Friday, June 30, 2006

pretending to sleep through the storms

I'm sure after hiding out during yet another round of storms last night, the dysfunctional duo was very glad to wake up to a sunny day (and less flooded back yard) today.


Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, June 29, 2006

Charity is only OK if it advances orthodox Christian principles

Talk about moral relativism! Charitable donations aren't always a good thing as a matter of fact, some are the work of the devil according to the Christian orthodoxy.

Well what did I expect after the fundies started railing that voting is downright unAmerican/unPatriotic if you don't vote for a Repubevangelical.

Tags: ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, June 27, 2006

not so Starry, Starry day

Star Jones may have managed to keep the method of her drastic weight loss secret, but her not so secret plans to leave The Yentas View were confirmed during this morning's episode of the televised coffee klatsch. On her departure, Jones didn't say what her career plans are but commented
“I’m not sure what the future holds,” she said. “But I’m absolutely sure who holds the future.”
Anyone want to guess that Jones, a Court TV alum, will try to hit up another Court TV alum for a position at MSNBC*?

* say no Dan, just say no!


Sphere: Related Content

Oops, he did it again

My old buddy Rush may have just screwed up a deal on prescription drug fraud in a desparate attempt to get laid. It appears as though "Mr. send the drug users up the river" was detained at Pam Beach International airport the other day with some contraband Viagra. According to Limbaugh's attorney:
Limbaugh’s doctor had prescribed the Viagra, but it was “labeled as being issued to the physician rather than Mr. Limbaugh for privacy purposes"
I don't know why he'd be ashamed of having the prescription - heck, Bob Dole did ads for the stuff. Maybe he was just trying to hide his non-marital sexcapades from the Christian Conservative ditto-heads.

Tags: ;

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, June 26, 2006

Mo money, mo money, mo money

Courtesy of Raw Story comes the news that what the queers lack in sheer number they more than make up in purchase power as gay buying power is expected to top a trillion by 2012.
"The purchasing power of the GLBT community is estimated today to be a massive $641 billion, with projections reaching $1 trillion by 2012. Add in the buying power of the millions of family members and friends who show fierce allegiance to fair- minded corporations, and you get a message that no company can afford to ignore: equality is good for business," said Jody M. Huckaby, executive director of the more than 200,000-member organization.

"This economic clout and product loyalty is only going to grow. We are here to give the business world this wake-up call and to help companies compete."
So tell me, what's a "Christian" capitalist to do? I'm sure it's only a matter of time before Daddy Dobson tells us. . .

Tags: ; ; ; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, June 19, 2006

How about a living wage?

The minimum wage in the US has been set at $5.15/hr since 1997. In that time, Congress has voted to give themselves a raise 9 times which have totaled more than 3 times a 40-hour/week FT salary of the minimum wage earner. In contrast, the $10,700 a minimum wage worker earns for a full year of 40-hour work weeks is $5,000 less than the official poverty line for a family of 3.

To put this into perspective, Senator Rick Santorum not only had to suck it up and let his wife do some work not related to keeping his house and raising his children to add another much needed $4,000/month to his then measly $162K/year salary but he also admits to occasionally accepting a bit of financial help from his retired parents to help keep the family from debtors prison (maybe he should pretend to be a resident of FL instead PA in order to keep the homestead if he has to file for bankruptcy).

It's well past time for a raise in the minimum wage. Senator Kennedy has recently introduced an ammendment to raise the minimum wage to $7.25/hr (that's still barely over $15K/year) and a vote on the matter could happen as soon as this Wednesday.
c/o AFL-CIO E-Activist

We’re coming down to the wire. The Senate is expected to vote on a minimum wage increase this week, but opponents may try to block it with phony proposals that actually hurt workers. Meanwhile, the Republican House leadership has refused to schedule a vote even though an increase to $7.25 an hour won a solid majority vote in committee. We have fought long and hard to give America’s low-wage workers a raise. What happens depends on your action now.
Please contact your U.S. senators and representative to vote to increase the minimum wage and reject any amendments to the legislation that would hurt workers.

