Campbell's or Progresso? A Decision Made Easier

I'm sure you've seen the commercials lately comparing the nutritional value and taste preferences between Progresso soups and Campbell's soups. Each commercial dangles one or more reasons why we should choose one soup over the other, but the American Family Association has probably given us a reason to choose Campbell's (and, by extension, Swanson products) over the Progresso options.

Placed prominently on their homepage today (I absolutely love it when they make it so easy, lol), is one of their infamous "action alerts" challenging all those who cherish "traditional" families to boycott Campbell's and their "Labels For Education" because the company advertises in The Advocate.

AFA went on to explain...

Many people aren't aware that when their school participates in Campbell's
"Labels for Education" program they are supporting a company that has openly
come out in support of homosexual marriage, and it has no intentions of stopping
that support.
"Labels for Education" provides equipment for schools in
exchange for proofs of purchase from the family of Campbell's brands.
Many
of the schools that participate don't know that Campbell's supports the
homosexual publication The Advocate with advertising. The Advocate is a leading
promoter of same-sex marriage.
AFA asked Campbell's to be neutral in the
culture war. Campbell's refused and said it would continue to support The
Advocate. The Media Daily News reported that a Campbell spokesman was quoted as
saying: "Our plans for the Swanson brand [a division of Campbell's] include
additional placements in The Advocate." To show their commitment to same-sex
marriage, Campbell's sought out and featured two
"married" lesbians and their son in one of the ads.

That's right...not only is Campbell's advertising in one of the leading LGBT publications, but they're actually seeking out homosexuals and their families to be featured in their ads! (Insert sarcastic gasp here)

It seems to me that the director, Mr. Wildmon, has shot himself (and, by extension, his argument) in the foot by pointing out that Campbell's was interested in showcasing examples of successful homosexual unions and their resulting families. Included in their alert is a link to the ad specifically mentioned, and I found it to be very warm and charming. Of course, the AFA will say I'm biased and on some level they'd be right...but isn't it comforting to see images of loving families? Go ahead...call me biased, but I'm in favor of any advertisements that promote the concept of loving families regardless of their individual components. I suppose this is just another example of the AFA's endless discrimination against anything that isn't palatable to them.

So...the next time you're on the soup aisle...reach for those cans of Campbell's and Swanson products and say, "Take that!" to Mr. Wildmon.

Did You Miss Me? I'll Be Back Soon

I've taken a long break in order to finish up my first writing project, so I will be back to posting as much sarcasm as possible very soon!

Westboro Raps?

Just when I thought the nuts over at Westboro Baptist couldn't get any nuttier, they come out with this delightful little gem...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZujlW3xQiQ

Sorry for the link, but my continuing battle with Youtube's 'post to blog' option is still giving me trouble. I would comment on the video a little further, but I think it speaks for itself...hatred knows no bounds.

Hillary on Ellen...Dances Around Gay Marriage Question

For my readers who are fans of Hillary, I apologize for what I'm about to say. It's no secret that I'm not a Hillary fan, but this just proves my point about her constant waffling...even to the extent of contradicting what has been one of her political mainstays...federalizing various issues so as to take them out of the hands of individual states.

First, watch the Youtube video of Ellen's interview with Hillary...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3huRVrckY8

Now, I could rightfully rant about Hillary's idea of what amounts to a 'separate but equal' system of civil unions for gay couples, but the comment that stands out the most to me is that she believes this is an issue that should be left for the states to decide. Not only did she dodge the root of Ellen's question, but she contradicted some of her well known political ideals...again.

Remember her healthcare solution from 1994? The core of her proposal, and current healthcare proposals as well, is that we should federalize the entire healthcare system. Whether you agree with that or not, it's a prime example of how Hillary constantly sends homosexuals to the back of the bus...so to speak. Apparently, it's perfectly acceptable to provide healthcare for all Americans, but it's not acceptable to do the equivalent regarding gay marriage.

The bottom line is that the idea of civil unions is 'safe' and using the word 'marriage' in conjunction with the word gay would produce an impenetrable barrier to the White House. By making the statement that this is an issue for the states to decide, Hillary has adopted a blatant 'hands-off' stance...something that is in direct contradiction to her other campaign promises and political ideals. She's always held the idea that social issues were best handled at the federal level, so why not this one? The answer...cowardice, plain and simple.

Taking Another Break

Labor Day Weekend is upon us, and I've got a full calendar starting tomorrow. I'll have more sarcastic posts starting Tuesday. Until then, have a great holiday!

