Sunday Roast: Ohhhhh, the poor poor widdle Christians

Seriously, how many ways is this just SO wrong?

These morons are giving “teh gay” so much power in their pitiful little lives, and it’s just pathetic.

OMG, allowing gay people the same human rights that the rest us so precariously enjoy will ruin EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!  If anyone voices an opinion or belief contrary to our own, we won’t be allowed to be “Christians” anymore!!!

drama-queen-i9063

Here’s your damn crown.  *eyes rolling*

This is our daily open thread –No I’m not dignifying the stupid film with commentary.

The Watering Hole; Thursday February 5 2015; Nutcasearrhea

It’s really getting bad out there. I was going to post something interesting and compelling today, but then somebody dumped a truckload of new wingnut theses on my keyboard and forced my hand in the other direction. So I set myself the most grueling task imaginable: to choose the five most insanely stupid links out there, links where the titles alone tell most of the tale. So here they are (if you have a weak stomach or a strong brain, click with care!):

1. Pat Robertson Furious About Obama’s Re-Election, Fears America Won’t Survive

2. Rep. Mo Brooks: Obama Should Face Jail Time For Immigration Actions

3. Newsmax’s Snake Oil Salesman Makes Outlandish Claims About Vaccines

4. Klingenschmitt: The Bible Opposes Gun-Free Zones

And finally, the pot calls the kettle black:

5. Bill-O Complains That The American Press Has Been Corrupted By Money, Internet, Ideology

So. Where do we go from here? Are there any options remaining besides down, down, and down? How deep will be the grave our fascist faux-Christian Wingnuttistanians are digging for the country once known as America? Tricky question, that one.

Or maybe, just maybe, the answer’s in the bible? It was there, after all, where Solomon noted —

He that digeth a pit shall fall into it.

:grin: We can always hope, right? :grin:

OPEN THREAD

 

 

The Watering Hole, Monday, January 12th, 2015: Just WOW

After visiting one of the following sites yesterday, I WAS planning to write about that effing bitch “Judge” Jeanine Pirro; unfortunately, I have a wicked toothache after root canal the other day, so I’ll get to her another time.

In the meanwhile, have a look at this strange, hard-to-tell-if-they’re-serious website [Cats, I know you stopped there yesterday, but I thought I should share it with everyone] called Beforeitsnews.com. Some of their ‘Top 50′ Stories include “Aliens Caught Creating PORTAL STARGATE…“, “Don’t Believe in Nephilim? You Will After This…,” and, of course, several articles exposing the Paris Charlie Hebdo killings as “fake” and a “false flag operation.”

While I haven’t been to this next website, The Enigma Channel, an email that I received – for whatever reason, unknown to me – made me curious. Apparently the EnigmaTV.com’s site is trying to be the clearinghouse for all weird conspiracy theories, UFO sightings, cults, and other even odder subjects. Unfortunately, one has to subscribe to the website, so here’s some excerpts from a few of their touted stories/”documentaries.” This first one is titled “SEX MAGICK SECRETS OF ALEISTER CROWLEY“:

“Our OCCULT documentaries take you deeper into the realms of secret societies than ever before. We cover subjects which no other broadcaster has the courage to show…
Various forms of SEX YOGA are being taught worldwide – some are true in origin to where yoga developed on the Indian sub-continent, but other forms of SEX MAGICK have perversed the original teachings. Our new series entitled CULTS investigates the weird and strange teachings of various covens and lodges…

One example is “Within Black Tantra we find the Bons and Drukpas of the “Red Cap,” terrible and perverse black magicians. These malignant people have disgusting procedures in order to reabsorb the semen through the urethra after having miserably spilled it. The outcome is fatal because the semen, after having been spilled, is charged with satanic atoms, which upon re-entering the body acquire the power to awaken the Kundalini negatively. It then descends to the atomic infernos of the human being and becomes the Tail of Satan…”

From “THE MASONIC ARCH SECRETS“:

“The ‘ARCH’ of masonry, as Chris Everard explains, is symbolic of the ‘arc’ of electricity which flowed from the anode and cathode of the ARK OF THE COVENANT. According to the freemasonic histories, the ARK OF THE COVENANT was at first deposited in the most sacred place of the tabernacle and afterward placed by King Solomon in the Sanctum Sanctorum of the Temple.
The Ark of the Covenant was lost upon the destruction of the first Temple by the Chaldean sorcerers who are today’s ‘jewish’ people], and there is an ancient replica at Axum in Ethiopia. The Ark was meant to be carried to Babylon [ancient Iraq] among the other sacred utensils which became the spoil of the conquerors…”

