The Christian War on Secularism

“But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”
- Thomas Jefferson.

Every year, Right Winged Christians over the pond stir up an imaginary shit storm, by imagining that Atheist Godless moral-less heathens wish to see the total destruction of Christmas. It is what we Atheists do. We burn Christmas trees…. after we’ve eaten a baby…. and worshipped Satan for the day. They are angry if we say “Holidays” instead of “Christmas”. They are mad that we even celebrate Christmas at all. As if it is a holiday for Christians only. Christians are excellent at rewriting history, to suit themselves.

Christmas changes. The celebratory atmosphere around this time of year, was not a product of Christianity. It is now a glorious mix of Christianity, Paganism, and Secularism. This mix, is Christmas. We can all call it Christmas, and we can all celebrate Christmas. People from all different faiths and backgrounds celebrate it, because it is a time for family. Christmas has a mix of histories; those include pagan, Christian, and secular. Belief in the birth of Jesus isn’t necessary to celebrate or enjoy Christmas. It is similar to Christians adopting the day, from the Pagans. Gift giving, family feasts, and parties on December 25th existed in Babylon long before Jesus, as the celebration of the feast of the son of Isis. Kissing under mistletoe, is a Northern European Pagan tradition, considered a fertility ritual during “Yule” – a festival dedicated to Mithras (coincidentally, Mithras had twelve disciples, was born on Dec. 25th, rose three days after being buried in a tomb, believed in a final judgement, and his followers baptised, and had Eurcharist). Decorating, and Christmas tree’s existed in many different Pagan festivals. Christianity simply appropriated much of the traditions of Paganism, after pressure from the Romans. Christmas therefore evolves. It started Pagan, Christianity took it on (and really, didn’t add much to the pot), and now it is secular as well as Christian. It is a lovely melting pot, and everyone enjoys the day for what it is. We Atheists don’t want to get rid of it. We have no problem with Christians celebrating the birth of Jesus. We however, celebrate for sentimental reasons; for family tradition and the joy that Christmas uniquely brings. And that’s allowed, whether Christians like it or not. Apparently some don’t….

The only ‘war’ on Christmas, is from those who wish to ensure that Christmas is not celebrated by anyone other than the narrow band of fundamentalist Christians who believe it is “their” holiday. It is an attack on every other interpretation of the holiday. It is a denial of history; that being Christmas traditions take more from Pagan festivals than they do from Christianity. Also….. spending four hours shopping for shit no one needs, followed by an hour singing Silent Night in Church…… is not the Christian spirit of Christmas.

Here is what Atheists don’t do.

We do not call for boycotts against private businesses, purely because they believe something different to us.
Allow me to tell you what the ‘war on christmas’ actually amounts to:
Walgreens has agreed to label all its Christmas decorations “Christmas” as opposed to “holiday decorations” or just “decorations”. Mad Christians who need constant reassurance that their religion is considered the most important system of belief (or….philosophy as Bill O’Reilly amusingly calls it) from about mid-October onwards, will be over joyed!

But Christian groups go one step further. Not only do they demand Federal recognition and validation of their religious convictions everywhere they go……. they also wish to impose this on the private property of others also. The American Family Association issued a sort of fatwa against The Gap and Banana Republic…. calling for a boycott. Effectively hurting business, thus hurting people who work for those businesses. Threatening, basically. Because, according the AFA:

The boycott is part of our ongoing campaign to encourage businesses, communities and individuals to put Christ back in Christmas. The boycott runs from November 1 through Christmas Day.

For years, Gap has refused to use the word Christmas in its television commercials, newspaper ads and in-store promotions, despite tens of thousands of consumer requests to recognize Christmas and in spite of repeated requests from AFA to do the same.

- Amusingly, it turns out the AFA issued this statement, a few weeks after The Gap’s advert which includes the phrase “GO CHRISTMAS!”
According to the AFA, The Gap, Old Navy and Banana Republic are at war with Christmas. Now, not only does the Gap’s Advert feature “GO CHRISTMAS!”, if you type “Christmas” into the Old Navy search engine, you are presented with products that clearly say “Christmas” on them, and have Christmas symbols. In fact, one of the items is labelled “Christmas bodysuit for baby”. If you go onto Banana Republic’s website At the top, you will see “Get it by Christmas!”, just above a massive picture of a Christmas tree, and presents. Type ‘Santa’ into any of the search engines, and a plethora of Christmas products are displayed. The conclusion? The AFA, like Fox, is a mouthpiece for the manipulative Christian Right.

The First Baptist Church of Dallas, in 2010 launched a website designed to allow users to ‘name and shame’ companies who take ‘Christ’ away from the holiday period, in their ads and products. Christians are naturally very talented at forcing their views on others, and silencing dissent, so to harm businesses – small and large – to harm the employees who work at these businesses by shaming them simply for not re-affirming the Christian aspect of Christmas every single second of every day, is no big deal to these horrid little Theocrats.
My position is simply; a business is privately owned. The owner can do with it as he or she wishes. He/she is not under the control of a few fundamentalists trying to ruin his/her livelihood for such a ridiculous reason.

We don’t believe in segregation.
Students and parents at Sullivan High School in Sullivan, Indiana have decided they wish to have a prom in which gay couples are not allowed. One the special education teachers Diana Medley, rather disgustingly said:

“We don’t agree with it (homosexuality), and it’s offensive to us.”

- This bigotry and a belief in apartheid should be offensive to us all. It should be fought at every opportunity. When Christians ask “Why do Atheists keep attacking Christianity”….. it is people like Diana Medley that drive us. Sexuality, as pointed out in a previous entry, has a genetic element. So, exchange the word “homosexuality” for “black” or “people with brown hair” or “women” and you will notice just how bigoted it becomes. Cloaking your bigotry behind outdated myths that have no basis in reality, and are refuted by genetics, does not make you any less of a disgusting human being. You are a bigot. And how does a woman like this get to be a teacher, when a percentage of people who have done nothing to cause her any harm, she finds ‘offensive’? You wouldn’t put a KKK leader in charge of a school in a black community.

We do not say that medical treatment should be prioritised for people who do not believe in a God. Can the same be said for the religious? Well, no.
One study found that a majority of religious people, when asked, would place an Atheist lower down the list of priorities for a kidney transplant, than people who believe.

Atheists do not say that people of belief should be banned from public office. Again, the religious aren’t so much a fan of rights for anyone who isn’t like them:

Arkansas’ Constitution:

1. Atheists disqualified from holding office or testifying as witness.
No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this
State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any Court.

Maryland Constitution, Article 37:

That no religious test ought ever to be required as a qualification for any office of profit or trust in this State, other than a declaration of belief in the existence of God; nor shall the Legislature prescribe any other oath of office than the oath prescribed by this Constitution.

Mississippi Constitution, Article 14, Section 265:

No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this State.

South Carolina Constitution, Article 17, Section 4:

No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution.

Tennessee Constitution, Article 9, Section 2:

No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this State.

Texas Constitution, Article 1, Section 4:

No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.