Ft.Lauderdale Mayor Off Tourism Board

Jim Naugle, the embattled mayor of Ft. Lauderdale, FL who has not only suggested installing "robo-toilets" throughout the city, but has also made several public statements which are incredibly discriminatory toward the LGBT community, has lost his seat on the tourism board. According to the local Sun-Sentinal, Broward County commissioners were concerned that Naugle's actions would harm the tourism industry...a multibillion-dollar asset to the county...and that he'd ignored warnings from commissioners about his actions. The Sentinal reported...

"Since Naugle made his initial allegations about rampant gay sex in public
restrooms nearly two months ago, the Greater Fort Lauderdale Convention &
Visitors Bureau has been deluged with hundreds of angry e-mails from tourists.
Some said they had canceled vacations, while others threatened to go
elsewhere.

A gay-oriented convention that was to draw 200 attendees this fall is on
hold. A group that plans black family reunions has voiced concern about whether
the mayor was sending a message of intolerance. Bookings of college and
high-school sporting events is also down compared to last year."

And how did Naugle respond to the fact that groups other than LGBT affiliated organizations were voicing their displeasure over his comments and actions? Take a look...

"Naugle was unbowed by the county's rebuke and said commissioners removed
him because they "feared a very vocal minority." He questioned why no
commissioner had talked to him beforehand to hear why he has done what he's
done.

Sometimes the easiest thing to do when you don't want to hear something is
to shoot the messenger, but that doesn't mean that there is not a problem out
there that needs to be addressed," Naugle said.

So now he's a victim? Give me a break. This guy is so obsessed with his homophobic ideals that he refuses to see how his actions have affected the economy of the community he is supposed to serve. County Commissioner Stacey Ritter put it best...

"I had hoped that this would die on its own, but Mayor Naugle continues to
push his own agenda and that is having an increasing impact on our community,"
said County Commissioner Stacy Ritter, who proposed removing him. "He has
continued to escalate his rhetoric, and we cannot be silent."

I half expect Naugle to shoot back by reiterating that homosexuals are the only ones with an "agenda," but he's put the nails in his own coffin with this little crusade of his. I sincerely hope the Ft. Lauderdale voters will take steps to either censure or remove Naugle entirely and replace him with someone who truly reflects the gay-friendly atmosphere that the community has worked so hard to establish. I think the closing comment another Commissioner says it all...

"Hate is something that is simply unacceptable and now has become costly to
the county as well," Commissioner Diana Wasserman-Rubin said.

I doubt Naugle will ever agree, but this is one step in a positive direction for both the Ft. Lauderdale community and the LGBT community as a whole.

Babs Not Welcome At Holiday Inn

Peter LaBarbera's organization (Americans For Truth About Homosexuality) had booked a fundraising convention at a Chicago area Holiday Inn, but has since been told they are no longer welcome. Why? The hotel manager feared protests by what Babs calls pro-gay groups.

In an audio interview with Babs, Matt Barber of Concerned Women For America blew the entire situation out of proportion by making claims that the hotel was being anti-Christian by not allowing the group to convene at their establishment.

First of all, the hotel and its corporate officials do have the right to refuse service to anyone. Had this hotel refused service to HRC, PFLAG or any other group Babs despises, he'd be celebrating it on his site...and he knows it.

Second, Pete is known for being abrasive...if not abusive...toward anyone who disagrees with him. Any opponent is instantly denigrated in what I would deem a vicious manner. No wonder the hotel was worried about protests and the effect they might have on their other guests and future business.

Finally, perhaps Babs will come away from this situation with some understanding of what gay and lesbian couples go through. I highly doubt it, because his arrogance is so profound that I doubt anything...even experiencing what discrimination others endure on a regular basis...will be able to penetrate his thick skull.

Listen to the interview at your own risk, lol...it made me sick to my stomach.

Larry Craig This And That

I started out with one post to follow up on yesterday's post, but I found so many examples of ridiculousness that I decided to put together some brief comments here.

** This is nothing more than despicable and cowardly behavior on the part of the folks over at WingNutDaily. Without giving any real comment, the site posted a headline today and linked to an article from the Idaho Statesman in what appears to be an effort to discredit the columnist who wrote the articles documenting the events surrounding Senator Larry Craig...

Columnist who exposed Craig backs 'gay' marriage 'Chance
to make a once-and-for-all statement that we are broad-minded folk' --Idaho
Statesman

I suppose that if you support gay marriage it doesn't matter how many police reports and other credible sources you can produce. In the eyes of the fundies, support of gay marriage instantly damages your journalistic integrity and credibility. Pathetic.

** The Idaho Values Alliance has called for Craig's resignation...no real surprise there, but I had to laugh at this part of their statement...

