If It Looks Like A Fetus

You know something? ... Oh, never mind!

We knew this was coming.

Two days after 9/11, Jerry Falwell took to the airwaves to proclaim that God had allowed the United States to be attacked because "the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians" had tried to transform America into a secular society. Just this weekend, wingnuts from the Westboro Baptist Church turned out at the funerals of two fallen soldiers to say that God is punishing the United States in Iraq for its tolerance of homosexuality back home.

So when Hurricane Katrina hit land yesterday, we knew it was only a matter of time before we'd be hearing from the lunatic fringe again. And now, here it is. In an e-mail message we just received, a group calling itself Columbia Christians for Life alerts us to the fact that a satellite image of Hurricane Katrina as it hit the Gulf Coast Monday looks just like a six-week-old fetus.

"The image of the hurricane ... with its eye already ashore at 12:32 p.m. Monday, August 29, looks like a fetus (unborn human baby) facing to the left (west) in the womb, in the early weeks of gestation (approx. 6 weeks)," the e-mail message says. "Even the orange color of the image is reminiscent of a commonly used pro-life picture of early prenatal development."

And in case you're not getting the point, the e-mail message spells it out in black and white: "Louisiana has 10 child-murder-by-abortion centers," the groups says, and "five are in New Orleans."
...

The Fat Thickens

I know many a person who has been told by their doctor that they need to shed some pounds. I know some people whose doctors need to tell them they need to shed a few pounds. So, I didn't have an issue with the doctor who was under fire for telling an obese patient that she'd be far more healthy if she lost weight. But, now it seems that "fat" wasn't the issue. It was her F'ability factor and "a black thing!"

The state is investigating a doctor accused of telling a patient she was so obese she might only be attractive to black men and advising another to shoot herself following brain surgery.

'Let's face it, if your husband were to die tomorrow, who would want you?' the state Board of Medicine says Dr. Terry Bennett told the overweight patient in June 2004.

'Well, men might want you, but not the types you want to want you. Might even be a black guy,' it quoted him as saying, based on the woman's complaint.

The board said it also is taking a second look at a 2001 allegation - deemed unfounded at the time - that Bennett told a woman recovering from brain surgery to buy a pistol and shoot herself to end her suffering.

Bennett made national news last week when the complaint from the obese woman became public without any mention of the racial comment. But Senior Assistant Attorney General Richard Head, who leads the state Consumer Protection and Antitrust Bureau, said Tuesday the woman complained about the racial remark, not about being lectured.

Now I am not sure if I am supposed to laugh or not. It's not like some sistahs haven't made constant reference to brothas taking up with "some fat, nasty, white woman." It's not like average black men (save the OJ, Wesley Snipes types) don't seem to prefer a little "meat on the bones." (Gees, was Kirstie Ally's remark about finding a black guy because she was overweight heard around the world)? I think I'd be more offended by "who else is gonna want you?" - period.

In any case, this sheds a little more light on the situation. The man's bedside manner has a lot to be desired. Some of his patients may need to lose some weight. He may need to opt for retirement.

Well Give That Man A Pretzel!

Let's see ... four states ravaged by natural disasters, nearly 100 more troops killed in Iraq and skyrocketing gas prices ... All this and FINALLY the President decides to cut his month long vacation short - 3 days short. Wow! What sacrifice!

President Bush will cut short his vacation to return to Washington on Wednesday, two days earlier than planned, to help monitor federal efforts to assist victims of Hurricane Katrina, the White House said Tuesday.

'We have got a lot of work to do,' Bush said, referring to the damage wrought by the hurricane along Gulf Coast areas.

The president had been scheduled to return to the nation's capital on Friday, after spending more than four weeks operating from his ranch in Central Texas. But after receiving a briefing early Tuesday on the devastation Katrina unleashed, the president decided that he needed to be in Washington to personally oversee the federal effort, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.

Everybody's Store!

Ya know! Maybe it's just that I've never been in a natural disaster - or any disaster for that matter ... but I just plain don't understand the rationlale for looting ... in a flood ... when you probably don't have anyplace to take the loot ... What the hell is wrong with people?

"With much of the city emptied by Hurricane Katrina, some opportunists took advantage of the situation by looting stores.

At a Walgreen's drug store in the French Quarter, people were running out with grocery baskets and coolers full of soft drinks, chips and diapers.

When police finally showed up, a young boy stood in the door screaming, '86! 86!' - the radio code for police - and the crowd scattered.

Denise Bollinger, a tourist from Philadelphia, stood outside and snapped pictures in amazement.

'It's downtown Baghdad,' the housewife said. 'It's insane. I've wanted to come here for 10 years. I thought this was a sophisticated city. I guess not.'

Around the corner on Canal Street, the main thoroughfare in the central business district, people sloshed headlong through hip-deep water as looters ripped open the steel gates on the front of several clothing and jewelry stores.

