Monday, October 31, 2005

Get to meet the religious right...

Here's the religious right... aren't they a bunch of peachy folks. I know I sleep soundly at night knowing people like this exist in the world... yeah, sure I do, in Bizarro world maybe.

Please, dig into the links below, these people's own web pages are only 2 or 3 clicks deep, and try not to flinch, it's pretty repulsive.

The most Scary one - Tim LaHaye and the "End of Times Theology" -
“God will destroy this earth that is so marred and cursed by Satan’s

Defining this concept of "Premilennial Dispensationalism" -
Dispensationalists welcome this period of death and destruction because it is inextricably connected to the Rapture. They look for signs of its coming, and many take steps to hasten what they believe to be biblical prophecy.

Gary Bauer -
“I will appoint men and women to the Federal judiciary who share my view of
unborn children as constitutionally protected and who will unhesitatingly vote
to overturn Roe v. Wade.”

James Dobson-
“Fight abortion. Block gay marriage. Stop stem cell research.”

Rev Jerry Falwell -
"AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals."

Tony Perkins -
"Counterfeit marriages called 'civil unions' pose a serious threat to the health of our culture."

Pat Robertson -
"Feminism encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians."

Phyllis Schlafly -
"Feminism is doomed to failure because it is based on an attempt to repeal and restructure human nature."

I have delved into some of their own sites... not too far, because I just ate lunch and already I'm on the verge of tossing my cookies reading what these people proudly stand for. I am a big believer in letting people live their life however they want, even when it's so repulsive and offensive to that which I hold to be true and good in the world, but these people sicken me because they are all basically saying that they want me (and other individuals out there) to live our lives like they live their lives and if we won't choose to do it on our own thanks to the rapture of their god infusing us, then they are going to stop at nothing to warp and twist the laws of this land to ensure that any action they don't approve of is criminalized. If their "vision for America" were to be reality today... well, let's just say that unless inmates in prison are allowed to publish blogs, you wouldn't even be able to read this.

That "Family Research Council"... wow, talk about a Halloween Fright Site. I think it was the scariest one. No, I take that back, each one is scarier than the last. I guess it's appropriate that today of all days I happened upon this particular site with links to all these most scary and unholy links, links to the darker and more revolting elements of our human culture.

Saturday, October 29, 2005

Abortion related depression questioned.

Anti-Choice proponents claim that women who terminate pregnancies are more likely to become depressed.

As reported in an Article on the BBC News Website - A recent study by British Medial Journal researchers indicate there is no credible evidence of any link to higher risks of depression.
They looked at 1247 women who either terminated and unwanted pregnancy or kept it to term and in fact found that the ones who terminated tended to be less depressed. They also found that those that tended to opt for pregnancy termination were more educated and affluent than those who decided to bring the unwanted pregnancy to term.

"This suggests that if the goal is to reduce women's risk of depression,
research should focus on how to prevent and ameliorate the effect of unwanted
childbearing, particularly for younger women,"
said the researchers.

Sophie Corlett, of the mental health charity Mind, said:
"While any distressing life event has the potential to affect an individual
person's mental health, this study supports earlier research that abortion, as
opposed to bringing to term an unwanted pregnancy, does not increase the risk of
later depression.

A spokeswoman from the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, which provides abortions to women in Britain, said:
"From our experience, abortion does not cause depression, as long as a woman has
discussed all her options and made a fully informed decision."
"Very few women return for post-abortion counselling and this is because they made the best decision for them at the time and see no need to talk to a counsellor."

Please read the entire BBC Article, there are opposing views from the anti-choice lobby and the lobby-of-people-who-want-to-force-their-religious-beliefs-upon-everyone-else. Example Link 1, Example link 2, Example link 3.

Friday, October 28, 2005

bushie&co - why do the "christian values" groups support this administration

And, why do they have such intolerance of anything that is different or outside their belief structure. Why can they not accept that there are other views, other lifestyles, other ways to be. And why are they so offended that this nation that is founded on freedom from religious persecution and this nation which is supposed to separate church and state to ensure that peoples of all faiths have access to life, LIBERTY and the pursuit of happiness actually sometimes does just that?