For more information, please check out the following:

Raising the Minimum Wage is a Matter of Fairness

Minimum Wage Showdown this Week

Let Justice Roll

Tags: ; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, June 17, 2006

Another day, another email from the AFA complaining about intolerant people firing folks for no good reason

When 18-year old Crystal Plotner, who the rink owners say was one of their top 10 employees, casually mentioned she was planning to move in with her boyfriend to her bosses, they implored her to check out their church and re-consider her sinful plans. When she refused to do either, they fired her sinful little ass for violation of their moral turpitude clause. Needless to say, I wasn't surprised when I saw the email I received from the AFA's Don Wildmon, wildly complaining about intolerant employers firing good people for no good reason. I saw the subject line of the e-mail and thought it's about time such a fine, Christian organization took up the cause of a great employee like Crystal who wasn't going around preaching against [traditional] marriage at the rink, telling rink patrons about how she was living in sin, or doing anything in a public forum that could make her employers look kinda shady. Then I opened it and found out my friend Don is only concerned about firing people who go out of their way to impugn others (provided the person who was fired is a "Christian" and the people being impugned don't even meet Anne Coulter's liberal definition of Christian.

A public official in Maryland has been fired by the Republican governor because he merely expressed his personal beliefs and the teaching of his church that homosexuality is immoral. Robert Smith was fired from his position on the Metro board by Gov. Robert Ehrlich, Jr. after a homosexual complained. Gov. Ehrlich said he is intolerant to any view that opposes the full social acceptance of homosexual behavior and its promotion in government. He said Smith's comments were "highly inappropriate, insensitive and unacceptable. They are in direct conflict to my administration's commitment to...tolerance." Gov. Ehrlich contradicted his own statement! He is promoting tolerance toward homosexual practice while being intolerant to Smith's Christian beliefs and the teaching of his church.
Smith, it seems, went on a local cable talk show to espouse his views that homosexuals live a life of sexual deviancy. He not only offended other Metro Board members by these public statements, he also ticked off openly gay board member DC councilman Jim Graham, who called for his resignation. According to Wildmon's email

Addressing his views on homosexual marriage, Smith said: "Homosexual behavior, in my view, is deviant. I'm a Roman Catholic. The comments I make in public outside of my [Metro board job] I'm entitled to make." His personal beliefs, he said, have "absolutely nothing to do with running trains and buses and have not affected my actions or decisions on this board."

Smith responded to a speaker who said homosexuals do not want the government interfering in their sex life. "That's fine, that's fine," Smith said. "But that doesn't mean that government should proffer a special place of entitlement within the laws of the United States for persons of sexual deviancy."

Smith said he has always supported the transit agency's policy against all forms of discrimination. Asked if he planned to apologize to Metro board member Jim Graham, an open homosexual who called for Smith's firing, Smith replied: "I didn't make the comments to Mr. Graham...I'm sorry he feels that way. I don't agree that his lifestyle is an appropriate way to lead one's life."

Smith was fired not because he wasn't doing a good job. He was fired not because of his practice, but because of his thinking! He was fired because he held different beliefs. So much for tolerance! If this firing stands, it means that any Christian who states publicly that homosexual practice is morally wrong does so at the risk of being fired.
The only thing is, based on Smith's own account of the cable show, it sounds as though he was on the show as Metro Board Member Robert Smith discussing local government issues, not as a private citizen (if anyone has footage, I'd like to see how he was billed). I guess the point is, Wildmon is OK with firing someone for doing something he thinks is wrong but broadcasting public accusations based on Christian beliefs doesn't count. I wonder if the AFA will take up the cause for the next BYU professor fired for taking a stance of equality in marriage, after all that person is only thinking and expressing their personal views.

Tags: ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, June 16, 2006

Annie Get Your Gun

In an email interview Anne "I can't define what Christianity is, but I know it when I see it" Coulter has gone on to show yet another example of her religiously correct moral superiority by implying that anyone who has served their time in the US military during wartime but don't support the war in Iraq should be killed.
"After harmlessly dismissing former Ambassador Joseph Wilson as the "World's most intensely private exhibitionist," she said of Rep. John Murtha, the hawkish ex-Marine and now antiwar congressman: "The reason soldiers invented 'fragging.'" [Editor & Publisher]
I wonder if her next step will be to say amnesty should be granted to insurgents who have attacked/killed US troops in Iraq because those injured and killed were flaming liberals who deserved to be attacked for not supporting our troops in Iraq. After all, those who serve in and survive the Iraq war may be the next group of un-Patriotic ingrates that speak out against the Repubevangelical Empire.

Tags: ; ; ; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, June 15, 2006

The liberals don't support the troops?

