One Nation, Underinformed...

To the Editor:

Regarding Mr. Warner's recent letter asking that the Pledge of Allegiance be returned to its original form, i.e. without "under God," I say "Phooey!"

I believe with my whole being that we are creatures of God. Though hundreds of years have passed, the words in the Declaration of Independence are as valid now as they ever were: " . . . all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights . . . ."

Since the day of our independence, our nation has respected those important words by putting "in God we trust" on our coinage, as well as invoking god during the swearing-in process of our highest elected officials, and for all court testimony.

I, too, believe in the separation of church and state; one faith should never be chosen over another. However, all faiths believe in the one creator, who asks us to love others as we would wish to be loved. This commonality defines our morality and enriches our very lives. We should, therefore, never allow ourselves or our government to be separated from God.

Separation of church and state - yes; separation of God and state never!

It should be very clear why I want "under God" left in our Pledge of Allegiance. I hope I have lots of company.

Charles

Of course you have lots of company, Chuck. Self-absorbed wing-nuts are pretty plentiful these days.

You know what I say "Phooey" to, Chuck? I say "Phooey" to your bullshit, self-righteous attitude. "The Creator" and our "Christian God" are only synomymous to us, because we happen to be Christians, Chuck. But you know what? It is NOT true that every Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, Wiccan, and Atheist is an axe-murdering psychopath. You know what I just did? I just blew your stupid fucking "commonality" that "defines our morality and enriches our lives" theory right out of the water. Next time take 5 seconds to educate yourself before you go off half-cocked about something you've got no perpective on.

I'm totally thrilled that you believe "with all your heart" that we are creatures of God. That's fan-fucking-tastic. And if we lived in a theocracy, you could rest assured that your fellow citizens agreed with you, or at least pretended to in order to avoid having bamboo shoots shoved under their toenails. But we don't live under a theocracy, Chuck. So what you "believe", while it may be very important to you, means exactly jack shit when it comes to how the government is run. You can put God on our money, in our court hearings, hell, you can brand it onto the forehead of every man, woman and child. You still won't make everybody believe what you believe.

The addition of "under God" into the Pledge of Allegience was artificial and politically motivated. Jesus wasn't a politician, Chuck. He was a carpenter. The Christian religion was founded seperate and distinct from the realm of politics, much to the dismay of those who were expecting a mighty King of the Jews. So you know what pisses me off, Chuck? Politicians who garner votes from people like you by evoking the name of God in something like the pledge while passing laws written by credit card companies to keep the critically ill from declaring bankruptcy. That's what pisses me off. James Dobson has become a mover and a shaker in politics by saying the word Jesus, on average, every 2.5 words that come out of his shifty little mouth. His training to be able to dictate who Jesus would vote for? He's a Psychologist. He's a fucking head-shrink. That doesn't bother you, Chuck? It sure as fuck bothers me. He is trained in how to influence the minds of others. And religion, while being the medicine of the individual, is indeed the opiate of the masses.

So keep whining about "under God" being in the Pledge of Allegiance, Chuckles. Keep turning a blind eye to a government that lets people die slow deaths due to a lack of medical coverage so that drug companies and insurance carriers can get fat off the backs of the poor. I just hope God doesn't one day ask you what you really did in his name.

A Bonus from the Times

To the Editor:

As terrible as the 2,000th death in Iraq is, we have not reached the toll of 9/11.

Those who died in this war have given us a crippled enemy who fights on his own soil instead of in the streets of New York. The sacrifice of our soldiers paves the way for a changed Middle East, so we can have a future without planes flying into buildings.

Julia Haas

Just tossing in this extra letter from the New York Times to illustrate that this kind of ethnocentric, racist thinking seems to be catching among uninformed Americans who need to justify their support for a corrupt administration by rationalizing an immoral war. This letter just puts it very succinctly.

See, some of us didn't know our efforts in Iraq were an attempt to match the casualties of September 11th, 2001, like some sort of bizarre, macabre 401k plan. Since 9/11 and Iraq are completely unrelated situations, a comparison like this is pretty fucking inane.

Now, let's talk about "his own soil", shall we? Who's soil, Julia? Iraqi soil? Remind me, you brainwashed little zombie, how many of the terrorists responsible for the events on 9/11 were Iraqi? Did you say absolutely none? Probably not, because you're still busy spouting the Bush camp line about staying the course and muslims who hate our freedom. But that's the right answer. Not one 9/11 terrorist was from Iraq, or had anything to do with Iraq. You know who did have something to do with it, Julia? A guy named Osama Bin Laden. Do you know where he is, Julia? NEITHER DOES THE FUCKING BUSH ADMINISTRATION. They gave up looking for him so they could defeat terrorism in what was once virtually terrorist-free Iraq. Brilliant plan, eh?

Your theory is blatantly racist, Julia. Your entire argument is pretty much based on the concept of all arab nations, and all arab people, basically being interchangable. Basically, it's the same as your neighbor going on an axe-murdering spree, and then the police coming and arresting you. Sure, we know you're not the one who did it, but you live on the same street, so it's pretty close, and if the axe-murdering neighbor gets scared into not axe-murdering people anymore, it's all okay.

Of course, in a slightly different sense, I suppose I hope your neighbor is an axe-murderer.

Sleep tight.

Fetus? It nearly killed us!

To the Editor:

In response to David Blanchard's commentary, "Fasting for Peace," I am writing to you about a war - a war taking place at abortion clinics.

The Rev. Blanchard wrote that he had been fasting for 26 days and in that time, 60 Americans soldiers had died, which is a terrible loss of life. During that same period, the war at the abortion clinics has cost 96,200 children's lives.

