Saturday, August 31, 2013

Things that seem too horrible to be true

A couple of stories caught my attention this week. I just saw mentions of them on various websites and thought I must be mis-reading or mis-understanding because these are too horrible to possibly be true.

Sadly, they are not.

The first story:


Montana judge won't resign over 30-days-for-rape ruling

Now that can't possibly be true, can it? A judge giving a rapist a 30-DAY sentence? Not 30 years, 30 DAYS?

But yes, that's exactly what seems to have happened.
How does this judge justify giving a slap on the wrist to a rapist?

In 2007, a Montana teacher named Stacey Rambold raped a 14-year-old girl who later ended up committing suicide. On Monday, Baugh gave him 15 years in prison for his crimes — but suspended all but 30 days of that sentence. And when arguing the case, Baugh noted that the 14-year-old girl was acting “older than her chronological age” and “as much in control of the situation” as the 49-year-old teacher who raped her.

A 14-year-old girl was just as much in control of the situation as the teacher who raped her? When has a 14-year-old kid ever been in control of any situation? Much less a situation involving an adult, and an authority figure at that?

Montana District Judge G. Todd Baugh reads a statement apologizing for remarks he made about a 14-year-old girl raped by a teacher in Billings, Mont., Wednesday Aug. 28, 2013. But Baugh defended the 30-day prison sentence given to the teacher as appropriate.
(AP Photo/Matthew Brown)

The Montana judge has defended his sentence, however, saying that he believes Rambold is at a low risk of becoming a repeat offender

Well, sure, now that he knows he might have to spend an entire month behind bars, I'm sure he won't make that mistake again!

Well, I assume that this defendant's history must have been in some way reassuring to Judge Baugh that he was not likely to again break the rules, right?

The prosecution entered into a “deferred prosecution agreement” with Rambold after Cherice’s death — which means the charges against him would have all been dismissed if he had successfully completed a sex-offender treatment program and met other terms, like avoiding contact with children.                                                But he broke some of those terms, and that’s why his case ended up before Baugh.

Jeezus Christ! He couldn't even follow the terms of his sex-offender program, terms that would have allowed him to get away scot-free, and you think he's not likely to re-offend?

As of this writing, some 41,000 people had signed on to a petition demanding Judge Baugh's resignation. Personally, I don't think he should be given the option to resign, I think he should be frog-marched out of the courthouse, tarred, feathered, and run out of town on a rail, but if you're interested, you can sign on here:

Story # 2:

Mother accused of torturing daughter takes witness stand


Carri Williams is accused of beating and starving her 13-year-old adopted daughter to death in May of 2011.

Williams described how the young girl was not given meals as punishment, and detailed the final moments before she found the child's lifeless body in her backyard.

The day Hana died, prosecutors say she was banished to the back yard. It was raining hard, and the family found her unconscious in the mud a short time later.

"My daughter was completely naked, and just her shoulders and head were on the patio face down," Williams said. "Her face was completely flat in the mole hill."

Although Hana died of hypothermia, there were other contributing causes to her death, including severe malnutrition and chronic gastritis, doctors said.

This monster left a naked 13-year-old girl outside in the rain. There are no words.

She used boot camp methods for discipline, and on numerous occasions forced Hana to sleep in a shower, nursery closet, and a barn for stealing food.
Stealing food? STEALING FOOD? You're her mother, you're supposed to give her food! She is entitled to food and shelter at a bare fucking minimum from her parents. If you are withholding food from your daughter, you are the one committing a crime, you sickening piece of shit.

The Williams' other children told investigators that Hana sometimes was beaten with a switch for standing more than 12 inches away from where she was told to stand or for speaking without permission.
And of course Carri Williams  did not act alone. No, of course there is also an adoptive father who is no less a sub-human cockhole.