Here is a response I started typing to a post (and the comments associated with the post) from the MartionAnthropologist. It got SOOOOO Long that I decided not to fill his blog comments section with the whole post but to link to this response here. Read his blog entry and subsequent comments >>Here<<

Some bush supports accuse those who fear and dread bush and his cronies of blaming them for everything. Yes, he is (or him and his cronies are) responsible for many heinous things, terrible crimes, evil deeds, much harm and hardship for US Citizens and the human race in general. Many of them clearly documented yet - somehow unprosecuted. But not EVERYTHING is solely their fault. There's lots of other bad people in the world, lots of other weak or corrupt or plain old stupid leaders.

Also - somehow these losers were voted in... so there are many average citizens too easily lead around by the nose to be able to discern truth from balderdash, they are indictable too.
I have serious doubts that the system developed 200+ years ago can work in today's society. Society itself, IMHO, has been subverted by - well, point your finger at what you will, corporations, the uber-wealthy, a secret kabal of insiders. Not saying it's some grand master plan by Nazi's and Space Aliens, but this "by, of, for the people" crap is not working because the average citizen is uneducated and ignorant. We have a country of specialists. Experts in their field, expert lawyers, doctors, mechanics, bankers, traders, bakers, butchers... but few are able to rise above the daily grind and look out across the vast plains and see what's going on. Few are trained in rational and logical thought - general rational and logical thought beyond their area of expertise, and therefore, they are easily swayed by specious arguments or by the loudest person at the shouting match.

And the Democrats?! Exactly how are they better. So far, they are just "less worse". (ok, technically that would be defined as better, hence why I'm nominally a democrat), but there are actually FEW elected representatives who I place any stock in. And there are some Republicans among that short roster. Sure, the overarching theme of the republicans (at this time in history) is evil/dangerous/manipulative and not in the best interests of the citizens of this nation nor of the world in general, but while the repubs may be more destructive, more dangerous, the dems are impotent and not really offering any real alternative. I'm not at all convinced that the democratic party is any more scrupulous either.

I hate to sound pessimistic and disillusioned - but look at all the wrong doing of this administration, yet in 5 years they are still in power, still not in jail for crimes. Clinton was attacked mercilessly for what is (in comparison) minor transgressions. All the most serious allegations were shown to be completely unfounded. Only the blow job stuck. bush&Co. have perpetrated such acts as lying to congress, and disregarding mandates for presentation of information to congress that led to a war which killed tens of thousands of people, 2000 or so of which are US soldiers. They have restructured requirements for medical aid along lines of "christian values" which apparently mean no birth control, only abstinence teaching - which is now responsible for a huge spike in the spread of std's including AIDS in 3rd world nations. They are hamstringing past legislation that is in place to protect us citizens and our progeny's right to a clean environment. They are pulling the curtains of secrecy over the process of governing, the likes of which were not even so bad in the Nixon years. Nixon was a liberal pussy compared to this administration (think about it, he opened up diplomatic relations with china, was a major instrumental force in environmental protection).

Has anyone seen the season finale of Seinfeld? They all went to jail for not aiding the guy who got car-jacked. Well - all of us see the crimes going on around us and we are standing by observing this train wreck and we're doing very little. Some of us more than others, but in general, we are complicit in these terrible deeds if we don't rail against them.

The worst part is that many of this evil administration's supporters are acting like they are the victims. They support this evil because it claims to be a proponent of "christian values" and the people who think that "christian values" are a good thing feel that they are bound to support it.
But - first, the ACTIONS of this administration are completely counter to any of the official values of christianity, though even the RC church is terribly guilty of transgressing the formally official christian values. But ironically, the "christian values" that so many seem to value to the point of voting in such dangerous evil, have not in any way been under attack, yet they act like they are the victims. This seems to be because they have no ability to tolerate other people who do not live their lifestyle.