"The Judeo-Christian tradition says that the standard for identifying the
truth is that “by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact is confirmed.”
The senator’s guilty plea, when added to the officer’s testimony, satisfies the
biblical standard for confirming the essential truth of what happened, and
unless the senator can provide a compelling and convincing explanation for his
plea, we will need to regretfully accept that the fact of his behavior has been
established. It seems unlikely that he can “unring the bell” his guilty plea has
sounded."

At least this bunch of wingnuts is using their biblical "standards" on one of their own since they are so fond of bashing the rest of us over the head with them, but it baffles me that they think they needed some biblical yardstick to confirm this one.

** Mitt Romney very quickly distanced himself from Craig, and it seems the White House is doing the same. The strange thing is that while statements from Romney, McCain, Huckabee and others are strongly worded, the White House spokesperson made this statement...

"We're disappointed in what's going on. It's a matter for the senator and
the Senate Republican leadership to address," deputy White House press secretary
Scott Stanzel said.

We hope that it will be resolved quickly, as that would be in the best
interests of the Senate and the people of Idaho," Stanzel said.

Is it just me, or does it sound like the Chimperor doesn't want to touch this story with a ten foot pole? This is a matter for the legislative branch of the government to handle (not that that's ever stopped Bush from sticking his nose where it doesn't belong), but the statement from the White House made it look like Bush was much more upset about potentially losing yet another Republican vote in the senate.

Another Ignorant Rant From Matt Barber

Another day, another bleating rant from the resident concerned "woman" Matt Barber. This time, Matt has gone after an Illinois school district over a summer reading list for 8th graders and even goes so far as to list examples of what he deems to be objectionable content from one of the books. Before giving that list, though, he opened by saying...

"Prairie Junior High School’s required reading list for rising 8th graders
gave children six books to choose from over the summer. Parents have complained
that three of the six books contain adult content which is highly
age-inappropriate. Those complaints, however, have fallen on deaf ears. At a
recent school board meeting, school board members said they intend to continue
assigning the books. The following are excerpts from just a handful of the many
salacious passages found in one of the books, Fat Kid Rules the World, by K. L.
Going:"

So, from the outset, Matt has acknowledged that the students were given a list of books from which to choose...argument hole number one. Unless someone was holding a gun to the heads of these students and their parents, it seems that other choices were made available.

Notice also that the objectionable passages Matt printed were from ONE of the SIX books on the list of choices for the students...argument hole number two. It appears that this book wasn't forced on anyone, regardless of what Matt said next...

"To add insult to injury, the school didn’t even have the courtesy to warn
these kids — or their parents — about the adult content within the assigned
reading. And parents are understandably furious. If one of my daughters came to
me at twelve having been assigned this smut, I’d be ticked-off too."

Okay, parents do have the responsibility to be involved in the education of their children, and these parents should have made it a priority to investigate these book choices and guide their children accordingly. Argument hole number three...as Matt pointed out, the students had a choice and none of the six books were specifically "assigned" no matter how much he'd like it to appear that way.

Now, with three holes in his ridiculous argument, let's look at the cute turn Matt makes with this delightful little story. He starts with the following...

"I telephoned Robert Berger, superintendent of schools for District 126,
fully expecting him to assure me that this foolishness would be remedied. But
instead, his response was defiant, defensive and arrogant."

It's a distinct possibility, given Matt's usual tone and attitude toward anyone who disagrees with him, that the conversation with Mr. Berger began with a similarly defiant, defensive and arrogant, and I wouldn't fault Mr. Berger for responding the way he did. I do find it interesting that while Matt provided explicit details about the one offensive book, he didn't do the same regarding his conversation with this superintendent. Only a couple of comments were mentioned in what was, presumably, a much more involved discussion..argument hole number four.

The real axis, if you will, of Matt's argument becomes very clear with these statements...

"Unfortunately the actions of District 126 are symptomatic of a
metastasizing moral malady within our larger system of public education. Kids in
public schools across the country are constantly inundated with material which
promotes profanity, homosexuality, promiscuity and abortion.

The Agenda is pushed and the curriculum set by leftist groups like the
National Education Association (NEA), the ACLU and the Gay, Lesbian and Straight
Education Network (GLSEN). Even the American Library Association (ALA) gave Fat
Kids its “Michael L. Printz Award for Excellence in Young Adult Literature.” The
book also received a rave review from America’s largest homosexual activist
literary organization, Lambda Literary Foundation.
By constantly lowering
the bar on decency, educators are intentionally playing a game of ideological
limbo with our children’s moral well-being as they seek to create little moral
relativists in their own iconoclastic self-image. And they’re robbing kids of
great reading like Oliver Twist, Treasure Island and many others in the
process."