When asked by an attorney what he felt most responsible about, Larry Williams replied: "I'm the dad... my daughter died... possibly I could have done something to stop it. And I didn't."
Oh, "possibly?" You "possibly" could have done something? Your number one responsibility in your entire fucking life is to protect your children. It's not like your daughter was kidnapped and murdered in some secret location beyond your control. It happened in your home. You and your wife are completely responsible you murdering piece of shit.

Now, when first I read this, I immediately thought "religious fanatics." No one would torture a helpless child to death unless they were doing it in the name of the Lord! Well, sure enough:
A witness told investigators that the Williams got their ideas for the disciplinary measures from a book, "To Train Up Your Child," which recommends switchings with a plumbing tool, cold water baths, withholding food and putting children out in cold weather as forms of punishment, court documents say.

Of course. of course they did. I don't know what is worse, the fact that these two monsters murdered this little girl or the fact that there is an instruction manual for how to do it. And of course, it's a religious-based book.

To Train Up a Child: Michael Pearl, Debi Pearl: 9781892112002 ... › ... › Christian LivingFamily

I looked at a little bit of this book on Amazon, as much as I could stomach. They suggest placing tempting objects somewhere that a crawling baby can reach them, then smacking their little hand when they grab for it. It's sick! Of course, they claim to be following God's example. They say that God planted the one tree Adam & Eve were forbidden to touch in the middle of the Garden of Eden so that they would be tempted to touch it, and could therefore be trained not to touch it, which , if I remember the Genesis story worked out not so great.
It's pretty fucking insane.

You know, it's one thing for some insane couple to embark on a program of child abuse and murder, we've become sadly accustomed to hearing such tales of horror, but this book. . .
First, these two scumbags have to sit down and write it, then they have to submit it to a publisher. Editors, publishing assistants, I don't know how many layers of management have to read "how to torture a helpless child" and say "yes, this is the sort of book our publishing house should put its name on."  Then bookstore owners and mangers have to say "yes, this is the sort of child-murdering book I would be proud to have on my shelves!" How can this happen? It just seems all too horrible to be true.

P.S. If you want to read a good summary of this horrible horrible book, check it out here:

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Well now I'm scared!

Two stories caught my eye today that are sort of related and together they have me just scared all to pieces!

Story Number One:

Bradlee Dean: Gays Commit Half Of All Murders

On this weekend’s edition of Sons of Liberty Radio, hosts Bradlee Dean and Jake McMillan claimed that gay people are responsible for half of all murders committed in large US cities, among other crimes. After Dean said that homosexuality and abortion are the “last two stages that a country takes before God judges that country,” McMillan charged that “half of the murders in large cities were committed by homosexuals

Okay, I'm not sure exactly who Bradlee Dean is except I know he's the guy who tried to sue Rachel Maddow for quoting his exact words which is obviously just textbook slander, so I typed him into the Google.
First off, he looks like this:


Secondly, he runs some gawd-awful organization called "You Can Run But You Can't Hide," which I assume is meant to sound that threatening.
According to Wikipedia: You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International (YCRBYCHI) is a United States Christian youth ministry that holds assemblies, including music concerts and discussions with students, in public schools. Founded by Bradlee Dean in 2008. . . YCRBYCHI's mission statement is: "To reshape America by re-directing the current and future generations both morally and spiritually through education, media, and the Judeo-Christian values found in our U.S. Constitution

Why a group that aims to direct children morally and spiritually would have a name that sounds exactly like a death threat, I don't know. But it's pretty safe to assume that Bradlee Dean is a huge asshole. The kind of huge asshole who would say things like Gays commit half the murders. Or:
Dean wondered if gay people are “thinking to themselves, ‘These people are really falling for this.” But of course gay rights are gaining ground, Dean claimed, since “they got their homo in office,” and have “infiltrated” the White House.