And from “THE ARK OF THE COVENANT“:

“Our cameras venture to Axum in Ethiopia where we film the amazing subterranean churches and the ARK OF THE COVENANT…
The Talmudists say that there were several things which were the “glory” of the first Temple of SOLOMON – which was the original hiding place of the ARK OF THE COVENANT. But the Ark was only one of several mysterious artefacts which we investigate on THE ENIGMA CHANNEL…

1. The Ark of the Covenant [which contain Leyden Jars which stored static electricity]

2. The Shikinah (or Divine Presence) [this is a female aspect of the Godhead who jews ‘make love to’ by swinging their hips at the Wailing Wall] and…

3. The Urim and Thummim (‘the holy fire upon the altar’ which resembled some ‘dice’ and feature prominently in the legends of the Mormons).”

The Enigma Channel email finished with the following:
enigma channel
Um, I don’t think I want to subscribe.

This is our daily Open Thread – have fun!

The Watering Hole; Thursday July 31 2014; IMPEACH!!!

Impeachment: the presentation of formal charges against a public official by the lower house, trial to be before the upper house. ‘Impeachment’ is also a word that’s been spoken and heard more often in the last couple of decades than in the previous history of the United States. Three Presidents, Wm. Clinton, George W. Bush, and now Barack Obama have been threatened with removal. Clinton was, in fact, impeached by the House but served out his term because the Senate (even with a Republican majority) refused to convict.

According to informed and wide-spread opinion, George W. Bush was indeed impeachable on multiple offenses, but even after Democrats achieved a functional House majority in the 2006 Congressional elections, no action was taken.

Today, Barack Obama is, according to un-informed and wingnut opinion, very definitely impeachable, and the threats to do so — particularly with the Tea Party faction — are gaining in popularity as the 2014 elections approach. Should the Republicans manage to both maintain their House majority and gain a Senate majority come November, the chances of impeachment will likely elevate accordingly.

Following is a closer examination of details, an overview of each of the three consecutive presidencies in which the word “impeachment” became operative. It is perhaps curious that of the three, only one enjoyed any level of the justification specified in Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution . . .

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

. . . and it was never acted upon.

In order of occurrence:

Immediately following 1998’s elections, the lame duck GOP-controlled House went after Bill Clinton by initiating impeachment proceedings, and on December 19, 1998 Clinton was impeached by the House on two charges: perjury to a grand jury and obstruction of justice. The (Republican-controlled) Senate did not convict, however, and Clinton served out his full second term.

The next President, George W. Bush, was, over the course of his two terms, accused of numerous impeachable offenses, and the impeachment option started to pick up speed in the summer of 2006 when it began to appear that Democrats might win an electoral majority in the House in the upcoming fall elections. On August 29, 2006, Dave Lindorf at PoliticalAffairs.net bluntly contrasted the folly of Clinton’s impeachment by summarizing the bulk of informed opinion as to why the impeachment of Bush should proceed. Lindorf wrote:

“Clinton’s offense was simply lying under oath about an adulterous affair.

“Bush, in contrast, has admitted to ordering the National Security Agency to monitor Americans’ telecommunications without a warrant, in clear violation of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (New York Times, 12/16/05). Beyond that, documents show he okayed torture of captives in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, contravening the Third Geneva Accord on treatment of prisoners of war, an international accord that was long ago adopted as U.S. law (Human Rights Watch, ‘Background Paper on Geneva Conventions and Persons Held by U.S. Forces,’ 1/29/02).

“He has blatantly subverted the Constitution by claiming the right to ignore (so far) 750 acts duly passed by Congress (Boston Globe, 4/30/06). He has defied the courts in revoking the most basic rights of citizenship-the right to be charged and tried in a court of law (Guardian, 12/5/02). And the evidence is overwhelming that he knowingly lied about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, and about Hussein’s alleged link to Al-Qaeda, in order to win public and Congressional approval for his invasion of Iraq (Center for American Progress: “Claims vs. Facts: Iraq/Al-Qaeda Links”).

