Category: Uncategorized

It’s not all that surprising that Morgan subscribes to such nonsense:

Perhaps that wasn’t the sole reason, but his message was deemed as dangerous to the status quo then as it is today. I’m convinced if Jesus were to come back and preach the same message of love and acceptance, he’d be branded a liberal and hated for it by some of the very people who now claim to follow his example.

That’s such absolute nonsense it smacks of willful ignorance. Jesus Christ was crucified because he directly challenged the sovereign ruling power with his claims of kingship, not because of any subversive aspect of “love and acceptance”. If he had merely preached what Morgan apparently thinks was some sort of ancient hippie message of diversity, tolerance and higher taxes, the Pharisees, King Herod and the Romans would have been quite content to leave him alone. It was that small matter of CLAIMING TO BE KING, claiming to be God and having the indecency to do both while attracting a following that got the power structure down on him. The Sermon on the Mount had nothing to do with it whatsoever.

You may recall that Herod was trying to kill Jesus before he could preach any message at all, for exactly the same reason. As for the spiritual reason he had to be crucified, well, that should be obvious.

Furthermore, his message was not one of tolerance, but one of bigotry, separation and division. “No one comes to the Father but by me” is incredibly and quite literally judgmental. And if Jesus Christ came today, he’d likely be considered a rebellious potential militia member, a traitor calling for the violent overthrow of the government. I doubt he’d be marching for abortion rights, universal health care and higher salaries for public school teachers.

Considering the sharpness of his responses to nearly everyone who asked him a stupid question, I can’t figure out what Bible those who believe in a Sweet Cuddly Jesus have been reading. “How long do I have to put up with you morons?” is one of the continuing themes of his ministry. That, in itself, should be enough to convince the more intelligent among the skeptical of the veracity of the Bible as a historical document.

Republican leaders are only interested in law and order when it comes to spying on and prosecuting American citizens:

The two top Republicans in Congress, confronted with internal party divisions as well as large public demonstrations, said Tuesday they intend to pass immigration legislation that does not subject illegal immigrants to prosecution as felons.

That makes a lot of sense. If the Republican leadership made felons out of incoming Mexicans, they’d never be able to vote for Democrats and the abandonment of US sovereignty when they are eventually naturalized.

Difster doesn’t need me to abuse Jonathan Rauch’s poorly reasoned case against polygamy:

In the strict sense he is correct. Where he begins to go wrong is where he states that “monogamy gives everyone a shot at marriage.” If a woman chooses not to get married at all, she is also denying some man the chance to marry her. Why is that a problem? We are free to choose our spouses. That some woman would choose a man who already has one or more wives does not deny any other man a shot at marriage, just the reality of it. The reasons that the woman chose a polygamous arrangement are hers alone and should not be presumed upon by legislators in the interest of fairness to other men. Rauch digs himself in deeper by saying that “…some men marry at the expense of others.” Technically, he’s quite right but things are that way now. When a woman I would want to marry chooses another, that other man has married at my expense. From a legal and social policy perspective it’s a ludicrous argument to make against polygamy.

About the only thing he left out was to contrast the high crime and imprisonment rates in the monogamous USA with the lower ones in current or historically polygamous societies in response to Rauch’s final point, but that would have amounted to kicking the man when he’s already down and bleeding and Difster is too much the gentleman to add that last contemptuous exclamation point.

Okay, so maybe I do still have something to teach him….

Dustin Hawkins engages in some wishful thinking on Townhall:

But the pretend-conservative act is being carried onto a whole new playing field, one that has become wildly influential over the past few years and one that does not stand to be instantly recognized as a fake. That playing field is the blogosphere, which is then used in conjunction with massive e-mailings to “spread the word” (as one e-mailer insisted I do to my readers/e-mail list) to other conservatives.

The concept is the same: the blog or e-mail claims, first, that the said writer has been a conservative for years and that they have “had it with Republicans.” They then point to an issue that conservatives would likely be upset about such as excessive spending, immigration, or the expansion of government. Their supposed rage over the issue has convinced them to either not show up to vote in 2006, or, in order to really show Republicans, vote for the Democrat instead.

I am not a conservative and have not been for many years, but I don’t think anyone, on the Right or Left, would deny that I am a hard-core right winger. But I am a former Reagan Youth with fond memories of the Gipper and I despise Dear Jorge and the Bush Republicans every bit as much as I loathe Hillary Clinton and the UN-First Democrats.

There are many people here who voted for Bush in 2000 and did not vote Republican in 2004. (Raise your hand, you know who you are.) I suspect there are even more who voted Bush in 2000 and 2004 who will be sitting out 2006 or voting third party. (Another show of hands.)