Atheists do not claim that those who believe in a God, are not fit for public office. Again, not so when it is the other way round.
When Asheville City Councilman Cecil Bothwell declared that he does not believe in a God, the Christian Right of North Carolina took great offence. H.K. Edgerton, a board member for the Southern Legal Resource Center – an organisation that apparently stands to protect the rights of all, threatened to file a law suit against Bothwell, claiming he is unfit to serve, and his appointment violates North Carolina’s anti-Atheist Constitutional provision. Whilst barring an Atheist from public office would certainly be struck down by the Supreme Court as a violation of the Federal Constitution; it doesn’t stop the Christian Right from trying, which often leads to long battles for an Atheist to serve publicly. For example, Herb Silverman ran for the post of Governor of South Carolina in 1992, but was discarded from the race for refusing to swear an oath to God. A whole five years later, the courts ruled in his favour.

We do not punish young children, for thought crime.
In 1996, at the age of 6, Michael Bristor was denied an Honour Roll, because he refused to believe in God. He was ridiculed at school, and it took his parents three years and a legal battle to get the Honour Roll award. When describing his treatment from his clearly fundamentalist teacher, Michael said:

“She gave me time outs for not praying. Kids were calling me a devil worshipper.”

Atheists do not claim that Christians are inherently bad role models.
The Boy Scouts of America, which exists through a Congressional Charter, currently does not allow Atheists to be a part of it. It states:

“The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God. In the first part of the Scout Oath or Promise the member declares, ‘On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law.’ The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship and are wholesome precepts in the education of the growing members.”

- That final sentence, is a disgrace, and goes against every rational basis for the Constituting of the United States of America. It is a dangerous sentence, it is a Theocratic principle, and it is massively unconstitutional.

Atheists do not enshrine Bronze age ‘moral’ values in law, nor do we wish to restrict an individual’s basic right to love, nor do we wish to place Atheist propaganda all over public buildings and money.
The rewriting of history to suit Christian America is a regular occurrence from the 1950s until the present day. Somehow, it has managed to convince a Nation that “One Nation, under God” was always a part of the Pledge, or that “In God We Trust” always appeared on the dollar bill. Both of which are a product of the rise of the Christian Right in the 1950s. Jefferson and Franklin would have reacted with anger at the inclusion of “One Nation, under God” on any public institution.

The Christian Right are experts at rewriting merging their prejudices with Christianity, and using it to attack the secular nature of the Constitution. Anti-social liberalism is a key ingredient in the making of the Christian Right, and this social liberalism extends to homosexuality. We see the influence of the Christian Right in the passing of the ‘Defence of Marriage Act’ – using ‘defence’ to hide the fact that they are slowly breaking down the barrier between Church and State, slowly eroding individual rights, replacing them with Christian theocratic ‘values’. The ‘Defence of Marriage Act’ states:

“In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.”

-If this isn’t a restriction of human rights, by a bunch of homophobic anti-constitutional theocrats, I don’t know what is. This is the ultimate in Government power over individual rights. It is a restriction on ‘love’.

Atheists do not care if our children marry someone of faith. As long as they are happy, and in love.
A recent study out of the University of Minnesota found that 47.6% of people polled said they would disapprove if their child married an Atheist.

Christianity isn’t under attack. It has eroded Constitutional secularism; the achievements of the Enlightenment to break the link between the State and Religion, and it isn’t finished. It is like a cancer, slowly making its way across all sections of public life. Schools, public office, science, love. The ‘values’ that they push for, that they insist on forcing upon the rest of society, are vastly incompatible with the Founding documents. Secularists and Atheists have an absolute duty, to resist it, to fight it, and to stand up for the secularism that took so long to achieve. We do not wish to destroy Christmas. I have a Christmas tree. I will be sharing gifts, and celebrating with the family.

So, sit back, and allow Fox to wage a non-existent war myth that it created, in an attempt to boost ratings. And remember, Christmas; which started off as pressure placed on Christians in Rome to join in the Pagan festivities… is for everyone.

Call it Christmas, call it winter festival, call it the holiday season, call it winter solstice, call it anything you wish. The vocabulary is irrelevant. Spend the time loving, smiling, and making memories, whatever your beliefs.

Racism in America: Today

When the United States was beginning to form, there was a hierarchy of oppression that kept everyone subservient to someone above them. The King of England demanded goods from the Jamestown white elite who exploited and controlled the white frontiersman who, in order to appease the elite with money and land, slaughtered Indigenous people and brutalized African slaves. Many whites joined Indigenous and African rebellions. The white elite worked to stop this because they knew such an alliance would become too powerful and would succeed at overthrowing the control that the elite and the King had. So in order to separate the whites from everyone else, they started giving more privileges (land and better treatment) to the white servants. This worked. The working class whites effectively abandoned the movements for change and to this day these groups have problems working together.
- Howard Zinn, 1980.

46% of American Republicans in the State of Mississippi believe that interracial marriage should be illegal. I will elaborate on and explain this later.

After my blog on the racism of Abraham Lincoln, I wondered whether race is still a divisive issue today as it has always been, in America. In the UK, race is still an issue, though it is far more subtle and much less noticeable, but it exists nonetheless. There isn’t this notion of white supremacy, nor do we have the history of the “founders” being slave owners or massive racial segregation up until very recently. We don’t have a KKK equivalent and we didn’t fight a civil war to protect the rights of States to own slaves. Race is certainly a problem in the UK though. We tend to become far more Nationalist during times of economic hardship and the need to blame immigrants or anyone who doesn’t happen to fit the narrow band of what it means to be “British” becomes an almost accepted narrative. Political parties push immigration reform to the top of their agendas, giving credit to such racial tension. Race is used as a divisive mechanism to subvert attention away from a failing class system.

Here in the UK, with talk of economic austerity, it was only a matter of time before the issue of race was introduced into the equation. We know that poorer areas like inner city Liverpool, Manchester, and Hackney are going to face the toughest council cuts. Low socio-economic areas are predominantly mixed race or black and Asian. So it was only a matter of time before David Cameron would bring race into the mix. He then suddenly made a speech against multiculturalism, in which he mentions the words “islam” and “muslim” 36 times, and “Christianity” once. Race is yet again being used as a divisive wedge.

Back to the USA, and the 19th Century, before the Civil War. It has long been argued by the rather hermetic Southern America that the Civil war was a war between the States (the South) and the big bad Federal Government (the North). Yes. The States rights to own and perpetuate slavery. The charge against a big bad Federal Government invading the lives of its citizens does not hold up when you look at the evidence, and is actually rather rudimentary.

The American lawyer and journalist William Walker, in 1854, after a failed attempt to set up a Republic of Sonora in Mexico, with the intention of it becoming a State of the Union; invaded Nicaragua for control of a vital trade route between New York and San Francisco. He succeeded in his efforts, and took control of Nicaragua, renaming it “Walkeragua” (seriously, i’m not making this up). In 1856, President Franklin Pierce, officially recognised Walker’s regime in Walkeragua as legitimate. His regime began to Americanise Walkeragua, by instating slavery, using American currency, and making English the official language. He advertised his new Country to American Southern businessmen by advertising the fact that his new quasi-State was pro-slavery and would remain so. By the time Walker revoked Nicaragua’s 1824 Emancipation Act, the rest of Latin America took note, and invaded. He fled and was bought back to the U.S where he was welcomed as a hero of the South. As “States rights” go, invading another sovereign nation and revoking its anti-slavery laws, is about as big and as bad as a Federal Government can get. He died before the Civil War kicked off, but the South referred to him throughout the Civil War as “General Walker“. The South did not just fight to preserve the institution of slavery, they wanted to expand it, on a grand scale, to the point where Senator John Crittenden of Kentucky proposed that the 36°30′ parallel north be a line that separates the northern free states, and the southern slave states, all the way down to the tip of South America. American racism has always been rife.

