20 Questions

From Townhall.com, a challenge: 20 questions that liberals can't answer. What they actually mean is "20 questions liberals can answer but I'm going to plug my ears and not listen, or pick at little things and use that as a red herring to avoid the discussion," thus rendering any "debate" with these people little more productive than masturbation (but nowhere near as enjoyable). Since I have a bit of a masochistic streak and I enjoy beating on the strawmen army they pony up, I figured I would take a little swing at this garbage and see if maybe I can't clear the stink.

So, let's take a look at these 20 questions I'm not supposed to be able to answer.

A Mask of Civility

I've run into this a number of times over the last few days, and it's worth noting:

Simply because you believe something does not mean it isn't harmful.

A very good example of this is the argument over marriage equality. While the segment of the population opposed to it is clearly loosing the fight, there are still those Christians (and Muslims, and Jews, and whatever) out there who think that, as long as you're not being Fred Phelps, you're okay. Or that you can still be intolerant but at the same time be a loving human being.

No. No.

Intolerant =/= Tolerance. You cannot be a loving human begin if you're a jackass who condemns people for expressing love towards individuals of the same sex.

"But... it's intolerant not to be tolerant of my intolerance!"

Alternatively:

"Oh yeah, you're tolerant, but not towards Christians who stand up for what they believe in. God doesn't hate you, he just [insert theological theistic teleological rhetorical garbage here]."

You're just intolerant of my intolerance, so you're not tolerant at all. That's how it always goes, isn't it? I'm not as bad as them, clearly, because I believe that God loves you but doesn't support your "lifestyle" choice - but I'm not as bad as Fred Phelps. I'm better than that.

Let me spell this out. I'd rather deal with Fred Phelps than you. Why?

For the same reason I'd rather deal with an honest, uncivil brute than deal with a dishonest, civility-obsessed caitiff. You have a gilded tongue, my f(r)iend, and it forks rather clearly down the middle. You are not better because you're not vocally an asshole. You still vote for vocal assholes, you still support polices drafted by vocal assholes, and you still believe shit told to you by vocal assholes. Everything you do is designed by vocal assholes; every waking moment of your life is controlled by these people. You do what they tell you to, you believe what they say, and you claim that you're better than them.

You're not better. You're subservient to them. You're worse. The vocal assholes made up their minds, and they're not cowards about what they believe. You are. You hide behind civility, you whine when people call you out for what you are. You're both just as wrong, but because you're a coward about what you believe, you're doing more harm than the vocal asshole who dictates your every waking thought. If these vocal assholes are the ubermensch, you are the last man.

If you believe something, stand up and accept it. Make it yours, actually believe it. Own it. Don't sit there and ho-hum about it. Your belief is the same thing as Fred Phelp's belief. Own it, goddamn it. Be a responsible adult and own it.

And ultimately, it's the same thing. How are you any different?

Because you hide it behind the mask of "civility." That doesn't make you better. That makes you an intellectual coward.

I'm not tolerant of you. I will never be tolerant of you. Not only because I'm intolerant of things that hurt marginalized people or hold populations of people down, but because I'm also intolerant of cowards. And when you step up and own your hateful belief, we'll be able to deal on even terms.

Original Genetic Sin

Apparently, sin is genetic and nobody told me (via Slacktivist):

                This scientific picture of a group of early humans raises many questions, including particularly difficult ones related to the Fall. Plantinga and pastor Daniel Harrell both suggest a possible solution: perhaps Adam and Eve were two individuals within the group of early humans. This would preserve Adam as a real historical figure and the Fall as a real historical event. However, the spread of sin to the rest of the group is problematic, since it would take many generations to spread genetically through a population of thousands.

Personally, I find this to be a startling revelation. Just think for a minute about what the existence of an original sin gene (or, more likely, a sequence of genes, since rarely does a gene do anything by itself) means. Sin, then, becomes a little more than a genetic illness; it is something that can be treated. It is something that can be screened at birth, and removed from the human genome. The human species is capable of removing sin, then, and transitioning to a new, sin-free existence in much the same way that it would remove all other illnesses.

Perhaps there is just the tiniest amount of truth in this, surprisingly enough, but it's coming close to a workable answer (that requires a lot of polishing) while going about it in the absolutely wrong manner; it's like solving 2+2 with 5, and going about it as such: 2+1 - 2 - 1 = 3 * 1 = 3 +2 = 5. You're pulling figures out of your posterior, making it up as you go, and eventually coming to a conclusion that's removed from the realm of being correct. But if we consider original sin to include death, and the sequence that leads up to death (which I've heard some people say is the case), then this statement is, surprisingly enough, at least a quarter true. Our genetics contain the keys to our lifespans; these things called telomeres at the end of your genes, which short every time the gene divides with the cell it's in, determine how long your cells last and, by extension, how long you last. So if you include death into the "original sin" label, then that part of original sin is definitely genetic.

Now, here's a good example of the incomplete nature of Evangelical Apologetic thinking: if sin has a material cause, then is it possible to manipulate it? If not, why? Think about what we could do:

• We could screen for sin at conception just like we do other genetic disorders and deformities and remove it from the genetic pool. 
• We could manipulate the sin gene, setting it so that it's switched "off". If the gene sequence defining sin is switched "off", what happens?
• Since it interacts with every generation, ever, it's neither a dominate nor a recessive gene, but it'd have to be something entirely different, like the gene sequences that determine your skin (not skin color, the fact that you have skin), or the fact that you have eyes, four limbs, or something of that manner. Maybe we could experiment with the nature of this "sin gene" and develop other genes that are just like it, which can help control behavior on the same level that we have complex gene patterns that control the fact that we grown skin and the organs we do grow.
  Just like there are fetuses who are born without heads or fetuses who are born without limbs or legs, then, it follows that there are also fetuses out there who are born without sin, since the sin gene failed to trigger. Of maybe the sin gene never fails to trigger. That would lead to phenomenal insights into how genes trigger and how they do, and perhaps allow us to piece together why the sin gene never fails to trigger and then export that pattern to other genes, as well.
• If the sin gene is responsible for self awareness, then we could take it and, through vertical gene transfer, put it into other animals, giving them self-awareness too. What happens if this happens on accident, as vertical gene transfer is apt to do in nature? Can bacteria be fallen - will that bacteria become intelligent?
• I can recreate computerized versions of genes, or we will be able to. If we recreate a computerized version of the sin gene sequence, will the computer doing so become fallen, too?
• Before the decade is out, we will have genetic treatments to postpone death, and anti-aging treatments. Immortality treatments may come before the end of the century, and eventually, true biological immortality will follow. We can defeat death, and if you're going to narrowly define the "original sin" present in the genome as the existence of telomeres that determine when we die, then we'll end up defeating "original sin" in the long run, too. 

This is another example of lazy Evangelical-Creationist apologetics. None of these implications were thought through; they're desperately looking for the ever smaller holes to cram their God into. We have the entire gene sequence of not just humans but also Neanderthals, chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans, and bonobos mapped out, along with other plants, fungi, eukaryotic genomes and a mass of animals that include cats, dogs, dolphins and elephants. We did not find a "sin" gene sequence, because it does not exist. It's fantastic god magic that deserves derision for being as foolish and arrogant as it is. It's also remarkably lazy, since I was able to find all of this information by just typing in "animal genome project" into Google and pressing "go."

