dwenius: (Default)
Prop 8 supporters: You suck, assholes.

1. Did you vote for prop 8 because you want to defend marriage? From WHAT? The Divorce rate is between 40-50% and has been for decades. (http://www.aboutdivorce.org/us_divorce_rates.html) Seems to me that you need to protect marriage from heterosexuals first.

2. Did you vote for Prop 8 because you are a Christian? Then in my strongly opinionated view you have fundamentally misunderstood the purpose and messsage of the New Testament. Christ never mentions homosexuality, not once (although he has plenty to say about divorce, See Luke 16:18 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+16:18 ).
2a. Paul is vocal about homosexuality, but then again Paul is a known prick, the James Dobson of his era, who didn't much care for marriage at all and thought women should shut up and stay in their God-appointed subservient place (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Corinthians%2014:29-40;&version=8;), so who gives a shit about his opinion in this modern age?
2b. The rest of the anti-homosexuality writing in the Bible is in Genesis and Leviticus. So...you're an Ultra-Orthodox Jew, then? Not that there's anything wrong with that, mind you, but for a Christian, it's a bit of a problem, no? (Note that apprently, non-Orthodox folks were ok with a No vote, see this article http://jta.org/news/article/2008/11/03/1000720/op-ed-prop-8-goes-against-gods-love-for-every-person). So, Mr. Christian, worn any poly-cotten blends lately, or eaten sausage? "Almost" doesn't count in Leviticus. Or perhaps you could get moving on that whole accepting Jesus as your personal savior thing? Love your neighbor, do unto others, etc? Ring any bells?

3. Take a look at the economy. Hear that giant sucking sound? The wedding industry generates somewhere between $60 billion and $140 billion of business in the US (http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/777801.html), and that's WITHOUT the fashion conscious gays getting in on the action. California, with our $35b budget shortfall, has already and would have continued to benefit on a local level when gays and lesbians from other parts of the country flew to CA to get married. Way to shoot yourself in the foot, math whiz.

4. Blacks voted for Prop 8 70%-30%. Possibly because they were listening to their so-called Christian preachers, see #2. Given that Loving v. Virginia is only 40 years old (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia), I...I really don't know what to say. Short memory? Somehow mysteriously unclear on the concept of discrimination and equal rights under the law? Desperately clinging to an established pecking order that gives you a group that you can look down upon in the same way that some whites have historically and continue to look down upon you (actual truth vs. perceived truth of said "looking-down-upon-beliefs" notwithstanding)??? Is it too un-PC to voice this one? Tough.

5. Did you vote for Prop 8 because you suck? Thought so.

Regarding the large Mormon influence and $$ contributions to the Yes campaign, if I had unlimited time and money, I'd get a bunch of Charter buses to Hollywood and the Castro, load 'em up, and head for Salt Lake City to give those holy-underpants-wearing motherfuckers what for. Calling ahead to the SLC police chief, of course, to arrange permits for a Constitutionally guaranteed First Amendment right of free expression. Free, and LOUD, and flamboyant, expression.

Also, Can we get some of the churches that HAVE been allowing gay marriage to sue for religious discrimination? A little church on church action in the CA supreme court? Please?
dwenius: (Default)
Seen various places...

As was demonstrated in an interview with Katie Couric, Sarah Palin is unable to name any Supreme Court Case other than Roe v. Wade.

The Rules: Post info about ONE Supreme Court decision, modern or historic, to your lj. (Any decision, as long as it's not Roe v. Wade.) For those who see this on your f-list, take the meme to your OWN lj to spread the fun.

Ok, my read of the interview question was that Palin couldn't think of a single SCOTUS case that she would go on record as disagreeing with. But it's indicative of how uninformed (see how nice I was, right there?) Palin is that immediately upon reading this meme, my brain spat out a handful of SCOTUS cases; check this list and I bet you can pick out at LEAST one that she disagrees with, more if you want to be uncharitable in your estimation of her moral modernity:

1. Plessy v. Ferguson, 1896 - a dark spot in SCOTUS history, upholding racial segregation laws and introducing the whole "separate but equal" bullshit
2. Brown v. Board of Education, 1954 - Overturned Plessy and all similar segregation laws
3. Loving v. Virginia, 1967 - Overruled anti-miscegnation laws, making inter-racial marriage legal
4. Lawrence v. Texas, 2003 - Overturned anti-sodomy laws, making consensual private sexual acts between adults legal

and now that I'm all riled up, I'll just add: Fuck you, Katherine Harris.
dwenius: (Default)
I'm shocked no one has floated this yet in the punditocracy, but given the players involved, isn't this the most likely scenario?