And there you have it, folks...it's the homosexuals who are forcing these poor, impressionable children to read the book Matt keeps blathering about. I will give Matt points for his clever use of alliteration with his, "metastasizing moral malady," comment, but the rest of his bleating is simply that...bleating. For the record, the Printz Award is one of the biggest and most prestigious children's literature prizes and is given, as Matt said, by the American Library Association. Unfortunately, Fat Kid Rules the World didn't win the award, but was one of the honored books for the year 2004...argument hole number five.

As usual, Matt has tried to spin this situation and has succeeded in insulting the parental intelligence of the students in the district in question, assumed that the traditional classic reading choices are being held hostage somewhere, gave false information regarding the one book that seemed to bother him the most and blamed everything on that ever elusive homosexual agenda.

With five glaring holes in your argument Matt...you'd do good to do a little more homework before posting your purposely inflammatory garbage.

Another Case of Convenient Dementia?

The more I've seen on the news and read online, the more I'm convinced that these elected officials who've been caught in these types of acts are suffering from what I'm dubbing convenient dementia. This time it's Republican Senator Larry Craig who's been stricken with this horrible disease. According to a report from The IdahoStatesman, a news source from his home state, Craig was arrested on June 11th in a Minnesota airport men's room for allegedly soliciting sex from an undercover officer. The details of that arrest can be found here.

Since an arrest was made, Craig was required to appear in court...an event that occurred earlier this month. Here's what the Statesman reported...

"News about the June 11 arrest at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International
Airport was reported on Roll Call's Web site Monday. According to police and
court records obtained by Roll Call, Craig pleaded guilty Aug. 8 to
misdemeanor disorderly conduct in Hennepin County District Court. He paid $575
in fines and fees. A 10-day jail sentence was suspended and Craig received one
year's unsupervised probation.

Craig on Monday denied any misconduct. "At the time of this incident,
I complained to the police that they were misconstruing my
actions," he said in a written statement. "I was not involved in any
inappropriate conduct. I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this
matter. In hindsight, I should not have pled guilty. I was trying to handle this
matter myself quickly and expeditiously."

Craig, through his staff, declined to answer questions."

Of course he declined to answer questions, because the first one would be why in the world would a longstanding Senator go into court and plead guilty without either having a lawyer with him or, at the very least, consulting one before heading into court? The answer is very simple...he was guilty and he was hoping not to handle the "matter" as he described, but hoping it would just go away.

Since the story broke yesterday, Craig has decided to take the dementia route by trying to make it look like he wasn't thinking clearly enough to do what anyone would do if arrested...hire an attorney. Here's the interesting twist I know you're waiting for...

"Craig, 62, was elected to Congress in 1980. Should he win re-election in
2008 and complete his term, he would be the longest-serving Idahoan ever in
Congress. His record includes a series of votes against gay rights and his
support of a 2006 amendment to the Idaho Constitution that bars gay marriage and
civil unions."

He has to claim that everything was misconstrued and that he shouldn't have gone to court without an attorney because his entire political life has an anti-gay record. The Statesman article has links and references to other instances where Craig's behavior has come into question, but this is just another example of convenient dementia...something more and more politicians seem to be catching. Maybe someone should check the water in Washington or, better yet, maybe these guys should just start telling the truth.

Would You Like A Little Cheese With That Whine, Boys?

You know, I sat down this morning and, inevitably, landed on Peter LaBarbera's site (Americans for Truth) only to read what is probably one of the most insidious headlines I've seen in a while.
Referring to last week's article by talk radio host Kevin McCullough, Babs implored his fellow hatemongers...I mean, loyal readers...to support the idea that bloggers who happen to be gay are not only angry but lie all the time. He didn't even have the sense to change McCullough's original headline or, perhaps, he's just that unimaginative...who knows...but while the words, "Why Do Angry Gay Bloggers Always Lie," were there, the proof of those "lies" were nonexistent. Babs starts out...as usual...with the focus on himself...

"As one who has been on the receiving end of too many online “gay” lies to
count, I can sympathize with Kevin McCullough – one of the few radio
conservatives nationwide who doesn’t downplay the homosexual issue. (And there
are some pretty big names in conservative radio who do by going ‘PC’ on
this issue with their silence … so support
Kevin.)"

Awwww, poor little hate-filled fundies! For all the anti-gay comments, campaigns and other efforts Pete has made and been involved in, I find it absolutely incredible...if not a bit nauseating...that he would have the audacity to complain about any legitimate rebuttal to his lame arguments, relegating them to the level of "online 'gay' lies." And, yes, I'm still wondering what's with the damn quotes around the word gay.