“These and other Bush offenses pose direct threats to the Constitution and to the survival of the Republic, and yet, despite widespread concern and outrage among the public about many of these actions, not one major corporate news organization has called for Bush’s resignation, the initiation of impeachment proceedings, or even for censure . . .”

On May 7, 2006 Patricia Goldsmith of Long Island Media Watch (a grassroots free media and democracy watchdog group) summarized potential impeachment charges against George W. Bush when she wrote:

“The push for impeachment acknowledges two simple truths: we can’t wait for 2008, nor can we live with BushCo’s legacy. That is to say, we must not only remove GWB, but we must remove all the devices and stratagems his administration has used to subvert the Constitution including: signing statements and the concept of the unitary executive; the abrogation of the Geneva conventions, the concept of enemy combatants, extraordinary rendition, and Guantanamo; pre-emptive military attacks; warrantless spying on citizens; the unlabeled exchange of government propaganda for news; and much more. These illegal maneuvers should not be available to future presidents of any party.”

Meanwhile, Fox News (online and during the runup to the Nov. 2006 elections) offered advice to the Democratic Party after apparently concluding that Democrats had a good chance of assuming post-election control of the House:

“Step one would be for the Democratic leadership to definitively put to rest any loose talk of impeaching President Bush. They should say in one and two syllable words that impeachment will not happen once they are in the majority and thus take away a potential rallying cry for the beleaguered Republicans.”

Fox eventually got its wish when, around the time the election results of November, 2006 had become operational, Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) laid the entire GWB impeachment thesis to rest when he announced, “Speaker Pelosi and I have made it clear that this Congress is not going to proceed with impeachment, and is going to focus on critical issues facing our nation, such as healthcare for children and the war in Iraq.”

Enter President Barack Obama, clearly the most Republican-despised President in all of history, a President for whom dreams of total and complete failure have defined the entire political aspiration of today’s extreme right wing-driven GOP. Obama’s use of the Presidential executive action tool — his attempt(s) to get at least SOMETHING accomplished in spite of the least productive Congress in the nation’s history are consistently viewed as “dictatorial” at best, impeachable violations of the Constitution in their unfounded rhetoric.

Sarah Palin placed her familiar ignorance on full display when she recently wrote, on Breitbart.com (in part):

“President Obama’s rewarding of lawlessness, including his own, is the foundational problem here. It’s not going to get better, and in fact irreparable harm can be done in this lame-duck term as he continues to make up his own laws as he goes along, and, mark my words, will next meddle in the U.S. Court System with appointments that will forever change the basic interpretation of our Constitution’s role in protecting our rights.

“It’s time to impeach; and on behalf of American workers and legal immigrants of all backgrounds, we should vehemently oppose any politician on the left or right who would hesitate in voting for articles of impeachment.

“The many impeachable offenses of Barack Obama can no longer be ignored. If after all this he’s not impeachable, then no one is.”

In late summer of 2013, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) laid out his own reasoning concerning Obama’s potential impeachment when he warned that if Republicans should decide to force the U.S. to default on its debt by refusing to raise the debt ceiling then it “would be an impeachable offense by the president.” Right. OK. Uh huh.

Gohmert is far from alone as an incumbent in support of impeachment, however. Here Is a List of Republican Incumbents Who Support Impeachment — I suspect it’s far shorter than it will be post-election IF the Republicans should happen to preserve their control of the House AND gain a majority in the Senate. Such points obviously don’t make their logic any more profound even though it’s probably predictable, given their post-election fevers in 1998.

Still, there’s a recently-emerged “other side”, a position that in all probability is based on legitimate fears that pre-election hype concerning impeachment (for clearly spurious reasons) may well jeopardize Republican chances of (a) gaining a majority in the Senate, or perhaps even (b), maintaining their majority in the House, by ‘inspiring’ more electoral support and enthusiasm amongst Democratic voters. Therefore, the new talking point, as spouted by John Boehner on July 29th 2014:

“We have no plans to impeach the President. . . . . Listen. It’s all a scam asserted by Democrats and the White House.”

Glenn Beck also blames Obama and the Democrats for using the impeachment “scam” as a means of diverting attention from the President’s failures — Immigration, e.g.

The bottom line, in summary, reads something like this: Each of the last three American Presidents — two Democrats and one Republican — have been accused of having committed impeachable offenses during their respective terms of office. Of the three, however, only one — Republican George W. Bush — actually engaged in policies which demanded a closer look because of their extremely dubious constitutionality, and even though several of the offenses were clearly of Article II Section 4 context, no official charges were filed.