In 2011, membership of white supremacist organisations has increased tremendously. According the the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks white supremacist organisations in the US, the number of members is up by 48% since 2000. Jeff Schoep, head of the National Socialist Movement (the Nazi Movement) in America, who the FBI classify as terrorists, said:

“The immigration issue is the biggest problem we’re facing because it’s changing the face of our country. We see stuff in England and Spain like this. … They are turning those countries into a Third World ghetto.”

Well, I live in England, and he’s right!!! Here is the River Thames in Central London a few years back:

Here is the River Thames in Central London today:

Sad times.

The largest white supremacist group in America; Stormfront have a website with a forum, which includes systematic attacks on white jewish people. They appear to use “Jew” as a term of race. White, black, Jew. On a discussion about the economic crises, a member called “Crowstorm” whose nationality he has set as “Jewnited States of America” says this:

The problem is, Jews look White so when people see a Jew do evil, they don’t say “look at the evil Jew”… no, they say “look at that evil White man.

- It is an odd statement to make for a variety of reasons. First, a Jewish person is not the colour “Jewish“. It isn’t white, black, jew. If he’s a white man and Jewish, then he’s a white Jew. Jewish is not a race. But not just that, but race itself is not biological. It doesn’t exist. It is a fantasy. An abstraction. Like Nationality and Religion. All man made abstractions, meaningless nothingness used to create tension between low socio-economic groups to ensure disunity. If poor white people are blaming poor black people for all the trouble in New Orleans after Katrina hit, then their attention is on each other, and not on the very rich folk in Washington (both white and black) who washed their hands of the plight of anyone who isn’t a very wealthy lobbyist decades ago. And lastly, no one says “look at the evil white man”, because for the vast majority of people, race isn’t an issue; if you’re evil, I don’t care what colour you are.

Another quite extraordinary post on Stormfront was from a school teacher who taught apparently in black schools. Here are some of the quotes from it:

I was away about two minutes but when I got back, the black girls had lined up at the front of the classroom and were convulsing to the delight of the boys.

Many black people, especially women, are enormously fat.

Blacks, on average, are the most directly critical people I have ever met: “Dat shirt stupid. Yo’ kid a bastard. Yo’ lips big.” Unlike whites, who tread gingerly around the subject of race, they can be brutally to the point.

When a black wants to ask, “Where is the bathroom?” he may actually say “Whar da badroom be?”

Many black girls are perfectly happy to be welfare queens.

There is something else that is striking about blacks. They seem to have no sense of romance, of falling in love.

Pregnancy was common among the blacks, though many black girls were so fat I could not tell the difference.

My white students came back with generally “conservative” ideas. “We need to cut off people who don’t work,” was the most common suggestion. Nearly every black gave a variation on the theme of “We need more government services.” One black girl was exhorting the class on the need for more social services and I kept trying to explain that people, real live people, are taxed for the money to pay for those services. “Yeah, it come from whites,” she finally said. “They stingy anyway.”

It is impossible to get them to care about such abstractions as property rights or democratic citizenship.

- The “teacher” goes on to say he doesn’t understand why his black students think he his a racist. Surely it isn’t racist to think that black students are inherently lazy, fat, illiterate, racist, anti-democratic, communist sluts who just don’t understand why being indoctrinated in Conservative ideology is a wonderful learning experience and are incapable of love?

The days of burning crosses and wearing silly costumes are over. White supremacists tend now to fight their cause with mainstream language like “We just want to protect our children and live in a safe environment“, the language is manipulative because they are simply masking the fact that they blame anyone with slightly darken skin for why their neighborhood isn’t safe.

A study by the American economic review between July 2001 and May 2002 entitled “Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination.” , found that job applicants with a white sounding name are 50% more likely to be asked back than an applicant with a white sounding name. The researches sent out 5000 applications in sales, marketing, clerical and customer service positions. The names they used were a mix of white sounding names, and black sounding names. The report showed that white applicants with stronger resumes than other white applicants received 30% more callbacks, whereas black applicants with stronger resumes than other black applicants received just 9% more callbacks. It proved that regardless of credentials, black applicants were 50% less likely to get a callback than a white applicant.

Institutional racism is particularly subtle, and so less noticeable. If you are black, you are three times more likely to be pulled over in your car and searched for drugs than if you’re white, despite the fact that if you’re white, on the few occasions when you are pulled over you are four times more likely to have drugs on you. If you are white and you drive past the police without them pulling you over, you are experiencing the privilege of being white. The war on drugs then, is not a war on drugs, if it were, those statistics would be a hell of a lot different. The war on drugs would go where the drugs actually are, not where the people with dark skin are. It is a racist institution.

Christopher Columbus is hailed as the founder of America. He has a day named after him. It is not taught in any history class at American schools the true horror that started the day that Columbus found an island in the Lucayan Archipelago in the Bahamas that he named San Salvador, though it was actually already named, by the population who lived there, as Guanahani. Within years, Spanish adventurers had captured thousands of the native Taino population, enslaved them, and took their women captive as wives/sex slaves. The Spanish had utterly devastated the Taino population by the turn of the 16th Century. Epidemic disease brought by the Europeans was bad enough, but the Spanish settlers placed too much strain on local crop farmers, and the survival of the Spanish was considered more important than the survival of the Taino’s and so the food naturally ended up in the hands of the Spanish. Columbus when he landed, wrote of the natives:

“We can send from here, in the name of the Holy Trinity, all the slaves and Brazil wood which could be sold.”

- We know what he had planned. Nicolas Ovando, the governor of the Indies from 1501 to 1509, decided he needed to ensure the Taino’s knew their place once and for all. He did this by inviting the much loved Taino queen Anacoana and local tribal chiefs to a dinner to celebrate his governorship. When they were all in the room, the Spaniards set it on fire, killing most of those inside. The ones who got out, were tortured for days on end and then killed. Queen Anacoana was tortured and hung. By 1510, the Taino’s were virtually extinct.

To be honest, there really isn’t much you can celebrate about Columbus. Apart from bringing with him the biggest genocide in history, he was a rather simple man. He believed Cuba was in Asia, that he hadn’t discovered a new land, that the entire continent of South America was an Island, and to pay his debt to the Spanish crown he raped his way across Central America taking as many as 1200 women and children slaves for Europe; children who had, without a second thought, been stripped away from their families. But don’t take my word for, take it from the man himself:

“We shall take you and your wives, and your children, and shall make slaves of them, and we shall take away your goods, and shall do you all the mischief and damage that we can, and we protest that the deaths and losses which shall accrue from this are your fault .”

I cannot think of a worse man to idolise.

Back to the present day, as if Stormfront and institutional racism and selective history aren’t enough to convince a person that racism is deeply ingrained in the American psyche, certain lovely little advertisements have deep racist connotations, still.

Aunt Jemima, a trademark for breakfast food owned by Quaker Oats is still going today. Aunt Jemima represents the notion of a good little black ex-slave girl who just loves her servile role as servant to a white middle class consumer.