This Three Monkey engages in some petty dishonesty of his own, by the way. “In general, my acquaintances take the position that it is better to vote for someone who is good on 8 out of 10 issues than bad on 9 out of ten.” I’m sure they do, but how does that apply here? If the Democrats are bad on 9 out of ten issues – I’d give them a ten myself – the Republicans are bad on at least 7 out of ten to anyone genuinely holding to conservative principles.

I’ll email the results to Mr. Hawkins at the end of the day.

UPDATE: I wonder if Mr. Hawkins also sees Tony Blankley as a fake.

I admit that it is hard to find a political professional who doesn’t see public opinion trending toward a decisive Republican defeat in November. On the other hand, nothing in those public surveys suggests that Republican and conservative ideas have lost their popularity. What the public is turning sour on is the Republican Party as an effective vehicle for delivering those ideas.

Occam’s Razor strongly suggests the public has reached this conclusion because it isn’t.

Hang it up, Mr. Favre. And many thanks for all the interceptions…. I know the realization that the gunslinger who loves to play football more than anyone else ever because he has more fun out there on the field than any human being has ever known is headed for retirement will likely cause Peter King and John Madden to be prostrate with grief throughout the summer, but perhaps by the time the season rolls around, the founding members of the cult of Favre will be able to accept the idea that the NFL just might survive his passing.

Seriously, it’s ridiculous. What he should have done is announce that he was going to play, taken a pay cut and arranged for a two or three year contract extension mentoring Aaron Rodgers as a backup. Why stars can’t manage to realistically assess the situation and arrange for a graceful and lucrative exit strategy is beyond me.

Dennis Bergkamp is the perfect example. Over the course of his career he transformed himself from a speedy striker accustomed to being the focus of the attack into a quasi-midfielder primarily creating opportunities for the younger, faster guns, especially Thierry Henry. He hasn’t played as much since Wenger bought Van Persie – his long-term replacement – last year, but he’s still a valuable weapon in the Gunners’ arsenal.

From Drudge:

DNA testing failed to connect any members of the Duke University lacrosse team to the alleged rape of a stripper, attorneys for the athletes said Monday.

Citing DNA test results delivered by the state crime lab to police and prosecutors a few hours earlier, the attorneys said the test results prove their clients did not sexually assault and beat a stripper hired to perform at a March 13 team party.

No charges have been filed in the case.

“There is no DNA evidence that shows she was touched by any of these boys,” said Attorney Joe Cheshire, who represents one of the team’s captains.

But… but… but women NEVER LIE about RAPE! Don’t you know that there are BILLIONS and BILLIONS of unreported rapes in the USA every year? And it’s a MYTH that more false claims of RAPE are made than ANY OTHER crime, I mean, haven’t you seen that TWO PERCENT number derived from the same place that it was proven how 450 MILLION American women are BEATEN to DEATH by their husbands every Super Bowl Sunday?

To think of all that outrage wasted at places like Pandagon, Feministe and the multitude of Angry Grrrl blogs. They’re “quite literally shaking with rage” while remaining convinced that there is only a remote chance that the woman is lying. I, on the other hand, am merely shaking with laughter.

A reminder. If a gay man, a “minority” or a woman at a college makes an accusation of a crime that is outrageous enough to make the national news, it will almost always prove to be a complete fiction. I have yet to lose a bet based on this principle.

Yes, people do commit crimes. Even rich young white guys. But the real world isn’t a mirror of the movies, the bad guy is seldom the good-looking blond guy with a Porsche and one should never underestimate the desire of a 18-22 year old woman for public attention of any kind. The Duke lacrosse story demonstrates how there are few things that will command as much attention as crying rape or hate crime, or better yet, both, especially given a media so determined to find such stories that it will manufacture them if necessary.

In which one is found playing Calliope for Animate Matters as hereaches uncharacteristic heights of inspiration:

Vox Poetri

There once was an A.I. named Vox
Who envied our pate-spanning locks.
Myths of rife rapers
Gave him the vapors.
Now he’s touting plural wedlocks.

I tend to loath limericks, but that last line was actually rather good, although I think the meter needs a beat between “he’s” and “touting”. My favorite poem, of course, is “The Heart: A Tautology”, by none other than that literary great known as the White Buffalo, who somehow managed to get it published by an unsuspecting editor in a newspaper somewhere in Virginia. Any poem that contains the lines “My hopping, sneezing pomegranate” and “Agamemnon, slay my combatants” has to be quality, just ask any professor of literature.