Molecular genetics is a surefire way to destroy creationism. There's no way it can survive what discoveries that molecular genetics finds; but then, we didn't need molecular genetics to destroy creationism. A little creative but thorough thinking and Google is more than enough to do that.

Timecube, Revelation Style

I'm not sure what the correlation between political and ideological extremism and crappy web design is, but between this, Timecube, CAP, and a number of extremist websites, I'm pretty sure that we have proof epistemic closure results in pathetic withering of those facilities.

In a sense, what we're here today to do is to swing at the low hanging fruit. I found this link through the Slacktivist, since there's no way I'd go looking for this stuff on my own (lies. That's pure bunk, but don't tell anyone. I just didn't go looking for this one). We I have for you today is a End Times Tribulation Chart (You have to scroll down to find it, but you'll see it. It looks like a worksheet table in a Microsoft office document, because I'm pretty sure that's where it was originally designed). This document comes us courtesy of the blackest pits of Hell the authoritative Tribulation Institute (no, the rest of the site isn't any prettier). This outline is a full map of the Tribulation, and because I love the intellectual aspect of picking apart ideas, I'm going to high light all of the various problems I can find with this one.

"But... you put too much thought into what Christian Fundamentalists believe."

"Well, someone has to."

No, Liberatarianism Does not Follow Atheism (part 1)

Readers of this blog know two things about me: one, I'm an atheist, but I don't like the term and I prefer humanist for the same reason Asimov did. Second, I have an extremely... unsympathetic... view of Libertarianism. 

So whenever I see something connecting the two like they're natural progressions of one another, I get rather upset. See, Libertarianism is, at its heart, a collection of incredibly varied political philosophies, only a handful of which follow any kind of logical progression and are remotely connected with the real world. So before I go into this, let me outline the various types of "lolbertarian" you'll meet (if only because "libertard" is far too harsh and hateful, for the same reason "retard" is. Some of these are also likely going to be types of libertarianism that you do not recognize from any debates online; the "internet libertarian classic" is a deontological libertarian who holds propertarian and minarchian views. Below the cut is what exactly that means).

Libertarianism, in most instances, is the castle built in the clouds; the pie in the sky. It gives us the potential for a society where people don't have to do what they don't want to, where individuals shouldn't be forced to do anything by anyone, and where creative spirit and freedom flourish, like the works of J. S. Steinmen, M.D. It's a great idea. It works great in theory, just like the rotary engine and communism. And it works in real life just like the rotary engine and communism did, too.

Every child dreams of not having to go to bed and of staying up late and eating whatever they want to and doing whatever they want to regardless of what their parents say or what society expects of them. When you age that by about 20 or 30 years, you get most libertarians.

Thoughts on Spree Shootings

A while ago, I wrote an essay about the age of the post-hero. This ties closely in with what I plan to ramble about today.

There's been a lot of finger pointing about the nature of the shooting in Newtown. And just like always, there's a rush to blame everything but the actual sources of the problem themselves: Easy access to guns and the culture that we have.

I'll See You In 2013

634 BCE: The Romans feared that Rome would be destroyed 120 years after the city had been founded. It was founded on the myth that twelve eagles had shown Romulus a mythical number, that was supposedly the lifetime of Rome. Each eagle was believed to represent 10 years. Rome was sacked once in 394 BCE, and it wasn't sacked again until 410 CE, when the Visigoths hit the city. Depending upon how you want to define the Roman Empire, the empire either didn't fall until Constantinople (1463), when the Holy Roman Empire collapsed and become Modern Germany (1806), when the Ottomans fell (1911) or when the Bolsheviks overthrew the Russian Empire and the Tsars (1917). Even going with the sacking of Roman, each of those eagles could not have been 10 years - that'd put them better than 600 years off. And with the other dates, they don't even remotely come close.

389 BCE: Rome again, for the same reasons above. Again, wrong for the same exact reasons.

66: the world ended sometime between 66 to 70 CE, according to The Essenes, a sect of Jewish Aesthetics. Sadly, their world met a very literal end when they went to war against the Romans.

365: The world ended this year, according to Hilliary of Poitiers.

375-400: The Antichrist has already been born and the world would end before 400 CE, according to Martin of Tours.

500: Jesus returned, according to Hippolytus of Rome, Sextus Julius Africanus, and Ireneus.

796, Apr 3: Jesus came back and crowned a crowd of people, according to Spanish monk Beatus of Liebana.

799 - 806: The world ended sometime in during this period, according to Gregory of Tours.

800: In what might be the first recorded instance of a Harold Camping in action, the world ended this year, according to the revised predictions of Sextus Julius Africanus (oops. Forgot to carry that zero, huh?)

848: The world ended this year, according to Thiota.

992 - 995: The Antichrist came back, and end times, within three years of 992, when Good Friday coincided with the Annunciation, according to various Christian Groups.

1000, Jan 1: The world ended on this day, as predicted by Pope Sylvester II, and various Christian groups. Sylvester is reported as being unaware of all the previous instances that the world ended, and feigned ignorance at being told that the world had ended at least six times before he was proven correct.

1033: The world ended on the 1,000th anniversary of the First Coming of Jesus, according to various Christian groups, ending with his Third Coming since 500.

1184: The Antichrist arose to take over the world, according to various Christians.

1186: The world ended during a planetary alignment, as predicted by John of Toledo. Word has it that he read it in an Ancient Mayan Codex.

1260: The Millennium began, sometime between 1200 and this date, according to Italian mystic, Joachim of Fiore.

1284: 666 years after the Rise of Islam, the world came to an end, according to Pope Innocent III. When accused of Islamophobia, Pope Innocent III proclaimed himself to be innocent of any charges.

1290: The world ended in 1290, after the followers of Joachim of Fiore rescheduled the ending. Reports at the time indicate that the stadium was booked and they had to find another venue for a cheaper price.

1335: The world ended in 1335, after the followers of Joachim of Fiore again rescheduled the ending following the last time the world ended, in 1290.

1346-51: The world legitimately came to an end for a great many people as the Black Death swept through Europe, leaving nothing but death in its wake in one of the worst pandemics in human history. A pandemic which had not been predicted at all up to that point.

1370: The Antichrist arose in 1366 and the Millennium began in 1370, according to Jean de Roquetaillade. Those attending the show were disappointed to find that 186 years of age had not at all been kind to the Antichrist's mind, and fans commented that his 1184 performance was a great deal better.

1378: The Antichrist appeared in this year, according to Joachite Arnaldus de Villa Nova. The Antichrist returned with much complaining, since he was told by his divine agent that the 1370 performance would be his last one before retirement.

1504: The Tribulation was well under way before this, but this was the Millennium, according to Sandro Botticelli.

1524, Feb 1: The world ended with a great flood that started in London, according to numerous Astrologers.

1524, Feb 20: Just 19 days after a great flood starting in London ended the world, a planetary alignment marked the end of the world and ushered in the Millennium according to Johannes Stöffler.

1525: The Millennium began, according to Anabaptist tradition.

1528: The world ended this year, based on predictions of Johannes Stöffler, who was still following up on his success from the previous prediction.

1528, May 27: The world ended, according to Hans Hut.