Every 23 seconds a child is murdered in the womb. That is 8,700 every day, 25,900 every week, 112,542 every month, 1,350,000 a year. In the last 32 years, 43,200,000 babies have been murdered. This is more than all of our deaths in all the wars since the American Revolution!

What can you do? Pray, fast, become active in pro-life causes. Then and only then, when people say enough is enough, will the killings be stopped.

Hank

Since it was a slow weekend, I'll do two today. What can I say? The nut jobs were in full force today.

Okay, okay, I don't really think Hank here is a total nut job. I definitely do question his numbers, however. The actual numbers are significantly lower. For instance, according to the CDC, there were 884,273 abortions performed in 1998, 861,789 abortions performed in 1999, and 857,475 performed in the year 2000; all of these figures are much lower than Mr. Donahue's estimate of 1,350,000 per year. So, okay, if you're going to use numbers, don't just take some activist website's estimates when hard numbers are available. It makes you look like a reactionary zealot, which you probably are, but you should try harder not to make it so obvious.

Besides the faulty numbers, equating abortions to war deaths is completely irresponsible. First of all, the death of a soldier is a sacrifice, and really shouldn't be compared to much of anything. Using it to boost you personal pet political agenda is completely innapropriate. The only issue that soldier deaths should have an impact on is the war itself. Second, let's be honest here for a minute, 'kay? It is the same group of fascist social conservative neo-con assholes responsible for continued troop death that is the most vocal about the issue of abortion. Are you coming out against the war? It doesn't really sound like it. It sounds like you're another brainwashed sheep marching in lock step with the Focus of the Fascists crowd who say it's immoral to kill a nonsentient lump of cells that might one day become a human, but getting fully sentient, honorable Americans killed for dubious reasons is just peachy so long as we paste enough $1.25 flag stickers on our cars. Pro life my ass.

This is another really difficult issue made to look like black and white. Look, I am really uncomfortable with the concept of abortion. I don't believe, however, that it comes close to murder. A first trimester fetus has the potential to become a human, but it is not a functional human yet. And let's think here for one damned second. If these pricks were really interested in stopping abortions, wouldn't you think they would be all about increased sex education and birth control use to PREVENT those abortions? Fat fucking chance. What they really want to do is control the bodies of women and force them to have children. This may sound crazy, but religion can make people think all sorts of crazy shit. These people take the concept of children as a gift from God one step further... they really believe children are a demand from God, and you've gotta accept them, like it or not. Which is fine, for them, but stops being fine when they want to impose that shit on everyone else.

Let's look back on Mr. Donahue's numbers for a moment. He claims (though I argue against) that over 42 million abortions have been performed since Roe Vs. Wade. Now, what is the one thing that all aborted pregnancies have in common? They are UNWANTED. So he's talking about 42 million unwanted children. Who does Hank here propose should be raising these 42 million people? How many unwanted children has Hank adopted? Probably not his share, given these kind of numbers. It's all pretty and happy and nice, until you realize that unwanted children tend less to grow up to be neurosurgeons and more to grow up into criminals. These aren't fetuses who would have grown into babies who would have grown up in loving Christian homes. These are children who were NOT WANTED. Do you wish a childhood of neglect on them, Hank? Do you wish the ramifications on society? Maybe you do, and maybe you don't, but it's something to think about before you go on talking about this like it's a simple matter of right and wrong.

Finally, I want to point out those numbers from the CDC again. Do you notice a trend? It's not a coincidence. During the Clinton administration, the number of abortions dropped every year. Now, I'm no Clinton fan, but maybe that can tell us something about effective ways to influence people versus ham-fisted bible thumping. You don't think so? Well, maybe you should consider that abortion numbers have begun to rise again since the Bush administration took office. That's some crazy shit. One could say that Bush is responsible for causing more abortions than his Democratic predecessor. Of course, he's responsible for a shitload of American soldier deaths too. So maybe those figures do have something in common after all.

Thanks, Soccer Mom!

I thank J. Mark Ford for his service to our country, as well as all active and prior servicemen. Each and every one of you are heroes to me.
I also agree with Ford's response that this paper had no right to insert pictures of our fallen Marines in the Rev. Blanchard's commentary Oct. 11. What a travesty!
I have known for some time that this paper is anti-Bush and leans way to the left. They prove it time and again, as they did with Blanchard's letter. It is a shame that they desecrate our military for their own political agenda.
This paper has no competition and can print whatever they feel fits their ideology. I have come to the point where I just glance over the letters to the editor because 80 percent are anti-Bush, anti-war and/or anti-military. What a shame.
I had a son who served in Iraq. He is proud that he did, and said he would go back again if he could. While in Iraq, he always told me not to listen to the media, because they do not tell the whole truth and fail to mention all the good things being done over there. That was two years ago, and evidently not much has changed.
Mainstream America is proud and thankful we have a strong leader who brought the fight overseas instead of waiting for another attack on our homeland. Is he perfect? No. But I thank God we have him as our leader, because he is a man of his word and has put fear into our enemies. And fear is all they understand. They wouldn't think twice about killing each and every one of us. They do not care what party we are affiliated with.
We were attacked because we appeared weak. In fact, I believe Osama bin Laden said that himself. Seems like he is eating those words now.
Linda

Okay. Here we go.

Question #1: Who the hell is PRO war?
Linda here accuses most of the letter-writers in the paper to be anti-war (which may in fact be true... I'd guess the ratio is probably around 3:2.) But who is Pro War? Who are these people so lacking in personal identity and common sense that they can watch 10 minutes of coverage on Iraq and be FOR that? You can defend this war, if you care to sound like a delusional, uneducated asshat, but you shouldn't use the term anti-war. Frankly, if you're not a defense contractor, you should be anti-war. This doesn't mean you're a pacifist, it just means you recognize war is not a goal to work towards. An example: If a small child were about to stab my wife with a butcher's knife, I would kick the kid and take the knife away. This doesn't change the fact that, in general, I am anti-child-kicking.

