Posts filed under 'Reposts'
Christian? You are probably in trouble….
by BFSkinner (originally posted on Daily Kos, wish I’d wrote it!)
Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 08:40:40 PM PST
Ok.
I am Jewish and gay.
And I am sick and tired of seeing homophobic asses using my bible to base their attacks on my life.
Many of them do not understand what they call the “Old Testament” yet they continue to use it to justify their hate.
When people come on DK and attempt to do so I often engage in various discussions of both Torah and Talmud law and they move on… but I thought what if I look just at the Christian bible?
This is NOT an attack on Christians.
This is, however an attack on Christians that use my Bible to base their hate of me to produce events such as
I admit I am not a Christian.
What the heck, though… they are not Jewish yet they use my Bible. So I say “No harm, no foul”
So…
Let’s talk about Jesus and some of his views.
Slavery:
I looked and could not find a single thing uttered against slavery by Jesus in the entire book. Slavery was around at the time, so I’d think it would be odd if Jesus was unaware of slavery as he lived in a world and a time where and when slavery was common.
So.. what did I find on slavery?
“Those who are slaves must consider their masters worthy of all respect, so that no one will speak evil of the name of God and of our teaching. Slaves belonging to Christian masters must not despise them, for they are their brothers.” (1 Timothy 6:1-2).
Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men, since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving. Anyone who does wrong will be repaid for his wrong, and there is no favoritism. (Colossians 3:22-4:1)
So slavery is OK…just don’t ummm..treat the slaves too bad?
And I like the part starting with “work at it with all….” so.. what it is saying is Mr or Ms. Slave, work as hard as you can as a slave, like a duty of some kind?
Ok….some other good ones.
Don’t call someone a fool. If you do, wear a fire-proof suit….
“But I say unto you, That whosoever shall be angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire” (Matthew 5:22).
But it is just us the gays going to hell, right? I mean…for having the sex, right? Nope. ‘fraid not. Huh?
“Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire” (Jude 1:7)
So all you not married heteros having sex…shame shame shame. Hell-fire awaits.
Have YOU ever been drunk or jealous? Uh oh. Doomed as Doomed can be.
Ruh roh.
“Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God” (Galatians 5:21).
Well, at least, thank G_D, Christians are not like ‘those other religions’ that tell people everyone else is going to Hell…er…wait…
“He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God” (John 3:18). “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16:16).
And last and not least.
If you are a woman and decide that you will not have children….or if you are a woman and for whatever reason you cannot have children, tough luck.
“And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety” (1 Timothy 2:15).
So….I guess I feel so much better. I mean, since some Christians use my book to tell me I am going to a place called Hell, I can use their book and tell most of them that THEY are going to hell.
Add comment November 19, 2008
Studs Terkel
Aaron Studs Terkel’s definition of being an agnostic, “a cowardly atheist”; it doesn’t get more honest than that! http://blog.speakingoffaith.org/post/57351628/the-shot-of-whiskey-i-never-drank-trent-gilliss
Add comment November 2, 2008
Religion is Ridiculous?
Sightings 10/23/08
– David G. Myers
Ridiculous, and worse. So say the new atheist books: In God is Not Great, Christopher Hitchens does not mince words, calling religion “violent, irrational, intolerant, allied to racism and tribalism and bigotry, invested in ignorance and hostile to free inquiry, contemptuous of women and coercive toward children.” Now Bill Maher’s movie Religulous lampoons the plausibility and social effects of all religion, ominously concluding that the world will end if religion does not end. But I suggest that social science data point to a different conclusion than do the new atheist anecdotes of hypocritical and vile believers.
Many in the community of faith gladly grant the irrationality of many religious fundamentalists − people who bring to mind Madeline L’Engle’s comment that “Christians have given Christianity a bad name.” But mocking religious “nut cases” is cheap and easy. By heaping scorn on the worst examples of anything, including medicine, law, politics, or even atheism, one can make it look evil. But the culture war of competing anecdotes becomes a standoff. One person counters religion-inspired 9/11 leader Mohammed Atta with religion-inspired Martin Luther King, Jr. Another counters the genocidal crusades with the genocidal atheists, Stalin and Mao. But as we social scientists like to say, the plural of anecdote is not data.