Equally as subtle, is Uncle Ben’s rice. It would be ridiculous for a company now, to have as its fictional spokesperson, a black man using the name “Uncle” which was a term used by the children of white slave owners to refer to their slaves. If a newly formed rice company were to say “Well, you know that we white people used to ship Africans in to farm our rice fields, as slaves? Well why don’t we make our spokesmen black?” they would be lambasted as a hugely racist company. But Uncle Ben is a tradition, and so it appears acceptable, though the stereotype behind it perpetuates the racist sentiments it subtly encourages. This kind of subtle cultural racism has not gone unnoticed. In an episode of the Sopranos (the greatest show on TV) Tony warns a black guy away from his daughter. Tony then has an anxiety attack when he sees a packet of Uncle Ben’s.

Public Policy Polling of Raleigh North Carolina, found that 46% of Republican voters in Mississippi think interracial marriage should be illegal. 14% said they weren’t sure. I cannot comprehend that number. It does indeed show that race is an issue, and especially with Republican voters. There is still the essence that the white race is superior and should be protected. This sentiment has found its outlet with the Tea Party movement of recent months. Whilst Glenn Beck spews his bullshit, insisting on top rated “news” channel that Obama has a deep seated hatred for the white race, his equally as vacant and mind numbingly moronic viewers stalk the streets with signs like this:

And this:

And this:

And this:

And this:

Now I wouldn’t immediately jump to the conclusion that the Tea Party is an inherently racist organisation, it is mainly a vehicle to promote the incoherent ramblings of an uneducated economically far right puritanical Republican group wholly run by Corporate America to advance its interest at the behest of even the idiots who indirectly fight for the rights of Corporate America, now slowly morphed to include racism as part of their base.

It is sad to see notion of race being such an issue in 21st Century America. One would have hoped that the social wedge of racism, placed to draw attention away from class and a deeply unequal wealth system would have crumbled away, or intellectually and politically dismembered for the disease that it is. Race is not real. Class is.

Blinded by Patriotism

In 2003 the Americans tried to convince the World that Al Jazeera had been infiltrated by spies, in an effort to produce propaganda for the war in Iraq. It is an interesting and mightily hypocritical claim by the U.S who have a media largely in bed with the American Government, and largely responsible for the biggest manipulation in war time history. Propaganda is an absolute specialty of the United States of America.

Ex CBS reporter Dan Rather stated recently, on the subject of his unquestioning adherence to absolutely everything the Bush Administration was insisting, that:

“Had journalists questioned the deceptions…the invasion would not have happened.”

The truth is, Al Jazeera is the only news network in the World who were investigating the horrors of the U.S invasion of Iraq. Where were the U.S press, the freest press in the World, when the population of Fallujah were being massacred? Phrases like “terrorist” and “insurgent” were being used everywhere, to describe anyone in Iraq who wanted to fight back against the U.S invasion.

Fox went along to an anti-war rally in 2004, and suggested several times, that the protesters were “unpatriotic“. Fox went along to the Tea Party rallies in 2009 and 2010 and referred to them as “true patriots“. Fox was the most watched news broadcaster for news on the war. Throughout coverage of the war in Iraq, Fox displayed a little waiving American flag in the corner of the screen.

Similarly, MSNBC played a segment every week, called “America’s bravest”, which showed photos of American soldiers deployed in Iraq.

Peter Arnett, a reporter with NBC was fired for questioning the legitimacy of the war. He had interviewed Iraqi officials and said the American “first war plan had failed”.

A Maryland University study into the media affects on public perception of Iraq, found that 57% of mainstream media viewers believed Iraq was involved in 9/11. 69% believe that Saddam was directly involved in 9/11. 22% believed WMDs had been found in Iraq. 80% of Fox News viewers had one or more of the above misconceptions.

Media watchdog group “FAIR” found that 79% of all 319 news stories on Iraq in 2003, were sourced from Government officials or Military officials.

The media became the mouthpiece for a barrage of lies and propaganda. This is evident even today. When Wikileaks leaked the war files, the news outlets, from Fox in the US to the BBC in the UK focused almost entirely on Wikileaks itself. American Republicans are referring to Assange as a traitor for exposing their criminal activity. The UK media was focusing on Assange personally. No one focused on what the war logs were saying.

Dr Chris Busby, a visiting professor at the University of Ulster, along with a team of researchers, surveyed 4,800 people in Fallujah and concluded that dramatic increases in cancer rates and infant mortality since the relative genocide by American troops, is “worse than Hiroshima”. After Fallujah, US Marines admitted, after first strongly denying, that they had used white phosphorus. The report is open for any to read, called “Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005-2009“. It shows a 38 fold increase in leukaemia (compared to a 17 fold increase, after Hiroshima), a ten fold increase in breast cancer, and an increase in brain tumours. This sharp rise if health defects, was not helped by the fact that the city continued to be blocked off to essential supplies, by the US, long after 2004.

Whilst the U.S networks were struggling to understand a map of the Middle East:

And using handy little catchphrases that seemed to give credit to the horrors:

Al Jazeera was getting right into the heart of the situation, and showing images, like the one below, which is beyond awful. (I have spent the past few minutes looking at this photo, and it is something I cannot comprehend without being overcome with quite profound sadness):

It is then, no wonder that the one media outlet that was actually bothering to do some investigative journalism, rather than imbedded journalism (in which the Western Military dictates what a Journalist is allowed to see and where he can go), showing pictures and videos of innocent people’s lives ruined, in the same way that Fox and CNN were after 9/11 were bombed. The Al Jazeera Kabul and Baghdad offices were bombed by the Americans, who also drew up plans to bomb the Al Jazeera office in Doha – Qatar!. Why? They weren’t harbouring terrorists. They were just a threat to US mass propaganda. We were not supposed to see the destruction and terrorism left by the Americans. We were supposed to see a happy population, joyfully welcoming the Americans as great liberators fighting for freedom. If people fought back, we were supposed to believe they were “insurgents” who “hated our freedoms”, rather than the fathers of dead children or orphaned children.

The “reality” of war, is not a natural reality, it is a construct. When thousands are killed in American and British aggression it is called the “reality of war“, simply because a Western Government has used the word “war” to describe it. But when a far smaller number are killed by extremists, it is called “terrorism” and it is “evil”. It is the creation of a narrative that seeks to propel Western aggression as necessary, to defeat evil. Whether that evil be Communists, Muslims, Vietcong, or Arabs. That is the public narrative. The truth is that if your dictator opens up his markets to American Capitalist ventures, he will be propped up for years to come. The moment he closes those markets, we will take them by force.

How blurred the lines of “reality of war” really are, and absolutely always in favour of the Western World. Vietnam, the propping up of Latin American and Middle Eastern Dictators, the dropping of the Atomic Bomb, the invasion of Iraq. None of it is labelled “terrorism”, and yet what else is it other than the spreading of terror and death across Nations that aren’t ours.

It isn’t new. The British Empire did it in Australia. Terrorised the Country but apparently it was for their own good. What if Aboriginal Australians had invaded England? Rome labelled anyone who disagreed with its policies as “Barbarians”. The concealing of crimes behind romaticised ideals is not new. Especially with America. America celebrates Columbus Day. A day when Europe began the mass genocide project across that continent.
The great American author Kurt Vonnegut sums this up in his book “Breakfast of Champions“:

rout and Hoover were citizens of the United States of America, a country which was called America for short. This was their national anthem, which was pure balderdash, like so much they were expected to take seriously:

O, say can you see by the dawn’s early light
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming,
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, thru the perilous fight
O’er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming?
And the rockets’ red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
O, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

There were one quadrillion nations in the Universe, but the nation Dwayne Hoover and Kilgore Trout belonged to was the only one with a national anthem which was gibberish sprinkled with question marks.

