call me old-fashioned, but generating buzzzzzz for a program about one of history’s most appalling tragedies by giving cash to someone whose best attempt at repudiating deniers of its existence is “Atrocities happened. War is horrible. The Second World War killed tens of millions of people. Some of them were Jews in concentration camps,” seems, oh, I don’t know, kinda nauseating.

Open Wide...

Demand Fair Elections

Last Wednesday, I posted about H.R. 550, The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2005, a House Resolution introduced by Congressman Rush Holt which would require all voting machines to produce paper trails, and would prohibit the use of secret software and all wireless and concealed communications devices in voting systems, the connection of any voting machine component to the Internet, the use of software or software modifications that have not been certified or re-certified, and political and financial conflicts of interest among manufactures, test laboratories, and political parties.

There's more, about which you can find out here.

Currently, H.R. 550 has 159 co-sponsors in the House, 9 of whom are Republican, and has been strongly endorsed by the bipartisan Carter-Baker Commission on Federal Election Reform, but it has been sitting in the House Administration Committee since it was introduced in February. We need to give H.R. 550 more attention.

This post is part of a continuing blogswarm launched by DBK of Blanton and Ashton’s, where you can find more information.

I encourage you, if you have you own blog, please participate in this important blogswarm, even if it’s just linking back to this post. And please sign the petition in support of H.R. 550 here.


Nothing we do matters if we don’t have fair elections.

Open Wide...

Baby Bush Toys

Shaker Litbrit sent me the link to this website, Baby Bush Toys, that offers “an exciting range of products for the resoundingly average child.” Absolutely hilarious. Litbrit’s favorite is the Terror Alert Xylophone:


I can’t decide which my favorite is, though I’m partial to the Twisty Thing That Is Red and the Lil’ Looming Disaster Pillow:




Adorable.

Open Wide...

Naked for Jesus

A German church group has generated a kafuffle with the release of a calendar that features naked people depicting notable Biblical scenes:

The calendar, on sale for £8 in the Katzwanger church in Nuremburg, contains photos such as a naked Eve holding an apple between her breasts for Adam.

Another month shows a topless Delilah cutting the hair of a sleeping Sampson.

Other pictures portray the baptism of Jesus, Lot's daughters, the dance of Salome and the sacrifice of Isaac - many involving nudity.

Stefan Wiest, 32, spokesman for the Katzwang Evangelical Youth group, said: "We wanted to bring old religious paintings to today's people by translating them in a contemporary context.

"We did not intend to cause any provocation and have received more positive responses that [sic] negative."




(Click on thumbnails for full images—not work-safe.)

Now, mind you, I have an opinion about these images based on my feelings about the role of women in the Bible; I’m not convinced that some T&A reenactments of stories depicting women as the conduit of worldly evil, the source of men’s weakness, or the sex surrogate for a lonely father are of any particular value. That said, if one has no problem with the Biblical message, I don’t think there’s much reason to get one’s panties in a bunch about the nudity. It’s not exactly hardcore porn.

However, the local archdiocese is none too pleased:

Winfried Roehmel, a spokesman for the region's Catholic archdiocese, said: "It is not acceptable to pose naked in a church. The right way to approach the Holy Scriptures is not by pulling your pants down."
Heh. But unsurprisingly, the majority of the criticism has come from the US. Shocking, eh? The puritans just don’t have enough to bitch about at home; they’ve got to scold the Germans, too.

Open Wide...

Buck, buck, buck... BAAWK!



Is that a chicken joke?

If you're not a reader of the excellent blog Orcinus, you've been missing out on some incredible writing. You've also missed an incredible series of posts in which David expertly dismantles the new Michelle Malkin pack of lies book, Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild. In it, he exposes how Malkin's book is simply dishonest. (I know, you're shocked.) If you have the time, I highly suggest you head over and read it. Here's part one.

Last Friday, David commented:

Has anyone else noticed that it's been a full 10 days since I wrapped up my critique of Michelle Malkin's Unhinged -- and still nary a peep from her?

Indeed, the entirety of Malkin's response to my critique of her work over the years has been to pretend that I simply don't exist.