It seems as though the yellow-bellied, un-American, terrorist-lovin' liberals - you know, the ones who the Patriotic folks at Faux News constantly deride as not supporting the troops by claiming we should not be at war in Iraq, aren't alone in the terrorist-supporting activities. The Republicans have proven yet again that the only time an American life matters to them is when they can wave their nice flag while beating their chests about how they value life. Raw Story reports
Five Republican Senators today took to the chamber floor invoking Nelson Mandela, the Confederacy, and even the Japenese to defend an Iraqi government plan to grant amnesty for insurgents who have attacked United States troops, or civilians
Yup, it was those of us who voted against the shrub and demanded Rummy, et al provide our military with appropriate supplies who show contempt for the troops.

Tags: ; ; ; ;; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

No Mo Po

Danny-boy's first major act as GM at MSNBC was to axe the Povich's. So far it looks like moving behind the scenes was a really good move for Abrams.

Tags: ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, June 14, 2006

PA House TO'd that Senate's version of bigotry bill let's some sinners have rights

There's a fire brewing between Pennsylvania law-makers as the PA Senate passed a version of the state's No Mo Marriage constitutional amendment that *gasp* allows municipalities to recognize and grant rights to people living in sin by registering as domestic partners. The lone dissenter in the senate, Jane Orie (R-Allegheny), decried the senate version for "defeating the purpose" of the amendment by not making it clear that traditional marriage is the only acceptable for people in a relationship to have any legal rights or responsibilities for adults in a romantic relationship, and that municipalities that recognize domestic partnerships undermine the safety of children and threaten to destroy the institution of marriage. After all, if two adults can register as domestic partnership the state no longer has the privelege of preventing people living in sin from obtaining benefits from companies that offer benefits to domestic partners.

Advocates for the original amendment language accused the Senate committee of trying to derail the bill.

"Members who voted for the bill as amended must have had the intent to kill the marriage protection amendment," said Michael Geer, president of the Pennsylvania Family Institute, which defines its mission as strengthening families by restoring traditional values to public life. [Inky]
The only way to prevent further erosion of the sanctity of marriage is to ensure no relationship or living arrangement that is similar to the traditional marriage (two adults living together and, possibly, even having/raising children) are reminded of how they are destroying society by not engaging in acceptable traditional marriage. Based on this thinking, even the House's version of the amendment doesn't quite go far enough to really protect marriage. After all, if people can enjoy a relationship that includes any of the benefits of a tradiional marriage, the institution of marriage is undermined. To be true to their goal of protecting marriage, PA lawmakers need to bring back anti cohabitation and fornication laws, complete with legal penalties against lawbreakers, as well as make other ways to prevent couples to "live in sin" or reap other benefits (sex, having children, etc.) that should be limited to heterosexual couples joined in an acceptable religious ceremony.

Tags: ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Crawford outs FDA irregularity

Former FDA head Lester Crawford has testified that the agency's intended response to Barr's prescription-to-OTC switch application for Plan B (emergency contraception) was not to deny the switch to allow sales of the drug without a prescription to females 17 and older.
Former FDA commissioner Lester Crawford, in a sworn statement, said he had reserved the right to decide whether to loosen the sales restrictions on the prescription-only emergency contraceptive pills. His account of that unusual and perhaps unprecedented move, given in a deposition over a lawsuit against the FDA, confirmed earlier testimony given by two senior agency officials who said he'd shut them out of the decision-making process.

But Crawford said his Aug. 26, 2005, announcement that the agency was delaying its decision on Plan B wasn't a move toward denying over-the-counter sales. Instead, it was a bid for time to work out how to enforce restricting nonprescription sales to women 17 and older. Girls 16 and younger would still need a prescription. [Guardian]
Barr had suggested a "behind the counter" plan for the drug - a plan similar to that applied to cigarettes which, based on Crawford's assertion that the FDA was just trying to work out an acceptable plan, should have been acceptable to the agency. Instead they delayed any decision to work out something different since a girl under the age of 17 could possibly get access to the drug without a prescription if they accepted the behind the counter suggestion by Barr. Interestingly, it's always "possible" for someone who doesn't have a prescription for a medication to get access to and use it (even children), so this argument holds less water than a colander.

Mark McClellan is next in the queue for a deposition on the issue. In the meantime, science and common sense continue to take a back seat to religious hystrionics.