Question #2: Is a soldier who fought in Iraq really an unbiased source?
Now, don't get me wrong. I don't want to take anything away from Linda's son or our armed forces as a whole. These are men who have agreed to kill and die in our defense, and I appreciate that. However, are they really a good source of information regarding the situation in Iraq? Look, most of us have had a shitty job at some point in our lives. We've been forced to rationalize the shittiness, and to find reasons to get out of bed in the morning. Now imagine a job so shitty, it could kill you. There's simply no way these soldiers can be overly critical of the effort in Iraq and still be able to do their jobs. How could you put your life on the line for something you don't believe in? We don't give them a choice about risking their lives, so they have to find ways to resolve it.
And frankly, I am sure good things are happening over there. That's not really the point. Our military could do good things right here in the U.S.A. The point is, we've invaded a sovereign country, put our soldiers at risk, gotten two thousand of our men and women killed, killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, destabilized the Middle East, and overrun once-peaceful Iraqi neighborhoods with bloodthirsty criminals. Is building a school a good thing? Yes. Is it worth the price? Are you shitting me?
Another example: A young boy is suffering from a rare liver disease, and will die without a transplant. His father murders the boy's sister to provide a donor, and the boy recovers after receiving his sister's liver. Now, is it a good thing that the boy lived? Absolutely. Does that make what his dad did okay? Are you shitting me?
My point is that these are really complicated issues, and just saying that we have to support our troops is a cop out, and of course makes the speaker sound like a coke-head, overcompensating soccer mom. Yeah, no shit, we support our troops. That doesn't mean we support the shitty things their commanders are making them do.

Question #3: How much smaller can "mainstream America" get?
Sorry, Mrs. "Glances-Over-The-Newspaper". Polls show that your heroic titan of a president is at about 37% job approval rating, and even lower for his handling of Iraq. Your "mainstream" America is actually "uninformed" America. You may be proud to count yourself among them, but more and more folks aren't. Maybe we've realized that a "man of his word" wouldn't have lied about weapons of mass destruction, or his ties to Saudi oil, or cutting veterans' spending after promising to look after our troops, or social security or unemployment or outsourcing or any of the other things he's lied about. It's pretty fucking impressive, when you look at how little he says about anything to begin with.
Mainstream America doesn't agree with you, lady. Maybe it's because Mainstream America doesn't stop reading the news when they don't like what it implies.

Question #4: OSAMA FUCKIN' BIN LADEN???
He's not in Iraq! He's NOT IN IRAQ! HE'S NOT IN FUCKING IRAQ!!!!! How is he eating his words? He's been on the loose for 4 years! We haven't caught him, and the administration never even mentions him anymore. The man responsible for the most heinous attack on Americans since Pearl Harbor is eating a fucking fig right now while we fuck around building Bush's oil pipeline through Iraq. Are you that fucking stupid??? What makes you think Osama Bin Laden respects us as an enemy or has any fear of us when we continue to let him go while we fight a war that has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Osama Bin Laden and his attack on America???

(Hypo)Critical Condition

(Ed. Note: Due to an utter lack of worthwhile material in the Post Standard today, this comment is regarding a story found on CNN.)

TOPEKA, Kansas (AP) -- The Kansas Supreme Court on Friday unanimously struck down a state law that punished underage sex more severely if it involved homosexual acts...

The court said "moral disapproval" of such conduct is not enough to justify the different treatment.

In a case closely watched by national groups on all sides of the gay rights debate, the high court said the law "suggests animus toward teenagers who engage in homosexual sex."

Gay rights groups praised the ruling, while conservatives bitterly complained that the court intruded on the Legislature's authority to make the laws...

...A lower court had ruled that the state could justify the harsher punishment as a way of protecting children's traditional development, fighting disease or strengthening traditional values. But the Supreme Court said the law was too broad to meet those goals.

"The statute inflicts immediate, continuing and real injuries that outrun and belie any legitimate justification that may be claimed for it," Justice Marla Luckert wrote for the court. "Moral disapproval of a group cannot be a legitimate state interest."...

...Mathew Staver, attorney for the conservative Orlando, Florida-based Liberty Counsel, said the different treatment was justified by the state's interest in protecting children and families. He also said the court does not have the right to rewrite the statute.

"That's a legislative function," he said. "This is clearly a sign of an activist court system."


Hate to harp on an issue twice in a row, but this story just caught my eye because it is such a good example of why you have to be completely devoid of critical thought to drink the kool aid that the current batch of social conservatives is handing out. Here is a case of a State Supreme Court obviously making the right choice from a legal standpoint. There is no rational legal reason why homosexual acts should be dealt with in a harsher manner than regular old two-dumb-opposite-gender-kids-messin'-around sex. But the reaction from the right is completely typical and causes my eyes to roll so far back in my head that I can look into my sinuses.

I'm going to remind everyone of something that happened not that long ago. Remember when the shell of a woman named Terri Shiavo, whom doctors had diagnosed as being in a state of complete mental atrophy (a diagnosis later proven correct by an autopsy), was in the news every day because her husband, who was legally responsible for her, decided to stop treatment, including the forced feeding that kept the mindless body alive? Do you remember the outcry from the social conservatives, demanding that the courts step in and stop this perfectly legal, and in the end merciful, halt of care? They even demanded that Governor Jeb Bush become some form of State Level Dictator and swoop in to take command of a situation he had no direct jurisdiction over. These were not people interested in due process or legal justice. These were people who wanted the law to do exactly what they wanted, and if it didn't, the law could go fuck itself. Whether you agree with Terri Shiavo's husband's decision or not, you simply can not deny that the social conservatives sought every possible way, both within the law and above the law, to stop him.

