Wednesday, November 23, 2005

More Randomness

DEMOCRATS
You know the thing that REALLY bothers me about Democrats is their weird obsession with destroying the Republicans instead of destroying Osama bin Laden (this coming from a former Democrat). It's VERY apparent after watching the last 6 months of political reporting here in the United States that the Democrats are far more interested in defeating, demolishing, demoralizing, and destroying the Republicans. If they put as much energy into doing the same to the enemies of this nation maybe most people wouldn't consider their vile party a DOMESTIC enemy of the United States.

Image hosted by Photobucket.com




JOURNALISM
To be sure, there is no longer any pretense of IMPARTIAL journalism in modern day society. Most journailsts work for governments or large web-content corporations, and are likely to obey their employers when it comes time to "spin" a given story. Other journalists pursue the "human interest" market, which primarily presents stories with more sensationalism than substance. None of this should be surpirsing to any citizen of the modern era--the notion that there ever was such a thing as OBJECTIVE journalism wil be regarded by future generations as a charming myth of bygone days. The ability to recognize and comensate for the biases in any given media source is a primary modern survival skill.

Image hosted by Photobucket.com




SOCIALISM
Socialism was man's most ambitious attempt to supplant religion with a doctrine claiming to ground itself in "science". Indeed, no religion ever spread so far so fast. Yet while socialism had established itself as a fact of life by the beginning of the 20th century, it did not create societies of abundance or give birth to "the New Man." Each failure inspired new searches for the path to the promised land: revolution, communes, social democracy, Communism, Facism, Third World socialism. None worked, and some exacted staggering human tolls. Now, of course, socialism is widely discredited.

Image hosted by Photobucket.com

Thursday, October 13, 2005

Whooping Cough and Mexicans

OK, the Denver Post has reported today (in a half-hearted way) that whooping cough is skyrocketing across the United States and should be taken seriously. I personally took an interest in this because my family and I all caught whopping cough and we seriously ill for weeks and weeks earlier this year. What pissed me off about this article by Linda J. Johnson of the Associate Press is that she is not reporting why whooping cough is spreading so quickly in the 1990s and 2000s in America. She quoted that cases of whooping cough, a potentially fatal disease, has more than doubled since the year 2000 in the US. What she didn't report (because it's politically incorrect) that it is Mexican illegal aliens that are actually spreading this deadly disease, along with tuberculosis, plague, and several other extremely deadly diseases (Mexicans do not get some of the vaccinations that Americans regularly do). I would also like to point out that almost all major outbreaks are occuring in Blue States, gee I wonder why that is? It really, really bothers me that reporters are only reporting half-truths, or outright propaganda, because we might hurt some protected groups "feelings". It was an illegal alien that brought West Nile virus to the US, and has literally crossed from one side of the country (from New York to Washington state) in less than two years, aided by birds like crows that are frequently bitten by misquitos. How many Americans have died from West Nile? Hundreds surely, yet no one on the left cares about this, its' all about our "valiant soldiers in Iraq", riiiiiight.






Also from the Denver Post this week:
State leading nation in whooping-cough cases
By Marsha Austin
Denver Post Staff Writer

Colorado leads the U.S. in the number of reported cases of pertussis, commonly known as whooping cough, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Thursday.

The outbreak has prompted national infectious-disease experts to collaborate with Children's Hospital in Denver to raise awareness of the ailment and encourage vaccination.

"The numbers have just exploded in such a short period of time," said Nicole Lynch, spokeswoman for the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases.

Health officials hope to prevent further spread of the highly contagious bacterium, which causes severe coughing, breathlessness and vomiting. The illness, nicknamed "the 100-day cough," can be bothersome for adults but deadly for infants.

"If they get pertussis, they have a good chance of dying," said Dr. Ann-Christine Nyquist, medical director of infection control at The Children's Hospital.

So far, Colorado is reporting 1,047 pertussis cases, and public- health experts predict the state will surpass 2004's total of 1,185, which was a five-year high. Last year saw more than three times as many cases as in 2003.