1533: Christ appeared before a crowd in Strausbourg, and 144,000 people were saved while fire consumed the rest of the world, bringing it to an end as predicted by Melichor Hoffman.

1533, Oct 19: Meanwhile, Judgement Day began at 8:00am on this day, as calculated by mathematician Michael Stifel.

1534, Apr 5: The apocalypse took place on this day, and only the city of Munster was spared from the disaster, according to Jan Matthys.

1555: The world came to an end after 7,000 years of human history had passed, as was recorded by Pierre d'Ally, a French Theologian. He wrote this down in 1400, and said that 6,845 years of human history had passed, but apparently did not consult with Ken Ham first, since that would make humanity not quite 7,456 years old, but not the 10,000 that AGI insists it is (Of course, because they believe in exact science, they'll tell you it's 6,000 - 10,000 years old and hope you don't notice the 4,000 year gap. And if you round that number to the nearest thousandths, you get 6,000 years, so they're right on the money).

1586: the Reign of the Devil, which began in 325 at the Council of Nicea, finally came to an end this year after 1260 years, marking the end of the world. This was as recorded by Spanish Christian reformer Michael Servetus.

1588: The world ended this year, vindicating the prediction of Regiomontanus.

1600: The world ended before this date, which was the upper date set by Reform Theologian Martian Luther. He would later go on to create the religious movement that would give the world Fred Phelps, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and American Christianity, making the world wish he was right.

1624, Feb 1: A great deluge hit the Earth during this time, ending the world, as predicted by Astrologers. Reports indicate that the astrologers were feeling a little left out, especially since people seemed to forget about how they had successfully predicted the end of the world in 1524 and they felt the Theologians were being glory hogs.

1648: The Jewish Messiah, concerned with how many times the world had ended, arrived in this year as predicted by Sabbatai Zevi, of Smyrna. He accurately predicted the date of the arrival and was there to meet the Jewish Messiah using the kabbalah.

1654: A nova that occurred in 1597 was used by physician Helisaeus Roselin to predict the world during this year.

1656: The world ended this year, as predicted by various Christians, who used Bible math to figure out that it had been 1656 years between Creation and the Flood.

1657: The final battle of Armageddon occurred during this year, leading to massive causalities. This was predicted ahead of time by the Fifth Monarchists. The Antichrist, who hadn't seen a performance since his 1378 appearance, was dusted off and propped on a dead horse and flogged to death by members of the oppositional forces for his poor 1370 and 78 performances, which were so bad audiences still hadn't forgotten them.

1658: After 7,000 years (the world was created in 5,343 BCE, without a 0 date), the world came to an end as predicted by the renowned captain and Native American Right's activist, Christopher Columbus.

1660: The Antichrist, who had first appeared in 456, and brought about the end of the world in 1660. Martin of Tours, despite setting the date at 400 and off by 56 years, was reported as feeling "vindicated" and saying "this is a hard business. It's difficult to get these numbers right, so you have to have a little give and take, y'know?"

1666: The world ended twice this year: once with the Jewish Messiah made a second appearance, as predicted by Sabbatai Zevi, and once when numerous Christians feared that the number 1666 would mark the appearance of the Antichrist, despite being 1,000 more. Interestingly, here in the real world, London burned to the ground in the Great Fire of 1666.

1673: The Millennium began this year, as predicted by William Aspenwall, a Fifth Monarchist.

1688: The end of the world came in this year, as predicted by mathematician John Napier, who used the Book of Revelations to back up his Bible Math.

1689: The world ended this year, according to Pierre Jureiu.

1694: In an unprecedented event, the world ended came to an end three times this year: The Millennium began twice this year, according to John Mason and Johann Heinrich Alsted, and Jesus also made a surprise reappearance, unforeseen by all except for Johann Jacob Zimmerman.

1697: The world ended this year, according to noted New World Puritan Minister, Cotton Mather. It would also end two more times after this, also according Reverend Mather, since the end of the world supposedly tastes like Lay's brand chips: you can't have just one.

1700: The world ended twice this year: It ended once more, according to John Napier, who due to finances was forced to reschedule his last ending of the world. It also ended according to Henry Archer, a Fifth Monarchist, with what was likely the Tenth Coming of Jesus since 1600.

1700-1734: At some point during this window, the world ended again according to Cardinal Nicolaus of Cusa. He supposed made the claim that he was unaware of all the other predictions, but was happy to be vindicated. He is also said to have made the claim that "Napier and Archer are hucksters; I predicted it first in 1700, those bastards just got lucky. Me? I needed a large enough window. You never know in this business; the more room you give yourself, the better off you are."

1705-1708: The end of the world occurred in either 1705, 1706, or 1708, as accurately predicted by the Camisard prophets.

1716: The second end of the world, as recorded by Cotton Mather.

1719, Apr. 5: A comet reportedly slammed into the earth, destroying it, according to Jacob Bernoulli. Due to being within several meters of the impact zone, of an end of the world even that took place 293 years ago, Bernoulli could be reached for comment.

1736: The third and final end of the world, marking an end to Cotton Mather's epic End of the World Trilogy, which he started in 1697. Mather was supposedly weeping tears of joy to have finally finished his life's work.

1736, Oct. 16: Amateur astronomy William Whiston accurately predicts another comet collision, ending the world not even 20 years after the first comet impact ended the world, as reported by Bernoulli.

1757: The last judgment occurred in the "spirit world" this year, according to Emanuel Swedenbourg. When asked for their thoughts on this last judgment on the spirit world, numerous native and animist leaders reported they "had no idea what the hell [Swedenbourg] was talking about".

1776: The world ends when Antichrist arises in the new world and overthrows English rule, forcing England to lose her colonies in the ... wait. Oops. 

1789: The Antichrist appeared, according to 14th century Cardinal Pierre d'Ally, who is on record as having successfully predicted the end of the world 200 years previous.

1792-1794: An accurate prediction of the end of the world placed it between these two years, as predicted by the Shakers cult.

1793 - 1795: Richard Brothers accurately predicts the end of the world and the Millennium during this time. Back in the real world, Brothers was eventually committed to an asylum.

1795, Nov. 19: The world ended on this date, as predicted by Nathanial Hallhed, who was campaigning for the release of prophet Richard Brothers.

1805: Christopher Love accurately predicted the end of the world, in a massive Earthquake, followed by the everlasting rule of God. When contacted for comment, God confirmed the date, with the addendum: "I know this is getting old, but it'd just be mean to leave My followers hanging without proving their predictions right."

1806: A Hen laid an egg in Leeds in which the phrase "Christ is Coming" was written. When asked for confirmation, Jesus confirmed the messages were indeed real, and result of a heavenly campaign manager who had misallocated campaign funds, forcing them to resort to cheaper campaigning methods to announce Jesus' Second Coming than had been used previously.

1814, Dec. 25: Pregnant with the Christ-child, 64-year-old self-described prophet Joanna Southcott, predicted that her child would be born in Christmas. In the real world, Southcott died on the day of her prediction, but an autopsy revealed that she (surprisingly) was not pregnant.

1836: John Wesley accurately foresaw the founding of the Millennium during this time.

1843: Harriette Livermore announced the end of the world this year, accurately predicting it both this time and the second time she made the announcement.

1843: The world ended twice this year. Once on April 28, and the other on December 31. Jesus returned both times, but due to internet lag and appalling processing power on their computers, the Millerites who predicted the Second Coming would miss it because they d/c'd. They would, however, be there for the Third Coming.

1844: The world ended twice this year. Acting as inspiration for an aspiring young Harold Camping, William Miller predicted the world would end on March 21 and then, after being vindicated, went on to spite the world by summoning Jesus again on October 22.

1874: Harriette Livermore's second accurate prediction. Jesus is reported as having been very tired and very worn out, having made so many sudden and successive appearances without a break. The Heavenly Union said they would enter talks with the prophets, warning them attempting to Summon Jesus too many times for fear of violating contractual terms.

1853 - 1856: The Crimean War suddenly boils over into the rest of the world, becoming the battle of Armageddon as believed by many Christians at the time.

1862: The world ended 6,000 years after Creation, in 1862, as accurately predicted by Scottish Clergyman John Cumming.

1863: The Millennium began on this date, as predicted by the Christian Israeli Church. When contacted for questioning, John Wroe was said to be "elated" and "happy that God followed through with his promise yet again".

1873: The second advent occurred, and the world ended yet again, as according to the author of The Present Truth, or Meat in Due Season, Jonas Windell.

1874: Both the Bible Studies Movement and the Seventh Day Adventists accurately predicted the end of the world during this time, shortly on the heels of Jonas Windell's accurate prediction.

1878: Apparently not content to be correct once, the Bible Studies Movement issued yet another correct prediction in 1878.


1881: Both Mother Shipton and the Bible Studies Movement scored an accurate prediction for the end of the world in this year, although because Mother Shipton had been alive in the 1400s, it was difficult to reach her for comment. Her agent did not return our phone calls.

1890: The Ghost Dance lead to the beginning of the Millennium in 1890, as predicted by Wovoka. Exactly why a dance would lead to the second coming of Jesus has since puzzled a great many baptists, who believe dancing sinful.

1892-1911: By reading the careful alignments of the great Pyramids of Giza, the pyramidologist Charles Smyth accurately predicted the end of the world during this window.

1901: The Catholic Apostolic Church proclaimed that Jesus would return following the death of their last member, who died in 1901. Jesus was spotted in the streets of New York, and when questioned, claimed that he was there "just to pick up some Yiddish food."

1908: The Bible Studies Movement issued yet another accurate prediction this year.

1914: Another accurate Bible Studies Movement prediction, which, surprisingly enough, lead to the end of the world sometime between the First Battle of the Marne and the First Battle of Ypres. Soldiers fighting on the Front of World War I were said to be surprised and thought it was Jesus, but it as hard to tell him indiscriminately killing the unsaved from the shells and mustard gas indiscriminately killing everyone.

1915: The Millennium began again for what is likely the 1000th time since 0 CE, making this a recursive, post-modern moment in modern history.

1916: According to a successful prediction by the Bible Studies Movement, World War I did not end with the Treaty of Versillies. Rather, it ended with the Rapture of the Saints, but since so many people had died from the war, it was hard to tell the Raptured from those who had merely been killed.

1918: Another successful ending prediction brought to the world by the Bible Studies Movement.

1920: In 1920, all Earthly governments perished by the sword and anarchy, while God came back down and destroyed entire Churches wholesale. When asked why, God mentioned that he was tired of all the successful predictions of the Bible Studies Movement and was working to destroy the churches so Jesus could get some time off, following the falling through of the Union/Church negotiations.

1925: Joseph F. Rutherford, a Bible Studies Student, predicted the end of the world with the return of people to Israel, who had achieved perfect health through all of their years wandering the world, using Alternative Medicine from the Mystical Far East that would later find its way to the United States, once the world had stopped ending. On September 13 of the same year, Margarette Rowen said that the Angel Gabriel had accurately predicted, and gave to her, that the world would end on Midnight.

1935: Wilbur Voliva, an Evangelist, said the world would go "puff" in September of the year. He accurately predicted the Second Coming of Puff the Magic Dragon, resulting in great confusion.

1936: The Rapture happened and the world ended, according to Herbert Armstrong.

1941: The Jehovah's Witnesses accurately predicted the end times on this date.

1943: Showing off, the Herbert Armstrong predicted the end of the world again, for a second successful time.

1947: Beginning in this year, the world collapsed into post-apocalyptic anarchy, resulting in Lord Humongous taking over the wandering desert tribes and their vehicles, ruling a distant place known only as "the Thunderdome", in accordance with the writings of John Newbrough.

1954, Dec. 21: The planets align precisely with one another and a great rift in the center of the galaxy, producing a cataclysmic effect predicted by the end of the Ancient Mayan Cale... wait. Wrong year. Dorthy Martin accurately predicted the death of the world in a giant flood.

1959, Apr. 22: Florence Houteff began her campaign to warn people of the Rod, which would cause the end of the world... that's not right. She began her campaign to worn people of the end of the world, which was imminent and occurred later that year, and the campaign was world wide and made references to a Biblical rod.

1962, Feb 4. Jeanne Dixon, a renowned psychic and well established prophetess, predicted a planetary alignment that brought about the end of the world, making it around the 5th or 6th planetary alignment to successful eradicate the world.

1967: Humor is set aside for a minute. 1967 was the year that Jim Jones convinced a large number of people that a nuclear apocalypse was imminent. They joined his cult, and he moved them into South America, at Jonestown. The result of this was 909 temple members who died in 1978, including 200 children, killed by cyanide poisoning. Darkly enough, the particular song that started playing at this entry is this one, which wasn't intended but certainly fits.

1967, Aug 20: George van Tassel received an accurate message from the alien Ashtar, who predicts the "third woe of the Apocalypse", which would resulted in the Southern United States being destroyed in a nuclear assault by the Soviets.

1969: Again, humor is set aside. Charles Manson predicted a race war in 1969, and ordered the Tate-LeBlanc Murders in an attempt to bring it about.

1969, Aug. 9: George William accurately predicts the end of the world on the verge of the 1970s, thus saving the world from the horrors of disco and bell-bottoms.

1970: Hal Lindsy publishes the text The Late, Great Planet Earth, which successfully predicts the end of the world. As of this writing, this otherwise successful document is 42-years-old.

1972: Herbert W Armstrong, displaying that age hasn't taken him down at all and he's still pretty spry for an old guy, once again accurately predicts the end of the world, adding to his already extensive collection of accurate predictions.

1972, Jan 11-12: The Comet Kohoutek heralds a great apocalypse, as predicted by David Berg.

1975: The Jehovah's Witnesses successful predict the end of the world and the second coming of Jesus during this time.. Not to be outdone, Herbert W. Armstrong rises to the occasion one more and final time, predicting the end of the world to spite the Jehovah's Witnesses.

1977: John Wroe successfully predicts the end of the world, while William Branham accurately predicts the end of the world as occurring no later than the end of the year.

1980: Leland Johnson, having come off a successful prediction of a nuclear Armageddon in early that year, predicted that God's Kingdom would be established again before the year was over with, shortly after heaven's engineers had dismantled it from the previous Millennial predictions.

1980s: Hal Lindsey, a prophet renowned for the accuracy of his predictions, publishes 1980: Countdown to Nuclear Armageddon, which successful predicts the coming nuclear apocalypse and the reestablishment of the Millennial.