Maher and the new atheist authors present anecdote upon anecdote about dangerous and apparently irrational religious behavior, while ignoring massive data on religion’s associations with human happiness, health, and altruism. The Gallup Organization, for example, has just released worldwide data culled from surveys of more than a quarter-million people in 140 countries. Across regions and religions, highly religious people are most helpful. In Europe, in the Americas, in Africa, and in Asia they are about fifty percent more likely than the less religious to report having donated money to charity in the last month, volunteered time to an organization, and helped a stranger.
This finding – that the religious tend to be more human than heartless – expresses the help-giving mandates found in all major religions, from Islamic alms-giving to Judeo-Christian tithing. And it replicates many earlier findings. In a Gallup survey, forty-six percent of “highly spiritually committed” Americans volunteered with the infirm, poor or elderly, as did twenty-two percent of those “highly uncommitted.” Ditto charitable giving, for which surveys have revealed a strong faith-philanthropy correlation. In one, the one in four Americans who attended weekly worship services gave nearly half of all charitable contributions.
Is religion nevertheless, as Freud supposed, and Maher’s film seems to assert, an “obsessional neurosis” that breeds sexually repressed, guilt-laden misery? Anecdotes aside, the evidence is much kinder to C. S. Lewis’s presumption that “joy is the serious business of heaven.” For example, National Opinion Research Center surveys of 43,000 Americans since 1972 reveal that actively religious people report high levels of happiness, with forty-three percent of those attending religious services weekly or more saying they are “very happy” (as do twenty-six percent of those seldom or never attending religious services). Faith (and its associated social support) also correlates with effective coping with the loss of a spouse, marriage, or job.
Maher would surely call such religiously-inspired happiness delusional. But what would he say to the surprising though oft-reported correlations between religiosity and health? In several large epidemiological studies (which, as in one U.S. National Health Interview Survey, follow lives through time to see what predicts ill health and premature death) religiously active people were less likely to die in any given year and they enjoyed longer life expectancy. This faith-health correlation, which remains even after controlling for age, gender, ethnicity, and education, is partly attributable to the healthier lifestyles (including the lower smoking rate) of religious people. It also appears partly attributable to the communal support of faith communities and to the health benefits of positive emotions.
These indications of the personal and social benefits of faith don’t speak to its truth claims. And truth ultimately is what matters. (If religious claims were shown to be untrue, though comforting and adaptive, what honest person would choose to believe? And if religious claims were shown to be true, though discomfiting, what honest person would choose to disbelieve?) But they do challenge the anecdote-based new atheist argument that religion is generally a force for evil. Moreover, they help point us toward a humble spirituality that worships God with open minds as well as open hearts, toward an alternative to purposeless scientism and dogmatic fundamentalism, toward a faith that helps make sense of the universe, gives meaning to life, opens us to the transcendent, connects us in supportive communities, provides a mandate for morality and selflessness, and offers hope in the face of adversity and death.
David Myers is a professor of psychology at Hope College and author of A Friendly Letter to Skeptics and Atheists: Musings on Why God is Good and Faith Isn’t Evil (Jossey-Bass, 2008).
2 comments October 23, 2008
do we really realize how important this election is?
Early voting in Evansville
from Politico, http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/Early_voting_in_Evansville.html
Here’s an early voting story from a medical student in Evansville, Ind.:
I squeaked in just before the 7pm deadline to find two very frustrated poll workers and a line of a couple dozen people, due to problems with the computerized voting system not accepting people’s driver’s licenses. It was taking about 7-10 minutes per person just to get the computer to accept them as valid and to print out their ballot, causing very long delays.