Isn't this someone who likes to brag before her audiences that she unflinchingly takes on her critics?
(More at link)

Several commenters opined that he simply wasn't "big enough" for Malkin to notice; "if he was on television," he'd get a response. David replies (in comments):

Michelle knows full well who I am and I know she reads this blog -- not regularly, but she is aware of what I've been posting. She also purchased a copy of "The Rise of Pseudo Fascism," no doubt to scour it for signs of "unhingedness."

She's counting on most of the reading public having the same reaction as you: "She's a stratospheric blogger, and he's a relative nobody: Why should she bother?" Well, the point of this post was that Malkin managed to devote a whole lot of heated words to a handful of even more obscure nobodies, but can't seem to find the time to respond to someone with at least a little more standing in the blogosphere who offers a more substantive critique.

-snip-

But I think I enjoy at least some standing as influential: Orcinus, you'll observe, is on the blogroll at most of the biggest left-wing names, including DKos, Eschaton, and Alterman. I've won a coupla Koufaxes. And so on. It shows up in "influence indexes" like the one at Blogstreet.

So for Malkin to simply ignore a sustained and serious critique from this blog kind of cuts against this whole "self-correcting nature of the blogosphere" business, don't you think?


Indeed. Malkin has spewed yet another waste of good paper and precious bookshelf space; a highly qualified writer has taken her to task for her dishonesty and written slight-of-hand, she obviously knows this (and David), and she's too much of a coward to engage him in real debate. She's more than happy to point to single sentences from comment threads on blogs as examples of how all liberals are "unhinged," but a six-part critique is somehow unworthy of her attention. One reader mentioned that he had sent a kindly-worded email to Malkin, requesting a response to David's critique of her book. He mentioned that if he did not receive a response, he would send her a "ruder version," to which David replied:

I'm not waiting for someone else to point it out in a vulgar fashion, because I really don't believe in that tactic. It's expiative and sure does feel good, but I just think it obscures your argument. I'm kind of a Spinozist on this: I think passions are the stuff of life, but reason is what I believe in.


(It also adds more fuel to the Malkin fire. Don't give her more material for her second book.- Paul the interrupting Spud)

What would be nice, of course, were if other bloggers were to start pointing out her avoidance of my critique too. (Nudge nudge hint hint.) I'm just not hamhanded enough to go asking.


Well Dave; I'm doing my part. I'm sure I've got a tiny fraction of your readership, but I'm more than willing to add fuel to the fire and call Malkin out on her bullshit.

And you never know who's going to google "Malkin" and "Bullshit" and find this post.

So come on, Michelle... let's see your response. And try and write more than a paragraph, please. And make sure you you do your own work, this time.

What's the matter? Chicken?

Buck, buck, buck, BUCK-KAWWWWK!

(Shakespeare's Sister has a gargantuan readership compared to my little home in Spudville... so perhaps this will help get the ball rolling.- Paul the cross-posting Spud.)

Open Wide...

Special Interest Indeed!

Was Brent Wilkes, founder of defense contractor ADCS Inc. and apparent director of The Wilkes Foundation (whose website is curiously bereft of content, but which allegedly exists to aid sick children and military families, even though Wilkes’ lobbying activities and association with disgraced Congressman Duke Cunningham may suggest otherwise), running a mobile brothel for the GOP? It certainly looks that way (emphasis mine):

Deep in the San Diego Union-Tribune's coverage of lobbyist Brent Wilkes, who is "Co-Conspirator No. 1" in the criminal case that brought down Republican Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, the Hotline uncovers this nugget: Wilkes is said to have run a "hospitality suite with several bedrooms" in Washington, first at the Watergate and then at a hotel on Capitol Hill.
The Watergate? Priceless. It would just be too beautiful if a sex scandal that rocked the worse-than-Watergate administration took place in the hotel that was the former Worst President Ever’s undoing.

Open Wide...

Be Brave

Shaker Merciless suggests we should all take up this challenge:


Click.

Running away seems to be a better idea all the time, considering today’s earlier story. (Merciless hat tips Mimus Pauly posting at Skippy’s joint.)