One man, who had about 10 pairs of jeans draped over his left arm, was asked if he was salvaging things from his store.

'No,' the man shouted, 'that's EVERYBODY'S store.'

Looters filled industrial-sized garbage cans with clothing and jewelry and floated them down the street on bits of plywood and insulation as National Guard lumbered by.

Mike Franklin stood on the trolley tracks and watched the spectacle unfold.

'To be honest with you, people who are oppressed all their lives, man, it's an opportunity to get back at society,' he said."

The emphasis on some quotes is mine because I am just stuck on stupid. Everybody's store? EVERYBODY's store?

Pimp Jesus' Ride!

I first saw the slick Bishop Eddie Long on the annual "State of Black ..." on C-Span this past winter. It was being broadcast from his mega-church. Oddly, one of the highlights of the day was watching a number of left-wing ministers read him the riot act for being roped up in George (who wouldn't meet with the Congressional Black Caucus) Bush's cattle call of black ministers (undoubtedly to barter their support against same sex marriage for a few faith based initiative dollars). He sucked it up but had the cameras not been there, he may not have allowed someone to tell him off in his own "house."

Anyhow, it seems that the fruits of his ministry render him quite the harvest and that is raising quite a few eyebrows.

"Several nonprofit experts and watchdog group leaders questioned how the $1.4 million home and the Bentley contributed to the charity's stated purpose.

They cited IRS rules warning that a nonprofit religious group could lose its tax-exempt status if it provides excess economic benefits to an insider.

'An organization can be a tax-exempt entity or a for-profit entity, but not both,' said Rod Pitzer, a tax expert with Wall Watchers, a North Carolina-based watchdog group that monitors the finances of large Christian organizations.

Nonprofit experts and others who viewed the charity's records at the Journal-Constitution's request said that it did not appear to have an independent board.

'With a wife approving her husband's salary, it appears that this board's stamp is really just a rubber stamp,' said Grassley, the Iowa senator.
[...]
Long said he represented a 'paradigm shift' in the black church. He said he won't be like other pastors who died broke while giving everything to congregations that 'wanted them to live in poverty and preach to them about prosperity.'

Any problem people may have with his charity, Long said, was rooted in some people's expectations that pastors should be poor.

'I would love to sit with you and walk with you through the Bible to show that Jesus wasn't poor,' he said.

His congregation is inspired by seeing its pastor do well, Long said.

'I'm not going to apologize for anything. ... '

I was going to suggest that every generation needs a Rev. Ike but I see that Rev. Ike isn't dead so Eddie Long's "riches" are hardly a paradigm shift. For some reason, I just never considered going to church to be inspired by my pastor to "do well" materially/financially. Seeing his $1.4 million home and Bentley would hardly nourish my soul or make me want to attain the same.

Sadly, Bishop Long sounds a lot like our President with "I'm not going to apologize for anything." Perhaps he doesn't have to. He has a willing congregation who doesn't seem to mind his ostentatious display of wealth acquired through his ministry. Prosperity preachers aren't new and will probably never become old. My problem is that they bring Jesus into it. It matters not if Jesus was poor and I'd love to see the scriptural references he is using to justify his excess. I'm reasonably assured that Jesus wasn't styling and profiling on a "pimped out" camel or donkey and that he didn't have a different gold threaded "robe" for every day of the week.

Instructor Needed: Skills For Living

I meant to post on this some time ago.

I think the mistake many parents, schools and churches make is placing too much emphasis on the 'sex act' when so much more is required of oneself and one's relationships than the actual biblical deed. Children/young adults need to be taught to view things with a broader perspective and understand how all of their actions, sexual or otherwise, can have tangible, psychological and spiritual ramifications that not only affect them but others as well. I agree with this post I found at Wood Moor Village.

"But, I for one don'’t think schools need to be teaching anybody how to put on a condom. The information is easily available out there, and we can distribute it if that will help. But the exercises of putting a condom on a cucumber or a banana are to me laughable. I guess the benefit would be in getting kids used to talking about this and being open about the need for such candor. In which case, let us facilitate deep and meaningful dialogues about sexuality, diseases, abstinence, etc. rather than the hyper affectation of putting a condom on a vegetable and assuming that somehow that will translate easily to moments of passion.

Lust and desire do not care if you have practiced with vegetables. Good preparation to meet your hormones is not about dressing cucumbers for battle, but about preparing oneself mindfully about what it means to be a sexually active member of society, the risks and responsibilities. The longer we skirt those conversations the worse off we will be. The longer we have people denying HIV, blaming others, seeing gays as evil, etc., the longer we will continue as a repressed society with all the troubles that brings. So, it is high time we offered not a sex ed. class in schools at certain intervals, but a Living Skills class that is a permanent part of the curriculum. It ought to cover interpersonal relationships, communication, gender issues, race and ethnicity, sexuality, GLBT, primary health care, etc. Every kid should graduate from High School with a strong set of Living Skills."