Only Montana has a higher prevalence of pertussis, with 77 cases per 100,000, compared with Colorado's 29 per 100,000, according to the most recent figures available from the CDC.

Low vaccination rates in Colorado are partly to blame, said Ned Calonge, the state's chief medical officer. In recent years, doctors did not give the full course of diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccine to children because of a shortage, he said.

For years, Colorado was last in the nation in immunizing children, but now the state ranks 44th. From 2001 to 2004, the state did not provide any funding for child immunization programs.

While health officials remain concerned about the numbers, more accurate testing and greater awareness of pertussis among health care providers could explain some of the rise in reported cases, Calonge said.

This year, there is plenty of vaccine, and the FDA has approved two new vaccines for adults and adolescents, whose immunity to pertussis wanes eight to 10 years after the last shot, Calonge said.

Colorado's statewide surge in pertussis reflects a national resurgence of the illness that has health officials worried.

According to CDC estimates, there was a nearly 63 percent

The Trouble with Muslims

You know I am really having a hard time with muslims. I mean, they cannot get along with any of their neighbors: look at Israel, and India, and Russia, and Indonesia (Timor), and now the USA. I mean I think there is something seriously wrong with these guys, mentally. I was talking to a co-worker a few weeks ago (a muslim woman) and she seemed to think that America had never played any positive role the muslim world, that it was only a hypocritical oppressor. I took issue with this of course, pointing out that it was the USA that saved Kuwait from a murderous Saddam, that America had supported her own homeland of Pakistan over India during their mutual brutal wars during the past 50 years, and that the US has a positive immigration policy towards muslims: we don't ban them like muslim nations ban Christians. Some other thoughts are really bothering me as well: the Islamic world's acceptance of apocalypic terrorists as heroes is perhaps the most profound indicator of its spiritual crisis and decay. We are currently witnessing the horrific mutation of a great world religion, and the Islamic world will likely prove the greatest breeding ground of apocalypic terrorists in history. The ability to dehumanize his targets is essential to the psychology of the terrorist, that is why it is so critical to give muslmim women in Iraq the right to vote. Also, these madman have convinced themselves that our way of life is satanic, and that we are the enemies of their religion and their God. More to come....

To read more, see: http://www.domini.org/openbook/ind20010119.htm

Monday, October 10, 2005

Katrina Kills Nagin and Blanco?

OK, so the Looney Left Crowd (aka the Bush haters) blame President Bush for everything, including Hurricane Katrina and Rita and their aftermath. However, the general public feels differently. An Online Survey of the Katrina disaster is now complete - with more than 175,000 respondents. Here are the results:

Do you believe George Bush and the federal government deserve primary responsibility for the Katrina disaster and response? 89% said "No." Just 11% Said "Yes."

Who bears more responsibility for the suffering caused by Katrina? Only 11% blamed Bush; 89% blamed "Mayor Nagin/Gov. Blanco."

Describe media coverage of Katrina. 86% said it was biased against Bush; 10% said it was neutral and 4% said it was biased in favor of Bush.




Mayor Ray Nagin



Governor Blanco



Damon: I found this survey very interesting. First off, I felt very early on that it was Mayaor Nagins' and Governor Blancos' fault for the breakdown of basic services in the New Orleans area immediately after hurricane Katrina. Mayor Nagin's guilt lies in not preparing ANY food or water for the refugees seeking shelter at the Superdome even before the hurricane arrived. he knew, as did most of the city's media, that large numbers of poor people who were unable to evacuate would seek shelter at the Superdome, and his failure to provide security or even basic food and water makes him guilty. Governor Blanco's guilt lies in the failure to call out the National Guard when the city of New Orleans descended into chaos. Her vile behavior towards President Bush showed her true colors: she would rather let innocent people die than let Bush and the Republicans gain anything positive out of this disaster. In my opinion all Democrats are like Blanoc, power hungry and caring little for the people who get in the way (ie civilians in New Orleans). I hope Nagin and Blanco get thrown out on their ass for their obvious incompetence, misbehavior, and failure of governance in a time of crisis.

Thursday, May 05, 2005

More Randomness

LEFT WING APOLOGISTS: The Left (especially in American colleges and university campuses) is always standing up for radical muslims, but today should be their darkest hour. While Leftists around the world and totalitarian muslisms have much in common, the following article should wake those on the Left up to the vileness of who muslims really are. Killing women is dispicable, I don't care what your religion says. CLICK


IT'S ABOUT TIME: Political correctness is going to get us all killed. As a gay man, I am shocked that the FDA hadn't banned gay men from donating sperm years ago! How many straight women (who just wanted to have a couple of kids) have been infected with the virus due to the lack of intelligent behavior on the part of gay men? The whole PC thing is just sickening. CLICK


ABU GHRAIB SEXUAL DEVIANTS: CLICK Seems like sexual deviants in the military may do things normal people wouldn't. Hmmmmm.....allow no sexual deviants in the military, I'd say.


I REALLY LIKE THIS GUY: CLICK Every time I get mad at Bush for not closing the border or some other important issue to my family and myself, he pulls something like this. I love this guy!


IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN: CLICK She is NOT going to keep any promise to hold the Senate seat in New York if she can be President. Are New Yorkers nuts? They must trust her far more than I ever did.....

Tuesday, May 03, 2005

More Random Thoughts

MSM PROPAGANDA: You know, what I REALLY hate about the Mainstream Media today is all the propganda they spew. Here is a good example. In today's paper is an article how Bush torpedoed the "Kyoto Treaty". The message was clear: Bush is an evil villain for not signing the treaty, but a closer look reveals more. Someone would have to be well read to know that Mr. Bill Clinton as President of the USA also refused to sign the treaty. The lack of honesty in this article makes me suspect, and highlights the dishonesty of the typical media outlets today. I am sure that Bill Clinton and George Bush Jr. agree on few things, but they do on Kyoto. The article should have tried to discover WHY both US Presidents didn't ink the treaty, not just spend 3,000 words bashing the current President. Morons....


JDAM: Well the US military has developed a bomb called "JDAM", the Joint Direct Attack Munition. Now 30,072 will be built by Boeing by 2007.

title or description

Key to drawing:
1)Warhead
2)Suspension lugs
3)1760 interface
4)Jacket
5)Strakes
6)Guidance section
7)Fins

The satellite-guided Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) is the hottest "smart" bomb in the US arsenal because it is cheap, accurate and can find its target in any weather.

It has been the weapon of choice of the US Air Force and Navy since the Nato air war against Yugoslavia in 1999.

So many were used in last year's Afghan campaign that the Pentagon stepped up production to replenish supplies ahead of any war against Iraq.

JDAMs are much cheaper at about $20 000 a copy than the laser-guided bombs that stunned the world during the 1991 Gulf War.

That means many more will be available than in the Gulf War, when precision weapons accounted for only about seven percent of bombs dropped. In Yugoslavia, the use of smart weapons rose to 30% of the total and in Afghanistan to 60%. Defence department officials say precision weapons will account for 70% of the bombs in Iraq.

Some experts caution that JDAMs are less accurate than laser guided weapons, and may not be optimal for bombing in heavily populated areas in and around Baghdad.

"They are most useful when you're fighting outside the cities, than inside the cities," said Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution. "JDAM misses by 5 to 10m if it's not jammed, and by 30m if it is jammed."

JDAM, which comes in 500, 1000, and 2000 lb variants, is essentially a dumb bomb with a tail kit that uses inertial navigation and signals from a GPS satellite to steer to the target.

The GPS guidance allows it to find its target through atmospheric conditions such as clouds or dust that can foil laser-guided weapons.

But JDAMs have had some spectacular misses.

A B-2 bomber blasted the Chinese embassy in Belgrade with JDAMs on May 7, 1999, killing three people.

The targetting error was blamed on outdated maps that showed the embassy in another part of town, not on the accuracy of the weapon.

In Afghanistan, a JDAM killed three US special forces troops and five Afghans during the siege of Kandahar after it was called in on a forward air controller own position on the ground because of a glitch.

The 38 people injured in that bombing included Hamid Karzai, who went on to become Afghanistan's president.

The bomb was delivered by a B-52 bomber, the giant aircraft built for strategic bombing not for close air support of ground troops.

But close air support is now a mission that can be carried out by any aircraft capable of delivering the JDAM, a Pentagon spokesman said.

The B-2, B-52, B-1, F-16 and F/A-18 are equipped to carry the bomb. The US military is looking to equip every other fighter and attack aircraft in its arsenal to deliver it.


title or description


title or description


title or description


title or description



IT HAD TO HAPPEN: Click Me

title or description


HOUSTON BANS
Houston Bans Offensive Odor in Libraries
Apr 28, 7:28 AM (ET)

HOUSTON (AP) - Those who want to browse books at Houston's public libraries should get enough sleep, eat and bathe before they begin to peruse the shelves.

On Wednesday, the City Council passed a series of library regulations that some say are an attempt to discourage homeless people from visiting the public buildings.

Library officials said people have been using the libraries as temporary shelters, restaurants and changing stations. The new ordinance prohibits sleeping on tables, eating, using restrooms for bathing and "offensive bodily hygiene that constitutes a nuisance to others."

Two council members voted against the ordinance, saying it was a direct attack on the homeless.

"I understand what they're trying to do, but when you start targeting a community like the homeless, I think that's poor policy," council member Ada Edwards said.

Mayor Bill White said there have been several complaints from the public about abuse of the city's libraries.

IT'S ABOUT TIME.......




CREEPY
Genetic Mingling Mixes Human, Animal Cells By PAUL ELIAS, AP Biotechnology Writer
Fri Apr 29, 8:44 PM ET

On a farm about six miles outside this gambling town, Jason Chamberlain looks over a flock of about 50 smelly sheep, many of them possessing partially human livers, hearts, brains and other organs.

The University of Nevada-Reno researcher talks matter-of-factly about his plans to euthanize one of the pregnant sheep in a nearby lab. He can't wait to examine the effects of the human cells he had injected into the fetus' brain about two months ago.

"It's mice on a large scale," Chamberlain says with a shrug.

As strange as his work may sound, it falls firmly within the new ethics guidelines the influential National Academies issued this past week for stem cell research.

In fact, the Academies' report endorses research that co-mingles human and animal tissue as vital to ensuring that experimental drugs and new tissue replacement therapies are safe for people.

Doctors have transplanted pig valves into human hearts for years, and scientists have injected human cells into lab animals for even longer.

But the biological co-mingling of animal and human is now evolving into even more exotic and unsettling mixes of species, evoking the Greek myth of the monstrous chimera, which was part lion, part goat and part serpent.

In the past two years, scientists have created pigs with human blood, fused rabbit eggs with human DNA and injected human stem cells to make paralyzed mice walk.

Particularly worrisome to some scientists are the nightmare scenarios that could arise from the mixing of brain cells: What if a human mind somehow got trapped inside a sheep's head?

The "idea that human neuronal cells might participate in 'higher order' brain functions in a nonhuman animal, however unlikely that may be, raises concerns that need to be considered," the academies report warned.

In January, an informal ethics committee at Stanford University endorsed a proposal to create mice with brains nearly completely made of human brain cells. Stem cell scientist Irving Weissman said his experiment could provide unparalleled insight into how the human brain develops and how degenerative brain diseases like Parkinson's progress.

Stanford law professor Hank Greely, who chaired the ethics committee, said the board was satisfied that the size and shape of the mouse brain would prevent the human cells from creating any traits of humanity. Just in case, Greely said, the committee recommended closely monitoring the mice's behavior and immediately killing any that display human-like behavior.

The Academies' report recommends that each institution involved in stem cell research create a formal, standing committee to specifically oversee the work, including experiments that mix human and animal cells.

Weissman, who has already created mice with 1 percent human brain cells, said he has no immediate plans to make mostly human mouse brains, but wanted to get ethical clearance in any case. A formal Stanford committee that oversees research at the university would also need to authorize the experiment.

Few human-animal hybrids are as advanced as the sheep created by another stem cell scientist, Esmail Zanjani, and his team at the University of Nevada-Reno. They want to one day turn sheep into living factories for human organs and tissues and along the way create cutting-edge lab animals to more effectively test experimental drugs.

Zanjani is most optimistic about the sheep that grow partially human livers after human stem cells are injected into them while they are still in the womb. Most of the adult sheep in his experiment contain about 10 percent human liver cells, though a few have as much as 40 percent, Zanjani said.

Because the human liver regenerates, the research raises the possibility of transplanting partial organs into people whose livers are failing.

Zanjani must first ensure no animal diseases would be passed on to patients. He also must find an efficient way to completely separate the human and sheep cells, a tough task because the human cells aren't clumped together but are rather spread throughout the sheep's liver.

Zanjani and other stem cell scientists defend their research and insist they aren't creating monsters — or anything remotely human.

"We haven't seen them act as anything but sheep," Zanjani said.

Zanjani's goals are many years from being realized.

He's also had trouble raising funds, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture is investigating the university over allegations made by another researcher that the school mishandled its research sheep. Zanjani declined to comment on that matter, and university officials have stood by their practices.

Allegations about the proper treatment of lab animals may take on strange new meanings as scientists work their way up the evolutionary chart. First, human stem cells were injected into bacteria, then mice and now sheep. Such research blurs biological divisions between species that couldn't until now be breached.

Drawing ethical boundaries that no research appears to have crossed yet, the Academies recommend a prohibition on mixing human stem cells with embryos from monkeys and other primates. But even that policy recommendation isn't tough enough for some researchers.

"The boundary is going to push further into larger animals," New York Medical College professor Stuart Newman said. "That's just asking for trouble."

Newman and anti-biotechnology activist Jeremy Rifkin have been tracking this issue for the last decade and were behind a rather creative assault on both interspecies mixing and the government's policy of patenting individual human genes and other living matter.

Years ago, the two applied for a patent for what they called a "humanzee," a hypothetical — but very possible — creation that was half human and chimp.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office finally denied their application this year, ruling that the proposed invention was too human: Constitutional prohibitions against slavery prevents the patenting of people.

Newman and Rifkin were delighted, since they never intended to create the creature and instead wanted to use their application to protest what they see as science and commerce turning people into commodities.

And that's a point, Newman warns, that stem scientists are edging closer to every day: "Once you are on the slope, you tend to move down it."

Monday, May 02, 2005

This speaks volumes

title or description

To me, this small chart (courtesy of Newsweek) speaks volumes. Many on the Left think that global wealth will equal global "happiness". I have always disagreed with that premise and now this chart apparently refutes such thinking as well. Enjoy!

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

It's IRAN Stupid!

April 20, 2005: Unrest continues among the Arab population along the Iraqi border. Iran is actually a multi-ethnic empire, with a core of ethnic Iranians surrounded by other minorities. North of the Arabs are Kurds and Turks (Azeris). In eastern Iran there are Afghans and Baluchis. These minorities comprise over a third of the population. The Arab minority, however, is special, as they sit on top of most of Iran's oil. Saddam Hussein thought these Arabs would would rise in rebellion when invading Iraqi troops entered the area in 1980. Didn't happen. But the Arab-Iranians do maintain their culture, and the Iranian majority has never been happy with this. The current unrest was caused by government efforts to control Arab language press. A lot of this censorship is not just being hard on Arab media, but the continuing efforts of the Islamic conservatives to stamp out dissident media. There is no press freedom in Iran, and hasn't been any for over two decades. Iran is blaming foreign media, and, of course, the United States, for the unrest. Al Jazeera operations in Iran have been shut down, and other foreign media threatened.