For me the most moving moment came when the family in front of me, comprising probably 4 generations of voters (including an 18 year old girl voting for her first time and a 90-something hunched-over grandmother), got their turn to vote. When the old woman left the voting booth she made it about halfway to the door before collapsing in a nearby chair, where she began weeping uncontrollably. When we rushed over to help we realized that she wasn’t in trouble at all but she had not truly believed, until she left the booth, that she would ever live long enough to cast a vote for an African-American for president. Anyone who doesn’t think that African-American turnout will absolutely SHATTER every existing record is in for a very rude surprise.
There were about 20 people in front of me but remarkably not a single person left the room without voting over the 2 hours it took to get through the line.
Add comment October 23, 2008
Dear red states…
Dear Red States…
We’ve decided we’re leaving. We intend to form our own country, and we’re taking the other Blue States with us.
In case you aren’t aware, that includes Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and the entire Northeast. You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states. We get stem cell research and the best beaches. You get Ken Lay.
We get the Statue of Liberty. You get Dollywood. We get Intel, Apple and Microsoft. You get WorldCom. We get Harvard. You get Ole’ Miss. We get 85 percent of America’s venture capital and entrepreneurs. You get Alabama. We get two-thirds of the tax revenue; you get to make the red states pay their fair share.
Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the Christian Coalition’s, we get a bunch of happy families. You get a bunch of single moms.
Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro-choice and anti-war, and we will want all our citizens back from Iraq at once. If you need people to fight, ask your evangelicals. They have kids they’re apparently willing to send to their deaths for no purpose, and they don’t care if you don’t show pictures of their children’s caskets coming home. We do wish you success in Iraq, and hope that the WMDs turn up, but we’re not willing to spend our resources in Bush’s Quagmire.
With the Blue States in hand, we will have firm control of 80 percent of the country’s fresh water, more than 90 percent of the pineapple and lettuce, 92 percent of the nation’s fresh fruit, 95 percent of America’s quality wines, 90 percent of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the U.S. low-sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools, plus Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Cal Tech and MIT. We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.
With the Red States, on the other hand, you will have to cope with 88 percent of all obese Americans (and their projected health care costs), 92 percent of all U.S. mosquitoes, nearly 100 percent of the tornadoes, 90 percent of the hurricanes, 99 percent of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100 percent of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia.
Additionally, you will enjoy those 38% who believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62 percent who believe life is sacred unless we’re discussing the death penalty or gun laws, 44% who say that evolution is only a theory, 53 percent that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61 percent of you believe you are people with higher morals than we lefties.
Peace out, Blue States
anonymous… someone brilliant!
4 comments October 21, 2008
The Business Panic of 33 ACE
Students of history are smiling. My thanks to Steve Finn for this post.
Lest we think that the current situation is something new.
In 33 AD, there was a small outbreak reported in Judea, which was resolved by the crucifixion of a malcontent. The much larger news was a credit crunch which wiped out many wealthy people. There was a run on the banks and lenders, foreclosures and auctions were rampant, and many people went bankrupt.
The basic problem was that too much credit was extended to too many people, and when the collateral requirements were enforced by the Senate (some Senators being among the primary guilty parties), a credit crunch ensued. It’s not exactly clear what the initial cause was, but as more and more people demanded return of their capital, the overextended credit system began to unravel. It was finally resolved when Tiberius took $4,000,000 from the treasury and loaned it at 0% interest for 3 years to those who had land as collateral. This allowed private lenders to rebuild and reestablish themselves, and the credit crunch gradually resolved itself.
The Business Panic of 33 A.D.
published in New York, 1910
Of the year 33 A.D. it may possibly have been recorded in the diaries of certain Roman business men, that there was a disturbance in the remote province of Judaea a tumult quickly quelled by the energy of his excellency Pontius Pilate, the governor, who seized and crucified one Christus, the chief malcontent, and two bandits, his accomplices. It is more probable, however, that they only remembered this year as marking one of the severest panics which ever shook the foundations of Roman credit.