The Great Oz Keeps On Yapping!

Please shut up!

President Bush on Saturday asked Americans to be patient with the U.S. military mission in Iraq, a request issued as less than half of those polled supported his war policy and thousands of pro-Bush and anti-war demonstrators competed for attention in his tiny hometown.

'Iraqis are working together to build a free nation that contributes to peace and stability in the region, and we will help them succeed,' Bush said in his weekly radio address.

He gave no sign of dismay at serious snags in Iraq's democratic process.

Twisted, Sick Minds

I'm trying to grasp this. The Fred Phelps crew is not protesting the war. They are protesting dead soldiers for serving America because it "harbors gays?"

"Members of a church say God is punishing American soldiers for defending a country that harbors gays, and they brought their anti-gay message to the funerals Saturday of two Tennessee soldiers killed in Iraq.

The church members were met with scorn from local residents. They chased the church members cars' down a highway, waving flags and screaming 'God bless America.'

'My husband is over there, so I'm here to show my support,' 41-year-old Connie Ditmore said as she waved and American flag and as tears came to her eyes. 'To do this at a funeral is disrespectful of a family, no matter what your beliefs are.'

The Rev. Fred Phelps, founder of Westboro Baptist in Kansas, contends that American soldiers are being killed in Iraq as vengeance from God for protecting a country that harbors gays. The church, which is not affiliated with a larger denomination, is made up mostly of Phelps' children, grandchildren and in-laws.

The church members carried signs and shouted things such as 'God hates fags' and 'God hates you.'"

This is part of the price we pay for Ronald Reagan putting crazy people (not pc, I know) out on the streets. God has nothing to do with this and God hates no one. These "believers" are unmedicated nuts who are following a bigger nut. Someone needs to round them all up and put them someplace where they can get some help.

(link via daffodillane.com)

Go To The Back Of The Bus!

If the American Taliban had its way, this would probably happen here too!

"For women, commuting across this ancient Islamic city has long been as easy as hopping into a minibus or climbing on the back of a motorcycle taxi. Both are cheap and readily available. Even if some female passengers found it unsettling to be so near strange men, who might make lewd comments or press their bodies close, such was the price of efficient transport.

But the days of casual travel are ending for the women of Kano, a bustling trading center of about 500,000 in northern Nigeria. Government officials, determined to halt what they see as the decline of public morality, are banning women from all but a handful of Kano's motorcycle taxis and are requiring them to sit in the back of public minibuses."
[...]
However, the second phase of the transportation policy, which will include the ban on women riding motorcycle taxis, threatens to be far less popular. In the next few weeks, police will begin fining motorcycle drivers caught carrying women who are not their relatives. Drivers licenses also may be suspended. And gender-based seating restrictions will extend to all commercial minibuses, even those that are privately owned.

That will leave women with far fewer choices for getting to work or school or going shopping. If the seats designated for women on a minibus are full, they will have to wait for the next bus or one of the new single-sex vehicles. The government has purchased 176 motorcycles and 500 three-wheeled vehicles with covered seating areas that are physically separated from the driver. Together, though, they represent a fraction of the tens of thousands of public transport vehicles that ply Kano's streets.

This is a dense, fast-paced city, with a centuries-old historic quarter whose narrow streets are not accessible to minibuses. Aisha Lawal, a 19-year-old student, said she will have difficulty making her twice-weekly visits to see her grandparents if the vast majority of motorcycle taxis are prohibited from carrying her. She predicted resistance from women.

On a sidewalk a few blocks away, Miriam Muhammed, 24, prepared to climb onto a motorcycle taxi. ``We don't want this,'' she said of the new system. ``Goodness, I'll be frustrated.''

Don't Start None ...

Won't be none! Heaven knows what the ultimate fallout of Pat Robertson's stupid remarks will be. But either symbolically or out of real concern, Venezuela is taking action against those Robertson claims to represent.

Venezuela's government has temporarily suspended permits for foreign missionaries after a U.S. televangelist said Washington should assassinate President Hugo Chavez.

The policy announcement came four days after conservative evangelist Pat Robertson said Washington should execute Chavez, a former soldier who often accuses the United States of plotting to kill him.

The chief of the Justice Ministry's religious affairs unit, Carlos Gonzalez, said Friday authorization of permits for missionaries would be curbed while the government tightened regulations on preachers inside Venezuela.

"The permits are suspended for a short time ... while we organize a system to see what additional data we need for people coming into the country to preach", Gonzalez told Reuters.

"We were already working on this, but these declarations have made us speed things up," he said.

Baby, Are You Really Gonna Wear Those Pants?