The only thing I could find in both articles (which are posted on AFT's site and can be read using the first link I gave in this post) that refers to a "lie" is the same, tired argument that fundies have been making all along...their belief that a person's sexual orientation is a choice and not a biological predetermination. I suppose the idea here is that if you don't agree with the fundies, you're a liar...plain and simple.

In his article, McCullough laments the name-calling he's endured...

"NGBlog
[WARNING: NGBlog has a hard time making his point without cussing–Ed.] and OutsideTheTent
have had me in their sights for sometime.

And when the towering intellects that they both are come up short
against an actual point of substance the best they can do is call me stupid, or
poopy pants, or whatever brilliant turn of phrase pops into their skull.

They are so desperate to make me appear stupid they slow down the video of me discussing the
Mary Cheney pregnancy on CNN to the one frame where in the middle of
speaking I appear half-inebriated. [See an AFTAH post on the Mary Cheney
baby story HERE.]

Classy…

They also lie a lot… the lying liars they
are."

The lying liars they are? Honestly, you'd think that a popular conservative talk radio host could do better than that! I won't stoop to any silly name-calling, but I will say that we do have an actual point of substance...one that will not vanish regardless of any vilification thrown our way. I and the other members of the LGBT community stand by our biological sexual orientation regardless of the obviously phobic and/or hateful misrepresentations of our identities. Since that seems to be the only point of contention for these two, I simply have to suggest they stop whining and accept the fact that we will continue to disagree...fundies will continue to try and paint us as the root of all evil, and gay bloggers will continue to poke holes in their arguments. As for this particular argument...seems you boys are the ones guilty of lying. So, take your cheese and curl up in a corner to whine some more...I know I'm not going to lose any sleep over it!

Monday's This And That

After a much needed vacation and computer changeover (I HATE Windows Vista!!!), I'm back to reading my news feeds. So, here are a few things to get your week started...



** In case you haven't heard, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has resigned after several months of turmoil and controversy. I suppose it's better late than never, but this should have happened long ago. The question now is who will the Chimperor try to push for confirmation? Speculation suggests that Michael Chertoff (head of Homeland Insecurity who not only contributed to the botched Katrina "relief" efforts, but recently announced he had a "gut feeling" about an impending terror attack here in the states) will be up for the job, which would not only further diminish what little integrity the Attorney General's office has left but would also pave the way for yet another Bush appointee in the Homeland Security Department and, no doubt, a very heated confirmation process in Congress. How long until the next election?

** Michael Vick held a press conference where he seemed to apologize for his participation in a dog-fighting ring. I use the word "seemed" because let's face it...he is taking a plea agreement which doesn't fully cover everything in which he was involved, and he's far more upset with the fact he got caught than anything else, I would imagine. As for the bonuses he received from the Atlanta Falcons...it appears the franchise will attempt to go after about half of what they gave Vick. Forgive me for not feeling sorry for him...if and when he serves any time, he'll still be a multi-millionaire.

** Westboro Baptist Church has added Mexico to their ever growing list of countries that God apparently hates. Fred Phelps (aka The Rotting Cryptkeeper) either has a direct line to God or thinks he is God...I'm leaning toward the latter, lol. As usual, I refuse to give them a link, but if you find yourself wanting to develop a bad case of nausea, their site can be found on Google.

Summer Hiatus

Due to illness and a much needed need for a vacation, I will not be posting until around August 22. Until then, be well and take some time to browse the archive.

Janet Folger Looks Stupid...Again

You would think that someone who posts a weekly article would make sure and check all available sources before allowing said article to be posted and distributed. Unfortunately, the incredibly unhinged Janet Folger had her head so far up her...well, you get the picture...that she didn't check her facts.

In her weekly article posted on WingNutDaily today, Folger urges her fellow wingnuts to watch the "Values Voters Debate" (the Republican version, lol...the Democrats will get their shot later) on September 17, rather than watching the CNN/YouTube Republican debate scheduled for the same night. Always ready with an attack on anything she deems remotely liberal, Janet blasted off with this...

"While CNN's YouTube debate for the Democratic candidates took place a week
ago Monday, I found it interesting they didn't plan a comparable debate for the
Republicans last week. Or this week. They didn't schedule the Republican YouTube
debate for next month. They scheduled it for ... Sept. 17 – the same day of the
Values Voters Presidential Debate. Coincidence? One thing that's not a
coincidence: why they can't seem to get anyone to come – the majority who care
about family values have already agreed to attend the values voters
debate."