Only homophobes claim there is a "gay agenda" to convert everyone to homosexuality. Link 1, Link 2 Well, I've met a few gay people who said they wished that was the case, probably more than half jokingly, but the reality is that no one's going around trying to change anyone's "team". OK, I know lots of straight guys who try to get the women around them to switch hit for both teams, but that's apparently considered perfectly ok. But other than that, no team changing going on, but these "christian value" people are terrified they're going to touch a gay person and become gay, or even worse, that their perfectly normal child will be "turned gay" by touching a gay person. It's probably easier to think that than for someone who hates people for their sexual orientation to accept that their own offspring could be a hated sexual orientation. Really - if they think that their god is "the god" and a "one and only god" and if they think that their "one and only god" hates gays, then let their "god" do something about it. Let the gay people live their life unmolested and then they can "burn in hell" or whatever punishment this alleged god has for them.

Same with abortion, no one who is pro-choice is trying to force abortions on people who don't want them, but the anti-choice people (I refuse to call them "pro-life", I mean really, unless you're a war monger like the bush&Co. administration, unless you go around increasing the amount of pain, sickness, death and suffering like they and other evil organizations do, then you probably fall into the category of "pro-life". I'm very pro-life - pro human life, pro animal life, pro plant life, pro life on earth, pro life without war, pro life with medicine, pro stem cell research to extend life, pro consciousness, pro intelligence, and pro lots of other aspects of nature that exist thanks to the existence of life and I'm all for letting people control their own bodies and take birth control (which I'm also very pro on) and get abortions or nose piercings or whatever else they want to do to themselves. So - these anti-choicers, they are what? Afraid that if abortion is legal they will trip and fall into an abortion clinic and lose their baby? wtf. Once again, if they believe their god feels this way, then their "all powerful" god can step in and take action. Or, say their all powerful god, that allegedly values life and souls, and which defines abortion as murder, say that this god doesn't mind the murder and just punishes the murderers (the mother's who get abortion in this bizarro world definition), then let this all powerful god go and do the punishing in the next life. (which is perfectly for all of us that don't subscribe to this belief structure and don't believe in an afterlife or those reincarnationists who think that the after life is just here, life after.)

Same with marriage - how insecure do you have to be - and its rhetorical, I am implying a VAST DEGREE of insecurity to anyone who can feel their marriage is somehow weakened by other people being married. How about TV, video games, movies, music and other entertainment - again, how tenuous must one's own faith and belief structure be that they can think that TV, video games, movies, music, or other entertainment can sway them away from their beliefs, or sway those around them away? I would think very tenuous indeed. I'm certain there's no music, TV show, video game or movie that could make me believe in the western judeo/christian/muslim idea of a god like jehovah/Yahwey. And I like spooky mythic stories with ghosts, goblins, angels or other non-existent fantasy themes. But they are simply entertainment, something to divert me for a moment.

Or ID - again, how tenuous a grasp of one's faith does one need to be to fear science that empirically disproves something that is completely implausible or totally contradicted by the natural record. For centuries faith/mysticism and the natural sciences were able to co-exist because everyone understood one was allegorical and the other was based on purely physical evidence. I was raised RC Christian, and even as I was a young child and asked those obvious questions - like "how could the earth and all life on it be created in 7 days when in science class they teach about millions of years epochs and dinosaurs and supernovae etc" and my mom, who does not even have a high school education told me that they are both true, because one is based on faith and is our understanding of the nature of god and the other is what really happened and who are we to say that to god, 1 day wasn't millions of millions of our years, and how do we know that the way that god made everything before "Adam and eve" was by evolving it from simpler and simpler to more complex. And I asked about the whole, "formed from dust and Adams rib" and again she said that this is a way of us understanding where we came from and she fervently believed in her god and felt that this was, in it's way, truth, but no in any way contradictory to the descended from apes observations of evolution, because apes came from dust too, everything on this planet was once part of a star, and was then dust, and then congealed to form planets, and then life began, etc, and the hand of god (for her) was in all this. And the stories of the bible were real and true to her, but not contradictory to the facts that we observe empirically. When did this ever stop being enough. When did people become so militant and so viscously ignorant that they cannot wrap their mind around the dichotomy? There has always been a dichotomy and others exist as well in human nature. There's no reason our minds can't handle both concepts concurrently.

