Barely Dressed

Bullies

2010-04-19T11:52:00.003-06:00

You know what gets me on the whole Phoebe Prince thing? Everyone being surprised that kids are so savage. Really? You didn't know that? PARENTS are surprised? What have YOU been doing instead of watching your kids.

"Lord of the Flies" wasn't just a fiction book. Children, left to their own devices, are savage little creatures. Reading any serious cognitive development time line would tell you that. WE were all little savages as kids. It's up to our parents to steer us in appropriate directions. Criminalizing a bunch of kids that are cognitively incapable of judging the long term effects of their current behavior is ridiculous. You educate these kids to show them the long term effects of teenage pregnancy, drunk driving, etc and yet they are supposed to be criminally responsible for not knowing the consequences of picking on people? That's just ONE thing wrong with the whole picture. You hold the school accountable, you hold the parents accountable, and may look into why Phoebe felt suicide was a more viable option than trusting her parents to protect her, even through removing her from school if necessary?

Some say what if this was your kid...well it was my kid. You do recall I homeschool right? That's one reason why I do so. My kid wouldn't suicide, she'd do exactly what she did: Tell Mom because mom would put it right, one way or the other. My kids trust me to defend them.

I know, intimately, the negative effects of bullying. TV has nothing to do with it. WE, not tv, but WE as a society, show our kids acceptable behavior. Society is not tv, society is a collective of individuals. TV should never be quoted as an excuse because if you taught your children properly the difference between tv and reality. They can watch all the violence they want and not BE violent. So easy to blame tv so we don't look to ourselves.

Bullying is done by our politicians, our religious, our scientific. We bully scientists into giving the results we want (or we'll yank your funding). We bully each other religiously (or you'll go to hell, lose your job, become a social pariah). We bully each other by class status and political belief, we bully each other constantly in the real every day world. Now I'm not talking about all laws, but the law is used to bully. Smoke and you get a ticket (it's still a legal activity and thus this is simply bullying, if you really cared you'd make it illegal). You do it when a democrat says "health bill or you don't care if people die". You do it when a Republican says "follow the bible or you'll go to hell AND you don't care about the US". You do it when you insinuate that you don't love children if you don't throw yourself wholeheartedly into whatever bullshit the media says about FOR THE CHILDREN. Hell, the US does it constantly as a nation. So many parents believe the US is the greatest nation ever and our kids see that and see our behavior, you can hardly fault them for emulating the greatest nation ever.

We are a society of bullies. We bully when we let our opinions over ride fact and then use whatever means to intimidate others into changing how they feel. Just as someone has said I must not care about the children or this girl's death because I don't think the other kids should be criminalized. Therapy, you bet your ass, criminalized no. The school definitely failed in their job and go after them with my blessing. It's not that I don't care, but I do think that bullying the bullies is hardly the correct response. They learned this is ok from somewhere, even if it was only their parents failure to instruct them. Perhaps it would be better if we all quit bullying each other and show our children better behavior?

Bassinet Recall

2009-08-20T18:40:00.001-06:00

Read here

I used one for my 3 youngest, the oldest of which is 5. You aren't supposed to lower the flap with the bar there. If the flap is lowered the bassinet is supposed to be pushed up against your bed and the bar isn't supposed to be on the bassinet. Any of you read those instructions it should say the same. Mine was the Graco one, btw.

IMO, they weren't the irresponsible ones and it's a shame the babies were hurt and not the stupid parents.

Mysoginst or true?

2009-07-01T14:31:00.002-06:00

Let me say to start off there are two valid sides to this argument.....

The argument is: Why are women responsible for the behavior of men? Now, to put this in it's place, why is it "what were you doing when you got raped"? Is that relevant?

Does it matter? Really? I mean, no matter what I was doing (barring wearing a sign that said RAPE ME), it is completely irrelevant to the fact that it was done. To think that I am somehow responsible for the acts of a criminal is wrong. I see this, I even agree that asking these questions target the victim as responsible for the criminal's behavior instead of simply saying "well whatever you were doing, it sure didn't warrant THAT". I even agree that this line of thinking is wrong to some extent....

To some extent...

At the same time, I also realize risky behaviors have consequences. I mean, if I stand in the middle of the highway, is the driver the ONLY one to blame for my getting hit?

The problem is, it's a thin, foggy, smudged, murky ass line. Most of us don't intend to blame the victim. But sometimes it kind of is your fault to some extent. No one says it's right, it doesn't suck..but at the same time it's a hard call to make.

Is it blaming the victim? Maybe, I guess it is to some extent....but at the same time, I'd also ask "what idiot stands in the middle of the road????" if someone gets hit. Let's draw the analogy out, because I'm not taking sides here, I'm trying to work through it. This is not my opinion, as of this moment, my opinion is forming, so if you flame me you're an asshole.

I guess if you're crossing the street then shit, that sucks. But at the same time, if you're standing in the middle of the road wearing black clothes at 3 am...it's not that you deserve it, but you can hardly be surprised at the result? It doesn't mean it's a good thing or a right thing, but it's hardly a shocker...

I guess I get that "well how were you dressed" is irrelevant to any case. I mean, that is definitely blaming the victim. Men go to nudie bars and don't rape women, so they just need to learn some control. I don't see a problem in agreeing that my clothing choices shouldn't be dictated because some man might feel urges. Some men might feel urges at hats...doesn't mean I quit wearing hats. I don't care if you're prancing down 5th Avenue buck naked, that doesn't relieve men of their obligation to control themselves.

But at the same time, I don't see the problem with protecting yourself via where you go and what you do. I don't see a problem with someone saying "that type of behavior could lead to rape". That doesn't make it your fault, but the fact is walking around Crime Central at 3 am even in a burka isn't exactly a good decision, neither is walking around there without a police escort. I don't see anything wrong with the warning. I don't see a problem with saying that "heavy drinking with unknown strangers could lead to rape" because at the same time I don't see a problem saying "walking around Port Arthur after dark could lead to you getting shot". Why not give yourself as much control over your fate as possible by making the dangerous areas or behaviors known? I really don't know if it's right to say that people can't say certain things because that "blames the victim". Sometimes it IS the victim...

If you stand in the middle of a police shootout and you know they are shooting...well it is kind of your fault you got shot. Or the highway analogy.

Look, I've been there and I wasn't doing risky behavior. I have a friend that was a good woman and at home alone not engaging in risky behavior. But I also have friends that didn't take their fate into their own hands: hung out at a bar and didn't watch their drink even though I know *I* told them not to leave it unattended. They didn't ask for it, they didn't deserve it, but they also didn't prevent it. We lock our doors, we watch the parking lot when we have to go out alone at night, we ask for identification before opening the door, we have alarms...in so many other areas of life we are warned to take our fate into our hands to the best of our ability and it's not our fault when things go wrong anyway. I'd think it would be irresponsible of us to NOT do the same when it comes to our bodies. It would be nice if no one had to say "that type of behavior is risky and can lead to x, y , and z", if we didn't have to lock our doors, etc.

I guess what I'm saying is I don't think a warning is blaming us for men's behavior. I do agree that society places too much responsibility on the victim for the criminal's acts in this case. But I don't think a warning is any more demanding than a warning to lock your front door to keep from being robbed.

Now you can flame.

I am a right wing utopian

2009-06-30T17:56:00.002-06:00

Generally speaking, that doesn't even make sense. I mean, if you stick to the TRADITIONAL party behavior (and conveniently ignore that they switch around so much they make a cup and marble game look stable) one can not be a right winger AND a utopian. I mean, generally utopians are "let's all help and love one another" and that has been trad democrat. Which I suppose makes the supposed "insult" right on the head: I'm a centrist.

I believe anyone who isn't centrist isn't really American in their heart. *stokes the flames* Go ahead and turn purple and then you can read on to why I feel this way, you might admit I have a point.

While one may say "they just disagree on which way America should go"...I'd say the party lines are actually ANTI-American. What they disagree on is which side should force the other side to live their way. Really, that's their big fight. Which is the exact opposite of our entire Constitution that gives everyone the freedom to be themselves.

Not to mention, the complete split because of party bickering. The idea behind America was a bunch of intelligent people putting their personal beliefs to the side in order to make a country they could all live together in peacefully. So guess what, you can christian, wiccan, or satanist..it stays at the door behind you, because it's not about you..it's about ALL of us.

"My faith makes me who I am" If you can't seperate your faith from your job (as so many do) then get a new job. Admit your weakness and move out of line. Admit you can't rise above your own opinions in order to remember you're not the ONLY person in this country.

"We should help others". There is NO proven fact we should help others. That is a belief the same as "there is a god" is a belief. You may feel it is our moral obligation, but let's not forget that's YOUR OPINION and shouldn't have anything to do with how I live my life.

Can't we all just agree that THEY can't force me to be christian and YOU can't force me to pay for debts that aren't mine? Let's stick to some common infringements and you just make sure we don't stomp on each other on the way? I am not allowed to kill other people and they can't kill me..that's not religious or liberal. I think that we can all agree on some human rights...no one should be allowed to take the life a walking talking human person without some questioning. I believe in killing in self defense, but I don't mind if the police want to be sure it WAS actually self defense.

There are some issues that are far more murky than forcing us to become charitable or religious at virtual gunpoint. So why not just compromise? Why not, instead of saying (both sides) it must be MY way, why can't it simply be "what will allow us to fix the problem while maintaining as much freedom as possible". Because our entire Constitution was based upon the idea of NOT FORCING OTHERS. And I don't mean that bullshit broad brush "that's offensive and you're forcing me to listen cuz I'm trying to eat here"...that's an easy fix...see which customer the owner wants to lose. And if you're the customer, show a little fuckin' dignity and find a place that doesn't give you shit.

You are not you when you assume public office. To be honest, people who vote for Obama because "they like him" are stupid. We aren't and never should have been voting because we like them, we should vote because he upholds the freedoms we believe in and that we were granted through the loss of millions of lives over the course of two centuries. We should not lead by force or by talks, but by example. How can we ever show how wonderful a democratic republic is if we're so busy removing it from our own country. "We're bringing them freedom", but if we were showing them how valuable and wonderful it is, they could bring it themselves. Maybe with a little help...

I don't care about Obama. I didn't care about Bush at first. I don't have to fuck them or even have a beer with them..I care about what they were supposed to do. Bush failed miserably and I began to actively dislike the face he showed us and the face he gave America. Really, I don't hate Bush...I don't even know him. But you know...granted it's only been 5 months into his very first term...I'm not seeing much of a difference in how Obama and Bush are...they just have different agendas they want pushed...

And another pedo bites the dust

2009-06-29T17:14:00.004-06:00

So yeah, I know, this a really unpopular opinion right now....and we all know how concerned I am with my popularity. But is there ANYONE else that's actually used logic and realized that we're probably down one pedophile in the world instead of hailing him as an American "icon"? Yes, I'm sorry, you don't just start being a pedo when someone accuses you, and Neverland preceded those accusations by MANY years.

And really, it's not like I just chose a side. I mean, I sat and thought this out years ago.

1. If the guy down the street with no children had opened a "private" theme park and invited ONLY your defenseless little boys over to play, are you really NOT going to think that's at least weird enough to choose "better safe than sorry"?

2. Are you aware that many men that have been accused of pedophilia AND PROVEN innocent still have their lives ruined by the accusation alone? But MJ's speshul cuz he made "Thriller".

3. The man had $20 million dollars to pay off in hush money AND one of the largest fan bases in the world, and what is the reason he believed that he couldn't ensure an accurate investigation?

4. The boys all looked amazingly similar, almost like...oh, I don't know..a profile....I mean, call me crazy but all MY friends don't look alike, yet all the men I have had sex with have shared many common traits. I'm just sayin'...

5. I really don't think a "deeply troubling childhood" excuses his behavior at all, any more than I think being famous does. I had a "deeply troubling childhood" and it doesn't excuse MY behavior.

6. The examination of his genitals came back with a conclusion of "highly accurate but inconclusive". Now, if it was a simple matter of "well the description is a very accurate one of ANYONE's penis" one would have thought that that would be what was said. Highly accurate is more than what I'd expect if the kid would have walked in on him in the bathroom. Acoording to police records there were some very incrimating matches found...Of course, the police were stymied when they tried to get his medical records and found that ALL OF THEM HAD BEEN RECENTLY REMOVED.

7. Why the need for a confidentiality agreement for "whatever went on while on Neverland Ranch" if it was all sweet and innocent? Guess what happens in Neverland stays in Neverland, huh?

8. Micheal's lawyer, who is well known for secretly taping conversations, did NOT tape the conversation with the little boy.....but I'm sure there's a completely innocent explanation for that....

9. I find it interesting how the things said on the Barbara Walters interview he and Lisa Marie did that he said a lot of things that the police and district attorney verified as inaccurate, and we're talking about the serious questions such as him being cleared and the photos of nude boys he claimed were not found in his home.

I could go on and on..but hell, "I'm a 35 year old man and like it when little boys sleep in my bed" would have me out the door of Neverland before anyone got their coats off.

The fact of the matter is, it points to guilty as hell. I personally think those that defended him are too star struck to get the facts and SEE the guilt. But for me it's easy, if this was ANY other grown man, what would I think? I would think he would be one who got shot for even looking at my kids. So tossing "but it's MICHEAL JACKSON" in there doesn't sway me.

I think he's guilty as guilty can get, I think the parents of these kids who would think "it's Micheal Jackson!!!" are also guilty as well. I think all of them belong in prison on the same charges. So, it's really offensive to be told how "he's an American Icon" by people who are all too star struck to separate his fame from the facts. And because of all that, everything he's ever done is invalidated. He's not an AMERICAN icon..if he's what represents us, we're in deep shit indeed.

Drunk salvation

2009-06-28T19:18:00.002-06:00

So I go to Wal-Mart a few weeks ago....I hate Wal-mart, I really do. But I had to have tylenol for the baby and what else is open at midnight? So while I was there I grabbed up a few other things, gatorade, crackers, etc. I made sure to keep it below 20 and slid into the 20 items or less checkout, grateful one was still open.

Now on the through the parking lot I noticed a shit ton of cops. I mean, like they all had a meeting or something. The cashier is a woman I've spoken with frequently and jokingly I asked "What'd y'all do? Install a donut shop where the McDonald's use to be?" She asked "why?" and I commented on all the cops outside. Now, note I am actually the second in line, as she was currently checking out a six pack of Michelob. I didn't look at the person in front of me, except to note that a person was there. The folks in the 20 items or less are transient. I doubt life long bonds form from those meetings even occasionally. If we weren't in a hurry, we'd not be in the 20 items or less line...

However, this person declares "Y'know why thar thar?" Now, note I do speak redneck, as I grew up one, as you've all surely noticed my frequent use of "y'all" and "ain't". I turn my attention to see this man listing in front of me, eyes glazed, and see an opportunity for entertainment. Please folks, think twice..don't ignore my error...

"And why is that?" "Thar thar to make thar peace with God." Immediately, I stifled a moan and felt regret. I also pictured either a holy descension or a shoot out. Generally "making peace" suggests a last minute regret that spans the course of your life, where you realize you're about to die and realize that all those things you were going to make up for? Yeah, that time has passed.

I settled for an "Uh-huh" and scooted forward as it was my turn and he was done. He stepped back and said "Have you? Will you be duhlivered from Satan?" Yes, DUHlivered, I'm not making this shit up. In my defense, I was tired. "I don't believe in Satan". "Well you beeve in God right?" Yes, beeve..if you hadn't noticed, he was drunk. "If I don't believe in satan, one would find it hard to believe I'd buy God." "Young lady, you need to hear the word of God." At which point I realize, not only am I embarking upon a debate about god with a "christian", and not only am I doing so with a DRUNK "christian", but I'm fixing to be testified to and offered salavation from a drunk "christian" and it was my own damn fault. I looked desperately to see if she was done, and she must have saw a pleading look in my eye as she said "Hey, this is my job, it's not professional for me to discuss." Way to copout.....to give her credit though, she moved faster.

To forestall further conversation I hoped to surprise him into stupidity, "Have you read Darwin's theory on religious fanatisism and the irony inherent in the christian belief system?" Please also note, in order to stupify, they must be able to basically understand what you're saying, even if you are talking out of your ass. It only worked on the cashier. I paid her quickly and edged past the man with "I'm a Pagan". That worked. By the time he collected his wits I was to the metal thingy-ma-jig and by the time he made it that far I was in the crosswalk.

While the meeting itself may not normally be blog worthy, it brings to mind all kinds of things. It's like Jimmy Stewart duhlivering a sermon against adultery while in the throws of his own ejaculation with his prostitute. Really?

It's no shock to me that many christians frequently sin while telling you YOU are the one going to hell. However, it's rare to encounter who actually does it WHILE in the act of sinning. Not to mention with NO consideration of others. Really? You're going to give me shit about not believing in god and I know you're drunk and fixing to drive home. (Yes, I DID stop the security and tell them if they didn't want sued perhaps it was a good idea to go do something about the drunk standing in the middle of the parking lot looking for me..I don't need god to make me do something responsible). Not to mention, is god really worried about MY salvation? I mean, you may be 10 minutes away from killing yourself or others....I would hope he has at least ONE thing bigger than me on his mind. Like the fact that maybe you are fixing to commit murder and/or suicide. And don't give me that shit about god's mind being infinite and being able to encompass many concerns. If you want to go there, perhaps he could do something about those starving children and dying mothers on the other side of the world.

Which brings me to another question: If he can't intervene on behalf of all those other evils that abound in the world....why the fuck would he intervene for my salvation, and half ass it with a drunk no less?

Supreme Court disappointing

2009-06-25T11:49:00.002-06:00

We've all heard about the Arizona girl who was strip searched over a single accusation of possessing Ibuprofen..you know, that dangerous drug that's been known to.....umm...ummm.....well you know, it's dangerous.

While she partially won her case in that the actions taken were wrong, noone's going to be punished for it. Because we know we all should reserve the right for school officials to strip our children at will. It's not like schools sometimes house sicko perverts...right? Right?

If I were this girl's parents the question wouldn't be "could I sue them"..the question would be "under which criminal charges can I charge them". That is, if there was anything left to sue after I beat the ever loving shit out of them. In my eyes, this is sexual abuse.

The Supreme Court's decision is disappointing in that the official receives no punishment. However, in all honesty I can't hold them solely responsible. The parents went the wrong route. The sexual humiliation of your child you want....money? No...you want jail time, honey. Who sues a fuckin' pedophile??? And while the principal may not be a pedophile...maybe...the idea is that his misuse of his authority permitted the sexual abuse of your child....that's jail time. I don't understand why he can walk, what was daddy doing? Maybe it's uncivilized of me, but a beating does leave a lasting impression. Ok, so *I* believe in a beat down, but really, what kind of parents want MONEY??????

Does anyone know if they tried criminal charges and maybe that route didn't work? I mean, then I could understand the money route..I mean the guy needs to suffer SOMEHOW....but only if they tried criminal charges first and those didn't work out. Although, it seems to me it'd be a landmark case. I mean, this isn't the first child to get strip searched by school officials. There was that gal who had to raise her dress during prom to make sure she wasn't wearing a thong (and didn't the teacher feel her up a little too?). Some kids were strip searched in a private school for $42. Hey, I got an idea! How about we waterboard the kids until they 'fess up!!??

So why didn't the school call the police and the parents...oh wait, she wasn't accused of a CRIME. So a strip search is justified how? The word of another 13 year old girl. ONE. That's it. No history of trouble, excellent GPA....and for what? Heroin? Crack? A gun? No, ibuprofen, that horribly dangerous substance you can't get unless you.....walk into a pharmacy with $10.

“My thought process,” Justice Souter said, “is I would rather have the kid embarrassed by a strip search, if we can’t find anything short of that, than to have some other kids dead because the stuff is distributed at lunchtime and things go awry.

Embarassed?? Embarassed??? Do you have any idea of the mental and emotional trauma related to this? Thanks for the next pedophile defense when they take naked pictures of children. I appreciate that. "Oh, the naked pictures don't HURT them, just embarass them a little..teehee". But hey, as long as they're school officials, they don't NEED a defense. They just have to pay a student $20 for a verbal accusation and they can ogle to their heart's content. Don't worry, you won't get in trouble.

One has to wonder how the result would have turned out had the girl gone to child services and said "my daddy strip searches me everyday".

I am stuck

2009-05-15T02:32:00.002-06:00

So here I am, kids are quiet, nothing going on and I remember i have a truly awesome story in the works. So I open up my word processor, I open the file and.....nothing. Where the fuck was I going with this?

I've read over it several times, it's brought me to tears (believe it or not, I write well)...no ding. I've read it out loud, I've bugged my husband 200 miles away (please say I told you the gist of this)...no ding.

I even know the basic idea where I was going. I mean, I was going to a certain end...but what happened to the rest of it? I know I had a truly raging idea going because I remember jumping up from the couch and hauling ass over to my computer and typing madly for 3 hours....

It's good..I know it's good....shouldn't it be good enough to take somewhere? Even if it wasn't where I was going to start with?

My conclusion: don't go to sleep.

An analogy

2009-05-12T23:11:00.004-06:00

Here's a thought:

Sears is giving away a box of free stuff today (not really, just read). You run up excited. You hear Sears has good stuff, this is a great chance to see what they have without blowing money you really can't spare. Or maybe you've never heard of Sears, but you're looking for a new store to buy toosl from. You finally find the box back by the stock room underneath a pile of broken down boxes. It's free, that's ok. You run home with it and open it. As you open the box, prepared to feast your eyes on an item that is supposedly quality, your nose twitches and your eyes tear up and then you peer down into the box. Did they...? Yes they did, they gave you a box of shit. On top you see a note. Holding your nose you lean in to read it and it says:

Don't complain, it was free.

If it's not a game, why are you playing?

2009-05-06T01:09:00.003-06:00

I've been quiet. We're going to move to Houston soon, and it's a lot of work packing all these people to move.

But in between cleaning and packing and chasing kids I sit down to relax and long on to SL. My second life is far quieter than my first and chatting with my friends is a nice way to chill until my back stops hurting or while I'm having lunch, or quite frankly like today when I was just too tired to get up and do shit. We spend that time doing something together, our new thing is hunts. We comb the grid in search of new shops and solving puzzles. Done correctly we have fun.

Of course, the majority have to do it incorrectly. I've been banned, boohoo, from one sim. Quite frankly, I didn't want to go to start with, but my friends did and so we did. Her stuff is quite substandard and well, I don't DO substandard.

And this will probably get me banned from a whole ton of places, and well, I don't care. The discussion arose on whether or not SL is a game. It does fairly often, and you have your sides on this. I really don't care. It's fun, so I'm not picking a side really. Except when business owners in SL start crap on "this is my JOB!!!" First of all, if you are making money playing World of Warcraft, that doesn't change the fact that it IS, in fact, a game. But most importantly, if it's really THAT serious to you, then why are you treating it like a game?

I have never in my life seen more shoddy business practices than in SL. Like the gal who got her feelings hurt by a customer and so threw the biggest hissy fit, even down to chasing her down on her blog to make it very plain that she wasn't affected REALLY. Even though she dropped out of the hunt and was in tears for just HOURS. And if you want to ban me honey, go ahead, I haven't even been back to your store for the freebies since that stunt.

I love the ones in hunts who make it very clear what's really more important. Foiling the cheaters at the expense of the customers? Really? Because you seem to put more effort into that than in showcasing your product, and most likely I'm going to trash it, unseen, because you're more concerned with cheaters ONLY looking for freebies than you are me, who would have gladly bought those six GORGEOUS things from you until I saw where your priorties as a business owner really are. Not with me, the future customer, but so you can best people who most likely won't ever return? Sorry, I got the landmark and deleted your gift. How do I know if I wasn't cheating? Well to be honest I wasn't. Since the little flowers began coming out and I found one and clicked it to see what it was about, I've been running tests. Solve the clue and then see if you are one of those more concerned with your customers or with getting the best of someone else.

My favorite though, my absolute fave, is the gal who closes her shop at least once a year for 4 or 5 months at a time. She always says when she'll be back, but sometimes she's not back for months after that. Wow, contempt for your customers much? For those of you not clued in, a designer makes her own stuff. So creativity can run short. I get that...but because you aren't "inspired" doesn't mean you shut it all down. The really pathetic part is how many fangirls stand around waiting and being treated like that so they can have "IT". The funny thing is that there's only so many designs out there and well, I can probably get the same thing, cheaper, and better made. But don't worry, I never come to your store either.

If it's not a game, if it's your job, then quit playing and show some professionalism. Most of you couldn't run a business if someone stood over your shoulder giving step by step directions in 2 syllable words. You aren't really "running" one now. You're playing around...badly. You're nothing special. You're failures for the most part, who found a medium that doesn't care. Oh not all designers. Some never had the opportunity, some had a hidden talent..but the majority, you just suck.

"I'm a designer, I have feelings!!" Sweetie, I'm a writer and y'know, that doesn't make a damn when those critiques come in. Don't tell me I don't know what it's like to put my soul in something and have someone say mean things about my work. I'm not even going to say it doesn't hurt my feelings, it does. But I don't throw a hissy and chase them down to prove that they haven't gotten the best of me. I ignore the idiots and try harder for those who at least were constructive. You've put yourself in the position for criticism...grow a skin and get used to it. We aren't here to coddle you. Do your thing or cry, but don't expect me to cater to your feelings.

And for the customer, if you won't accept this kind of behavior from Sears or Red Lobster, why are you letting them do it to you here? There are tons of good creators out there that appreciate YOU and show it, frequently. Cilia'angel? Awesome person, awesome customer service. House of Ruins..awesome eyes, awesome customer service. Caly, Pazazz, Pididdle, Katatonik, Whimsy, Rockberry, Lemania (I don't always like her stuff, but you cannot fault her for her customer service or her work), Stringer Mausoleum, Ema's, Evie's Closet, House of Zen, Nikki Ree, Ova Hauled..I could make a long list. I'm sure you have your own list. They show they care about the customer, we make their business and they know that. They don't give out free stuff necessarily, but they still care and appreciate us. That's where you need to focus. Reward those who remember it's a business and don't act like they are doing US a favor. WE pay them...they aren't paying us. Of course none of these people are going to put up with bullshit, but if you approach them as an adult, they've always responded to me as one.

Being Different

2009-04-03T14:47:00.003-06:00

I was reading about some idiot school that wouldn't let the kids paint Easter eggs because 2 of the kids were allergic to eggs. I wonder how they got along until Easter, because I know eggs were a staple of my school breakfasts.

1. If you don't want to draw attention to your kid, don't make them the center of the fun ruining. If you ruin the fun for everyone because you and your kid can't manage his differences, that makes the other little kids hate him for those differences. Where normally many probably wouldn't notice if he did things a little different himself, they will definitely know of the little kid who was responsible for them losing out. And believe me, they will find out.

2. If you are too incompetent to manage your differences, kill yourself. Don't bug me, just go away. Look I HAVE allergies. I'm allergic to pork, grass, pine, cats, the list can go on and on. I have asthma. I have managed my asthma for 17 years and my allergies all my life without bugging anyone else. I don't stop anyone from doing anything. I don't make it a point to put others out to accommodate my special needs. I handle all this myself. Cuz I'm a big girl. This is while not being able to take asthma medication because I'm allergic to it too. It's called responsibility. Get over it. We are not here to suit you. For every "special need" we are FORCED to accommodate, it's one more "special need" we resent. I have never seen less sympathy for the handicapped, asthmatics, etc than I have in the last 5 years. Even I'm losing my patience with them and I'm one of them. If you're so sick that walking outside can kill you, I'd suggest you stay in the house. I do it every summer while you people manicure your lawns to death, so you don't get any sympathy from me. I grew up with kids with allergies. They worked with parents and teachers to manage their differences and I've never seen a child have a reaction or an attack in school. Of course, teachers and parents weren't as lazy then as they are now, and that may have something to do with it.

3. What is the thing here? Either you don't want your kid to "appear" different or you want thier differences highlighted. "We're going to draw attention to our kid's differences by forcing everyone to do the same thing so they won't notice his differences". Again they WILL find out. There was a doctor, 2 ambulance men, 2 nurses, and 2 parents trying to keep it a secret that a girl got a coke bottle stuck up her hoohaw...the whole school knew about it the next day. She wasn't even entered into the records as what actually happened. She was entered in as appendicitis or something. We still found out. I think kids can manage to find out which retard's parents are causing trouble. And yes, one of my children does have allergies, to red dyes in certain drinks. Before we homeschooled, we managed, even in kindergarten. Her teacher wasn't lazy either.

If you don't want people hated for being different, then don't use their differences to cause trouble. Embrace the difference. You are unique. So what if you're body responds differently to certain things. Fine. Quit making such a big production of it and stay the fuck away from it. If peanut DUST will kill your kid, then maybe you need to take them out of school. YOUR problem, NOT mine or my kids or other people's kids.

The Age of Stupidity

2009-03-22T23:15:00.003-06:00

Originally I was pissed about a new development in my game, where all the puritans have won the right to put some shorts over the Statue of David's penis. Realize that's an analogy, not exactly the truth. What it basically comes down to is "I don't want to see it and I have successfully made things change in a massive inconvenience to suit me". GO SL!!!

So I was off to rant on the whole puritan movement in my game, right up until I thought of the world today. Then I was pissed about the puritan movement in my world, until I thought a bit longer and realized that there is no age of science any longer, we have entered the age of fanaticism. It's not about puritans or even religion, it's about throwing yourself whole heartedly into a belief of any kind, without using any sense whatsoever. Intelligence is faked. Big words and an understanding of quantum physics does not make you smart. Just means you can memorize shit.

Take the smoking issue (and I swear to fuckin' god I will lose it if someone makes this all about smoking, you know you are Anon the Coward). There's this believe system that NOTHING good comes from smoking, yet it does good things. Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, focuses thought, a natural thing to turn to for those in psychiatric care. Don't get caught up in the smoking point, understand that there is NOTHING in this world that is all bad. NOTHING. Yet people have thrown themselves into this crusade without thinking about it and making that connection. Just a blind fanaticism. No thought behind it whatsoever. Then you go into the blind acceptance, no serious thought. A commercial or politician or something tosses out some tidbit and they latch onto it like rabid dogs and parrot it about. They don't read up on it and get the full story. Hell, just think about it. Arsenic, belladonna, bleach..all poisonous, yet they also do good things. It's hard to believe ONE thing has bucked the system.

Then there's the whole chastity ring thing going. What's that all about? I'd have more respect if someone had sex and then did the chastity thing, because they tried it out and said "hey, I don't need this right now". Yet instead, without investigating their options, these idiots have crawled all over this. No thought, no investigation, no anything. Just someone said "hey, do this" and a bunch of sheep said "ok". Just like that. No reading up on it, no nothing, just "ok".

And of course, you can't ever mention fanaticism without religion. I don't have to explain that one, do I?

I understand fads, but have you noticed all the new fads require a cultish devotion to something? I'm so fuckin' sick of Relay for Life. Yet if I point out that the majority of the money these people donate ends up in some jetsetter's pocket as well as politics and I refuse to contribute, I'M the asshole. So sorry for my investigations, maybe I'm not quite the fanatic you are. I like some thought with my coffee.

Are we regressing, or have we become that selfish? Is it just too hard to think anymore? It's hard to tell. Perhaps this has always been a part of humanity and I'm the outsider for not being a nutjob?

It seems to me a matter of selfishness. Oh don't get confused, I do hear their little justifications. "I don't want other people to get poisoned", "I only want to save your soul", "don't you want to cure cancer for the world". But y'know what I've found, in the end, it's always about THEM. "Your poisoning MY air", "I've decided God is the right one, so you must do as I do", "I lost my mom to cancer and I want a cure there when I get it". So it would seem that the new religion is "ME!ME!ME!" And really, since when do we look into the reasons for our own behavior? Are they all afraid to face the fact that what someone else wants may not be the supreme evil they want to paint it? Or maybe if they paint it as the ultimate evil, they don't see the damage they do? It's easy to close your eyes to what good there is to something when you're so bent on getting your way. So just don't admit there IS good. Sex is painted as some horrible evil (regression much), yet sex does so much good physically (and I don't mean just how it feels, but how it affecs the human mind and body) that I'm surprised doctors dont' prescribe it. Did you know that sex is actually good for certain back problems? That sex releases natural hormones that improve the mind in various ways? Hell, look at how happy some folks are who get it good! LOL

The point is, we seem to have re-entered the age before the age of reason. No one wants to read the science, no one wants to hear the truth, no one cares about you really. Just DO it, this way on this day at this hour in exactly this fashion. Your inconvenience, your feelings, YOU do not matter. If they really cared, they'd ask you what YOU wanted, they wouldn't tell you what they want.

Then again you could make a really good case for apparently the whole world no longer wants to use their brains. Isn't it easier when you have a preacher telling you how to behave and what to do and what to say? Life is always easier if someone else makes all the decisions and holds all the responsiblity. Then you can always get out of trouble with "I'm just following orders". Is the new religon "Blank brain"? Your preacher/politican/mechanic engineer tells you what all the bibles/scientific papers say and you just don't have to bother your pretty little head about it. Forget the fact that teen pregnancy and sexual diseases have been shown to soar when abstinence is the message. YOU don't want them having sex, so you just shake some papers on national television and lie about the conclusions.

I don't think that bothers me near as much though as the fact that it works does.

You vill do as ve say

2009-03-03T08:11:00.003-06:00

Wow. Why did we kick Germany's ass? Apparently we weren't mad at Hitler, we were made because we hadn't thought of it first!

Alabama Plans to Tax Fat Employees to Recoup Insurance Costs

If you read the article you get nice blurbs that are actually quite scary.

But there's a way to avoid the fee: Get a check-up at an in-office "wellness center," where nurses will check for diabetes and hypertension and measure blood pressure, cholesterol, glucose levels and Body Mass Index (BMI).

Let's take this apart. Apparently we are all yogis able to control the tiniest of bodily reactions. If you have high blood pressure, screw stress and every OTHER way to get it, screw that it may have absolutely NOTHING to do with a bad habit you don't have. You WILL bring it down, or you will be "punished" for it. Diabetic? You're that way because your fat, because we all know diabetes isn't genetic. How stupid are you? You'll be charged for it. BMI? Fuck that scientific bullshit that BMI is completely useless for the majority of people, meet it or pay. Can't lose weight, too fucking bad. Got a thyroid problem? Too fucking bad. YOU WILL DO IT OR WE WILL TAKE MONEY OUT OF YOUR PAYCHECK.

