Meet your new thread, same as the old thread.

[Oliver_Wendell_Ramone]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
is this a Jesus reference?

Or is Penske really popular in these Michigan neighborhoods?

[Penske's Biggest Fan!]

Originally posted by Oliver_Wendell_Ramone
Or is Penske really popular in these Michigan neighborhoods?

Beloved! He (co)invented the Motor City Bagel.

[Spanky]

Tell me to stop if you find this obnoxious, I just find this fascinating.


Homosexual Indoctrination in Schools


SB 777 to be voted on by the Assembly -- Immediate Action Required!

SB 777 (Kuehl), the homosexual indoctrination bill, may be voted on by the Assembly at any time.

Now that the legislature has reconvened, please call your Assemblymember and tell them to vote "NO" on this astounding assault on traditional values in the classroom.

In a sly attempt to counter CRI's public exposure of SB 777's true intent, Senator Kuehl recently amended the bill. Originally, the bill stated that no teacher, textbook, instructional material or school-sponsored activity may "reflect adversely" upon homosexuals or transgenders.

The bill now states that no teacher, textbook, instructional material or school-sponsored activity may "promote a discriminatory bias" against homosexuals or transgenders. This change in language is merely a linguistic slight-of-hand effort to confuse legislators and citizens as to SB 777's purpose.

Make no mistake: SB 777 seeks to implement a radical social agenda in California classrooms.

Los Angeles Unified School District has already implemented the policies contained in SB 777. These absurd policies include allowing boys who "perceive themselves as girls" to enter the girls' locker rooms and restrooms.

The language "promote a discriminatory bias" is so vague that those who seek to advance a radical sexual agenda could use it to introduce their agenda into school districts all across the state. Promoting a discriminatory bias could mean showing male and female couples in textbooks; allowing only females to participate in girl sports; prohibiting boys from running for prom queen, etc. The full ramifications of this legislation will extend to extreme reversal of gender roles and sexual confusion.

In the few, brief committee hearings on SB 777, legislators have failed to recognize the inherent dangers to young girls of allowing boys "who perceive themselves as girls" into female locker rooms and restrooms. As teachers and school officials grow accustomed to seeing boys entering female-only areas, they will be less likely to intervene for fear of offending a transgender student. Those with evil intentions will then gain access to innocent girls in otherwise safe environments. Proponents of SB 777 argue that these new policies will make students safer-this could not be further from the truth. True safety means restoring order and discipline to school campuses.

Please contact your Assembly member and tell them to vote "NO" on SB 777!

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Spanky
Tell me to stop if you find this obnoxious, I just find this fascinating.


Homosexual Indoctrination in Schools


SB 777 to be voted on by the Assembly -- Immediate Action Required!

SB 777 (Kuehl), the homosexual indoctrination bill, may be voted on by the Assembly at any time.

Now that the legislature has reconvened, please call your Assemblymember and tell them to vote "NO" on this astounding assault on traditional values in the classroom.

In a sly attempt to counter CRI's public exposure of SB 777's true intent, Senator Kuehl recently amended the bill. Originally, the bill stated that no teacher, textbook, instructional material or school-sponsored activity may "reflect adversely" upon homosexuals or transgenders.

The bill now states that no teacher, textbook, instructional material or school-sponsored activity may "promote a discriminatory bias" against homosexuals or transgenders. This change in language is merely a linguistic slight-of-hand effort to confuse legislators and citizens as to SB 777's purpose.

Make no mistake: SB 777 seeks to implement a radical social agenda in California classrooms.

Los Angeles Unified School District has already implemented the policies contained in SB 777. These absurd policies include allowing boys who "perceive themselves as girls" to enter the girls' locker rooms and restrooms.

The language "promote a discriminatory bias" is so vague that those who seek to advance a radical sexual agenda could use it to introduce their agenda into school districts all across the state. Promoting a discriminatory bias could mean showing male and female couples in textbooks; allowing only females to participate in girl sports; prohibiting boys from running for prom queen, etc. The full ramifications of this legislation will extend to extreme reversal of gender roles and sexual confusion.

In the few, brief committee hearings on SB 777, legislators have failed to recognize the inherent dangers to young girls of allowing boys "who perceive themselves as girls" into female locker rooms and restrooms. As teachers and school officials grow accustomed to seeing boys entering female-only areas, they will be less likely to intervene for fear of offending a transgender student. Those with evil intentions will then gain access to innocent girls in otherwise safe environments. Proponents of SB 777 argue that these new policies will make students safer-this could not be further from the truth. True safety means restoring order and discipline to school campuses.

Please contact your Assembly member and tell them to vote "NO" on SB 777!

Whatcha wanna bet that the person who wrote this does the hand motions to Y-M-C-A at their kids' football games.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

This is probably too nutty even for Slave.