Aaaanyway. . . I was a bit skeptical about this statistic. Half the murders? That seemed impossible since if you add up all the murders committed by all the gay and lesbian folks I know, they total up to less than one. I couldn't understand how they were able to kill so many people, what with being such a small percentage of the population and what-not. Fortunately, Article Number Two clarified things for me.

Robertson: Gay People Deliberately Spread HIV/AIDS By Cutting People With Special Rings

Oh, now I get it! Thank goodness insane fuckwit Pat Robertson is around to explain these things.

Thinking makes my head hurt!

“You know what they do in San Francisco, some in the gay community there they want to get people so if they got the stuff they’ll have a ring, you shake hands, and the ring’s got a little thing where you cut your finger,” Robertson said. “Really. It’s that kind of vicious stuff, which would be the equivalent of murder."

Holy fucking shit, Pat Robertson is a vile little owl-casting of a human being. Who would say something like that?
Is this even worth refuting?
A: most gay men do NOT have HIV or AIDS.
B: People who do have HIV/AIDS do not want anyone else to ever have it ever. Just like people who have cancer don't want anyone else to get cancer or people with ALS don't want anyone else to suffer ALS. You've heard the expression "I wouldn't wish this on my worst enemy?" That's how people with HIV/AIDS feel about HIV/AIDS.
C: Name one. Name one incident where someone shook hands with another person and got cut with a special ring. There must be a police report somewhere, right? So go ahead. Name one.


But maybe we should err on the side of caution. From now on, I'm not shaking hands with any gay guys. I'm going straight in for the hug. Can't be too careful!

Thursday, August 22, 2013

Demons are after your kids? In the TV?

So apparently, there is a group called "Morality In Media." And also apparently, there is a new nominee for head of the FCC. I think you can see where this is headed.



Because, yeah, that horse isn't out of the barn!

(Oh, and I just noticed that this article is from back in June which shows you how carefully I monitor the activities of the FCC)


1.) The underlying federal criminal statute that prohibits indecency on the public airwaves is found at Title 18 U. S. Code Section 1464.  Have you read this law?
(“Whoever utters any obscene, indecent, or profane language by means of radio communication shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”)

Okay, so I guess it's okay to shout "Fuck!" on TV?

Imagine the kerfuffle had this been on the radio!
2.) Are you familiar with the FCC’s working definition of the term “indecent”?
(“Language or material that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory organs or activities.”)

Are you familiar with what contemporary community standards are? I mean, outside of Amish country.

The standards of the community of Los Angeles

And do you think that "patently offensive" is a measurable standard?
adverb: patently
  1. 1.
    clearly; without doubt.

    "these claims were patently false"
 In order to be indecent, something has to be "offensive" by "community standards" in a way that is "clear and without a doubt." How is that going to be enforceable?
And it must portray sexual or excretory organs? I watch a lot of tv and I don't recall ever seeing any penises or vaginas being portrayed on any show.
(Oh, wait I forgot about OZ. My God, the penises!)
Detective Stabler! Put that thing away!
Anyway, if that is the definition of indecency, you have nothing to worry about. Until someone starts broadcasting a show called "Will's Penis & Grace's Vagina," I don't think there is anything on broadcast TV or basic cable that approaches the standard of "indecency."
Of course I could be wrong. Maybe the FCC's mission is a lot more serious than I thought. Maybe they are the only agency that could prevent demons from raping our children, which they totally are doing, obviously, duh!
Klingenschmitt: The FCC Is Letting Demonic Spirits
 'Molest And Visually Rape Your Children'                        
Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Thursday, 8/22/2013 10:38 am -
Citing a campaign launched by Morality In Media to ensure that Tom Wheeler, President Obama's nominee to head the Federal Communications Commission, will enforce decency standards, "Dr. Chaps" Gordon Klingenschmitt said on his "Pray In Jesus Name" show that demonic spirits are using lax FCC enforcement of these standards to "molest and visually rape your children."

See, I thought that TV companies put on risque' programming in order to make monies because they're running a business and don't really care who's offended as long as they're selling ad time, but no! It's demons! I should have known!
"Dr. Chaps" said that former FCC chairman Julius Genachowski failed to adequately enforce the decency standards during his time in office and that was because there was a "demonic spirit of tyranny or immorality inside of him."

Because when I think of "tyranny," I think of "lax enforcement!"
And even though Genachowski outwardly appears very polished and successful, "the demonic spirit influences him to abuse and, dare I say, molest and visually rape your children.

You know, I think that if you're really serious about wanting to enforce decency standards on TV, I think the first thing you have to do is be realistic about who your nemeses are. You're going to have to go up against huge multinational media corporations who have unlimited resources and own more Congressmen than I own socks. It's not going to do you any good to pretend that it's "demonic spirits" who are to blame for shows you don't like. I don't think you have any chance of affecting the change you want, nor do I wish you luck in that endeavor, but if you're going to try to fight this battle, you at least have to take to a battlefield located in the real world.

Monday, August 19, 2013

Give it up, Bill Kristol

Sarah Palin is never, ever, ever going to go out with you. She doesn't like you like that.  Plus, she's a married woman. And I know, I know, there's a good chance she'll quit the marriage halfway through, but still, every red-blooded tea-bagging male is crushing on Palin, she's not settling for you.

I mean, I assume that Bill Kristol is hopelessly in love with Sarah Palin, how else do you explain this?

Bill Kristol: Palin Can 'Resurrect Herself' With Alaska Senate Run

Bill, Bill, Bill. . .
Sarah Palin is not going to run for Senate. Oh, sure, she may do a half-assed pseudo-run just to keep her name out there, but she is never going to be a Senator. Senator is a job you actually have to show up for. Sarah Palin is not going to be a Senator because the Senate won't build a studio in her house and let her legislate by Skype. Also, everyone hates her, so how is she going to win an election?

Bill, for some reason, there are still people who take you seriously. There's no reason you should have any semblance of credibility, having previously been wrong about everything, but there you are. Why would you want to squander this inexplicable  credibility that people pretend you have on Sarah Palin? Again? How'd it work out the first time, hmm? Yeah, not so good. Give it up, Bill, She's not going to go out with you.

Thursday, August 15, 2013

Beyond the Pale

This is truly disgusting:

Stockman invites Missouri rodeo clown to perform in Texas

The "Stockman" referred to in the above headline is Congessman Steve Stockman (R-Eprehensible)
And the headline is from Congressman Stockman's own website, because obviously this is something of which he's proud.

Oh, and in case you missed it, the rodeo clown is the asshole who put on a Barack Obama mask and asked a cheering crowd if they'd like to see Obama trampled by a bull.

You've got to be pretty confident that your audience is mostly assholes to pull this shit!

Here's some of the text from Stockman's website:

Aug 14, 2013
Press Release

Liberals want to bronco bust dissent, create a state of fear
First of all, "bronco bust dissent?" Jeezus, don't try to be clever. that's really just sad. That's worse than the ads you hear during ball games where they say things like "you'll hit a home run every time with Johnson Brand detergent!" or "It's a slam-dunk that you'll get a good deal at Fuckington Chevrolet!"
But mostly, how are liberals "busting dissent" or "creating a state of fear?" You can't just drop those rhetorical bombs without some sort of examples to back them up.
WASHINGTON -- Congressman Steve Stockman Wednesday invited the rodeo clowns who performed at the Missouri State Fair, and were banned or ordered into “sensitivity training” when one clown mocked President Barack Obama, to perform at a rodeo in Texas’ 36th District.
Okay, see, it was the Missouri State Fair that fired the clown for his offensive antics, not some cabal of liberals. And I don't think anyone was ordered into sensitivity training. And the assclown wasn't "mocking" the President, he was providing a bunch of mouth-breathing Missouri rednecks the fantasy of the President being seriously injured or killed for their amusement. That's a little different.
And, honestly, no one really cares if some ignorant racist rodeo clown did something horrible because what would you expect, but for an actual US Congressman to put his stamp of approval on the awfulness? That is really beyond the pale.
“Liberals want to bronco bust dissent. But Texans value speech, even if its speech they don’t agree with,” said Stockman, “From Molly Ivins to Louie Gohmert and every opinion between Texans value free and open political speech. 
Did you seriously just mention the late great Molly Ivins in the same sentence with half-witted buffoon Louie Gohmert? Oh, fuck, now I just did it, too! You bastard!
And you're really going to claim that Texans value free and open political speech? I think maybe you might want to ask Natalie Maines about that. Because I don't really seem to remember a whole lot of Texans embracing her after she shared a few words of free and open political speech.
“Disagreeing with speech is one thing. Banning it and ordering citizens into reeducation classes for mocking a liberal leader is another,” said Stockman. “Liberals have targeted this man for personal destruction to create a climate of fear.”
Jeezus Christ, what the fuck is it with you people? No one has banned this man's free speech. He is absolutely free to dress up in his Obama mask and say whatever he wants, he is just no longer employed by the Missouri State Fair because they found his act to be an embarrassment to them and to the State of Missouri. Your First Amendment right to free speech does not entitle you to keep your job after you've embarrassed your employer.
And please, give me one example, just one, of a liberal who has targeted this man for personal destruction. Name me one liberal who has done this and I will personally go have a talk with this bad liberal and set him straight. Go ahead, name one. . . I've got all day. . .
“The liberal reaction is straight out of Alinsky. 
Okay, just stop it with the Alinsky. You don't know anything about Saul Alinsky. Hell, I don't know hardly anything about Saul Alinsky. But every time one of you right-wing wackadoos refers to something as being "straight out of Alinsky" it just shows that you're regurgitating talking points you got from Glenn Beck.
“The liberal reaction is straight out of Alinsky.  They want to crush dissent by isolating and polarizing anyone who questions Obama, even if it’s a rodeo clown with a harmless gag,” said Stockman. “The idea to create a state of fear and make people afraid to trivialize Obama. 
No. People should absolutely make fun of Barack Obama. Whoever the president is, even if the next President is the reincarnation of George Fuckin Washington, people should make fun of him. It's important for a Democracy. What people shouldn't do is openly hope for him to be injured and/or killed. Not just because he's the President of the United Goddamm States of America, but because he's a human being. And nobody deserves the level of contempt and scorn that you fuckers heap on this man at every opportunity. Hell, one of you assholes invited a man who threatened Obama's life to be a guest at the State of the Union.
It's wrong. It's unseemly, it's undignified. It's not so bad when it's a rodeo clown at some fair in Missouri, but for sitting Congressmen to sink to this level, well that's really beyond the pale.

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

People who scare the Hell out of Me

The next generation of the Religious Right.

If you think this generation is nuts, wait until you see the kids they've been homeschooling.


She doesn't even know why she's crying!
It's not just that they are being brought up in a bubble, I was brought up in that bubble. I went to Church-run schools from 1st through 12th grade. We were taught that "the world" was not to be trusted, that the Devil was lurking everywhere, looking to tempt us into damnation. We were taught to expect persecution when we "went out into the world." But at least we had tv. No one was putting out straight-to-video veggie Tales and Kirk Cameron movies to further insulate us. And there weren't 20 different cable channels featuring nothing but conservative preachers. (There was Billy Graham, but he was considered a sort of heretic in our church.) (Seriously.)  And we could get books from a public library. I don't think a lot of these kids get any exposure to real life. Hell, they even have their own haunted houses at Halloween time, lest their fantasy life get polluted by witchcraft and the occult!
Besides, nothing could be scarier than an abortion doctor!
But it's not just that the bubble has become even more all-enveloping. It's the increased use of military imagery that really makes these kids scary.