So it's $25 now. Sure, but would you feel the same way if it was you being charged for having a low white cell count? Why aren't they charging extra to folks with cancer? If I can control my glucose levels enough to bring them down because you say so, then shouldn't YOU be able to mentally squeegee the cancer out? You're just lazy and want folks to feel sorry for you, stupid cancer patient. We all know you can get rid of it. It's just that easy.

And hey, if you think you're weight is YOUR business, fuck you. You're a comany man. You're life is NOT your own. WTF were YOU thinking? No, when you signed up for a job, you signed up for life management baby. Your ass belongs to them and you're fucking retarded for thinking otherwise. Just because you don't get paid 24 hours doesn't mean that time is YOURS.

Charge women more because they can have babies, increasing risk of death and permanent medical issues. Put sky divers, horse back riders, people into sports on that list too. Sexually promiscous folks. Why don't YOU tell us all how many people you've fucked and if you used protection? If fat people get public weigh ins, then we get to know what a slut you are.

What I want is what happen to freedom? Freedom isn't real if you're being punished for it, no matter if it's fifty cents or $50,000. We can talk shit all day about you paying my "health" bills, but it doesn't matter when you even decide to stick your nose in MY food.

BTW, smokers told you it'd be the fat people next.

Politesse dear, always

2009-02-05T11:06:00.002-06:00

Y'know, sometimes, ok, all the time, the sheer impoliteness of people drives me nuts. I mean, I know coming from Queen Asshole that's funny, but I may be an asshole but I'm a polite asshole. The thing is, my assholishness (yes I made it up) is just honesty that pisses folks off. So I'll tell you there's birdshit on your head, but unless you're making fun of someone's hat, I'll take you to the side to do it.

So I'm in this email group with other moms of gifted kids. One mom is, well, stuck up is the word I'd use. Her 14 year old spends his free time playing video games and wants to be a game designer when he grows up. I feel sorry for the kid, because his mother obviously believes that since SHE thinks so low of games then he should have higher aspirations and "quit wasting his time". Apparently she missed all the after school movies that show that parents like that drive their children away.

So anyhow, she writes in how this is what he does in his free time and how to make him stop because video games are immature and she knows of some adults who play and goes on to imply that adults who game are emotionally deficient and how worthless her son is going to be for making this his career. I do take offense at the attitude, but not her, I mean, how is she supposed to know I'm a gamer? So I sent in my two cents....it took me 2 hours, but I was pretty confident that I had come off as "you seem kind of misinformed, I'd like to show you the other side of it". I told her I was a gamer, I explained the intricacies, the studies. I promise, every line I wrote was combed over and over in order to inform and not sound rude. It may seem like a waste of time, but all I could think of was this poor kid being raised by a woman that tells him his dreams are worthless, which to a kid could imply that he's worthless for having such worthless dreams.

Now, I expected, as we're a polite group, maybe not agreement, but maybe a tone down of the immature, worthless gamER attitude. I mean, as much of a bitch as I am, *I* would have toned it down. Hell no, she writes this passive aggressive email back about how this is her opinion and reiterates over and over and over again how worthless and useless and he needs to stop. I mean, says it to the point where I know two things: 1. she's not interested in the other side, 2. this is a personal attack. So I write another email, changing tactics and focusing on the need to not let her personal opinion influence her treatment of her son and deriding his dreams. A sure fire way of installing a wall between them. Which was a lot nicer than the other response from another mom: "I feel sorry for your son for having you for a mother."

Which rates yet another PA email in which she relentlessly pursues the worthlessness and immaturity of someone who plays games. I quit at this point. Not because I don't want to give the poor kid a break, but hey, there's only so much you can do from email with a jackass and engaging in the "you're a cunt" fight accomplishes absolutely nothing for the boy. And quite frankly, here's my elitism showing, but she's obviously not sophisticated enough to engage in a conversation on a topic without letting her personal opinion permeate every inch of it. I mean, she won't get the larger point of "you're causing you and your child issues" because all she cares about is the topic itself "gamers are idiots".

How stupid can you be? I mean, look, I have a lot of opinions and many are set in stone. Not because I'm closed minded, but because I've thought long and hard about each of them. If anything directly proves them wrong, I'll change them, but as things stand, through much consideration, they are my opinions and I'm very vehement about them. However, your opinion on a subject cannot override the greater issues, especially if it's someone you profess to love.

This is a story I shared with her: I find sports fucking useless. I think players are overpaid and it's pretty sad to get paid so much for running around with a ball while there are men and women who work harder or contribute more to society that barely scrape by. I could go on and on in very derogatory terms that would make my opinion on sports crystal clear and make people who watch them feel like I personally think that person is useless for watching them.

One problem here: *I* dont' see the point. That doesn't mean that there isn't one. That damn sure doesn't mean that people I care about or know are useless over one thing *I* don't get. My husband LOVES sports, he's a jock through and through. To let my personal opinion override the big picture would cause our marriage issues. I know my husband isn't worthless. I know my friends are not immature and worthless. To define them over my personal opinion would be stupid. I'm very careful to keep my opinion out of his day to day ball games. The only time it comes up is if we're trying to find new ground, which has happened once. LOL

My husband feels the exact same way about my gaming. He thinks it's worthless and stupid. He also does not deride it, though I'm sure he wants to sometimes. We give each other shit sometimes, in joking. "ah, look, he's playing with the ballie again, another million!" or him: "Ooooo double experience weekend?" *orgasm sounds follow*. It's all in fun and we each try to make time for the other to engage in their chosen activity. He frequently heads out with his buddy to watch UFC pay per view fights at a bar, I try to leave him alone during important games. I get to play for a few hours while he takes over child care. For one, while he is a jock and I'm a gamer, these only define us to some extent, it isn't who we ARE. These things don't invalidate why we love one another. To let these opinions override who that person is, it would ruin our marriage. To be honest, no matter how much I don't like sports, I still love that part of him.

You can't let your opinion on something ruin something with someone you love. There are times when you have to set that to the side because to not do so would drive you apart. You wanna drive a wall between you and your kid, do it because he beats up old ladies or does drugs, don't do it over fuckin' video games.

This was a rant on politeness that turned into a rant over stupidity, but hey, you've read this enough, can you honestly say you didn't see the turn coming?

Gor: or you asked for it

2009-01-15T10:39:00.005-06:00

"Gor" refers to the lifestyle some people have committed themselves to based on these books by John Norman. Go see Wikipedia, I haven't read them. I might, I have some friends who like this type of living, but I personally am not into anything that gives me a "master".

The basics, man is Man/Master, woman is slave, freewoman (not enslaved), or panther (won't happen except by force). Please understand I'm getting my info from Second Life, NOT from the books. Now, slave is slave. Easy to get, you want to please anyone free, particularly your master. Freewoman is a woman living by gor rules not enslaved, but if she acts in any fashion outside the rules, she becomes slave. By doing a slave activity, she can be enslaved. She has to be covered all the time. Panther is refusing to live by man's rules and lives outside the Gor society. Basic gist, it gets far more complicated than that.

What we are discussing is the slave aspect. Don't picture the panther, being brought in a kennel (yes you heard me) against her will kicking and snarling. No no, we have women who VOLUNTEER to be slaves. I've asked them why and there's this long discussion of "wanting desperately to please a man", of women already being slaves to men, or women not being slaves not living their full womanly potential. I'm picturing fundie women on crack here. None of this resonates with me, I don't get it. But hey, if you like it, more power to you. I have gor friends, masters/slaves/freewomen/panthers. If they like it, no issues. This isn't about Gors, there are some lovely wonderful people who RP or live gorean.

My problem lies with the fundie haters. Most of which are women who had a "bad experience" with Gor. I get it, something like this is frought with those who wish to take advantage of it. Men who overdo it. Yet, you VOLUNTEERED. Are you really stupid enough to think that men who choose this type of "life" are all decently wonderous men who only look to love a woman? I mean, it's OWNERSHIP, SLAVE is the operative word here. What the fuck did you think would happen? The men would give you cookies? If you go into something ASKING to be treated like an animal, how can you expect there won't be some with a distorted view of what animals should be treated like?

Yeah yeah, I've heard it. "You don't understand, it's a mental hold they get over you. They manipulate your emotions and blah blah blah". This is the same shit I have heard from abused women except one key part. Abused women don't hear a man hits them and say "oooo I want some of THAT". No no, the beatings are a SURPRISE. These women don't volunteer for the abusive husband.

These gor chicks ask for it. It's not like you can be enslaved at the grocery store. Now, get this, there's more. This isn't REAL LIFE, this is SECOND LIFE. In other words, you can teleport away and log out and bye bye gor lifestyle. Most of these men? Long distance. You might be from Maine and your "master" from France. In other words, he can't come get you. You don't even have to permanently log out on that character. You can do all the neat computer things that put him on ignore and he can't do anything to you you don't allow. He can grief you, but that's what landowners and Mentors are for. This isn't something that happens against your will, you have to approve of every thing he tries to do to your avatar. And don't give me that mental "he trapped me" shit. YOU have issues if you let a guy ONLINE control you and fuck up your self image. YOU need therapy. I'm not saying he doesn't, but this isn't about him.

So don't be surprised if the next time I say "gor" and you react negatively I tell you to get over it. YOU ASKED FOR IT, literally. I am completely unsympathetic to your bad experiences. You ASKED for it. You are the idiot who jumped in there, and I don't want to hear a damn thing about "he hurt me". Good, what the fuck did you expect? This isn't a set up for men worshipping women, this is women worshipping and being enslaved by men. That's what you volunteered for.

"Well, he said he'd respect me". Well, when I was in high school the guy I gave my virginity to said he loved me. Both of us were stupid, move on. The fact is, you cannot claim the abuse the married woman claimed. You ASKED for it. You said, "you're my master. I am yours to command as you see fit." How can you be surprised when he sees fit to mistreat you? An abused wife isn't looking for a master, she's looking for a husband. She can claim abuse. All you can claim is stupidity.

So, I don't care about your bad experience. I don't care about how he "abused" you. I don't care that you were looking for a nice master and picked the wrong one. I was looking for a good husband and have a divorce under my belt. Hardly a call for abuse, just picked the wrong one (the first time). If you want to cross me off your list because I have friends who live Gor and I don't tell them what to do or cut them off, good. Most likely you've been crossed off for being stupid, so we're even. Go take your sob story to some one who gives a shit.

New drain covers; aka I'm still not watching my kid

2009-01-15T08:59:00.004-06:00

Go look then come back and listen.

1. You notice who got affected? "7-year-old granddaughter of former U.S. Secretary of State James Baker" Ok, if you have suffered a tragedy, you shouldn't be allowed to speak for a law until you've passed the grieving. These people are dangerous to fundamental freedoms. They are either manipulators or poor grieving family members USED by manipulators. Either way, they shouldn't be allowed to speak for something until they are thinking reasonably again. Or at least thinking. I've lost someone very close to me. I can assure you that my decision making process was definitely impaired.

2. This happened in a hot tub, not a swimming pool. Believe it or not, there is a difference.

3. Notice there was no lobby for WATCHING YOUR KIDS. Ok, mean me to pick on the family, getting past that, you have to admit that perhaps if you don't allow children in swimming pools alone (or shouldn't), then a hot tub would definitely be out? Or does that make too much sense? I'm not positive, but I think hot tubs are supposed to be unhealthy for little kids anyhow. Why on earth would anyone think it's ok to leave ANY kid out in a container full of water alone anyhow? Even local pools have lifeguards. If kids had good judgement they wouldn't need parents.

Why is the answer to make a federal law telling us what kind of drain techniques we must use and NOT for parents to watch their kids? I understand, you can't watch your kids constantly. I get how even the best parent has something happen. The other day my 2goingon3 got a bottle of Tums. However, *I* didn't go bitching about Tums' not so child safe lid. (He's fine btw)*I* was beating myself up for not keeping a better eye on him. It's not Tums' job to keep these things away from my kids, it's mine. Tums did it's job when it put "Keep out of reach of children" on it. Granted I did put it up, but hey, kids grow and I know that. I should have done a better job. There is a limit to how much we can demand everyone else take the responsibility we are supposed to have. (BTW, Poison Control Center RAWKS)

We should not expect others to change their lives for our children. They are OUR children. WE agreed to change our lives, others did not. To demand that everyone behave as if a child could drop out of the sky any second and your house must be childproofed on that off chance, is going beyond what we have a right to demand. To make a federal law requiring ALL pool owners do something, whether children are allowed around it or not, is just micromanaging. It's a step into shit government needs to stay out of.

fires off the second shot

2008-12-12T16:48:00.002-06:00

You know, it's hilarous how the "season of peace" has spawned a war...

Let's bring in dear Senator Buttars...poor Buttars doesn't have enough to do with his day. Apparently ignorant of the war in Iraq, our new incoming president, AND the economic crisis, he got bored. He wants Utah legislature to declare it's opposition to the war on Christmas.

Obviously he's also ignorant of the First Amendment and history.

"It would encourage the use of 'Merry Christmas,'" Buttars said of the non-binding statement that is still being drafted. "I'm sick of the Christmas wars -- we're a Christian nation and ought to use the word."

Yeah, I'm sick of the "Christmas Wars" that the christians make up every single year too.

I don't know what's sadder, that it took a reporter and a lawyer to bring up the violation of the First Amendment or at how many Senators were asleep through history class. Maybe they didn't even bother to show up.

I get it, it's a resolution. It's really nothing more than a statement that "we support Merry Christmas". But it's also a statement that says "we don't recognize the Jews, Blacks, and others of our nation". You're putting Christmas ahead of Kwanzaa, Hannukkah, Yule, and those that actually do celebrate Festivus, and secular Christmas celebrators. So what, our beliefs are all secondary to yours? Once again a christian (and I mean that in the loosest possible terms) has made it abundantly clear that they will force us to face them whether we want to or not. Why? Why must you be in our faces constantly? The only problem with this thinking is that if we are forced to face you, then we have to do something about you.

This is also a government attempt to back a religion. Christians claim Christmas every year when they start this war on Christmas shit. If you're backing a religious holiday, then you're backing a religion. If you are backing Christmas to the exclusion of Kwanzaa, Hannukah, and Yule, you've tossed your hat in the Christian ring. Resolution or not, it's one that will be followed with lawsuits.

Don't even get me started on interfering with the free market and the irony of regulating businesses to say Merry Christmas while many christians condemn the same businesses for "commercializing" it.

This is getting beyond stupid. I read about a guy who was at a store and bought something and paid with his credit card. As the cashier held the credit card back to him she said, "Merry Christmas!" He says, "You too." She wouldn't relinquish her hold on the card and repeated "Merry Christmas." She thought she didn't hear him and said, "You too" again. She continued this behavior until he realized she wouldn't let go until he said "Merry Christmas" all the while glaring. He finally said it and was allowed to leave. I'd have said "oh you're not a christian either?" and reported her ass.

But the point comes to: Why are you such selfish little bastards? There's like a half dozen holidays in December and yours is ONE day. Diwali (I have no idea what that is), Kwanzaa, Christmas, Hannukah, Yule, and believe it or not, some folks DO celebrate Festivus. Hell, Hannukah lasts longer AND predated Christmas. Yule predated it too, in fact, they stuck Christmas in our Yule!

Also, Jesus actually celebrated Hannukah, you Christians are refusing to recognize the day that Jesus himself recognized! That can't bode well....

Sorry, got a little distracted.

Go victimized a christian, say "Happy Holidays" everwhere you go.

I've been tagged

2008-12-08T15:04:00.003-06:00

Well, it seems my friend, SWFreedomLover, has tagged me. This seems like a very sneaky way of finding out what I'm reading since I'm THE book connoisseur of the web. ;) EVERYONE, who's ANYONE, wants to know what I'm reading.

RULE ONE, I have to grab one of the books closest to me, go to page 56, type the fifth line and the next two to five lines that follow.

RULE TWO, I have to pick five people who love books and who could receive the Bookworm award with honor. (note: I’m picking five people and assuming four of them love books, one I’m sure does…..LOL)

So here goes:

"Nonetheless, each floor has its own invisible peculiarities, lurking in wait for dancers' feet. Even the floor of Toronto's famous Drummond Theatre. The company had gone through two complete rehearsals, undress and dress, without a hitch; it was in the final onstage warm-up class, a scant hour before curtain, that John DeMarco, who had been dreaming of and working toward this night for all of his professional life, found the flaw with his name on it. It broke his ankle."

Starmind, Spider and Jeanne Robinson, Ace Books, 1995

The problem with five people is I don't know 5 other people who aren't already referenced, I only know 3. So I'm breaking a rule, but still tagging those I can.

My 3 are: Ron Britton, Watcher, and Sophisticat. All are very well read fellows.

Don't worry, new post in the works as well, sometime in the next couple of days. The War on Christmas has begun!!! I take my place in the front lines!!!!

Black Friday (How stupid are you?)

2008-12-02T11:36:00.005-06:00

I don't want to know which of my friends participated in Black Friday. I really don't. I don't want to know how many of you chose to participate in an event that grows more and more out of control every year. L, I would like to note this is not a response to YOUR post, but a response to the many others who have decried ANY responsibility on the part of the shoppers.

I know it's "IN" now to blame those nasty corporations. It's all their fault for everything. I'm not a real corporate friend myself. There's much they do wrong and Black Friday COULD be handled better. However, in our rush to blame everyone else, let's not forget to lay this directly where it belongs: on you. Every single one of you that participates in Black Friday, ie going to the store and waiting in line, have contributed to this man's death. I get a good deal, I know how it is, especially when you're poor. However, many of you participating are not. I know some folks that have plenty of money and buy things not only they don't need (I mean, they did not WANT these items until they saw the deal and do not use them), but also don't have them in mind as gifts. Really, what is the point in buy 6 of an item you know you will not use and don't know if anyone you know will use? Just because it's cheap? Really? You do realize that the $200 you just spent will now sit in your closet until it's obsolete? Gape like a fish, but you know it's true. Well, maybe not, some of you will not consider your friends on their birthdays in order to get rid of this stupid thing and justify your shopping. You will then tell yourself next year, "Well, I got rid of them all, everyone loved them!" Maybe, and maybe they are better friends than you are. Since you all chose to queue at the doors of stores like animals, you have told the corporation yet again, "do with us as you will".

But let's get back to the real point here. Are we adults or are we not? Are we the decisionmakers in life, or are we sheep steered hither and yon for the corporate cash box? Are WE in charge of ourselves, or are we nothing more than ignorant masses here to feed the corporation? I say this in all superiority because I STAYED HOME!! I shopped some awesome deals online at midnight Thanksgiving night and was in bed by 1 am secure that my shopping for the entire Christmas season was over. I was in my pajamas, at home, cigarette in hand, getting free shipping. I know, not everyone can do this sort of thing, but if you can and you didn't, then you are a problem.

*coughs* Sorry for the gloatfest, but I do so love shoving your stupidity in your face and grinding it in. It's orgasmic. Anyhow, the fact is, we are in charge of ourselves and our behavior. While certain blogs (which will remain linkless) will decry the corporations as it's the responsabilité du joure, let's not rule out free will. We all know the madness of Black Friday, provided you didn't crawl out from under a rock buried in the center of the Earth yesterday. We are all aware of what our needs and wants are. It's not that I wouldn't LIKE to participate. We aren't broke, but a good deal sure helps out. It's just that I don't let what I want overpower my decency. My decency says we do not contribute to the madness. My decency says as I could do just as well elsewhere and lessen one person contributing to the standard mob mentality that we allow to run our nation. Black Friday is not the disease, it's a symptom of us, the human disease.

Ah, that's not the right analogy, as we're not a cancer, mindlessly reproducing, ignorant of our effects...we just don't CARE. Look at the AP article.

Other workers were trampled as they tried to rescue the man, and customers stepped over him and became irate when officials said the store was closing because of the death, police and witnesses said.

Shoppers stepped over the man on the ground and streamed into the store.

"When they were saying they had to leave, that an employee got killed, people were yelling 'I've been on line since yesterday morning,'" she said. "They kept shopping."

How is Walmart responsible for THIS? How is any company responsible for the people who chose to continue shopping and whine because a man had the gall to die when they trampled over him in a rush to get to their "deal"? I get why not stop and help him, you surge forward or get trampled yourself, but to whine because the store is closing after you helped kill a man???? You want to blame the corporations for our "fellow man" (not mine) being so crass and having no decency? The corporations didn't foster this behavior. Something is seriously wrong with these people. If I hurt someone I will stop and try to help and suffer over what part I may have played. I DO NOT CONTINUE SHOPPING! You have decided a plasma tv is worth more than this person's life.

Look, it's bad enough to show up and later say, "I never expected this" after watching this shit on the news every fuckin' year. We'll just stamp "Retarded" on your head and put you on the special bus. But to then WHINE and continue shopping? You are a criminal. Not only have you possibly contributed to a wrongful act, but you have NO remorse. You're no better than a serial killer. I'm not exaggerating, you really are no better. If you want to blame the stores, the fundamental problem is not Black Friday, but YOU. You are trying to remove the blame that SHOULD cling heavily to your own shoulders. It doesn't matter that the corporations COULD find a safer way or better way to do this. This does not remove the responsibility for your actions and your behavior from yourself.

Are we human beings, theoretically capable of rational thought, or are we nothing but animals throwing feces? I can tell you what you damn well look like...

The True Dangers of Internet Porn

2008-11-11T16:51:00.003-06:00

Wow. I'm not a big porn fan (hehe, I said big). While I'm a fairly lenient parent in letting my children view sex on tv provided it's in a context that they observe natural behavior in life, I do not subject my children to blatant sex for sex/entertianment's sake. We do not watch shows when there is no rational reason to throw a graphic sex scene in the middle other than to pull in the male viewer or titti-late. ;) While the Matrix 3 was not bad, I to this day do not see the purpose of tossing in Neo and Trinity's sex scene throughout the tribal scene. I do get the sexuality in the tribal dancing. One seemed sex for sex sake, the other was making a point of the culture. I can't explain it too well, but I get it.

So understand, I have a healthy view of sexuality in that I understand it's a fact of life and I'm no frigid virgin scared of a little willie (I know, I gotta stop that). I refuse to raise my children with that view myself. Now, going a bit further, if you're new to this blog, I'm a HUGE fan of personal responsibility. I tend to put a lot of people's behavior on their own shoulders. One should act, not react. If you choose to be reactionary, then you are choosing to give up responsibility of your behavior to your emotions.

Knowing all this, you can probably understand a few of the problems I may have with the above website. (Yes, I'm well aware it's selling a product, however, if you think this is the first time I've seen Vagina Madness, you're blind) If you click on the title you get taken to the Reefer Madness of Porn. I say this because this:

The price our young people pay is more often than not, addiction. The sexual images our teens view release chemicals in the brain (endorphins), our body eventually craves these feel good chemicals like alcohol or drugs--- serious problem though, the alcoholic can avoid the bars and situations… how do you avoid the images that pop into your head when you’re trying to study? When you see a new face at a party? You don’t, that’s why Internet Porn has been compared to crack cocaine– but worse!

sounds suspiciously like this:

At the heart of the campaign are two studies on the neurochemical effects of THC, marijuana's effective ingredient, published recently in Science magazine. The putative results: Marijuana is not only a "gateway" drug to heroin, but addictive in its own right. Just like alcohol and cocaine, marijuana is capable of "hijacking the brain's so-called reward system," Science reported, and priming it for future addiction.

Really? Seeing a penis is a "gateway" drug to donkey shows? Please say your fucking with me..please?

Internet porn is not a romance novel. It is not a sex education for beginners. In its simplest form it teaches a complete lack of intimacy—using another human being to masturbate oneself, and most often degrading the other.

Wow, and who would imagine that after thousands of years of some version of porn (do you really think there were no voyeurs in Ancient Rome? wrong) that the sudden slight convenience of internet porn verses mailed/cornerstore porn is going to ruin the view of intimacy, ESPECIALLY if the parents display a healthy view of intimacy? Now I'm not trying to be an ass, but if your kid is that stupid, the problem isn't porn. We have survived the advances of porn for thousands of years and, because of the internet, we are suddenly brainless monkies?

When viewing porn on the internet starts becoming an addiction, the viewer becomes obsessed with making/stealing time for this activity. He/she will turn down healthy invitations to social activities, preferring time with the computer, will find excuses to be home alone or locked in their room, etc.

Because no young boy discovers masturbation unless someone points it out to them, and they'd hardly disappear to the bathroom when they did find it. C'mon guys, admit it, for the first little while you did it a lot. I'm not giving you shit, but be honest.

Don Juan, move over—there is a new role model for young good looking guys—the predator! There is a generation of young men who think that sex is a game. They are the hunter and any girl is the hunted, the concept of relationship does not even cross their mind. They emulate the role models they see on porn sites, and strive to be like them.

And where the hell are you dad? While it's apparent that every generation would far prefer to lay the blame on something else, let's get down to brass tacks: Your fault. Now, it could be because we as parents do not get a handbook. We're flying by the seat of our pants here. However, at least admit you've made mistakes. We all have, nothing to be ashamed of. It could also be the example set by dear old dad. Dear old dad who divorced mom after 20 years because that hot thing on his arm is younger and prettier. Don't worry dad, mom does it too. You and your friends teach these boys where to get their ideas. Predators are glamorized as "playas" on tv yeah, but where the hell were you, from when he was a little boy? You obviously weren't teaching him proper respect for a woman. And the worse you treat women, well, the more he gets the idea that they aren't meant to be treated respectfully. Studies still show that the biggest influence on a child is his or her parents. So guess who's falling down on the job? The buck stops here, you are the weakest link, pick a phrase, but get it.

If you read "understanding your critical role" you see a ton of good ideas. I can't argue with any of these really. I suppose I could question just what exactly they mean by "protect" as it's constantly misused as "don't even let them know it exists", but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

I can't argue with "things you should know". Those ARE things you should know...if you're doing your job.

In the "6 Signs Your Kid Could Be At Risk" I have a problem with. At risk of what? A disturbing scene? Have you seen the NON-porn things these kids have sent to each other? What exactly is the risk here? Getting an idea? Knowing young men, they probably have already heard it from a friend and decided to accept/discard it. I'm really not sure what the risk is.

The family computer is conveniently placed in the basement, attic, back room
Your child has a computer with internet access in their room
Your child has their own laptop with internet access
You have not set parental controls on the computers that your children have access to
You never check the history on you’re computers browser
Your teen creates/finds situations to be home alone and on the computer

In other words, shadow your child constantly. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of supervision, but you have to learn at some point to start trusting your kid a little. If nothing else (especially if you're one of those constantly harping on what the "right" way to raise a child is), trust the method you used. Just as those who seek to be enlightened must maintain a state of unconscious wakefulness, you must maintain a state of watchful trust, tailored to your child. Some children need more watching than others, but they all need to feel that you believe in them to make the right decisions. By setting parental controls and checking their history and not leaving them alone, you show that you don't believe they can handle responsibility. This being the same little brat you bought a 2 ton metal machine that goes in excess of 100 mph. Wow, schizo much? You'll trust him to not run over someone and speed around (though it's been proven that damn near every teenage boy does) and yet can't trust him to not go into a sexual frenzy over the site of a vagina? Please be aware, this says a lot more about you than it does him.

The younger your children are when you start your action plan the less resistance you will meet; the following are the basic House Rules for all ages at all times.

Wow, David Koresh's guide to brainwashing: the sooner you can get them under your thumb, the sooner you can laze back and let the threat manage things. I'm not saying don't teach them young, but this phrase suggests making them malleable to better able to control them. Just remember, when you have made them so and are in control, you've left the back door open to everyone else that would like them malleable and controllable. Also, a sign that you're too lazy to BE a parent. As long as you maintain control over them, you don't have to actually teach them a thing, huh? What gets me is you treat them like little children as long as possible and then SEND them off to college. When the dean calls for the 8th time about Johnny's alcohol stash and Jenny's been busted blowing the football team again, you're surprised! Really? And it's all porn's fault, not yours for treating them like they're 5 until the day they moved out. You gave a 6 year old a credit card and now you're pissed because he spent 10k on toys.

Look, I see what it is. You're lazy. It only takes a village to raise a child when mom and dad don't want to do it. You have relegated the responsibility of your child to everyone else. The schools teach them sex, political views, acceptable behavior. The church teaches them values. The internet, the tv, the books must all be modified to suit what you want them to learn. What the hell do you do? Not a fuckin' thing. What gets me is you are the same lazy asses who get mad at what the schools teach them. "I don't want my kid learning that liberal bullshit/redneck religion". Well, they gotta teach them SOMETHING, you're damn sure not doing it. Don't bitch if you don't like it. You bitch, and yet you STILL don't take responsibility. You don't change it, you expect everyone else to change.

The buck stops here. We are the ones who CHOSE the responsibility of OUR children. I don't want to raise your kids. Chances are, I don't LIKE your kids. I may feel that some of the "child free" are some stuck up bastards but there's one thing they have right: They didn't choose to have children, YOU raise them. I didn't choose to have more children so what the hell makes you think I want responsibility for yours? If you want a village raising your kids, put them in a state home. Look how well that whole village thing is going for THOSE kids.

Filling a hole

2008-11-10T23:05:00.002-06:00

Now I want you to follow me here. This is NOT a religious thing. If you pay attention, you'll get it. If you don't pay attention, well, don't expect me to be surprised.

One of the things that drives me absolutely batshit in this world is desperation. Not the feeling, that doesn't get me. It's the things people do that drives me nuts. A woman's husband dies. They've been married for 40 or so years. We're talking committed. In the wake of her husband's death, while desperately grasping for something to fill the hole his loss has left in her life, she's become a fundie christian. (Stay with me) She's turned her back on her entire life in order to find a meaning. Now, this wouldn't bug me, aren't we all looking for some sort of meaning? That our time on earth isn't worthless. That we will leave a mark that says "I was here and I did something".

We all do this and it's ok. It's human. But in the wake of a loss of any kind, one must expect that desperately clawing for any meaning is no better than having no meaning. You commit your life to some ephermeral that, within a few years, you realize really means nothing to you. In return for this desperate race to fill that hole, you have burned bridges that you may never get back.

I say this isn't religious because in THIS case, she turned to religion. I've seen cases though where people have undergone complete personality changes to devote themselves to charity, a friendship, children. You say, how can that be bad? Well, 1. You get to this point when, most of the time, you realize that this isn't YOU. This isn't who you are. 2. You're trying to replace something that can't be replaced. The funny thing is that anyone with a modicum of intelligence (I know I just greatly shortened that list) will tell you that it's not healthy to replace someone. Yet no one bats an eye when you replace someone with god or charity or some socially approved behavior. Really, it's no different.

I hear all the things. Maybe this is what she needed to get through. If this gets her to sleep at night, leave her alone. I'm not interested in how much sleep she gets. I'm interested in her working through what she feels to make decisions for her life that won't hurt her later. When you come back from any type of rehab, they say to make no big decisions for a year or so. Do you know why? So you don't try to replace the drugs/alcohol/etc with a dependance on another person or with a new type of addiction. Why would any such thing be different if you lost a spouse? Why would you make a sudden decision that the religion you've mocked all your life is something you should jump into? That the charity you've turned your nose up at is suddenly worthy of your time? Why is it no one points out the painfully obvious? No matter what you fill that hole with, it will never take the place of the loss. Don't change your life significantly until you are no longer grieving. Don't run to religion, sports, people, charity. Socially approved behavior or not, that does not make it more healthy behavior. Yet I'm the asshole for pointing that out.

If you cared you wouldn't accept her "conversion" to god, but recognize it for what it is: A lost, lonely woman clutching desperately for something to give her life meaning in the wake of losing a, if not THE, central part of her life. Let her grieve, help her, be the rational one at a time that she needs someone else to be rational.

Homeschooling, unschooling and "Bad Parents"

2008-10-18T08:49:00.005-06:00

There's this site called babble.com. Apparently they allow articles that go against the grain of standardized parenting. Some homeschoolers on there. Joanne Rudnall wrote an article on her first attempt at homeschooling. She has chosen to use an unschooling method. IMO, a perfect method at least to start with seeing as how her son is 5 years old. The article is fine, I'm sure we could find places to disagree were we to talk, but the article doesn't bother me. The comments, WOW. What a bunch of losers. What gets me is the hoops they jump through in their mind to justify their OMG reaction with.

1. The little boy gets the appropriate amount of sleep for a young child, he just stays up late. Why is it that everyone thinks that everyone else has to follow THEIR timetable? I'm sorry, I'm not a morning person. I get my energy and my drive after dark. Since we've started homeschooling the kids sleep as they wish. My older children are up at the butt crack of dawn, greeting the sun as it rises to the sky. Myself and my younger children come blearily stumbling through the house after daylight to find that my oldest children are eating breakfast and have already started on today's lessons. I would hardly find this abuse. Ok, so their lives aren't lived by bells and whistles, ordering them when to stay or go. They learn punctuality, as I'm a great believer in it. We have appointments just like any other family and those times are strictly adhered to. Just in the rest of our life, a clock doesn't run it.

2. She took him to a bar. OMGOMGOMG!!!!! Ok, not the bars YOU hang out in, but a family friendly pub type bar. She's English, as I understand it, that's normal. Where's the objection here? Is it the alcohol? If so, arrest any parent who's ever had a drink at home. I don't care if it's an upscale bar...it's not the dive we go to where there are fights every night, someone's always loudly sloshed, and the waitress has brained a guy twice with her tray because he can't keep his hands off her ass. He's not even getting alcohol, he's drinking cranberry juice. Get over it.

3. Why do people assume homeschoolers are some elite bunch with a ton of disposable money? I've never met or heard such a person. Sorry, but we make sacrifices to be able to stay home with our kids and teach them. We don't get Red Lobster every night, we don't drive a new car, we don't have a cool tv, our clothes are not in style (but they are comfortable). Every homeschool parent I know or have heard of barely make ends meet. We aren't taking advantage of a easy life, we are sacrificing for something we feel is more important.

4. A beer doesn't equal getting wasted. So if we get to have a beer or margarita at 2 pm at the playdate, that's no different than you coming home to your kids and having a martini in front of them. We don't assume YOU get roaring drunk, why do you assume we do?