• Exclusive: Conquering the Drawbacks of Democracy
  Philip Atkinson
  
  Author: Philip Atkinson
  Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
  Date: August 3, 2007
  
  While democratic government is better than dictatorships and theocracies, it has its pitfalls. FSM Contributing Editor Philip Atkinson describes some of the difficulties facing President Bush today.
  
  
  Conquering the Drawbacks of Democracy
  By Philip Atkinson
  
  President George W. Bush is the 43rd President of the United States. He was sworn in for a second term on January 20, 2005 after being chosen by the majority of citizens in America to be president.
  
  Yet in 2007 he is generally despised, with many citizens of Western civilization expressing contempt for his person and his policies, sentiments which now abound on the Internet. This rage at President Bush is an inevitable result of the system of government demanded by the people, which is Democracy.
  
  The inadequacy of Democracy, rule by the majority, is undeniable – for it demands adopting ideas because they are popular, rather than because they are wise. This means that any man chosen to act as an agent of the people is placed in an invidious position: if he commits folly because it is popular, then he will be held responsible for the inevitable result. If he refuses to commit folly, then he will be detested by most citizens because he is frustrating their demands.
  
  When faced with the possible threat that the Iraqis might be amassing terrible weapons that could be used to slay millions of citizens of Western Civilization, President Bush took the only action prudence demanded and the electorate allowed: he conquered Iraq with an army.
  
  This dangerous and expensive act did destroy the Iraqi regime, but left an American army without any clear purpose in a hostile country and subject to attack. If the Army merely returns to its home, then the threat it ended would simply return.
  
  The wisest course would have been for President Bush to use his nuclear weapons to slaughter Iraqis until they complied with his demands, or until they were all dead. Then there would be little risk or expense and no American army would be left exposed. But if he did this, his cowardly electorate would have instantly ended his term of office, if not his freedom or his life.
  
  The simple truth that modern weapons now mean a nation must practice genocide or commit suicide. Israel provides the perfect example. If the Israelis do not raze Iran, the Iranians will fulfill their boast and wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Yet Israel is not popular, and so is denied permission to defend itself. In the same vein, President Bush cannot do what is necessary for the survival of Americans. He cannot use the nation's powerful weapons. All he can do is try and discover a result that will be popular with Americans.
  
  As there appears to be no sensible result of the invasion of Iraq that will be popular with his countrymen other than retreat, President Bush is reviled; he has become another victim of Democracy.
  
  By elevating popular fancy over truth, Democracy is clearly an enemy of not just truth, but duty and justice, which makes it the worst form of government. President Bush must overcome not just the situation in Iraq, but democratic government.
  
  However, President Bush has a valuable historical example that he could choose to follow.
  
  When the ancient Roman general Julius Caesar was struggling to conquer ancient Gaul, he not only had to defeat the Gauls, but he also had to defeat his political enemies in Rome who would destroy him the moment his tenure as consul (president) ended.
  
  Caesar pacified Gaul by mass slaughter; he then used his successful army to crush all political opposition at home and establish himself as permanent ruler of ancient Rome. This brilliant action not only ended the personal threat to Caesar, but ended the civil chaos that was threatening anarchy in ancient Rome – thus marking the start of the ancient Roman Empire that gave peace and prosperity to the known world.
  
  If President Bush copied Julius Caesar by ordering his army to empty Iraq of Arabs and repopulate the country with Americans, he would achieve immediate results: popularity with his military; enrichment of America by converting an Arabian Iraq into an American Iraq (therefore turning it from a liability to an asset); and boost American prestiege while terrifying American enemies.
  
  He could then follow Caesar's example and use his newfound popularity with the military to wield military power to become the first permanent president of America, and end the civil chaos caused by the continually squabbling Congress and the out-of-control Supreme Court.
  
  President Bush can fail in his duty to himself, his country, and his God, by becoming “ex-president” Bush or he can become “President-for-Life” Bush: the conqueror of Iraq, who brings sense to the Congress and sanity to the Supreme Court. Then who would be able to stop Bush from emulating Augustus Caesar and becoming ruler of the world? For only an America united under one ruler has the power to save humanity from the threat of a new Dark Age wrought by terrorists armed with nuclear weapons.

link

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
This is probably too nutty even for Slave.

• Exclusive: Conquering the Drawbacks of Democracy
  Philip Atkinson
  
  Author: Philip Atkinson
  Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
  Date: August 3, 2007
  
  ...
  
  By elevating popular fancy over truth, Democracy is clearly an enemy of not just truth, but duty and justice, which makes it the worst form of government. President Bush must overcome not just the situation in Iraq, but democratic government.
  
  ...
  
  If President Bush copied Julius Caesar by ordering his army to empty Iraq of Arabs and repopulate the country with Americans, he would achieve immediate results: popularity with his military; enrichment of America by converting an Arabian Iraq into an American Iraq (therefore turning it from a liability to an asset); and boost American prestiege while terrifying American enemies.
  