Personally, I have no dichotomy on this front because upon maturing, I found that I didn't need to shield my consciousness from the reality around me so I shed my security blanket of mystical faith in that which is not provable but comforting. I don't need to pretend that there's some old guy in the clouds looking out for me, or punishing those people I don't like. I don't need to believe that after my short life is over, that I will be rewarded for all my suffering. I don't need to fear reprisal after death to ensure that I follow a path of moral and ethical righteousness either, for I derive my morality and ethics from the very laws of the universe themselves. Funny - but all the things that many people need religion for - to tell them what is right and wrong for example, can be derived directly from observable and testable laws of nature. I can show for example why thermodynamics teaches us that murder and lying and stealing is wrong. Universally. But that's an entirely other entry.

For a long time I was comfortable co-existing with those that believed otherwise, I had no issue to take with those that believed in that which is unprovable. It certainly didn't bother me. Until I saw how those "of faith" were suddenly always on the attack, if not against me and my beliefs, then other free citizens of this nation. That's what spurred me to start writing and getting more vocal and involved and passionate about my liberty and freedom from persecution. Even when others around me were the victims, I saw and responded to the injustices perpetrated by the "christian values" groups as well as the more disturbingly evil groups such as this current white house administration.

I don't object to people holding these beliefs or any other beliefs, provided they are not using them to harm me (such as certain flavors of christianity preventing their offspring from getting medical aid because it's "against their religion"), but I do feel that these "christain values" people are harming me, by supporting an administration that claims to be their proponent, despite overwhelming evidence against that statement, and also by supporting not only their right to live their lives the way they choose, which I am all for, but by also trying to put legislation in place that prohibits me from living my life the way I want to, even though my life choices do not affect them at all.

And really, if I was a woman living in town A and had an abortion, in what way does that even affect anyone else in Town A (other than the father of course, but heck, it's not his body either), let alone how does it affect someone in Town B? "oh my god, someone got an abortion, my fetus is now at risk?!" that is ludicrous.

On the abortion topic, perhaps I'm arguing the wrong point because they are anti-abortion because of this "soul" thing. But not everyone believes in a soul. That concept only exists in some of the religions of the world and it is not in any way testable. So - I can't argue for/against that idea. And it therefore cannot be legislated. Unless we live in a theocratic state that has an official state religion. THEN, they can officially say that part of being a citizen is believing in this mystical bs and that mystical bs says that a soul exists and furthermore that it begins to exist as soon as fertilization takes place. But - until that time (and at that time I'm outta here), they cannot make that argument in our courts.

Wednesday, October 26, 2005

More on why Harriet Miers is not a good candidate.

The Harriet Miers nomination was wrong on so many levels, about the only thing going for her in my mind is that the republicans and neocons and conservatives don't like her. (which is almost like an endorsement.)

But still, "evangelical christian" is not a qualifying requirment for being a supreme court justice. Yet, so fare, that's all we know about her right now.

Furthermore, on the topic of evangelical christian - the term evangelical when applied to the christian religious organization, means several things, none of which a judge on the supreme court should be. ( def on 'evangelical')

  1. It means believing in the utter sole authority of the christian bible, and it's inerrancy (inerrancy was the term used in, I know it doesn't look like a real word, but it must be). That doesn't sound like a sound foundation for a country that is supposed to offer a government that is religiously neutral.
  2. It means in personal conversion and salvation only thru spriritually transforming one's life in a christian belief structure (once again, how impartial can a person who is unquestioning and absolutist in their dogmatic belief be?) and it means
  3. "Marked by ardent or zealous enthusiasm for a cause", and in this case the cause is the conversion to christianity. I can't fathom living in a country where so many conservatives sit on the supreme court where they can legislate from the bench on forcing the rest of us, the non-christian american citizens, the non-religious US citizens, into living life by their religious dogma.

Here's my point - right now agnostics and athiests are descriminated against regularly, and there's not much we can do. Non-Christian but religious people in this nation are also increasingly under fire. I mean, can you imagine an outed athiest getting elected to the presidency or any public office? Can you imagine an outed athiest holding any high position or post? Unlikely. That's descrimination. Now imagine an EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN (see def above) sitting in that appointed position for life! How much worse can life for non-christians get?