Two thirds of the Republican house members woke up this morning, called their brokers, sold the market short in as many ways as their portfolio would allow, then marched out to scuttle the bill, ensuring the markets would plummet. and thus the rich get richer.

Mind you, I like the alternative explanation-- that McCain utterly failed as a leader to muster the right number of votes from his party-- but isn't the above the most obvious explanation? I don't even think it's that cynical.
dwenius: (Default)
The Pope recently published a book in which he comes out strongly against evolution, saying in part:
"But it is also true that the theory of evolution is not a complete, scientifically proven theory." Benedict added that the immense time span that evolution covers made it impossible to conduct experiments in a controlled environment to finally verify or disprove the theory. "We cannot haul 10,000 generations into the laboratory," he said.
He offered no explanation for why God would choose to deny to mankind the same biological advantages He apparently saw fit to give to drug-resistant viruses, pesticide-immune insects, or other sundry beasts.
dwenius: (Default)
...and worth repeating:
"The White House is now saying the troops would only be temporary. But temporary until when? I guess just until there aren't any more illegals trying to come across the border from Latin America." In other words, you're suggesting the White House doesn't have an exit strategy from getting the troops out of ... our own country?
Also, stealing paraphrasing from elsewhere: how much you want to bet that the guardsmen conveniently come home right before (or perhaps right after) the November election? Just like those orange alerts that magically went away in late November 2004? And just so we're clear:
  • Nat'l guardsmen deployed to Afghanistan in sufficient numbers for success? No.

  • Nat'l guardsmen deployed to Iraq in sufficient numbers for success? No.

  • Enough Nat'l guardsmen left in the U.S. to assist in LA. and MS. during the worst national disaster in a decade, a task that actually falls under the specific terms of their charter? OH HELL NO.

  • Enough Nat'l guardsmen left in the U.S. to help patrol the border and defeat terrorism energize the G.O.P. base make sure no one ever has a clean hotel sheet again? ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY!

dwenius: (Default)
Rice Urges No Aid to Hamas Government

Edited to add: Because apparently, it's all well and good if we prop up our puppet government with aid and other less legal funds, but if you ignorant citizens have the temerity to democratically elect a government we disagree with, well fuck you, then.
dwenius: (Default)
I've been following the Alito hearings, with the expected amount of horror. Somewhat surprisingly, Alito wouldn't even agree with Roberts, who said in his confirmation hearings that Roe was "settled law".

So, let's jump forward a few years. Alito gets confirmed. Roberts is still Chief. God forbid, Bush gets to appoint another justice. And after a handful of minor cases, they pull the trigger and successfully overturn Roe. What happens then? )


Jan. 4th, 2006 01:10 pm
dwenius: (Default)
You really can't summarize the current state of our government much better than this bit from CNN Money, talking about the scheduled, mandatory transition from analog to digital TV signals in 2009:

The difficulty, of course, is that the analog broadcast system will then be shut down -- which will leave most of today's TV sets unable to receive a signal over the air. [....] To avoid a consumer revolt, Congress has set aside about $1.5 billion to smooth the transition. Owners of outmoded TV sets will be eligible for two vouchers, worth $40 each, to help buy converter boxes that will enable today's analog TV sets to receive digital signals.

Yes, the very same federal government that is cutting back on college loans and food stamps will soon be issuing TV vouchers.

Dear Apple

Nov. 23rd, 2005 10:15 am
dwenius: (Default)
When your flagship product has a well established and independently verified reputation for poor bass output, it shows exceedingly poor business judgment to license your product to Bose, so that they can create another crappy sounding product, then saturation-bomb the planet with advertising. Just trying to be helpful.

P.S. Dear Bose: Your ad, which by my count appears 342 times in various parts of the BART system, features words of praise from Forbes magazine. Forbes. Because god knows, when discerning music lovers worldwide want the absolute last word on audiophile quality portable sound, the FIRST place they turn is to a second rate financial magazine/corporate pimp.
dwenius: (Default)
So it seems that Bill O'Reilly advocates that terrorists come in and blow up San Francisco. viz:

"Fine. You want to be your own country? Go right ahead," O'Reilly went on. "And if al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead."
Isn't this treason? Giving aid and comfort to the enemy? Wasn't Jane Fonda vilified for decades for making substantively similar comments? and as the article states, didn't Bill Maher lose his show for saying less?

I know, I shouldn't even acknowledge that a snotwad like O'Reilly exists. But come ON.
dwenius: (Default)
What IS the matter with Kansas?