You can spank my hand with a wooden spoon right now but I have to say something ...



Okay, I can't find the words. But, between Star, Al and that miniature dog that she dresses up, I can't help but long for the "old days" when I played with paper dolls. The Jones-Reynolds family would have made quite a nice set. Alternating with my books, I would have been entertained for the entire day.

P.S. Wait! Will any straight man who'd wear those striped pants please email me?

The Plank In Your Eye

One thing that Pat Robertson's latest outrageous outburt has done is make people take a closer look at him and what a hypocrite he is. The fact that he cannot see that his views are a mirror image of the views of Islamic extremists is sad. Hopefully more people will begin to see it and also see how inappropirate it is to have him so dangerously close to the President of the world's sole superpower (a president who has yet to condemn or dispute anything Pat has said).

And yet, these spiritual bling-bling artists are not -- or at least, shouldn't be -- ignorable. We may say it in mocking tones, but these figures do indeed represent a striking parallel to the religious extremist movements that pose such significant threats in the Middle East. Consider the ever-expanding list of parallels...

• Though not strictly part of government, hold such substantial political power as to be able to dictate many government policies, with well-known religious figures holding forth in frequent public court on government policies and actions.

• Extremely distrustful of science as being contrary to religious values. Generally anti-intellectual.

• Intolerant of those with differing religious values; view other religions -- even generally closely related sects -- as illegitimate. Associated persecution complex which presumes religious-neutral or religious-absent law to be intentionally oppressive of their own beliefs.

• Attempting to weaken state-based education systems in favor of a government-funded network of religious schools dedicated towards the teaching of strict fundamentalist values.

• Demand government support for their religious agendas, including the passage of laws based on their particular religious beliefs, under the assertion that the country was "divinely founded" and therefore inherently subservient to their religious sect.

• Generally dismissive of the rights of women.

• Generally dismissive of the rights of minorities.

• Calls for God to "remove" political opponents by killing or otherwise rendering them unable to serve.

• An extensive worldwide fundraising network that includes financial connections to the bloody West African "conflict" diamond trade and other questionable financial activities.

• And finally, as we have seen in the last few days: willing to publicly endorse the utility of violence against international foes. Significantly, actions against purely political or socioeconomic foes are justified based on questionably religious grounds.

Who You Callin' A Chickenhawk?

It's so funny how these backseat drivers who want to dictate the rules of war but don't have a license to drive or a even car get so offended when you call them on it.

Cindy Sheehan has returned to Crawford, Texas, and brought back with her all the questions she's raised about the Bush administration's war in Iraq. One issue that's clearly ruffled the feathers of conservatives is the word 'chickenhawk,' which has risen in prominence since Sheehan began to demand that those who are gung-ho about the war should pick up a gun and replace a grunt in the midst of his third rotation.

Fresh-faced pundit Ben Shapiro and Jonah Goldberg of the National Review are among the conservative commentators who have pecked angrily at the 'chickenhawk' assertion, arguing that just because they're not fighting in the war doesn't mean they can't support it. Goldberg clucked last week that 'arguments must stand on their own merits, regardless of who delivers them,' while in a two-part series titled, 'Why the 'chickenhawk' argument is un-American,' Shapiro squawked that for liberals to mock supporters of the war who haven't served in the military 'undermines fundamental values of representative democracy.'
[...]

Chickenhawk, chickenshit or just plain chicken. People of age who feel so strongly about the war should enlist and serve! Period!

Just A Hunch

I've been looking at this guy's record from all different angles but I guess I'll be heading back to Dianne Finestein's website to urge her to vote against John Roberts. The rights of women and minorities are too much in question to err on his side. She says she's got a feeling? After seeing Bush and Condoleezza sell the women of Iraq (and Afghanistan) out to Islamic extremists, I've got a feeling that every one who has doubts about him should vote no - even if he ultimately gets the nomination.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, speaking to a large gathering of lawyers, made it clear Wednesday that maintaining a woman's right to have an abortion would be the litmus test she would apply in deciding whether to support Judge John Roberts' nomination to the Supreme Court.

Feinstein, who has long supported abortion rights, has said Roberts' view of the landmark Roe vs. Wade abortion ruling would influence her decision on his nomination as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. But her comments to the lawyers and to reporters afterward marked the first time she has stated that her vote on Roberts' nomination would hinge on his position on this single contentious issue.

'It would be very difficult for me to vote to confirm someone to the Supreme Court whom I knew would overturn Roe and return our country to the days of the 1950s,' the 72-year-old Democratic senator said."
[...]
"It is my hope that Judge Roberts would play a role similar to Justice O'Connor's on the court and bring with him a voice defined by temperance and open-mindedness," Feinstein said.

Feinstein added that, while she has "a feeling" Roberts would not vote to overturn the Roe vs. Wade decision, she still is uncertain where he stands, even after a one-hour private meeting in Washington earlier.

"I am really not sure what his views are," she said.
[...]

"I did get a 'feeling' " Roberts supports abortion rights, Feinstein said, then added, "Well, you can't take a feeling to the bank."

End Of The Road

Really? I thought President Bush called them (from his vacation) and pressured them to come to a consensus.

An Iraqi government spokesman said early Saturday that talks on a draft constitution were hopelessly deadlocked and that 'this is the end of the road.'

A top Sunni Arab negotiator said said no agreement had been reached, and he called on Iraqis to reject it in an Oct. 15 referendum. The Sunni negotiator, Saleh al-Mutlaq, made the statement on Al Jazeera television after Sunnis studied compromise proposals offered by the Shiites on federalism and purges of former members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party.

'The issue of division through federalism is on the table,' Mutlaq said. 'The Iraqi people have to give their word now and reject the constitution because this constitution is the beginning of the division of the country and the beginning of creating disturbance in the country.'

Oops Upside Your Head!

Dang! I know that going away to school can be stressful but DANG!

A college freshman was charged with assault after authorities say she beat her new roommate with a hot clothes iron, hitting her so hard she fractured the young woman's skull and broke the iron into pieces.

The 18-year-old victim told authorities her roommate attacked her following their first day of classes after accusing her of putting a hidden camera in their room.

Heather Haase suffered a skull fracture, bruises, cuts and a burn on her arm in the early- morning attack on Tuesday, university police said.

Her roommate, Sharronda Barkley, also 18, told officers Haase injured herself when she fell out of bed and hit the iron, according to a police report. Barkley was being held on $25,000 bond Thursday. A judge ordered her not to return to Bowling Green State University or have contact with Haase.

Freshmen arrived last week at the university, 20 miles south of Toledo. Barkley is from a Cleveland suburb; Haase is from a small town in northeast Ohio.

'You have two young ladies that go off to college with an expectation of obtaining an education and hopefully having a good time, and they're not here a week and one of them is severely injured and the other ends up in jail,' University Police Chief James Wiegand said. 'That's not the way it's supposed to go.

(Couldn't resist the title from a Gap Band Song).

And One More Thing

Just in case folks are clueless and want to jump on Bush's Billy Bad-Ass Bully wagon, let's understand that Chavez does have some leverage over us (and his threatening to use it is why Bushco hates him so) with that oil. There are too many other countries (like China) who are large consumers of oil who are only interested in a deal without all of our cowboy drama. People like Pat and the rest of Bush's croanies need to shut up because if folks start having to pay $5/gallon for gas, Hugo Chavez isn't going to be the only one getting death threats.

But Chavez holds cards that make remarks like Robertson's all the more incendiary on the Latin American street, where language like "U.S. imperialism" suddenly has currency again. One is the past: Latin Americans have too many vivid and bitter memories of U.S. intervention in their countries—operations that sometimes included brazen assassinations —which is why the Bush Administration got burned by accusations it backed a failed coup against Chavez in 2002 (the White House denies the charge). Another is democratic legitimacy: Chavez, for all his authoritarian tendencies, is a democratically elected head of state who last year won a national recall referendum approved by international observers.

Perhaps an even more important factor is populist backing: leftism is on the rise again in Latin America for a reason, namely the burgeoning feeling around the region that a decade of U.S.-backed capitalist reforms has simply widened an already epic gap between rich and poor—and that the Bush Administration is indifferent to it. As Chavez uses his multi-billion-dollar oil revenues to fund the kind of social projects that Venezuela's legions of impoverished never saw from his kleptocratic predecessors—and to subsidize cheaper oil for his cash-strapped Latin neighbors—more people are willing to defend him, as most Latin leaders did last spring when Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice toured South America.

As a result, any cold war-style talk about "taking Chavez out" with "covert operatives," as Robertson suggested, just confers more Che Guevara cachet on the former army lieutenant colonel (who himself led a failed coup in 1992). And since Chavez has threatened to cut off oil exports to the U.S. at the first sign of gringo aggression, it makes America's important Venezuelan oil supply look all the more volatile.

We Interrupt Scheduled Programming ...

Okay! That's just nasty!

African-American Baptist Buddhist

I know a number of black Americans who have a hard time resolving accepting the "religion of white oppressors," and end up converting to Islam, Judaism or Buddhism. I vow not to "convert" to anything but consider myself a student of many religions. I have found Buddhism, though, particularly facinating so I see how this woman chose it and was able to resolve her issues with Christianity.

Jan Willis never felt drawn to the Baptist church of her 1950s Alabama childhood—a place where the preacher hadn't done his job unless he whipped parishioners into a spiritual frenzy that left them fainting in the aisles. She avoided the revival tents until her mother forced her to go for the sake of her soul. And though she was eventually baptized at 14—'a wondrous experience,' she admits—she quickly fell back into her old suspicion of Christianity as the religion of white oppressors. Who could blame her? So-called Christians in her hometown periodically blinded black children by tossing acid or hot lye at them. The Ku Klux Klan even burned a cross outside Willis's house, as she crouched inside, expecting to die.

Willis had always cherished the ideal of peace and in 1963 marched in Birmingham with Martin Luther King Jr. In college, inspired by the images of monks in Vietnam setting themselves on fire to protest the war, she became interested in Buddhism. But by the time she graduated from Cornell in 1969, Willis was faced with a stark postcollege choice: go to Nepal and study Buddhism or join the Black Panthers and fight for black rights—'peace or a piece,' as she puts it. She opted for peace. And everything in her life changed. Buddhism taught her compassion and self-acceptance. It led her to her current job, teaching Buddhism at Wesleyan University. And it even taught her how to make peace with the Baptist church.
[...]

The June 29th issue of Newsweek focuses on "Spirituality In America." Should be an interesting issue.

An Embarrassment To The Church

Pat Robertson is an embarrassment to Christianity and humanity as well. The only reason why he cannot be written off as a complete buffoon and caricature is because he is a key partner and representative of a major support base for this administration.

Robertson is known for his completely irresponsible statements - that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were due to American feminists and liberals, that true Christians could vote only for George W. Bush, that the federal judiciary is a greater threat to America than those who flew the planes into the World Trade Center Towers, and the list goes on. Robertson even took credit once for diverting a hurricane. But his latest outburst may take the cake."
[...]
It's clear Robertson must not have first asked himself "What would Jesus do?" But the teachings of Jesus have never been very popular with Robertson. He gets his religion elsewhere, from the twisted ideologies of an American brand of right-wing fundamentalism that has always been more nationalist than Christian. Apparently, Robertson didn't even remember what the Ten Commandments say, though he has championed their display on the walls of every American courthouse. That irritating one about "Thou shalt not kill" seems to rule out the killing of foreign leaders. But this week, simply putting biblical ethics aside, Robertson virtually issued an American religious fatwah for the murder of a foreign leader - on national television no less. That may be a first.
[...]
Robertson's political and theological reasoning is simply unbelievable. Chavez, a democratically elected leader in no less than three internationally certified votes, has been an irritant to the Bush administration, but has yet to commit any holocausts. Nor does his human rights record even approach that of the Latin American dictators who have been responsible for massive violations of human rights and the deaths of tens of thousands of people (think of the military regimes of Chile, Argentina, El Salvador, and Guatemala). Robertson never criticized them, perhaps because many of them were supported by U.S. military aid and training.
[...]
Robertson's words fuel both anti-Christian and anti-American sentiments around the world. It's difficult for an American government that has historically plotted against leaders in Cuba, Chile, the Congo, South Vietnam, and elsewhere to be easily believed when it disavows Robertson's call to assassinate Chavez. But George Bush must do so anyway, in the strongest terms possible.

It's time to name Robertson for what he is: an American fundamentalist whose theocratic views are not much different from the "Muslim extremists" he continually assails. It's time for conservative evangelical Christians in America, who are not like Islamic fundamentalists or Robertson, to distance themselves from his embarrassing and dangerous religion.

And it's time for Christian leaders of all stripes to call on Robertson not just to apologize, but to retire.

Please God ... Amen!

The Enemy Of All Religion

Just something to think about:

'Let me say to you again -- and let me say it once and for all -- that morality has nothing to do with religion. Morality does not depend upon the supernatural. Morality does not walk with the crutches of miracles. Morality appeals to the experience of mankind. It cares nothing about faith, about sacred books. Morality depends upon facts, something that can be seen, something known, the product of which can be estimated. It needs no priest, no ceremony, no mummery. It believes in the freedom of the Human mind. It asks for investigation. It is founded upon truth. It is the enemy of all religion because it has to do with this world, and with this world alone.'

-- Robert Ingersoll

Who Are The Terrorists Again?

'Cause I'm confused ...

In discussing Robertson's August 22 statements and the resulting controversy, guest and former CIA operative Wayne Simmons endorsed the assassination of not only Chavez but also Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and North Korean ruler Kim Jong Il.

From the August 24 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:

HANNITY: But first, Pat Robertson caused a bit of a media firestorm this week when he advocated, some say, the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. Now Pat Robertson apologized for those remarks today, but who is Hugo Chavez? Is he a threat to the United States that must be dealt with?

[...]

ALAN COLMES (co-host): Should we assassinate him?

SIMMONS: Well, listen, if a stray bullet from a hunter in Kentucky should find its way between these guy's -- this guy's eyes --

COLMES: Just by accident?

SIMMONS: -- no American --

COLMES: Who knew?

SIMMONS: Yes, who knew? No American should lose any sleep over it.

COLMES: Let me ask you this. Pat Robertson considers himself a good Christian. We -- some people consider us a Christian nation. Would assassinating a leader of another country be the Christian thing to do?

SIMMONS: Listen, this is not about Christians. I'm a Christian, as well, but I'm about protecting this country and protecting Americans.

COLMES: Do you want him dead?

SIMMONS: Anyone who -- I absolutely would -- he should have been killed a long time ago.

COLMES: By whom?

SIMMONS: And anyone who blames other -- by anyone, Alan.

COLMES: It's against the law.

SIMMONS: By anyone, Alan. It doesn't matter to me who kills this guy.

COLMES: It's against the law.

SIMMONS: He needs to go.

COLMES: We have an executive order, 12333, Executive Order 12333, put in place in the '70s. We don't do that to other --

SIMMONS: The president can -- the president can order that.

COLMES: Well, should --

SIMMONS: It should have been ordered. This guy -- this guy needs to go.

COLMES: Well, if we're going to kill him, aren't there some dictators even a little more dangerous to us? Khamenei in Iran? Should we kill him? Should we kill Kim Jong Il in North Korea? Should we knock those guys off, too?

SIMMONS:Yeah, absolutely. Listen -- listen, this is what's happened, Sean.

COLMES: This is Alan.

SIMMONS: I'm sorry, Alan. This is what's happened.

COLMES: If someone's a target, I want to know exactly who the target is. Don't get people mixed up here. It makes me very nervous.

SIMMONS: I'm sorry about that. OK, look, what's happened here is -- on a very serious note -- things are getting all convoluted and out of control. And what I mean by that is, terrorism is a very, very, very real part of our lives today. This is not something where we have a terrorist dictator that we can go negotiate with.

COLMES: But you want to go kill people. You want to go after a guy who's not an imminent threat to the United States. You want to be in the assassination business.

[crosstalk]

SIMMONS: Come on, Alan. Alan, you know that's not what I want to do.

COLMES: That's exactly what you said.

SIMMONS: I want to protect America. I want to protect America. These are our enemies.

COLMES: How many people should we kill?

SIMMONS: Alan, if I'd have had the opportunity to assassinate Hitler or Mussolini, I would have done it. This situation is no different.

What About The Women?

I'm not sure who the anchor/host(ess) was on MSNBC this morning but she was confused. She had an Arab woman on discussing the new constitution and the rights of women. For some reason she was speaking as though women would have more rights than under Saddam and that Saddam had them under Islamic Rule - which is the exact opposite of what is truly the case. It was much too early for me to be yelling at the TV ... but I was. This article is much closer to the truth as it stands today

Remember Safia Taleb al-Suhail?

She was the Iraqi woman George W. Bush trotted out for his State of the Union address earlier this year, the daughter of a man murdered by Saddam Hussein who provided the feel-good moment of the president's performance when, sitting up there in the balcony with Laura Bush, she embraced the mother of an American soldier killed in Iraq.

We wonder if she'll be invited back for next year's speech.

Bush says he knows that Iraq's still unfinished constitution will be a victory for women because Condoleezza Rice told him so. But if the president were to check in with Suhail, he might come away with a different story. According to a Reuters report, Suhail, who is now Iraq's ambassador to Egypt, believes that the draft Iraqi constitution represents a major setback for the women of her country.

"When we came back from exile, we thought we were going to improve rights and the position of women," she said. "But look what has happened -- we have lost all the gains we made over the last 30 years. It's a big disappointment."

She is concerned -- as many Iraqis are -- that the draft constitution allows religious sects to run Iraq's family courts, likely leaving decisions about divorce, inheritance and other issues important to women in the hands of Islamic clerics. "This will lead to creating religious courts," she said. "But we should be giving priority to the law."

Suhail said the United States has sold out Iraq's women in the drive to get a constitution -- any constitution -- approved by Iraq's National Assembly. "We have received news that we were not backed by our friends, including the Americans," she said. "They left the Islamists to come to an agreement with the Kurds."

The Equal Rites Awards

So close and yet so far:

And now let us pause to celebrate Aug. 26, the anniversary of women's suffrage in the United States. It's been 85 years since Harry Burn, a young Tennessee legislator, followed the advice of his mom and cast the deciding vote ratifying the 19th Amendment.

In this spirit, our one-woman committee met again this year to dispense prizes to those who labored mightily throughout the past year to set back the cause of women. Without further ado, we present the Equal Rites Awards:

We begin, as we must, by going overseas, where so many vie for the International Ayatollah Prize. This year it goes to the Islamic clerics in northwest India who ruled that a woman raped by her father-in-law not only had to leave her husband but had to marry his rapist father. To those pro-family clerics we lend a fatwa: Don't just blame the victim, marry her.

While we are abroad, the Double Standard Bearer Prize goes to our allies, the Saudis, who still refuse to give women the keys to the kingdom. The latest petition opposing women drivers explained, 'Women are less decisive than men and less capable of dealing with difficult situations.' To the oil-rich and common sense-deprived Saudis, we send Indy Racing League sensation Danica Patrick to chauffeur them to the 21st century.

[...]

Turning now to the court, we award John Roberts, President George W. Bush's nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, the Let's Hope He Grew Out of It Prize. As a teenager, Roberts editorialized against admitting women to his parochial school because he didn't want to study Shakespeare's racy passages with "a blonde giggling and blushing behind me." Ruth Ginsburg, beware!

Finally, our Knight in Shining Armor Prize goes to George Bush himself for so many reasons, but especially this one. He didn't follow his wife's advice to nominate a woman to the Supreme Court, but he did let her appoint the first woman chef to rule the White House kitchen. Who said there wasn't progress?

When A Good Butt Whuppin' Won't Do

If They Wanna Die For A Lie ...

Bush is able to rationalize his ignoring and bashing of Cindy Sheehan because the families he talks to don't feel the same way she does. He neglects to mention, however, that he only speaks to crowds of people who support him and the war effort. Cindy Sheehan supported him until his lies became neon signs.

Speaking in Idaho a few minutes ago, Bush argued that moms like Cindy Sheehan are a threat to freedom:

There are few things more difficult in life than seeing a loved one go off to war, and here in Idaho, a mom named Tammy Pruitt…knows that feeling six times over.

Tammy has four sons serving in Iraq right now with the Idaho National Guard — Eric, Evan, Greg, and Jeff. Last year, her husband Leon and another son Aaron returned from Iraq where they helped train Iraqi firefighters in Mosul.

Tammy says this — and I want you to hear this — “I know that if something happens to one of the boys, they would leave this world doing what they believe, what they think is right for our country. And I guess you couldn’t ask for a better way of life than giving it for something you believe in.”

America lives in freedom because of families like the Pruitts.

Notice that nary a one of his children, his siblings' children or his cohorts' children are in Iraq. This woman hasn't lost a family member - to date - but at the rate that we are going "staying the course," it's not too far fetched to say that she might.

Chief Thief!

Do we honestly think that we can snatch a country's riches right out from under people's feet? Apparently, Bush does!

"But what hasn't been on the table is at least as important to the formation of a new Iraq: the country's economic structure. The Bush administration has succeeded in maintaining a stranglehold on issues such as public versus private ownership of resources, foreign access to Iraqi oil and U.S. control of the reconstruction effort -- all of which are still governed by administration policies put into place immediately after the invasion. The Bush economic agenda favors foreign interests -- American interests -- over Iraqi self-determination.

Over a year ago, orders were put in place by L. Paul Bremer III, then the U.S. administrator of Iraq, that were designed to 'transition [Iraq] from a ... centrally planned economy to a market economy' virtually overnight and by U.S. fiat. Those orders were also incorporated into the transitional administrative law -- Iraq's interim constitution -- and the economic restructuring they mandate is well underway.

Laws governing banking, investment, patents, copyrights, business ownership, taxes, the media and trade have all been changed according to U.S. goals, with little real participation from the Iraqi people. (The Transitional Authority Law can be changed, but only with a two-thirds majority vote in the National Assembly, and with the approval of the prime minister, the president and both vice presidents.) The constitutional drafting committee has, in turn, left all of these laws in place.

A central component of the Bush economic agenda is foreign corporate access to, and privatization of, Iraq's once state-run economy. Thus, an early Bremer order allowed foreign investment in and the privatization of all 192 government-owned industries (excluding oil extraction)."
[...]
By all accounts, the draft constitution has failed to provide Iraqis with the means to control their economic future. As Iraq prepares for the October 15 referendum on the constitution, these crucial issues must be added to the debate, and the influence of the Bush administration countered, so that Iraqis can truly determine their own economic and political fate.

Just as discussions are finally emerging for ending the U.S. military occupation of Iraq, so too must the economic invasion be brought to an end.

I went to a grand opening of an Albertson's once and, of course, the store was brimming with free samples. In one spot there was a self-serve plate of brownie pieces under a plastic dome with a small opening for tongs to grab a sample. Some unsupervised child managed to get his hand in the hole and grabbed as many brownies as he could. Unfortunately, he wasn't able to get his hand out with the fist full of brownies. So, instead of releasing some of them, he held onto them and proceeded to scream for his mother (you know I opted against a sample after that).

I guess that is part of the reason Bush says we won't leave. Our plan was to grab as much pirate's booty as we could for his corporate cronies. His hands are full (only with destruction and mounting casualties) and he won't let go. As someone said early on in the war, he claims he didn't go there for the oil (or other riches) ... but he sure isn't leaving without it.