First of all, CNN has already announced that the Republican debate is being postponed because so many of the candidates had scheduling conflicts or were going to be attending so many debates in the month of September that the CNN event was just going to be one too many. While spinning her wheels looking for some vast left-wing conspiracy, Ms. Folger didn't bother to check her facts. Second, no information on where the debate was being broadcasted was mentioned. I find that funny, because the purpose of her article (other than demonizing the evil that is all Democrats) was to mobilize the fundie base and get them to watch the debate. I suppose fundies have some sort of mental telepathy that isn't granted the rest of us, but I have no idea how they are supposed to know where to even tune in to see this great debate.

In her final statements, Janet again shows her stupidity and arrogance by saying...

"This isn't about partisanship. It's about values. We are less concerned
about the letter behind your name than we are about the values in your heart and
the policies of your administration. What matters to you? Well, where you are on
Sept. 17 will say it all. Will the candidates address the largest voting block
in America? Or will they be more concerned about raising money or catering to the flaky
agenda of a left-leaning Frosty the Snowman? We will see."

The hell it isn't about partisanship! That's a blatant lie, and she knows it, but what's worse is she's implying that candidates who decide to attend the CNN debate aren't interested in tough questions. The only question of the 39 posed to the Democrats that she mentions is the admittedly ridiculous Frosty the Snowman question. In truth, though, the questions chosen were rather well balanced in my opinion. I suppose that Ms. Folger isn't really interested in balance, though...she's obviously gone the way of FOX News in throwing out the concept of fair and balanced reporting. I realize I'm being repetitive, but the CNN debate won't be on the 17th as she restates in that final paragraph, so her condescending remarks are somewhat laughable.

If anyone knows where to see this values-based debate, though, please let me know. I want to see it so I can see the "right-leaning Frosty the Snowman," LOL!

Tuesday's This And That

Just something to get your week off and running, folks.

** Those lovable little nutcases over at WingNutDaily are all excited because another publication gave them credit for an article discussing Paris Hilton's high school hockey stint. In an article published June 14th, WND wrote about Hilton's hockey "career," and the Connecticut publication picked up on it. I suppose it was a slow news day, or WND once again contradicted its "hard news" stance...who knows. If you want a laugh at the expense of Paris, though, give it a read.

** Here's an interesting perspective on the civil union mess in New Jersey and a short quote from the article...

"So civil unions aren't just legally unequal to marriage; they're not just
emotionally unequal; they're not even just morally unequal. They're unequal in
the most literal, practical sense of the word. Even in the state where the civil
union is the law, people in civil unions are not being treated the same by their
employers as people who are married."

Give it a read, because the blatant differences between marriages and civil unions are discussed in great detail. Separate but equal just doesn't cut it...period!



** Okay, this article from New Zealand has me both slightly disgusted and shaking my head...I don't know how else to describe it, LOL. Apparently, it's not kosher for vegan individuals to have sex with 'carnivores.' Now there's a new category, vegansexuals, to denote those who not only don't eat meat, but won't have sex with anyone who does. Here's the quote that just had me grossed out, though, lol...

"One vegan respondent from Christchurch said: "I believe we are what we consume,
so I really struggle with bodily fluids, especially sexually."

I so didn't need to read that at 8 am, LOL!



** It seems that Paris Hilton's billionaire grandfather has had enough of her ridiculousness and has taken away her inheritance. Okay, so she won't get any money when this 79 year old man dies, but let's be serious...how much money does she have already? I doubt this declaration is really a big deal, and I'm certainly not going to lose any sleep over it!

Shapiro Calls Pushing For Same-Sex Marriage A 'Progressives' Political Trick'

Do you remember the YouTube debate question posed by a black, Southern pastor, asking why religion should be used to prevent same-sex marriage? I posted about it a few days ago, and it was one of the questions chosen for the debate. Benjamin Shapiro of WingNutDaily, though, sees the whole concept as some sort of political trick, and you won't believe why.

In summing up Edwards' response to the question of imposing religion on the issue of gay marriage, Shapiro says the following...

"Sen. Edwards first stated that based on his religious principles, he was
personally opposed to same-sex marriage. Then, he retreated from his principles:
"I think it is absolutely wrong, as president of the United States, for me to
have used that faith basis as a basis for denying anybody their rights, and I
will not do that when I'm president of the United States."

Ben is right (and you have no idea how much it pains me to say that, lol), Edwards' response was one of the most uncommitted, spineless, safe, pointless...well, I could keep on going, but I think you get the point. It's Ben's next few statements that make my blood boil...