The motto of Dwayne Hoover’s and Kilgore Trout’s nation was this, which meant in a language nobody spoke anymore, Out of Many, One: “E pluribus unum.” The undippable flag was a beauty, and the anthem and the vacant motto might not have mattered much, if it weren’t for this: a lot of citizens were so ignored and cheated and insulted that they thought they might be in the wrong country, or even on the wrong planet, that some terrible mistake had been made.

It might have comforted them some if their anthem and their motto had mentioned fairness or brotherhood or hope or happiness, had somehow welcomed them to the society and its real estate. If they studied their paper money for clues as to what their country was all about, they found, among a lot of other baroque trash, a picture of a truncated pyramid with a radiant eye on top of it. Not even the President of the United States knew what that was all about.

It was as though the country were saying to its citizens, “In nonsense is strength.” A lot of the nonsense was the innocent result of playfulness on the part of the founding fathers of the nation of Dwayne Hoover and Kilgore Trout.

The founders were aristocrats, and they wished to show off their useless education, which consisted of the study of hocus-pocus from ancient times. They were bum poets as well. But some of the nonsense was evil, since it concealed great crimes. For example, teachers of children in the United States of America wrote this date on blackboards again and again, and asked the children to memorize it with pride and joy: 1492. The teachers told the children that this was when their continent was discovered by human beings. Actually, millions of human beings were already living full and imaginative lives on the continent in 1492. That was simply the year in which sea pirates began to cheat and rob and kill them.

Here was another piece of evil nonsense which children were taught: that the sea pirates eventually created a government which became a beacon of freedom to human beings everywhere else. There were pictures and statues of this supposed imaginary beacon for children to see. It was sort of an ice-cream cone on fire. Like this [the Liberty torch].

Actually, the sea pirates who had the most to do with the creation of the new government owned human slaves. They used human beings for machinery, and, even after slavery was eliminated, because it was so embarrassing, they and their descendants continued to think of ordinary human beings as machines

Vonnegut is ingeniously pointing out the illogical mental illness of Patriotism and its refusal to accept the horrors that came before it, and are committed in the name of it. It is a delusional, non-existent entity that exists to hinder human progression rather than help that seed to grow. A heartfelt anthem and a flag are just ways to mask injustice. It is a clever social construction, to make you think what you are doing is for the greater good and that the greatest good is the Nation State, when in fact the truth is, it is all for the sake of profit.

The dominant superpower will always place itself as the moral standard, and we buy into the bullshit, because it takes too much effort to stop playing on Fifa, and actually read.
Instead of seeing a little girl marched out of her home, crying and scared and made to kneel down on the floor with her hands in the air, by our troops, isn’t presented in the media. Instead, the media will have experts in to talk about how awesome our aircraft is, or how the Democrats are trying to block Defence funding. As if any of that bullshit matters.

We don’t see a bunch of vicious soldiers shooting random people or committing mass murder in Fallujah. Instead, we see a Saddam statue being brought down and how wonderful and free Iraq now is. We don’t see the pictures of a family digging their dead child out of the rubble, instead we only hear words like “insurgents” and “terrorists”. If my child had just been killed by American forces, for no reason, I’d fucking do all I could to kill the bastards too.

We are all desensitised to war, by this obsession with an us VS them mentality. Consumerism is a useful tool against the questioning of the immoral actions of big business and government. It is a simple narrative to understand, we don’t have to read too much into it, we’re busy working our arses off for shit we don’t need, so we consume easily accessible news, without questioning its motives or its intentions. We are apparently the good guys, and they are apparently the enemies, that is how it is presented. A healthy dose of National Pride, by making pictures of American soldiers draping their flag over the head of the statue in Baghdad, ensures that we are kept docile and unquestioning. We don’t want to seem unpatriotic.

Whereas, the reality is that the good guys are the idiots who are compelled to fight to perpetuate the economic war system, on both sides, rather than joining hands and fighting the very people who profit from war and make it a rational product of Capitalism. Do we really believe that the American private defence contractors and oil companies would love to see a peaceful World? They exist, to profit from war. Therefore, the financial sector profits from war. It is gross manipulation. These are the real bastards, not a few farmers in Afghanistan.

David Cameron went to Kuwait and told them that 20 years ago a brutal and violent dictator invaded their home land, and they had a right to defend themselves. How offensive; we sold those arms to that brutal dictator, before we designated him a brutal dictator, because he was nice to our businessmen. I keep seeing arguments defending Cameron’s arms sales across the Arab World as “good for jobs in England”. Economic matters are being placed above human rights. It is believed that British arms were used in the massacre of protesters in Libya this week.

Blair’s government lifted sanctions on the sale of weapons to Libya in 2004. Since then British companies have sold £500,000,000 worth of arms to Libya n 2009 alone. This includes Sniper rifles, tear gas, and crowd control ammunition. Are we seriously suggesting that selling tear gas and crowd control ammunition to a dictatorship, is going to be used to protect itself from an evil outside force? They are always going to be used against protesters, to keep the dictatorship in power. For that, I don’t care how many jobs it creates in the UK, we should be ashamed.

And so whilst the Libyan government uses our weapons, like Saddam did before him, on its own people, the rest of the World will sit back and have lots of UN meetings and keeping saying “please stop“.

Sometimes, death is good for the economy, and so we are all expendable.
Was is an essential ingredient of Capitalism.

O’Reilly proves the existence of God.

I quite liked this video.
It is disturbing to my sense of rationality, that Bill O’Reilly is one of the most watched men in America. In this video, he proves the existence of God (in the illogical world of Christian America, if nowhere else) by saying the the tide goes in and out.
Just incase the American Right decide my EVIL SOCIALIST ATHEIST agenda is misleading, O’Reilly actually said:

“I’ll tell you why [religion is] not a scam, in my opinion. Tide goes in, tide goes out. Never a miscommunication. You can’t explain that. You can’t explain why the tide goes in.”

It is been quite some years now, since humanity first discovered why the tide goes in and out. We are pretty certain that it isn’t because of a God in a cloud somewhere using a big sea magnet. I am sure I learnt in very early school, that the tide is controlled by the Moon’s orbit.

Bill then goes on the defensive:

You’re calling me a moron.

Yup.
That’d be pretty accurate.
Sadly, I’m sure there are a number of American Christians who sat up during this, and said…
“YAR! That there is one heck of a good case for Jesus, yes sir! He was all like, what about the tides going out and shit, now i’m no racist but that nigra couldn’t god-damn answer him. Fucking Atheists tryna turn my Kids into an-tie Christian, an-tie- Amerkan pro-gay commies”

Perhaps O’Reilly was suggesting that the moon is ideally placed to create a tide. I doubt he was suggesting that, because, that’s not what he actually said. But for arguments sake, let’s say he was suggesting the ideally placed moon. It is only ideally placed, because we exist. There is no design or reason behind it. It is just there. It isn’t “perfectly placed” because we invented the concept of something being perfectly placed, purely because we’re here. It is rather vain of us to decide that the chaotic universe, and the size and scale of it, exists, purely for us. There is no reason, or logic, or cause, or meaning. It stands to reason that if a Moon is at a certain location, and the planet is at a certain location relative to its star, and conditions for life exist, then life will pop into existence. It is just how it is. It does not mean it was designed that way at all.