Tuesday, October 18, 2005

Another GREAT post from Martian Anthropologist

Martian Anthropologist has done it again - check out "Belief: The most Dangerous Thing in the world".

Martian Anthropologist says,

Belief without evidence is dangerous.

Nothing could be more true.

This is a GREAT post. I read this blog regularly and would endorse it to anyone as a well written, and provacative blog, a very analytical and rational mind is at work here. Agree, disagree, that's all the better either way, but you'll definately be challenged to think and consider, not just simply absorb the content.

The comments are a rich tapestry of dialog on a very engrossing, and to me, important topic.

I like it, because as you may know if you know me, one of my long running sayings is that "Organized Religion is, bar none, the most dangerous threat to the continued existance of the human race."

Well, this article proposes that belief unfounded in rational examination and consideration, based not on fact and evidence is the most dangerous thing. That is very similar to my bold statement regarding organized religion. Please note my standard caveat that my statement is not directed towards spiritualism, nor faith, mystisysm, myth, or religious ceremony.

PS - when you're checking out the comments, don't overlook mine way way down towards the bottom. It's rich, you'd rue missing it. ;)

Contact your elected reps to oppose cuts to vital programs

This Thursday there's going to be votes held to potentially cut 35 billion from necessary social programs and to implement a $70 billion dollar tax cut to the rich. This is just criminal, especially with all the tragedy affecting so many of us non-rich citizens. (Katrina anyone?!)


Hundreds of thousands of Katrina survivors are homeless, jobless, without health
coverage—added to the millions already poor in America.

The right wing's
response? Cut Medicaid, food stamps, housing and other vital services still

Hard to believe—but this Thursday the House of Representatives
is expected to vote on increasing the cuts in vital programs (such as Medicaid,
food stamps, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), child welfare
services, SSI, unemployment insurance, child support, etc.) from $35 billion to
$50 billion. Forces in the Senate would also like to cut more. 1 In addition,
House right-wing members are calling for across-the-board cuts of all the other
programs—including housing, education, public health, nutrition, child care,

A coalition of groups is mobilizing a massive outcry against this
inexcusable legislation—a national call-in is scheduled until Thursday's
vote—and TrueMajority members can play a crucial role in this action. 2 Using
the guidelines below, call your congressperson toll-free today and tell him or her to oppose the planned tax cuts and the cuts in spending on essential social services

Right-wing operative Grover Norquist once infamously said he
wanted to see our government shrink until he could “drown it in a bathtub.” 3
Hurricane Katrina, though, showed us the real consequences of starving our
infrastructure. It's past time to make our country strong again with functional
emergency services, first-rate universities, healthy communities and all the
other things that come from working together in an effective government.

With $35 billion dollars planned to be cut from Medicaid and other
important programs and $70 billion in planned tax cuts for the rich, this
legislation is too important for us to remain silent. Join activists around the
country in this opportunity to tell Congress that a strong domestic
infrastructure is essential for an effective government—one that can meet the
needs of ALL of its citizens.

Thanks for all that you do,

TrueMajority Coordinator

[1] The Center on Budget and Policy
statement on the challenges facing Congress in the aftermath of

[2] The American Friends Service
is sponsoring the toll-free number for the U.S. Capitol
Switchboard. Members of the coalition include USAction and The American Federation of State,
County, and Municipal Employees

[3] Link to an article
with Norquist’s statement

Here's how to take action, (again from

Call 1-800-426-8073 to be connected toll-free to the U.S. Capitol
Switchboard. Ask to speak to one of the senators from your

When the senator’s phone is answered, say: "My name is
[your name] and I live in [your town/city]. I would like Senator [name] to
oppose the $35 billion or more in cuts to Medicaid, food stamps, and other
important programs and to oppose $70 billion in planned tax cuts. Congress
needs to adopt a fair and moral budget that benefits everyone. Thanks.”

If the lines are busy, be patient and try again. Or look up your
senators’ direct office number at

Repeat steps 1-3 to call your state’s second senator.