Open Wide...

www.hawk.bush


The Heretik takes on Brand W:

W W W We will not waver (see waiver for important details). The wicked will not win.(Results may vary. Your victory results may not be the same as ours.) It’s World War Three, the Global War on Everything Terror TM, brought to you by the people who brought you W, the boy on the bubble who stood on the rubble, the man to stand behind as they stand up and we stand down. We should all fall down with shock and awe at the brilliance of such Patriot Acts. W, W, W. Watch what you say, watch what you do. The Heretik is falling down laughing. Or something.

ONCE YOU REALIZE W George Bush is a brand, the marketing of the less than smart seems more the stuff of genius. Iraq? The mess of what was Mesopotamia for the White House is like the problem General Motors has with those two McKrap TM brands Buick and Pontiac.
Go read the rest. Good stuff.

Open Wide...

Bleh

Speaking of being hot under the collar, ’Bean at Julien’s List and Pam are discussing Hillary Clinton’s latest rightward maneuver: Co-sponsoring a bit of flag-burning legislation with Republican Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah. ’Bean says:

This morning, over bleary-eyed coffee, I realized who the infamous Senator Bennett is. Fortunately, so does Yahoo's Search Engine - so you can read about the disgusting, racist homophobe yourself.
Pam adds:

When we compromise and bite the bullet for the centrist Dems that curry favor with the Right Wing, progressives get a condescending pat on the head and a lecture to be quiet. As we have seen in the case of gay rights, we didn't get a return on the investment -- in fact, we've been fighting the AmTaliban to keep rights from slipping away ever since, state by state, town by town -- with no leadership at the national level willing to give vocal, unwavering support.
And the same can be said for any group with a progressive base. Advocates for reprodutive rights, minority rights, labor rights—we’re all on the back foot, defending against regression rather than fighting for progression. It wasn’t just a cute turn of phrase when Howard Dean referred to the “Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party.” (However, I think that wing is now closed for business.)

In the end, this isn’t even a particularly smart way to curry favor. The legislation would outlaw “intimidating any person by burning the flag, lighting someone else's flag, or desecrating the flag on federal property”? The first two provisions—intimidation and destruction of others’ property—are already covered under existing law. The third is simply a limit of free speech, and, as ’Bean points out, there are liberals and conservatives who “happen to rather LIKE the First Amendment.” The ones who don’t will never vote for Hillary Clinton in a bazillion years, anyway. More useless politicking. More empty pandering. More reason for progressives to distrust and dislike Clinton. Situation: Same old, same old.

(King Cranky’s on this, too.)

Open Wide...

More Culture War

Another story out of Kansas (has anyone figured out what, exactly, really is wrong with that state yet?) is getting me all kinds of hot under the collar. A religious studies professor at Kansas University, who has no love for fundamentalists, recently wrote online about a plan to teach intelligent design as mythology in an upcoming course, and said it would be a “nice slap” in the “big fat face” of fundies. Tactless, but not incorrect. Immediately, said fat face got all up in his grill, Mirecki apologized, and KU canceled the course. (Normally, I might consider that an overreach, but he hardly left KU with much choice after he decided to frame it the way he did.) It should have been the end of the story.

Kansas University religious studies professor Paul Mirecki reported he was beaten by two men about 6:40 a.m. today on a roadside in rural Douglas County. In a series of interviews late this afternoon, Mirecki said the men who beat him were making references to the controversy that has propelled him into the headlines in recent weeks.

“I didn’t know them, but I’m sure they knew me,” he said.
Mirecki was being tail-gated and pulled over so the pick-up truck closely following him could pass. Instead, the driver pulled in behind him, and two men got out. When Mirecki made the mistake of getting out of his car, they proceded to beat him up.

The sheriff’s department is looking for the suspects, described as two white males between ages 30 and 40, one wearing a red visor and wool gloves, and both wearing jeans. They were last seen in a large pickup truck.
If you’ve seen these two, who should be easy to find in any crowd in the Midwest by their descriptions, please call Crime Stoppers at 843-TIPS.