5. The children were naked, playing in the mud. It seems if you're going to let kids play in the mud, nudity is the best option. Especially if you're riding a subway home. I get it, to you nudity means everyone is having sex. I'm sorry, not all of us tie sex to nudity. Some of us actually get naked for other reasons. I took my clothes off last week for a strange man, spread my legs wide open, and accepted his entry. He was my gynocologist. No sex involved...pervert. If you think those paper gowns mean anything except to make you feel better, you have issues. I mean really, they are up your cooch, is the paper gown really doing anything to keep him from seeing it? It's just there so you feel dignified.

6. She hasn't read the unschooling handbook. I find it amusingly strange that an unschooling parent has said that another unschooling parent is at fault because she didn't get information out of THE unschooling handbook. Waitwaitwait, you mean to tell me, the person who believes learning is best on hand and in the world (not from books) is telling another unschooler that she can unschool best if she gets it from...waitforit....a BOOK?????

7. He watched Juno. THAT'S NOT APPROPRIATE TV FOR A LITTLE BOY....Ok, YOU watch Disney every day. Who are you to say what's "appropriate" for a kid you haven't met? Ok, I get it, YOUR kid isn't smart enough to get it so other people's kids can't watch it. Why don't we tell all the kids who can read 4 grade levels ahead of their own that yes, I know you understand it and yes, the "baby" books are simple, but you are only 6 and so MUST only read the "baby" books. That's no different from telling an intelligent child he can only watch Sesame Street and Blue's Clues because it's for his "age group". You want to keep your kid limited, I suppose that's your business. MY kid however is going to be challenged at every opportunity. I think all the "oh so now your so cool because your kid can watch Juno" comments are jealousy because their kid can't UNDERSTAND Juno.

8. She's being arrogant? So are you, you are arrogant enough to think you know her whole life from an article. You are arrogant enough to think your method of raising children should override anyone else's. You're arrogant enough to think your rant should matter to anyone. She's ENGLISH. Different sense of humor, different way of talking, get over it.

9. Why do people think sending a child to school is the way to prepare a child for "real life"? I really don't know anyone who sits at a desk all day with only breaks for bathroom and lunch, calls his boss to get permission to use the bathroom, never talks to anyone, and listens to someone else lecture them for hours on end except for breaks on pre-made worksheets. No one, my husband doesn't know anyone either and he knows TONS of people. (My husband doesn't need a fave five, he needs a fave 60). We all know people who have to take responsibility for their own job, have meetings, take lunch and sometimes have lunch with a client, leave the office to go work on clients things, talk all day on the phone, and stop between clients to make sure their paperwork is filled out. They can take an hour off at any point in the day to go for a workout if they are stressed, accept phone calls from their wives (except during meeting times), and stop for a coke and a snack. If you're more working class (such as a roofer or welder) you definitely don't see a desk that day and you INTERACT (not merely in the presence of) with others. Oh wait, I DO know one guy who does that (except for listening to someone lecture him all day, he does do that part). He's a programmer and he has deplorable social skills. People consider him abnormal because he doens't talk to people much. Ok, so this situation is abnormal for adults, but acceptable for children because they are in the presence of 30 other kids they can't talk to? Wow, you're right, that's SO much better. Also, that whole segmented day thing, is your day segmented? I mean do you ONLY work on certain things at certain times of the day? What happens if something happens outside it's segment? Yes, I'm being deliberately obtuse, but really, you people SHOULD think about it.

Hell, you people should think, but I suppose that's entirely too much to ask.

A Place at the Table

2008-08-22T10:16:00.003-06:00

Every day we are told that we mustn't eat what we want, that we shouldn't enjoy our food, that whatever we're eating must be more than we should have, that we're entitled to only the most minimally adequate meals. Most fat people have heard this message again and again, sometimes in ways that are callous and cruel, and sometimes in ways that are meant as kindness--but all of them are hurtful.

We've been harassed and ridiculed by family members about every bite we eat. We've had restaurant menus snatched from our hands by our "friends." We've had complete strangers come up and criticize what we put in our grocery carts. The message comes through loud and clear: we don't belong there at the table with everyone else, not until we've atoned for the sin of being fat--and the only way to do that is to get thin, by whatever means necessary.

Moreover, fat people are refused some of the most basic rights and the respect due any member of the human family. We're fair game for ridicule and insulting, ignorant stereotypes in the media. We can legally be discriminated against in forty-nine U.S. states and virtually every country. Public accommodations--from theatre and airplane seats to essential medical equipment--often aren't accessible to people of size. Amazingly, we are blamed for our own lack, since many see it as our responsibility to abuse ourselves into a smaller body size, rather than the responsibility of providers of public spaces to accommodate a wider range of sizes; we are treated with contempt if we demand better treatment.

Medical practitioners are often quick to blame our weight for everything that goes wrong with our bodies. Some refuse to treat us until we've lost weight, effectively putting adequate care out of reach for many of us. They continue to prescribe diets (a treatment with a 95% failure rate), and blame us when this treatment fails yet again, often pressuring us to try something far more dangerous, like weight-loss surgery, or risky and questionably-effective drugs like "fen/phen."

Fat people aren't allowed to take their Place At the Table and enjoy basic rights and privileges that others take for granted--all because our culture has the idea that fat people are somehow less than human, and therefore shouldn't share the simple human right of fair and decent treatment. (Taken from A Place at the Table)

Catch up on Kathleen

2008-05-22T08:31:00.005-06:00

So, you all saw the motion to squash was granted and Shoemaker was ordered to show cause.

So now she has responses. I urge you to go read this mess, but I'll try to sum it up here.

1. She (Kathleen) doesn't agree with us, and that harms us. Lots of folks don't agree with me, I think it's a bit of a stretch to call it harm.

2. She used science and sense to prove us wrong, thereby making us look like we're wrong and forcing us to defend our science.

3. Her husband uses the wikipedia...oh the agony.

4. You have to post this verbatim:

Ms. Seidel states in her web site that others aid her, including her husband. That renders her activity a conspiracy to dissuade potential Federal litigants and their witnesses by intimidation and to penalize those who are not dissuaded by injury to their property interests, particularly their employment.

Others help her and somehow this turns into witness intimidation. I missed the part where it was proven she intimidated anyone. But then again, legalese confuses me.

5. My personal favorite. She claims to be a wife and mother, but she is so smart she must be getting help. Apparently us wives and mothers are entirely too stupid to look things up for ourselves and have good study skills.

6. She agrees with the pharma companies, so she MUST be getting help from them. Although you gotta love a man that puts someone else's opinion up as "beliefs" in quotes...as if they aren't real and poor little dumbass Kathleen, wife and mother, was led to a toxic well and dumb enough to drink. You guys know how much I hate pharma companies, but even I don't jump to this conclusion without a good reason.

You ought to go read this stuff..there's even testimonies as to how Kathleen's opposing viewpoint has harmed those involved. Quite frankly, if they were harmed it was due to their own behavior in objecting to having opposing viewpoints published. It's my understanding that this isn't the first time they've tried to use the courts to undermine science because they felt threatened that it didn't agree with them.

Neurodiversity

I'm not a legal person. Legalese tends to make me feel that my brain is going in circles and is not under it's own control ( can we declare legalspeak detrimental to one's health?). But this sounds like the worst kind of idiocy I've ever heard. Pretty much, this man's defense seems to be wives and mothers are entirely too stupid for this level of sophistication and there's some things I don't understand going on. Which says a lot more about him than it does about anyone else. He appears, in his response to show cause, using his own words, as a neanderthal and a whiner ("no one agrees with me, I"m going to squash opposing viewpoints so I don't look stupid"). IMO, he doesn't need outside help to look ridiculous, he does just fine on his own.

California's crackpots

2008-05-19T07:56:00.003-06:00

I'ts been a few days since California ruled that same sex marriage is ok. The nuts have come out of the wood work like mad. If it's not christian "love" a la "kill all homos" (only the guy ones, you rarely hear diatribes against lesbians), it's how "unnatural" de gayznezz is, or it's how California has violated the will of the voters (amusingly enough, that's happened LOTS of times, but as long as it benefits them it's ok). They desperately grasp for any string that will pull the horses back. They swear in November it'll be different, or they threaten to overturn the state constitution.

Amazing, isn't it, how fast they turn on our US Constitution or their state Constitution when it doesn't do what they want?

Realize folks, if there had been a vote for interracial marriage the majority would have voted against it. If there had been a vote to allow women's rights, it would have been the majority against it. However, I now have the right to vote, marry a black man, or hell, marry a black woman. Get used to it. You keep pushing it and there will be an over turning of our Constitutions. The right to arms can be removed as fast as gays can be added. The right to freedom of religion can be removed as fast as same sex marriage added. You want to open this can of worms, go ahead. But realize, there are educated folks out there, that know that the right to bear arms is there to fight against tyranny, that freedom from religion serves both the atheist AND the christian, and that same sex marriage is a HUMAN right. You're gonna have to give up something, it seems you'd support same sex marriage because it's the least of your worries.

That and it's none of your fuckin' business to start with. I promise, I will be the first in line to vote against gay marriage if it passes and gay men show up to your house in droves to make you marry them. Somehow though, I don't think they want anything to do with your stuck up, bigoted ass. I wonder why?

Update on Kathleen

2008-04-21T21:12:00.002-06:00

Kathleen successfully got the subpoena quashed and the lawyers has to show why he shouldn't be sanctioned.

From the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire, Case No. 1:08-mc-00013-JM:

ENDORSED ORDER granting MOTION to Quash Subpoena.

Text of Order: “Granted. Attorney Clifford Shoemaker is ordered to show cause within 10 days why he should not be sanctioned under Fed R Civ P 11 – see Fed R Civ P 45(a)(2)(B) which requires that a deposition subpoena be issued from the court in which the deposition is to occur and Fed R Civ P 45 (c)(1) commanding counsel to avoid burdensome subpoenas. A failure to appear will result in notification of Mr Shoemaker’s conduct to the Presiding Judge in the Eastern District of Virginia.”

So Ordered by Magistrate Judge James R. Muirhead.
(Entered: 04/21/2008)

Read it all at her blog, with appropriate links here

I am Kathleen!

The gall of some people

2008-04-19T09:02:00.003-06:00

Maybe I have a different idea of what it means to be a friend...well, I know I do. It's a very good reason why I don't have many friends. These days no one really knows what it means to BE a friend. "Friend" has become pretty fucking shallow these days. Apparently all a friend is good for anymore is to have someone to brag about your kids to, hang out at the beauty shop/mall/arcade, and stab in the back at the first opportunity. It amazes me that I'm 32 years old and the meaning of friendship hasn't really changed since 3rd grade....my grandmother though, has friends. Like real friends. "I'll go through some hardship to be there for you" friends. Which is why I have only THREE friends. Don't worry, no one "betrayed" me...Just understand, a friend is there no matter what. This is what I believe a friend is. If you really want to get right down to it...I have 20 or 30 friends. People I haven't talked to in a long time because our lives went seperate ways, but we care for one another and will still be there. I have 2 friends that I hadn't spoke to in years because they moved and some bad shit happened to them...but they heard from another mutual friend I needed help and HITCHHIKED to come give it. Now THAT's a friend.

My husband has the most shallow fucking friends...I swear. Ok, let's straighten this out. My husband has two best friends. One is C. C was actually MY friend from high school. We grew up together, went to the same college. When S and I met, they met and became extremely close. C and S have a real friendship. When C got married naturally we made room for his wife. She's hard to get close to, she's painfully shy, but after several years I hope she feels like she's a member of us. Then there's J. He's a nice guy, in that whole "I'd have a beer with him" type of thing. That's really it. He and my husband grew up together. They were best friends since they were like 4 or something. In each others wedding, played Little League together, y'know I'm really hard pressed to find anything he's done that is best friend-ish. He's like an arm's length friend. Anyhow, moving on. J has this girlfriend, maybe wife, we've met her twice. The first time she seemed quite the snot. J and I aren't friends, his girl and I are not friends, his girl and my husband are not friends. There's your background.

S got these 4 tickets to an Astros game. Apparently these seats are THE SHITZ!!!!!!!!eleventyone!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Dudes, you get those type of tickets you call 1. Your bestest friend 2. Your best friend 3 & 4. A couple of cool dudes you like to hang with. Well, C's wife just had a baby so S calls and they do that guy high school thing. "Fucker I got some tickets..brag brag" and what it pretty much comes down to is 'I want you to come with me, but life has you and I just wanted you to know I thought of you FIRST'. So naturally step 2 is call J. They haven't hardly spoken in MONTHS. The only reason J knew WE'D had a new baby is because last time they talked we had just found out I was pregnant. So if he had the time free you'd expect "yeah, I'll be there". I mean, hey, hang out together, catch up, have a good guy time. (I take S's guy time very seriously because he has so many responsibilities..I feel he really needs that). Instead J says "I haven't spent much time with the gal pal, mind if she comes if you have an extra ticket". WTF???? So you take my husband's extra ticket and then bring your girl who is going to take up the majority of your time? WTF????? Be man and buy the damn tickets off of him. Otherwise you're just taking advantage of a good friend and being a not so good one to boot. You don't take your girl to a guy's time at all, but even if you feel that for some damn reason it's necessary, you damn sure don't take the ticket from a guy who you're probably going to hardly talk to all fuckin' day. You wanna spend time with your gal, great, but do it on ya'll's time. Say you can't make it and hang with her. That's fine. But how the fuck do you say, "Sure, I'll take the ticket that wasn't intended as gift and now I want a second one so I can spend the day with my gal". WTF is wrong with you people? He wasn't giving you a ticket, he was inviting you to join him.

S says it doesn't bother him and perhaps it shouldn't bother me. But it does. I feel he's taking advantage of my husband and my husband's good nature. My husband avoids confrontation. He doesn't like the negativity that comes with confronting someone. He lets me take care of that for the most part. However, MOST OF THE TIME, when it comes to soley HIS friends and HIS family, I stay out of it. There's shit I ain't stepping in. Next time I'll suggest other buddies than this one to go hang out with, since J doesn't feel S is worth hanging out with. Just taking his ticket.

Sex offenders

2008-04-17T10:59:00.003-06:00

This is actually two different subjects. However, I'll do the daily dose of stupidity first for those who just come for the rants.

BBC News has an article where the Pope comes out against sex abuse and how disappointed he is the US bishops aren't getting this under control. And do you know why priests are screwing little kids?

He laid part of the blame for the crisis, of which he feels "deeply ashamed", on a breakdown in US values.

and:

"What does it mean to speak of child protection when pornography and violence can be viewed in so many homes through media widely available today?"

Because apparently the answer isn't to let your damn priests get married and fuck. The answer is to make Americans watch Disney. It's not AMERICANS doing it, it's PRIESTS who happen to be American. If it's really American tv then why don't the church stop paying cable subscriptions? Or should I take the second sentence above to me 'why protect children from pervert priests under our control if we don't also step in and protect them from CSI?'. Look you guys, your concern is priests and the child sex scandal. Don't blame it on shit OUTSIDE of your church, blame it on the laws of the church. YOUR CHURCH is the problem. Out of all the jobs in the world where there are more child sex offenders, it is only PRIESTS and TEACHERS. Teachers I get. Pervs like jobs that get them around their target. The sad thing is, even teachers fall a far distant second to the amount of child sex offenders in the Catholic church! A good many of the teacher sex offenses we see on the news is the 15 year old boy fucking his hot math teacher. Believe me, 9 times out of 10 he WANTED it. He was all over her like...well, like a 15 year old getting the chance to fuck his hot math teacher. Just let the priests fuck. Nothing brings you closer to the glory of an invisible being like the glory of an orgasm. If nothing else, think of it like this: Your god gave you dicks. Your god gave you the sexual urge that goes with those dicks. Glory your god by using the gifts he gave you, and the priests will fuck other women (GROWNUP WOMEN) and not little kids. I'd rather hear of 7 Jimmy Swaggerts in the Catholic church than ONE priest even THINKING about molesting a child. Which brings me to another point: Do you realize how many Baptists have been busted fucking around on their wives? And the church is still going strong. People don't want associated with the Catholic church because apparently even the ones that aren't raging child molesters COVER UP FOR THOSE CHILD MOLESTERS. Criminal charges people, have you heard of them? You don't retire them to a fuckin' GARDEN. If you cannot police your church, then shut up and let us police them. Don't give me that "we take care of our own problems" shit. You have an obligation to god to protect the weaker (children). You aren't just letting down those kids, your letting down your god. Unless he approves of mollycoddling pedophiles. Then he's a sick bastard too.

So onto Sex Offenders part 2.

I'm not "FOR THE CHILDREN". It's a cry used to manipulate the populace when you don't have a rational leg to stand on. It's the new way of stirring up mob mentality. Terrify the parents (who are obviously retarded).

However, that being said, there are certain things that are non-negotiable when it comes to my kids. My husband comes home today all kinds of excited. We are looking for a house. All these kids and 2 bedrooms are just not enough. He found what he thought was an awesome one. I have to admit, the bathtub made my heart speed up 1/2 a snail's pace. I was too busy waiting for the other shoe to fall. The house is great, even though it's not enough bedrooms (one of these days I'llget him to understand we NEED 4 bedrooms. A big bedroom in a 3 bedroom house is not good enough). Anyhow, so I'm listening to all the GREAT features. They are great. I got alittle held up in the fact that we'd be renting the house and the owner is using part of the garage for storage. Not cool IMO. But what, for me, was the big problem was the OLD MAN LIVING ABOVE THE GARAGE. ON the property. Not next door in his own house, but ON THE PROPERTY. My husband says, "she says he's real nice and keeps to himself". So I'm not even getting second hand knowledge here, I'm getting it THIRD HAND. I have a problem with this. If there's an old man living next door, you tell your kids to stay in their own yard until you get to know the guy. You poke your head out the door every so often, count heads, and make sure no wierdo is hanging out over the fence talking up your kid. Sit in the kitchen, drink your coffee and watch out the backdoor because if the dude comes on your property, SOMETHING is up because he doesn't belong there. Maybe he's telling you he saw a waterleak under your house, maybe he's a perv. How do you watch an old man who's SUPPOSED to be hanging out in the backyard? And what kind of freak-o's will he have over that may hang out there with him? I know you can't live your life by mights and maybes, but this isn't he MIGHT come steal our tv (which I could handle), this is he MIGHT mess with our KIDS. If you bust him IT'S TOO LATE. If the tv goes missing and you find out its him, no biggie. Have him arrested buy a new tv. This is a bit more than a damn missing tv. S got irritated at me. "You say I don't think it's important enough to move and I find a great place and you blow it off over one thing". Not one little thing buddy. A BIG one. A HUGE one. I don't care if he's quiet and keeps to himself. I've SEEN a real life child porn ring busted. Not in the room seen, but I knew damn near all the participants (small town). One of the guys owned the video store I rented at all the time. Really nice guy, nice wife, kept to himself. Quiet type. He was a star in several of the movies they busted. In fact, out of the 5 guys busted, only ONE was someone we all wouldn't let on our property. HE didn't surprise us. The other 4? Very nice men who went to church, friendly, seemingly decent folks, married. Yes honey, it's just like on tv. They aren't exxagerating, it is more often the nice old man next door than the goth guy down the street. S "You just assume he's a criminal". Yes, because we're not talking about our tv, we're talking about our kids. I assume everyone is a criminal, it doesn't stop me from moving next door to them. I just be aware. This guy stops me, because it's MY KIDS. Maybe I'm being mean and he's not a perv. Odds are he's not. But I"m not hurting him by assuming he is. I would be hurting my kids by assuming he isn't and putting them in his reach.

I can't afford to trust anyone. I have a job protecting these little defenseless people I love. That's not to say he doesn't take his job as the same seriously. It's just, I came from the criminal element. I KNOW as only a kid growing up in that can. I really do assume everyone is a criminal. We move next door to a sweet old lady with a lot of traffic, I WILL assume that she's selling drugs to beef up her SS. I will still talk to her, I might be wrong, probably am. But when the cops show up to pick the gal up, I'm never surprised...

Bloggers unite!

2008-04-08T14:12:00.004-06:00

I had a list of things I wanted to cover today, just general bullshit, bad drivers, stupid people, etc etc. However, I come home to find something more intolerable. The blogger at neurodiversity.com, Kathleen, is being harassed. Kathleen runs an autism site. I don't profess to know much about autism, just enough to make me sound stupid if I was dumb enough to talk about it like I had a clue. I call it harassment, but the woman was issued a subpoena for pretty much her entire life. The lawyer represents a widely known autism case I'm not familiar with. Quite frankly, I would suggest you read the subpoena and her response to it, at her website here: http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/article/150/ for the details. Many of her commenters feel this is a strike against getting the truth of autism out. I don't know about all that, but this is a strike at bloggers everywhere. Whether you blog to inform, a la Junkfood Science, or blog your frustrations a la Fundie Watch and What's Going On?. This subpeona demands, as if she had some effect on the case itself, her compliance in some pretty serious demands that are not at all relevant to the case in question. In fact, the case was began in 1994, some ten years before she ever began blogging. It seems they are offended that she has the unmitigated gall to disagree quite heavily with them. The demands are wide reaching, and even if she did have something to do with the case, some are a stretch of your imagination. They've even gone as far as to include her entire blogroll on the subpeona, simply for the crime of being on her blogroll. At least one of those bloggers have nothing to do with autism! They didn't actually read the blogs apparently, just included the whole blogroll.

Many of the comments think this is about autism, and I won't deny it is, but this is also a strike against us all. Blogging is word of mouth anymore. Blogging is our voice. Just think of the blogs you read and which ones inform you, and how much you rely on their voice (hopefully only after serious intelligent thought) and realize that these are people who's voices would never have been heard if it wasn't for the internet. I find Junkfood Science just vital on my list of things to read. Sandy is my access to transparent medicine as she outlines everything she writes. Hers is a voice I'd to have done without if it wasn't for blogging. She's my reassurance that some medical proffessionals are fighting the abuses from within. Imagine how bitchy and disillusioned I'd be without her, now that you've seen me with her. What's Going On? keeps me up to date on my favorite subject, the abuses around us, since I just don't have the time anymore to find the gems she finds so well. I rely on her good sense, her skepticism, her information when I don't have a second all day until bedtime, and then I just want to check on my friends. Without The Rest of the Story, I wouldn't know that there are others out there as upset as I am over abuses of not just smokers, but science itself. It's a comforting thing that probably adds years to my life. And thank goodness for Watcher, who without Fundie Watch, would leave me smack in the bible belt so frustrated I'm not sure if I could keep myself out of prison.

Not all these blogs are information, or even valuable information, but can you imagine if the Concerned Women for America's Matt Barber tried these tactics to silence Watcher or Ron Britton ((Bay of Fundie). What about the innocuous deafgamers.com? Would the gaming industry pull a stunt like this because the site cost them customers due to being rated as "Not Deaf Friendly"? That one is a stretch, but apparently, no amount of stupidity is beyond people. If such a tactic can be used to silence Kathleen, then cannot such a tactic be used to silence us all? You don't have to find an interested reporter anymore to blow the whistle, there's the Internet...or will there be if any jackass can subpeona your entire life, even if YOU have absolutely nothing to do with the case, just because you said something he didn't like? In these days the newspapers are not a reliable source of information anymore, this is all we have. And while some bloggers are idiots, others are invaluable to us all. I wouldn't even silence the idiots so that those of use can't be shut up. Imagine you've been unfairly targetted by a lawyer for something in your blog, how else will you spread the word? Should that lawyer be able to file against you, costing you money and abusing our legal system? Yes, this is about autism, but it's about so much more, too.

I am Kathleen!

Deaf website

2008-04-02T08:17:00.004-06:00

Most of you know I suffer from progressive hearing loss. I try to prepare for it, but it's preparing for the unknown. So sometimes I am struck with the things that I may not be able to do. I'm pretty ok with it, no matter what it is. The things I truly love for the most part don't need the ability to hear....except my games. Oh my games. PC games, console games, online games, rpgs...RPGs MAN!!!! *coughs* Umm.yeah, so I'm a geek.

Point being, it never crossed my mind that someday I may not be able to play many of my games AT ALL. I mean, I am going deaf, and some of my games have a heavy dialogue thing going..but I got a very awesome headset that helps....it didn't occur to me that if I needed a top of the line headset, that I may have some issues later when I can't hear. So imagine my surprise, and surprising gratitude at www.deafgamers.com. I'll be linking it in the side panel as well. But I wanted to draw attention to it. If you know a deaf gamer, this is a great site and I may even contribute in with online games myself, as those don't seem to be covered as well. From their About:

At Deaf Gamers the way we review the software is a little different as it's from a deaf persons perspective. Text/visual feedback is a key issue for a deaf person and many has the occasion been when a deaf games player has purchased a game only to find no visual feedback or very little of it (this can ruin the game for them). As you will know, conventional game reviews usually don't provide this info and the deaf gamer is left guessing. This is where Deaf Gamers comes in and tries to redress the balance.

This is just a little piece of it. There's a bit more info for those that are interested. But check it out if you are deaf or send it to someone else you know who could use it.

A full out rant just for Eli

2008-03-27T03:16:00.004-06:00

A few?? A few??? Phelps, Bush, Swaggert, Robertson, Falwell, Dr. Laura, Alan Keyes, Jesse Helms, Don Knickles, Trent Lott, Reggie White, The American Family Association, Paul Cameron, then you count all the christians that support them, then all the christians I'm surrounded by constantly here in the Baptist bible belt, and the fact that I was raised Christian, the in laws that swear that not only I'm going to hell but taking the hubby with me since he no longer attends church. Then let's not forget the bill so that christians can harass others and it's not a hate crime. However, let me go out with a sign that says my god will send christians to the darkest hells like they do gay people and watch them all scream persecution! You people think it's persecution if we don't put "Merry Christmas" on every store! Here's the majority of your high profile christians:

1. sex offenders
2. pedophiles
3. Phelps (does god really want him disrespecting men and women who die for our country by picketing thier funerals and disrespecting grieving families?)
4. Phelps (that man's HATRED for gays is only surpassed by the late Falwell's hatred for feminists...real christian like)
5. Spreaders of hate
6. Homophobic, which is none of my business except they picket and pick on the gay people
7. Go read Fundies say the darnedest things...read some of the hate and vitriol, in fact, read all over the internet
8. Adulterers
9. Hypocrites
10. Whining, insensitive dramatics

You say there's no proof...sure is. There's proof every time christians picket gays, most of Congress, the marriage amendment,

If I'm picking the weakest, that's because that's all we see. ALL WE SEE. Those claiming christians are being persecuted because Walmart put up "Happy Holidays", yet none of us are demanding to put you in gas chambers. Hollering persecution when YOU don't get fired for being pagan or muslim. YOU HAVE YOUR OWN FUCKIN' TV CHANNEL and you still cry about being "picked on" because we won't let you put religion up in the courthouses. Guess what, I pay my taxes too and I'm not a christian! This is my country too. While I'm happy to share it with you, I will not let you marginalize me. I haven't met just teenage christians, I've met them young and old. THE TEENAGERS WERE ACTUALLY MORE CHRISTIAN THAN THEIR BIBLE THUMPING PARENTS!!!

And yes, they do act holier than thou. It's not just me. Anytime you go around looking down on people for not choosing your way, it's holier than thou. You do it in your post to anonymous with "If you are plagued by your past actions, I can understand it. There are burdens that come with failed relationships, and the best way to cope is to turn them over to God." If that just doesn't scream condescension and superiority I don't know what does. He never said he was plagued by his past actions. In fact, quite the opposite. What made you toss that in there? What purpose did that serve except for you to deride his choices, albeit subtly, by labeling his relationship(S) as failed? Especially as he'd only mentioned one that both parties parted on good terms? Then you follow up with: "The point I want to make to you is that inserting drama that you completely invented simply for drama's sake means you no longer get to be taken seriously." Pardon me, but who made you god on that blog? There it is again, that subtly condescending, "Ok,now you're throwing a wittle fit, so you gotta go pway with the wittle kids" attitude. I've read the bible, TWICE, at no point do I recall God or Jesus saying you're supposed to talk down to your fellow man. And then I love this one: "You don't even understand why your rant against those mean judgemental fundies exposes that you are more interested in..."blah blah bullshit...You presume to know what he's thinking? You mean to tell me YOU understand his rant but he doesn't? Are you actually saying that because of your "superiority" (whether you attribute it to god or intellect) tells you what he feels and believes better than HE does? WOW. I'm an intellectual snob and an asshole and even *I* don't go around telling people I know what they are thinking better than they do.

Now, one more thing: "You want to be one of the enlightened and you desire to put fundies like me in my place."

Don't tell me what I want unless you want to hear what I want. I want your church to clean up your public image and your own fellow worshippers before picketing my gay buddies' parties. I want your church to read your bible and know it better than *I* do before you come up to me with your tracts and your flyers. I want your christians to go talk to a Jew that's been persecuted in Germany before screaming persecution, but you better hurry, I think there's only one left. I want your christians to shut up, quit whining, and live WITH the rest of the religions in our country (which means I want your religion to stay too, just SHARE). Which means no picketing Walmart for putting up "Happy Holidays" because a few other religions have holidays in the same time frame. It also means keeping YOUR religion out of public schools so that you don't interfere with my teachings, but to be fair, I will also keep MY religion out as well. But don't bitch when you get your religion in and mine follows in right behind it. It also means that when I say Happy Holidays, don't take it wrong, take it like I mean it. I WANT YOU TO HAVE A JOYFUL HOLIDAY SEASON NO MATTER WHICH ONE YOU CELEBRATE. I want christians to do what I do: Don't go bugging people about who they worship UNLESS ASKED. If you want to testify about Jesus, then LIVE LIKE HIM. I want your religion to publicly denounce those high profile folks that claim christianity while sinning as bad as the devil before you give me shit about "painting you all with the same brush". I want your worshippers to see the new pagan store go up in town and welcome the PERSON and wish them well even if you don't agree with their beliefs. In return I will give you EXACTLY the same amount of respect you give the rest of us. I want to wear MY religious symbols without worrying about, not only if my husband will lose his job, but also if he'll even be able to get another one that pays just as well without moving. I also want to wear them without being approached by christians, sneered at by christians, or hearing smart ass not so christian remarks from them. I also want to be able to have a bad day or a bad experience without someone like you coming along to tell me that it's because I don't have gawd in my life. What, do christians not have bad days or bad things happen to them? I can assure you they do. I was Christian for 12 years before I lost the faith and I was physically abused. The bad thing is what drove me from the church were the followers. As Ghandi once said, "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ." I don't have a problem with Jesus or God, I have a problem with christians. And if I understood the Bible correctly, so does God and Jesus (have a problem with christians I mean). Don't attempt to psychoanalyze me, Eli. You won't like what you find in there. I believe in letting gays marry and pagans have parades in the streets and the right to choose and atheists having "God" removed from anything the government puts out. I believe in religious freedom and the freedom from religion. It's shocking in there.

I also want world peace and an end to starvation, and I'll likely see that LONG before I ever see a christian do all of the above.

Hoax

2008-01-18T08:04:00.000-06:00

Last entry was a hoax..leaving it up for posterity.

Hehe, non-smokers targetted

2008-01-09T10:13:00.000-06:00

Boss sued for sacking non-smokers

A German boss is being taken to a tribunal for firing non-smokers and replacing them with smokers who "fitted in better".

Thomas Jensen, head of a telesales company in Buesum in northern Germany, has laid off three non-smokers at his company and said he will not be hiring any more.

He said: "Smokers have always been our best employees. Non-smokers interfere with corporate peace.

"Our non-smoking employees were actually convinced that they had the right to smoke-free zones. They just complained all the time about smoking, and I don't like grumblers.

"It was also very disappointing that the non-smokers would distance themselves from the smokers at social events - it didn't build any team spirit. From now on, I'm only employing smokers."

The three sacked workers are now suing him for unfair dismissal.

Ok, ok, I've always said I don't support firing smokers for smoking on their own time. No one should be fired for being a smoker. I DO support this,not because I support treating non-smokers any differently,I don't, but because maybe this is what's needed to reverse doing this to smokers. I think it's wrong to fire someone for their off hour behavior. When the company pays you 24/7, then they can run your life. Until that day happens though, there's company time and private time and the twain shouldn't meet. I think this should make blatant the hypocrisy in firing smokers for smoking off company time. Unfortunately you must break a few eggs when making an omelet and I'm sorry that 3 people will have to suffer while we repair the damage the anti-smoking agenda caused. However, there have been more that have suffered from the discrimination for being smokers and well, something has to fix it. So please, file your lawsuits. I hope you lose, because smokers haven't won yet. However, I DO hope it succeeds in making it clear that company policies targeting your off hour activities (or in this case, lack there of) are unacceptable. I also hope that maybe being on the receiving end of this type of behavior will also shed some light on how it feels to be treated badly for something that you CHOSE to do.And please, if you are a business owner who supports the choice to smoke, why don't you take a leaf from the same page and fire your non-smoking employees. Let's shove this type of hypocrisy to the front pages!

New Look

2007-12-04T09:19:00.000-06:00

Ok, THIS is definitely the last new look for awhile. Now, SophistiCat sent me this excellent picture that I wanted to set up as my look...however, I just don't have time to really get into making a great layout. Or even a decent one. However, the image is saved and put away for a future in which I have a few hours to myself and can actually complete a thought that isn't interrupted with MOMMA.

I've had Barely Dressed for a while. Several years. I even did a stint off of Blogger hosting it myself, and will one day hopefully return to that. In all those years, it's been difficult to find a layout already made that so fitted the title. And finding an image that didn't show someone's snatch so I could make my own layout...well, the title is BARELY dressed, not totally nude. Then there's finding something fitting with class. Most half dressed pictures are overly suggestive for what Barely Dressed means to me. Some scantily clad gal in bright red lipstick sucking a lollipop/banana/chocolate strawberry/etc was NOT the point I was trying to get across.

Barely Dressed is not a phrase of sexuality. It has nothing to do with sex, lasciviousness, or physical nudity. I wanted a barely dressed image that didn't offer sex, bare genitals, and titillation. I wanted a statement, of class, of being just within the realms of decent while maintaining some pride. No nasty poses. No suggestive sucklings on various fruits and foods. But it had to have just a hint of salaciousness. Just a hint, mind you, of "naughty". Why?