As with most panics, the causes of this were not obvious. About a year before, the firm of Seuthes & Son of Alexandria, lost three richly laden spice ships on the Bed Sea in a hurricane. Their ventures in the Ethiopian caravan trade also were unprofitable, ostrich feathers and ivory having lately fallen in value. It soon began to be rumored that they might be obliged to suspend. A little later the well known purple house of Malchus & Company (centered at Tyre, but with factories at Antioch and Ephesus) suddenly became bankrupt ; a strike among their Phoenician workmen, and the embezzlements of a trusted freedman manager being the direct causes of the disaster. Presently it became evident that the great Roman banking house of Quintus Maximus & Lucius Vibo had loaned largely to both Seuthes and Malchus. The depositors, fearing for their money, commenced a run on the bank, and distrust spread because men, experienced on the Via Sacra (the first century Wall Street), said that the still larger house of the Brothers Pettius was also involved with Maximus & Vibo. The two threatened establishments might still have escaped disaster had they been able to realize on their other securities. Unfortunately the Pettii had placed much of their depositors’ capital in loans among the noblemen of the Belgae in North Gaul. In quiet times such investments commanded very profitable interest; but an outbreak among that semi-civilized people caused the government to decree a temporary suspension of processes for debt. The Pettii were therefore left with inadequate resources. Maximus & Vibo closed their doors first; but that same afternoon the Pettii did likewise. Grave rumors obtained that, owing to the interlacing of credits, many other banks were affected. Still the crisis might have been localized, had not a new and more serious factor been introduced.
In a laudable desire to support the Italian agricultural interest then in a most declining way the Senate, with the assent of Tiberius, the emperor, had ordered one third of every senator’s fortune to be invested in lands within Italy. Failure to comply with the ordinance invited prosecution and heavy penalties. The time allowed for readjustment had almost expired, when many rich senators awoke to the fact that they had not made the required relocation of their fortunes. To find capital to buy land, it was necessary for them to call in all their private loans and deposits at the bankers. Publius Spinther, a wealthy nobleman, particularly was obliged to notify Balbus & Ollius, his bankers, that they must find the 30,000,000 sesterces he had deposited with them two years before. Two days later Balbus & Ollius had closed their doors, and their bankruptcy was being entered before the praetor. The same day a notice in the Ada Diurna, the official gazette posted daily in the Forum, told how the great Corinthian bank of Leucippus’ Sons had gone into insolvency. A few days later it was heard that a strong banking house in Carthage had suspended. After this all the surviving banks on the Via Sacra announced that they must have timely notice before paying their depositors. The safe arrival of the corn fleet from Alexandria caused the situation at the capital to brighten temporarily; but immediately afterward came news that two banks in Lyons were “rearranging their accounts,” as the euphemism ran; likewise another in Byzantium. From the provincial towns of Italy and the farming districts, where creditors had long allowed their loans to run at profitable interest, but were now suddenly calling in their principals, came cries of keen distress and tidings of bankruptcy after bankruptcy. After this nothing seemed able to check the panic at Rome. One bank closed after another. The legal 12% rate of interest was set at nought by any man lucky enough to possess ready money. The praetor’s court was crowded with creditors demanding the auctioning of the debtor’s houses, slaves, warehouse stock, or furniture. The auctions themselves were thinly attended, for who could buy? Valuable villas and racing studs were knocked down for trifles. Caught in the disaster, many men of excellent credit and seemingly ample fortune were reduced to beggary. The calamity seemed spreading over the Empire, and threatening a stoppage of all commerce and industry, when Gracchus, the praetor, before whom the majority of the cases in bankruptcy came, at his wits’ end to decide between the hosts of desperate debtors and equally desperate creditors, resorted to the Senate-house; whence, after a hurried debate, the Conscript Fathers dispatched a fast messenger with a full statement of the danger to their lord and master Tiberius, in his retreat at Capri.