  He could then follow Caesar's example and use his newfound popularity with the military to wield military power to become the first permanent president of America, and end the civil chaos caused by the continually squabbling Congress and the out-of-control Supreme Court.
  
  President Bush can fail in his duty to himself, his country, and his God, by becoming “ex-president” Bush or he can become “President-for-Life” Bush: the conqueror of Iraq, who brings sense to the Congress and sanity to the Supreme Court. Then who would be able to stop Bush from emulating Augustus Caesar and becoming ruler of the world? For only an America united under one ruler has the power to save humanity from the threat of a new Dark Age wrought by terrorists armed with nuclear weapons.

link

I knew it was only a matter of time before some true patriot would finally be brave enough to say what needs to be said.

I only pray that Cheney realizes Bush hasn't the will to conquer in time to kill him, seize power, and save us from ourselves.

[ltl/fb]

He did not, in his prepared statement, say he wanted to spend more time with family. Nice job. That makes me think a little better of him.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

• NEW HAVEN, Conn. - Two people who sprinkled flour in a parking lot to mark a trail for their offbeat running club inadvertently caused a bioterrorism scare and now face a felony charge.
  
  The sprinkled powder forced hundreds to evacuate an IKEA furniture store Thursday.
  
  New Haven ophthalmologist Daniel Salchow, 36, and his sister, Dorothee, 31, who is visiting from Hamburg, Germany, were both charged with first-degree breach of peace, a felony.
  
  The siblings set off the scare while organizing a run for a local chapter of the Hash House Harriers, a worldwide group that bills itself as a “drinking club with a running problem.”

link

Someone ought to explain to MSNBC's editors what the word "forced" means.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
This is probably too nutty even for Slave.

• Exclusive: Conquering the Drawbacks of Democracy
  Philip Atkinson
  
  Author: Philip Atkinson
  Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
  Date: August 3, 2007
  
  While democratic government is better than dictatorships and theocracies, it has its pitfalls. FSM Contributing Editor Philip Atkinson describes some of the difficulties facing President Bush today.
  
  
  Conquering the Drawbacks of Democracy
  By Philip Atkinson
  
  President George W. Bush is the 43rd President of the United States. He was sworn in for a second term on January 20, 2005 after being chosen by the majority of citizens in America to be president.
  
  Yet in 2007 he is generally despised, with many citizens of Western civilization expressing contempt for his person and his policies, sentiments which now abound on the Internet. This rage at President Bush is an inevitable result of the system of government demanded by the people, which is Democracy.
  
  The inadequacy of Democracy, rule by the majority, is undeniable – for it demands adopting ideas because they are popular, rather than because they are wise. This means that any man chosen to act as an agent of the people is placed in an invidious position: if he commits folly because it is popular, then he will be held responsible for the inevitable result. If he refuses to commit folly, then he will be detested by most citizens because he is frustrating their demands.
  
  When faced with the possible threat that the Iraqis might be amassing terrible weapons that could be used to slay millions of citizens of Western Civilization, President Bush took the only action prudence demanded and the electorate allowed: he conquered Iraq with an army.
  
  This dangerous and expensive act did destroy the Iraqi regime, but left an American army without any clear purpose in a hostile country and subject to attack. If the Army merely returns to its home, then the threat it ended would simply return.
  
  The wisest course would have been for President Bush to use his nuclear weapons to slaughter Iraqis until they complied with his demands, or until they were all dead. Then there would be little risk or expense and no American army would be left exposed. But if he did this, his cowardly electorate would have instantly ended his term of office, if not his freedom or his life.
  
  The simple truth that modern weapons now mean a nation must practice genocide or commit suicide. Israel provides the perfect example. If the Israelis do not raze Iran, the Iranians will fulfill their boast and wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Yet Israel is not popular, and so is denied permission to defend itself. In the same vein, President Bush cannot do what is necessary for the survival of Americans. He cannot use the nation's powerful weapons. All he can do is try and discover a result that will be popular with Americans.
  
  As there appears to be no sensible result of the invasion of Iraq that will be popular with his countrymen other than retreat, President Bush is reviled; he has become another victim of Democracy.
  
  By elevating popular fancy over truth, Democracy is clearly an enemy of not just truth, but duty and justice, which makes it the worst form of government. President Bush must overcome not just the situation in Iraq, but democratic government.
  
  However, President Bush has a valuable historical example that he could choose to follow.
  
  When the ancient Roman general Julius Caesar was struggling to conquer ancient Gaul, he not only had to defeat the Gauls, but he also had to defeat his political enemies in Rome who would destroy him the moment his tenure as consul (president) ended.
  