I don't understand the "prayer warrior" thing, either. To me, a warrior is one who fights battles, not one who gets on his knees and asks someone else to fight them for him. But anyway. . .
Remember "Jesus Camp?" There's a couple of scenes in there that are disturbing. One is a skit the kids do dressed in camo fatigues and talking about "defeating the enemy."
 Correction: Only the BOYS wear camo fatigues. Girls wear, what, Danskins?
 The other is when the lady who runs the camp bemoans the fact that little Christian children aren't being raised with the same fervor that leads Palestinian children to grow up and become suicide bombers.
 Here's an example of the sort of creepy, militaristic stuff coming from the Dominionist right these days. From wacky self-proclaimed prophet Cindy Jacobs:

Lay Siege to a City

By Cindy Jacobs
The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it.
 (Psalm 24:1)

. . . Frankly, as we examine the cities in which we live, many would have to say, “Truthfully, there is a lot about my city that is not godly.” . . . What has happened to God’s world? The Bible also states that Satan has declared himself the “god of this world.” Satan has effectively built strongholds around our cities and the people groups of the world. He is holding captive billions of souls who will spend an eternity in hell if we do not learn how to storm the gates of hell on their behalf

Okay, it's one thing to lay siege to a city, but if you're planning on invading Hell, you're on your own! Atlanta is hot enough, thank you very much!

The army of God is on the move and ready for battle strategy. A new breed of watchman is emerging across the nations. This breed is ready to lay siege to their cities.

See, this is exactly the kind of talk that usually ends with someone denying that she ever meant for anyone to kill that doctor, not that he didn't have it coming.

Jacobs, by the way, has a 4-step foolproof plan for laying siege to your hometown!

1. Make a map.
God desires to reveal strongholds to His intercessors concerning their area. Ezekiel was told to make a map (4:1). This concept, called “spiritual mapping,” has been largely uncovered by recent pioneers in spiritual warfare such as George Otis, Jr.

Yes, "Spiritual mapping." Also known as cartography. Also known as wasting a lot of time since you can buy a fucking map at any gas station or bring one up on your phone in like 2 seconds, but sure, of course God prefers your crude, hand-drawn "map" of your city. Also, the passage she references, God tells Ezekiel to literally draw a map. Not a "spiritual map," an actual, physical map, drawn on a tile. And this is an actual siege that Ezekiel is prepping for, not some stupid "spiritual siege."

Thou also, son of man, take thee a tile, and lay it before thee, and portray upon it the city, even Jerusalem: And lay siege against it, and build a fort against it, and cast a mount against it; set the camp also against it, and set battering rams against it round about.

Battering rams. Building forts. This sounds like real warfare, this has nothing to do with whatever Cindy Jacobs is talking about.
 And reading further, what result does God predict will follow Ezekiel's siege?

Ezekiel Chapter 5:
10Therefore, fathers will eat their sons among you, and sons will eat their fathers; for I will execute judgments on you and scatter all your remnant to every wind. . .
12'One third of you will die by plague or be consumed by famine among you, one third will fall by the sword around you, and one third I will scatter to every wind, and I will unsheathe a sword behind them. 13'Thus My anger will be spent and I will satisfy My wrath on them, and I will be appeased;

And this is what she wants us to emulate? Holy fuck!

What's step 2?
2. Set an intercessory strategy.
The spiritual mapping of a city can be used to develop a strategic plan to tear down the strongholds of the enemy. Ezekiel was instructed in verse 2 to “lay siege walls” against the city. These were movable watchtowers which were placed near the walls or strongholds of the enemy to spy out, research, and weaken the besieged stronghold. “Watchmen” were placed in these towers to give information for strategy. These watchmen harassed the enemy from a high place that was purposely built for war. The Lord has placed his watchmen throughout the world whom He has anointed to spy out, research, and harass the enemy through intercession.