Repeat steps 1-3 to call your representative in the House of

Give this message: “I urge the Representative to vote NO on
Thursday’s budget resolution that would increase cuts in domestic programs from
$35 billion to $50 billion, and may make other deep cuts as well.”
To find your representative’s name and direct office phone number, visit

Thursday, October 13, 2005

Sign petition to help support women's rights to birth control

Lilies of the Field

Here's a great post from a blog pointed out by the Martian Anthropologist, titled "Lilies of the Field".
It's about working, and the way society has been stacked to keep the average person working for a few elite powerful groups or individuals, and for naught much to show.

I am very willing to do hard work, be it physical or intellectual - and not just soley for myself. If someone needs help or if there's a team effort worthy of performing, I'm eager and willing to participate. But - every Sunday night, as I gird myself mentally for another "work week" I still say to myself - "There's got to be a better way". Society is structured to keep us busy and distracted. That's got to be it, because we all work MORE now than ever before, and this is after all the "labor saving" devices that have been flooded into the market.

I have no issue with working, expending effort, I'm not "lazy"... or, er, not any "lazier" than average. BUT - it's true, there's a movement that's occurred in the last few hundred years, that breaks up our lives. We work/toil for someone else, for 40-50-60 hours per week, just to make, money which then allows us to buy the things we need. But then we have only a few waking hours per week to actually do all the rest of our work to survive - cooking, cleaning, paying bills.

My thinking is that even at the founding of this (the US) nation, many people had much more time that they didn't have to be "working", and that allowed for intellectual growth, philosophical thinking, and is what lead to a pretty profoundly unique foundation for this country. One that if we still adhered to, we'd be much better off.So - why the change? Well, one thing that this does is it makes it very difficult to stay abreast of what's going on around us. Who can discharge their duties as a citizen, to keep a close guarded watch on the elected officials who guide out lives, if we're too busy "working" for most of our waking hours every day. And - sure, there's TV, Movies, Video Games, Sport, socializing... I have heard arguments that we can curb these "leisure" activities..But studies show that the more complex an organism's mind, the more down time it needs to maintain a healthy and balanced mental process.

I'd argue we are kept so busy we are not even getting enough "leisure" activities to maintain our mental health and balance. Let alone then having time to participate in society as citizens. In fact, it's almost like brainwashing or some other kind of psyops manipulation. Keep us starving for leisure activity, keep us running around like rats in a recursive maze with no end, so that even when we're not working our job, or buying our food, or paying our bills or cooking our meals or cleaning our domiciles, we barely have enough time to grab a smidge of diversion and distraction, but we certainly have no time to bend our intellects to grander notions, notions that might lead to independence, freedom, questioning our elected officials, promoting the welfare of ourselves and our fellow citizens. We are too drained to do anything but acquiesce to whatever we are told by our media that our common will is. We have no resources to question, in any meaningful way, the truth of these statements.

Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Ask Forrester to Disclose Campaign Finance Info

Tuesday, October 11, 2005

California - Prop 73, another attack on liberty

In California's next election, there's a proposition on the ballot to require young pregnant women's paren't be notified before they get an abortion.

At first blush, perhaps this seems like a not so bad idea, but it's an insidious attack on a woman's right to choose. Once again, like the 3rd trimester abortion ban (an evil bit of legisltation if there ever was one), it's not the issue of what these nutters are writing on the prop, but it's the very specific wording within the legislation the erodes a woman's right to choose. Besides, it's only got to get in the way of girls who have accidentally gotten pregnant but are afraid to tell their parents. And where will that lead? Back alley abortions again.. Sick, primitive, inhumane, and degrading. What kind of people would try to do something like this. Sad, insecure, vindictive little people.

They are framing their legislation with wording that is granting the civil rights of a citizen to a fetus, which is not a citizen, it is just a growth inside of a citizen. But they are doing this to take away a person's ability to govern their own body. We need some guideline of when we consider a person to be a citizen or an individual human being at the very least. Because - think about it - the brain of a 1st or 2nd trimester fetus is very undeveloped. A dog, or a cat, heck, even a frog's brain is more developed, is capable of more reasoning, is more self aware, is more sentient and intelligent, that that of a 1st or 2nd trimester fetus. So - the only way they are going to be able to justify granting civil rights to a 1st or 2nd trimester fetus is if dogs, cats, pigs, chickens, cows, sheep, frogs, mice, rats, you name it are also all granted the civil rights of a citizen.