Now, I’m certainly not endorsing a professor’s decision to taunt any group; it’s inappropriate, no matter who the group is. But, after Mirecki issued an apology for what he had said and the class was canceled, that still wasn’t good enough for some folks. He had to have his ass kicked, too.

Let’s get real about what happened here. A liberal said something inappropriate. Not threatening, not inflammatory, not even especially provacative. And he got beaten up.

Meanwhile, conservatives go around with liberal hunting licenses stuck on their bumpers, Ann Coulter says a baseball bat is the most effective way to talk to liberals, Bill O’Reilly offers up San Francisco to terrorists, conservative hate groups are on the rise again, violence against the LGBT community is on the rise again, women who report rapes are being prosecuted, pharmacists are telling women they’re being punished by God as they rip up their prescriptions, the poor suffer a constant barrage of shit from conservatives and their policies that allow them to abstractly blather about an “ownership society” but have real-world, life and death consequences for the people subjected to those policies, and the asinine duo of O’Reilly and Coulter have the temerity to moan about how conservatives need to employ security details to protect them from liberals. Can we please have a modicum of perspective on who, exactly, is being attacked here? What’s Ann’s big concern? That she might get another pie thrown at her? Well, sorry—I don’t have a lot of fucking sympathy for someone who incites violence against liberals and then finds herself with whipped cream in her hair.

People like O’Reilly and Coulter bloviate endless vitriol with impugnity on a daily basis, all while casting themselves as victims of some nefarious left-wing conspiracy to hurt them, of which their best evidence is Pat Buchanan getting douched with salad dressing. And they like to dissociate themselves from the radical elements in the conservative movement that drag black people from the backs of their pick-ups and hog-tie queers to fences and shoot abortion doctors and beat up professors, but all the shit that comes out of their mouths every day is what gets the people who do these things riled up. When was the last time you heard Al Franken or even the great liberal boogey-man Michael Moore advocating violence, suggesting we pick up baseball bats to “talk” to conservatives? Give me a break.

Enough with the martyr complex already. The only thing you've got left to defend is an unimpeded ability to say whatever you want to say, whenever you want to say it, no matter how outrageous. And to do that, you've got to pretend that the evil liberals have taken you out of context, even when they're just reprinting your direct transcripts. You're pathetic. Every hate group in the world should have it so good as you.

And P.S. rest of America—they'll come for you, too, eventually. Then maybe the culture war will be more than just a source of amusement.

(Hat tip Agitprop.)

Open Wide...

DeLay Moves One Step Closer to Trial

Uh-oh:

A Texas judge dismissed one charge against Representative Tom Delay on Monday but let stand two more serious charges, complicating Mr. DeLay's hopes of regaining his post as House majority leader when Congress resumes in January.
You know, I think it’s a safe bet that he can wave bye-bye to that one at this point. Even the GOP can’t be crazy enough to let the Bug Man return in such a public position after all this.

The judge, Pat Priest of San Antonio, handed Mr. DeLay and two co-defendants a partial victory in dismissing charges of conspiracy to violate the election code by making an illegal corporate contribution.

Judge Priest left standing charges of money laundering and conspiracy to launder money against all three.

The decision moves Mr. DeLay and his co-defendants, the Republican fund-raisers John D. Colyandro and James W. Ellis, a big step closer to facing trial - perhaps as soon as January - on felony charges that carry long prison terms and fines...

One Republican lawmaker, who has supported Mr. DeLay in the past but is concerned about the political fallout from this case and others involving Republicans, said there was some sense of relief with the decision, since it postponed Mr. DeLay's return to the top.
Ouch.

Although DeLay’s team is calling the dismissal of one of the charges a victory, DA Ronnie Earle still has the opportunity to appeal the dismissal, and a defense lawyer involved (who requested anonymity so as not to “antagonize” the judge) said that the ruling “could be read as a substantial victory for the prosecution.”

Meanwhile, Cheney appeared with DeLay yesterday at another fund-raiser, which was closed to reporters. He sure knows how to pick his public appearances.

Open Wide...