Makes one wonder if these days the most compelling impeachable offenses are simply those which are the most sententious, i.e. each and all of those moralizing and self-righteous pithy aphorisms which seem to flow steadily from the mouths of the far right wingers. Or maybe it’s even simpler. Could it be that their sole perceived impeachable crime is nothing other than the President’s political party affiliation? Or, horror of horrors, the President’s skin color?

Stay tuned.

OPEN THREAD

 

 

 

The Watering Hole, Monday, July 7th, 2014: Crazy Talk

Thanks to commenter BruinKid at Daily Kos for these two libertarian wingnuts’ words:

First, a quote from Libertarian Kevin Gutzman, who is currently a “neighbor” of ours living in Danbury, Connecticut (In the olden days when Wayne and I were growing up in Brewster, New York, Danbury was considered a ‘local’ call, and we didn’t have to dial the 203- area code.) It’s kind of scary that he is a professor of history at Western Connecticut State College, or as we have always called it, “WestConn.” (My sister attended for 3-1/2 years.)

“As Americans celebrate the Fourth today, remember this: the statists are the intellectual descendants of those who did not celebrate the Fourth in the 1790s, celebrating Washington’s birthday instead:

“In the Founders’ day, the 4th of July was a partisan holiday. It was celebrated in the 1790s and 1800s by Jeffersonian Republicans desirous of showing their devotion to Jeffersonian, rather than Hamiltonian, political philosophy. If you were a Federalist in the 1790s, you likely would celebrate Washington’s Birthday instead of the 4th of July. If you believed in the inherent power of the Executive in formulating foreign policy, in the power of Congress to charter a bank despite the absence of express constitutional authorization to do so, and in the power of the federal government to punish people who criticized the president or Congress, you would not celebrate the 4th. The 4th was the holiday of the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, those great states’-rights blasts at federal lawlessness. It was the anti-Hamilton, anti-Washington, anti-nationalist holiday.”

Next, from Jeffrey A. Tucker, who, according to Wikipedia, describes himself as “a dedicated anarchist” (he may also have been involved in the racist newsletters that got Ron Paul in some trouble):

“Now that 4th of July celebrations are over, let’s take the Declaration of Independence seriously and abolish the United States. It’s a cobbled together empire based on nothing but 19th century political ambitions. The results have been a menace to the world and certainly a menace to its own people. If the U.S. devolved to hundreds or thousands of small countries, or even became the great 21st century experiment in P2P legal institutions with no overarching geographically contiguous legal structure, that would even be better. The nation state is an anachronism, and the largest surviving case in point really should set the example, in the spirit of the principles that gave it birth, and be the first to go.”

Last, according to Salon’s July 1st article by Elias Isquitch, Governor Paul LePage of Maine has apparently been “pallin’ around with terrorists.” Author Mike Tipping, who covers local politics in Maine, has a book out about Governor LePage’s several meetings with a group called “Sovereign Citizens”, who are purportedly allied with the “Constitutional Coalition”, who are on the FBI terrorist watch list. LePage’s staff have verified that the meetings did occur. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center:

“Among the things reportedly discussed at these meetings was whether or not to seek violent retribution against key political opponents. A Coalition member named Jack McCarthy described the meeting on a radio program hosted by a small group of sovereign citizens calling themselves the Aroostook Watchmen:

“We also discussed this there, that as far as I know, the penalty for high treason has not changed in 100 years. And, I did not say it, but the governor said it. I never – I never opened my mouth and said the word. The governor looked at us and looked at his buddy and said they are talking about hanging them.”

LePage has vehemently denied that he ever discussed executing anyone, let alone his Democratic opponents, with the group, and a spokesperson characterized the meetings as a benign effort by the governor to listen to people across the political spectrum…

The topics of these meetings evidently revolved around classic antigovernment “Patriot” movement conspiracy theories, including the belief that American dollars are phony “fiat” money and that the Federal Reserve is a hoax. One of the meetings was dominated by discussion, led by noted conspiracy theorist Michael Coffman, revolving around the notion that the United Nations is out to seize Americans’ private property rights and impose a New World Order environmentalist regime.”