1981: Chuck Smith predicted that the generation of 1948 would be the last generation. He was correct; the world ended and there were no further generations following the prediction.

1982 Mar 10: John Gribbin and Stephan Plagemann successfully predicted the planetary alignment that would destroy the world that year, undermining all of God's previous attempts to establish a Millennial kingdom as predicted in 1980 and frustrating the saved, who didn't expect such a sudden end to their paradise.

1982, Oct/Nov. Pat Robertson makes his first, of many, correct predictions regarding the end of the world and the second coming of Jesus.

1984, Oct 2: Jehovah's Witnesses yet again successfully predicted the end of the world. Pat Robertson is on record as having accused them of aping off of his already pin-point accurate prediction.

1985: Lester Samerall joins the rank of successful prophets to predict the end of the world. This is also the year that I was born.

1987-88: An accurate prediction on the end of the world issued by Noah Hutchings, president of the Southwest Radio Church. He, with pinpoint accuracy, predicted the world as ending "sometime in 1987 or 1988."

1987, Apr 29: Leland Johnson is successful in yet another prediction on the end of the world.

1988: Hal Lindsey successfully predicted the Rapture yet again, this time in the year of 1988. He then went on to sell millions more copies of his book, The Late, Great, Planet Earth.

1988 Sept/Oct: Edgar Whisenant successfully predicted the date of the apocalypse, with laser-like accuracy, as occurring sometime between the months of September and October.

1989, Sept. 30: On a roll from his last prediction, Whisenant once again called the end of the world on this date in 1989.

1991: Esteemed Louis Farrakhan, leader of the tolerant and open Nation of Islam, accurately called the Iraq War the "War of Armageddon."

1992, Sept 28: A successful attempt to predict the apocalypse occurred on this day, in 1992, as predicted by Born-Again Christian Rollen Stewart.

1993: David Berg's prediction of the Tribulation, which began in 1988, successfully reached completion by 1993, marking the return of the Millennium.

1994, May 2: Neal Chase called the end of the world 40 days after a nuclear attack on New York, resulting in a bombing that leveled the city and won him drinks on the house at the local bar for the remainder of the tribulation.

1994, Sept/Oct: Legendary Prophet Harold Camping, learning from the previous predictions of those before successfully predicted the end of the world exactly during this time, as "sometime between September and October", validating that God hates the months of April, September, and October.

1995, Mar 15: Prophet Harold Camping scores yet another successful prediction of the Rapture.

1996, Dec 17: Sheldon Nidle, a Californian psychic, successfully predicted the end of the world when 16 million people were hoisted up into a space ship populated with angels.

1997, Mar 26: Marshall Applewhite, leader of the Heaven's Gate cult, lead his cult out during the appearance of the Comet Hale-Bop.

1997, Oct. 23: James Ussher, a 17th century Irish Bishop best known for his accurate measure of the Earth's age (at ~6,000 years old), accurate predicted the end of the world on this date, exactly 6,000 years since Creation.

1999: The Seventh Day Adventists once again accurately predict the end of the world, while Charles Berlitz, a linguist best known for his guide books on specific languages, accurately predicted the end of the world, but was a little hazy on how it would be ending.

1999, Jul: Bucking the trend, as daring young prophets are known to do, Nostradamus predicted a "terror king" who came from the sky, leading to the end of the world that many feared that it would.

'Before' 2000: Hal Lindsy once again managed to successfully predict the end of the world following his 1980s predictions, as did Gordon Lindsy, Timothy Dwight IV, the Jehovah's Witnesses, and conspiracy nut, Texe Marrs.

2000: Peter Olivi, a 13th century Theology wishing to give himself a lot of wiggle room, predicted the rise of the Antichrist in 1300 or 1340, and the end of the Antichrist's reign in 2000. Helena Blatvasky also correctly foresaw the world ending in 2000, although Theosophy was an entirely different set of reasons than the Antichrist, who apparently had stepped down following his tragic 1300s performance. Isaac Newton also accurately predicted the arrival Jesus and the Millennial in 2002, while self-proclaimed Christian Psychic Ruth Montegomery successfully predicted the change in the Earth's axial tilt that lead to the appearance of the Antichrist. Ed Dobson, Reverend Moon, and Lester Sumerall also accurately predicted the end at this time, while Edgar Cayce, a renowned prophet, predicted the second coming, along with 18th century Johnathan Edwards, who predicted Jesus' Millennial beginning this year. Jerry Jenkins and Tim LeHaye predicted a Y2K bug causing an economic collapse that would lead to the end of the world, while Jerry Falwell said that God would pour his judgment on the Earth. Not all of these predictions came true; understandably, the Hosts of Heaven didn't have enough manpower to make them all occur, but like Santa, according to the Archangel Michael, "We couldn't do it all, but we gave it that old college try anyway."

2001: Tynetta Muhammad accurately predicted the end of the world. She is a columnist for the Nation of Islam.

2003, May: Earth collides with Nibiru, according to the prophetess Nancy Lieder, who was receiving messages from the aliens at Zeti Reticuli warning her of the event.

2006, Sept 21: The House of Yahweh, related to IHOP But without the pancakes, released a newsletter that predicted the end of the world in nuclear Armageddon.

2007, Apr 29: Legendary Prophet Pat Robertson once again predicts the end of the world, with such success that it's unnerving.

2008: The world ends with the LHC goes online, producing strangelets that turn the planet Earth into a mass of strange matter.

2010: The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn successfully predicted the end of the world during this year, using their magic to likely foresee the imminent doom.

2011, May 21: Legendary Prophet Harold Camping makes another successful prediction on the end of the world. However, God called in sick that day, telling Harold Camping that, while successful, he would need to reschedule the apocalypse. However, God did carry out a "Spiritual Judgment," according to Camping. When asked for their thoughts on this last judgment on the spirit world, numerous native and animist leaders reported they "had no idea what the hell [Swedenbourg] [Camping] was talking about".

2011, Aug-Oct: Despite the best efforts of scientists to lie to the people about their intentions, the Comet Elenin both collided with and passed close enough by the Earth to disturb the crust, resulting in a new apocalypse.

2011, Sept 29: Roland Weinland predicted, in 2008, what would eventually come to pass: the second coming of Jesus, and the explosions that blew up American port cities, resulting in the blowing of the second horn of Revelations. This was his first successful prediction; he would later schedule the same prediction again in May of 2012, just to show off.

2011, Oct 21: Harold Camping's original 2011 prediction completed with the second coming, proving Camping right, as he had been ever since 1994, when he started.

2012, May 27: Weinland's second replay of his 2011 prediction comes to pass, and once again, the port cities are annihilated in a burst of nuclear flames.

2012, Dec. 21: The Mayan long count calender, which is shaped like a circle, rolls over to its new era. Meanwhile, Earth will be destroyed in a supernova, by a collision with Nibiru, an alien invasion, geomagnetic reversal, and finally, the sheer pain of being overwhelmed with bad television predicting events that will never happen, and never have happened.


So stop worrying about the end of the world. It hasn't happened yet, and if it does happen on December 21, it wont be because it was predicted ahead of time: it'll be because of some fluke coincidence that likely couldn't be predicted anyway. I'll probably be around (I have the month of December off) but I'm announcing now that I will be here to see you folks in 2013. I hope you'll still be here, too.

- source

Want An Idea of Why Our Science Scores Are Crap?

Paul Broun is a Representative from Georgia. Now, it goes without saying that he's got an R in front of his name; this is Georgia we're talking about here. If I saw traces of the 20th century from that State I'd be shocked. He's a Congresscritter, so my expectations of his knowledge weren't very high, and being a republican, I'm pretty sure someone stole that low bar and buried it somewhere in the Dead Sea.

But here's something else interesting about Paul Broun.

You see, this man was appointed on congress to set on the House Science Committee. So really, I'd sort of expect something better than this:

"God's word is true. I've come to understand that. All that stuff I was taught about evolution and embryology and the big bang theory, all that is lies straight from the pit of Hell," said Broun, who is an MD. "It's lies to try to keep me and all the folks who were taught that from understanding that they need a savior."

"You see, there are a lot of scientific data that I've found out as a scientist that actually show that this is really a young Earth. I don't believe that the earth's but about 9,000 years old. I believe it was created in six days as we know them. That's what the Bible says."

You've seen a lot of scientific data. Show it to me, you fucking lair.

Don't ask me why I'd expect something better than that from a Republican elected official from Georgia, but being on the House Science Committee... I dunno. No, really, I don't know why he's even there. Him sitting on that committee is fucking stupid even by congressional standards.

Once Again, It's This Stuff Again

So, the clowns in Georgia (yep. To quote Adam Savage: There's your problem) are setting up for a fight with the ACLU and the rest of the civilized world. They've set up the Ten Commandments inside of a court house (Why do they do that? Why; of all the places to put them, why blaspheme them by sticking them up in front of one of the most dysfunctional justice systems on the planet?), and to my knowledge, even passed a bill making it "perfectly legal" to do so.

The common argument I routinely here is that they're the foundation for American Law and the foundation for Western Law. Western Law I can't speak too, but I know they sure as hell are not the foundation for American Law; explicitly, the Constitution.

How so? A lot of atheists say that, but very few of them actually stop to explain the number of ways that the Ten Commandments violate the Constitution, expecting people to either know or go and look it up themselves. Well, I have some free time tonight (and an earache; the sinus infection wasn't bad enough, you know. I really hate living in this state, with it's unpredictable weather), so I'm going to lay out exactly how and why the Constitution, if it was inspired by the Bible and the Ten Commandments, as is so commonly claimed, it was as an example of what not to do in a system of law.

The very first thing you have to do when talking about this is decide which of the various versions you want to use. Exodus and Deuteronomy both give two versions with their major and minor differences, and each Christian sect has their own variation on the theme. There are some things that run in common, however, but they're not as many as you would think. When you think about it, the very concept of a "generic" list of 10 Commandments is offensive to at least some Christian sect somewhere, because "generic" usually means "dominate group", which in this case would be some form of Baptist. Because it becomes a theological clusterfuck trying to determine which set to use, however, I'm going to just role with whatever set is easiest for me to find - and because Wikipedia is there for me, and Exodus comes before Deuteronomy, that's the version I'm going to be using. I have no fetish for "original commandments" because, if you recall, Moses supposedly broke the original ones on the ground when he saw that the Americans were worshiping Adam Smith, money, and the golden idol of Capitalism Hebrews worshiping the golden calf, so I personally couldn't care less. I just need an example list to show you how wrong this is, so Exodus will do.

Not My Time Machine

There's an excellent essay documenting the nature of white privilege up over on Lean Left. It's a good read; it highlights the nature of white privilege, and lays bare some important points about it.

Shut The Fuck Up, Fascist Dog

Joel McDurmon would like you to know that it has an opinion on the whole situation surrounding Todd Akin's ignorant and hateful admission of just how utterly stupid and psychopathic the Republican Party has become lately. When Todd Akin put on display how knowledgeable he was of 14th century medicine, everyone rightly criticized him. He put on display a core belief in the Republican Party today, once again showing how the Republicans do nothing but show contempt towards women.

To Mr. McDurmon: Shut the fuck up, you fascist pigheaded motherfucker self-righteous unholy coprophilic. You caitiff. You backbiting, contemptible, unscrupulous, reprobate misbegotten shit-eating abomination. You're a Backpfeifengesicht. I'm not going to engage you in a debate. I'm not going to be nice. I'm not going to play with the kid gloves because you know what? A debate is carried out when you think you can change someone's mind, or get them to see your side of the equation. Motherfucker, you won't see any side other than your own. You're not going open your eyes. You cannot reason a person out of a position they weren't reasoned into, and you know what? Fucker, you're not even in the same goddamn hemisphere as reason. So I have one thing to say to you, you self-grandiose piece of human detritus: Shut the fuck up.

No, seriously.

Shut. The. Fuck. Up.

I'm not a mean liberal. Hell, I'm just warming up, you arrogant douche. To even suggest that what Todd Akin has received (rightfully) received for his obscene and horrifyingly sociopathic comments is like to [WARNING! This link leads to the full article] gang rape - motherfucker, you need to shut the fuck up like right the fuck now. You needed to shut the fuck up yesterday.

No.

This is not persecution. This is me treating you like the contemptible piece of shit you are. Fuck you, fuck your God, fuck your religion, and fuck everything you stand for you degenerate. You abnormal, vile, pusillanimous, beyond contempt wretched Hell-spawn. 

I'll say it one more time: Shut the fuck up, fascist dog*. Don't justify what you said. Don't try to explain it to me because all I hear is "I think rape is only real rape if the victim is [x]" - you don't have the first fucking clue, you rape apologist. And if you think your God believes that, your stupid fucking God can go fist himself. And there's not a fucking thing your pathetic little God will ever do to me, motherfucker. That's got to chaff your ass, knowing that your God won't do a damn thing to me even though I'm standing up and shouting him down. Because he doesn't even exist. Because the demon you worship is not the God that the majority of right-hearted and caring individuals worship. Your Old Testament Monster Under the Bed can go kiss the fuck off. Just like you, you pig-fucking fascist asshole.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
*This comment is not intended to offend dogs. Dogs are intelligent, caring, social creatures. They are friendly, family oriented, and don't care what their masters are so long as their masters feed them, love them, and play with them. DeMar is none of that. He is not intelligent. He is not caring. He might be a social creature, but the social circles he travels through are likely the First or Second layer of Hell. He is not friendly. And he revels in all of the above, believing them to be positive traits. 

Toxic Memes and Poor People

I'm at home tonight with sinusitis, so I'm writing this while in pain. It doesn't make me a very happy individual at all, but compared to the pain this damn sinus infection has inflicted upon me before, what I'm feeling now is nothing.