Barely Dressed is an attitude, a way of thinking, of being. It's honesty with a little blunt force trauma. It's saying that thing you aren't supposed to in "polite" company, even if you ARE in "polite" company. It's being "naughty" and stating the things that "shouldn't" be said, just nakedly saying it in such a way that people stop, listen, laugh, but understand. It IS about making people feel stupid and look stupid, if they are being stupid. It's about standing up and knocking people around a little (verbally) and doing so while breaking the barriers with pride. When people stand up in their underwear, they feel shame and under dressed. This is standing in your underwear, hands on hips, straight backed, and telling people "Look into my EYES. Look beyond and really see."

This is who I am. I get a lot of grief over this. From everyone around me. Tact and diplomacy are two words I've heard ALL MY LIFE. People wanting nice. People wanting a spoonful of sugar. Where the hell they got the idea I'm Mary Poppins I have no fuckin' clue. They want to change what I say, how I say it, so no one feels bad. However, if you've gotten to the point that I feel I have to say it, then you deserve to feel bad. I haven't learned tact and diplomacy, I've learned silence. They see stand offish, aloof, superior. I'm just keeping my mouth shut. I'm not out to offend the whole world. Most people's problems aren't worth remarking upon. I'm content to leave others their perceptions and delusions up to a point. Then when they drop a piece of massive stupidity or cross the line between opinions and being a jackass, then I feel obligated to step up and call them out. I do not put up with racism, intolerance, forcing opinions on others. If someone doesn't call them out, then this type of behavior persists and spreads. I am the one who stands in front of the mob with pitchforks and burning torches and says "ARE YOU FUCKIN' KIDDING ME???? What has he ever done to YOU????" You see that person on tv, in some movie and think "Way to go! Someone with some decency and sense." You talk to me and what I hear is "She's so mean. What an asshole." All I can think is you didn't see yourself as part of the mob until I said something. I guess I made you feel bad, get over it.

So, the new layout, there it is. Hands lightly on hips, standing at a cocky angle, relaxed, proud, in her underwear. Covered enough for society's standards, but in her underwear. Not her bathing suit, her underwear. Yeah, I know her hands are positioned as if she's going to drop the panties, but look closer. Are you sure? Are you sure she's not standing there saying, thumbs hooked on the edge of panties as if hooked over a pair of Levi's, saying "Yes, I'm in my underwear, and you are all hiding your mouths behind your hands, and I don't even notice. I'm too busy, too busy yanking down your stupid boundaries, your stupid misperceptions, preconceived notions, your ignorant prejudices. I am already in my underwear and I'm proud. What happens when I yank all your clothes away?"

Love can keep us together (only if it's Jesus love)

2007-11-21T10:44:00.000-06:00

What amazes me is how the "christians" can read the preachings of a man who counseled love in everything we do, and yet use it to spread so much hate and controversy. Liberty Counsel (the name an indication of heavy irony in itself) has begun it's annual hate campaign, during what is supposed to be a holiday of showing love to your fellow man. Did I call it a hate campaign? Oh yes I did.

And why not? They are acting like 4 year olds who aren't getting their way on the playground. From one of their sample ads "In essence, we will be a “Friend” to those entities which allow for the constitutionally protected right of expression but will be a “Foe” of those which attempt to
suppress religious liberty." In other words, if you don't play my way, I won't be your friend no more. Not to mention they're liars based on that statement alone.

Again, no one is "stealing" Christmas. (Don't even get me into where you stole it from to start with guys). No one is looking to rename it or remove it altogether (not like you did the original pagan celebrations). In fact, we all just celebrate in our own way...but you can't stand that can you? Let me explain this so your small minds can comprehend:

1. Happy Holidays is a saying that includes ALL holidays of the season. Yes, yours too. It's not taking away YOUR right to say Merry Christmas. If it helps, look on it as a way to remember Jesus and love your fellow man, regardless of his religious affiliation. "You're a different religion, but I wish for you to be happy at this time of year anyhow. I wish to show that I love you, as Jesus taught, because Christianity rocks that way." The funny thing is this is supposedly Jesus' birthday. Would you dream of attending a real person's birthday party and being rude to everyone who showed up? Yet you do it on Jesus' birthday..what an asshole.

2. Including OTHER holidays that are celebrated at the exact same time is not because we don't like YOU. It's because we like to make our fellow man happy and comfortable. I don't know if you noticed, but this is America. We are diverse. That means we have lots of different people. We have white folks, black folks, brown folks, "Christian" folks, Jewish folks, Pagan folks...take my word, many different people. All these people have the right to be recognized for ALL that they are, which includes their religion. They should all feel comfortable to be in our country (especially since most were BORN here) and live their lives as they wish without harming others. I'm sorry, but your campaign to emphasize your religion over others harms others. You show your children, every Christmas, that it's more important who you worship than being a good person. Those kids go out and do the same thing to the other kids in their class. What a shining example of the love Jesus preached.

a. When schools decide not to sing "Christian" songs during the play, that doesn't mean they are out to crucify "Christians" after the play. It means that thanks to your psychotic meanderings they are trying really hard to follow the Constitution AND not cause a scene that ruins the holiday because you guys are real assholes. See, to show a welcome to all religions then that means they gotta sing that Jewish song, Kwanza song, Chrisitan song, Pagan song. You people will show your true agenda (which is NOT to love your fellow man) by getting all pissy about the Hanukkah songs, Kwanza songs, and Yule songs. So they either have to drop ALL religious songs or sing them all. You've made them a nice catch-22 there. Dicks.

b. This also applies to displays of religious natures. See, it's all or nothing. Once again, you make sure they have no idea which way is right by hating whatever they do either way and making a big stink over it.

3. You are so in this war alone. It's funny, but every fuckin' year it's the "CHRISTIANS" who start the shit. Some innocent person goes off to the wrong activist and says "Happy Holidays" with all the good intentions of the world and YOU people go off. You cause resentment (I swear you guys' AQ is higher than anyone else's on the planet, that's Annoyance Quotient for you idiots out there), you cause ill will, and then get mad at US...that's balls for you. If I KNOW you're a "Christian" and every day do my damnedest to convert you, eventually you're going to start getting annoyed with me. Maybe even pissed off, then you might start pushing your religion just to get my goat. That's what you people do every fuckin' year. Newsflash: You're right, we DO wish you'd go away...just so you'll shut up and leave us the fuck alone. But we didn't until you started this shit. I don't like most of you people, you wouldn't know Jesus teachings if he came down here and gave you the Apple, but I never wished you gone until you started pushing harder and harder. Now I do wish you'd go away, but only for the peace factor. You can stay if you'll calm down and chill the fuck out. You can tell me Merry Christmas and I'll say Happy Holidays and we'll smile and wish each other well and MOVE THE FUCK ON.

4. Can you only feel love if you scream about Jesus? What is this thing you got here where no one can be thankful of what they have, appreciative of spending time with their family, basking in the glow of their loved ones UNLESS they have the Jesus sticker? Do you really think that NO other religion, or even no other human being, can feel those things except you? You had a nice idea going on: A holiday where you spend time with your family and show appreciation and bask in their love. We liked that idea...we used it. Ok, so for us it's not about the Jesus. But it seems we're doing what Jesus said, and apparently that's the only thing the man asked for for his birthday. At least WE are giving the man his wish...you're just too busy being a "christian" instead of acting like one. Damn near every one of you is nothing but a Sunday "christian" anyhow. You act all nice in church, but I see you on the internet. The only people carrying around as much hate and intolerance and childishness is Al Quaida. You people need some Jesus therapy, and I know just the perfect Christian to do it. Shame is, he's too Christian to want to be around you folks. It would sadden him, he'd try I know, but he'd be so ashamed of you....

Look, just enjoy the fuckin' holiday alright. Try a bit of that Jesus love he left behind and you've been thumbing your nose at. As Bill and Ted said:

Be excellent to each other. Party on, dudes.

Kids Cough Medicine; Or why you're an idiot THIS time

2007-11-05T09:30:00.000-06:00

This isn't usually a problem I have myself, but atm, I DO have it. I foolishly took my son to the doctor (18 months) when he swallowed a very tiny fuse. The foolish part was taking him to the damn waiting room, where apparently we all caught a severe cold. (How do I know it was there? We hadn't left the house for a week except for the doctor appointment, how the hell else does the WHOLE family turn up sick on the SAME day? Anyone with more than one child knows if it's getting passed from child to child, each child generally turns up sick on a different day or a different time. Normally they don't all get sick at the same hour.) So anyhow, this is right after the big FDA warning: NO COUGH MEDS FOR THE LITTLES.

Naturally of course parents are now in the throes of the newest demand and so what you see online is "OMG, NO!! No cough meds!!!! IT'S THE DEATH!!!" And this classic suggestion from the apparently brilliant at CNN-massages and music....let's just sing the sick away...PRAISES...pray..er..sing the sick away...yeah....

Listen VERY carefully you morons-STOP GUESSING DOSAGE!!!! It takes 5 minutes to call the nurse, give her/him your child's weight and get a proper dosage suggested. If you don't (for some odd reason) have a doctor, you can also call the hospital and get someone to tell you (sometimes, they are so afraid of lawsuits. However, a nurse in a location not to be named did NOT tell my husband that sudafed is ok for pregnant women..get me? My doc's answering service was down). Also, why in the hell (unless there's some fever) would you give a child a dosage EVERY 4 hours just because the meds say so? How do you know if they are getting better??? ATM, my 3 year old is getting Motrin ONLY for fever, she has no cough, throat pain, congestion. Dosage naturally double checked since I'm not a complete moron. My 18 month old is getting tylenol cold and cough ONLY for sleeping. Not so *I* can sleep, I'm still not sleeping, but so HE can. Who doesn't know it's VERY important to get plenty of rest when you're sick? Hell, it's one of the things the doc ALWAYS says "drink plenty of fluids and get a lot of rest". If your body is wore out from lack of sleep, it's gonna be shit to fight off illness. So, except for nap and bedtime I leave him alone except to wipe his nose and check for fever. This also allows me to pay attention to his symptoms, so I can see if they are improving, worsening, or maintaining. If you're giving a child an anti-fever medicine, you're not gonna be able to tell if fever is a new symptom. (Yes, it does treat a symptom he doesn't have, however, he has all the rest). My daughter doesn't get her Motrin unless she shows signs of returning fever, not at the exact moment the medicine says so. Motrin says wait 6-8 hours, so I wait generally longer. If her fever isn't returning, kind of stupid to give her medicine for it, wouldn't you think?

Use a little common sense. You are all so quick right now to return to the methods of our grandmother's time. Some are great, I won't lie. My grandmother is one of the first I call too. But common sense applies. A tiny amount of whiskey and honey is suggested for over 1 year olds...that IS an old method, but not my idea of a GOOD one. Don't be so quick to throw out medicines. Remember, while some of these children's medicines haven't been tested on kids, neither has many of these home remedies. At least Robotussin has been on the market for 40 years and is something we can sue over if it's wrong. Yeah, echinacea has been around a lot longer, but my grandmother (much as I like to think she knows everything) does NOT know medicine. Also, what works for you not only won't work for others, but may prompt an allergic reaction. I'm allergic to belladonna, a staple in many natural sty remedies (and some pharma ones).

Look, I'm not a big one for meds myself. Quite frankly, except for yesterday I've been treating MY cold naturally. I had to finally take something to help me relieve my symptoms long enough to get some rest, just like I had to do for my son. But I'm for sure not stupid enough to throw out medicines that HAVE been tested publicly over 40 years just because you people are too stupid to give it properly. And I surely am not going to be shamed into letting my children suffer by a bunch of idiots who read a headline and start screaming like Chicken Little (or who are all too stupid to pay attention to their kids and the medicines they take).

As for the deaths that have occurred even when properly dosed...I believe it was 30 deaths in the last 40 years...not to sound too harsh, but really....there have been more deaths in the last 5 years from driving cars, we're not throwing cars out are we??

BTW, for those of you too stupid to pay attention, if your kid isn't improving after 3 days TAKE THEM TO THE DOCTOR. I know some of you people are giving these kids this crap for a week with no doctor visit...that's beyond stupid. If my kids haven't improved by tomorrow morning they go to the doctor. I don't keep dosing them for a week. And if they are improving, they not only don't need a doctor, they don't need the damn medicine. You don't keep giving kids this shit for a week, that's just idiocy. That also includes home remedies...TAKE THEM TO THE DOCTOR. Yeah, it may still be a cold, but if you're kid isn't improving, isn't it safer to be sure they don't have something worse than to wait and let it really settle in? You think a doctor visit is expensive, try hospital bills.

Observations of Hypocrisy: Or Nothing New Today

2007-09-26T14:54:00.000-06:00

There was a huge outcry when the Iraqi war began. Bush said "You're either with us or against us". Republicans called democrats "traitors to America" for not supporting the war. Dems cried out that they weren't traitors, the war was wrong. Many were angered that their loyalty to our country was called into question because they felt the best thing for America was staying out of the Iraqi war. Dem's weren't "patriotic", they were supporting Osama, giving aid to the terrorists. Dems were, naturally, very upset over these accusations. As they should have been. t shouldn't be one way or the other. We should be allowed to hold opinions against something without having our loyalties called into question. And the dems said that.

But apparently, the dems don't see their own form of "you're with us or against us". Yeah, those dems have one of their own. "FOR THE CHILDREN". If you don't do what THEY think is best "FOR THE CHILDREN", then you obviously hate THE CHILDREN. You're not allowed to have general disagreements about an idea because it's FOR THE CHILDREN, so you HAVE to support it to prove you really love THE CHILDREN.

So, the dems have made it clear that they really ARE unpatriotic, traitorous supporters of Osama. Because if they want to hold the repubs to FOR THE CHILDREN, then we should hold them to "YOUR WITH US OR AGAINST US". It's only fair.

Well said.

2007-09-04T11:18:00.000-06:00

First They Came For the Smokers…Then They Came For the Overweight

August 31, 2007

By Jacqueline S. Homan

It’s funny…well, maybe not so funny…that every time there is a group of people whom it is legally, socially and politically acceptable to discriminate against for jobs, deny all around equitable treatment and abuse with impunity; there is some “study” concocted by “intellectuals” and “experts” to justify it.

When overweight people, especially middle-aged overweight women, are denied jobs and consequently end up poor; they are then berated for “not doing anything” about their appearance. Fitness clubs aren’t cheap. Neither is fitness equipment often advertised on the shopping channel by fitness gurus. They cost a lot of money – money that low income or unemployed people simply don’t have when paying the rent, mortgage and utilities is of paramount importance and there isn’t any discretionary cash to be had.

For those who are overweight and who are fortunate enough to have enough economic security and financial stability to belong to a fitness club, keeping up with an exercise regimen is often fraught with abuse by the “pretty and thin” people who treat them with disdain, or as one poster put it: the attitude of “How dare you bring your obese body into MY gym where I have to LOOK at you!” Those who are overweight who are trying to do something positive for themselves by going to the fitness clubs to swim or work out get treated so disrespectfully and cruelly by those who enjoy thinner leaner figures that it’s too mentally and emotionally exhausting to continue going. Thus, they often never return to the gym after being discouraged by the shabby treatment from inconsiderate and judgmental people. It is these same superficial and judgmental people who, ironically, are always the first to admonish the overweight to “get off their fat asses and exercise”. No one wants to willingly subject themselves to such abuse – unless they have masochistic tendencies.

Some of the discrimination and poor treatment the overweight, the smokers and those over age 40 experience is because of personal preferences, but more often it is a problem compounded by the media. The media plays the whore by pandering to the special interest groups funding these “studies” – which are largely based on junk science as fancy excuses to marginalize a given target group of people, be it the overweight or those who smoke.

What is more reprehensible about this is that these special interest groups who are causing untold pain and misery for those targeted for vilification are doing so for a profit. With all the appetite suppressants, nicotine replacement therapy drugs, antidepressants, botox shots, liposuction and plastic surgery; there is a lot of money at stake. Trillions of dollars in wealth would literally vanish if there actually was a proven means of curing weight problems, preventing aging, or preventing people from smoking. Despite all the medical technology and wonder drugs, there are still people who are overweight, there are still people getting old, and there are still people who won’t quit smoking. In the end everybody dies – regardless of how good they looked before being shot up with formaldehyde and crammed into a pine box.

Obviously, the diploma’d elite are not omniscient and do not have all the right answers. The definition of an “expert” is someone who has been educated beyond their mental capacity, and who makes up fancy excuses to justify discrimination and the abuse of others – using the media to bolster their agenda.

The media is especially at fault for prostituting itself to these sanctimonious “experts” and the special interests that fund their “studies.” While I firmly believe in preserving freedom of speech and of the press, it should be noted that freedom and responsibility are two sides of the same coin. Freedom of speech does not entitle you to yell “Bomb!” on an airplane. When freedom of speech is used in conjunction with freedom from responsibility by the media, there is a major problem. This lack of responsibility on the media’s part has contributed significantly to smokers being thrown out of their jobs and denied the right to consume a legal product in public for which they are taxed oppressively. This same lack of media responsibility is also a major contributing factor to the overweight being denied jobs and older people being forced out of jobs – causing severe economic hardship and poverty for many who do not deserve it.

The media is also largely responsible for the false elevation of the medical community to god-hood. This largely contributed to the false sense of security and invincibility so many people have developed. An extreme example is that of a teenager who underestimated the risks and dangers of climbing around a parked freight train in order to cross the tracks to hurry home for a friend’s birthday party. When the 6,000 ton train lurched forward, the teen fell and the train rolled over his left arm and left leg, crushing and severing them. The young man nearly bled to death. While he was being carted to the hospital and realizing that he lost two limbs, he underestimated the severity and permanent nature of his injuries because he thought that his severed arm and leg could simply be surgically reattached due to the marvels of modern technology and modern medicine. He had seen and heard about limb reattaching on educational medical programs on TV. The doctors could fix everything for him and make him all better, or so he thought. He now wears a hook for an arm and a prosthetic leg. His injuries resulted in the medical revocation of his drivers’ license – permanently.

If the media can lull people into a false sense of security that causes them to underestimate the dangers of fooling around on train tracks and the severity of losing a limb, then it is no surprise that the media has caused smokers to be unjustly criminalized and that the overweight are denied jobs – then labeled “lazy slobs” for failing to join fitness clubs in order to “do something about it”. In our gerontophobic society, it’s also perfectly okay to deny older people jobs, benefits, or promotions and career advancement opportunities. The concept of older people, overweight people or smokers actually having happy and healthy sex lives is reviled as “gross” – because of what the media projects. Thin young Barbie Doll types may prance about on beaches and swimming pools in thong bikinis with impunity, but women who are plump from recently giving birth are abused and discriminated against for daring to breast feed in public – however discreetly they do so and with minimal breast exposure. The media reaffirms this point of view: thin girls in bikinis that show it all are desirable, beautiful and sexy – nursing mothers with their post-partum figures are not.

In sum, the problem isn’t the overweight, the smokers, or those over age 40. It’s the prejudice and lousy attitudes by those who lack sufficient intelligence and the discipline to resist brainwashing by the media and the powerful special interests controlling it.

© Copyright 2007 The Smoker's Club, Inc. Please repost with link back to this original article.

Lifestyle War

2007-08-17T10:58:00.000-06:00

So here I am, chatting in the comments of Gas-doc's blog, when I make a statement that, after I typed it, made me jump in my seat. We are in a Lifestyle War.

Did I dare say it, yep, I sure did. Lifestyle War. We are in a battle to be left alone and live our lives in peace. I say this because there's the smoking thing, because apparently some people are too functionally retarded to see a Smoking permitted sign and go elsewhere...or shouldn't have to go elsewhere. Then there's the Obesity war...you do realize our government is declaring war on us, the citizens, on a fairly regular basis here lately, don't you? I mean, diabetics are assholes, smokers are assholes, fat people are assholes, mothers are assholes. We cause all the world's problems, so therefore we are going to be regulated. We are too fat, too sick, too ewwy. The entire basis of the smoking problem is based on "I don't like the smell". Fat people are gross. Diabetics cost too much. You realize Americans are being punished for 9/11? Yeah, our phones can be tapped without a warrant, we can see every book you check out...the guy who actually DID it? Our government not only has no real clue where he is, but they don't CARE. Gays can't marry. Mothers are being told not to eat too much because they'll get fat. Oh we can't have that!!! FAT PEOPLE!! ARGH!!!!! However, they played with mom's weight back in the 60's and we ended up with a bunch of dying, ill, or defected children. The current weight gain was decided after that. Go ahead moms, worry about your figure...Jr. doesn't really need to be healthy.

To top it off, every bit of it is a lie. You people are being played for fools. I'd laugh, but you idiots are fucking us all over.

What really gets me is while we're worrying about how people look, or how ewwy they are, our kids have become ruder, there is still crime at high rates, people are actually less intelligent (that's what you get for getting your information through sound bites). We are, as a group, actually bigger assholes. But character isn't important, how you LOOK,now that's the real factor huh? We don't even hold our politicians up to any decent kind of standard anymore. Just don't smoke, don't get a blowjob, you're in. You can torture folks, I mean it's not like they are REAL human beings. We have a football player making national news for going to court for abusing his dog while we discuss denying health care to people because we don't like something they do. If we let a dog starve to death, someone gets arrested. But hey, we'll let that person that can't function on any level slowly starve to death because it's not ok to let people be humanely put to sleep. If we let them die, we'll let them starve to death, that's much nicer. We wonder why our kids do so much drugs while we let sports figures "juice up", they don't get fired. Maybe banned a few weeks, maybe dock 10k from their 3.5 million dollar salary. But hey, they WIN..standards be damned.

Do you get it yet? As a country, we are depraved, selfish, assholes..but who cares..we need to stop smoking and fat people!!!!!! Clarion is CHARGING people money (employees mind you) from the paycheck they earn, if they smoke or are fat. That's theft people. But that's ok, we can steal some of their paychecks, because theft is ok when it's something we don't like. We wonder why our children have become such scuzzy little, criminal bastards...maybe that's why. Maybe because you're too busy declaring Lifestyle Wars instead of being a good person.

Don't you ever wonder, if smoking is so horrible, why isn't it banned? And don't give me that prohibition doesn't work shit. It hasn't stopped you on drugs, and backdoor prohibition is still prohibition, except it hurts more because apparently the backdoor is you fucking a smoker in the ass. You take our money, tell us you will take away our rights, want to remove our children.....honey, that's prohibition. Actually that's a pathetic manipulative tactic, but it's ok to manipulate people instead of just remove the problem. It's ok to prohibit it in every way possible, that's not REALLY prohibition. You people really suck at justification. Oh fuck it, I hate you. I hate you all. Not because I'm a smoker, but because I'm a human being. A real one, with standards...and you aren't. You are just a bunch of selfish, egotistical, depraved animals with serious intelligence issues.

"Public Health" or How Stupid is Our Country?

2007-07-28T09:55:00.000-06:00

I've been reading so much here lately about "public health" and it's bullshit. I think what irritates me the most is not that these people are talking, as it is the rest of you are listening. What, did you brain just shut off? Are you perhaps, functionally retarded? And if you are, why are you up to treating me like I am just because you don't want to hire your own personal nanny?

It's not that I don't hear you. I agree to some extent. Health care access in this country sucks ass. Yes, someone needs to do something about it. I have an idea, very productive actually too. More productive than standing in the I'm a fuckin retard line with the rest of you idiots. Why don't we push for legislation that stops allowing hospitals to charge $14 for ONE tylenol??? You have seen the price of tylenol right? $14 will buy you 3 bottles of the stuff, 2 bottles if you get the big ones. I know you people have bought aspirin...you know how much it costs. If you really want to lessen the costs of health care, let's start with, oh I don't know the PRICE GOUGING???? You idiots want to write your congressman, let's at least start with the cost of ONE TYLENOL before we go refusing treatment to folks. Before we blame diabetics, smokers, and fat people, why don't we show just a little, a smidgeon, of fuckin' intelligence. You know as well as I do that $14 for a tylenol is about $13 too much. You'd rather be an inhuman monster, blaming other people for your idiocy, than to address the real issue here? Before we call out Big Brother, can we at least take a wittle look see at the hospital bills? Go ahead and click the subject link, I'll wait. See, there it is, $126 for a box of tissues?? How much do YOU pay for a box of tissues? I know I pay $1.26, not $126. How much are tissues really worth to you?

I just don't understand you people. All ready to hand your body to the state so they can decide for you, but not near willing to look at a fuckin' medical bill and go "This is fuckin' ridiculous". You will write your congressman because fat people, smokers, and diabetics "cost too much" not realizing you cost too fuckin' much too! But yours is for being STUPID.

National Health Care isn't the answer. You obviously don't want to pay for others decisions (fat, smokers, diabetics). Fine, I have no disagreement with that. I don't want to pay for your stupid decisions either. So how about a little price control? It's been done, in Maryland, and apparently, there are still hospitals in Maryland! How about that? They can live without severe overcharging. Quit donating to the ACS, the ALS, they've made no inroads on cancer. Why don't you make it easier for cancer patients to get their meds and pay their bills so they don't leave their families in destitution? Let's stop weighing them down with medical bills. Maybe if we stop paying the ACS and the ALS money they'll understand that we won't pay unless we get real results. Kill two birds with one stone? Go donate to the National Health Care Anti-Fraud Association. Tell them you want realistic prices for health care. National health care will put us all in the same sinking boat, don't you think it's time to get your head out of your ass and bail some fuckin' water you selfish assholes?

Another new layout

2007-07-23T10:53:00.000-06:00

Don't worry, I'll end up changing it around often the next several months until I find one I can stick with...but hey, this is much better than Shrek.

New Layout

2007-07-11T11:56:00.001-06:00

Naptime got screwed so I went and chased down a new layout. Why Shrek? Well, why not Shrek? It's not really that I'm a huge Shrek fan, it's cute, but not my overwhelming passion. However, I couldn't find a huge finger flipping people off, so hey, why not disgust and confuse people with a layout like this on a page that uses the word "fuck" more than the letter "e"? I just get so damn sick and tired of those tired little layouts that are our options...and I like to fuck with people. THAT'S my overwhelming passion. Let's see how it works out. Maybe I'll come across that finger, but if not...well, like I said...why not Shrek?

OMFG--I did it AGAIN

2007-07-11T10:59:00.000-06:00

I went off and got myself pregnant AGAIN. TOTAL surprise. I suppose it could be a false positive (actually 2 false positives) , so I have a doctor's appointment July 23 (soonest they'd get me in) and maybe we'll see. However, I don't hold out much hope and I'm sure number 5 will be arriving sometime in late February, early March. I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry. I'd do a poll, but I'm afraid to see the results (laugh or cry). For the moment, I just put it out of my head and go on with my day with a few minor changes (no alcohol, no unnnecessary meds..not that I have unnecessary meds, but I mean, if it's a small headache I just go take a nap..Hey, I'm sleeping for two here!) Anyhow, point is, I'm tired, I'm fuckin' starving to DEATH, and running after the other children...kind of...more like jogging very slowly, perhaps a fast walk with a break for a nap or a huge plate of nachos.

Therefore, posting is growing even more erratic. Go read those over on my list there. Watcher's got up some good stuff and so does Sophisticat and Did We Say That Out Loud (Lucy and Ethel, I love you) are writing up a storm with some really good stuff. And as always, Junk Food Science is a MUST read immediately. Will be adding more blogs to that list soon I imagine as well....ah shit...it's naptime again.

Kids should be seen and not hear, EVER

2007-06-21T10:30:00.000-06:00

I don't have to comment on this:

GARDEN CITY, N.Y. — It's what kids do: squeal in delight when they're having fun.

But to some Long Island residents those squeals were unwelcome noise, and they wanted two neighborhood girls playing in a backyard pool to pipe down.

The complaints fell on deaf ears Wednesday night when Bayville's acting village justice dismissed a summons accusing the girls' parents, William and Rachel Poczatek, of violating a village noise ordinance.

"I think the village did the right thing," William Poczatek said.

Poczatek said he was shocked when he and his wife were slapped with a summons. Sure, he said, Ashley, 11, and 5-year-old Chloe make noise when they're outside enjoying their aboveground swimming pool.

"What, are you telling me that a kid can't make noise?" he protested. "It's not fair."

The Poczateks were cleared because the ordinance is usually reserved for "the shouting and crying of peddlers, hawkers and vendors, which disturbs the peace and quiet of the neighborhood," their attorney said.

The statute didn't apply," insisted attorney Andrew Campanelli, who got no argument from the judge or prosecutor.

Before the hearing, neighbor Sheila Brown said the children's squeals were not your usual brand of merriment.

"I have five dogs," Brown said. "Five dogs don't make this much noise. This is not something that started yesterday. They have been asked politely, but this is an ongoing issue far beyond children just playing in the pool."

Neighbors did not speak with reporters after the court proceeding.

Poczatek offered a conciliatory message: "Yes, we will try to keep them quieter."

Screw keeping them quieter. If these people don't like the noise of children, I suggest they find another place to live away from them. 5 dogs make less noise than 2 children???? I have FOUR children, and when we get them all together my mother's 4 dogs make more noise than my 4 kids at full throttle. What, kids can't laugh and yell when playing? Fuck off...you don't like it, MOVE where there are no children. I'm sure you think children shouldn't exist, and you have your right to feel that way. But you have no right to stop them from being what they are, children, who laugh and play.

Oops, forgot the link: Fox News

Men and Women

2007-06-18T14:26:00.001-06:00

There's a new book that's made the America's Best list..one of them..called The Dangerous Book for Boys. Geared to...you guessed it, boys. Now I could give a shit about gender roles, really. I really don't care. My kids will be whatever they want to be and be happy at it, society's views mean nothing. Boys and girls are different. I'm sorry to break any hearts on the whole equality thing, but we are. And it goes a lot further than boys have a penis and girls have a vagina. Men are better able to perform certain feats better, but then again, women have their own feats they do better. That doesn't make men better than women, or vice versa. We are simply different. Men's bodies are made to do these things, women's are made to do those things. I can admit that simply because, I don't care. Men's bodies are more capable of certain physical activities than females. Females bodies are more capable of certain physical activities than male. It really evens out in the end, and none of it has anything to do with whether or not a girl can work on a car. Quite frankly, I'm a much better mechanic than my husband, even with that one little incident (don't ask). At least I think I am, I'm more apt to fix my car myself, he takes it to a mechanic. But then again, my husband has a much more extensive knowledge of geography and history than I do. It doesn't matter if we're boys or girls, just we have different talents.

One little tangent, you ever notice how some women tend to look down on the homemaker? If this was REALLY about equality, why do some women feel that all women MUST be doing something traditionally male to support the cause? Really, if you feel that men and women are equal and a woman *can* do anything a man can do.....why do you look down on women that do cooking, baking, marriage, kids? You're looking down on that role yourself. So you perpetuate the idea that "women's things" are less than "men's things". When in all actuality, it's all pretty individualized and all very much equal in it's fashion.

So why are we bitching about the book? Just 'cuz Boys is in the title? Who cares. Traditionally these were the guidelines for boys..there is nothing wrong with wanting to give those same guidelines to boys who follow the traditional mode in behavior. If you're a good parent, you've read the book first and are teaching your child where your views separate from the traditional guidelines. And if there are girls that prefer to do more boy type things, then the book serves for them. Again, read the book and tell her where you're own views separate from the book's.

Look people, men and women are different. We aren't capable of quite the same things. I'm sorry. WHEN there is a woman capable, she ought to be able to compete with men and vice versa. But sometimes you people carry it way too far. You have a severe hangup....

The problem with people

2007-06-11T18:06:00.000-06:00

While I type this, instead of smokers sitting back, cigarette in hand, quietly chuckling, I see many afraid. And those with some intelligence in the non-smoking side of things sit in fear as well. Naturally the stupid and the anti's out-scream them both. We smokers watched as you enroached upon everything. Talking bullshit about "choice", while steadily removing real choice in favor of the the false "choice" you offered...the anti-smoker way alone. ANd we told you then, "They will be after your food next." And everyone of you stupid little twats said "Well that'd be stupid!" Stupid or not, yep, they are. However, we smokers can't sit back and chuckle, because quite frankly, this shit isn't funny. It's a long article, but it's definitely worth the read. I know you don't want to be scared, but you damn well better prepare yourself. A couple of quotes and we'll get on to the real point of this entry.

This extraordinary development, which will forever change the face of pediatric medicine and private family life — eliminating the ability of doctors to practice quality medicine and of families to make their own choices on their foods and lifestyles, and even how parents may parent — was completely ignored by mainstream media.
This may sound melodramatic, but it won’t after you’ve read the new recommendations for the medical management of fat children and teens just released by the AMA, CDC and HHS from the “Expert Committee on the Assessment, Prevention and Treatment of Child and Adolescent Overweight and Obesity.” Before getting into just who is this Expert Committee and who is funding it, let’s get right to their harrowing clinical practice guidelines, which were posted on the AMA website.

Every well-child visit is now to include a qualitative assessment of eating behaviors, which must include identifying how often the family eats meals away from home, consumption of sweetened beverages, portion sizes, how often and what children and teens eat for breakfast, how much fruit juice is drunk, how many fruits and vegetables and foods high in fat or calories are eaten, and the frequency and types of snacks.
Each pediatric check-up should also include a determination of physical activity which is to include “at a minimum” if the young person is meeting recommendations for 1 hour of moderate to intense physical activity everyday and, if not, why and what social, environmental or familial situations are standing in the way; and how many hours they watch TV or videos, play video games and use the computer, to ensure screen time is less than 2 hours a day.
Every child deemed “overweight” or “obese” by these new standards should have not just blood pressure measurements, but a complete work-up for all “obesity-related risk factors” — one that appears more appropriate for an elderly, ill cardiac patient — as the referenced table shows:

If this doesn't scare you, you're a retard. Not the "I'm going to insult you by calling you names" kind of retard. I mean you HAVE to be functionally retarded. I mean, like Corky. Go read the article. It SHOULD be required reading. Check her links...and now on to the point of this entry:

The trouble with most of you people is you can't be bothered to think. You have your work, your tai-bo classes, your suburban mommy playdate suck your husband's cock every Wednesday at 10 bullshit. And while you're living your life in your little perfect fuckin' bubble, those of us with more intelligence than, say, the average pile of shit are to sit here and run your life. "We'll let the doctors/lawyers/politicans figure it out, that's what they are there for." "Doesn't the DOCTOR know more about this than we do?" "That's what those scientist guys do is figure this out so I can sit on my porch with those neighbors I hate and brag about little Timmy's little league homer?"