From the “Constitutional Coalition” website:

“Our Constitution established specific powers of the federal government, powers that are limited and enumerated. The founders believed that the government exists to perform only those services that the people cannot provide for themselves, such as the national defense. Local and state government powers were also to be limited and enumerated with the people self governing in all other areas.

The founders held that only a moral people – a nation of godly people with common spiritual and social values – were capable of self government.”

Here, to take the bad taste out of your mouths, just watch any one of these “comedy vs anti-science videos” that “show how humor can make a difference.” (Which I found as part of “more related stories” after the Paul LePage story, right next to one described as “Comedy can’t change the world: why Russell Brand is dead wrong about politics and humor…” – heh) Or, you can celebrate the fact that Pink Floyd is coming out with a new ‘album’ in the fall. Yay!

This is our daily open thread–what’s on your mind today?

The Watering Hole; Friday June 20 2014; AmurKKKa

I ran across the following video the other day on a C&L page which began with the words, “A BBC crew filming a gathering of Ku Klux Klansmen recorded one of the group’s leaders discussing a plan to use returning military veterans to train KKK members in combat techniques.” This kind of crap frankly sickens me, and, were I not so angry I might be able to at least chuckle at the collective stupidity that has come to define such a significant portion of this country’s dregs. 

In any case, the nine minute video is enough to sicken the spirit of anyone who cares for each and all of those previous, present, and future victims of irrational racial hatred, hatred which sadly persists and lives and probably even thrives, at least amongst the decidedly ignorant, the stupid. Sadly, these same nine minutes would likely serve to fuel the hatred of those who have no means of knowing anything other than the irrationalities embedded within their evil and shriveled souls.

One more time it’s the same old vitriolic mentality. I thought it was over, but still it goes on. And on, and on, and on.

OPEN THREAD

The Watering Hole; Thursday June 5 2014; BER(gdahl)GHAZI!!

Outrage, anyone?

OH MY GOD!!! Obama allowed the exchange of five — count ‘em, FIVE!! — Taliban POWs for only ONE American Army POW! Uh oh. America’s DOOMED!! The “terrorists” now have five more guys than before!! We’re doomed!! We’re doomed!!

Fascinating how a relatively “simple” POW exchange near a war’s end can suddenly become so vicious a topic. Rest assured, however, that the nastiness has no foreign “terrorist” source. Nope. The true terrorists behind this mess are familiar and home grown, domestic. Republicans, Teabaggers, Conservatives, Wingnuts, Fascists, . . . choose a name, any name; all are equally accurate and descriptive . . . and disgusting.

Found two links which pretty much summarize both the source of the outrage AND the impact of same on anyone still possessing a viable mind. First is this little gem — Fox Contributor Grenell Behind PR Campaign For Soldiers Critical Of Bergdahl — in which the undercurrents driving the day’s vitriolic drivel are described and revealed. One of the comments which followed stood out in the way it summarizes the silliness implicit in the (faux) “outrage” being endlessly spouted by the American Fascist Movement, aka the GOP:

LockeNessMonster: 
You know, we are supposed to be the mightiest, bad-ass military in the world (USA! USA!), but we are SO worried about five dudes? Seriously? Your kid is much more likely to get shot in school by an American than killed by a terrorist from the Middle East. (underline mine)

Amen, amen.

Then there’s this one, an essay on Stonekettle.com entitled Negotiating With Terrorists, in which the author pretty much sums up how at least a few folks, myself included, have come to feel about the never-ending Wingnut BS in which this country finds itself immersed. He effectively summarizes the impact of the current POW exchange freakout when he writes:

Are we now so filled with foul bilious hatred, are we now so consumed with soul-destroying fear, do we now despise our own selves so much that we would actually protest the return of one of our own? Is that it?

Is that what we’ve become?

If so, then the sooner America collapses of its own maggot-ridden gangrenous rot, the better.

Indeed: is that what we’ve finally become? I can muster little if any argument with either the premise or, sadly, the conclusion. Never thought I’d ever come to feel that level of outrage, but . . .

Well, maybe Emily Dickinson summed it all up 150 yrs ago when she wrote (were the consequences of today’s mangled American Politic somehow predictable way back then?) —

The difference between Despair
And Fear — is like the One
Between the instant of a Wreck
And when the Wreck has been –

The Mind is smooth — no Motion –
Contented as the Eye
Upon the Forehead of a Bust –
That knows — it cannot see –

Hmmh. I will think on this. 

OPEN THREAD