Help Protect Library Users and Bookstore Patrons from PATRIOT Act Abuses

Dear Friend,

I thought you might be interested in this alert from
TrueMajorityACTION on the PATRIOT Act. They are working with
Congressman Bernie Sanders to help protect library users and
bookstore patrons from PATRIOT Act abuses.

I just signed their petition, and you can too!

Wednesday, October 05, 2005

Today's Letter to Congress

You know those various grassroots activist organizations, like TrueMajority and Faithfulamerica? I am a member of several of them... I love the fact that you can take pre-formed letters about issues and send them to congress, but also that you can edit them too.

For example - this one is opposing the development of bunker buster nuclear weapons. But before sending it, I included some advocating for some of my more closely held priorities... Nuclear Power generation and Nuclear Propulsion. I hate seeing money wasted on weapons when it could be better spent improving the planet and our ability to travel thru space.

Here's my enhanced letter:

Oppose funding for the Bunker Buster Nuclear Weapon
I am writing to urge you to vigorously oppose any legislation allocating funding for the so-called "Bunker Buster" weapons program. We need to develop more Nuclear Electric Power Generation and Nuclear Propulsion systems (such as the ORION and NERVA Programs developed and tested) instead. As a person of conscience I cannot support any effort on behalf of my country to further escalate a growing and increasingly unstable worldwide nuclear threat. However, I STRONGLY Support Nuclear Power Plants and Nuclear propelled spacecraft.
Such a weapon is not in our best interests, nor can we claim to be leaders for peace if, in asking other countries to abandon their nuclear ambitions, we feed our own.
Also - we should resurrect the ORION program and use our existing nuclear arsenal as "fuel pellets" for the ORION class spacecraft that were designed in the 60's. NOW is the time to finally give that program the attention it deserved all along.
Former Secretary of Defense William Perry said, "I have never been more fearful of a nuclear detonation than now. . . . There is a greater than 50 per cent probability of a nuclear strike on U.S. targets within a decade."
Our nation must learn from our mistakes. The world will not allow yet another U.S. nuclear weapons program to remain unmet. For the security of the planet, for the reputation of our nation in the world, and for the sake of our own conscience, I ask that you authorize not one penny of our national treasure for this misguided nuclear project. Nuclear weapons are not the answer, Nuclear Electrical Power Generation and Nuclear Propulsion IS!

On the lighter side

A friend and co worker of mine, a republican no less, just told me the following joke.

Prez bush is being briefed on the deteriorating situation in Iraq. His generals are reading off the list of new casualties by nation. The General says, "And 3 Brazillian troops were killed last night."
bushy is agast! He's stammering and wringing his hands. He says, "Oh my god, what a terrible tragedy, what a shock. Three BRAZILLION? Oh my."
Then he furrows his brow, and looks to the side and asks his aide, "how many is a brazillion again?"

The following streaming movie was sent to me from a friend. The genius of "bushy speak".

Monday, October 03, 2005

My take on bushy's nomination of Harriet Miers

You know, I have never heard of Harriet Miers before this morning. As - I'm pretty sure - neither have you. And you know what, beyond the lack of experiance and the fact that this person was counsel to the pres during the time he staged his non-violent coup and stole the nation's highest office with a very fishy legal judgement - there's even more afoul here than that, which is pretty durn foul if you ask me.

The two met in Texas, where she was his personal lawyer, then served on his
gubernatorial campaign in 1994 and again during his presidential election of

The main thing is - at this is just my opinion of course - but, I think that this is an insult to Sandra Day O'Connor. I mean, don't you all get the feeling that he said, "Dang, I gotta replace a chick with a chick, hmm, what to do?" and at that moment, Condi Rice walked in and he said, "nah, she's already be given a promotion for incompetance, can't do that twice so close together.", then there was another knock on the door and Harriet walked in, and he said to himself, "ah, here we go, a chick lawyer, and she's been on the inside for all our immoral dealings so she's got no scrupels...." then he said, out loud to everyone, "Hey Harriet, what'cha think about being on the supreme court?"