I have a little newsflash for you: We're no more honest than you are. And some of us smart people DO look down on you and say "Yeah, we can fuck you in the ass without lube, because your too busy hiding your little pharmaceutical addiction to worry about how much it's gonna hurt when we're done." You're too busy worrying about a non-existent "War on Christianity", your next tai-bo class, when you're gonna cheat on your wife, or whether your little Timmy gets the grade you WANT him to have rather than the one he deserves. You sit in your little bubble, voting in retards and power hungry warmongers cuz your afwaid. You sit in your little bubbles, where nothing has changed except the cost of everything, thinking about shit that means NOTHING. You sit in your little bubble, with your big ass skeletons in the closet, judging smokers and fat people and drug addicts while you tell us how to live our lives. Your perfect little bubble, that really isn't so perfect. Because obviously if everything was perfect at home, you wouldn't be out looking for ways to bug others. You'd be at home in your perfect life.

And now they're after your food...and to torment your children. But that's ok right? You're still stupid enough to think that little Tommy hasn't noticed the pharmaceutical company you keep in the medicine cabinet. Don't you think it's time to wake the fuck up?

As I said, teaching kids religion should be criminal

2007-06-07T12:51:00.000-06:00

Religion and Child Abuse

You guys should read this, I've provided some excerpts. Realize this is RELIGION and child abuse, not Christianity and child abuse...but hey, Christianity is mentioned as well.

Such abuse begins with the involuntary involvement of children in religious practices from the time they are born. All religions, through ritual, preaching, and religious texts, seek to bring children into day-to-day religious practice. This gives holy books and scriptures, as well as those who teach them, an early grip on the developing minds of young people, leaving an indelible impression on them. In many cases, most notably in the Catholic Church, this forced and prolonged exposure of children to religious institutions has also been a key factor in the physical, mental, and sexual abuse of children by religious leaders.

This early grip is so strong that very few people, once grown, ever get an opportunity to change their minds, despite being exposed to science and rational thinking, or even other religious systems. Religious beliefs thrive by imposing themselves upon impressionable minds and gaining their blind adherence to certain dogmatic practices.

.........

There is a global unwillingness to acknowledge that all religions use their educational institutions and programs, be they Sunday schools, madrassas, or Jewish or Hindu temples to indoctrinate children. Sometimes, this is in the guise of conveying good moral values, but, while it may be much more rigid and overt in, say, a madrassa, it is no less influential on young minds in a Christian Sunday school.

Ultimately, all such programs try to instill a belief in the superiority of one religion and inculcate an unquestioning faith in that system.

............

The Death of Common Sense

2007-06-07T07:50:00.000-06:00

Stolen from Stephanie:

Sunz--
No worries about excess Common Sense. Alas, Common Sense died recently. Here's the obit:

Obituary

The Very Sad Passing of Common Sense

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old common sense was since the birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape.
Common sense will be remembered as having cultivated valuable lessons such as knowing when to come out of the rain, why the early bird catches the worm, that life isn't always fair and that just maybe it was my fault.
Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you earn) and reliable parenting strategies (adults not children are in charge).
Common Sense's health began to deteriorate rapidly when well intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place....Reports of a six year old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing his classmate, teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student , only worsened his condition.
Common sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly children. It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer panadol, sun lotion or sticky plasters to a student, but could not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.
Common Sense lost the will to live as the ~~Ten Commandments became contraband~~, churches became businesses, and criminals received better treatment than their victims. Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from an intruder in your own home and the burglar got the right to sue you for assault.
Common Sense finally gave up the will to live after a woman working in her office failed to realise that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled some in her lap and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.
Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust. His Wife; Discretion; His daughter; Responsibility; His Son Reason....

He is survived by three stepbrothers, I Know My Rights; Someone Else Is To Blame and I Am A Victim....
Not many attended his funeral because so few realised he was gone. If you still remember him, pass this on. If not, join the majority and do nothing!

Amen

ROFLMFAO

2007-05-31T16:02:00.000-06:00

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! *Jalestra falls on the floor rolling, almost pissing her pants*

How many times have I said to just give the Christians what they wanted under the laws of our country? How many? And a place did it, and the Christians got back right what they asked for! TWICE!!! There's a link on the blog title too, don't miss it..it's where I got most of my info!

A group of Pagans in Albemarle County, Va., was recently given permission to advertise their multi-cultural holiday program to public school children – and they have the Rev. Jerry Falwell to thank for it.

The dispute started last summer when Gabriel and Joshua Rakoski, twins who attend Hollymead Elementary School, sought permission to distribute fliers about their church’s Vacation Bible School to their peers via “backpack mail.” Many public schools use special folders placed in student backpacks to distribute notices about schools events and sometimes extra-curricular activities to parents.

School officials originally denied the request from the twins’ father, Ray Rakoski, citing a school policy barring “distribution of literature that is for partisan, sectarian, religious or political purposes.”

A Charlottesville weekly newspaper, The Hook, reports that Rakoski “sicced the Liberty Counsel on the county,” and the policy was soon revised to allow religious groups to use the backpack mail system. Liberty Counsel is a Religious Right legal group founded by Mathew Staver and now affiliated with Falwell.

Some local Pagans who attend Thomas Jefferson Memorial Church, a Unitarian-Universalist congregation in Charlottesville, decided to take advantage of the new forum as well. They created a one-page flier advertising a Dec. 9 event celebrating the December holidays with a Pagan twist and used the backpack system to invite the entire school community. (There's more if you click the link)

So that was the first incident..then, as you gather from the link in the title, it happened again:

So, the Religious Right got want they wanted from the federal courts (the same federal courts they accuse of “kicking God out of the public schools”) and now they’re hopping mad…again.

World Net Daily reports that the Albemarle School District is under attack by a Religious Right group for sending students home with flyers for Camp Quest, an overnight summer camp for young atheists, agnostics and freethinkers.

This time, however, the problem has been exacerbated by a handful of teachers who have refused to send the flyers home. The group assailing Albemarle School District, Rick Scarborough’s Vision America, says “it’s outrageous to force teachers to distribute these flyers.” He’s urging members to contact the district to protest its “establishment of disbelief.”

An anonymous spokesman for the rebelling teachers told World Net Daily some teachers refused to hand out the Camp Quest flyer because they were “disgusted” and were concerned parents would think the school was endorsing the camp. Even though there is a disclaimer distancing the school from all extra-curricular information sent home, “it’s still coming from me and my classroom,” he said.
Mr. Anonymous is partly right. Anything that comes home from a public school, no matter how strong the disclaimer is, may be perceived as having the school’s stamp of approval. But that’s water under the bridge. Religious Right activists, through the 4th Circuit ruling that they sought, have forced public schools to allow their religious messages in the “backpack mail” system

Now that they have opened the forum, they can’t close it to perspectives they don’t like. Although these religious conservatives demand people listen to them, they appear unwilling to listen to others.

I can only close with a comment from the blog:

Well, Cathy and Jeff, it’s a new day. Your pals Falwell and Staver have opened up this forum, and now everyone gets to use it. Isn’t that what you wanted all along – freedom of religion? That freedom means all religions – even ones you don’t happen to like.

Let's go after ME!ME! Roth again

2007-05-31T10:59:00.000-06:00

Why not, she's made a target of herself. What a bitch....to look at a human being and see nothing but disease??? Not an individual but disease??? What a disgusting, sick INDIVIDUAL ME!ME! is. And what a mean little bitch. Yeah, I know,coming from me that's rich..pot meet kettle..HOWEVER, I would NEVER tell someone what a cow she is unless she ASKED me. And then at least I'd TRY to be nice, not saying I'd succeed, but I would TRY. Of course, ME!ME! is the type that would steal candy from a baby.

I repeat, what a sick, disgusting, lazy person ME!ME! is. To not see the good things about Jordan, but only to see what's bad, and not even THAT bad at that. To want to hold Jordan back for no other reason than Jordan is "fat". I'm sorry, but the girl ain't fat..chubby? Maybe. I hear her father is an NFL linebacker...that girl will NEVER be a size 2. Obviously the Jordan has SOME talent (apparently more than ME!ME! has) and that's what we should see. Look, it's none of my business how she eats or how she chooses to live. Quite frankly, she's a breath of fresh air. I'm really sick of the anorexic bitches. It's hard to find pictures of ME!ME! that haven't been doctored, but the head shots I saw aren't encouraging. You can "count her vertebrae from her neck" to quote someone else.

Look, with people like ME!ME! it's no wonder that we have two conflicting problems, NOT EPIDEMICS, problems: obesity and anorexia. If you harp on one to the extent ME!ME! does, you're going to have a problem with the other. She is entirely too skinny to try to tell fat gals to lose weight. She and the Olsen twins are poster kids for anorexia, I wouldn't be going and giving shit to folks who aren't THE perfect size. Especially when YOU can afford a personal trainer. Especially when I can count your rib bones when you're slouching.

Look, ok, so some people are fat, guess what, NOT YOUR BUSINESS. You need to be taking care of you and your family, not sticking your nose in other people's faces. This isn't just for ME!ME!, but for all you nosy bastards. And no, it's not FOR THE CHILDREN. The children are quite well protected, ever heard of the CPS and doctors? Well, if your kid gets obese, they can have your kid removed for that. There is NO reason for people to make new little laws and rag on other people. There is NO reason to stick your nose in another adult's business.

Look guys, you wanna know where this shit leads? Here's some links for you:

http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2007/05/medical-privacy-update-healthcare-for.html

Massachusetts: According to the CCHC, like all managed care plans, the MA state plan includes a provision for monitoring people’s lifestyles and their compliance with “wellness” goals established for them by the state

Minnesota: People would have no choice but to buy the health plans the state determines and these, again, are managed care programs, not true insurance plans. People would be forced to get the screening and preventive care, treatments and medications the state determines; lower their health indices to state-approved numbers; and their medical care would be managed by the state.

California: As the Los Angeles Times reported, “people who refuse to obtain health insurance could be tracked down by the state or a private contractor, enrolled in a plan and fined until they pay their premiums.”

U.S. Health Freedom on Verge of Collapse

This new bill panders to concerns of Americans regarding the safety of drugs. This legitimate worry is used by Kennedy and Enzi to garner support when in reality the bill does just the opposite - exposing Americans to almost unfathomable new drug risks and dangers while simultaneously making it possible to remove super safe, therapeutic, and helpful dietary supplements. The entire Critical Path initiative is a plan to race new and untested powerful biological drugs onto the market and experiment on patients all over the country – throwing caution to the wind as far as drug safety is concerned.

While S1082 also pretends to address the issues of drug safety, in reality all the needed Big Pharma loopholes are firmly in place. Additionally, the establishment of a clinical trial database as written in this proposed law will enable Big Pharma to hide experimental and undesirable side effects. Instead of full disclosure we will have a sterilized clinical trial database that will have the net effect of being used as a tool by Big Pharma to promote off label use of drugs. This is a far cry from disclosure that results in safety.

Be afraid, be very very afraid.

Top Ten Signs You're a Fundamentalist Christian

2007-05-28T16:49:00.000-06:00

10 - You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.

9 - You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.

8 - You laugh at polytheists, but you have no problem believing in a Triune God.

7 - Your face turns purple when you hear of the "atrocities" attributed to Allah, but you don't even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua" including women, children, and trees!

6 - You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and then ascended into the sky.

5 - You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old.

4 - You believe that the entire population of this planet with the exception of those who share your beliefs -- though excluding those in all rival sects - will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering. And yet consider your religion the most "tolerant" and "loving."

3 - While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor speaking in "tongues" may be all the evidence you need to "prove" Christianity.

2 - You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered prayers. You consider that to be evidence that prayer works. And you think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.

1 - You actually know a lot less than many atheists and agnostics do about the Bible, Christianity, and church history - but still call yourself a Christian.

-----stolen from a craigslist thing

In all fairness

2007-05-25T14:31:00.000-06:00

The national office of the ALA has seen the ad and pulled it from the air and YouTube. They apologized and expressed their disgust.

To quote Dr. Siegel (link on the right)

Apparently, the spot was produced by an ALA affiliate, and the national office was not aware of it until seeing my blog post this morning.

I will post a statement of regret from John Kirkwood, the president and CEO of the ALA, momentarily.

I applaud the American Lung Association for pulling the ad, expressing its thoughtful sentiments, and for its sincere apology.

ALA, John, this is called "damned if you do, damned if you don't". You're own fault however. You have spent so much time lying, I don't believe your sorry for your, albeit distant, involvement in this commercial. I think you're only sorry it wasn't the reaction you hoped for. I like this quote from a reader over at Doc's website:

The lies and frauds of the antismoking movement go beyond the damage to science: they hurt people and they hurt our society. The action of the ALA with regard to this ad is commendable, but I wouldn't give them an award any more than I'd pin a ribbon on a soldier who spared a month old newborn after gunning down its mother and a half dozen of its 1 to 8 year old siblings.

Michael J. McFadden
Author of Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
http://pasan.TheTruthIsALie.com

Smoking commercial more offensive than you think smoking is

2007-05-25T12:05:00.000-06:00

I have posted it elsewhere and repost it here. I can not link the video at the moment because it was taken down and I must find a new site. Suffice it to say that a anti-tobacco commercial was made (please read this first paragraph before you go view it, for your mental health) by Ramaa Mosley at Triofilms.com. It is a very emotional video and if you've ever been the victim of child abuse, please be warned that this video may be very...well offensive, but look, be sure you're ready to deal with a possible reliving of your childhood if you watch it. I'm so angry right now I can't hardly think straight. Her post to her right to air such a tasteless commercial is here as well as my own response.

Her post:

I directed this commercial because I believe that people who are complacent enough to continue smoking in front of their children need a huge jolt - something powerful to alter their way of seeing their actions.

People may be furious with the comparison between second hand smoke and child abuse - this is not a surprise. It is extremely disturbing to hear the sounds of the child in the spot being abused - as it should be. It's also extremely disturbing that there are still parents out there who know that smoking causes illness and possible death in children, yet they continue to smoke in front of them!

First off, the definition of abuse is "to treat in a harmful, injurious, or offensive way..." In webster's it's "a corrupt practice or custom".

What happens to babies when they are exposed to cigarette smoke?
--Babies and children who are exposed to cigarette smoke have a much higher incidence of pneumonia, asthma, ear infections, bronchitis, sinus infections, eye irritation, and croup.
--Colic occurs more often in babies whose mothers or fathers smoke or if
a breastfeeding mother smokes.
--Researchers believe that not only does the nicotine transferred into mother's milk upset baby but the passive smoke in the home acts as an irritant.
--Babies of smoking parents fuss more, and mothers who smoke may be less able to cope with a colicky
baby (due to lower levels of prolactin).
--Heavy smoking by breastfeeding moms occasionally causes symptoms in the breastfeeding baby such as nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps and diarrhea.
--Babies of smoking mothers and fathers have a seven times greater chance of dying from sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).
--Children of smoking parents have two to three times more visits to the doctor, usually from respiratory infections or allergy-related illnesses.
--Children who are exposed to passive smoke in the home have lower blood levels of HDL, the good cholesterol that helps protect against coronary artery disease.
--Children of smoking parents are more likely to become smokers themselves.
--A recent study found that growing up in a home in which two parents smoked could double the child's risk of lung cancer later in life.

I will confess that I grew up in an extremely abusive household - this commercial is tame in comparison to some of the things I experienced
and witnessed as a child. I also have have known a child raised in a family of smokers who died from cancer. Growing up I was friends with two other children who had terrible asthma and chronic respitory infections - all were raised in families where the parents smoked around the children.

Now that we're adults who is worse? I've gotten counseling, resolved most of the issues with my family and am living a productive life. My
friends still have constant asthma attacks and have had respitory infections that have lead to three bouts with pneumonia. Not to mention the fact that their father passed away ten years ago from lung cancer. So... who is worse off?

No one is is. That's the point. Child abuse is horrible. Smoking around your children is abuse.

As a mother of two small children, I believe that no child should be subjected to abuse of any kind. I'm proud of this spot - I believe it is a powerful statement on the behalf of children. My sincere hope is that parents who are currently smoking around their children will see this spot and make the right decision to NEVER smoke around their child again. We're not telling people to quit smoking - just quit smoking around your child. Take that cigarette outside, don't smoke in the car...

Sincerely,
Ramaa Mosley
Triofilms.com

Ramaa, not all victims of abuse would agree with you at all. I know I don't. I WISH my parents had ONLY smoked around me. That never bothered me at all. It didn't bother my asthma, no one in our family or neighborhood died of lung cancer.

MY children and the children of my neighbors and the children I grew up with are just fine. I did know a girl way back that died of cancer, but she was in a non-smoking family, and even if she wasn't it was a brain tumor, something I have yet to see attributed to smoking. If we were going by anecdotal evidence alone, my evidence would be just as important as yours.

I am also highly offended at your trivialization of my childhood. While YOU may feel that you have some right to do something like this because you are a fellow sufferer does not make it true or even ethical. To think so would to also say that since I was abused I have the right to rob your house and you must acknowledge that right and NOT file charges. Your commercial did shock me into one reaction, reliving briefly my own childhood. What right did you feel you have to do that? Just because you have an agenda you'd like to push? Just because I have overcome my childhood does not mean I want to relive it EVER, especially not for your lies, not even for a few seconds. It takes a lot of work to put that behind you, which you OUGHT to know if your claims are true. Even if the information was factual, it was still in VERY poor taste.

Also, if you people would BOTHER to check the information you've been fed you'd find that many are inaccurate. The WHO found that children of smokers were 22% LESS likely to develop lung cancer. Link here: http://www.obscurious.co.uk/ comp...smoking1440.pdf

You would also find that "there are no documented allergens in cigarette smoke. An asthmatic is potentially allergic to thousands of things, the most common being dust, pollen and pet hair. If cigarette smoke contained allergens there is no possible way millions of asthmatics could possibly be smokers." I am a smoking asthmatic, and the man who wrote the quote is a 40 year smoker and asthmatic, Warren Klass.

You would also find information about SIDS, linked here:
1. a letter from the Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Alliance to John Bazhaff http://www.forces.org/evidence/f...iles/ cohe01.htm in which it's stated very clearly:

"To date, no direct causal relationship has been established. " I encourage you to actually read and understand the whole thing.

2. http://www.data-yard.net/10p2/sids.htm

Brain Stem Abnormality Seen in SIDS Babies, Study Shows

Thank you very much for leaving your company name. I will be sure to include it and your name to every abuse victim who finds this a disgusting, tasteless act. And I can assure you there will be many. Unfortunately, not being as callous as you, I will be sure to let them know that the commercial is extreme and they may want to consider it before viewing it based on their own feelings and whether or not THEY have gotten over their childhood. Not everyone has you know.

Letter from a former student asshole

2007-05-25T08:12:00.000-06:00

This is totally Sophisticat's fault. He linked, I read, I love it..however, some things I'd like to address...this might take a while:

To my college professor's:

My first English 2 class:

1. "In your attempt to be witty you failed utterly". Well, in your attempt to read my mind, you failed utterly. I was not attempting to be witty in the slightest. I was not thinking "clever" that day. I was thinking: a. Gotta write this English paper b. gotta dump our laundry in the bathtub and do the twist (hehe, no washer and dryer, no car, hey, you work with what you got) c. I have to walk to the nearest store, 3 miles away with a 1 year old to get her milk. JUST milk, and will I have time to go ahead and do a LITTLE shopping just to save myself some effort? d. How to do my computer homework with no computer and, possibly, no electricity e. Do you really, really think you did your best work on this book? I mean, I understand why you didn't entitle it Ode to My Ego, but it really would have saved us both some time and intense frustration. Or at least be prepared for my critique of your various misspellings, inaccurate "facts" (which was being polite), and complete disregard for the language that, not only we all have agreed on, but is also the SUBJECT YOU TEACH.

2. I didn't transfer out of your class and retake it the next semester because you gave me a bad grade. I transferred out because YOU CAN'T TEACH. My other instructor was much better. I know you are contemptuous of him because he's a hippie, however, he's a hippie that can TEACH and I'm glad I dropped your class for his. I actually learned something. Even if I did feel my grades were less than desirable. *sniffles*

To my computer instructor:

You are a doormat, but the sweetest doormat in creation. In the 4 years of attending a variety of your classes, I learned nothing. That's not your fault. I am a failed genius with no social skills. And it has nothing to do with the fact that I missed pretty much EVERY class. I think I proved with my work being turned in and the tests results that I knew the material. Did you know I could test out of those classes? I didn't. I was completely unprepared for college due to my own faults and the faults of public education. YOU are the only reason I made it through college at all with my amazing amount of issues. Yes, even in the classes that you weren't teaching. Thank you for the sheer amount of office hours you devoted to meeting me on the phone at my neighbor's house because I couldn't trudge the 6 miles to the college that day with a toddler in a stroller due to rain, intense heat, or later, due to the being so doped up on vicoden I don't even remember the last 2 years of college. I hope you felt vindicated when I underwent 2 surgeries. I always wanted you to know I wasn't just another BS'ing student, just one trying so hard to get through college. I hope I didn't cause you any frustration, but I'm sure I did and I'm heartily sorry.

To public school teachers:

1. To my high school English teacher (yes, for 3 years I had the same one), I'm still very sorry I said that your morning perkiness made me want to pick you up and shake you like the bell you were shaped. You were a good teacher and I was a shitty person. I still am a shitty person, but not nearly so much, thanks to you. Just because the biggest portion of my teachers up until then had been so stupid I'm surprised they could muster the effort to drool gave me no right to take it out on you.

2. To the first of my 9th grade English teachers: I am not sorry I wrote "Mrs. Smith is a bitch" in lipstick on the bathroom mirrors (yes, all of them). I am only sorry that a. I was too principled to do it anonymously b. that there wasn't enough room to write the reasons why you were such a tremendous cunt and c. That I felt it necessary to do it by graffiti instead of newspaper and causing the school janitor a obscene amount of work. I do not know why you felt it necessary to side with the "cool" kids in the daily harassment and abuse of myself and the exchange student. Your active participation begged for some kind of response, and unfortunately I was powerless to do more than what I did do. I'm not sorry I was so much smarter than you, I'm only sorry you were too intent on being the "smartest" than to appreciate the challenge that lay before you. I did not excel in the gifted English class they later placed because my teacher was "easygoing"...I succeeded because he was a wonderful teacher excited about what he taught. His excitement was catching. Estrella shouldn't have been degraded and abused for not knowing the language perfectly. There were Mexicans that grew up in our country in that class that didn't have the handle on the language she did. I tried to get her out of that class..but again, I was powerless. Which brings me to:

2. Mr Green...(yes, that's his real name). I am not sorry that while trying to figure out where to put me for my in school suspension for the above behavior that I told you that you were "a fucking drooling idiot who wouldn't know his asshole from a hole in the ground" and "a mean spirited dick head looking for a reason to shit in someone's hat". I am not sorry you decided on a complete suspension. I am sorry I took it the superintendent, not because she did such a good job of addressing most of my problems with yourself and the English teacher, but because she made you move on to another school. Why you chose to follow me and harass me at my next school is beyond my comprehension. Luckily that school quickly realized you were a drooling idiot as well. I am sure you were very dismayed when, in spite of your slander and harassment, I flourished under the tutelage of my Spanish teacher. I am also sure that you were highly pleased when you called my mother and made her come up to the school because I had "ripped the entire office to shreds and thrown an extremely large book at you and you were contemplating involving the police". My mother is NOT sorry she came up there, glanced around the office in which I sat utterly clueless, noted the perfect organization and calmness in the office, and proceeded to inform you that I was correct, you ARE a drooling idiot and a prick to boot. Why you thought my mother would side with you I have no idea. While the woman did not graduate high school, she was surely no idiot. Also, she was fully aware that if I decided to get in trouble I would not half ass it so badly that you would have the office completely organized and calm in the 15 minutes it took her to drive up there. I am aware that you were probably devastated to find that all adults did not share in the sheer stupidity you yourself flaunted so proudly. I am also not sorry for the multiple times I loudly informed you that looking at the legs of teenagers and up their short skirts was extremely inappropriate. I am very sorry I was not aware that this is one of the signs of a pedophile looking for a place to happen. If I had been, I may have found evidence that you had acted on your feelings and had you arrested, thus removing any ability to harass, and possibly sexually abuse, these kids in the future. I am also not the least bit sorry that drawing so much attention to your behavior that it did at least get you removed from my school. It wasn't my accusations that done you in, it was getting caught while being watched BECAUSE of my accusations.

To all those I wrong who should have been wronged: I'm not sorry, I never will be. You just happened to have a student that didn't give a shit. You made sure I didn't trust another teacher, even the good ones. So I had nothing to lose by proclaiming your faults as loud and offensively as I could. Most of you, admittedly with my help, had already made sure my record showed me as anti-authoritarian and anti-social as possible. While I will take full responsibility for choosing to live up to these characterizations, you are the ones who made sure my reputation proceeded me.

To all those I wronged and didn't deserve it: I'm sorry. I take the majority of the responsibility for my behavior. While those above may have done their part to make sure I viewed you all as shitty and incompetent as them, I am the one who chose the behavior I exhibited.

My problems started in the third grade because a teacher took an extreme disliking to me and decided I deserved to be punished, often, corporally. I always saw school as a great place up until then. It was the greatest place. I could read and learn all I wanted to and I escaped being home where I was beaten. When the beatings started at school, you betrayed me. I was nice once. It was downhill from there. I know that's where the rock started down the hill. I was a good student and never missed a day, and that turned the other kids against me. I was a genius in my element. I didn't like being picked on by anyone and well, I chose the route of an asshole. I chose to half ass most of school, I was encouraged in this half assed behavior by all but 2 of my teachers, and the sum made the student you saw before you.

So I read RYS and find myself nodding, and sometimes feeling a bit ashamed of myself.

And maybe tomorrow I'll go into the horridness of public schools today and myself on the parent end of it.

Ah look! A new toy!

2007-05-23T13:42:00.000-06:00

My comments in red!

ASH: New Frontiers and Victories in the War For Nonsmokers' Rights (While we're discussing rights, while I may not have the right to pollute your air, you don't have the right to clean air. That's not covered anywhere. However, the right to the pursuit of happiness covers us both!)

by Public Interest Law Professor John F. Banzhaf III,
FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor Executive Director and Chief Counsel
Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)

Presented at the Medical Symposium of FAMRI {Flight Attendant Medical Research Institute)
in Miami, Florida, May 2007

I’ve been asked to talk with you about the many new battlefronts which we at ASH have helped to open in the war to protect nonsmokers’ rights. (cuz nonsmokers have more rights than smokers, and white people have more rights than black people, bigotry is bigotry, no matter your target)
Here are more than a dozen – all in less than ten minutes.

■ 1. More than a dozen states are virtually smokefree, with smoking banned in all workplaces, including bars and restaurants
almost a dozen more are effectively smokefree, but with smoking still permitted in bars
thousands of local jurisdictions have similar prohibitions
some now beginning to ban smoking even in gambling casinos (yay! you knocked how many of the people you're trying to protect out of work??? Dave Hitt guys, look it up...LOTS of job losses, but hey! no SHS...well, not at work anyhow)

■ 2. More than a dozen countries also are already virtually smokefree, with more on the way,
this occurred largely as a result of a new world antismoking and nonsmokers’ rights treaty known as the “Framework Convention on Tobacco Control”
which ASH helped to get adopted, and now – through the Framework Convention Alliance – has a major role in enforcement
Thus there are no more smokey Irish pubs, and, when you arrive at the main airport in Norway, you see the sign:
"THE ONLY THING WE SMOKE HERE ARE SALMON" (not many pubs in Ireland left from what I hear from someone who actually LIVES THERE)
NEW proposed guidelines under the FCTC to protect nonsmokers can be found at: http://ash.org/fctcguidelines

■ 3. Others people – including (Batty) Patty Young of FAMRI, Billy Williams, and Jack Cannon –
are now using the Americans With Disabilities Act [ADA] to obtain additional protection for persons with conditions which make them especially susceptible to tobacco smoke,
a concept ASH helped pioneer first with the predecessor Federal Rehabilitation Act, and then with the more expansive ADA
and one which will soon be extended oversees – as you will hear (wait, those motherfuckers get protected from the MAYBE RISK of SHS but you won't make them stop mowing their fuckin' lawns for me?? I can't even leave my fuckin' house in the summer because of my allergies...I HAVE THE RIGHT TO GO OUTSIDE AND NOT SUFFER!!! *whine whine whine* And another fuckin' thing, I'm going deaf, I INSIST everyone learn sign language so they can better take care of me whenever I finally CAN go outside....I have a disability, 2 of them actually!)

■ 4. More than 800 jurisdictions, including several states, now ban smoking in various outdoor areas
commonly on beaches, in parks or playgrounds, on lines, and near entrances to buildings
Calabasis, CA, with urging from ASH, banned smoking virtually everywhere outdoors – it’s now permitted only in “smokers’ outposts”
In Calif the Air Resources Board (ARB) has declared tobacco smoke outdoors to be a Toxic Air Contaminant because it can cause lung cancer, heart attacks, and even breast cancer in nonsmokers, and this ruling may ultimately force outdoor bans throughout state (it can't cause shit..there MAY be an increased RISK..notice how there are no numbers supporting this claim. No science studies referenced. He can't point you at one, you might read it and know he's lying through his fat teeth)

IMPORTANT: It is important to note that these various victories, in addition to their primary purpose of protecting nonsmokers, also are a major factor in discouraging smoking itself, in several ways;:
they make it more difficult, or at least inconvenient, to be a smoker;(but we don't hate smokers...just smoking..right ASH, isn't that what you said)
they also remind smoker that smoking makes them stinky and smelly, rather than suave, sexy, and sophisticated as the ads claim (so does sports...stinky smelly motherfuckers...oh, and that fuckin' shit you call cologne...that stinks too...wait, don't fat people stink too? Mmmmm..I know someone at ASH that needs their stomach stapled...and since when don't I have the right to stink if I so choose...*throws out the deodorant*)

■ 5. In almost two dozen states, judges have ruled that nonsmokers may have legal rights to be protected from toxic tobacco smoke which drifts into their apartment or condo – even in the absence of any statute. We have been successful in using three major legal theories
trespass by particles (fuckin' A...I got the lawn defense..fuckin' neighbors can't mow now, their particles are trespassing on MY property)
breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment (the anti-smokers screams don't fuckin' count??? here you are, quietly enjoying a cigarette and here comes some loud offensive jackass)
nuisance (unhealthy & offensive) (prove unhealthy..I also find Glantz offensive, why isn't he banned yet?)
In addition, Calabasas and Dublin California have by statute declared tobacco smoke to be a legal “nuisance” (California is full of nutballs...Ahnold is their GOVERNOR for fuck's sake)
thereby simplifying the problem of brings law suits. (yeah, don't want to make you actually WORK for it)
Thus, while a man’s home may still be his castle, he doesn’t have an unlimited right to smoke in it if the smoke drifts into other castles
OR HARMS OR PUTS CHILDREN AT RISK -- WHICH LEADS TO THE NEXT SEVERAL VICTORIES (oh yeah, not out to attack our homes at all..isn't that what you said? just public places)

■ 6. In about 35 states, courts have ruled that it is appropriate for judges deciding custody disputes to consider if a parent subjects a child to toxic tobacco smoke in the car or at home
thousands of court orders have banned smoking in cars, and even in homes, when children involved in custody disputes are involved, some 24-48 hrs before they arrive
and, in a few cases, parents have lost custody if, after being warned, they continued to subject their child to toxic tobacco smoke (yeah, because actual parenting has nothing to do with it...better to choose a bad nonsmoking dad than a good smoking mom...and hey, taking children from their loving parents doesn't hurt anyone at all)

■ 7. Largely as a result of a new movement ASH began two years ago, more than a dozen states, and many local jurisdictions, have ruled that smoking should be banned in cars and in homes when foster children are present
particularly in view of the very high concentrations of tobacco smoke to which the children are subjected in cars – much higher than in a typical home or office, or even in a smokey bar.
This, by the way, seems to be have opened the door to banning smoking in cars when any children are present – something which, prior to this development, could not be done through legislation.
Now legislators are beginning to realize that banning smoking in cars when only certain children are inside makes no sense, and that all children in cars should be entitled to the same protection from toxic tobacco smoke as those in foster care or involved in custody disputes.