Whatever that means. Nothing good, I'm sure. Harassing people from a watchtower, isn't that what the Jehovah's witnesses do?

3. Implement the strategy.
God told Ezekiel to build a ramp or earthen mound against the walls. He was also told to build camps and lay battering rams against it (4:2). Today this is accomplished through unity in prayer with pastors and leaders, prayer in local churches and the formation of “camps” of prayer groups for the city. These groups pray the prayers that are the “battering rams” against the gates of hell in the city.

Wait. The gates of Hell are here in the city? Couldn't we just padlock them? Problem solved!

L5P by spudboy67
Found One! Hand me a padlock!

4. Build a wall of protection.
Ezekiel was instructed to take an iron pan and place it as a wall (4:3). This wall offered protection against the fiery darts of the enemy from the besieged stronghold. We can build a wall by claiming the protection of God in our lives (Psalm 91). To withstand Satan’s counterattack, we need to keep these walls in a state of repair through personal holiness and right relationships to God and man.

A pan. I'm to hide behind a pan. Really? A pan? That's going to protect me from Satan himself? A pan?
Well, if it's good enough for Brandon, Iowa. . .

Anyway, I seem to have digressed a bit. Point is, the next generation of the Religious Right is going to be Hell!

Tuesday, August 6, 2013

Pop Culture Blasphemy III - Iconic TV shows

Again I'm not saying these shows aren't good, just not as good as everyone seems to think.

1. 30 Rock

I thought this show was going to be good. I always liked Tracy Morgan and Alec Baldwin. I never thought Tina Fey was funny on Weekend Update, but I read that she had written some great bits (old French Whore, for example) and Rachel Dratch was supposed to be playing the part that ended up going to Jane Krakowski. When NBC screwed Rachel Dratch out of the cast, I should have known there were going to be problems. The first season wasn't bad, I thought it had potential. I thought they would figure out how to use Tracy Morgan and that Kenneth the Page would be phased out, but I was wrong on both counts. But by then, 30 Rock had somehow been designated as the show that smart people like, so it dragged on and on getting less and less funny until it finally petered out. Why have a talented comic like Tracy Morgan play a guy who basically just shouts idiotic things that don't make sense (get it? He's supposed to be crazy! Isn't that hilarious?) And why have the absolute most annoying character in the history of television, Kenneth the page? Lazy stereotyping of rural southerners? What a fresh comedic idea!  And when they did stumble on to a funny character, Tracy's wife played by Shari Sheppard, they didn't stick with it. Tracy was gone for a couple of episodes, she was funny, just make the switch!

2. The Sopranos

When this show first came out I thought it sounded like a great idea. A mob boss who sees a shrink. Wow, that's something I haven't seen before, a Mafioso who feels conflicted about his criminal career, who feels bad about the people he's hurt but of course there's no getting out because it's the mafia. But when we finally started watching the DVD's, I was so disappointed. Tony isn't conflicted at all. And over the course of how ever many seasons his character doesn't develop at all. He's a violent narcissistic thug in episode one and a violent narcissistic thug in episode however many there were. There's no one to root for in this show. I have no problem with the idea of the "anti-hero," I love Breaking Bad, but at least Walter White shows character development. he starts off as a basically decent guy trying to do something for his family, then gets a taste of money and power and becomes completely corrupted. Tony Soprano starts corrupt and ends corrupt. But James Gandolfini is so goddamm likeable that he's able to carry the show on his back. I'm not saying The Sopranos was a bad show, I enjoyed it, but I don't understand why it's on everyone's list of greatest shows ever.