Now, these same self-righteous shitbags have the nerve to say that the Kansas Supreme court, in declaring a law unconstitutional on the basis of equal treatment under the law, are an example of an activist judiciary. First of all, there is no way in hell that the Supreme Court in Kansas is a bunch of pot-smoking, Phish-concert-attending hippie radicals. Second, the job of the Kansas Supreme Court is to... insert drumroll... ensure the constituionality of laws passed by the Kansas Legislature. So, according to Matthew "Who Would Jesus Sue?" Staver, in doing the duty set for them by the Kansas constitution, the Kansas supreme court justices are being irresponsible. Now, this piece of rat shit got through law school somewhere, so I have a really hard time believing that he doesn't understand the function of the State Supreme Court. More likely, I think, is that Mr. Staver is a lying asshole who will say anything he thinks will stir up the masses of under-educated Americans who don't understand the function of the State Supreme Court.

How can people keep falling for this hypocritical bullshit? I understand that a lot of them have invested their identities in this nonsense, and pulling away would cause them to have to reconsider a lot of shitty things they've said and supported. But eventually, you have to have some pride, and a dose of self respect, and realize that these people are just preying upon your Christian upbringing and lack of sophistication. Frankly, I'm sick and tired of having to vote Democrat just to not have one of these wastes of carbon in office. When I need someone in the government to tell me who to screw, I'll let them know. Until then, I'd appreciate it if these so-called conservatives started balancing the budget and showing some fiscal responsibility and stopped flapping their priveledged pink gums about every topic that's none of their damned business.

Homosannah

To the Editor:
Dave Pasinski's article in Sunday's Opinion Section fails to point out an essential aspect concerning homosexual behavior: it is sinful and must be avoided!
When I was taught the faith as a youngster, avoiding the near occasions of sin, or risks for temptation, was also crucial. If, as Dave Pasinski indicates, the Catholic priesthood and seminaries are becoming more gay-friendly, then it is imperative that the Vatican and bishops take action.
A gay-friendly atmosphere helps promote a gay culture which then leads to condoning homosexual behavior. Our priests are called to holiness as well as service. Let's build a priestly culture that promotes both!

Terrence

Well, so much for keeping things light, eh? This may be a touchy issue for some, and even I am a litle loathe to get snarky about it. (By "it", I mean the religious issue. The homophobe issue is deserving of all the sneering contempt we can muster for it.)

I should start by saying I am a Protestant, non-Evangelical Christian. This is in no way an effort to ridicule the spirituality of Christianity, which is really a pretty beautiful thing that does not at all resemble the religion of persecution and self-superiority represented by assholes like James Dobson, Pat Robertson, and, with appologies to my Catholic friends, increasingly Pope Adol... I mean, Benedict.

People like the writer of this letter are very vigilant... certainly we're all aware of the increased focus on homosexuality in our culture. This focus is not stemming from the homosexual community, who to a large extent have moved away from their flamboyant, gay-culture roots and are seeking inclusion into mainstream America and promoting their normality. The focus is part of the drive of religious fanatics who see that homosexuals are the last repressed people, a situation that must and inevitably will be corrected, and are trying to do everything in their power to stop that correction from taking place. They are very similar to the armchair racial seperatists who fought the civil rights movement. "That's different," they say. "This is a matter of religion." Bullshit. Until relatively recently, interracial marriages were still illegal in parts of America, and the justification for those laws were almost exclusively culled from the Bible.

The thing is, this entire argument is based on the belief that homosexuality is a sin, something I'm just not willing to buy. Oh, yes, yes, my repressed friend, I'm fully aware that you can open up your bible to that dog-eared page in Leviticus and tell me that God commanded the Israelites not to "lie with" those of the same gender. Good for you. But here's the thing. That was a specific rule, passed specifically to the Israelites, who were struggling to survive on their own after being slaves to Egypt, and were trying to build a nation. Were homosexuality truly a sin that we should all be deeply concerned with, God might have considered including it in the Commandments he passed down for all of us. I like to think he gave those commandments adequate consideration, and the omission there is glaring. Besides, I never see Christians protesting Red Lobster, and yet Leviticus prohibits the eating of shellfish at least as fervently as two guys lying with each other.

Ah, but as Christians, we should really be turning to the New Covenant of the Gospel, right? So why don't you find for me where Jesus decried homosexuals? What's that? You can't? Well, of course you can't, because he didn't. There's a lot of stuff in there about not judging others, and about embracing the outcasts of society, but nothing about tying fags to fenceposts and beating them to death. Strange that, isn't it?

So now the Pope wants to "cleanse" the church of homosexuals. Even if you want to stick by your poorly informed stance on Leviticus, the passage refers only to men lying with men as they lie with women, not the desire to do so. Priests, under a vow of celibicy, aren't lying with anybody. And there's a priest shortage. Seems likely to me that if God was really worried about all the gays involved with his church, he be busy calling up a lot more straight folks to replace them.

Seems to me this is just another campaign of fear, propagated by people that are, most likely, repressed self-hating homosexuals themselves. The only people I ever hear refering to homosexuality as a "choice" are fanatical religious christerbators who are trying really hard not to have to face the realities of their own sexualities. Reasonable straight folks like myself realize that we never "chose" to be straight, and see no reason to assume anyone else has that "choice" either. If these folks believe so fervently that we choose our sexual orientation, doesn't that seem to imply that they made a choice themselves, most likely that of self-loathing misplaced on others instead of self-acceptance?