Comments to the Kansas State Board of Education should be sent to Penny Plamann, the Board Secretary. You may want to make reference to the theory of Intelligent Falling as an alternative to Gravity. After all, a staggeringly small number of people in all of history have fully understood Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, and no one has ever observed a Graviton or a Gravity Wave (although the latter may now be within reach). Personally, I asked if the six idiotsmembers of the BOE who voted in favor of this can fly.
dwenius: (Default)
When you are indicted for campaign finance abuses that may have helped you unfairly during an election, starting your defensive media posturing with the line "Because they couldn't beat me at the ballot box..." is in exceedingly poor taste. What, you thought we wouldn't notice? That's the kind of arrogance that led to you getting busted in the first place, idiot.
dwenius: (Default)
I have now listened to the official Extraordinary Machine album release three times. I tried to give it the benefit of the doubt, listen with open ears to the new arrangements and production, but to no avail. Sony, in some misguided hope of creating a radio-friendly release, has managed to squeeze almost every bit of fire and life out of the songs. The weakest tracks, they managed to improve a little, but the rest of the album was dumbed down to match that new, low standard. Now, it...well I dunno, I don't listen to the radio, but it sounds like what my concept of "what everything on the radio sounds like" ought to sound like. I'm exceedingly disappointed. Not angry, per se...I'm saving my anger for the Bush administration. But definitely disappointed enough to give you this track by track review of HOW THEY SCREWED THE SONGS UP )
dwenius: (Default)
Tom DeLay indicted on conspiracy charges, steps aside as majority leader.

Now then. When do we get the announcement of SEC charges against Frist for insider trading, and when in god's name does the Fitzgerald report come out so Rove can get his?

Pardon my vindictive streak and all, but it's about goddamned time.

p.s. Fuck you Mike Brown. Again.


Sep. 28th, 2005 10:25 am
dwenius: (Default)
So, an attempt to rename a Berkeley post office for a 94 year old City Council member was shot down by Steve King, a Republican from Iowa, who questioned whether she represented American values. This sort of immature slapfight is all too common in the modern, partisan age, but what really jumps out of the article is this quote:
King responded: "I think that if Barbara Lee would read the history of Joe McCarthy, she would realize that he was a hero for America."

Perhaps someone should offer the Honorable Mr. King two tickets to Good Night and Good Luck.

No, really, there are people who still hold McCarthy up as a role model? And they are allowed to hold public office? That's fucked.

Full Contact info for Rep. King after the cut, should any of you want to make your feelings known. )


Sep. 5th, 2005 10:50 pm
dwenius: (Default)
Like many of you, I suspect, I have been hoovering the news since Katrina struck, but since we still haven't had any need to unpack the TV, I've been getting all of it online. Out of the huge number of pundits and bloggers out there, John and the folks over at AMERICAblog seem to have taken the Fed's screwups personally, and have amassed a truly staggering collection of headlines, transcripts, video links, and so forth that frame the enormity of the debacle. They're also all over any piece that comes out in the mainstream media which breaks from the current (unfathomably lame) party line Rove wants the country to swallow, which is fascinating in its own right. It's a daily good read, if you have a strong stomach.

Speaking of the...well, closer to mainstream media, check out this video of Keith Olberman on MSNBC, or go and read the (mostly accurate) transcript.
dwenius: (Default)
It begins with "It wasn't easy picking George Bush's worst moment last week", lists several worthy candidates, then piles it on with "and he was so slow." Still not strongly worded enough, for my money, but it's a start.
dwenius: (Default)
Lots of interesting blowback going on these days for the Bush administration, but this article may have slipped by you. It points out that the National Response Plan, signed and put into effect in December 2004, *specifically* directs the feds to take proactive steps in response to natural disasters. The talking points about "the state/local governments didn't ask for help/didn't manage the situation/didn't prepare adequately" that we have been hearing? Pure bullshit. The NRP allows for the suspension of any and all such protocols for events of "catastrophic magnitude", which is sure as hell what we have here.

So, Homeland Security has proven conclusively that it hasn't accomplished jack shit since 9/11 except for a nifty color coding scheme, plus adding a deadly level of bureaucratic incompetence to the operations of FEMA. This NRP is suposed to be the ONE plan for domestic incident response, but it looks like NOBODY got the memo.

In other news, Bush is sending more troops and "several cabinet members" to the region tomorrow. Oh, that's just dandy, cabinet members! I better see Rumsfeld and Rice personally handing out food and/or picking corpses out of the convention center, or WHY THE FUCK ARE THEY THERE?


dwenius: (Default)

October 2011

1617181920 2122
232425 262728 29


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 18th, 2017 08:30 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios