Despite repeated claims, Hanoi Jane Fonda has never apologized for her treasonous collaboration with the Vietnamese Communists. Writing that it was 'a betrayal' and 'a lapse of judgment' is a confession, not an apology.
She committed treason. She exploited and misused American POWs. She gave the North Vietnamese communists, with whom we were then at war, propaganda that American POWs endured unimaginable torture not to give them, she gave it to them for free. And, indeed, she caused the deaths of American fighting men and the deaths of our allies as well.
If you read Krugman -- read this:
9 indications that you might not be appropriate "academy" material, in Paul Krugman's estimation
- You adhere to the crazy “conservative” notion that US has been a force for good in the world
- Your quasi-retarded decision to vote for Ronald Reagan all but destroyed the last great hope for economic and social equity that was at the core of Communism.
- Your antipathy to the UN proves that you’d be unable to abide the consent-driven grievance politics so essential to the proper functioning of university humanities departments
- When you hear “Columbus Day,” you think “yay, parade!”—when what you really should be thinking is, “fucking egomaniacal Dago bastard and his band of murderous, sea-faring imperialist world destroyers!"
- You refuse to acknowledge the self-esteem-wrecking affront to the social progress of women represented in the following sentence: “Everyone should bring his baseball glove."
- Your skepticism over suggestions that Abe Lincoln was an active homosexual who spent the Civil War bedding union soldiers clarifies either a) your hateful homophobia, or b) your latent homosexuality.
- To you, a quilt holds very little social significance—though you do like the way it keeps your feet warm on those cold, winter evenings when you and your friends sit around the fire, shotgunning beer and recalling all the “wool” you “fleeced” in college.
- You refuse to say that it is NEVER okay to execute a multiple murderer, but that it’s ALWAYS okay to snuff a child in utero.
- You believe in a higher power not named “Kennedy” or “Clinton."
New media adviser for the Bush White House?:
Jim Belushi is quite the press critic. Asked by Entertainment Weekly how ABC News should fill the "Nightline" time slot when Ted Koppel retires, the ABC sitcom star says: "ABC should create another breakthrough called 'Investigate Reporters.' ... The first 10 minutes would be dedicated to retractions, the next 15 minutes to all the lives ruined by the mistakes of journalists, and the last five minutes would focus on critics and what movies and TV shows they panned ... that became hits."
Harry "Dickhead" Reid:
As the fight over Bush's nominees rages on, the rhetoric of the Democrats gets increasingly self-righteous. Lately, the rhetoric has evolved into the Democrats attacking the Senate GOP's threat to the Senate rules to ban the filibuster of judicial nominees by equating the Democrats' obstruction with checks and balances...
"When it comes down to it, stripping away these important checks and balances is about the arrogance of those in power who want to rewrite the rules so that they can get their way," Reid, D-Nev., said in his party's weekly radio address.
I am no constitutional scholar, but I do remember quite a bit from my past education on our government and Constitution. So, let me give Senator Harry Reid a lesson on checks and balances, because clearly what I remember from a high school civics class forty five (45) years ago is greater than the knowledge Reid has today.
In our system of checks and balances, the President's check over the Judicial branch of government includes the power to appoint judges. Congress's check over the President includes the confirmation of judges, which is also a check over the Judicial.
The system of checks and balances does not include a separate check by the minority party to obstruct any nominees they don't like by requiring a super majority to break a filibuster before giving a nominee an up or down vote. I can say right back to Senator Reid, "When it comes down to it, stripping away these important checks and balances is about the arrogance of those out of power who want to rewrite the rules so that they can get their way," and that would be more accurate.
Yes--I'm an atheist
One atheistic tendency is to think that religious people are not only wrong, but insincere, or even liars. The feeling can be particularly strong during discussions with those who profess a literal belief that God is “everywhere,” in the sense that He’s in the room with them examining every fiber of their body and being. He sees your skeleton; has numbered every cell and atom of your body and keeps track of the most minute of changes on an instant-by-instant basis. He hears the slightest rustling of your hair and rumbling of your stomach; is simultaneously sniffing your armpits and your anus, and tastes every inch of you as surely as if He were licking you with His tongue. What’s more, He views you from every possible angle simultaneously and sees you bathed in every frequency of light, including the ultraviolet ranges that are imperceptible to human eyes.
Yet I’ve talked to enough religious people to know that they do honestly believe exactly that. They feel his presence inside and out. They know he hears their prayers as surely as if their mouths were pressed against His ear. Although unwilling to discuss some of the seedier implications of their theory (“do you truly believe his nose is up your ass?”), they refuse to concede that there are any limits to God’s perceptive abilities. To do so would deny Him the full measure of His glory.
But then again, I wonder, do they really believe this? One question to ask them is this: what would you do if a fifty-foot tall, fire-breathing Jesus suddenly materialized in your kitchen, staring at you intently? Continue to stir the Hamburger Helper and hum? No: most likely you’d jump out of your skin -- or at very least inquire of his mission, determine the purpose of His visit and what he intended to do with you.
But why the surprise? Certainly to those who are sincere about their belief in divine omnipresence, a mere physical apparition of that nature would be far less intrusive than the full-body scouring that His being administers daily. A pair of eyes staring down from several yards away is nothing compared to a God white-water rafting down your bloodstream. It’s no answer to say that there’s something out of the ordinary about God making a physical, personal appearance. Having an infinite being permeating your body is at least as odd, and if you sincerely accept that premise then a house call from Tall Jesus shouldn’t startle you anymore than a cat walking by and rubbing against your leg.
Also counting against the professed sincerity is the things people do despite their alleged conviction in His ever-pervasive presence. Most of them exercise a certain level of restraint the in company of strangers, children or their grandmothers, even if they’re away in another room. Yet they’ll curse, steal and commit adultery in full view of their God. And here again, it’s no answer to say one “forgot,” or succumbed to human weakness. If I were to thrust my head under a woman’s dress in the subway for a momentary glimpse of what God surveys eternally, she’d never forget the experience; how could anyone who for even a split-second at any time in her life believed that God was doing a complete inventory put that thought aside? And weakness is no excuse either -- even the weak exercise caution when they believe that the police are reasonably nearby.
For my part, I know that were I to find myself plucked out of bed at 3am by a pair of giant fingers, suspended over a black void and bellowed at by a supernatural spirit, I’d start behaving. That moment would be enough and He wouldn’t have to follow me around constantly. I might even tone down this blog, perhaps now and then leave the “o” out of G_d. But hasn’t happened and it never will. He isn’t everywhere. He isn’t anywhere.
Here's the point. If God is everywhere and anywhere all the time and knows everything while having a plan for everyone and every thing at all times---why can't the big guy just show up?
Because:
He isn’t everywhere. He isn’t anywhere.