Tags: ; ; ; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, June 12, 2006

Religious-induced ignorance still trumps science when it comes to women

Last night on 60 Minutes, they re-ran their story on how Repubevangelical FDA advisory appointee David "sodomy is best when perfomed without consent" Hager helped prevent a decision to approve OTC availability of Barr's Plan B emergency contraceptive. Women, including rape victims, are still being denied access to Plan B with a valid prescription for no other reason than the fact the religious right continues to mislabel the drug, which prevents the ovulation necessary for conception to occur, as an abortifacient. There are three evide points that really need serious consideration when the self-appointed arbiters of morality unneccesarily make the inacurate claim that Plan B induces abortions:
  • If ovulation does not occur, an egg can not be fertilized and pregnancy (even if you define it as conception instead of implantation) does not occur.
  • There is no evidence or logical reason to believe, let alone assert, that the drug causes expulsion of an implanted embryo when pregnancy has been established.
  • The claim that Plan B, in the case that ovulation and conception occur, prevents implantation into the endometrial lining has come about because chronic use of hormonal contraception can lead to thining of the endometrial lining which helps decrease the heaviness and/or duration of menses.
    • Please note the operative words are "chronic use" and "can."
      • All women using hormonal contraception on a regular basis do not have thiniing of the endometrial lining; quite a few do not and those who have gotten pregnant while using hormonal contraception do not necessarily suffer spontaneous abortion related to contraceptive use.
      • Plan B is not a chronic use drug - it's a drug that will be used on relatively rare occasion.
We are past due the time when our Representatives finally take positive action to ensure that women have access to emergency contraception, especially those already traumatized by rape.

C/O NARAL Pro-Choice America

Improve health-care services for rape survivors

We need your help to make sure women who’ve been raped get the chance to prevent pregnancy. please contact your US Representative to make this a Federal requirement for hospitals receiving US funds.

Send a message to your members of Congress today to help pass the Compassionate Assistance for Rape Emergencies Act (“CARE”: S.1264/H.R.2928).

This bill would ensure that survivors of sexual assault are offered the “morning-after” pill in the emergency room. The morning-after pill, also known as emergency contraception or EC, prevents pregnancy after sex or sexual assault. Improved access to the morning-after pill could prevent 88 percent – approximately 22,000 – of pregnancies that occur as a result of rape.
For more information, please check out FP's post at Weekly Action Coalition.

Tags: ; ; ; ; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, June 10, 2006

Premature Ejaculation

It looks like the preznit shot his fundamentalist wad a little too early this year as the so urgent he hasn't spoken about it since the last election Marriage Protection Amendment appears to have stalled in the Senate. The pro-bigotry brigade in the Senate only managed to garner 49 of the 60 votes needed to pass a procedural motion to even have a vote on the measure.

Tags: ; ; ; ; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, June 07, 2006

welcome to pennsyltucky

So much for addressing important issues like property tax reform or disclosure about lobbying, Pennsyltucky lawmakers have decided that ensuring those damn 'mos don't undermine the sanctity and wholesomeness of "traditional" (that'd be heterosexual) marriages is the top priority. The state House voted 136-61 to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman the other day - the state Senate is expected to take up the measure at the end of the month. The amendment that was approved by the House reads:
Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this Commonwealth, and neither the Commonwealth nor any of its political subdivisions shall create or recognize a legal status identical or substantially equivalent to that of marriage for unmarried individuals.
Those voting for the measure should be ashamed of themselves, not only for their overt support of bigotry but also for ignoring the fact that a marriage license is nothing more than a legal document that provides the couple with legal rights and binds them to legal responsibilities towards one another. There is no requirement that any religious official, church or even society at large accept or condone any relationship for it to be valid.

If the requirement for a marriage license were in any way linked to the government's/society's endorsement of a marriage (or any relationship, for that matter) we, as a society, should be allowed to vote on the acceptability of each couple's petition to marry as well as any request to end a marriage. Otherwise, we should stay out of any private relationship between consulting adults that does not directly impact us or can not be shown (supported with unbiased documentation) to pose a substantial threat to those involved and/or society at large. Homosexuality and gay marriage are not the reason we have such a high divorce rate, straight people are. If anybody has been shown to undermine the sanctity of marriage as an institution and the "traditional American family", it's those who've been directly involved in the destruction of their own families.

Tags: ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, June 05, 2006

Well, I can't really define irony...

Doing his best Winona Ryder impression, WH press secretary Tony Snow indicated that King George considers the Marriage Protection Amendment a civil rights issue but then couldn't explain what civil rights are. In a follow-up to today's WH briefing, it was confirmed that "civil rights" are defined as: the rights afforded to Repubevangelicals by the Christotheocracy and those very rights are violated whenever gay people are afforded the same rights to execute a mutually exclusive legal contract with one another as heterosexual people.