Will O’Reilly add Fox News to his enemies list?

I’m just wondering, since they’re throwing a holiday party. Majority Report got a copy of the invite. (Hat tip AMERICAblog.)


Wow—sounds fun. My favorite holiday parties are always the ones where you’re “kinda working,” too.

I have it on good authority that attendees will also be playing sexually harass the female interns, and each employee will receive a clump of Murdoch’s corny poo as a holiday bonus. Everyone’s hoping Hannity gets drunk enough to eat his again this year.

Open Wide...

Question of the Day

The conservative of your choice will be strapped into a chair in a small, windowless room for twenty-four hours, during which time you will be able to unleash a stream of profanity-laden venting about how angry their divisive, vitriolic, sexist, homophobic, racist, illiberal, and otherwise odious politicking makes you and why it's bad for America. No violence allowed, but you can yell until your head feels ready to pop right off. Oh, and by the way, they can't talk back.

Who do you choose?

Bush? Cheney? Dobson? Falwell? Coulter? O'Reilly? Someone you know?

It's really hard for me to choose, but I think I might go straight for the top and drag Karl Rove into the screamatorium. And make no mistake—he'd be left a quivering pile of useless mush by the time I was done. The piss puddle on the floor beneath him would be left with more sense.

Open Wide...

Scottish Star Trek

Hilarious. Passed on by Shaker Angelos.

Open Wide...

OMG

Bear in mind, this is a Fox News poll, but still:

[S]ome Americans think there are still weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. A 42 percent plurality thinks Iraq had weapons before the war and moved or destroyed them, while 28 percent think there were no WMD at all. Almost one in five (19 percent) think there are still WMD in Iraq.
No.

No no no no no.

It’s just not possible I live in a country where 19% of the population is so fucking stupid that they believe there are WMDs in Iraq now. Good lord.

Open Wide...

Dobson’s Hateful Business Continues Unabated

Wells Fargo is next on the conservative fuckwits’ shitlist, since they had the temerity to give a grant to GLAAD:

The conservative Christian group Focus on the Family says it is withdrawing its funds from Wells Fargo because of the bank's support of gay organizations.

"Focus on the Family has elected to end its banking relationship with Wells Fargo, motivated primarily by the bank's ongoing efforts to advance the radical homosexual agenda," says a statement on the Focus Web site dated Thursday and attributed to Focus President and CEO Jim Daly.

"Our decision is not personal, but principled, and we trust our constituents and others will respect it," it says.
Let’s have a look at that “principled” decision. Wells Fargo provides a $50,000 grant to support the leadership counsel of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. Defamation, particularly of gays and lesbians, is Focus on the Family’s bread and butter. Seems to me their decision to target Wells Fargo wasn't so much principled as financial. They don’t want to keep their dosh with a bank who supports a group that might undermine their relentless attacks on the gay community, which is one of their most profitable fund-raising activities.

”Let's just call this what it is another attempt by an anti-gay group to try and intimidate companies into not supporting or doing business with gays and lesbians," [Glennda Testone, spokeswoman for GLAAD] said of the action by Focus.
In fact, let’s call it what it really is—just another cynical business move by the anti-gay industry.

Groups like Focus on the Family are part of an industry whose product is hatred of gays. They package up the product in boxes with names like “Marriage Protection Act” and point to everything from children’s TV characters to the placement of Fortune 500 company adverts as evidence of the existence of the radical homosexual agenda. The product flies off the shelves, as security moms and NASCAR dads, who know no other way of life than a suspended state of fear, scrabble to protect their children from the insidious gay element about which their ministers and politicians can’t stop talking. It’s a booming business, and Dobson and his other anti-gay CEOs are as good at pumping out product as is Coca-Cola, Nike, or any other successful industry with a high-demand item.

So let’s not even give Focus on the Family the credit for being “principled,” even if their principles are so much garbage. Let’s call this bullshit what it is—a business decision. They’re no better than any other corporate monolith with shareholders to answer to, and their profits helped buy the same president. Moral values? Get real. Big Oil has nothing on Big God.

Open Wide...