The Most Rabid Mr. Brin

OK, so I am cruising around the internet, looking for authors to highlight here in my journal and recommend to anyone who reads my LJ, and I stumble acorss David Brins' website. Now, I liked David Brins' works, and his "Startide Rising" is classic sci-fi to many people, but when I saw his political rants on his site I was intrigued.....and then began reading. Now, I, being the right wing guy that I am, was utterly horrified at his vicious attack on Bush, conservatives, Republicans, relgious people, Christians, the "Right", and even the mainstream media. He actually told me that the major media outlets in the USA were "right wing". Here is the money quote:

"To call CNN anything but utter neocon propaganda mill is absurd."

Right...the CNN that cohorted with Saddam Hussein. The CNN that bashes the US military by saying that they used chemical weapons in Cambodia. The CNN that accused the US military of DELIBERATELY killing US journalists (the head of CNN made that quote and was forced to resign). CNN, the TED TURNER CNN, which hates Christians and the Pope more than just about anybody in the world. And let's not forget about the New York Times, one of the most anti-USA media in the country, or the Washington Post, or the Denver Post (where I live), or the Seattle Times, or LA Times. I challenged Mr. Brin on the point that these media outlets were right wing. I told him that NONE of them had positive things to say about pro-life people or anti-gay people (both strong right wing positions). He of course dodged that question.

He also railed heartily against the "aristocracy" that is now in power in Washington DC, but when I emailed him about these issues, he actualy had the GALL to say this too me:

"You deride as bizarre the views of the best educated people in this country."

I mean, this is WILD. He bashes Bush and Co. for being elitist, but then attacks me with this elitist remark. I don't give two SHITS what your education level is. Some of the most educated people in the world have brought us the greatest horrors in the world, thank you very much.

Then he went on to make this ridiculous "coup" point.

"I am in this fight because I care about my children and I see a coup taking place. If the left were doing it, I would fight THEM, as I fought communism all my life. (Far more effectively than you ever did.)"

Now of course this pissed me off, first because I was actually black balled at a university because I fought against the prevalent communist viewpoints of some professors (which bring sme to another point, the total LEFT-dominated academia in America today, a point which Brin dodged as well). My grades were also lowered because of the right wing viewpoint that I held. I also pointed out to Mr. Brin after this ludicrous statement that people ELECTED Bush Jr, twice, and that their was no "coup". They also elected larger and larger elements of the Republican party, for many many reasons. He also said the follwing:

"But the left is a spent joke. They could not take over a library. The threat is from your pals, who have already taken over everything."

Now this of course is absurd, and I will tell you why. If ANYONE was paying attention to the widespread intimidation tactics that the left used in the last election, you would have noticed that it all came from the Democratic side. Not only were Republicans threatened, shot at, delibrately run down (Katherine Harris), computers stolen, cars vandalized, etc ad naseum, but I noticed that it only came from the left. The left wants to deny people their right to vote, as seen from the tire slashing event back east where Democratic "activists" slashed something like 40+ cars tires that were rented by Republicans to "get out the vote". The political violence, which I pointed out to Mr. Brin and which he pointedly ignored, was shocking to me. VIOLENCE is not part of the USA political process, and anyone who supports such a position should be drummed out of the country. Only leftist hold this point of view in America btw, you don't see people on the right advocating this type of behavior.

Mr. Brin also said this to me: "Not one thing this administration does is "conservative". EVRYTHING it does serves the aristocracy. Find one counter example. One."

Now of course anyone who knows anything about Republicans knows that Bush is a conservative on many issues, but not on others. And I replied to Mr. Brin that Bush has done many things that are conservative and that do not support the "aristocracy". One was to appoint a gay man to the federal office of HIV. That move cost him dearly at his "base", which attacked him over it. He also appointed blacks (Colin Powell and Condi Rice) to high level government positions, even though 95% of blacks supported DEMOCRATS in the last election. I also could not fathom this "aristocracy" viewpoint. So I just put it down to normal left-wing hyperbole. I mean from Mr. Brins limited viewpoint, if Democrats get elected then they are "high minded statemen" but when Republican sget elected they are "aristocrats". How sad. A great mind like Mr. Brin goes off the deep end. How far left can you POSSIBLY be to think that the USA is ruled by aristocrats and that the major media is right wing? Elites yes, aristocrats no. Just because Bush Jr was the son of Bush Sr does not automatically mean that we are some sort of aristocracy. And by the way, Bill Clinton did far more to damage the White House, the US military, government, the USs' position in the world, and the internal political discourse in our country than any other President in history, IMO.