While the Caesar’s reply was awaited, the business world of the capital held its breath. Four days after the dispatch from the Senate, an imperial courier came pricking back from Campania. The Senate assembled in the Curia with incredible celerity. A vast throng slaves and millionaires elbowing together filled the Forum outside, while the Emperor’s letter was read, first to the Senate, then from the open Rostrum to the waiting people. Tiberius had solved the problem with his usual calm, good sense. The obnoxious decrees were for the time to be suspended; 100,000,000 ses. were to be taken from the imperial treasury and distributed among reliable bankers, to be loaned to the neediest debtors; no interest to be collected for three years; but security was to be offered of double value in real property. The law being relaxed, and the most pressing cases cared for by the government loan, private lenders began. to take courage and offer money at reasonable rates. Dispatches from Alexandria, Carthage and Corinth indicated that the panic had been stayed in those financial centers. The moneyed world of the Via Sacra began to resume its wonted aspect. A few banking houses and individuals never recovered from their losses, but the majority escaped permanent suspension and so the panic of the “Consulship of Galba and Sulla,” i.e. of 33 A.D., passed into half-forgotten history.
Such a little expanded from Tacitus and Suetonius is the tale of the great panic under the third Caesar. A narrative like this would have no verisimilitude unless placed in a society extending over seas and continents, with a great internal and foreign commerce, rapid means of communication, complex and vast credit transactions, an elaborate system of banking; in other words, with conditions not unlike many of those of the twentieth century. Great was the Roman Empire in its military glory, its system of law and administration, its preservation of the artistic and intellectual heritage from Greece, its elimination of clan patriotism and local prejudices but it was also great, in that it fostered the development of an economic life such as has not come again to the world until very recent times. It is of this Roman commerce, communication, banking, credit, and of a society largely founded on such a “money basis,” that we propose to write.
Add comment October 11, 2008
Obama and the Jewish Vote
An excellent article from RealClearPolitics by Professor Pierre Atlas
www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/08/obama_and_the_jewish_vote.html at August 01, 2008
By Pierre Atlas
In order to win the “Jewish vote,” candidates often try to out-trump each other in demonstrating their support for Israel. The media play into this game, as many journalists and pundits tend to assume, along with politicians, that American Jewish opinion is monolithic (and uniformly hawkish) when it comes to Israel: that no criticism of Israeli policies or actions will be tolerated, and that no pressure should ever be put on Israel to make compromises.
As Barack Obama traveled to the Middle East last week, his every move was scrutinized by the media. Was he pro-Israel enough to secure the vote of American Jews? Would any nuance in his statements be interpreted to mean he was pro-Palestinian?
It does a great disservice to both American foreign policy and to the Jewish community to portray American Jews as of one mind, marching in lockstep and demanding that all candidates read from a script when it comes to Israel. Contrary to popular belief, the majority of Jews are not single-issue voters. George W. Bush, arguably the most “pro-Israel” president in American history, was able to garner only 24% of the Jewish vote in 2004. Fully 76% voted for John Kerry according to exit polls. Jews have traditionally voted overwhelmingly for Democrats since the 1930s. That didn’t change after the Second Intifada, 9/11 or the invasion of Iraq. Indeed, Bush was able to increase his Jewish support by only 5 percentage points from the 2000 election.
One reason for the widespread belief in a monolithic and inflexible Jewish position on Israel is the success and perceived power of AIPAC. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee has played a key role in helping to establish and maintain bipartisan support for Israel in Congress and the executive branch. AIPAC, which has become increasingly pro-Likud in recent years, is a textbook example of a successful interest group, on par with the NRA, AARP, and the farm lobby.
But American Jewish opinion, although not as diverse as that of Jewish Israelis, is more varied on Israel than AIPAC’s pronouncements would suggest. According to the November 2007 American Jewish Committee’s annual survey of Jewish opinion, 46% of American Jews supported the creation of a Palestinian state, with 43% opposing and 12% not sure–this, in a poll taken just months after Hamas’ violent takeover of Gaza. Asked whether they were “willing to compromise on the status of Jerusalem as a united city under Israeli jurisdiction” in a permanent peace deal with the Palestinians, while 58% said no, 36% said yes and 7% were not sure.
Reflecting this diversity of Jewish opinion, American pro-Israel peace groups such as Brit Tzedek v’Shalom and J-Street, the new pro-Israel PAC, have emerged as more moderate alternatives to AIPAC.