I'm pretty sick of these self-righteous, insecure tight-asses holding up their right to be ignorant like it's some sort of badge. You can be ignorant, and you can "choose" to be a hate-spewing fuck, but you are deserving of the contempt you get, and a shitload more to boot. One day, you're going to find yourself in the position those segregationists do today, realizing you spent a lot of energy supporting an ideology of ignorance and hate. Tell the grankids all about Pop-pop's letter to the Post Standard, and let them laugh at Pop-pop's stupidity. I'll be laughing too. Hopefully God has a sense of humor.

If Only The Poor Could Eat Pomposity

To the Editor:
I don't think I can take another editorial or letter about "the poor." You and others claim "we need to do more." In fact, we do more than enough. Being poor in this country is, in the majority of cases, the result of one's own decisions.
And enough about "hunger." How many people can you find who are going hungry? I'm not asking how many are using welfare, food stamps, food pantries, etc. I'm asking, how many are going hungry? There have been no recorded deaths from starvation in this country in any recent decade and over half the population is overweight!
Your latest barrage was over child care subsidies. What, you ask, is a poor working mother with three children to do? Start by not having three children with no way to support them! The monstrous welfare society we have created simply enables people to shirk their duty to be a responsible citizen.
Your view is warped, you inundate us with stories of "brave women" who got through school with three kids while on welfare and are now self-supportive. So what? So the rest of us, who got our educations, got married, bought a home, then had children, and paid for all of it ourselves, are somehow less than these "brave women" because we did it the right way? Please.



Sometimes the well runs dry, and then sometimes the flood of stupidity seems almost too overwhelming to tackle. Today was an example of the latter. Choosing a letter to comment on was challenging not because none of them were quite batshit enough, but because a good handful deserved some serious attention. I settled on the one above, mostly because it is self-righteously ignorant, which is just one of my favorites.

First of all, you have to love the tenacity in the way these morons constantly state that "Being poor in this country is, in the majority of cases, the result of one's own decisions." What an absolutely idiotic assertion. How many people do you know who "decided" to be poor? Nuns and private school teachers are the only people who come immediately to mind. Look, my wife and I are educated people. In fact, it is her ten years of working towards her Ph.D. that is responsible for the majority of our debt, because a full set of post-grad at an ivy league college isn't available at All For A Dollar. All it would take would be for one of us to lose our jobs to introduce us to the wonderful world of poverty. I guess we could blame it on her "decision" to get her Ph.D., but frankly, I think I'd be quicker to blame the shitty job market and the death of job security in America. That's just me.

Of course our decisions are a big part of where we end up. They're not the only factor, though, which is something that Johnny Whitebread here is too priveleged to comprehend. It's not that our "view is warped," asshat. It's that your view is too rigid. You can't see beyond your own silver-spoon-fed baby fat. There are people out there who weren't priveledged enough to grow up with examples of material success, or a clearly defined way to reach it for themselves. Children of the poor have a significantly larger chance of living in poverty as adults. Do children who grow up poor just make bad decisions? Or is it more likely that the widening gap between the rich and poor in this country is making it even harder for those who start from a lower rung to climb their way to the top? Studies show that living in poverty exposes children to higher risks of learning disabilities, emotional disorders, and developmental problems. Guess those kids made a poor decision to grow up in poverty.

If you're an asshole who just doesn't want to feel guilty about not helping the poor, then grow some balls and be self-righteous about that. Don't make an idiot of yourself by professing that the poor don't really exist, or that they have a reasonable way out of their situation. You are correct that people do not have to starve to death in this country, but it's not because of cold-blooded pricks like you. Fortunately, enough of us have a sense of common decency that we make sure there is a minimum standard by which everyone should live. It's still not high enough, but at least some of us still have souls. People may not starve, but you better believe that this winter a lot of people will either be cold or hungry, as food and energy costs go up while their meager little welfare paychecks stay meager. But hey, don't worry about it. You'll be well-fed. You'll be warm. And you'll most likely still be a stuck-up shithead.

No, you are not "less than those 'brave women'"who have to get by on federal assistance, but more importantly, you're not more than them either. As human beings, we all have intrinsic worth. However if it came down to someone having to starve to death, them or you, they would be the greater loss.

Revenge of 50 Questions (the mathematically challenged edition)

More unrestrained egotism! Yay! Thanks to Amy at RQ for this list of questions.

1. Who did you last get angry with?
When I get angry, I tend to get migraines. So I’ve sorta learned not to get angry in the traditional sense.

2. What is your weapon of choice?
Sarcasm.

3. Would you hit a member of the opposite sex?
It is difficult for me to imagine being able to do so, but I suppose there are circumstances that would make it necessary.

4. How about of the same sex?
I try not to. I’ve been in one fight, the result of which was my opponent being rushed to the hospital with a broken arm and a ruptured eardrum. I think this is why I never got in any other fights.

5. Who was the last person who got really angry at you?
I seem to have really gotten under the skin of some local right-wingers. Not sure how that happened.

6. What is your pet peeve?
Self-righteous self-importance.

7. Do you keep grudges, or can you let things go?
I give my trust rather easily, but once it’s lost, it’s nearly impossible to retrieve.

8. What is one thing you're supposed to do daily that you have not done in a long time?
I tend to go 3 or 4 days without shaving when I’m feeling lazy, but I’m not sure that counts as a ‘long time.’

9. What is the latest you've ever woken up?
I spent a few years working the night shift. So 3 PM was customary.

10. Name a person you've been meaning to contact, but haven't.
I actually just did… probably to my embarrassment. There may be a point at which contact shouldn’t be attempted.

11. What is the last lame excuse you made?
“I WAS on my way to bed, but the blog took forever to publish.”

12. Have you ever watched an infomercial all the way through?
No. I don’t really watch television, but I can’t imagine a situation in which there was nothing better to do than watch an infomercial.