Oh well......see MY books in the bookstore sometime ;) Damon

Sunday, April 24, 2005

Beginning Blog

Okay, I am going to begin blogging here because my LiveJournal (God bless em) isn't really the place for all this political stuff. It is mainly for personal reflections and feedback from my friends, some of whom are spread out all over the country. I wanted to have a specific spot where I could rant and rave from the right, so here it goes:


GREEN DAY: In a recent Newsweek article (why do I read this trash mag?) the music band Green Day was quoted as saying, "...whatever musical direction they were headed in, they want to produce something complete. We didn't want to be a band bitching about downloading," says Cool, "which happens when you put out one good song and a bunch of filler." He couldn't possibly have been more right. Many people, myself included, hate to buy entire albums for just one or two really good songs. This sort of mindset is an excellent response to downloaders and forces bands to be more professional, putting out more good music in one album, instead of adding "filler". I am grateful that Green Day has seen the light. One hopes that other popular music bands, who shall remain un-named, will also see the light, put out better albums, stop suing their fanbase.


ANDREW SULLIVAN: He just never seems to get it right anymore. As a gay man and a conservative, I used to love reading his rants. However, in recent years he has gone off on the deep end and is becoming more and more Democratic in his stances. Yes he has brilliant conservative spurts now and again, but I confess I have stopped reading his blog for various reasons, some of which I will address here:

Gay Marriage is a major issue for Andrew Sullivan and apparently a huge number of gays according to the coverage put out by the left-wing media. This however is a farce as there has been literally no debate within gay circles on the issue of gay marriage. Many gays feel that being like straights in issues like marriage is acting and thinking like straights, an anathema to many gays. In fact, I have heard very few issues that spark such hateful rants as gay marriage within the gay community. Other gays, because of the way they live, do not even think about gay marriage. Large numbers of gay men live in three-way or "open" relationships. These men would find it impossible to get a marriage license for a three-way marriage and thus do not support gay marriage at all. Most gay men are not into monogmay at all, seeing their current sexual partner as a temporary one and thus have no stance on gay marriage.
It seems that a small click of gay men, backed up by power left-wing media, is promoting the gay marriage agenda, and many gay conservatives feel that the issue is badly damaging gay-straight relationships. Of course their voices are not being heard. I mean, when was the last time you heard a gay conservative (and boy are there alot of them now) speak against gay marriage in the mainstream media???


CHURCH AND STATE: Mr. Sullivan had this email quoted on his blog today, something I cannot ignore. It said "I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute -- where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote -- where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference." Now obviously Mr. Sullivan believes in this stance as well otherwise he would have refuted it on his webpage or at least not highlighted it there. However, there are some fundamental problems with this sort of political stance.
First off, it denies religious people of fundamental rights of political organization. It is supremely undemocratic for the left (and obviously this is a Leftist) to say that people on the right (who are mainly Christians, at least here in Ameria) should have no political say. For Leftists to deny Christians the ability to organize and vote at a group level is surpising (well maybe it isn't, they hate anyone on the right so much anyways they seem quite insane now). Imagine if some right wing group tried to prevent blacks from organizing politically, or Jews. My god, the outcry would be heard around the world from tleftist groups and US "mainstream media".
As far as I know, no President, be him Catholic or not, has ever told a US President what to do. As if a sitting US President would ever listen. The Lefts preoccupation with (or lies about) a right wing theocracy being formed in America is a red herring. It's the only way they hold onto power on the left, to threaten a right-wing "takeover" or "coup" (oh how I have heard this language so often now). BTW, I notice that only the left uses the word "coup", no one of the right uses it with any regularity.
"And no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote". Oh yes, wouldn't Leftists love to have this sort of power over religious leaders in the United States? It is exactly what they did in the former Soviet Union by the way; politically gagged religious authorities. The Lefts' habitual flirting with totalitarian leanings is shocking and should be shown more pointedly by right wing bloggers. It is only the fact that stupid Christian churches exchange freedom from taxes for political muzzling that allows this travesty to continue. Christian people and Christian churches have every right and are responsible to God for being involved in the political process in the United States. Whenever men of good concious sit out of the political debate, tyranny surely follows.