On July 16, J-Street released the results of a new survey that demonstrates “a remarkable gap between the attitudes of American Jews and the conventional wisdom about how Jews view America’s role in the Middle East.” According to the survey, 86% of Jews would support the US “playing an active role in helping the parties to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict [even] if it meant the United States publicly stating its disagreements with both the Israelis and the Arabs.” Eighty-one percent would support the US exerting pressure on Israel as well as the Arabs “to make compromises necessary to achieve peace.”
American support for Israel is longstanding and bipartisan and the reasons go well beyond AIPAC’s influence. The political, cultural, religious, scientific and economic ties between America and Israel are substantive and multi-faceted. Both Obama and McCain understand Israel’s security needs and its existential anxieties. Regardless of which man becomes the next president of the United States, the special relationship between the US and Israel will continue.
Many Israelis, however, are concerned that Obama might be hostile to the Jewish state. The false assertions that he is a Muslim and that he was raised in a radical madrassa in Indonesia, concerns about his association with Rev. Wright, and even his middle name have all played into the fears of some Israelis–just as they have with some Americans. When I was in Turkey last month, I spoke with an Israeli tourist in my Istanbul hotel who was convinced that Obama would be “bad for the Jews.” When I asked him why, most of the “facts” he cited about Obama were patently false, based on the same email rumors and innuendo that have been sent to American Jews.
Obama has sought to reassure Jewish voters and his trip to Jerusalem and Sderot was an important move. Yet he too may have bought into the simplified image of American Jews. When he spoke before the AIPAC convention in June, Obama declared that Jerusalem “will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided.” In so doing, he unnecessarily went further than the official US position on Jerusalem, which states that the city’s fate should be left to the final status negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
Obama’s declaration came off as pandering for the Jewish vote. Ironically, while it caused consternation in the Arab world and dismay among peace negotiators, it is doubtful whether the statement did anything to satisfy the more hawkish Jewish and Christian supporters of Israel in the United States.
In its three-thousand year history, Jerusalem was divided for only eighteen years, from 1949 to 1967. This was a disaster and should not be allowed to happen again. But for a two-state solution to succeed, Jerusalem must become the capital of both Israel and Palestine. Israeli and Palestinian negotiators have been exploring the idea of dual municipalities for years. Imagine if Obama had told the AIPAC audience that while Jerusalem should not be re-divided, it ultimately must be shared. He could have shown bold leadership and vision on one of the most vexing issues of our time, and he would have been supported by a large number of American Jews.
If the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is to be resolved, the next president will need to take steps that facilitate Palestinian statehood while also maintaining Israel’s security. This will require bolstering Palestinian moderates in their political struggle against extremists, encouraging key compromises on both sides, and rewarding cooperative behavior by neighboring states.
The questions posed to McCain and Obama should not be simplistic queries as to who supports Israel the most, but how they plan to move the peace process forward. What is each candidate’s vision for a new Middle East, and what role does he see for the US in achieving it?
For both the candidates and the media, acknowledging the diversity and sophistication of American Jewish opinion will be a much needed first step.
As for Obama, if he can debunk the false rumors and make the case that he is no less supportive of Israel than previous Democratic candidates, he should have little problem attracting Jewish voters, who tend to be liberal on social issues and are most comfortable with the Democratic Party. He won’t have much difficulty convincing younger Jews. The real challenge will be with the older Jewish voters.
1 comment August 1, 2008
Criminal Behavior
I don’t know where this came from (someone forwarded it to me) but it’s brilliant!
10. Alberto Gonzales
Crimes: The most truckling, amoral flunky to ever serve as Attorney General. A jurisprudent organelle, he manifests no concept of the law independent of its expediency to the president. Would smilingly accuse himself of providing material support to al Qaeda at President Bush’s request, hurriedly plead guilty, sign his own death warrant and flip the switch himself. His testimony before congressional committees is to public service what cholera is to the small intestine. As first Hispanic Attorney General, Gonzo typifies the self-betrayal and ethical compromise necessary for minorities to become successful Republicans. Been felching sweet approval from Bush’s lily-white ass since Texas. A conscienceless, memo-drafting, loophole-crafting liar for hire, pushing for all the worst administration policies, including nixing habeas corpus, denying and then defending rendition, torture, political firings, and a ton of other evil stuff. He even visited a seriously ill and disoriented John Ashcroft at the hospital, attempting to coax him into reauthorizing a clearly illegal wiretapping program. The only Attorney General who ever could have made John Ashcroft a sympathetic character by contrast.
