Gratuitous Common Sense

And do you know who grew me? The Bush Administration. That’s right. I am a homegrown terrorist, thanks to the for-profit entity currently occupying the executive branch of our government - BushCo.

But they won’t get blamed for their malfeasance… I will. They planted the seed, they plowed the field, and they made sure I (and others like me) had plenty of sustenance upon which to feed. And now, with the help of the other party that controls the government, the responsibility for cultivating this brand of terrorism will rest squarely on my shoulders.

I am a homegrown terrorist.

Doesn’t quite seem fair, does it?

In a previous post, in the process of describing the unprecedented power claimed by the current administration, I made a passing mention of the fact that we were only “one rubber-stamped, unread law away from instituting the thought police.” At the time, I must reluctantly admit, I was completely unaware of the existence of H.R. 1955, and the fact that it had almost unanimously passed the House vote a month earlier. This is a bill sponsored by a democrat, a California democrat no less, a member of the same party that has derided the USA Patriot Act for its encroachment on civil liberties and abuse of power. I know they didn’t read the Patriot Act, but what’s going to be their insufficient excuse for this piece of shit? You can’t try to excuse your vote for it if you wrote the damn thing!

But I digress…

I am a homegrown terrorist, as defined in the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007:

The term `homegrown terrorism’ means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

I state here, unequivocally, that I am an individual born, raised, and operating primarily within the United States. I also state that I am purposefully and willingly threatening the United States government with the use of force and violence in and effort to intimidate them and coerce them in furtherance my political objective of protecting the Constitution of the United States.

In case I’m not being clear enough, let’s have just one example. If a government employee attempts to enter my house, procure my papers or effects, or in any way touch me or my property, whether it be owned or leased by me, without a warrant issued by a court or probable cause to do so, I am actively planning and threatening the use of force in defense of my political agenda that includes coercing and intimidating them into obeying the limits set by the 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share This

Apparently those three words make you, not only “foul-mouthed”, but also a “bigot”. They also define how you should be remembered for the rest of your life. That is, unless you repent.

Duly noted.

Good thing Bill Donohue has never said anything even remotely as vulgar and bigoted as that, lest he not be free to throw all the stones he wants.

“Suck it, Bill”

- Kathy Griffin, some time in the near future

Maybe someone needs to inform William that irreverence (or even hypocrisy) is not what makes someone a bigot.

Share This

That’s what the “Generals on the ground” (i.e. the voices in Bush’s head that he has been listening to so intently for 4 years) are trying to do to this administration’s dreams for Iraq. Their hubris, their resolve, their misguided preordained righteousness. Like any bad habit, it’s an addiction that will be difficult to break, even for those whom the decider has promised to listen to.

Nightmarish political realities in Baghdad are prompting American officials to curb their vision for democracy in Iraq. Instead, the officials now say they are willing to settle for a government that functions and can bring security.

In other words, settle for the government that Saddam had in place. Perhaps? Just maybe? I’m willing to bet they’d take that trade-off at this point. I’m not saying Iraq would be better off with Saddam still there, it’s just odd that his government meets the qualifications of what they’re willing to settle for now. Oh, if only they could have 1980’s Saddam back, wouldn’t that be dreamy.

This would be funny it weren’t so fucking late… by about 84 years. And if it wasn’t just another nail in the coffin for the rose-colored predictions that the Bush administration got absolutely 180 degrees dead wrong, it might even qualify as ironic.

I might even be dumb enough to think it will have an effect on this administration’s policies if I hadn’t already seen the video of 1994 Cheney telling us that these exact circumstances would exist in Iraq if we “liberated” them. If I wasn’t so sure that they’d trumpet the old “9-11 changed everything” slogan right in the face of perfect evidence that it, in fact, did not, then it might be worth it to hope that the habit can be curbed.

But it’s not.

Share This

…but you can get thrown in jail or fined, you filthy Atheists! So watch out!

PART IV. CRIMES, PUNISHMENTS AND PROCEEDINGS IN CRIMINAL CASES

TITLE I. CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS

CHAPTER 272. CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY, MORALITY, DECENCY AND GOOD ORDER

Chapter 272: Section 36. Blasphemy

Section 36. Whoever willfully blasphemes the holy name of God by denying, cursing or contumeliously reproaching God, his creation, government or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching or exposing to contempt and ridicule, the holy word of God contained in the holy scriptures shall be punished by imprisonment in jail for not more than one year or by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars, and may also be bound to good behavior.

http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/272-36.htm

This is not to say that Massachusetts is alone in having arcane and unenforceable laws on the books, they are just first on my list. Perhaps I’ll turn this into a series that highlights these kinds of laws, which appear in more than just those famous states where you can’t hold office without pledging your allegiance to the appropriate god.