It hurt worse earlier. So bad I had to admit myself into an emergency clinic and now I have to wall my wallet away inside of my tin can so it doesn't strangle me for it. There's a reason I've waited to treat it - I just recently paid for breaks, so I'm hurting financially enough as it is. I was just hoping that if I ignored it, it'd go away. It's been chronic for the last month or so, since the end of the last heatwave. Part of the problem, I'm sure, is the fact that my neighbor is an asshole. this guy hasn't mowed his lawn all summer (being in jail hasn't helped, but I have a right to be mad at the general situation because it's an eye sore and the city should, but won't, do anything about it) but the weeds - gawddamn. They're bigger than I am. And they've spent most of the summer flowering; kicking my allergies way into overdrive. Even my cat has been suffering from allergies this summer. So I'm sure that's what causing it; that and the fact that work they have something in the filters that just makes it utterly unbearable. I stayed at work as long as I could today - I had to clock out early so I could carry myself off to an emergency clinic because it hurt so bad I wanted to cry. I have quite sensitive teeth; any kind of pressure on that nerve makes it unbearable for me. My teeth were literally throbbing today. I could feel them; I can still feel them now. It felt like someone was trying pry my face apart. Motrin didn't even take the edge off. I kept my patience until I realized that I just couldn't do this anymore. It hurt to talk; someone drove a nail through my jaw and lit that nerve that runs along the chin on fire. That's when I left work early, losing 2 hours of pay. I'm on antibiotics now, so hopefully I'll see some improvement before I go back on Tuesday. I have a weekend off to get better, at least.

Anyway, this post stems from something I've seen too many times.

America is a culture of soundbites.

It's a culture that compresses complex ideologies and multifaceted problems into a few words that, at most, give only a cursory and biased glace at the problem itself. This is what happens when you have a culture of soundbites. As a result, people begin to think in soundbites and begin to expect immediate solutions to present themselves almost as easily as the soundbites are tossed out by our ignoble leaders.

This isn't the first one of these that I've seen, but it is the most recent. And I've commented on almost every one that I've seen, including several arguments with people who thought they supported this stuff. I can't say how many minds I've changed; I doubt the people who support measures and rhetoric like this want their mind changed (as Fred Clark calls it, the "Good Jackie/Bad Jackie test". To my understanding, it works like this: if you tell someone some wild and fanciful story they're repeating is a lie/wrong, how do they react? If they react with "oh, I didn't know that", then you're looking at Good Jackie. If they get mad because you're telling them the truth and they storm off, then you're looking at a Bad Jackie. Most importantly, I reserve the right to be wrong about this. I hurt, y'all. This is not fun).

So, America is a culture of easy and simple soundbites for complex and complicated problems. Here's a very simple solution approach to a problem so complex it has bedeviled people since society first began.

Being Poor

Being poor is knowing exactly how much everything costs.

Being poor is wincing when people tell you that you're voting against (their) best interest when you vote democrat, because you're "poor and uneducated". And they tell you this while they stand in front of a range rover at a political campaign stop, to donate large sums of money to the politician who thinks he's one of us because he only has two car elevators instead of three.

Being poor is not going out because you don't have the money for gas, and spending another day alone.

Being poor is stress put on your mind until it breaks, and then people blaming you for not being strong enough to carry the world, with them sitting around and doing nothing about it.

Being poor is understanding that your vote is split: either you vote for the corporatists who will occasionally pretend to care about you and do moral things when convenient or you vote for the ones that hate you and blame you for everything that's wrong with society. 

Being poor is understanding that the middle class will join you soon enough if they keep voting like they are. The only mobility in the United States is down, not up.

Being poor is understanding why negative stereotypes about the rich are not only acceptable but perfectly normal, and why it has nothing to do with envy and everything to do with hate for the lazy fuckers because they expect you to carry them everywhere and then applaud themselves for walking to the damn door after you finally carry them to the stairs.

Being poor is knowing the "self-made man" myth is bullshit.

Being poor and educated about history is when you look back at all of this, and all of the contents of the post linked, and realize that yes, maybe Robespierre and V.I. Lenin did have some good ideas.

Root For Her Like You Would A Male Character

This is probably the most frustrating thing about being genderfluid. I identify as a guy when I'm not identifying as a woman or something in between, and identifying everything from X -10 to X +10 with a little bit of Y and in some cases, Z, thrown in, I don't like to think I have a wider perception than most people. It's not that hard to understand people. You shut up and listen. That's how this works. Guys have an irritating tendency to dominate the conversation anyway (of course, if you've ever met me in person, you know I have a tendency to dominate the conversation, too - partially because I don't like silence and can't stand it. I'm also a bit of a motormouth and can talk really fast if I get a good enough cadence going). I will listen, though.

It boggles my mind why so many guys don't understand this. Shut up for just one second and listen. This is not rocket science. And maybe, if you listen to women talk and hear what they have to say, and learn that they're not all one large group of people, stuff like this can stop happening.

Laura Croft attempted rape will make players want to "protect her".

I don't know about you, but this is incredibly offensive to me. So offensive, in fact, let me count the ways:

The Unbearable Status of "Technological Stagnation"

Transhumanism post - I know I haven't done of these in a while, but I've been flagging in inspiration. Today, though, I found an article that frustrated the hell out of me, so here we go.

I was reading over at H+ magazine and I ran across this article by Dale Carrico. Carrico is (according to the comments, anyway; I don't know this for a fact) a leftist and a critic of transhumanism and futurism all together, leaving me to wonder if this man has even been awake for the last 30 years. In his article, The Unbearable Stasis of "Accelerating Change", Dale levels quite a few accusations against the transhumanist (and, by extension, science fiction) community. There's a lot of fair criticisms to be leveled to the community; criticisms are and constructive criticism is always helpful because it helps you improve. Very little of what is said here are accurate criticisms. Rather, this is a variation of the "futurehype" argument. I haven't seen the futurehype argument employed before this, so this is my first shot at tackling it.

The TRUE Middle Class Scored a Victory In Wiscousin...

Unfortunately, the actual middle class just got fucked over something fierce. It's like how anything good for TRUE America, the REAL America, is disastrous for the physical, corporeal United States (I should start up a corporation and trademark "True America/n", "Real America/n", and "True Middle Class" so I can laugh when I send cease and desist orders for trademark violations to the stupid people who run around saying this garbage).

I aimed to rant about how frustrating this thing is; I whip-lashed today between "well they deserve it for voting him in" and "how do we know this wasn't a case of fraud? In the lead up to the election there were all sorts of rumors of freelance right wingers out in the field lying about who could and couldn't sign the petition, or destroying petitions, of stuff along those lines - there was an entire FB page devoted to it. How do we know these people not only stopped there (providing they started at all)? How do we know they didn't fuck with the votes, too? And more importantly, isn't it really sad it's even gotten to that point?" I suppose as your country spirals down the toilet to 3rd world status, rigging elections becomes a natural thing, and I'm just jumping the gun (maybe).

I'm friends on FB with a group called "Being Liberal". You can gasp in awe now; I know that comes as a total surprise. Now that we're done, I occasionally get updates on my news feed from them. One of them was a letter that family members of a fellow friend received; the back story behind it is that they live in West Bend, WS., and they got this letter in their mail box today:

Spare Me Your Indignation

Christians - Real True Christians, anyway - shouldn't have the right to complain about anything anymore. Apparently they don't know how to use it, and it gets abused at every turn.

Case in point: Mt. Vernon, home of the crackpot teacher who burned a cross into their student's arm, John Freshwater, has had another religious dust up. Apparently, prayer was removed from the agenda of the city hall meeting. Because, you know, praying before a city council meeting doesn't exclude anyone at all. I'm sure it was one of those bland, faceless, religion-neutral prayers that satisfies no believer and is offensive to everyone. I mean, to do otherwise would be exclusionary. Not that these folks have a problem with exclusionary; why, special pleading is what they do best:

“I think it’s pathetic,” said local religious advocate Jeff Cline, who approached council members and demanded answers that night. “We keep kicking God out of everything.”