Tags: ; ; ; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Missing Monday

8-year old Robert Sample, Jr has been missing since yesterday afternoon when he left Frankford home with $20 to go to a local store at Penn and Sellers Streets. Sample, who left his home on the 1300 block of Adams Ave. around 2pm, has gone off on his own before, but never for more than a few hours. He knows how to ride SEPTA and may have taken the bus to locate a friend named Jamir who recently moved from the neighborhood.

Robert is 4 feet tall and weighs about 65
pound s and was wearing a red shirt, blue jeans and black sneakers when he was last seen, If you have see (or have seen) the boy please contact the Philadelphia police.

UPDATE: Robert has been located with relatives in West Philly. (h/t to the lovely and talented Albert)

16-year old Ashley Nicole Brown was last seen in Apollo, Pennsylvania on May 17, 2006. Ashley, who answers to the nickname Sissy, is 5'2" and weighs about 98 pounds. She has blonde hair, blue eyes, a pierced nose and multiple ear piercings. She is considered an endangered runaway and may still be in Western PA. If you have any information on her disappearance or current whereabouts, please contact the Washington Township Police Department at 724-727-3410, or the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children 1-800-843-5678 (1-800-THE-LOST)

Tags: ;

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, June 04, 2006

Marriage Protection Amendment is Dubya's way of being altruistic towards gays

In response to all the cynicism surrounding the election year resurfacing of the Marriage Protection Amendment, the boy blunder spoke out to reaffrim his committment to protecting the almost obliterated institution of marriage while explaining that the sudden new push for the amendment was, in fact, to protect gays as much as marriage [emphasis added]
Bush said that it was necessary to keep the debate over gay marriage from spilling over into prejudice. 'As this debate goes forward, we must remember that every American deserves to be treated with tolerance, respect and dignity,' he added. [Guardian UK]
Enacting the amendment will, in fact, stop any debate over gay marriage since it will ensure that, while gay people can't get married to their chosen partner, it will ensure everyone has equal protection under the constitution as it does not prevent gay people from marrying altogether or even marrying each other (provided the partners are of the opposite sex). Of course, once life-couselor Richard Cohen completes his task of "hugging the gay away", American society will be safe from any 'mo threats.

Tags: ; ; ; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, June 03, 2006

A Congressional Candidate Who Really Supports Traditional Family Values

Speaking of little Ricky's support for only heterosexual relationships and how, as the Senator from VA says, we need the Marriage Protection Amendment to end the extreme "harm" beings done by the obviously un-Christian act of treating people "nicely", we now have additional evidence of the exquisite nature of the moral superiority of Republican "pro-family" politicos. Californian Republican congressional candidate Jim Galley has been running on Repubevangelical "pro-traditional family" platform. Unlike many men, Galley has shown no signs of commitmment issues and is a huge supporter of marriage - provided the marriage is between a man and a woman, of course. Like many "traditional family" Republican politicians, he's even made that sacred, life-long, committment to marriage twice. While his two marriages don't, exactly make him the uber-traditional marriage supporter like Newt Gingrich or Rush Limbaugh, he has added to his "traditional" only credibility by comitting bigamy. Yes, it appears as though Galley was so eager to ensure women without husbands didn't end up marrying other women (as would be forced upon them if America doesn't protect marriage from the gays), he married his second wife, Beth, in 1982 while he was still married to Mrs. Terry Galley. Beth Galley divorced him in 1990 after accusing him of spousal abuse and filing a restraining order against him. He's also been accused of defaulting on child support payments to his first wife.

For his own part, 50-year old Galley, writes the concurrent marriages off as a youthful indiscretion noting he thought the divorce from his first wife was final. He also explained that his second wife trumped up charges for the restraining order to get him out of the house and that he only defaulted on the child support payments for a few months. Still, you can't help but think that Galley is such a beautiful example of how right Rick Santorum is when he points out that homosexuality is what's destroying the superb traditional moral fiber of the great American tapestry. I just wonder if the girl pictured next to Galley (above) is what stands in the way of my dream of a happy hetero (and life-long) marriage to the traditionalist.

Tags: ; ; ; ; ; ;

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, June 02, 2006

Could Senator Santorum be right?

More evidence the "traditional" family is healthier and definitely superior to non-traditional families.

Tags: ;

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, June 01, 2006

Holy Amsterdam Batman

Batwoman is a dike! Does this mean Ben Affleck will be donning the batsuit next?

Tags: ; ;

Sphere: Related Content