13. When was the last time you got a good workout in?
I spent the majority of my life at a toned 145 pounds with no effort whatsoever. This whole working out thing is new to me, and I’m still adjusting. Wait, now I should go back and change my ‘lamest excuse’ answer.

14. How many times did you hit the snooze button on your alarm clock today?
None. It’s Saturday.

15. What is your overpriced yuppie beverage of choice?
Zhena’s Gypsy Tea in Green Mint

16. Do you eat the skin of off chicken?
I dislike chicken cooked in a way that gives it ‘skin’.

17. Have you ever used a professional diet company?
No.

18. Do you have an issue with your weight?
I do since I’ve quit smoking. I gained 45 pounds in 2 weeks.

19. Do you prefer sweets, salty foods, or spicy foods?
Yes.

20. Have you ever looked at a small house pet and though about eating it?
No. I have eaten dog though. Long story. Best not to think about it.

21. Have you ever caught yourself staring at the chest/crotch of the opposite sex during a normal conversation?
I was busted for this when I was about 13, and think I learned my lesson pretty well.

22. What is your favorite body part on the opposite sex?
The eyes. Seriously. That’s not just a bullshit pandering answer.

23. Have you ever been propositioned by a prostitute?
No.

24. Have you ever had to get tested for an STD or pregnancy?
I haven’t, but I’ve been the cause of the latter, which is tons of fun.

25. How many credit cards do you own?
None. However, a number of credit card companies own me.

26. What's your guilty pleasure store?
Target.

27. If you had $1 million, what would you do with it?
Invest it, keep my job, and live comfortably but modestly without ever worrying about finances again.

28. Would you rather be rich or famous?
Famous. I don’t care too much for money. Money, as it turns out, can’t buy you love. Or, more specifically, the adoration of millions.

29. Would you accept a boring job if it meant you would make megabucks?
My current job is pretty boring, so I guess I would accept a boring job even if it didn’t mean I would make megabucks.

30. Have you ever stolen anything?
Yes. Thank you for not asking about specifics. I was a kid, I was dumb, I’m ashamed.

31. How many MP3s are on your hard drive?
About 500.

32. What one thing have you done that you're most proud of?
Being able to do the things I’m most proud of anonymously.

33. What one thing have you done that your parents are most proud of?
I don’t think I’ve made my parents very proud since high school, frankly. They were probably relieved at my choice of a spouse, however.

34. What thing would you like to accomplish in your life?
I want to be quoted in 11th grade history books.

35. Do you get annoyed by coming in second place?
Every time.

36. Have you ever entered a contest of skill, knowing you were of much higher skill?
Not that I can think of.

37. Have you ever cheated on something to get a higher score?
During the American History AP test in high school, there was a fire alarm and we all had to evacuate. We discussed answers outside. The only one I would have otherwise gotten wrong was the date of the Scopes monkey trial.

38. What did you do today that you're proud of?
I cleaned the kitchen using 3, count them – 3, different types of cleaning agents.

39. What item of your friends would you most want to have for your own?
My friend Matt’s income.

40. Who would you want to go on "Trading Spaces" with?
What is “Trading Spaces”?

41. If you could be anyone else in the world, who would you be?
Gavin DeGraw.*

42. Have you ever been cheated on?
More times and in more exotic ways than I care to get into here.

43. Have you ever wished you had a physical feature different from your own?
Although I pretend it doesn’t bother me, somewhere, deep down, I wish I hadn’t gone bald.

44. What inborn trait do you see in others that you wish you had for yourself?
Artistic Talent

45. Where were you born?
Glamorous Syracuse, NY.

46. Where are you now?


47. What is your heritage?
About 50% Austrian/German and 50% French. Every 25 years or so I get the urge to beat myself up.

48. What shoes did you wear today?
My Bass slipperloafers.

49. What is your biggest weakness?
There’s a spot on the back of my neck that, when softly petted, makes me unable to speak. Seriously.

50. What is your biggest fear?
Currently, a Christian Theocracy in America.

51. What are your favorite pizza toppings?
Sausage and Peppers

52. What is your biggest goal for this year?
Debt Reduction.

53. What is the first thing you think in the morning?
I don’t actually begin thinking until early in the afternoon. Usually there’s no need.

54. What is your best physical feature?
I’ve been told my eyes are rather striking.

55. What time to you try to go to bed?
I shoot for about 9 PM. I can’t tell you the last time I came close, though.

56. What is your fondest memory?
I try not to play favorites. I’m a very nostalgic person. I have many, many fond memories.

57. Do you smoke?
Not since August of last year.

58. Do you swear?
Yes, I swear, I haven’t had a cigarette since last August. Fuck, get off my back.

59. Do you sing?
Rather well, frankly.

60. Do you shower daily?
I shower or bathe daily. Never both though.

61. Have you ever been in love?
Yes.

62. Do you want to go to college?
Again? The prospect is both inviting and terrifying.

63. Do you want to get married?
I did, despite assuming for years that I never would.

64. Do you believe in yourself?
Occasionally.

65. Do you get motion sick?
Yes, but it doesn’t deter me from reading while riding.

66. Do you think you are attractive?
I really don’t think about it… I’ve been told by some that I am and by others that I’m not.