Boy, if only.

The Palin Doesn't Fall Far From the Tree

There are few things I enjoy more in this world than watching right-wingers project their own sexist insecurities on the left. While the left certainly has its own problem with sexism, there's nothing quite like listening to someone say that you're guilty of criticizing Sarah Palin because "She's a woman". Because, as we all know, Palin is perfect and great and when she winks starbursts fall from the sky. Unicorns shit rainbows in her presence. Rich Lowery is reduced to half the quarter of a man he already was. No, we don't criticize her because she's a massive hypocrite. We don't criticize her because when she opens her mouth, the collective IQ of her audience drops by 10 points; because you as a liberal feel less intelligent just listening to her. Because aerogel has more substance than her beliefs and the only thing denser than her skull is a teaspoon of overdense neutron star. We criticize her because she's a woman, and as we all know, Republicans never say anything bad at all about women. Nuh uh. Never. And if you heard otherwise, it's a lie. Because I said so, and I rewrite reality, that's why.

Well, I think that I may have found something arguably more dense than Sarah Palin. While I was skipping through Pathos, I made a horrifying discovery.

Bristol Palin has a blog over on Pathos. And not only that, but she's even worse than her mom, if that was at all possible.

Let’s pause for just one second.  When Christian women run for high office, people inevitably bring up the question of submission.  Once, Michele Bachmann, for example, was asked during a debate, “As president, would you be submissive to your husband?”
People automatically assume that a Christian female President isn’t capable of making decisions without her spouse’s stamp of approval.  (I should add female Republican candidates –liberal women don’t get the same kind of questions.)
So are all those reporters who feared excessive family intervention in the White House all up in arms over the President’s announcement yesterday?  Um.  Not quite.
Liberals  everywhere are applauding him for his bravery and his wisdom.
So let me get this straight – it’s a problem if my mom listened too much to my dad, but it’s a heroic act if the President made a massive change in a policy position that could affect the entire nation after consulting with his teenage daughters?

Ah, yes. The "gotcha technique" that's so commonly used by the liberal media. You know, asking a conservative candidate if they honestly believe what they said. That's bad. Because the things they say are stupid, and they know it. So why don't liberals get asked these questions? Could it be because they're not espousing these bronze aged beliefs? Could it be because they're not constantly dragging out how it's the job of the wife to be homemaker and that she doesn't need or deserve a position of power? That she's a hood ornament for her husband? I don't ever recall a liberal woman saying that she believes these positions, so why should they get asked questions implying that they do?

Here's my apple, now here's your apple. Now throw out your apple and we'll compare my apple with this chair. Welcome to the world of Bristol Palin - where apples are compared to chairs.

Sometimes dads should lead their family in the right ways of thinking.  In this case, it would’ve been nice if the President would’ve been an actual leader and helped shape their thoughts instead of merely reflecting what many teenagers think after one too many episodes of Glee.

 I've never watched Glee, but I've heard some positive things about it. I'm just not hip, I guess. If you haven't guessed by now, this is in response to the President's "evolving views" on the issue of marriage equality - that is, his expedient political shift to try and win the GLBT vote this election following the Republican party handing it to him with the passage of Amendment One in North Carolina.

Wouldn't it be nice if the President had been an actual leader and just agreed with my position, rather than taking a stance that 50+% of the nation now supports. I have to admit it wouldn't be out of the norm for a politician to take a stance opposite to what the rest of the nation wants - see the issue of defense cuts and the hissy-fit that the MI-complex is making of the very notion we'll spend less than 50% of our GDP on military weapons and productions. However, in this case, Obama managed to read the political weather-vane and adopted the position most in-line with what the majority of Americans now believe.

Which, as Palin is finding out, is the exact opposite of what her painfully vapid mother raised her to hold. Your kind are a dying breed, Ms. Palin. With each passing generation, there are fewer and fewer of you. Soon, you'll look around and realize that there's nobody there to support you. Society marches on. The last thing you want to heave on your kid is for them to be known at school as the kid who's mom still believes the world is flat.

Meta: From Ancient Greek, Meaning "Beyond", Not "I Have No Clue"

Amazing, isn't it? Here's another piece of tripe out of the liberal media. Watch as this woman doesn't even let Tim Curry doesn't even get a word in edge wise, even when he's trying to call her out for her media tricks.

I've never been more proud to be a liberal. Especially when he got thrown off the air. I didn't expect her to do that. I'm really impressed; Tamron Hall is currently my hero. She cut his mike right there on the spot; she didn't let him try to change the subject, she didn't let him try any of the usual right wing tricks to undermine a real story and the people who present them. Take a close look at what we saw of Curry's "debating" style. He was invited on to discuss the Romney Campaign's to a particular issue. Most mature, responsible and respectful adults would discuss it. But Curry, like most in the right wing claptrap, is not a mature, responsible and respectful adult. Like most people who take their marching orders from FOX news and the modern oligarchic gerontocracy that runs the right-wing noise machine,  he takes the follow steps:

I Hate Illinois Nazis. Everyone Hates Illinois Nazis

Or, in this case, Floridian Nazis.

This is actually really scary. This is actually what happens when you let individual like this run amok. By their own admission, they're down there to "prevent race riots," which I translate as "shoot Black people and race traitors". They're doing the Police's job; the same police department that so horribly botched the murder investigation of Trayvon Martin. A murder that lead to this whole situation, that would likely have never reached this point - where animalistic conservatives are frothing at the mouth at the thought of demonizing a young Black teenage male while accusing liberals of race bating and projecting their own racism - had Trayvon been White. One that most certainly wouldn't have happened had Zimmerman been Black and Trayvon been White.

This is really going to make the situation better. Hell, I can see all sorts of lollypops and rainbow-shitting unicorns out of this deal. I know that it says the police haven't received any reports, but hey, they didn't arrest anyone for what was obviously a murder, so why the fuck should I believe what they say?

What's more, these particular Nazis call themselves the "White's Civil Right movement."

Nazis. The White's Civil Rights movement. This isn't appropriation of the term "Civil Rights". See, appropriation is highly offensive. This is well beyond merely "highly offensive."

There's so much wrong there I can barely begin to fathom it. That's a Calabi-Yau Manifold of  Absolute Wrong. Just when you think you've unwrapped that singular point in space time, you realize there are about six or seven other dimensions of wrongness that you totally overlooked. Reality parsed at the quantum level makes more sense than that statement does. It's like a singularity of malevolent stupid. What reality looks like on the other side of that singularity I can't contemplate, but I can guarantee that natural laws do not apply as we know them.

The murder of Trayvon Martin is one of the most racially charged crimes to happen in years. And what it's dredging up is the ugly history of American racism, and the ugly present of American racism. And as always, instead of having a conversation, and listening to the other side, the Conservatives are screaming like they're getting their teeth pulled without anesthetic. They just do not want to listen. They refuse. But then, this is nothing new. And with them, the vast majority of White men and White people, including non-Conservatives, in the United States.

New rule: if you deny racism exists, you cannot call yourself a Liberal. If you deny the existence of racism, you cannot call yourself a rationalist, either.

Nazis are now the White's Civil Rights movement. Someone please stop this ride, I want off.