  Caesar pacified Gaul by mass slaughter; he then used his successful army to crush all political opposition at home and establish himself as permanent ruler of ancient Rome. This brilliant action not only ended the personal threat to Caesar, but ended the civil chaos that was threatening anarchy in ancient Rome – thus marking the start of the ancient Roman Empire that gave peace and prosperity to the known world.
  
  If President Bush copied Julius Caesar by ordering his army to empty Iraq of Arabs and repopulate the country with Americans, he would achieve immediate results: popularity with his military; enrichment of America by converting an Arabian Iraq into an American Iraq (therefore turning it from a liability to an asset); and boost American prestiege while terrifying American enemies.
  
  He could then follow Caesar's example and use his newfound popularity with the military to wield military power to become the first permanent president of America, and end the civil chaos caused by the continually squabbling Congress and the out-of-control Supreme Court.
  
  President Bush can fail in his duty to himself, his country, and his God, by becoming “ex-president” Bush or he can become “President-for-Life” Bush: the conqueror of Iraq, who brings sense to the Congress and sanity to the Supreme Court. Then who would be able to stop Bush from emulating Augustus Caesar and becoming ruler of the world? For only an America united under one ruler has the power to save humanity from the threat of a new Dark Age wrought by terrorists armed with nuclear weapons.

link

As with most "position papers", this guy has a few interesting ideas.

[ltl/fb]

"Alberto Gonzales is the first attorney general who thought the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth were three different things."

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
"Alberto Gonzales is the first attorney general who thought the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth were three different things."

does this mean it is now okay for Dems to admit they trumped up Watergate, and that john Mitchell was innocent of all wrong doing?

[Atticus Grinch]

GOP Senator Pleaded Guilty After Restroom Arrest
Idaho's Craig Denies 'Inappropriate Conduct,' Says He Regrets Entering Plea

The undercover officer was monitoring the restroom on June 11. A few minutes after noon, Craig entered and sat in the stall next to him. Craig began tapping his right foot, touched his right foot to the left foot of the officer and brushed his hand beneath the partition between them. He was then arrested.

While he was being interviewed about the incident, Craig gave police a business card showing that he is a U.S. senator. "What do you think about that?" Craig asked the officer, according to the report obtained by Roll Call.

What the fuck did he think he was pleading to? Aggravated footsie?

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
does this mean it is now okay for Dems to admit they trumped up Watergate, and that john Mitchell was innocent of all wrong doing?

The guys who write our jokes are not the same as the ones who write our policies. You should consider this change for a 2008 platform plank.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
GOP Senator Pleaded Guilty After Restroom Arrest
Idaho's Craig Denies 'Inappropriate Conduct,' Says He Regrets Entering Plea



What the fuck did he think he was pleading to? Aggravated footsie?

so your point in posting this is he might be gay? Like "heh heh, look this guy is a queer?"

When you guys post stuff like this you expose yourselves as hypocrits of the worst cloth.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
so your point in posting this is he might be gay? Like "heh heh, look this guy is a queer?"

When you guys post stuff like this you expose yourselves as hypocrits of the worst cloth.

Does that mean that Atticus is no better than Larry Craig? And if you're defending Larry Craig, does that mean Atticus isn't much of a hypocrite at all?

eta:

Hilzoy:

• I have a certain sympathy for closeted gay men and lesbians. I think that being so deeply ashamed of a part of yourself that's so fundamental, and that you can do nothing to change, must be close to unbearable; and the knowledge that coming clean would involve not only admitting that you're gay, but also that you have lied for years to people you care about, and who trust you, would only make it that much worse. But my sympathy vanishes when it comes to people who support amending the Constitution to ban gay marriage, as Craig did. There are limits to what you get to do to protect your own secrets, and being willing to permanently destroy gay men and lesbians' chances to marry the people they love, and with whom they have found happiness, is way, way outside them.
  
  (For the record, I don't have much sympathy for straight people who support this idiotic and mean-spirited amendment either.)
  
  Craig seems to have made a habit of voting against laws that would secure the rights of gay men and lesbians. In addition to supporting the Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, he voted against a bill that would have banned job discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, against expanding the definition of hate crimes to include sexual orientation, and was rated zero by the Human Rights Campaign in each of the last three Congresses (1, 2, 3; all pdf.) I truly can't imagine what it would be like -- how little self-respect a person would have to have -- to amass that sort of voting record while cruising for gay sex in airport restrooms.
  
  And besides, if I had any sympathy for Larry Craig, the fact that he "handed the plainclothes sergeant who arrested him a business card that identified him as a U.S. Senator and said, “What do you think about that?”" would have destroyed it. The laws are meant to apply to everyone, Senators included. No one gets to violate laws he himself supports and then use the fact that he has been elected to high office to get himself off the hook. Being elected Senator means being given a position of trust and responsibility that you should work every day to be worthy of, not a Get Out Of Jail Free card.