Exhibit A: “The fact that the Constitution — again, there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution. There is a prohibition against taking it away.”
Sentence: Death by dull guillotine, head bent by Beckham.
9. You
Charges: You believe in freedom of speech, until someone says something that offends you. You suddenly give a damn about border integrity, because the automated voice system at your pharmacy asked you to press 9 for Spanish. You cling to every scrap of bullshit you can find to support your ludicrous belief system, and reject all empirical evidence to the contrary. You know the difference between patriotism and nationalism — it’s nationalism when foreigners do it. You hate anyone who seems smarter than you. You care more about zygotes than actual people. You love to blame people for their misfortunes, even if it means screwing yourself over. You still think Republicans favor limited government. Your knowledge of politics and government are dwarfed by your concern for Britney Spears’ children. You think buying Chinese goods stimulates our economy. You think you’re going to get universal health care. You tolerate the phrase “enhanced interrogation techniques.” You think the government is actually trying to improve education. You think watching CNN makes you smarter. You think two parties is enough. You can’t spell. You think $9 trillion in debt is manageable. You believe in an afterlife for the sole reason that you don’t want to die. You think lowering taxes raises revenue. You think the economy’s doing well. You’re an idiot.
Exhibit A: You couldn’t get enough Anna Nicole Smith coverage.
Sentence: A gradual decline into abject poverty as you continue to vote against your own self-interest. Death by an easily treated disorder that your health insurance doesn’t cover. You deserve it, chump.
8. Michael Chertoff
Charges: Looks and acts like a man who sleeps in a coffin. As the head, or should we say skull, of our latest redundant security bureaucracy, the Department of Homeland Security, Chertoff used 2007 to further Rumsfeld’s purportedly defunct policy of “Total Information Awareness,” ordering U.S. military satellites be trained on American soil for first time in history. Beyond that, DHS seems to function as a corruption farm, spending billions on programs that either don’t work or are never implemented, often lobbied for by former DHS employees. If the terror threat really is as dire as Chertoff says, then he is criminally negligent.
Exhibit A: Habitually references his “gut feeling” that the next terror attack is imminent.
Sentence: Gut feeling is actually stomach cancer.
7. Erik Prince
Charges: Priming Baghdad’s streets for American imperialism by making them pristinely wog-free. Prince’s Iraq is one massive free-fire zone for his bullet-sweating mercenaries, a Hogan’s Alley in which everyone dusky is blithely expendable, rape is a mischievous dalliance, and accountability an inside joke. Remarkably, enabling the US occupation and simultaneously fomenting destabilizing enmity. Bringing the privatization of warfare to full fruition — next time, Exxon can just invade a country directly.
Exhibit A: Blackwater Vice Chairman Cofer Black is Mitt Romney’s campaign counterterrorism policy adviser. The company’s website also hawks infant onesies.
Sentence: Tanned and tethered outside Baghdad’s Green Zone after curfew. Whatever happens, happens.
6. Rudy Giuliani
Charges: 9/11 Tourette’s syndrome, compounded by compulsive lying. Despite the ‘93 WTC bombing, didn’t act to put all first responders on the same radio frequency and chose to house his Emergency Command Center on the 23rd floor of WTC 7. Giuliani Partners consulting firm routinely did business with a Qatar ministry run by royal Abdallah bin Khalid al-Thani, a man whose farm has seen guests the likes of Khalid Sheikh Muhammad and Osama bin Laden. Wooed mistress and future wife with an NYPD chauffeur and trips to Southampton on NYC taxpayers’ dime. Ruined the prospect of a Times Square tug-job.