Indeed, you can’t get stoned in Massachusetts, but what about everywhere else? We’ll see.

Share This

In 2006, the American movie industry used the date of 6-6-06 to shamelessly promote a movie called, The Omen - a remake of a 1970’s film by the same name. The date, however arbitrarily determined by the gregorian (or solar) calendar, was given significance because its corresponding numbers are the so-called mark of the beast, 666. Of course they ignored the fact that the devil’s number has been devalued to 616.

Anyway, now it’s 2007. And it’s time for some more Armageddon fun with the calendar. As you may or may not have noticed, it’s July, which can only mean one thing. It is the 7th month. And July has a 7th day, on which the date will be 7-7-07. Jesus is Coming!

Please pray on 777 (Saturday July 7 2007) with millions for what will become the World’s Greatest Christian Prayer Day! Let’s help everyone focus on the Light of the world and his return. Expect the Spirit of God to be powerful on 777 because of faith and unity never before witnessed.

Surely, two Armageddon-esque dates so relatively close on the never-ending calendar are a sign of the apocalypse, the end of days, end times, the second coming, salvation, rapture. Fear!! or Pray!! Because the national day of prayer does not provide enough unity to be witnessed.

We beleive (sic) that the Almighty has planned and prepared this day, 777 from the beginning to continue his end time scenes.

Of course, the 777 that occurs in the 21st century is the one he has planned and prepared, not the one in the first century (as a literal reading of god’s word might lead you to believe), or the one in the 8th century .

But a christian page encouraging prayer would not be complete without an innocuous passive-aggressive chapter-and-verse threat…

Faithless people may start getting a little nervous about 777. This is why and in the Lord’s own words

40. Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. 41. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

42. Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

but don’t let the comedy dissuade you. They eventually get around to what “The Manchild Team” really believes:

Yes there is a tribulation coming, but more importantly, is the fact that there is going to be a deliverance from the tribulation. Most protestant religions call this a rapture. The ManChild Team would like to fly to heaven but we think that this is more of an escape from what’s coming kind of rapture. The Ark that the small few chosen escaped in during the first world judgment and punishment for the wicked is a message and example of how we shall be given safety. The Israelites made a little Ark called the “Ark of the Testimony” which had great Godly powers like in Raiders of the Lost Ark. This symbolized Noah and more importantly the Ark we are all getting in or going to. We believe it may be in a mountain valley of some sort in Canada or the hollowed out of a mountain. When all the fireworks or tribulation is over we come out and start a new world. This time we will be led into the Ark by Christ and led out to prosper the new world as it will be called for approximately a thousand years. This will be a world that is not based on sports heroes, celebrities, politicians or the greed of money. It will be based on righteousness and only righteous honest decent people will be honored. Tell cold heartless American TV, Bye.

I love how he cites Raiders of the Lost Ark, then says to “tell cold heartless American TV, Bye,” as if the movie industry creates any less idolatry. Love it!!

I’m preparing for the lord, as we speak. You think some wine is in order? A nice Chianti with some pasta? Nah, he’ll probably just need some water.

Share This

It’s about time! Finally, someone has offered to help the seriously afflicted, like Jackie Chan, and Margaret Cho, and maybe part of Soledad O’Brien (who knows? I mean, really).

Thankya Jeeesus!

“Curing” Ted Haggard in three weeks, instead of the usual 4.5 years, has emboldened Christians, and they now have the balls to think they can counsel the genetics right out of you. I can’t wait to see the first success story!

Actually, to be honest, the billboard above was probably changed to illustrate the fact that homosexuals don’t choose to be gay any more than Asians choose to be Asian. Both people who read this blog are already aware of that fact, so I’ll refrain from pulling out the multiple sources that show it’s a natural ‘phenomenon’. That’s a moot point anyway.

What really needs to be done is to get people to stop thinking solely in terms of sexual activity when it comes to homosexuality, as if that’s all that matters in a homosexual relationship. A lot of people, especially those that have a problem with it, think of it as a kind of hedonistic orgy of rebellion and sexual hegemony, but never bother to consider any other kinds of attraction that two people can have between each other. Their problem with homosexuality isn’t that two people are emotionally, psychologically, and physically attracted to or in love with each other. Their problem is that they act on it, like any heterosexual couple would, by having sex.

In other words, it’s okay for two men (or women) to love each other, as long as they don’t have sex (or get “married” in the eyes of the state). Sure they’ll find a euphemism for their motive, like “traditional family values”, but to those that have a problem with it, it’s all about the sex. And as long as that is allowed to continue, homosexuality will be brushed off, subjugated, and easily classified as less genuine than heterosexual relationships. And people like those in the Truth Ministry will continue to think it’s something to be cured.