■ 8. So now at least two states – Louisiana, Arkansas – and several local jurisdictions, including Bangor Maine – have banned smoking when children are present in a car,
and California is considering a similar measure

IMPORTANT: In addition to protecting children, who are the most vulnerable and helpless victims of toxic tobacco smoke, these bans discourage smoking:
by making it more difficult to continue being a smoker (but remember ASH does not hate SMOKERS, just the smoke...and the KKK doesn't hate black PEOPLE, just the color black)
and by forcefully reminding smokers that their smoking is putting their families at risk (prove it....again, no references here...in fact, the WHO found children of smokers 22% LESS LIKELY to get lung cancer..guess who has references? ME! The only statistically significant number was a decrease in the risk of lung cancer among the children of smokers. PDF here)

■ 9. Tobacco smoke itself is hazardous, but even the residue of tobacco smoke which remains on a smokers’ clothing and hair after smoking can be dangerous, at least to people who are particularly susceptible. (prove it)
So ASH, opening up still another new front in the battle to protect nonsmokers, threatened to take legal action against a university when they forced a sensitive pregnant nonsmoker to work in the same office as a person who smoked – even though not in the office.
We cited letters from her physician that these tobacco residues endangered not only the health of the nonsmoking woman but also her fetus, and legal precedent that she was entitled to special protection.
The university backed down immediately – and we hope that this new movement attacking tobacco smoke residue,
as well as tobacco smoke itself, will likewise continue to spread. (notice the uni BACKED DOWN, it never went to court...with REAL scientists...rare these days I know...but I'm sure we can find ONE..anyhow, it probably NEVER would have won)

■ 10. At ASH we think nonsmokers’ rights extends beyond protection from tobacco smoke, and that nonsmokers and their families should have the right NOT to be killed or injured in fires caused by cigarettes –
cigarettes the major cause of residential fire deaths (prove it)
At this moment, more than half a dozen states – including California – and all of Canada, have laws in place which require that only cigarettes which have been demonstrated NOT to cause fires when carelessly dropped by a smoker can be sold.
These so-called “fire safe” cigarettes, also called RIP for “reduced ignition propensity,” do not continue to burn as most US cigarettes do,
Rather, they generally self-extinguish quickly. (ahhh..and what about YOU poisoning me with more chemicals...oh yeah, only non-smokers have any rights)
And, one possible additional advantage is that the annoyance of having to relight such cigarettes is that it may discourage consumption. (FWIW, I'm gonna keep smoking JUST to piss you off)

ECONOMIC: As you may know, the US Surgeon General has estimated that smoking costs the American Economy about $140 BILLION a year,
and that most of it is paid by nonsmokers in the form of higher taxes and bloated insurance premiums. (Harvard University professor Kip Viscusi has repeatedly demonstrated that smokers paid more in excise taxes than the social costs of their habits even before the 1999 Master Settlement Agreement raised the price of a pack of cigarettes)
Well, that’s beginning to change, because of several new frontiers in the battle to protect nonsmokers' rights"

■ 11. I recently obtained a governmental ruling re-establishing the right of health insurance companies to charge smokers more –
or nonsmokers less, which is really the same thing,
for health insurance, because smoking adds thousands of dollars to the costs of providing medical care to people who smoke. (see the link I made above)
More and more companies are moving to do this.
There are at least THREE Reasons Why Charging Smokers More Reduces Smoking:
1. For many smokers, it provides for the first time an immediate and very concrete incentive for them to quit (no it doesn't...not one smoker I know has quit over that...not ONE)
2. Strong reminder that the dangers of smoking are very real (no it doesn't...we kind of knew there was some danger before..nothing has changed except your hand in my pocket)
3. Monthly bills serve as a constant reminder and reinforcer (nope, sure doesn't...just makes us really really hate anti's)

■ 12. In a related move, ASH is pressing states to begin charging smokers more for health insurance services under Medicaid, and Tennessee has now become the first state to do so. Such charges will also help to reduce smoking, for the same three reasons. (nope...it won't)

■ 13. Finally, some companies are going even further, insisting upon a workforce which is both smoke free as well as drug free –(oooo...more discrimination! can't kick out the niggers and wops, but can the smokers! Don't jump my ass...I'm not the one who coined the term "nico-nigger")
and refusing to employ or promote workers who smoke, even off the job – since the dramatically-increased health care costs are the same whether they smoke on or off the job. (and telling us what we can and cannot do on our own time...wow..who knew the company ran my life...apparently fetuses have more rights than us too)
ASH is defending that practice, one which has now been adopted by many leading companies, as well as by the World Health Organization. (yeah, because denying smokers a living will definitely make them quit smoking..let me come to your house and tell you that you will either stop doing something legal or I'll fire you....yay bullying tactics! ooo..I got an idea..let's burn crosses on their lawns...it won't HURT them..only make it more clear that being black is bad for them...doh...wrong discrimination..sorry)

AND now a quick look at some possible new frontiers in the war to protect nonsmokers’ rights

■ A. ADOPTION: We are considering asking or even requiring adoption agencies to consider if an adoptive parent is a smoker who will be subjecting the child to toxic tobacco smoke, and perhaps permitting the mother putting up a child for adoption to insist that the adoptive parents be nonsmokers (also make sure they are christians and rich...don't worry about anything else, that's all that matters)

■ B. AUTO ACCIDENTS; Banning all smoking while driving, as New Delhi has just done, and as England and several other countries are now considering, not to protect children, but rather to help reduce automobile accidents (sure, as soon as you ban eating, talking on cellphones, televisions in the front seats, GPS trackers that require you to look at them, anyone think of more?)

■ C. PETS - Since there appears to be a growing body of evidence that secondhand tobacco smoke can affect the health of pets as well as people,
we may want to consider using that as a argument for smokers to quit, OR
even seeking to use animal protection laws to limit smoking around pets (Pets have more rights than human smokers)

■ D. ENVIRONMENTAL: With all the recent and apparently growing concern about Global Warming and Environmental Harm, we might want to take advantage of that movement to stress how much smoking contributes to both:
obviously not just the heat generated by smoking, but by the deforestation it contributes to, the fossil fuel used to grow, transport, and even cure tobacco and to make cigarettes, etc. (first you have to explain why, if global warming is peoples fault, the other planets had the EXACT same reaction...clue: there's no people on other planets)

■ E. LITTER: A closely related problem which also adversely affects nonsmokers is that of tobacco-related litter
in many areas, such as beaches, cigs are the major cause of litter (but NOT fast food and drink containers)
Not only can we use this as an additional argument for banning smoking in many outdoor areas, (but NOT fast food and drink containers)
but perhaps even move towards requiring a deposit on cigarette filters such as many states have for soft-drink soda bottles. (but DON'T ban fast food and drink containers)

And before you jump my shit on using the race card...I got a little newsflash for you...you don't HAVE to be black. I think Micheal Jackson has proven that. You CHOOSE to stay black. Now, there is NOTHING wrong with that. I don't have a problem with anyone based on race. I think people are all idiots equally..color has nothing to do with it...however, you can CHOOSE to turn white. Don't give me that "black people don't have a choice" shit..because technically speaking, yeah they do. Look, you want to be a bigot, fine, just be honest...race/lifestyle, it doesn't matter how you split them up, you're still a bigot.

And before you tell me how smokers should die and be killed, tell me why pedophiles aren't castrated? You wanna talk about a sick, disgusting disturbing motherfucker...legalize castration of pedophiles on their first offense...then you have a right to talk shit about anything less...and if you think pedophiles are less offensive than smokers, you're a sick motherfucker.

Deafness

2007-05-23T09:58:00.000-06:00

We may have two posts today, I have a rant going but well, I think I just lost another chunk of my hearing and well, I gotta "think out loud" so to speak.

I'm going deaf. I haven't been to an audiologist, though it's in the works finally. But I've steadily lost hearing for about 5 years now. I had some serious ear infections, led to a vicoden problem and 2 surgeries. One to put tubes in, another to remove scar tissue and replace a tube in my right ear. I lose more hearing from my right ear than my left, though the left is going too. I say lost a chunk of my hearing because while my hearing does decline fairly steadily, there have been 2 times, this will make 3, where I noticed a severe and sudden loss of hearing. I know it's permanent because, well, the "chunk" never returned. The tube in my left ear has been gone for about 2 years now, at least...the right ear tube is still there. I'm not sure if this chunk is permanent or not, right now my ear is draining like a sieve (that's good though), so it could be a result of fluid trying to get out.

I'm losing my hearing in a fairly common way: failure to differentiate between sounds. Increasingly it is harder it sift out sounds. Used to I could sift out all sounds and listen solely for my children crying. Convenient when you have them all screaming through the house and playing. I could easily differentiate, subconsciously, if that was a pain cry or a play cry or if it was just fighting amongst themselves. Now I do good to hear them crying at all from the next room. Watching tv? Very carefully. I have to be able to hear the baby and the toddler and hear the tv. I can't hear the tv unless it's at full volume...makes it extremely difficult. Thank goodness for live tv you can pause or I'd never be able to watch a full show the few times I bother to.

My hearing loss very much upsets my husband. It doesn't upset me too much really. I mean, out of all the senses to lose, I'm of the opinion that hearing is the best for me. I will miss music and hearing my children's voices and the ease of just speaking to someone rather than signing (a skill we will be learning this summer as a family), but am I upset about it? Nah. I'd rather see, and move, and feel, and smell...things could be MUCH worse. And hey, if it's reversible..well, signing is a good ability to have regardless.

Being deaf will not be the end of my life. It might be the close of some parts of it..but all in all, as long as I can SEE the world...I don't mind not hearing it...in some cases, that might even be a good thing. LOL

But I will miss the music...

Don't you hate it when a really awesome idea gets shot to hell?

2007-05-18T12:10:00.000-06:00

So I got some scam religious thing in the mail. My first thought was "Shit, get them away from my door and they start sending me junk mail." So I open it up to see what it is, my curiosity ALWAYS gets the best of me. It's got some little prayer rug or some shit, pages of praise Jesus...blah blah blah..the obligatory donation. And I got to thinking, how do I make these guys SERIOUSLY regret sending me this shit?

1. pee on it...oh yeah, I was tempted, but you can't transfer bodily fluids in the mail.
2. tear it up and send the trash back in their prepaid envelope...not near as much fun.
3. Send them a copy of the Satanic bible....except I don't know where to get one.
4. My fave: Steep it in sulfur and send it back with a letter from Satan on the "prayer rug". Damn...I'm not sure if it's illegal or not to send something reeking of sulfur through the mail. But it's an awesome idea....*cries* And it was RUINED!!!!

It's a scam...not near as much fun to screw with a scammer like that. If it was a real church, yeah, but the scammers won't be bothered. They'd probably think it was funny too.

I settled for a letter on the "prayer rug"...but I'm still feeling a bit let down over it....

One less fundie nutjob

2007-05-15T16:30:00.000-06:00

One week before his death, Falwell told CNN's Christiane Amanpour he needed at least 20 more years to accomplish his vision for Liberty University.

Apparently god answered his prayer with a big resounding NO.

Look don't get pissed just because I had the balls to say it "Ding dong the witch is dead". What part of "I'm an asshole" did you not understand? Now, if only god will answer Pat Robertson's prayers with a big resounding NO as well. I never wished the man dead...but I'm not above taking pleasure in it. I know, I'm so mean, but hey, just because someone died, it doesn't make him a good person. And Falwell has spent his whole life making sure you knew, no matter what claims toward following a loving Jesus he made, he was NOT a good person. Let's remember him as he was:

"AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals."

"I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America," he said. "I point the finger in their face and say 'You helped this happen.' "

If you're not a born-again Christian, you're a failure as a human being.

God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve.

AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.

I listen to feminists and all these radical gals - most of them are failures. They've blown it. Some of them have been married, but they married some Casper Milquetoast who asked permission to go to the bathroom. These women just need a man in the house. That's all they need. Most of the feminists need a man to tell them what time of day it is and to lead them home. And they blew it and they're mad at all men. Feminists hate men. They're sexist. They hate men - that's their problem.

"Someone must not be afraid to say, 'moral perversion is wrong.' If we do not act now, homosexuals will 'own' America!...If you and I do not speak up now, this homosexual steamroller will literally crush all decent men, women, and children who get in its way...and our nation will pay a terrible price!"

Yeah, I'm not the asshole for noticing he was one too...just for pointing it out. Goodbye to one of the great hatemongers of the 20th and 21st century.

And before some of you start in about how hate shouldn't follow hate or some other shit, get over it.
1. Don't throw shit if you aren't ready to have it thrown back. Falwell has thrown more than his fair share of shit, I'm not saying anything I hadn't already said when he was alive. I'm just reminding people before they get off in "well he's dead now, let's be nice" bullshit. I don't see anyone saying that about Hitler.

2. I. Don't. Care. One of these days you'll realize I don't say this shit to be cool...I say it because I. Don't. Care. The neat thing about not caring is that I can say whatever I want without worrying about whose feelings it hurts.

3. Don't give me shit about enjoying the loss of an asshole, ESPECIALLY if you enjoyed the loss of Saddam Hussein...

Various things

2007-05-09T06:59:00.000-06:00

I got a bit upset at the Doc (Doctor Seigal.linked), so haven't been hanging out at his site here lately. I'm sure he saw it as an overreaction...but y'know...when you start bringing words like "normal' into, that means someone that's not following your guidelines is "not normal". Let me at least put the comment:

With that said, I do not suggest that people will get used to it overnight. But over time, they will. I remember a time when people would have said that smoking in a restaurant was inherent to dining. Or inherent to flying in an airplane. People are able to adapt to these changes. Over time, yes. But social norms can and do change.

Social norms...yes they can and do change, but to put it like this change is "good" and "welcome" is beyond the pale. It's neither. For one, it appears with such a comment that society's idea of normalcy wins. But you can't get two people to agree on WTF normal is. And for society as a whole to be identified as "normal" then there must be those opposed to societal norms and therefore "not normal". By showing agreement with this, you are showing that there are folks you consider "not normal". And well, I got a bit annoyed....in fact, I said, and believe, it's the most hateful thing Doc has written. Actually, considering THIS is the most hateful thing I think he's written shows how nonoffensive he actually is. However, I suppose I expected more of him. It's so easy to label those who don't agree with "society" as the outcasts, the freaks, the wierdos. Howeve,r while society occasionally does do something right when the social norm NATURALLY changes, for the most part its just a bunch of idiots who are being led around by the nose, yet again. While for the good you have elimination of slavery, you also have Prohibition for the bad. Social norms are no indication of anything except how far you can manipulate society. And one's person's "normal" is another person's "FUREAK!".

Which moves us right along...be sure to read the recent Fundie Watch about the Hate Crimes bill. I won't try to go into it, because Watcher has, as usual, addressed it in his much more pointed fashion...but I do encourage you to read it...well. As I said, one person's "normal" is another person's "FUREAK" and well, I found one of my freaks at Faith 2 Action. Just go read it...

In other news, the Disney channel is pushing it's own brainwashing...yeah, it has been really, but this one really pisses me off. My kids like Little Einsteins and the Mickey Mouse show...then we flip it over to Nickolodean. However, I noticed the two little shits doing a "for your own good" clip and stopped to watch. Most of this stuff you roll your eyes and move along. I think my teachings will go much further than Disney's in my house. It wasn't WHAT they were saying, because I happen to agree with a good portion of it, it's HOW they go about doing it. I have a huge objection to my children getting the idea that it's ok to dress me down like they are the parent because some cartoon shows it's ok if it's for the "right" reasons. Encouraging children to, even politely, chew their parent out is, to me, a very bad idea. Like we as parents don't have enough trouble getting around their peers, now we have cartoons with what appears to be two 4 year olds telling dear old dad that he's breaking the rules and that they have *every* right in the world to jump his ass. Newsflash, they don't. I'm an adult, if I choose to break a rule, then I will be living with the consequences. This whole thing about adulthood is supposed to be the idea that you don't *need* parents anymore (hear that you busybodies?). We're supposed to be able to make our decisions and live with the consequences (hear that you wienies?). While it is one thing for my child to bring something to my attention, it's a whole 'nother for them to TELL me what I can and cannot, should and should not, do. Last I checked, I was the parent. I get to tell YOU what to do. I try to raise my kids with a mutual respect for the most part...but there are limits. My job is to guide my childrento become productive adults that can live with THEIR own choices. And hopefully impart a basic guideline of what "good" is. Me, the one with more experience in how the world works and what it requires to live in it. To fill them with these ideals, and not with the whole story is ridiculous. Yeah yeah, don't litter is a fine lesson to teach. But don't have children chewing out their parents, and tell them they don't need NEW laws, just folks with the balls to enforce the old ones. And don't fuckin' tell my kids to tell me how to vote. If I'm not going to listen to George Clooney, I'm damn sure not going to listen to my 11 year old who's only seeing half the story. Y'know, there should be laws against you type of people....if you can't appeal to the public with honesty and truth and let us make our own decisions, then you probably don't have a legitimate fact to stand on.

As far as society, well, if you act stupid, they treat you stupid. So quit acting stupid. You know why we're suffering from all the things we are now? Because YOU'RE an idiot. The government and the media have seen how you let yourself be manipulated...Don't get mad at them because they USE that knowledge. You've been so stupid in the last 12 years that well, they believe your stupid. And apparently, you are.

That goes for the anti-smokers too!

Daughter Update

2007-04-27T11:58:00.000-06:00

Ethel's comment reminded me I should post an update. We have a plan now.

1. Don't try to go through the school unless they are extremely willing to bend over backwards. If you are in Texas, don't bother. Texas has a minimum requirement for children that are gifted, especially in the 10-13 age group, that is absolutely useless. You're better off on your own.

2. Children over the age of 10 cannot have a proper IQ test done. It's useless for them. They'll max out the test even if they are only slightly gifted. Duke University hasa talent search every year. They help you get your child in to take the SAT. While many of us think SAT and get scared, this is a better measurement of your childs abilities. What they cannot answer tells them as much as what they can. I'll be signing H up for that when it comes around. The score is not a permanent part of their record at this age, unless you call up afterward and specifically request it. However, why? I mean, if your kid can pass it at 12, then it won't be a problem later.

3. If you DO live in Texas, here's a link that finally helped me tremendously: http://www.txgifted.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=36 (Texas Association for Gifted and Talented Advocacy. If you don't live in Texas, here is a link that will help you find your state group if you have one: http://www.nagc.org/index.aspx?id=609&gbs
And here's a wonderful site just full of resources: http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/identification.htm

4. Don't, under any circumstances, go beat the living shit out of the school that does not possibly understand what your child needs no matter how much you try to explain it to them. This is really not meant to sound conceited, but they will never understand. Ever. Having a gifted child, no matter how gifted (little or profound) is a whole new entity. The school cannot leave the labeling of children behind, and you are just going to get a headache or go to jail. I know, you'd think noone, especially a school principal or counselor, could possibly be that stupid as to not realize children are all individuals with different needs. Yes, they are, that stupid I mean.

Later, I will set up a special links section with all the wonderful places I'm finding. I tell you, the minute you stop dealing with the school is the minute doors open. If they are being less than friendly, find one of these state advocacy groups, they will tell you waht your state is responsible for helping. Then take that, and MAKE the school help, if you can. If you live in Texas, I'm sorry, our options are extremely limited.

Ethel, I'll never come to New York, too damn cold up there and I can't smoke LOL

My daughter has a problem

2007-04-19T07:09:00.000-06:00

My oldest girl is a genius...I'm pretty certain she's a genius, I do know her Iowa tests came back showing she could easily work at an 8th grade level (she's in 5th) and in some subjects work at a much higher level...try college. Ok, so I'm kind of bragging too. But it causes problems.

I understand these problems, I AM a genius. Let's pay attention for just a minute, I AM, a tested genius. I, however, am a definite ditz, that requires no testing. My IQ is high, but I forget everything and am more likely to find my glasses in the freezer and supper on my desk than the other way around. i don't know why, but this has happened. And I spent HOURS looking for my glasses, apparently the meat on the desk seemed perfectly normal. Well, up until I looked on my desk later and said "Why is there raw meat thawing out on my desk?" The point is, my IQ tests out at genius, I'm a fucking nitwit a good portion of the time. IQ is just a number, if you do nothing with it. It means less than the ant that you stepped on when you were mowing. The point is I AM a genius technically speaking, and why, do you ask, am I not some well known scientist or some such? Well, I lay that at the feet of several. The educational system is not cut out for geniuses. Your choices are homeschooling and skipping grades and remaining in your own grade. None were presented as options for me. The schools I attended otherwise had no idea WHAT to do with me. I spent a lot of time in trouble. My family had no idea what to do with me. I was obviously highly intelligent, but I was a troublemaker. And I had no idea what to do with me. School was miserable, mom couldn't homeschool, and ONCE they offered for me to skip a grade, 2nd. I cannot, and do not, fault my mother for saying no. I'm not sure if I agree or not, but I completely understand her objections and she was only trying to do what's best for me. My life in school was misery, I pissed off the kids, they didn't "get" me. I pissed off the teachers, they thought I was a smart ass. I pissed off the principal, I BECAME a smart ass. I distanced myself from my peers, and eventually became what you see now. A highly intelligent person, staying home to take care of the children, who cannot deal with the world at all and can't find her glasses in the freezer (I don't wear glasses anymore, but that's beside the point).

And now, here comes my oldest girl, trying to follow in my footsteps. She has the exact same problems, and I have a new set of problems. I have homeschooled, I loved it. H is in school because she wanted to be. Right off they moved her to the gifted classes...she's still having problems. Not as many, but still the same problems. To say the school is ill-equipped to deal with her is the understatement of the century. The principal's suggestion? Dumb her down so she can make friends. Ok, that's not exactly what he said. What he said is to encourage her to at least fake an interest in clothes and hair to make friends. So I talk to her and she doesn't WANT to. And why the fuck should I make her more miserable? She has 2 friends, she's happy with those two. All she wants from the other kids is to leave her the hell alone. My husband and I have discussed homeschooling again. I'm a huge advocate in homeschooling, but in this case I'm not sure if it's the right thing to do. Her interaction with other children has IMPROVED since she's been in school. Maybe not by 100%, but even the teacher has noticed that since she was moved into the gifted classes, she does have it easier. To me that suggests she just needs more people who understand her, of her age, or around it. I've checked, there are no progressive type schools in the area. There is a Montessori school here, but in the state of Texas, homeschool is considered private school. You don't have to have a degree to homeschool. At the moment I'm all for taking a look at the place and getting some credentials myself. My husband says "for allw e know a janitor can be teaching those classes". Well as far as I'M concerned, if they are learning how to clean, a janitor is the best person for those classes. I don't know, his point has merit. I do not disagree that we shouldn't care about WHO is teaching the classes, however, I do not agree with his action of just blowing the whole thing off completely without looking into it. Skipping grades, not an option. It would do more harm than good. You cannot take ANY child out of a child setting and then just throw them into a teenage setting. I don't give a damn how smart they are. H is way too sensitive for the type of abuse she would have to undergo.

Quite frankly, I think the best thing is to get her tested. While IQ may not be the end all and be all, it IS an indication of which extreme you are working under. If she is only mildly higher than her classmates, skipping A grade will not hurt her. If she is as highly intelligent as the principal seems to suggest, then the Texas school system has NOTHING to offer her at all, except boredom and misery. But damn the testing is so expensive. And it's not a matter of I won't be able to pay for some luxury item, it's a matter of we're going to have to get get considerably behind on the bills to get this kind of testing done. Something I don't see as benefitting her either. No child left behind huh? Seems my child will be left way behind of her own capabilities. I suppose I could join some group of parents of gifted kids, but most of them require testing to prove the child is gifted. So even they don't really want to help with these kids. The first step is to identify them. Not leave them languishing away in some school getting in trouble constantly. And I'm not talking about getting sent to the principal trouble. I was suspended several times.

Well, I'm just friggin clueless. I'm looking it up, but it's a great big circle jerk. Not to mention not being sure of where to look. Can't get help without the testing, can't get testing without help...Do the words "fuck you" come to mind...indeed they do....

Idiots

2007-04-18T08:07:00.000-06:00

Oh yeah, like that's a new title. You come here, you must be looking for daily derogatory comments on the stupidity of human beings. Virginia Tech, let's go THERE. But I'm not going to talk about the shootings. I'm sorry, but if you want me to get riled up at yet ANOTHER psycho, you're sorely mistaken. Quite frankly, I'm pro-death penalty. Before you turn on your wittle knee-jerk screams, realize something: If we KNOW who did it and they did it on this level, they are trash. And do we sit around poking trash? No, we take it out to the dumpster and forget about it. I don't understand why on earth people see death as a torment. It's not, bam, it's over. That's not torture. Torture is making them live, in prison, with men who rape them, living in fear of being "shanked". Of course, we're talking about society that would rather starve Terry Shiavo to death rather than just give her an overdose of some nice drug that makes you go to sleep. Quite frankly, this country sucks when it comes to caring for it's citizens. For a group of people who supposedly don't want to "torment" others, we are ALL about tormenting in the name of progress. Here's a little newsflash for you: 1. Death is not torment. If done correctly, such as say, with a morphine overdose, there's not even any pain. 2. You are some sick fucks that approve of starving someone to death or sticking them where they can be raped and fucked with until they become even worse than they were when they came in. And then to top it all off, you actually BITCH about the cost of maintaining their new homes! And before attacks of what an imhumane, no-respect-for-human life worm I am, maybe you should see it from my point of view: Of course I have no respect for human life, I have respect for human BEINGS. For all that I think most of you can't seem to put their pants on without drooling on them, I don't want to see anyone suffer. A fool that can go to a school and shoot it up has no respect for human beings. He doesn't care about you, he's an animal. He cannot overcome his he-man instincts, in this case "ugh ugh, my woman ugh ugh". If you want to support this guy until he dies of old age, being abused in our prison system YOU pay the taxes, leave me out of it. I'm not in the business of making a monster even more monsterous so he can come kill MY family.

Which brings me to yet another point: I'm not fond of guns myself. There's no real skill involved (yes, I have shot guns. That's two words, I have done the act of shooting guns. I don't own guns). I prefer something with some skill and work to it. I own swords. However, I don't want guns banned, illegalized, or so hard to get you have to suck the president's dick to get one. You know why we have the right to bear arms: So the government is scared of us. And if they ever get not scared, we have the means to fix that. I don't know if you noticed it, but there are people in this world that want to rule you completely (Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, Hitler, Stalin, am I ringing any bells here people?). And eventually we're going to have one in our country because you people are a bunch of pussies. I mean, c'mon, Saddam Hussein and his guys were WAY outnumbered by the populous and they were too big of pussies to bring him down. If such a person gets in charge here, OUR FAULT. And while I may not own a gun, I want to be able to get my hands on one fairly quickly. And if I don't, well I hope there are still some Americans left that want to take that person down. Now, you know our military, and if we were ever to get such a person in office, then you should realize that without an equalizer we'll never be able to take them without huge losses of life. I would hope we'd try, but it will be devestating going up against a tank with a baseball bat. Not to mention, any ruler that wants to take away our guns, we should be very afraid of. That person wants unhindered access to a slave population. I am sure YOU think we are too progressive for that and for a revolution, I however am quite willing to realize the foibles of human beings, and that we're not too progressive. We're talking of a group of people who haven't stopped hating, they choose more socially acceptable ways of hating (wishing violence on smokers here lately guys?) Human beings are more than capable of trying to rule over others, and I have proof: Domestic violence. Put that guy in charge of a country, do you really think he's going to treat YOU better than his wife? And don't give me that checks and balances bullshit, hasn't worked to well LATELY now has it? It's quite easy for me to foresee the appearance of a dictator before the end of my own life. Because look at how far the current administration has pushed things and you can't even get the balls up for an IMPEACHMENT. Anyone else is going to look at that and see what I see: Not only will you cheer as you vote a dictator into office, you'll HELP him take your rights away. Fuckin' morons. Our educational system is so fucked up you don't remember how Hitler became the leader of Germany.

So onto my last point: You fools really believe that making guns illegal will help a damn thing. OMFG. You ARE morons. Hello, War on Drugs? Huge War on Drugs, we have guys whose job is to do nothing but catch folks bringing drugs into the country. How come I can take a half hour drive and score any drug under the sun? Oh yeah, that's working out REALLY well. You really think, that a guy determined to go out and cause as much damage as possible in the name of his cause is really going to be stopped by LAWS? Because if you do, you're a bigger idiot than I thought! I mean, he's already on his way to break a couple of laws, do you really think he's going to stop and say "Oh shit, guns are illegal, gotta ditch this plan". As Sophisticat so aptly pointed out (link to your right), people determined to do damage go where? WHERE THERE ARE NO GUNS! So some of you will say he was looking for a chick and he went where the chick was. Well, if the chick had been at a police station, do you really believe he'd have gone THERE and shot up the place? I'd be willing to bet he would have at least thought twice about it, and I'm pretty confident he'd have thought "fuck that". These guys want to go out on THEIR terms. Just because a guy is suicidal doesn't mean it doesn't matter WHERE their suicidal. Case in point, terrorists can be suicidal in the name of a cause..does that mean they will go home and kill theirselves? Hell no, proof, 9/11. They go where they can suicide with a point. It's pointless to suicide in a police station. You'd most likely never meet your main objective. (Actually, the part Sophisticat pointed out is that these people never shoot up police stations because police stations have guns. *I* took it a step further and this is in no way saying he agrees with me.) Only a complete moron could possibly believe that taking away people's guns will stop criminals. Instead it will only declare open season on the populous. Look, I'm from Texas (yeah well, that's not why I support gun ownership. I have my own brain, TYVM and I detest guns, but I'm not so stupid as to not see where their positives are), I see a few things. Like, if you own a gun, you're less likely to get robbed. And generally you only get robbed ONCE, when you shoot the SOB. People tend to see you shoot a guy and think "Shit, then he'll have no problem shooting me too". Not everyone wants to die for a cause or a tv. While you're thinking to yourself "What about all the innocent folk that were accidentally shot with a gun" I can point out the times a citizen with a gun saved a life. And don't bring up that bullshit about "But kids accidentally shoot each other". Would you like to know why? Because YOUR a jackass. EDUCATION. My children can be left alone with guns, except the 1 year old, but in a year, he can be left alone with one too. And why can we leave OUR kids alone with guns? EDUCATION. My kids have always been taught that GUNS are NOT TOYS. They have toy guns, but they recognize the difference between a toy and the real thing, and the one time they saw a toy, we'd already taught them "better safe than sorry" and they didn't touch it. Why? Because education stops a lot of tragedies, and I'm not afraid to RAISE my children to adulthood instead of protecting them from society. I PREPARE my kids for real life. And in real life you should NEVER pick up a gun and investigate it. ASSUME it's what it looks like, a tool that can greatly harm people. It's not different from teaching them not to hit people with daddy's golf clubs. Children are exposed to potential weapons all their lives, and some are quick weapons. Drop a toaster in your bath, not quite as fast as a gun, but faster than stabbing someone and you can completely take them by surprise. So how many kids go dropping toasters into bathtubs "on accident"?

Which brings me to a point I didn't think of: With the fact that you can get on the internet and in less than a minute have the recipe for making your very own homemade bomb, do you really think the lack of access to guns is going to be a big crimestopper? I mean really, how many people can you shoot in a minute vs how many you can blow up in 15 seconds. These people ALWAYS find a way. I suppose you'd have felt much better IF by chance gun illegalization worked, if this guy would have had a bomb instead? We lost at least 32 human beings and what 20 hurt but recoverable with A gun. Bomb? I definitely say the loss of life would be considerably higher.

I hope I've made SOMEONE out there think all this out. I'm not the best speaker in the world, but anyone with half a brain has a good starting off point on each subject. Maybe it's time to abandon the knee jerk screams and put some thought into the actual intelligence (or lack of) in your positions. Of course, many of you won't, you're too stupid, but hey, here's hoping...

Ron Luce

2007-04-16T10:24:00.000-06:00

Just go read the article about he and his church in the newest issue of Rolling Stone. I supposed I could cover his idiocy point by point, but I"m not sure where exactly to start. However, if you have half a brain you should be able to read the article and see why I think it should be criminal to teach children religon....ANY religion. I don't care if you're a peaceful Buddha...NO religion, then we can't fall so easily into this type of brainwashing. And for you Christian folk, you know where god said Beware false prophets? I'm pretty certain this is the guy he had in mind...or one very like him...of course for law suit purposes I want you to be sure this is just MY opinion. And in my opinion, I'm offended on behalf of Christians. The real ones, you know Jesus said "Love thy neighbor". The Jesus who wanted peace? Yeah, that guy.

We're talking about a guy who says that his calls for battle "are not a metaphor". And for those of you saying "Rolling Stone had an agenda", this isn't the first time, or the only place I've seen the type of crap Luce spews. I don't need RS for that, quite frankly, I just have to look at the website and know quite enough. Probably because I'm an adult and have an IQ over 50, not blinded by religion. And that's not necessarily to say religion is blinding, but when you leave no room in your head for people of other faith, it just makes it easier to suck you in. You're too busy reading about God to read about the brainwashing techniques used to draw you away from him. And justify it with well, Satan's work. So let's go takea look at the website:

"A stealthy enemy has infiltrated our country and is preying upon the hearts and minds of 33 million American teens. Corporations, media conglomerates, and purveyors of popular culture have spent billions to seduce and enslave our youth. So far, the enemy is winning." --So here's our nebulous enemy. And it includes the whole world! You can't get a good fear induced hysteria without the fear part. And it's cool leaving the enemy pretty vague, because then you can steer your screeching mob to whatever target is pissing you off at the moment. I got a newsflash for you all, most of us could really give a shit who you worship...we don't want to take your wittle god away. If there is any animosity, well, ti's because you're trying to take OURS away. See, if you make America Christian, what's going to happen to those of us that just want to worship our version of god? Yeah, see, THEN we might get mad. But if you just hush up and worship YOUR god, we will hush up and worship ours and all will be well. Why is it only Christians have a problem living beside other faiths in America? Oops, getting sidetracked..moving on.

HUGE EVENTS--It's time to stir up the sheep...tribal drum..er speaker beats, loud music, a building filled with so many you can barely move....it makes you feel closer to GOD! No it doesn't, there's always a huge rush in such a situation. Ask any atheist that has been to a rock concert...yours is just more extreme because you have some idiot stepping in every so often to target your feelings for you. See, we don't have that, frankly because we don't need someone to rile us up for our religion. 1. We do not need to be targetted so we can fill our religion, we don't need to have a big group to be a part of to know our religion is real. We can be totally alone and still feel that our religion is worthwhile. 2. We also do not need a huge group of people to behave just like us so we aren't tempted. We tend to have minds of our own and accept our own blame if we believe we have "sinned". We do not need to blame it on some anti-god.

Testimonials--Ah yes, we need to let you know that it works, even though it never works for you right now, we have some fake stories here that will show you this really works. If it doesn't work for you the fault is in you, not our beliefs. See, this is a nice "trust me" and self flagellation all rolled into one. You are all just dirty sinners, worthless, but that's ok, because god loves you. You are unacceptable, but we accept you anyway. Umm..this is a big fat duh..give the outcasts a place to be accepted, a WAY to be accepted, and most will run after it and buy up all the tinfoil hats. Appealing to the most basic fear in human beings, that noone really accepts us. And when you harass others to come join your crusade, well, you can feel secure as all your intelligent friends abandon you, that its THEM, because you have just tons of friends in brainwash central!

Now, there's one more, but it can't be just some one word thing..no, this is most interesting. If you have a war that includes EVERYTHING around you, then nothing can be trusted. And noone can be trusted, except those in your little group...everyone else is out to tempt you. So you get no exposure to new ideas. Media is against you, your parents, your schoolbooks. All out to "get you". The parent thing is very odd (especially since BattleCry appears to encourage youth to go around parents if necessary) considering one of God's top commandments (#5) says Honour thy mother and thy father. But of course, you're only parent is Father-God...I knewthere was a reason you pray like that.... Anyhow, no exposure to new ideas means noone to disagree with your figurehead. Then he doesn't have to worry about you wising up and taking your money back to the Gap, where he won't get his cut. Not to mention, he gets to keep you in the fold, where you belong, worshipping him.