By measuring the total mass of stars and luminosity in our galaxy alone, there are estimated to be 100 billion stars, plus another estimated 200 million Galaxies. A star is like the Sun, so for every 100 billion stars, let’s say there are roughly 5-10 planets around each one. That would produce around 500 billion planets in our Galaxy alone. Is it not reasonable to suggest that one of those 500 billion might have a Moon placed in a position that has an affect on the liquid of its planet?

How arrogant one must be, to suggest that this was all created for us.

That being said, conditions on Earth are not perfect for human existence. They are adequate to say the very least. We have natural resources that are running out, not enough food to feed the World and billions of people live in abject poverty for their entire lives, on very inhospitable land. A cyclone is currently tearing its way through Queensland in Australia, only a few weeks after Queensland suffered severe flooding on a scale unknown to locals. If the Earth is the creation of God, for the intention of housing man, then God is a little bit incompetent.

We are an insignificant, tiny race of apes, in an unimportant dot on the map of the universe. There is no grand design for this tiny little dot.
Probability is irrelevant. We are surrounded by absolutely no evidence for the existence of God. Saying “yeah, but you can’t disprove the existence of God” is meaningless. If I see a dog, I shouldn’t be expected to accept the possibility that it might be a monkey. Similarly, I have all the evidence for Natural selection, I shouldn’t be expected, when faced with such a plethora of evidence, to say “yeah, but it might be a God.”

Now, O’Reilly then uses a classic logical fallacy. If person X cannot prove their position, then person Y must be right in theirs. O’Reilly suggests that because Silverman was too stunned by O’Reilly’s intense stupidity that he didn’t answer him in the millisecond that O’Reilly allows his guests to actually speak, that he must therefore not be able to answer, and so he presumes he is correct.

O’Reilly then goes on to complain that by saying Religion is a scam and a myth (which it is), American Atheists are insulting Americans. This comes about two minutes before he calls Silverman a “loon“.

O’Reilly would insist he insults no one (except every week, when he refers to someone new, whom he disagrees with, but doesn’t give them the opportunity to argue their case, as a pinhead). Fox News spent most of 2008 attacking President Obama because Obama included non-believers in his inaugural address. The title of the piece just after the President’s speech was “Obama reaches out: addresses Muslims and Atheists in speech“. As if we’re the “other“. As if we, along with the Muslim community are a problem that needs to be addressed. The Fox host (I don’t know his name, but he looks about 12), said:

“It surprised me when I heard it, it made me do a double take.”

Why? Because some people aren’t all absolutely mad Christian Right Wingers? Mike Huckabee on that same show, said that Obama had acknowledged that some people don’t believe in anything….. “but themselves”. So, if I don’t believe in the Christian God, I must be a bit of a narcissist and nothing more. Am I unable to believe in beauty? Do Christians have a monopoly on beauty? When I see something beautiful, must I thank Christians for giving me that sense? Am I unable to believe in love? Must I thank Fox News for how I feel about Ashlee? Without Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly, would I just be raping and murdering my way through life? Fox went on to ask if it was offensive to include a reference to Atheists in the speech. As if we’re non-human. We shouldn’t be recognised. But if we dare question religion……. we’re the ones being offensive. The mad World of Fox News.

Here is O’Reilly again, being insulting toward Atheism. Mocking it. Not logically, with well thought out, reasoned Philosophy; just the ramblings of a mad old hillbilly Christian, who has absolutely no idea what he’s talking about, and is just appealing to his very low-IQ’d viewers. Here, he refers to a sign that was shown by Atheists at Christmas, and says “No God, No Problem; be good for goodness sake” (which is a fantastic and optimistic and not in any way offensive at all; sign) a “dopey sign“. He then says:

“What is it about Christmas they don’t like”.

What a ridiculous question. Atheists aren’t attacking Christmas. We still celebrate Christmas. We don’t celebrate it for the birth of Jesus. I’m convinced he didn’t actually exist. We celebrate it, because it is a time when all our friends and family have time off work at the same time, we share gifts, we have a family meal, and we create memories and stories for our children. It is a small break from a very rushed life. We absolutely love Christmas. O’Reilly is trying to spread fear and hate. O’Reilly then, quite brilliantly says:

“Why do they loathe the Baby Jesus”.

As if we’re all sitting around, throwing darts at a printed picture of the baby Jesus. We get angry when we see the baby Jesus. Some of us can’t control that anger, and we actually vomit.

He then ponders how Atheists sell Atheism by “running down a baby, it’s just a baby”. That’s not what any Atheist has ever done, in the history of the Catholic Church allowing Atheists to exist without being executed for it. Nor is it what the poster is actually saying, or even alludes to. I’m not sure how more manipulative one massive twat could actually be.

Some equally as vacant Fox presenter tells O’Reilly that the sign is a:

“direct and deliberate smear against Christianity”.

In other words, anything that remotely questions a socially prevailing belief system, must be an attack on it. Atheists should all keep quiet, we shouldn’t question, we shouldn’t be allowed to present an alternative. We should accept that homosexuality is a disgrace because the Bible says so, we should accept that abortion doctors deserve to be shot, we should accept that the Pope shouldn’t be brought to trial for covering up child sex abuse, we should just accept that schools in America teach Christianity as fact and evolution as theory, and just ignore it, because the Christians’ point of view is far more valid and reasonable, simply because it is based entirely on tradition; another logical fallacy.

She goes on to say:

“What comes with Christianity are traditional values”

Really? Is that so? And what are those traditional values? Burning witches? Beheading perceived “heretics”? Hanging gay people? Fucking children? For every positive value one can loosely ascribe to Christianity, it is equally as easy to ascribe a pretty direct link between Christianity and shameful violence and corruption.

O’Reilly ends the piece by suggesting that Atheists are just jealous because we have nothing, that Christians have Christmas, and we don’t. He asks “what do they have?” and concludes “nothing”. We have wonderment. We have the understanding that nature is so beautiful and creative itself, without the need for a cruel and angry dictator in the sky. We see the stars and stare in awe at how inspiring it all is. We see a slug and admire how this ugly looking thing is so beautiful because it is as evolved as we are. We have Darwin (Not even the baby Jesus is as great as Darwin). But most importantly, we have fact. To quote the brilliant Douglas Adams:

“Isn’t it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?”

I do not accept what Silverman is saying in the first video. He says that he believes people in America only go to Church because their is a social pressure to announce your belief in Christianity, but most people don’t believe it. I’d say that may be true to an extent, but for the sake of O’Reilly thinking Silverman is being insulting, I can go one better and say that those people actually go to Church because they are brainwashed and deluded; uneducated and illogical; unthinking and weak minded.

If O’Reilly thinks Silverman is insulting toward Christianity….. he obviously hasn’t read my blog.

The wonder of Fox News

Fox News, and News Corp in general provide quite the amusing slant on World events. We in the UK find it an endless source of hilarity and bullshit all rolled into one. We understand that much of America actually takes Fox News seriously, which amuses us even further.