3. Dexter

Okay, first of all, there are damn few cases where blood-spatter analysis is required. Yet Dexter is employed full-time doing nothing but blood-spatter analysis for one local police precinct. I know Miami has a lot of crime, but come on!
Second, the writers could never make up their minds whether Dexter was a sociopath or not. If you're going to make him a sociopath, then you can't have him forming an emotional bond with Juli Benz, and trying to split the difference by having him say things like "if I were capable of feeling love, I think that's what I would be feeling now" just doesn't cut it.
And if the "code" he lives by is only intended to keep him out of prison, why does he follow it so religiously? When Jimmy Smits wanted to kill that lawyer, he refuses because she hasn't actually committed any murders herself. Why the fuck would a sociopath care? He might refuse because she's a prominent member of the community which would make her murder harder to get away with, but why would he object on moral grounds? He should have no morals.
Third, the sister character is just horrible. I know the writers want her to seem super-tough, but having her say fuck and goddamn every three words is a pretty lazy way of doing it. Also, why does she love Dexter so much? She was an only child whose father's world revolved around her. Then this foundling shows up and not only does she have to share the father with him, he monopolizes the father's time because of his psychological problems. She should at least feel some resentment. Again, not necessarily a bad show, I enjoyed watching a few seasons, just nothing to write home about.

4. Mad Men

Zzzzzzz. . . .


Monday, August 5, 2013

Just when you thought they couldn't sink any lower. . .

. . .They come out with this:

(don't bother trying to read this screenshot)
Yes, the right, funded of course by the loathsome Koch Brothers, has started a campaign to encourage people to refuse to enroll in "Obamacare" with the catchy slogan:

Defend Your Health Freedom!
Because freedom's just another word for dying of preventable disease, I guess?

Obamacare will officially kick off on October 1, 2013 with open enrollment through the state and federal government health Exchanges. Exchanges, which are the key to implementing health care reform, threaten individual choices, privacy, freedom and pocketbooks.

Naturally, no explanation is offered as to how exchanges, the whole point of which is top offer choices, will threaten individual choices, or privacy, or pocketbooks. It's just a given that they will.


Obamacare will officially kick off on October 1, 2013 with open enrollment through the state and federal government health Exchanges. Exchanges, which are the key to implementing health care reform, threaten individual choices, privacy, freedom and pocketbooks.

Is that true? Probably not. I mean, if a bunch of wingnuts refuse to drive cars, I don't think the DMV would shut down. But either way, this has to be a new low point for these sons of bitches. (And I mean that literally, they are the offspring of male humans and female dogs)

They are actually sinking to a new low of convincing the ignorant, gullible rubes that listen to right-wing media to forego having the ability to see a doctor or get medicine just for the sheer nihilistic satisfaction of sticking a thumb in the eye of a President they don't like. And some of these fools will take them up on it. And I know, I know, it's easy to say that these horrible people deserve whatever bad things happen to them, but as horrible as they are, they're still people, dammit!

So, other than "Defending your Health Freedom," what other reasons are there for refusing to get insured?
Glad you asked. There are four of them, and they're all bullshit!

Reason #1:
No Private Insurance –

Obamacare is "Medicaid for the middle class" – or as CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin calls Exchange coverage: "a second Medicaid program."

Of course, this is an obvious lie since the exchanges will ONLY offer insurance from private companies, as the President caved shamefully on the public option.

Reason #2:
No Privacy
Data enters federal database accessible by IRS.

If we've learned anything over the past few weeks it is that you have no privacy at all anymore anyway. I'm not sure what personal information you think that your doctor is going to have to report to the IRS under "Obamacare."
You've got some questionable deductions, Mr. Smith, and I see here that you've been taking boner pills!

Reason the third:

3. Limited Choice –
 Coverage is "narrow network" policies.

Okay, I don't know what "narrow network" policies means, although I could hazard a guess, but compare them to the choice most of us have now. We have the choice of going with the policy our company's HR dept. chose or having no coverage at all. And we're the lucky ones! Some folks have the choice of no coverage or no coverage if their employer doesn't offer it.

And finally, reason # four:

4. High Cost Premiums – Income redistribution to pay for Exchange operations and subsidizing high-cost individuals.