67. Are you a health freak?
Quit asking dumb questions and pass the butter.

68. Do you get along with your parents?
Yes. They’re fantastic people.

69. Do you like thunderstorms?
Immensely.

70. Do you play an instrument?
I tried really, really hard to learn to play guitar. It did not turn out well.

71. Have you had alcohol in the past month?
Yes.

72. Have you smoked in the past month?
NO, DAMMIT!

73. Have you used illegal drugs in the past month?
No.

74. Have you dated in the past month?
Thankfully, I do believe my dating days are behind me.

75. Have you been to a mall in the past month?
No.

76. Have you eaten a box of Oreoes in the past month?
No.

77. Have you eaten sushi in the past month?
Oh yes.

78. Have you been on stage in the past month?
Sadly, I have not been on stage in years.

79. Have you been dumped in the past month?
No.

80. Have you been swimming in the past month?
Nope.

81. Have you stolen anything in the past month?
Nope.

82. Have you ever been drunk?
For about 3 years, I think. Long time ago.

83. Have you ever been called a tease?
I don’t think guys get called teases, really, but I’ve been accused of the guy equivalent, yes.

84. Have you ever been beaten up?
No.

85. Have you ever shoplifted?
That’s the stealing incident. Yes. I was a dumb kid. I’m sorry.

86. How do you want to die?
On the 6:00 news.

87. What do you want to be when you grow up?
Perpetually immature.

88. What country do you most want to visit?
Australia.

89. How many things in your life do you regret?
I don’t do this whole ‘no regrets’ nonsense. There are numerous things I would have done differently had I known better.

90. Any final words?
I think I am the aggregate of the personalities of everyone who has ever been important to me. I’m not sure if this means I have no personality of my own, or if this is really what everyone turns out to be.
________________________________________


* This answer is meant to be ironic.

50 Questions

1. What year was the best year of your life?
2004.

2. One animal or insect that Noah should have left off the ark?
I wish drowning on no animal… although my cat often tests my resolve.

3. Do you make a wish before blowing out your birthday candles?
Candles? Don’t get wax all over my cake.

4. Do you generally open your bills on the day that you receive them?
I pay everything online now. It is the best thing to come out of the internet.

5. How many pillows are on your bed?
Two.

6. Favorite ice cream flavor?
Vanilla, covered in a layer of pulverized chocolate chip cookies.

7. What is the most dominant color in your wardrobe?
Green

8. Have you ever seen a ghost?
Never seen one, no.

9. Would you rather go to a carnival or circus?
Oh, God, neither.

10. Favorite meal: breakfast, lunch, or dinner?
Dinner. The others tend to be repetitive and rushed.

11. Your favorite fictional animal?
Little Critter

12. Have you ever flown first-class?
Nope.

13. Would you go on a reality show?
It would have to have a really compelling premise. Just to eat bugs and bitch about everyone else? No.

14. Are you more optimistic or pessimistic about the future?
I’m cautiously pessimistic.

15. Pancakes or waffles?
Waffles.

16. If you could own a home anywhere in the world, where would it be?
I have not traveled enough to be able to answer this question definitively.

17. Your favorite Soup of the Day?
Italian Wedding.

18. What site is a must see for all visitors to your city?
“You Are Now Leaving Syracuse, NY.”

19. Can you recommend a good restaurant in your city?
The Bangkok Palace. Fantastic curry, and impeccable service.

20. You go to the zoo; What is the one animal that you want to see?
Turtles. I have a thing about turtles.

21. Potatoes, rice, or pasta; Which is your favorite?
Rice. Preferably with chicken gravy.

22. What is the best movie that you've seen this year?
I’m not sure… it hasn’t been a great year. To my shame, I have not yet seen Brokeback Mountain, though I suspect that’ll be the one.

23. One of your favorite books when you were a child?
The Hobbit. Harry Potter is for sissies.

24. What in your life are you most grateful for?
My wife, my family, my iPod, and free speech.

25. You are home alone and use the bathroom; do you close the door?
No. This would anger the cat, no matter which side she’s on.

26. What is your favorite small appliance?
Is an iPod an appliance? No? Well, I’m counting it anyway.

27. Salty snacks or sweet treats?
What is this hellish alternate reality in which one must choose?

28. Are you usually a little early, a little late, or right on time?
Early. Always. This drives my wife insane.

29. What is the most daring thing that you have ever done?
I ran into a burning house to save a small child. Okay, to save a dog. And the house wasn’t on fire. Actually, the dog was just standing there and I went over to pet it. Well, almost close enough to pet it, but it looked like it might bite.

30. Have you ever met someone famous?
I’ve met Alec Baldwin, Kim Bassinger, and Rebecca Gayheart.

31. What was one of your favorite games as a child?
Mousetrap ruled.

32. At what age have you looked your best?
28… just before I quit smoking.

33. One person that never fails to make you laugh?
David Cross

34. What was the first music that you ever bought?
I think it was “Use Your Illusions II” by Guns & Roses. I am not proud of this.

35. If you could change one thing about your family life when you were a child, what would it be?
I can’t think of anything offhand. I turned out okay.

36. What is the one thing that you cook that always receives compliments?
Peppered Pork Pitas. It’s all about the sauce.

37. From what news source do you receive the bulk of your news?
I employ a variety of sources. For convenience, CNN Online is my start-up page.

38. In the last calendar year, how many people have you told that you love them?
Two.

39. Who received your first kiss?
This is probably something I’m supposed to remember, but I don’t.

40. The single most important quality in a mate?
Intelligence.

41. What do you value most in a relationship?
Honesty.

42. Do you believe that you have a soulmate?
I don’t even really understand what that means. One person I’m destined to be with? No, I kinda think that’s a cop out for people looking for relationships that don’t involve work.

43. Do you consider yourself well organized?
Hahahahahahahaha… HA!

44. On average, how many times a day do you look at yourself in the mirror?
Once, to shave.

45. Did you ever make a prank phone call?
I grew up before caller ID. So, yes, often.

46. What one quality do you seek in a friend?
A fondness for engaging in conversation.

47. Have you ever killed an animal?
Not on purpose.

48. When you were twelve years old, what did you want to be when you grew up?
An actor.

49. Do you believe in an afterlife?
Yes.

50. What would you like to accomplish with the remaining years of your life?
I’m pretty sure I have a novel in me somewhere. I should probably have it surgically removed.