Side Note: it's okay when Clinton, Gore, and other Dems go to black churches to "get out the vote" but its wrong for white churches to try and do the same, riiiiight. We call that hypocrisy in my church.


GAY CATHOLIC PRIESTS: I am outraged by the lies that Mr. Sullivan sometimes promotes on his website. Here is one from today: "My prediction: the pedophiles and their protectors will remain (in the catholic Church, by the new Pope Benedicts hand). The gay men will be scapegoated and purged."
As if none of the gay men in Catholic robes never raped a little boy. I myself am a gay man and I am more than sure that some gay men do molest children from time to time (the two men that molested me were homosexual btw). And if anyone in the straight community didn't know, there is a huge segment of the gay community that likes extremely young boys. For Mr. Sullivan to not address gays in the Catholic priesthood, and there sins, seems progandistic at best. I cannot imagine in my mind why any straight man would molest little boys. Little girls yes, but little boys? It just doesn't seem logical. I would like to see some hard facts on this issue, since there is many lies circulating about the supposed sexual preferences of religious straight men. (On a side note, I cannot believe that Mr. Sullivan actually says this, that straight religious men are more prone to sexual abuse of little boys than gay men are, what an unbelievable lie).



THE BBC: At it again. Now why does this surprise me (it shouldn't, really)? I am sure that US MSM has done the same thing over and over again and it would be interesting to see if other media could track down phony stories created and developed by the MSM. I mean, this tactic seems alot like something Michael Moore would do. So the BBC is now using Michael Moore practices, hmm......



GOOD RIDDANCE (or die wolf die!): See it here. See the problem with the Looney Left is this: they just do not promote humanity over nature. I have personal experience with the reintroduction of wolves because I lived in northern Idaho where it was done recently. People who actually live in the area protested the federal governments reintroduction of wolves because they are a danger to humans and people's pets and livestock. Of course their fears were not even addressed and wolves would repopulated into the area, and the wolves promptly began killing sheep and pets. And they spread of course, into Montana, where they caused serious problems for that regions sheep farmers. Now the US government wants to reintroduce grizzy bears (titanic 2,000 pound human killers) back into Idaho. Over my dead body.....



FINALLY, HILLARY: You know, I don't know why this woman bothers me so much (actually I do know; it was her 8 years in the White House and all the illegal crap her and her husband pulled) but one sentence she said several months ago still haunts me and I need to blog it. She said, "It’s impossible to be both a Christian and a Republican.” Is she kidding me?! How anyone could vote Democratic and be Christian is the real question! I mean, isn't it the Democrats that are the Party of Death? They promote abortion (which is murder of the unborn) and euthanasia (murder of the elderly, handicapped, dying, suicidal, etc). They also promote homosexuality on a national level. Jesus did neither of these things, nor would He ever promote such ideas. This woman is clearly nuts, and is the most dangerous Democrat to ever run for office. I also worry a great deal now about how far the left is from the mainstream, and how far the right is from ever working with the left. Both parties have purged their "moderates". It reminds me of the fall of Rome.

Side note: the only Christian group of any size that acyually votes Democratic is, surprise, the Catholics.



PRESIDENT HILLARY: See it here.



SURPRISING POLITICAL NUMBERS: See it here.



GAY AND CONSERVATIVE? See my buddy Dreadnoughts' blog. He's great, even though he is Catholic.



OTHER BLOGS: I don't really read other political blogs on a regular basis, so I do not know if they are covering the same thing as I do. Let's hope not, I like to be original. Warm regards, Damon