Exhibit A: Stages phone calls from his wife during campaign stops-to show ‘em he’s got family values. Family values apparently do not include rudimentary put-it-on-vibrate cell phone etiquette. Invoked 9/11 to explain this.
Sentence: Victim of the next 9/11, which consists of two radio-controlled hobby planes smashing into his face.
5. Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid
Charges: Graduates of the Neville Chamberlain school of appeasement, the Democratic leadership continues to ignore the constitution-and the American people-by keeping impeachment “off the table” and refusing to defund the war. True pushovers, they’re too stupid, cowardly, weak and outmatched politically to accomplish anything substantive, their “strategy” essentially boiling down to whining a lot while handing Bush whatever the hell he wants. There is just no way that appearing this weak and ineffectual could be any better for them politically than impeachment. Everything that the White House gets away with, it gets away with because congress allows it.
Exhibit A: Failure to woo the two thirds majority needed to override a presidential veto is moot: They could defund the war with a 41-senator budgetary filibuster. But that would take guts and conviction.
Sentence: 2 cups anthrax bisque.
4. Seung-Hui Cho
Charges: A useless fucking nerd who shot a bunch of better people because he couldn’t get laid. Take note, all you pent-up losers out there: If you think you’re about to go on a murderous rampage, either take up a drug habit, find a hooker, or just kill yourself. Your inability to cope with a comfortable life in a developed nation is nobody else’s fault, except maybe your parents. Nothing says “I have a tiny penis” like a douchebag taking pictures of himself with a gun.
Exhibit A: Cho’s infamous “disturbing” stories are only disturbing in how completely terrible they are, but now every kid with an imagination is going to be hauled off to the nuthouse if he expresses himself.
Sentence: Used as kindling at bonfire kegger for rich, popular kids.
3. Fred Phelps
Charges: Leads a picketing campaign so hyperoffensive that his Church is unanimously reviled by queers and Bible thumping homophobes alike. Along with daughter Shirley, will drag hate into the public spotlight wherever it might seem least helpful or appropriate as long as it garners his “cause” attention. Harasses widows of heterosexual soldiers at funerals because their beloved were employed by a government that does not stone fags. Torments loved ones of those murdered in anti-gay violence. Is almost definitely gay himself.
Exhibit A: He is such an effective, soul-sucking brainwasher that Fred’s granddaughter declines relationships because of her delusion that world will end in her lifetime.
Sentence: Finally comes out of closet and is immediately killed by his followers.
2. Dick Cheney
Charges: Worst president ever. So openly horrible, he now makes jokes about being Darth Vader. Unashamedly advocating for executive abuse of power and corporate theft. In and out of public office since his congressional internship during the Nixon Administration. Didn’t care about the quagmire he foresaw in ‘94, because since then he’d deftly maneuvered to profit from it. Polling lower than HPV.
Exhibit A: His Halliburton stock options rose 3000% in value from 2004-2005. No joke.
Punishment: Raped by the sun.
1. George W. Bush
Charges: Is it a civil rights milestone to have a retarded president? Maybe it would be, if he were ever legitimately elected. You can practically hear the whole nation holding its breath, hoping this guy will just fucking leave come January ‘09 and not declare martial law. Only supporters left are the ones who would worship a fucking turnip if it promised to kill foreigners. Is so clearly not in charge of his own White House that his feeble attempts to define himself as “decider” or “commander guy” are the equivalent of a five-year-old kid sitting on his dad’s Harley and saying “vroom vroom!” Has lost so many disgusted staffers that all he’s left with are the kids from Jesus Camp. The first president who is so visibly stupid he can say “I didn’t know what was in the National Intelligence Estimate until last week” and sound plausible. Inarguably a major criminal and a much greater threat to the future of America than any Muslim terrorist.
Exhibit A: “And there is distrust in Washington. I am surprised, frankly, at the amount of distrust that exists in this town. And I’m sorry it’s the case, and I’ll work hard to try to elevate it.”
Sentence: Dismembered, limbs donated to injured veterans.
1 comment January 3, 2008