During our UK election, they announced that the result was the UK’s total rejection of Socialism. Which of course was nonsense. Our Conservative Party, whom Fox News supporter, told the electorate that they would look after and protect our single payer Health Service, making the Conservatives evil Socialists in the eyes of right winged America. Fox News also failed to point out that more people in the UK voted for Parties on the Left and Centre-Left than they did for those on the Right. So actually, it was far from a rejection of Socialism. I blogged on Fox News calling the UK election, here.

But the stupidity doesn’t surprise me. In the past two years they have labelled President Obama a Marxist, Communist, Fascist, American hating Muslim, Foreigner with terrorist sympathies who hates White people. I give it a week before they ask if he is actually a homosexual transvestite. It stinks of bitterness. A torrent of hate and bullshit. They labelled the anti-Iraq war protesters as ‘un-American’ whilst those who protested the Health Care Bill were labelled Patriots. But they assure us that they are not bias. They assure us they are in no way a rallying point for all single brain celled racists Right wingers across America.

On The Daily Show two nights ago, Jon Stewart, once again, made Fox News appear fools. For weeks Fox has been drawing weak links between the Muslim Centre near Ground Zero with funding from shady characters with Terrorist ties. The guy they point to as helping to fund the project is a man named Al-Waleed bin Talal. He is a member of the Saudi Royal Family. He has invested more than $300,000 in projects for Feisal Abdul Rauf, the principle planner of the Muslim Centre near Ground Zero. This is one of the guys that Fox refer to as a shady character. What Fox failed to point out is; Al-Waleed bin Talal owns 7% of News Corp and so owns 7% of Fox News. News Corp (Fox News) owns 9% of Al-Waleed bin Talal’s entertainment company Rotana. Al-Waleed bin Talal is part of the Carlyle Group, which has business deals with the Bin Laden family. So, by association, Jon Stewart pointed out that Fox News is funded by those linked to terrorism, if we are to use their logic. Stewart ended quite brilliantly, by saying that if “We want to stop funding terror, we must as a Nation, together………… stop watching Fox. IT’S THE ONLY WAY!!”. The stupidity of Fox is outstanding.

It is almost as ridiculous a situation, as the time that The Simpsons ran a mock Fox News on one of it’s episodes with the news ticker running along the bottom, proclaiming; “Do Democrats cause cancer? …………… Rupert Murdoch: terrific dancer……………. Study: 92% of Democrats are gay………… Bible says Jesus favoured Capital Gains cut.” Fox News took exception to this, and threatened The Simpsons with legal action. The problem is, that The Simpsons is owned by Fox. So effectively, Fox were threatening to sue Fox. Fox backed down and didn’t sue Fox for mocking Fox. Fox now has a new rule stating that The Simpsons cannot do the news ticker any more, (I promise I am not making this up) because it might confuse viewers into believing it is the real news.

I will leave you with that thought. I don’t think much more can be said. Fox News is an embarrassment all by itself, it doesn’t need those of us on the Left point it out, although it’s much fun to do.

Campbell vs Boulton

We all know Fox News is so ridiculously bias, it makes us laugh to watch it. Sky News, is a Murdoch run news network in the U.K. We have laws that prevent our news coverage becoming too much like Fox – manipulative. Sky, along with other Murdoch Publications; The Sun newspaper, have spent the past few months attacking Gordon Brown and Labour constantly.

An entire day’s lead story, last week was a Labour candidate in an unwinable seat, crazily rambling about “we’ll get all socialism and stuff in, like, England, and stuff” and how Gordon Brown is the worst prime minister ever. That was Sky’s lead story, all day.
A day or two later, a Tory MP, is was revealed (not by Sky), is a member of a Church that claims it “cures homosexuality”, Sky did not even mention it.
A day or two later, a Tory peer said “Muslims don’t have morals or principles”. Sky did not even mention it.
So yes, Sky is ridiculously bias.

Today, has proved it more than ever.

Today Gordon Brown announced his resignation as Prime Minister. Effectively, he will remain in power until the Conservatives and the Liberals agree on a way forward together, and until the Labour Party can elect a new leader. Which is obvious. Otherwise, there is no Prime Minister, no Executive branch, and no leader of the Labour Party. He is right to stay on until this Constitutional nightmare is over.

Sky HATE it. They have spent years suggesting everyone in the Labour Party should burn to death, and that Brown should resign, now that he has, they are accusing him of trying to cling to power.

What this means is, the talks between the Tories and the Liberals has been thrown into a little bit of chaos. The Liberals always said they did not want a coalition that propped up Gordon Brown. Well, now Brown has gone. It was paved the way for a Labour/Lib Dem coalition, on the same day as the Liberals announced they have opened discussions with the Labour Party.

Sky have had a mental breakdown at that.

In this video, you see Adam Boulton. He is Sky’s answer to Bill O’Reilly. He is in essence, an idiot. A very very bias news “person” (I wont say Journalist). He has spent the past few months defaming Labour and Brown as much as possible, and given David Cameron a free ride. He even (along with the Sun) went as far as to claim Cameron has a lot in common with Obama.

The other man is Alastair Campbell. Campbell was Tony Blair’s Director of Communications, during the Blair years. Campbell was essentially, Blair’s spin doctor. He is known for being the King of Spin over here in the UK. A lot of people took a dislike to him. Myself included, especially over the September dossier.
Now he’s out of Government, I quite like him. He knows what he’s talking about. He has been around Government and Journalism along time. He know’s media bias when he sees it. This is a good example of that.

This outburst comes days after Sky’s equally as useless presenter, Kay Burley told a pro-electoral reform spokesperson to “just go home“.

Sky, you can tell today, are panicking hugely. They did not expect this at all. It has been hour after hour of wheeling people out to tell England how evil Brown is for clinging onto power. How awful it is. How Britain sacked Gordon Brown, and yet he’s still here. Britain may have sacked Gordon Brown, but they did not employ David Cameron.

Alastair Campbell 1 – 0 Murdoch’s fucking idiotic English version of Fox’s Bill O’Reilly.

Fox calls UK election!

It is 2:20am, and we in Britain are in the midst of the results of the election. It looks as if it is going to result in a hung Parliament, which may result in a Liberal Democrat/Labour coalition (hopefully). The BBC, ITV and SKY all will not call it. They keep saying it will most likely be hung, and that despite all the money that Lord Ashcroft has spent on the Conservative campaign, they are not gaining the seats they REALLY targeted, such as Tootin.

However, our crazed right winged friends over in the USA have a different story. They have called it for the Conservatives by a huge majority.
Sean Hannity on Fox News just this second said:

“It looks as if the Tories lead by David Cameron are running to victory, a clear message to the World that England is rejecting Socialism.”

It feels odd to actually be on the receiving end of Fox bullshit. We see it aimed at Obama constantly from Fox, but we in England are usually free from their nonsense. Tonight, it is new. For three reasons.

Firstly, it doesn’t “look like David Cameron is running to victory” in the slightest. In fact, given how unpopular Gordon Brown is, it must be a complete embarrasment to the Tories that they STILL aren’t able to gain a majority. Against Gordon Brown, an Arab yelling “DEATH TO THE WEST” could have won. David Cameron has taken a poll lead of 19, to 5. That isn’t “running away” with the election, to anyone else other than Fox.