"Edwards was clearly mistaken in his appraisal of the role of religious
values in politics. Religion shapes morals; morals shape politics. The
Constitution forbids Congress from making any law respecting an establishment of
religion. It does not bar politicians or voters from consulting their moral
compasses in charting America's course on the big issues of our day."

Politicians can consult their moral compasses all they want, but they are NOT permitted to impose their religious values or mores on any of us...period. He continues talking about how "progressives" are forcing fundies to bear the burden of proof on issues pertaining to gay rights. He preaches about the ridiculousness of forcing "tradition" to change (funny how these self-righteous fundies almost always align themselves with tradition), but then says...

"This is not to say that tradition should always prevail. Sometimes change
will meet its burden of proof: anti-slavery advocates, anti-segregation
advocates and anti-sexism advocates made their cases strongly and forcefully,
overcoming the weak arguments for tradition."

Notice how he left out gay rights, lol, but before you get too excited...read what he says next...

"But constant social experimentation – perpetual change justified only by
empty assumptions about the infallibility of the New – discards experience in
favor of untested theory.

An immature society asks, "Why shouldn't we?" assuming the past is
antiquated. A mature society sees the proven value of the old and the possible
value of the new, asking, "Why should we?" Sometimes change should be
undertaken; sometimes not. This is only right: Some change is progress, while
some change is decay. We can only tell progress from decay by asking change to
make its case – to meet its burden of proof."

So, it would seem that Mr. Shapiro is trying to say that progressives (aka advocates of gay rights) are attempting to make our society accept the idea of gay marriage by tricking people into some sort of hypnotized state. Funny, isn't that what he and his fundie pals have been trying to do all along? What he calls "proven value" is relative...a fact he will probably go to his grave denying. Sorry Ben, but it sounds like you're describing yourself...not the so-called progressives.

Thursday's This And That

I've got a few short stories for you...consider this an open thread and comment away!



** It looks like McCain's (aka, 'The Tool') campaign may be quickly falling apart. Following the departures of key campaign members last week, The Wall Street Journal is reporting that his entire media team has resigned. I'll refrain from doing my "happy dance" because I don't want to scare anyone, lol, but it's hard for me to hide my delight with this news.



** I apologize in advance for this post because I swore I wouldn't blog about this...BUT, lol, you've no doubt heard about Lindsay Lohan's latest arrest involving a car chase while under the influence and in the possession of cocaine. It seems she decided to send an email to Access Hollywood (according to Newsday.com), in which she states...

"I am innocent. I did not do drugs, they're not mine ... I appreciate everyone
giving me my privacy."Lohan also wrote that she "was almost hit by my assistant
Tarin's mom." She apparently refers to a car chase involving Lohan and her
personal assistant's mother, which ended just prior to the arrest in the parking
lot of Santa Monica's Civic Auditorium."

Anyone buying that? I know I'm not, but what really upsets me about this story is her father who went about booking approximately 7 different talk show appearances following his daughter's most recent arrest. What's despicable about his actions is that he appears to be capitalizing on his daughter's downward spiral to destruction by getting his face on as many television shows as possible. It's possible I'm overreacting, but he and Lindsay's mother are ultimately responsible for all this turmoil by allowing her to enter the Hollywood stage at such a young age. It reminds me of the very young Drew Barrymore and the struggles she endured...and overcame. Unfortunately, Lindsay may not have the same success due to the selfish ambitions of her greedy and self-consumed parents.

** Peter LaBarbera has yet another rant up today about the HRC/LOGO Democratic debate. I won't go into great detail about what he has to say out of courtesy to those who might be trying to eat while they read this, lol, but there is one statement that stood out to me...

"Who represents the tens of millions of Americans who morally object to
homosexuality, and who stand to lose their religilous (sic) and First
Amendment freedoms if HRC’s agenda is enacted? (I hereby volunteer my services
as a conservative questioner if the organizers care to make a pretense of
journalistic objectivity.)"

The free speech fallacy aside, what makes Pete think he is some beacon of journalistic objectivity? Other than his unadulterated hatred for the homosexual community and the various articles he's written to that effect, where are his journalistic credentials that would bring this so-called objectivity? Obviously, HRC president Joe Solmonese and musician Melissa Etheridge probably don't have any credentials themselves, but that's not really the point. If Pete can blather away on his site, why can't the homosexual community hold a debate without its integrity coming into question? Just my opinion on the matter.

WND Attempts To Demonize Organization For The Alleged Actions Of One Person

If the charges mentioned in today's story prove to be true, then I will be among the first to proclaim the utter despicability of this man's actions...BUT...WingNutDaily pounced on the opportunity to demonize a legitimate organization. The article begins...