SOB: The Comprehensive Index

(Through 4/26/06)

Abortion

Fetus? It nearly killed us! - 10/25/05

Boy Scouts

The Boypower Conference: Surprisingly Antigay - 4/13/06

Capital Punishment

Do These Pants Make Me Look Heartless? - 12/15/05

Christian Fanaticism

Buying Sexual Identity Insurance from Dear Abby - 4/21/06
Of Today's Annoyances, These... 4/5/06
Am I The Last One Left? - 3/29/06
Gotta Have Faith - 3/23/06
You Got Me Feelin' Emotion - 1/30/06

Church & State

Sunday School v. 2.0: Now 6 Days a Week! - 4/11/06
Misquoting the Presidents - 2/20/06
Would the Real First Amendment Please Stand Up? - 2/10/06
One Nation, Underinformed... - 10/28/05

Coulter, Anne

If This Entry Were Titled Like an Ann Coulter Book, It Would Be Titled, "Somebody Give Ann Coulter a Sandwich" - 3/9/06

DeLay, Tom

Of Today's Annoyances, These... 4/5/06

Education

Southern Baptist University Bigoted; Nobody Shocked - 4/12/06
Sunday School v. 2.0: Now 6 Days a Week! - 4/11/06
With a Rebel Yale - 3/15/06
My Big Fat Unqualified Teacher - 1/20/06
Kansas: Because They Didn't Have Enough of a Stigma Alread - 11/8/05

Historical Revision

I'll Just Put S. Baldric - 3/28/06
Making Up For Lost Time - 3/22/06
Misquoting the Presidents - 2/20/06

Homosexuality

Buying Sexual Identity Insurance from Dear Abby - 4/21/06
Southern Baptist University Bigoted; Nobody Shocked - 4/12/06
(Hypo)Critical Condition - 10/21/05
Homosannah 10/20/05

Immigration

Holy @$&*! - 3/30/06

Intelligence Misuse and Domestic Spying

If I Poke a Hole In My Own Waterbed, Is It Still a Leak, or Just a Disclosure? - 4/19/06
Senators Never Write to the Post Standard - 4/14/06
Straight from the "Expert Lounge"... - 1/25/06

Intelligent Design

Kansas: Because They Didn't Have Enough of a Stigma Alread - 11/8/05

The Iraq Occupation

What is Your Major Malfunction? - 4/25/06
Top Brass Imply 9/11-Iraq Link; Nobody Shocked - 4/17/06
Wielding God's Rocket-Propelled Grenade Launcher - 4/3/06
I'll Just Put S. Baldric - 3/28/06
Soylent Green is Made of Terrorists - 3/24/06
Making Up For Lost Time - 3/22/06
Would You Like To Play a Game? - 2/16/06
Straight from the "Expert Lounge"... - 1/25/06
Cal's Gone Wild - 1/18/06
You Can't Make A Silk Purse From An Immoral, Illegal Occupation - 1/13/06
Ho Chi Murtha - 12/16/05
Somebody Nudge the Record Player - 12/8/05
Neo-Con Shuffle - 11/1/05
A Bonus from the Times - 10/27/05
Thanks, Soccer Mom! - 10/25/05

The Media

Remember the Maine! - 12/12/05

Neo-Cons

John Podhoretz Overcompensating with Misogynist Machismo? No Way! - 3/31/06
Neo-Con Shuffle - 11/1/05

O'Reilly, Bill

Bill O'Reilly: Like an Old, Mean, Angry, Lying, Spiteful Boyscout - 4/25/06
Defending Dishonesty, the O'Reilly Way - 4/17/06
The Boypower Conference: Surprisingly Antigay - 4/13/06

Partisan Politics

Bits & Pieces - 4/26/04
Apathy Kills Democracy (again) - 4/18/06
Recognizing the Problem - 4/6/06
If This Entry Were Titled Like an Ann Coulter Book, It Would Be Titled, "Somebody Give Ann Coulter a Sandwich" - 3/9/06
It's a Twofer! - 2/17/06
Would You Like To Play a Game? - 2/16/06
Eating Your Cake - 2/1/06
Taking A Moment to Ponder - 1/31/06
You Got Me Feelin' Emotion - 1/30/06
Slow News Day - 1/11/06
Bonus! Happy Fun Link! - 12/12/05
A Letter From My Old Boss - 11/18/05

Peace Activism

Making Up For Lost Time - 3/22/06
Cal Thomas is an Asshole - 3/15/06

Personal Information (memes)

I'm It? - 4/10/06
Keepin' It Light - 4/7/06
Revenge of 50 Questions (the mathematically challenged edition)
50 Questions

The Pledge of Allegiance

One Nation, Underinformed... - 10/28/05

Poverty

If Only The Poor Could Eat Pomposity - 10/18/05

Race Issues

This Won't Make Me Popular, But... - 3/16/06

Religion

Am I The Last One Left? - 3/29/06
Gotta Have Faith - 3/23/06
Cal Thomas' Batshit Symphony in G major - 2/15/06
Would the Real First Amendment Please Stand Up? - 2/10/06
'Tis the Season to Be Jingoistic - 12/5/05
One Nation, Underinformed... - 10/28/05
Homosannah 10/20/05

Thomas, Cal

Cal Thomas is an Asshole - 3/15/06
Cal Thomas' Batshit Symphony in G major - 2/15/06
Cal's Gone Wild - 1/18/06

The War on Christmas

A Very Corny Christmas: The Mallard Fillmore Holiday Special - 12/14/05
Hark, the Harried Bigots Whine! - 12/13/05
'Tis the Season to Be Jingoistic - 12/5/05