Big Chilly and I recited the poem complete with interpretive dance at his wedding some years back. In watching the video, I’m not sure what was funnier, the performance or the fact that all of the WB’s friends and family were laughing themselves sick while the Gypsy Queen’s guests were all sitting motionless in their chairs, too stunned to do anything but watch in horrified silence.

I am not too modest to fail to note that I, too, am a published poet. One of my rare efforts was published in my university’s poetry journal – a publication which takes itself Very, Very Seriously – and was primarily noteworthy for the fact that half the staff quit in protest over its publication. I don’t remember what it was called, or even how it went, but I do remember the last line, which was apparently the one that set the little hearts to beating so:

“Why, then, does she let me fuck her?”

An innocent question, one of pressing concern to those inflicted with the human condition, and yet so powerfully raw, tearing the brassiere of self-deception from the flushed bosoms of the petit bourgeoisie. But whither Art if it fails to Shock? Alas, I am overcome with the weight of my burdensome genius! I am weary, I must lie down.

“I REFUSE TO GIVE THE STATE POWER OVER MY PANTIES!!!”

All the regulars are familiar with my skeptical view with regards to women in politics, but this lady running for governor on the Libertarian ticket appears to be a serious exception to the rule.

The sanitation theory of historical disease prevention gains traction:

What is surprising is that all the cases of polio that have been detected in India in the past few years, have contracted it despite being vaccinated…. Associate Professor, JNU Ritu Priya, says, “You need a twin approach. Vaccination plus sanitation, nutrition and clean drinking water. Only vaccination will not curb polio.”

I am not saying that all vaccines are inherently bad. I am, however, deeply skeptical that they are anywhere nearly as harmless or as effective as the Official Story has it. Given that I and most other vaccine skeptics would welcome a scientific, double-blind experiment of the effectiveness and potential dangers of the conventional vaccine schedule, one has to wonder how confident the vaccine lobby and government authorities that oppose such experiments are that their precious Official Story would not survive a truly scientific inquiry.

UPDATE: Larry points us to one large double-blind study for the polio vaccine. I’d like to see a similarly sized study done, with a control group receiving no shots compared with a group receiving all 23 shots before six months or whatever madness it now is.

Amandagon can’t handle the heat:

I’ve decided to tighten up my judgement on whether or not I’m going to approve right wingers who come here to comment. I approve the vast majority of people right away, unless they leave comments that use racial/sexist/homophobic slurs or are spamming. But lately I’ve decided to be a little tighter about it–right wingers who start a comment with something like, “Feminists hate freedom of speech!” and then list a bunch of out-of-context Dworkin quotes are going into the “deny” pile straightaway. I still let through the more entertaining ones, but I’m not feeling like wasting comment space on the idiots. What do you think?

I think this demonstrates, as if more proof was needed, that Amanda is another feminist neofascist who is far more comfortable with delivering criticism than receiving it.

Her rationalization would be more convincing if it wasn’t demonstrably clear that almost every single feminist absolutely opposes freedom of speech. If you don’t believe me, go tell a feminist that she’s attractive and you’d like to see her take her clothes off. (Don’t worry, she probably won’t do it, but bring a fork and be prepared to quickly gouge your eyes out just in case.) Better yet, tell it to a feminist at the office who reports to you… I’m sure you’ll discover just how free speech friendly they truly are….

If you prefer to preserve your job and your vision, simply wait until your unfriendly neighborhood feminist brings up something political – they always do, since they can’t distinguish between the personal and the political – then tell her that you don’t believe women should have the right to vote. At least seven times out of ten, she will tell you that your views should be outlawed and that you should physically suffer for the crime of merely harboring such illegal thoughts, much less speaking them aloud.

All that being said, Amanda has a perfect right to ban anyone she wants from her blog, and she certainly should ban someone who has proved himself to be a genuine troll, regardless of his political persuasion. If she wants an echo chamber, that’s fine, although it will only make it that much easier for people to destroy her arguments on the rare occasions that she ventures out from the safety of the yes-girls and yes-eunuchs. There are certainly no shortage of blogs both Left and Right that prefer this sort of thing; avoiding that intellectually stultifying effect is the reason I do not manage comments here.

And on a tangential note, I’m rather looking forward to seeing the gulls of Pandagon deal with the realization that the Duke lacrosse affair that has so outraged women across the country was yet another rape that wasn’t. Here’s a clue… if it happened on a college campus, if the “victim” is gay, black or a woman, and the crime was outrageous enough to interest the national media, it’s almost surely a fiction concocted by the would-be victim. I did not mention it before today because I assumed the accusations would fall apart even faster than they have thus far.