Y'know, I notice a lot of military language in BattleCry..perhaps a subtle (ok, not so subtle to those of us not brainwashed and with an IQ over 50) way of getting a military mindset. BTW, I watched that commercial with the kids standing around holding signs with their little nuggets of "information" on them. I'd like to know what is with the chick holding "1/3 has been raped"....is that insinuating that it's because you weren't falling down to pray? Because I got a fuckin' newsflash for you: It happens whether you pray or not. ANd it has NOTHING to do with god. I've known a VERY religious, modestly dressed (yes Christian) woman who was raped twice. Does that mean she didn't fuckin' pray hard enough? Fuckin' sickos. And I'm not sure what that "53% of us believed Jesus sinned" means. The only possible thing I can think of is his alleged marriage to Mary Magdalene believed in some circles..and if he was MARRIED to her, then they don't believe he sinned. And "65% of us say there is no way to know which religion is TRUE"..well, newsflash, unless god painted it in neon in the clouds, that's a true statement. We don't. There is NO modern day proof of ANY religion. There is NO scientific proof that one religion has it right.

So yes, I'm watching my children closely. It's bad enough you get the right to subject my child to abuse whenever you like...but if they are going to follow the Christian religion, they are going to do it by Jesus. I'll make damn sure of it.

And if you feel the need to post something hateful, you Christians that so enjoy doing that, please do. I need not only another reason not to become one, but I just LOVE seeing you abandon Jesus and show what you truly are.

I hate people

2007-04-10T08:47:00.000-06:00

Now why you say? WEll, same reason really, they're stupid. Ok, I know some of you out there have seen this: You, or a friend, throw your child a birthday party. You send out invitations to all their classmates. At least one parent drops their kid off and leaves. This parent has never met you before in their life, they've never even SEEN you, but yet they leave their child with you. They won't walk off and leave their wallets/purses with you, but hey, it's just a kid.

WTF??? I've had this happen to me, and of course, friends. Or this one time, oooohhh...this woman drops off her kid, doesn't even get out of the car or wave or anything. If the kid wouldn't have been carrying an invitation I'd have never known she was supposed to be under my care! 4 hours later, that's 2 hours after the birthday party was supposed to have ended, the parents show up. They wonder why I'm still taking care of their daughter, because there was another birthday party right after my daughter's in the same location, and I was suppose to pass the kid off to THOSE people. 1. I didn't know that since the only one who bothered to tell me was 6 years old, and well, I don't feel comfortable taking the word of a 6 year old on where I'm supposed to "dump" her. 2. I'M a responsible person, I would never leave my child or anyone else's with people I don't know. Of course, maybe I'm the asshole, perhaps this little pixie 6 year old knew some major kung fu that put her on a par with a 6'1", 250 lb man. Of course, they rolled their eyes and said "Well she knows these people at the party, they are our neighbors." How the fuck am I supposed to know? Maybe this couple crashes birthday parties to pick up UNMONITORED children for a fuckin' child porn ring.

Anyhow, to the subject again, WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE????!!!! You won't give me your credit card numbers for 5 minutes, why the fuck would you walk off and leave your kid with me for 2 HOURS? Have you lost your fuckin' minds? Are you retarded?? Do you suffer from secret brain damage that allows you to appear totally normal but in all actuality makes you as responsible as a millionaire teenager on crack???? And you know what, if I was to say how much I wanted to kill these people the FBI would investigate ME.

Ok, so I've come up with an idea. Here's what you do: when some fuckin' moronic, disgusting excuse for a human being does this to you, AFTER the party (don't ruin your kid's or some other kid's birthday party), when the fucktards show up to pick up their kid, ask them for their wallet. And when THEY look at YOU like YOU'VE lost your fuckin' mind say, "Well, I figured if you'd leave your kid with me without meeting me you'd trust me with your bank account numbers and American Express. I mean, a kid is much more important than that and if you already trust me that much, I figure it'll be a piece of cake to get your monetary information. Oh, and I'll need your housekeys too."

*goes off mumbling* I really really really fuckin' hate people...

Spring Bunny

2007-03-08T11:23:00.000-06:00

Yeah, 5 years and NOW someone's crying...

What people need to understand is the words connotate *christian* beliefs...of which not all Americans share. To me it's not PC, it's establishing a new mindset of what our country is. All the time christians use justification for trying to push yet MORE religious doctrine through our legislature (gays can't marry?) with well, we ARE a christian nation. Guess what, we're not, and there's one way to make sure you start thinking of us as a nation of PEOPLE and not a nation of CHRISTIANS...remove the christian parts of anything governmently backed.

If it REALLY doesn't matter if it's an Easter bunny or a Spring bunny because it no longer is treated religiously by the public, then why does it matter if they change the name? I'm not offended by the word Easter, but I AM offended that the christians think it's ok to promote Easter publicly and scream at anyone, ANYONE, else that has the gall to try to have their faith in public, let alone practice it there. http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/mass4.htm And while some of the things done may have been a bit off...I believe these statements are VERY telling:

Rev. Paula P. Durrant of the Congregational Christian Church of Somerset declared that it is "a sign of sad times" when opinions of religious leaders are not promptly acknowledged by politicians.

According to the Herald News, signatories of the letter warned: "In our region there are a variety of groups, witches, Devil Worshippers and representatives of many other religious beliefs. We fear that the creche and the menorah would be compromised even more should other groups seek to have their symbols included."

If your religious beliefs are compromised over something like that, then hey, your faith must be on pretty shaky fuckin' ground.

WWJD

2007-03-08T07:36:00.000-06:00

I can say what Jesus wouldn't do: deny anyone medical care due to someone's appearance. But this good doctor decides he has some kind of right to judge others and to hide behind Jesus' robes when he does it. Dr. Gary Merrill, not so Christian to deny treatment to anyone, let alone a child. I suppose one can refuse to treat gays because "AIDS is God's punishment". Or maybe refuse to treat blacks, how about we refuse to treat old people, I mean shit, their old, they won't live too much longer anyway.

The "good" doctor has set his standards for treatment, and he decides if you are "worthy" of his precious time.

Let me say something here: If you cannot reconcile your religion and your job, get a new job. One would think being a doctor would be the ultimate way of practicing Christianity, I mean, you get to HELP people, save lives. Apparently at least ONE idiot has found a way they can't work together. It's really easy, if your job puts you in a position to do things you don't agree with, GET A NEW JOB! Mr. Merrill, and yes, I leave off Dr. on purpose because you are not a real doctor since you can't seem to follow basic human decency, Mr Merrill who made you God? What a stunning example of Christianity! Using your religion to judge others and deny them their basic human dignity!

Yeah, makes me want to go out and make a new Christian friend! Jesus was known for treating the undesirables...one would think that if AMA didn't hold him to that standard, Jesus would.

However, let me point something out. He IS hiding behind Jesus' robes...He has up in his office "Standards of Dress" apply. I don't recall Jesus having a dress code...perhaps I'm wrong. It's been a lot of years since I read the bible, but I'm pretty certain he didn't. What this sounds like is a class issue. You're obviously poor and I don't want my rich patients to be forced to look at you.

Regardless of which, you're a sorry ass human being...and like most other Christians who like the limelight, you're a sorry ass Christian.

Please, tell the good doctor what you think...maybe a few hundred Christians can convince him that Jesus wasn't a dickhead.

Christian Medical Services 2920 F St # C6, Bakersfield, CA(661) 324-8990

Burbia.com

2007-03-07T11:20:00.000-06:00

Ok, let's back this train right on up and do a little exploration. So I find this site and go to get a few laughs and end up in this twilight zone of "family values". If you go to the rants section you find 3 different rants entitled: Swinging in the Burbs--II, Swingin in the Burbs, and Sleeping with our next door neighbor.

Now, you ought to know by now, it's none of my business and I could give a shit what YOU do. However, it DOES bring up a question. Let me show you some quotes here:

I thought I knew our town. It's outside NYC, and it's about the last place in the universe you'd expect this. Daughters of the Revolution, Woman's League. Yes.
My town is totally totally conservative. That's the thing. You'd never think of stuff like this going on. I was stunned at first. But maybe it's these towns that need it most.
some were on the pta! 1 was an asst principal.
i'm screwing my husband's best friend and he doesn't have a clue. if he's going to ignore me, then i'll find what i need elsewhere. hah!
i'm having a fling with a contractor on our street.
definitely screw your husband's friend. no question. how piggish can he be?

And we're worried about gays destroying the "sanctity of marriage"? You're fuckin' with me right? Now, hold on, the reason I bring this up is let's paint us a picture of the Suburbia, Daughters of the Revolution, PTA, etc.

We're talking about people who are usually Christian, white, of course straight (or in denial), y'know who I"m talking about, those screaming about SANCTITY of MARRIAGE. Read that shit again and tell me GAYS will ruin the "sanctity" of marriage. What fuckin' sanctity? Marriage is a joke to the biggest portion of Hollywood, divorce rates are insane, and apparently we have so much fuckin' going on in Suburbia with people outside the marriage that I'm not sure how anyone keeps track who they are married to.

Now, if you want to swing or cheat, your business. Just don't ask me to do it. I'm definitely NOT putting down someone for the sex they have (though if you're a cheater I will stay away from you because noone likes a liar). However, I do wonder how much the sanctitiy of marriage group overlaps the PTA, DotR, suburbia group. And you know they do at least a little, it's the law of averages. Yeah, I know, it should be obvious what a joke marriage is now due to politicans fuckin' around while they try to pass through an amendment saying gays can't marry. But hey, let's say you support that marriage amendment...why don't you rethink your position here? If you look at our media, our politicians, the anonymous rantings of bored suburbians...does your marriage feel like a joke? Mine doesn't. And little newsflash for you: Gays won't make it any less or more a joke than Britney Spears getting married for 2 days for fun.

Anyone who opposes gay marriage (and no, a civil union is not the SAME thing. Otherwise you're wasting our time trying to make a new name for the MARRIAGE of gay people you fuckin' idiot), is a hypocritical bastard. Because until you make divorce and sex outside of marriage (consensual or not) a federal crime, you have NO right whatsoever to deny gays the right to MARRIAGE based on this mythical "sanctity of marriage" bullshit.

Verra verra interesting....

2007-03-06T07:54:00.000-06:00

Posted on Wed, Jan. 15, 2003
NORTH DAKOTA LEGISLATURE: Groups
question tobacco banMeasure would make it a misdemeanor crime to sell or use
productAssociated Press
BISMARCK - Health groups that discourage smoking
lined up Tuesday to fight legislation what would make North Dakota the first
state to outlaw tobacco, a stand that left some lawmakers perplexed.
The measure, introduced by Rep. Michael Grosz, R-Grand Forks, would make it a
misdemeanor crime to sell or use tobacco. Sellers would face up to a year in
jail and a $2,000 fine, while casual smokers or smokeless tobacco users
could go to jail for 30 days and be fined $1,000.
"The education approach is obviously not working in North Dakota," he said. "Should we not prohibit the sale and use of tobacco just because it may be difficult to enforce, and let nearly 1,000 North Dakotans die every year?"
Bruce Levi, director of the North Dakota Medical Association, called the measure "novel," but said it "introduces an approach to tobacco control that has not been proven effective or even implemented in any other state."
"Our goal is to prevent and reduce tobacco use. There is scientific evidence to support the programs that are beginning to move forward in North Dakota," Levi said.
"Prohibition has not been shown to prevent tobacco use."

Aww..I've been looking all over for this darn link. So tell me, tell me true, why if prohibition has not been shown to prevent tobacco use, why o why are they going crazy to prohibit it in restaurants/hotels/etc? If it doesn't work, then you're just being an asshole. And who says that it has to be proven in another state before ND could do it? Seems a catch 22 here. But here's the million dollar question: Why is it the anti-tobacco organizations the ones that cried the loudest AGAINST it?

At a hearing where the House Finance and Taxation Committee voted 9 to 4 in
favor of tobacco prohibition, a line up of anti-tobacco special interest groups
denounced the bill in no uncertain terms. Given the chance to support
their goal of a smoke-free society The American Lung Association, American Heart
Association, North Dakota Medical Association and North Dakota Public Health
Association all spoke out against the ban on Tuesday, much to the dismay of some
lawmakers on the committee.
Even in written form their panic was palatable. How can this be? To oppose this bill is the only proof anyone needs that all the talk about health and reducing death rates is a complete lie. The anti-smokers are frantic that the cash flow they receive
from cigarettes may come to an end. Their greed can their only motive
since, if what they have been preaching for years is true, allowing cigarettes
to be legal means that those who permit it have blood on their hands.

Perhaps it's because they would have to find new jobs? Yeah, this happened back
in 2003..it was never passed, but I wouldn't be quite so quick to push it under
a bridge. If you are against smoking you need to ask yourself a few questions.
One of the excuses given by the anti groups is it would drive smoking
underground. Wow, with that kind of logic why even have drug laws? Or rape laws?
Or murder laws? I mean, you're just "driving it underground". What interest would these groups have in pushing how "deadly" a product is, but keeping it legal, all the while imposing more and more taxes, prohibitions, etc on the user? If smoking is really killing so many and this is a matter of public health, what do they have against making the manufacture, sale, and use of it illegal?

It's really funny how disgusting, evil, distasteful, sickening, etc smokers are until you have their money in your pocket.

http://www.tobacco.org/news/114664.html

Belter told the House that committee members were frustrated last week with
the testimony from anti-tobacco groups that testified against the tobacco ban .
. .

You should wonder if the anti-tobacco groups have your best interests at heart, or their wallets...

What does the writer owe the reader?

2007-03-04T11:16:00.000-06:00

Ok, this post might just bite me in the ass...but hey, if she sees it then well, maybe she can understand my point of view...don't take it personally, I'm sure you'rea very nice person, but at this moment, I really really fuckin' hate you.

Background here: I read....boy do I read...ALOT. You have no idea...I have over 2000 books NOT boxed up...at least another 500 in boxes until I get more room for shelves. I read *everything* except romance novels. Comprehend how much I love to read...I OWN my own library. I even have textbooks that I didn't get in college. My biggest wet dream consists of a bookstore that has every book *ever* written and an unlimited budget. My second biggest consists of a library the size of the Sistine Chapel AT LEAST. My own private library, not a public one. If I was given a choice between not ever reading again and stopping breathing, I'd stop breathing. Are you getting this?

If I get pissed at a writer then well, you did good man. I must have really got into your novel, way to go. If I want to burn your house to the ground and do impossible things involving shoving your computer/typewriter in interesting places...you fucked up. I'm a very loyal reader...if I find a superb author, I tell everyone about their books, and will buy a book from them without fail. You would think I'd stop doing that considering they will let you down so quickly. Let me list the things you owe a reader, and you DO owe them something.

1. Give them what you promised. If you have promised a 3 book series, then give it to them. You don't leave them hanging in book 2 and then tell them they have to wait 10 years for book 3....maybe, that's if you get to it at all. How would you like someone to worm their way into your emotions and then step back and go "Ok, we're stopping now, for no reason at all. It's been fun! Later" Imagine being left on the cusp of orgasm and then him jumping up, throwing his clothes on and saying "Hey, I'm done...I gotta go". It's one thing to write 8 books independant of one another and make ONE sucky one. Fucking up a series? You're a dickhead. (This is actually in reference to a different writer, but it is owed).

2. You cannot kill off the main character at least 2 books early. The main character is there for a reason. And you have told us that we will be following this character's life. To end it early, and then write more books is bullshit. JUST because the new character is in the old characters body DOES NOT mean we're following that character. If you brain-damaged the main character and gave her an alternate personality that doesn't integrate with the main one, the main one is dead and you're writing a whole new series. Please don't do that. We go into a book expecting Jane, and now we have this whole new personality called Dorothy. Tell us this, so we either go into the book expecting something new, or start a new series. Instead we feel robbed because we bought a book about Jane, and instead got a book about Dorothy. It's false advertising and it's a shitty thing to do. I'm sorry, but a true reader understands that all books carry an emotional investment. How do you expect people to react when you play with their emotions? You didn't just bottle up Cheer in a Tide bottle...you bottled up a person I don't know and does not have the depth of the original into the original's body/story, an original character I love/respect/admire/masterbate to, what-the-fuck-ever.Not fucking cool. To me it says "I'm just trying to sell books". Because everyone will pay for a story about Jane, you fuck them over by sticking in Dorothy and putting Jane's cover on. And if Dorothy sucks (as she does in this case), you're a bigger asshole.

People say if you don't like what the writer does, don't buy the books anymore. Yeah, and I won't. But I can still bitch about it. You cannot do a job based on appealing to the emotions of people and then fuck them over. Well you can, but you only have yourself to blame if they feel betrayed. I'm definitely NOT saying the writer has to write what Ilike, but I do think the writer owes the reader what they are promised. ONLY what they are promised. If I want to buy books about Jane and you want to move on to Dorothy, hey, start a new series and advertise in the new series "If you enjoy Dorothy and would like to know where she comes from, read the Jane series". Or title it something obvious (or sub-title) "Story of Dorothy: After Jane". Then we can say "Oh, I didn't like Dorothy, so Iwon't buy these". Which is probably why you didn't do this to start with. Dorothy probably won't sell as well, so we're going to make them think this is Jane and sell some books.

Now, if Dorothy and Jane are going to integrate after I write this post..well, I can't say I'm sorry. Thus far it seems as if you've killed off Jane entirely. ANd for what it's worth, Jane's husband is a sorry motherfucker who didn't even mourn his damn loss. And I used to LIKE him. Look, a writer is only as good as his last book. In your case your last 2. You built a fanbase that even after the first "bad" book, stuck around having faith that you were setting us up for something good. And what assholes would we be to complain while you give the character one book to grow into something a bit more? But hey, the second book is supposed to return and see the original character grow, not morph into some idiot.

So let me make this position of mine clear: If Stephen King wants to move onto Danielle Steele type books, that's his business. The reader has NO right to demand he keep writing horror. We can be disappointed all we want, but we better get over it. He does not owe us a damn thing in that regard. But if he moves into Danielle Steele type shit and packages it like Cujo...he's a dick and has betrayed his fanbase. He also cannot say he's writing about Lassie and package it like Cujo. That is LYING. I spent money to read about Cujo, I got fuckin' Lassie...ain't that some fucked up shit? You ripped me off. No, don't buy your fucking book back, but damn, at least apologize!

For what's worth, I won't buy another book without reading it first, IF I can bring myself to read it. And I will no longer be suggesting your books as THE thing to read. I don't want you ripping off my friends. And I hope Jane's husband dies a horrible, torturous death and Jane dances on the ceiling, the fickle son of a bitch. Her enemies were more true to her than he was...

John Edwards

2007-02-28T11:20:00.000-06:00

Ok, well, John Edwards...I'm ambivalent toward John Edwards. He seems ok, but I worry about how religion would influence his politics. He seems sincere.

Starting with John Edwards stance on the issues, I really like how his site has it vey clear where to find them. Just go to About, and Issues. 100 is our max, so he doesn't gain any, but hey, doesn't lose any either.

So, here's what he's about and my comments on each:

Restoring America's Moral Leadership in the World--Ok, that's a pretty arrogant statement IMO. Who said we were really the moral leaders? Ok, so we do good things sometimes, but I don't think I'd place us as the top of the moral tree. Arrogance of the statement aside, quite frankly I think we better clean up our OWN morals before we try to set an example for others. He has removing our troops from Iraq there...what he has is a bit closer to a plan, but it's not a plan, another idea. 1 point off, while it's better than Hillary, it's not much better. 99..

Naturally Health Care falls in there..it's a "key" issue--Ok, he gets his point back for having a REAL plan. However, I think we could fix this whole health care issue by not allowing insurance companies and hospitals to gouge the living fuck out of the public. And if it doesn't fix it (though I really think it would), it will come pretty damn close. I'm not sure if I approve of yet more tax cuts. And I don't agree with requiring all Americans can get it. If your plan turns out shitty, well, those that can't afford it are fucked again. Why don't we do a test run and then pay it out. My husband keeps telling me health insurance is not a secret mafia demand for protection money, requiring all Americans to pay for health care does not reassure me he's right.

Eliminating Poverty--Poverty is a very important issue, and he's got a very good, idea that states its goals clearly. But it's still not really a plan. And, not to be a party pooper, but you can't eliminate poverty. It's one thing for us as a nation to help out those that had something bad happen and make them poor. But this doesn't tell us if this plan also applies to those lazy ass bastards who are poor because they don't *want* to work. You know one, I know several, c'mon, do YOU want to support that guy/chick?

Strengthening America's Middle Class--First of all, if you were to actually eliminate poverty, would there be a middle class left? Just curious...this is worse than no plan, this is criticizing our current way of life, but not suggesting even ideas on how to fix it. He says what our goal should be, but how will John Edwards help us achieve that goal? 10 points off for no idea...90

Leading the Fight against Global Warming and Our Addiction to Foreign Oil--I know dick about global warming..I hear all kinds of shit and quite frankly, I have not done the research to come to an informed opinion. I have a feeling the whole things been fucked with so much that I probably won't actually get an informed opinion. However, I'm all for doing things to keep our earth healthy. I completely agree about fighting against our reliance on foreign oil, hell, I want to fight our reliance on oil period. I'm with him on this one. No real plan, but really is this something you CAN plan for? Or just work toward it? I vote give him a break on this one.

I think it's cool he addressed man issues that aren't THE issues...but naturally I want more. I want to know about key issues and small issues. Off to the next step...Since he stated his issues clearly, I actually don't have to do a search through his speeches and such, so we can move right along to his voting recrod at Vote-smart.org.

Oh, wow, I may have to redo Hillary's posting...I should have explored this site more. Well, her'es some more on how Edwards feels (note this is not his voting record, just the stance he takes. If you click on Edwards' name, you can read details):

I support a woman's right to choose and believe this that right is constitutionally protected. I also support funding for family planning.--Hmm..10 points back..not for agreeing with me, but protecting the individual. For what's it's worth, I'm pro-choice, anti-abortion. In fact, I've never met anyone pro-abortion. This means, I support a woman's right to choose, *I* would never choose abortion. But I do not deny that another woman should have the right to choose it, nor will I, or have I, judged her for her choice on it. SOME of us mind our own business and just be there for those we love.

At first I was a bit concerned over the fact that all the budget questions were not answered, however he leaves some information at the bottom: I have laid out a detailed agenda on taxes and spending. My plan includes: increased funding for education, health care, homeland security, and other priorities; funding for a strong national defense; tax fairness, including repeal of the Bush tax cuts for those making over $200,000; and tax cuts for the middle class and working poor. Hmm..well, if there is a detailed agenda, may I suggest putting it up on your website? I did not see a detailed plan. Perhaps though, I missed it. I would suggest putting it up in your navigation bar. Some of us want to see plans, others just want to know you have one, any one, after Bush. 20 points for saying you have a plan, but not leaving it where we can read it. You can't say "I have a plan trust me", ok, you can SAY it, but don't expect intelligent people to actually trust you. You're a politician.

I support a ban on contributions by federal lobbyists to federal officials, public financing of elections, and other measures to reduce the influence of special interests in Washington. I strongly supported the McCain-Feingold bill. I believe in equal rights and dignity for gay and lesbian Americans. --Oh wow, I'm sorry guys, I won't do anything about points with this one as I'll be so damned biased...but I've always DREAMED of banning contributions by federal lobbyists and public financing of elections. I mean I'm creaming all over myself as we speak....Ok, I know the McCain-Feingold bill tries to address this, but it's pretty soft IMO. I of course support gay rights and glad to see him do it, but many people have been fighting for this and the recognition that gays aren't treated equally doesn't wet me enough...a monkey could see that..a DEAD monkey could see that. The fact that ANY politician is talking about coming down hard on the "donations" the politicians get is awesome...And if he actually was to DO it...I think it would kill me...

I support greater emphasis on drug treatment and elimination of mandatory minimums for certain non-violent crimes. I also support the death penalty and reform of our probation and parole systems to provide more support and supervision.--Whoa..he's taken a definitive stance on the death penalty. Shit, I don't think I have a bad thing to say about this...mm..If you want my views on the death penalty and why I support it, I'll be happy to address that in another post. I am however extremely shocked to see his support of it. He always struck me a John Denver lovey dovey type...

I support keeping drugs out of the United States and vigorous prosecution of drug sales. I also support greater funding for drug treatment and alternatives to incarceration for nonviolent offenders such as drug courts. --Really I can't say I support this statement. I'm of the opinion that if you want to fuck yourself up, knock yourself out. Now, vigorous prosecution of selling to children..I support that. To me this kind of statement is still a stand against freedom. If you want to fuck yourself up, go ahead, and if you hurt other people we'll throw the book at you. But hey, he's making a step in the right direction.

I support higher pay for teachers, especially in low-income schools; smaller high schools: afterschool programs; offering a free year of college at a public university to students who work 10 hours per week; and other education measures. --I support higher pay for teachers...smaller high schools, SOME after school programs...but how exactly does he plan to get the money? The free year at college? I'd like to hear more about that..it sounds good..but there could be a problem I'm just not seeing.

I support job training programs, an increase in the minimum wage, greater protection for unionization, and greater help for Americans balancing work and families. --Hmm..job training programs...that's good. Not everyone is cut out for college...and maybe this is a step into accepting an apprenticeship type program in certain jobs. I mean, do you REALLY need to go to 4 years of school to learn to be a plumber? Again, this sounds good, but it does say he SUPPORTS....so he'll support measures assuring these things, but will he instigate any? Is this a priority to him and how high? Just curious more than anything.

I support affirmative action. --I don't. AA was great and needed..but it can't stay forever. There comes a time when it must be phased out. Either your equal, or you get special considerations. These days there are other ways to be sure that someone less qualified and white does not get a job a more qualified black person should get. I'm sorry, but real equality has to start somewhere, and now's better than later. These days the boosts they give to black people to get in college seems more insulting to me. They are effectively saying black people are not up to the same standards as white. I have faith in the black people...I have faith they are up to the same standards as I am and I think it's past time to remove AA and allow black people to surpass the rather insulting standards we have for them.

Unlike President Bush, I support strong environmental protection, higher CAFE standards, protection of ANWR, and American leadership in the world's battle against global warming. --I agree with what the statment is saying for the most part. However, two small bones to pick here..and they are small, and seemingly petty, but if we don't hold our government officials up to some standard of behavior, then they'll just stay as shitty as they are now. 1. Did we really need the "Unlike President Bush"? Seems a bit catty, most of us are well aware the contempt he shows for our environment. Be above that. 2. WTF is with American leadership? Why do WE have to be the ones that lead the world? Why not, I don't know, just work together? For a country supposedly based on freedom and equality, we sure spend an inordinate amount of effort trying to be above the rest of the fuckin' world.

I believe the right to bear arms is protected by the Second Amendment. I also support reasonable measures to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, including closing the gun show loophole and vigorously enforcing gun laws. --Yay! Someone who wants to leave our guns alone! Look, for those of you watching the Jalestra network: I don't know how you got the absolutely retarded idea that banning guns in this country is going to make guns go away. If you take the guns away from the good guys, only the bad guys will have guns. And while gun crime MAY, MAY go down (due to limiting the ways of getting a gun), the same assholes bound to use them, will still get them. So all your doing is taking those people on the fence off...and then we get to wait until they go crazy in a different, more creative way. I don't like guns either, I think they are stupid. But just because the guns are stupid, doesn't mean I have to be. Another secret, if you EDUCATE your child about guns, they very very very rarely actually shoot someone on accident. If you notice, accidental shootings by children finding guns only increased in the last 15 years...WHEN PARENTS QUIT EDUCATING. Now, I DO agree there is really no reason for the average citizen to have those nice extreme automatic weapons. However, I believe we have the right to those as well. While we may all like to believe we're all too civilized for war(Yeah, right), IF we ever do get a leader bent on turning us into a police state, only our ability to fight back will save us. And I do believe that at some point in the future...there will be another American revolution. *shrugs* It's human nature..

I support a health care plan that would cover every child and millions of vulnerable adults, and also bring down health costs for all Americans. I support a strong Patients Bill of Rights, prescription drug benefit in Medicare, and stem cell research. --WTF do we need health insurance for anyhow. Did you guys know that once upon a time you only got health care to protect you if something really serious happened? And that health care costs were cheaper? Some of us don't really care to pay protection money to the health insurance mafia...Why not lower health costs???

I support policies that welcome immigrants and protect our security, including an earned legalization program for those who work hard and play by the rules. --If you don't support a statement like this you're an asshole or a bigot (or both). We can't shut ourselves off from the world. It'll just make us Christians...some of you might like that, the rest of us are crying now.

I will reorient U.S. assitance toward supporting open societies, giving more aid to nongovernmental bodies, and cutting assistance to dictators uninterested in democracy and upholding human rights. --Ok, I agree..to a point. Why do they have to be interested in democracy? Our form of government is not the best for everyone. If someone has a peaceful monarchy..knock yourself out. Theocracy's scare me, but if some country OTHER THAN AMERICA can pull it off with decency and peace, go ahead. NONE OF MY BUSINESS.

To rebuild Iraq, I will immediately turn over oversight of the civilian authority to the United Nations. The U.S. must play a central role in helping Iraq become safe and secure. I will work with our military to ensure that we have the right mix of forces to handle counter-insurgency and peace enforcement operations, and that we have enough forces on the ground to do the job. I would also involve NATO immediately, with the goal to eventually placing NATO in charge of Iraq's security. I will establish specific timetables to transfer authority to the Iraqis to give them more control over their economy, civilian authority, and security, and to help them create a new government that defends their freedom and represents their diversity. And I will establish an independent oversight commission to ensure that the contract process is competitive, fair, and transparent.--Hmm.. sounds good...draw up some more specifics and get back to me.

For more information about my positions on a range of issues, I urge you to read my detailed, 60-page policy booklet, "Real Solutions for America," which is available at http://www.johnedwards2004.com/real-solutions.asp.

It all sounds good. Maybe it is. I'll take a look over his voting record and we'll move along.

Wow...not too impressed with his voting record. There were some very important votes that he just did't vote on for some reason or another. Scared to rock the boat? Didn't want to alienate someone? Hmm..I'm really not sure what to do about this...his voting record is sketchy and, to me, a bit suspicious. I don't feel John Edwards has been properly tested for being our president. Seems like he has a lot of talk, not so much to back it up....

So, I'd vote John Edwards before Hillary Clinton, but neither is *my* candidate. Kind of a shame..I voted for Kerry in the last election so I was already more positively inclined to John Edwards than any of the other candidates...I feel kind of disappointed...

You know what drives me absolutely batshit?

2007-02-27T15:06:00.000-06:00

http://www.cavalierdaily.com/CVA...=29524&pid=1556

Then there is James E. Enstrom, a cancer research rogue at UCLA. He claims that most research about second-hand smoke reflects the efforts of a vast disinformation campaign that perverts data with hyperbole. Enstrom might be a credible source -- if his research wasn't funded by Philip Morris. A timeline compiled by Jon Krueger, a contributor for tobacco industry watchdog tobacco.org, reveals that Enstrom incessantly begged the tobacco industry for money to support his research. J.R. Reynolds and Philip Morris, over a span of 25 years, gladly obliged, providing more than half a million dollars.
But the difference between studies conducted by the University and researchers like Enstrom is that the University's research probably won't produce data in support of the tobacco industry.

I call bullshit. No, I believe that Enstrom might be funded by Philliip Morris. What I call bullshit on is how it is wrong to accept money from Phillip Morris because of their vested interest in their agenda, but it is NOT wrong to decide public policy based on anti-tobacco funded studies, pharma studies, and government studies. ALL with also a vested interest in their agenda.

Anti-tobacco has an agenda. If you believe this is a health issue, then tell me why tobacco is not banned? And why is anti-tobacco, supposedly so worried about everyone else's health (including forcing smokers to quit) not asking for the ban of it's use, sale, and manufacture? You are aware of how much funding they get to "prove" tobacco is naughty naughty?

Pharmaceautical studies--Did you ever wonder, if nicotine is so dangerous a drug that you can't smoke it, and you can't chew it...why can any 8 year old walk into Wal-Mart and buy nicotine patches and gum? There is nothing against the law about a child buying this stuff. In fact it's encouraged. Ah, I see, kids shouldn't do the evil nicotine unless Pharma sells it. Ah, I see. And umm..how much money do you make again for pushing your products as a "stop smoking" aid when it's been proven that only 24% of those that quit smoking do so with NRT? And wait, how do the rest quit again? Ah, cold turkey...wow...funny how cigarettes are as "addictive as heroin" but heroin users can't seem to jump that ship without more help than a fuckin' patch huh? And who keeps telling you that you'll NEVER succeed quitting cold turkey? Aww...that would be those disinterested Pharma companies huh? No agenda there...

And let's go to goverment--Naughty naughty government, who not only receive (each state) MSA money (that's master settlement) but also receive..hold on, let me check that--14.7 billion dollars to the state of Texas for suing cigarette companies, then let's include the 1.00 tax hikethis year estimated to bring in 986 million dollars

And according to that site smokers cost $10 billion a year to care for. So even IF, IF they were actually using the money to cover smoker's health care (which they aren't,more on that),we're still paying about 5 million more (and if you think the cost of that lawsuit isn't being passed on to the consumer, that's smokers, you're a goddamned idiot). But what they are actually doing with that money is get ready

balancing the state budget and funding education. Yeah, I know that last link says it will fund tobacco education. No it won't. Ricky Perry stated very clearly that it's to fund schools. And in the meantime, the non-smokers see a nice school property tax cut. No vested interest there, huh?

So, umm..where's the hypocrisy? Oh, you bet your sweet ass I call BULLSHIT...

By the way, you better hope I don't quit smoking, or Texas will crash and burn..

I support your child's education, I buy by the carton.

Mm...

2007-02-27T13:42:00.000-06:00

*sigh* My whole presidential discovery thing didn't go so well. In the end I fucked up and appealed to emotionalism..but anyone who has kids gets emotional. Since it was not really about appealing to you, it was my search to be fair...I wasn't appealing to emotionalims, I just got emotional. I'm sorry, there's NOTHING Hillary Clinton can do to get me to vote for her. I understand we have Congress, but quite frankly, the didn't do so well when Bush and Republicans were in office, pardon me if my faith in them is gone.