"The outreach coordinator of Milwaukee's homosexual "PrideFest"
is now facing a felony charge after police say he sought to meet a 14-year-old
boy via the Internet for a sexual rendezvous.
According to authorities,
David W. Bodoh, 42, of Wauwatosa, Wis., apparently made contact with a boy from
Oconomowoc, and eventually set up a meeting with an undercover state agent who
posed online as the child."

Okay, like I said...if these charges prove to be true, then Mr. Bodoh needs to be put away. Here's where WND crosses the line, though...

"Though Bodoh's name has been removed from the PrideFest website, an archived
version indicates he was part of the production team for the 2007 event, listed
as "Community Outreach."

According to its website, "The mission of PrideFest is to advocate,
celebrate and educate the general community and the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and
Transgender (LGBT) community with regard to all aspects of LGBT culture. To
accomplish this, PrideFest produces an annual Pride celebration. Educational
events include, but are not limited to, exhibits, lectures, art and community
outreach which fully display the diversity of LGBT culture."

I'll give WND some credit, this was very subtly done, but their point was still made. And, once again...the actions of one individual automatically demonize and condemn the rest of us as being some sort of predators who are just waiting to assault an innocent child. I realize that the fundies see the homosexual community as pedophiles by nature...which infuriates me...but this was a very lame attempt on their part to try and link us all to the actions of one individual. The, "where we go one, we go all," nonsense has to stop.

Out Of Left Field?

Just about every day, the folks over at WingNutDaily have what they call an 'Out of Left Field,' feature where they highlight an article or blog that they deem to be ultra liberal. While I usually find this feature rather humorous, today's offering left me shaking my head. In a blog article published by Truthdig, the subject of children's health insurance was addressed. Presently, the subject of the S-CHIPS program is being discussed, heatedly, in Congress and, as the article reports...

"Congress is considering bipartisan legislation that will cover poor
children in the U.S.

The major obstacle? President Bush is vowing to veto the bill, even
though Republican and Democratic senators reached bipartisan agreement on it.
The bill adds $35 billion to the State Children’s Health Insurance Program over
the next five years by increasing federal taxes on cigarettes.

The conservative Heritage Foundation is against the tobacco tax to fund
SCHIP, saying that it “disproportionately burdens low-income smokers” as well as
“young adults.” No mention is made of any adverse impact on Heritage-funder
Altria Group, the cigarette giant formerly known as Philip Morris."

Disproportionately burdens low-income smokers? Ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous! That aside, how, exactly is this issue something "out of left field?" The Chimperor is waving his banana sword in the air and is trying to appear strong on this issue, but the heartbreaking stories (which are only the tip of the iceberg) should rouse even the hardest of hearts...Bush's included. The fact is that health insurance for poor children is an obvious necessity and Bush is pulling his usual stubbornness...just because he can. Shame on you, Mr. Bush, and shame on you WND for labeling this issue as something that is out of left field!

Monday's This And That

Just a few items to start off your week...some funny ones and some, well, you'll see, LOL!



** The next season of Fox's hit show (and one of my personal favorites) '24' will feature a female president played by openly lesbian actress Cherry Jones, according to the Baltimore Sun. It's unclear as to whether her character will be lesbian as well, but I suppose we can hope!

** This is a story I just have to shake my head and wonder, "What were they thinking." Macy's ran into a little bit of trouble over one of their marketing ploys attempting to lure in more Hispanic shoppers. They introduced a t-shirt bearing the phrase, "Brown is the new white." Needless to say, Macy's has since pulled the shirt from its stores and has started the apology campaign.

** The American Family Association as issued one of its 'Action Alerts' regarding the hate crimes legislation, again suggesting that homosexuals don't deserve the sort of protections outlined in the bill. I wonder if Ted Kennedy and the other sponsors of the bill added Evangelicals (aka, Fundies) to the bill, if they'd still be making such a ridiculous uproar about it. Who knows, lol...they may just feel to 'dirty' to even comment!

** Matt Barber and all the other fundies with inoperable television remote controls should be breathing a little easier today, as the bill that would curb foul language during prime time managed to get the approval of a Senate panel. When a bill that suggests censoring religious programming is presented, I hope these fundies embrace it as much as they have this bill. After all, you just can't have it both ways.

** Those nutcases over at Westboro Baptist have proclaimed that God hates Ireland now too. This is just another of many proclamations (including the more well known, God hates America pronouncement), and will probably not be the last. If you want to see their latest press release, you can Google them...I refuse to give them a link. (h/t to Jeremy at Good As You)