Share This

Cannot… compute… head… hurts…

This is one of many questions from a survey by Newsweek, conducted June 18-19, 2007. Yes, 2007! The people who answered this question are over 18, and part of the voting public.

Yes, that’s a warning.

Not only are 41% of people completely ignorant, but that’s up 5% since 2004.

Share This

Ever since Ray Comfort of Kirk Cameron so eloquently argued for the seemingly perfect design of the banana, Atheists have been running around like mad trying to explain away the purported divine inspiration. Ray and Kirk dubbed the banana “The Atheist’s Nightmare”, and indeed it seems they were right.

Atheists scrambled for a response, like neo-cons looking for a war, and offered crazy claims about humans cultivating the banana over thousands of years. As if that wasn’t, itself, part of God’s plans. pssshh. Crazy Atheists!

Still they pressed on, and the banana continued to haunt them as they attacked the intelligence of Mr. Comfort and Sir Cameron. They even likened them to the primates that feast on the banana. Ah, the last gasp of the dying argument, ad hominem attacks.

The Atheists were stuck. They were cornered, with nowhere to turn…

until one evil Atheist grocer found a way.

Atheists respond, ironically, with one of their oldest and most basic tactics - denying the banana ever existed:

Hark! Those clever bastards! They had nearly been snuffed out by their nightmares of bananas, but it seems they live to fight another day.

You win this round Atheists… you win this round.

Share This

To ban or not to ban, that is the question… that is being asked about rolling sneakers.

I was browsing around the news sites yesterday when I came across the following bit on the front page of msnbc.com:

What caught my eye was the second headline, “Rolling sneakers blamed for injuries hike”. But not so much for the headline itself, as what immediately followed, “Ban ‘em?” As if that should be our first reaction when we find that the kids who wear these sneakers with hidden wheels, called “Heelys”, are getting injured because of their inability to heed the warnings that are issued with every purchase.

You can read the actual story here.

The link to for the “Ban ‘em?” question leads to a survey that asks, “Should rolling sneakers be banned?” And what I always hate about these questions is that they fail to specify who, exactly, is doing the banning.

Are we talking about schools, or malls, or other high traffic establishments banning their use to protect fellow pedestrians? Or are we talking about a complete outright ban of the shoes, in the form of a law or an ordinance, in order to protect the would-be roller?

In the case of the former, it’s relatively easy to understand why making rules against their use would be beneficial, and welcomed in most cases. For schools, it’s akin to outlawing running in the hall. A time honored tradition that has set the speed limit in school hallways at around 4mph. For places like malls, it’s been likened to roller-blading or skateboarding, which can present numerous risks where groups of people gather.

However, in the case of the latter, to ban their use would be a blatant restriction of freedom in the name of safety. Or creating a Nanny-state, as some would call it. It takes responsibility away from the parents and the kids who wear these things. And I can only assume that this is what the question is actually asking, because it already notes in the article that many malls and schools have banned them.

After complaining about the injuries that her son sustained while using these rolling sneakers, Nancy Woelfel of Davidsonville, Maryland, said that other parents should know about the risks. As in, other parents should read the warnings that come with the shoe. Certainly that’s what she meant. I would just be plain cynical to assume that she was talking about anything else.

One of the shoe’s manufacturers, and the product’s adopted namesake, Heelys, has the safety gear warnings posted all over their website. They encourage the practice of ALWAYS using protective gear in statements similar to this one:

Important:
We always recommend that anyone who attempts to use HEELYS in any capacity should ALWAYS wear full protective gear, including: helmets, wrist, elbow, and knee pads. The video you are about to watch contains footage of highly skilled, trained, professional, adult skate team members, some of whom may not be wearing full gear. These should only be attempted by professionals. NEVER use HEELYS in an unsafe manner, and NEVER WITHOUT full protective gear. By clicking on the videos to view them, you understand and accept our warning.

But leave it to the mainstream media to play on the fear of injury and the penchant to shirk responsibility. I especially like how they added the note that, “some walkers find heelers who zip in and out of crowds a nuisance.” As if mere annoyance is enough to justify regulating the behavior of others.

Whatever is going on, it’s apparent that the warnings are not enough. Kids are getting injured for chrissakes!! Something has to be done! I know… let’s ban ‘em!

Share This

“I see no good reasons why the views given in this volume should shock the religious sensibilities of anyone.”

- Charles Darwin, On the Origins of Species

Share This