Understand, I WANT a female president. I believe we're ready for one, I just don't believe Hillary Clinton is that female. If you want ot get down to it, I have a gut feeling that she's going to do more to harm this nation than help it. Not globally, but in THIS country. She'll harm us. I'd rather wait for a better woman to come along. One who understands what being a mother REALLY is. I feel that she must not have actually raised her daughter, or she might understand how the rest of us wouldn't be quite so quick to turn ours over to other people. One who also understands there's a time to talk and a time to fight. That realizes our Constitution is more than a pretty document from a long time ago. I feel that Hillary Clinton has some feeling for her fellow man...but I think maybe she needs to redirect her "nurturing" instinct to her child and not us and ours.

You just don't fuck with my kids.

Analysis of a presidential wannabe

2007-02-27T09:59:00.000-06:00

Well, I've decided with the coming presidential race, we should find out some background on our hopefuls. It's never too soon to educate yourself. And I've decided to start with Hillary Clinton, because I fucking HATE her. However, I am aware that the biggest part of my extreme dislike is NOT based on rationality, I just get the feeling she's not a good person. I DO disagree with some of her beliefs on where America should go, but I REALLY dislike her. How much? I would vote for George Bush before I would Hillary Clinton. I truly feel in my heart that she will fuck this country to a fare thee well. Yes, I fully believe she would fuck it up worse than Bush. So, let's found out how right I am, ok, or how wrong I am...*sings songs* but I'm voting I'm riiiight...Ok, I know, I'm going in biased, but hey, I'm Jalestra, not Mother Theresa, work with me here. This is NOT your opportunity to compare her to other candidates. We're not talking about *other* candidates, we are discussing Hillary Clinton. All information is found from her official website HillaryClinton.com

You have to really search for what Clinton believes, while other candidates in MY experience have their views on the front page of their web central, hers were nowhere to be found except in her biography. IMO, that is a strike for *any* candidate. The public wants to know where you stand...we really don't care where you grew up. You guys try to out-poor each other anyhow. Out of 100...Hillary is down to 99..and some questions. Is there some underlying reason that she doesn't want to make it obvious where she stands? Is it *really* necessary for us to explore her entire lifeline instead of to just say it? I think this is at least partly right. Don't want to alienate anyone yet right?

Ok, having read the biography, I'm still clueless on how she stands on the "key" issues. I see how she voted, and that's important, but I want to see what she's telling the American people she stands for. I want to see how what she says aligns with how she voted. I do see she fought for women's rights, but how? I see she sped up and made easier the adoption process...how? I know these are things we can all look up. But when you think of the American people in general we don't think of them educating themselves *cough*Bush*cough*. I take a good chunk of points off for lack of clarity in how she stands. 20 points. At the moment we are the average American..we don't care if you can chase the info down. Clinton drops to 79 points. I'm sorry, but we all know the American people just don't do much reading...and they are very easy to fool...why all the vagueness? Probably because the American people jud don't do much reading and are easy to fool. So she can step up and make as many contradictory feel good speeches as she likes. This is not an attack on Hillary Clinton, they all do it. She's just being quite a bit more vague than I'm used to.

On to the next logical step: Speeches. Surely those will give us a better idea of how she stands...

Wait, I'm a lazy American (or yes, actually even a BUSY American), I don't want to read speeches!? WAit wait, here's Talk Action! Ok, what does it say?

Ending our country's dependence on foreign oil will take real leadership. Hillary proposed a simple idea to help end the cycle of dependence: put some of the oil industry's windfall profits into a fund that would help develop practical new sources of renewable energy.
What do you think about Hillary's plan? Should we use some of the oil company's record profits to fund alternative energy research? What are some other ideas to reduce our dependence on foreign oil?

Ok, for the fucking record--THAT'S NOT A PLAN! That's an idea...when you list pros/cons, how to implement it, costs..predicted results..THAT'S a plan. This is simply an idea. What do I think about her "plan"? Not enough information. I can't tell you what I think except it has possibilities...give me more information, I can tell you if I want to fall behind it!

The President owes an on-going consultation to Congress and owes straight talk to the country. We have to get this right. The Congress should debate our current course, including the current silent-treatment policy toward our adversaries.
We want to know what you think. Read Hillary's speech and share your thoughts with us about the role Congress must play to make sure that President Bush doesn't repeat history.

Title of Speech pretty much says it all: IRAN: No Military Action On Iran Without Congressional Authority

Ok, this is a gimme...I mean, we all can easily agree with that. Does anyone else get the feeling that she's testing the waters before committing an opinion? Jeez, she's not even subtle about it!

Fine, she wants to be vague..then we'll move along to her voting record. However, the fact that she cannot seem to state a flat out opinion one way or the other, plan, something, will definitely stand against her in the end. FWIW, this is not increasing my opinion of the woman. Even with a good voting record, I cannot help but feel that she is deliberately being extremely vague for no other reason than to drum up votes. This "conversation with America" is not helpful at all...I mean, hey, I can talk pretty, that's not a serious discussion. More like being a pain in the ass. Yeah, I know, kiss ass to become president, but really...do you think THIS is the best idea? Hell, it could be the reason we end up with idiots as president is because you manage piss anyone off with a decent, well used brain.

*sighs* Moving on--Vote-smart.org for her voting record. Oh now, momma likes...this is so organized, so clear...fuck Hillary, Vote-smart.org gets 500 points for organization!

Abortion--Now, this isn't just important as a woman's right to her body. This is also an indication of how you intend to vote in the individual freedoms of a people. Abortion is a *personal* choice. Noone's business but the woman's. As such, and since objections to abortion are based on another individual's opinions or beliefs, this is an indication in how important it is to grant man's freedoms based on a rule of freedom rather than a rule of belief. One person's beliefs/feelings should NEVER decide another's course of action in regards to their own life. And while you may feel that is a life inside her, well, she's the one carrying it and her feelings count more than yours.

Now, it doesn't matter how the bill turns out, what matters is how it was voted on.

Hillary Clinton voted yes on hte Unintended pregnancy act. An act that:
- Increases funding and access to family planning services
- Funds legislation that requires equitable prescription coverage for contraceptives under health plans
- Funds legislation that would create and expand teen pregnancy prevention programs and education programs concerning emergency contraceptives

She voted no twice against prohibiting partial birth abortion.

She voted yes to Military Abortion Amendment:

- Would not require public funding of abortions, individual seeking the abortion would be responsible for all cost associated with the procedure
- Would overturn the ban that currently allows abortions in military hospitals only in cases when the life of the woman is at risk, or in cases of rape or incest

Ok, this shows a respect for an individual's choices. Let's hope that continues.

Agricultural she voted yes twice on Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002. Go look it up at the site, but this sounds good. Not being a farmer I cannot attest to the effectiveness...but this is basically, as far as I can tell, a good bill..let me rephrase that, the intentions are good. Without more information, well, I can't tell you. I have kids, I can't keep up with *everything*.

Up until education I find that she tends to side with the people more often than not. owever, she voted yes for the No Child Left Behind Act. Quite frankly, everybody said it was a clusterfuck from the beginning, and all I've seen is proof we are right. It would be a small thing except one would think we wouldn't fuck with our next generations' education. A fuck up like this, that is having bad effects years later is not a minor issue. Any suffering in education on this level will effect what these children have learned for years. Education is NOT a minor issue, and I fail to see why she agreed with it. Teachers are "teaching to the test" now more than ever, and the government has done nothing but insure that is what they HAVE to do. Well, believe you me, we'll get into public education another time.

We do well again until:Firearms Manufacturers Protection bill A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others.

I think it is extremely unfair to sue *any* company because someone misused their product. I beleive this only encourages the idiot lawsuits we have now. It's one thing to sue a company for making a gun that when fired correctly blows up, and another to say "since you made that gun, YOU are responsible for how people use it". Noone hails Smith &Wesson as heroes when police shoot down a deadly threat, noone should penalize them when a criminal shoots down an innocent. The individual engaging in the behavior is the responsible party, not the creator of the object in question. Do we sue GE because Susie Q stuck John Q's hand in their blender? Or perhaps we ought to just worry about arresting Susie Q, and not blame it on "well, if GE hadn't *made* the blender, it wouldn't have happened*. I have to say that this vote against freedom. REmember, if you want the freedom to do as you please, with it comes the responsibility to take the consequences of your actions.

Ok, so according to her voting record alone, I would have to say that she comes off for freedom more often than against, however, I do feel her stance on the FireArms bill is a huge step against adults taking responsibility for their own actions. Sometimes giving the people what they need is not giving them what they want. I would have to raise her from 79 to an 82.

Now we go into behavior: Well, it really bothers me that we can't get our shit in Iraq straight and she's already entertaining thoughts of attacking Iran. Why don't we clean up one mess before we move on to the next huh? But I find this sentence chilling: "We need to use every tool at our disposal, including diplomatic and economic in addition to the threat and use of military force,"

But Jalestra, you say, they are making nuclear weapons! Are you fuckin' sure? I mean, deja vu? Hello? Hey Dipshit, don't you think we ought to put forth a little more effort this time, a tiny bit, just a smidgeon in MAKING FUCKING SURE!? Holy shit, what kind of fucking moron are you...oh sorry, wrong rant. Anyhow, come fuckin' on, how fuckin' dense do you have to be????

1. Might be smart to be sure that we can get out of our CURRENT war, make sure it's cleaned up, give our troops a bit of a rest. Do a complete investigation? Hmm...or is that too fuckin' easy?

2. WHERE THE FUCK IS BIN LADEN?? You idiots do realize there's a great chance he's hiding out making new plans. And you are aware, right, that HE is the one who instigated ATTACKING our country? We're in one war over a lie, and she's ready to commit to another based on MAYBE??? And we still haven't paid back the fucker who ACTUALLY KILLED PEOPLE IN OUR OWN FUCKIN' COUNTRY. I'm not saying NO to war, I'm just saying, let's make sure THIS time..hmm..a little tiny smidgeon of fuckin' intelligence this time around, I mean, come on, it's not like I'm asking for the MOON! Sorry, with being so quick to jump into yelling about military force I definitely have drop her 30 points...52 points...I'm not saying these guys are trustworthy, but shit, even an idiot ought to see the sense of not jumping on the military balloon quite so quickly. And has anyone ever thought that if she is ready to say military force, after what we did in Iraq, Iran MIGHT go ahead and get started...I mean shit, if someone comes and is having a gun fight with the people next door over a lie, and you disagree with him a tiny bit (even if he's right), if he yells I'm gonna shoot you next, won't you barricade in and start stocking up on weapons? I mean, shit, he's already shooting the neighbors, so he's got a nice history of jumping in with both feet.

Ok, where were we?

Well, actually, we're in the final step. I'm sorry, but this is where Clinton loses all her freedom points. "It takes a village to raise a child". Parents beware..let's go over some ideas Clinton has: *check her book, It Takes a Village*

"a consensus of values and a common vision of what we can do today, individually and collectively, to build strong families and communities."--Ok, and who's values and common vision will we use? Someone's not going to agree, and you can't use everyone's. They contradict each other too much. I mean, let's go...I believe teaching children religion is criminal, You think your child should be exposed to YOUR religion only..so who wins? We both have a point...who wins? I believe that children need freedom to breathe, grow, think..other parents want constant structure...who wins? Wait what if YOU have one child that turns out great and I have one that turns out great, but we COMPLETELY different beliefs in how to raise a child? Who wins?

She insists that there will be times when "the village itself [read: the federal government] must act in place of parents" and accept "those responsibilities in all our names through the authority we vest in government."--Ah, I see, so our children will be raised by the government. Ok, let's ignore the fact that invades our rights as parents to guide our children into life in a way we feel best prepares them for the real world. I've met lots of governmently raised children....they didn't turn out so well for the most part. Yeah, in fact I'd definitely say it's a very bad idea.

Don't worry though single people! You get indoctrinated too! "Videos with scenes of commonsense baby care--how to burp an infant, what to do when soap gets in his eyes, how to make a baby with an earache comfortable--could be running continuously in doctors' offices, clinics, hospitals, motor vehicle offices, or any other place where people gather and have to wait."--ooo..how...1984. Hillary Clinton has had ONE child..ONE...I've had FOUR...I think I got it by now thank you. And really, the purpose of inundating those without children constantly about how to care for them..yeah, that goes over really well.

And quite fuckin' frankly, some of us have ideas that we think are abusive in raising children, although they aren't considered such in society. *I* happen to think teaching children religion is criminal, leashing children like dogs should be outlawed, and sometimes a spanking is what it takes. YOU may find all these thing sthe opposite. Do you really feel you want to put another parent or yourself through the ache in your heart when you feel your child is mistreated? I mean, don't you feel it when someone ELSE's child is mistreated? How would you feel if it was YOURS? That you feel deep deep down, that what someone is doing to a child is wrong and you want to cry? Because I feel that way about leashing children and teaching them religion, and I can just imagine the pain I'd feel when I felt my children weren't being given the respect I feel they deserve in favor of treating them like animals and indoctrinating them. My children don't need 500 parents, they need me, they're mommy...the one who loves them and does the best I can by them. We deserve to have the freedom to give them that...and I guess I know now my dislike of Hillary Clinton does have a rational basis and an irrational one. I love my children...

Hillary, YOU FAIL.

FUCK!!!

2007-02-26T10:11:00.000-06:00

I've been reading a new blog..link in the side pocket there. It's an old entry on this fundie's problem with "profanity". And I kind of felt the need to leave a comment, but why? But I did feel the need to point something out:

Ok, so I admit I probably wouldn't use FUCK so much if people hadn't managed to make it so FUN. To address several points about profanity:

1. Fuck sounds great. Darnit just doesn't really get the point across. FUCK..well listen to it, it's a very harsh word...it sounds good when you've been frustrated beyond all reasonableness (is that a word? I don't care, it is now).

2. Yes, it gets attention, and makes it painfully aware how you feel about the subject. I will admit it's overuse is making that more difficult, BUT, I have no qualms with that. I still like the word.

3. However, I do not think (hmm..hold on, I just hammered my thumb, and it hurts like hell, what's a good way to get attention..oh, of course, I'll yell FUCK!). I really don't. What I'm actually thinking is "FUCK! That fuckin' hurt!" I don't know why every time I hammer my thumb, stub my toe, chop off a finger (yeah I'm exaggerating, but my dad did almost lose his thumb and what he said first was FUCK, so I probably would too) I say FUCK. But I do. I could no doubt try to consciously change what I yell, but name me one person that stops to think after they stub/hammer/etc. I have a feeling I'll be using "fuck" for a long time to come. It's ingrained, for whatever reason, and since I'm not hurting anyone, well, fuck it.

4. The biggest point, YES, if it hadn't been made SOOOO interesting, I probably wouldn't use it any more than I use any other word. Quite frankly, that's your fault. Not me saying it, just you making it so fuckin' interesting. One thing I've learned with my children: if you don't make the word interesting, with interesting things happening when they say it, they don't really say it. My kids did the same thing they do with every word they learned: you say it a few times, turn it over in your mouth, and when it becomes just another word, you stop. What's funny is I *permit* it and they don't curse at home all the time. My mother-in-law freaks out over it and you guessed it--instant grandma attention getter! They curse at her house all the time. I told her to stop it, she's just making it worse, but *shrugs* I guess she doesn't seem to get it.

Quite frankly, this is all your fault. It's just a word. Who decided it was a "bad" word? Is there even such a thing as a "bad" word? Did "fuck" go rob a bank and kill innocent people or something? Words only have the power you give to them. If you make it a "special" word, then it has the power to offend and harm. Black people wanted to take back "nigger", make it something that couldn't hurt them. Except they fucked up, it's still "special", because if a white person uses it, then black people get pissed off and offended. It's still a power word.

Retarded didn't use to be a power word, just a descriptive one accepted everywhere. Now because people use it to insult people of little intelligence, it's become a power word and we had to make up a new "acceptable" word. Guess what, now people of little intelligence are called mentally challenged, do we get yet another "acceptable" word (ok, that one is two words, but I don't write the rules) and another "bad" word? How stupid is that?

Perhaps, maybe we should just stick to the words we have. Quit making words so crazy. I admit words carry some weight. But it's HOW you say those words, what YOU mean by them. I think context is what carries the real weight. I mean, if a person goes up and calls another person a retard I think it's real easy: If he's a retard, then well, he's a retard. If he's not a retard, then that guy calling names has problems and we just won't hang out with him.

It doesn't matter if I call you a poopiehead or a shithead, either way I think I've made it clear what I think of you.

Edit: While I take all responsibility for all bad grammar and mispelled words, please realize 2 things:

1. I have small children, I type fast in short bursts.
2. I have conjuncitivitis and while they say that doesn't interfere with your vision, well something is....

Jesus was a hippie

2007-02-25T11:54:00.000-06:00

Hippies rebelled against established institutions, criticized middle class values, opposed the Vietnam War. Hippies opposed "political and social orthodoxy", choosing a "gentle and nondoctrinaire" politics that favored "peace, love, and personal freedom.". They perceived the dominant culture as a corrupt, monolithic entity that exercised undue power over their lives, calling this culture "The Establishment," "Big Brother," or "The Man."

I'm so tired of Christians. "You dayumned libruls..." Guess what, Jesus (if he existed) would be a "librul". He loved everyone, fought the man, and believed in peace. He opposed war and the establishment. He had long hair and would have lived in a commune(with his disciples, if it wasn't for that whole traveling thing). And y'know the man could have thrown a party with that whole water into wine thing.

But he still would not have voted for Hillary Clinton.

I'm sooo vacationing in the UK

2007-02-22T18:34:00.000-06:00

Ok, gotta post the whole article here, but link up top too!

Fat Fighters: We Couldn't Make This Stuff Up
By
ConsumerFreedom.com
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
The obesity panic fueled
by crazed food activists is now spreading across the ocean.
Today Marks & Spencer, one of Britain's largest grocery store chains, announced its plan to hire 1,500 food police to patrol supermarket aisles and lecture shoppers on the contents of their carts. Reminiscent of grade-school Hall Pass Monitors, these health food patrols will donofficial Healthy Eating Adviser badges while harassing customers about the fat, sugar, and salt levels of their purchases. Not to be outdone, retail competitor Sainsbury's has launched its own set of gastro guards to walk the beat. And the store donated £3 million ($5.9 million) to MEND (Mind, Exercise, Nutrition and Do It!), a government sponsored program that trains "food advisors" and deploys them at stores and classrooms. With more patrols, police, and monitors filtering into every aspect
of life, the United Kingdom's big brother looks increasingly like a vice
squad.
The English city of Bolton is a prime example. The city's director of
public health admitted to the town's local paper that "just providing
information on healthy lifestyles is not enough." Instead, officials rely on
strong-arming citizens through community initiatives. So Bolton health and education officials have teamed up to deploy squads of fat fighters and surveillance teams to local schools. Taking from the workload of local bullies, these groups will actually pull kids out of class for mandatory
weigh-ins.
The Center For Consumer Freedom is a nonprofit coalition supported
by restaurants, food companies, and consumers, working together to promote
personal responsibility and protect consumer choices.

It's gonna be great! I'm going to camp out in the grocery stores waiting for someone to get punched! I swear there will be at least ONE riot and I sure don't want to miss it!

And I swear by all that's existing in this world, if anyone EVER tries this shit on me or yanks my kid out of class for a fuckin' weigh in there will be HELL to pay. Revelations will look like a fuckin' vacation resort utopia. Of course, America is right behind in this kind of fucked up shit so we're not far.

NYC councilman asks: How much caffeine?

Schools tag out contact games

FCC wants to regulate TV violence

So much for "America". What choices?

Good Samaritan; Injustice

2007-02-22T10:31:00.000-06:00

Ahhh...try to be a good person, get criminal charges. So nice to see our government in action, fucking up once again. Way to go in ensuring that if he ever hears a person scream again that he will be sure to just lock his doors and turn up the tv.

So, dude hears a woman screaming, fears she's being raped, and like a REAL man, a GOOD man, goes to save her. Naturally taking some kind of weapon. And finds out the neighbor is watching a porno. Not only is he embarassed, but now he gets criminal charges. What exactly did he do wrong? Yes, he damaged the apartment door, but y'know, if it was me being raped, I don't think I'd mind a damaged door. He scared the poor guy shitless....too fuckin' bad. If you're a decent human being, then you understand. And you ought to be comforted that there is someone nearby who gives a shit if you ever need him. You should also turn your fuckin' tv down dipshit. In a time when everyone is too cowardly to "get involved", too much of a selfish bastard to come help someone in need, we ought to be grateful for every guy not ashamed to go help someone he believes is in trouble. I myself have been known to take off acrossed my front yard with a baseball bat to go after a man attacking his wife in HIS front yard. *I* was a hero and a cool person...(I'm just damned if I see a 6'1" 200 lb man beat the shit out of a 4'6" 98 lb chick). This guy is what? A criminal? For trying to help a woman in trouble? What kind of fucked up law enforcement are we running here? Surely we don't have a Retard 102 station...

Just be sure ladies and gentlemen that if you ever hear someone who needs help, a woman being raped, a man being robbed, you just turn your head and shut your ears. Do NOT help them...or the only way you'll be able to tell the good from the bad...shit, you won't be able to, both will be in jail! Let's hope the judge is a hell of a lot smarter than the idiots who answered the call. And if he isn't, then the truth is well known, our "justice" system is a clusterfuck on crack.

BTW, if you ever hear ME being raped, please feel free to NOT give warning by knocking on the door, and KICK that door in like it's the winning kick at the Super Bowl!

ME!ME! Roth

2007-02-21T09:43:00.000-06:00

Me!Me! Roth has decided that you have an "obligation" to stay fit for others, whether it's your family or well just the public in general. Me!Me! Roth has an objection to fat women. Whatever her reasons (and due to her claims of fighting her own inner fat person, one must wonder if she just REALLY wishes she could have a cookie), it's patently obvious she looks down on a woman who is fat. She wants to turn on an obesity "epidemic" because you live your individual life and choose what you eat and she's decided that apparently YOU are offenisve. And for all her harping on SIZE, well good for her to encourage the next generation of anorexics and bulemics!

Me!Me! decided that making people feel accepted for who they ARE is not good enough, women must conform to HER view of healthiness. One must wonder under what obligation we are to to remain healthy for others? Because we're mothers? Because we have loved ones? Mmm..well, according to Me!Me! we are encouraging our children into a "fat" lifestyle. Ah, do we hear it...yes yes, FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!!! Ahhhh...the cannon fodder for whatever agenda is on the books...load the cannon with FOR THE CHILDREN and watch normally intelligent adults fall all over themselves trying to prove they LOVE THE CHILDREN. If you're a parent, until you prove me wrong, I will assume you love your children. Don't worry, Me!Me! and her ilk will not make me wonder how devoted you are to your little ones if you don't run after her in a fear of your image as a parent or human being or whatever that cry is supposed to make you afraid of. Be yourself here. I know you love your little ones, I don't need you to prove it. No need to follow that orgasmic cry..(don't smoke after!)

Sorry, kind of rambling because well, Me!Me! has so many little viewpoints that are so important. She's judging you by your weight. One would think the doctor would be able to tell you that being overweight is unhealthy and then YOU would be able to decide what you want..but no apparently we need Me!Me! to go after "fake food"..WTH is fake food? If you can eat it, it's real food. Anyhow, no we need Me!Me! to make sure you know you are a bad parent for BEING fat, no matter how well your kids are doing. And that if your family and friends love you anyhow, well they are encouraging your abuse (of yourself). Apparently, skinny people should not love you if you're fat if they REALLY love you. Don't believe me? Redbook. She wants Redbook boycotted because as part of an article series they did "Whether your size 2 to 20W, we love you". Redbook damn sure doesn't want to start off a whole new batch of anorexics and bulemics. Me!Me! didn't read the next article in the 3 part series, something about a beautiful and healthy makeover". Let me make clear here, Me!Me! is not a doctor, well, at least she doesn't say she is. She doesn't appear to be a nutritionist. Quite frankly, she seems to be nothing but a skinny woman out to put down fat people. In fact, apparently the only thing she's done is organize a wedding gown challenge to spend the rest of your life in the same size as you were when you got married. Ok, ladies, we'd all like that, wouldn't we...however, when do we have time? I'm a SAHM who lives lower mid income. Is Me!Me! going to pay my gym membership? Babysit my kids? Yes, there is stuff you can do at home...mmm..so what do we say when the 3 year old gets kicked in the face from those Tai Bo videos...oops? Do it at naptime...mmmm..so yeah, one kid is napping, that's the baby, my 3 year old does not nap...Of course, these are all just excuses to Me!Me! because well, SHE does it.

Jeez, so much to address..this must seem a mess. But well, I'm greatly perturbed that because SOME people can't seem to keep their children's weight down Me!Me! finds justification in removing our rights as parents and apparently, our foods. Her website makes it clear she's out to eliminate some foods. Me!Me! obviously has enough time left over from parenting (I hope she's parenting) to come raise our kids too! Well of course she doesn't, instead she'll do like the anti-smoking agenda and legislate it so she doesn't have to. She's even coined the term "2nd Hand Obesity". Mmm..Glantz says good grasshopper. Quite frankly, well I think she's an idiot. A skinny person on a mission to denormalize fat people like smokers. It's not "normal" to be fat. The funny thing is who is SHE to decide it's not. Maybe it is. What the hell is normal anyhow except one person's perception of how things are supposed to be?

"Somewhere between the wedding reception and delivery room, many women abandon their brains, body and libido."--Ah, let's take this one apart here. Abandon brains? So if you're fat you're stupid? Libido--I have a fairly healthy sex life. In fact, I know quite a few fat women with a healthy sex life. Quite a few fat men too. And well, if we're happy, what business is it of YOURS. Body--I haven't abandoned my body, I'm still in it. Do you mean abandoned the media perception that counting rib bones is healthy? Yeah, I definitely abandoned that. I'm hooking toward 145 and that's where I intend on stopping. I could care less about BMI, at which I can assure you I will be over. That's when I look my sexiest and feel my best. I refuse to drop down to 125 and look sickly and feel sickly like an idiot.

"It's wrong to be fat. It's easy, but it's wrong." It's wrong? Who says it's wrong? YOU? So what about those fat women who are wonderful, nice people who do good things? I guess they are still the assholes here because they are fat. If you are deciding someone is wrong based on their WEIGHT and not their behavior, you're the one with a problem. I've known some wonderful generous fat women and some skinny little cunts. And vice versa...I can assure you, weight has nothing to do with it. Being skinnier will not make you a better person, and THAT'S what's important.

Look, buy the girl scout cookies, if you're weight is bothering you give them to a friend, throw them in the trash, eat one cookie instead of a box. I know I'm harsh on the fat people. And unfortunately I agree with Mrs. Idiot that it's YOUR fault you're fat. Hell, I am fat and it's my fault. However, if YOU are happy with yourself then I don't care. It's none of my concern. You are not stupid, you are not wrong, you are just you.

Be fat, be skinny, smoke, don't smoke, just be good to one another. Be happy, be considerate, be honest, be loyal. If I meet you and love you, I'll love you fat and all, skinny and all, smokes and all, If you're just an arm I'll love that arm with all I"ve got. If you can't even get out of your bed, I'll do the same. And Me!Me! sweetie, if you can't love yourself, noone else will. I'm sure it's easy to go jump on fat people because you're dissatisified with your own looks. If looks is all that important to you, then go surround yourself with shallow people who never are an ounce over the "acceptable" and have the perfect hair. Myself, I'm gonna go out and find a really nice fat person and make her my friend, and just to piss you off I'm gong to tell her everyday how beautiful she is..because even if she may not be outside, she probably is inside. I surround myself with beautiful people, not beautiful bodies.

Voters are morons

2007-02-13T00:06:00.000-06:00

Ok so apparently some of you don't know how this voting thing works. I'm already hearing some really stupid shit for the 2008 race. Let's go ahead and get this ongoing bitchfest started.

1. If you vote for a candidate who has agrees with your "key issue" and that's it, not only are you a moron, but you're a selfish jackass not interested in America, only in your life in America.

2. If you vote for a candidate only because he follows your belief system (religious or otherwise), not only are you moron, but you're NOT an American. Read your Constitution, 1st Amendment, y'know that AMERICAN document that we have to study in history class?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

What that actually means is our government at any level cannot ENDORSE a religion. That does NOT mean you can't practice yours. It's just not the government's job to interfere. And those government funded schools can't back religion either. America is diverse. Many people, many systems of belief. A nation for all to come to and be free of persecution. Not ONE religion be free, ALL are free. I would NEVER endorse a candidate who wanted to eliminate religion, please respect me and don't vote for one that would FORCE me into a religion, or your religions idiotic views on what's "right".

3. This is not about YOU. This is about EVERYONE that lives in this country. I know YOU don't want to be exposed to outside ideas, I suggest you stay home. The gays have a right to marriage, children, and *gasps* interaction without threat. The blacks have the same. So do christians, catholics, satanists, methodists, pagans, smokers, the child "free", the parents, the men, the women. If you want the freedom to decide what's best for YOU, I suggest you not vote for people who are in favor of curtailing the rest of us. If a dictator gets in charge and does something YOU don't like, you are no better off than the rest of us,and we will not let you in the revolution. Assuming anyone can get the balls up to have one.

4. If you vote for Hilary Clinton because she's a woman, or Barack Obama because he's black, it doesn't matter if one of them actually happens to work out, you are still an idiot. Somehow I just can't buy into that being an intelligent decision. Just because a broken watch has the correct time twice a day doesn't change the fact that it's broke. You deserve to be shot. And while *I* won't shoot you, I'm not above cheering if someone else does.

5. For you authoritorian followers, (don't ask me what it is, use YOUR brain and look it up...however you may have to do some simple math first so you don't blow a gasket when all those gears kick back in), nothing will change you. You're fuckin' morons on a mission, any mission, do me a favor and find a nice Kool-Aid camp. The guy holding the jug is very very nice and everyone gets free drinks!

I REALLY REALLY hate people, especially at this time. If the backbiting doesn't kill you, the "American" people will.

Christian Persectuion aka ME ME ME

2006-11-25T09:20:00.000-06:00

What a bunch of wienies. Me me me, this is CHRISTIAN DISCRIMINATION, this is against CHRISTIANS. Well I have a couple of questions:

1. How does NO RELIGIOUS PARAPHANELIA target ONLY christians? Last I heard LOTS of religions include little emblems that can be turned into jewelry. You don't have the monopoly on religious jewelry.

2. NO RELIGION IN SCHOOLS...noone said no CHRISTIAN religion, they said NO RELIGION. That doesn't mean just Christians, that means, no Wiccan religion in school, no Pagan religion in school, no Muslim religion in schools...

You're "War on Christianity" is nothing more than enforcing rules and not only against "christians", but against EVERYONE.

I love this list of the "persecution" suffered by christianity (btw, christians, go talk to a Jew with a number tattooed on their arm they didn't ask for, then you might have an inkling what persectution is). Here'st he list:

The federal government abridges the free exercise of religion in America by:
Regulating churches and other religious organizations through its tax laws.
Limiting religious liberty in the area of public and private education.
Forbidding non-denominational prayer in public schools and at educational ceremonies.
Excluding the Bible from school classrooms and from other school property.
Refusing to permit the religious displays on public property, such as Christmas and Chanukah.
The City council in Oceanside, CA banned public prayers that begin or end with the phrase "in the name of Christ."

Ok ok, let me say first of all, this is all BS. This is expected of EVERY religion, not just "christians". Selfish little bastards, all they want is THEIR religion up, not anyone elses. Notice their gripe is with the state backing a religion, that the state is not backing THEIRS. I don't see them fighting to have Muslim precepts posted beside the 10 Commandments (commandments the most vocal of the "christian" religion can't even seem to follow), they also aren't allowing Wiccan or Pagan precepts up. No no, JUST the 10 Commandments. Somehow though, the word persecution doesn't seem to apply, I mean, I don't see "nailing us up on crosses" on the list, nor "hot irons applied to the feet", nothing like "fired because I was christian" or "arrested because I was christian" nor do I see "run out of town for being christian" or "tried to run me out of town for being christian'. However I can sure find signs of christians persecuting others!

30 Muslim workers fired for praying on job at Dell

http://tennessean.com/local/archives/05/03/66733769.shtml?Element_ID=66733769

Of course, a prayer of 5 minutes is unflexible for an employer, but christians refusing to work on Sundays is not?

Muslim Pilot Fired Due to Religion and Appearance, EEOC Says In Post- 9/11 Backlash Discrimination Suit

http://www.eeoc.gov/press/7-17-03a.html

"Woman says firm fired her for being Wiccan"

http://wwrn.org/article.php?idd=22062&sec=39&con=4

We could go on and on. However, you do see cases of christians fired, yes, and it seems it's always about following rules. Math teacher fired for preaching in class...yes, perhaps because he's a MATH teacher at a PUBLIC school. Woman fired for wearing her cross, yes perhaps because the policy there was NO RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS. See the trick of the eye there? WOMAN FIRED FOR WEARING CROSS, but only later is it pointed out that umm..NO religious symbols were allowed. They weren't firing her for the cross, they fired her for BREAKING THE RULES. I have never heard of an instance of an employer being accused of finding out Bob is a christian and firing him over it. But you hear many cases of finding out that Jill was Pagan, Tom was Muslim....ad nauseum.

What irritates me is not that christians want their rights, it's that convenient hearing thing they got. NO GOVERNMENT BACKED religion they actually seem to hear NO GOVERNMENT BACKED RELIGION except for Christians. NO RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS seems to translate as NO RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS except for Christianity. Wrong, no means no, none means none. And danged if these idiots don't get the job and proceed to disobey and then bitch about it. "*sputters* Well surely they don't mean me!" Yes! You TOO!

To me it's an all or nothing deal here: Either all religion in school or none. You post the 10 Commandments there will have to be equal time AND space for all other religions. You want the Bible in Class, then you must have all other religious books. You want Bible class, you better all religious classes. Or you take it all out. Quite frankly, if you stop and think of how much education these kids will miss just so you can be sure they will hear the Bible and the rest of us be sure all religions get equal time and treatment, you're better off taking it all out. Not to mention somehow I think the christians might rethink their view when we get past Bible Class. In fact, I would make it mandatory that Bible Class appear later than other religions at a random spot so parents can't force our kids to attend Bible class and then yank their kids out so they won't hear "Satan's Wild Ride" (Satanism IS a religion y'know).

We should do that, let's give the christians what they want under the law of our nation. Equal time with the rest of the world religions, in fact, I ask that it's mandatory that all students must attend or cannot graduate....yeah, the christians might get what they want, but boy will they hate it...and they might know how the rest of us feel...