Secondly, people aren’t rejecting Brown out of a hatred for Socialism. In fact, we kind of like our Socialist traditions. If the Conservatives had said “We plan to privatise the National Health Service”, they’d have lost the election quite horrendously. People are rejecting Gordon Brown because they want a change. They see Brown as the PM who presided over the worst recession in decades. They see Brown as being the PM who allowed the Banks to have a free ride, without Government regulation. So in fact, it’s lack of Socialism, lack of Government oversight, especially over immigration and the financial system, that has drove voters away. I guarantee, people did not choose to vote Conservative lightly. We in the UK, are not like the USA, we do not have this irrational love affair with the free market, we are very suspicious of the markets.

Thirdly, if the Conservatives do not gain an overall majority, it means that more people voted Labour and Lib Dem collectively, than voted Conservative. Which means more people voted for Left and Centre-left parties, than voted Right winged parties.

This election is not an outright attack on Socialism. In fact, it’s actually quite offensive to those of us on the Socialist Left to refer to the Labour Party as Socialist. They haven’t been Socialist in over a decade at the very least. A lot of voters, will not vote Labour this time, because of their abandonment of Socialist values.

Fox are actually using the UK, to scare the US. It’s fucking abhorrent that they are allowed to do that. Hannity said it will send a message to President Obama that the World does not want his brand of Socialism. That isn’t the case at all. If you ask any Brit, they will tell you they despised George Bush, they despised Sarah Palin, and they did, and still do, love Barack Obama. It would be almost unanimous support for Obama. In fact, if you ask the population of the UK, what they think of Fox, they would just laugh at you.

Back into the land of the normal people, and away from the crazed right winged American idiots, I do envisage a Hung Parliament. Oddly, because Labour are doing far far better than expected, the Tories are not doing as well as expected, and although I voted Liberal Democrat, they appear to be doing horrendously, which has shocked every media network across the UK.

Economically, i’ve always wondered why people vote Tory, especially after a crash. Individualism vs Collectivism aside, it is financial deregulation started during the 1980s, along with building society sell offs and the removal of reserve assett ratios, that lead to the banks to build an economy based on speculation. Which, caused a sort of financial time bomb. The reason it this was the case, was because of lack of oversight. Now, the Conservative principle, is to remove oversight from the markets. Surely tighter regulation on the financial sector, promotion of responsible social Capitalism, as opposed to all out economic war, further promotion of toxic gambling and failure to do anything about ending this whole obsession with consumerism to the point where even toxic bank assets are for sale (see Goldman Sachs) is the way forward?

The deficit has not been caused by excessive government spending. The deficit has been caused by an out of control financial sector, that got it’s right to be out of control, from the Conservatives. Surely you have to spend a lot when the private sector fucks up, to keep infrastructure in place and keep interest rates low, but more importantly; to keep people in their homes and jobs? Otherwise, you are throwing people onto the scrap heap. The recession of the 90s, under the previous Conservative Government saw homeless rates double, and suicide rates shot up, because of the lack of help people were getting. How is that the right way to go about recovery? I don’t care if recovery takes a little longer, as long as people’s necessities are protected. The Conservatives do not believe in those basic protections.

The Conservatives blame government spending fully for the problems. They seem incapable of accepting that the deregulated financial sector is the reason the government had to spend more in the first place.

By punishing the public sector, for the failings of the private sector, whilst simultaneously ignoring the problems in the private sector, you are simply putting a weakly tied bandage onto a system that will inevitably fuck up again in a few years time.

It amazes me that the slightly manipulated political discourse of this election has it that the “Welfare State” is the parasite of the economy. It wasn’t the Welfare State that fucked up.

By spouting about deep public service cuts, what they are essentially saying is the public should pay for the gambling debts of the City of London, which were encouraged by both the Conservatives and Labour over the past thirty years.

David Wearing a PhD researcher in Political Science at the School of Public Policy at the University College, London said quite rightly:

” What we are witnessing here is a unique form of bank robbery: the banks robbing the public of tens of billions of pounds, with our elected politicians driving the getaway car.”

I hope tonight results in a Hung Parliament, and a Lib Dem/Labour coalition. Anything to keep the Tories out.

The Man who controls the World

“We’re all in this together” cried Shadow Chancellor George Osbourne during his speech at the Conservative Party Conference yesterday. Which, is slightly insulting given that (according to The New Statesman), Osbourne is worth upwards of £4,000,000. His lovely house in Nottinghill (which explains the Tories obsession with cutting inheritance tax), his beautiful cars, his £5000 fee per article written in the Spectator, and his inherited credentials including the Osbourne Baronetcy of Ballentaylor. So what he meant to say was, the rest of us are in this for the long ride, worrying about jobs and how secure we are in our homes, whilst Osbourne and friends tell us we’re on our own, with no help from the next Government whatsoever…. in fact, they’re even going to cut our help to as less as possible. Nice. Thanks.

The Media, seems to be giving the Conservatives a free pass to Government. One wonders why. It is the deregulation of the financial industry that ultimately lead to this crises (blame Brown if you so wish, but it would not have been any better had the Conservatives been in power). In fact, when statutory regulation was introduced by Labour, the Tories opposed it. Which, in simple terms, means that if the Conservatives had been in power these past twelve years…… we’d be in a far greater mess than we are in now. When William Hague was leader of the Conservative Party, he is quoted as saying:
“As prime minister I will make deregulation one of my top priorities. I will drive deregulation from the centre and I will promote ministers not on the basis of whether they regulate enough but on the basis of how much they deregulate.”
Which, means that he would have left bankers, and mortgage lenders to do as they please, without any oversight whatsoever. Hague could not have been more wrong, if he’d have been George Osbourne making the wrong decision on every aspect of this crises. The crises we’re in today exists, because there was not enough regulation and oversight.

Why haven’t the media picked up on this?

The Sun certainly has a motive for backing the Tories.
The Murdoch’s, owners of News Corporation have recently taken swipes at the BBC, for the fact that it is a non-profit organisation with global reach, meaning it apparently distorts the market, especially given that the BBC’s online content is free….and Murdoch wishes to start changing for Sky’s online content. Apparently the BBC run the risk of becoming a dangerous tool of the State. Nowhere, does Murdoch accept that without the BBC, the Media, and so News in general, will run the risk of becoming a dangerous tool of News Corp, given that News Corp currently runs:
BSkyB, The Sun, 20th Century Fox, Fox News, 17.5% of ITV, Sky Italia, Sky Deutsch land, Myspace, Vogue, The New York Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Australian Daily Telegraph, The Australian Sunday Herald Sun, The Australian Sunday Mail, The Australian, News of the World, The Times, Dow Jones Newswires, BulgarianTV, Israel 10, LNT Latvia, National Geographic Channel; all among many many more holdings.

The Tories, have agreed to revamp the media regulator Ofcom, ditching much of it’s regulatory functions – if they were to come to power, which means Murdoch, The Sun, and Sky can get away with saying just about anything. In simplistic terms, it means Murdoch gets to exert potentially dangerous political power over another Country, much like he does with his American news network, Fox News. We do not want a Fox News in this Country.

During the Summer of 2008, Rupert Murdoch’s son-in-law paid (around £34,000 in total) for the leader of the Conservative Party, David Cameron, to fly Santorini (a Greek Island) for private talks on a yacht, with Rupert Murdoch. Also in Santorini for the talks was a lady named Rebekah Wade……………. Editor of The Sun.

It is no coincidence, that a couple of days after Murdoch spoke in the Sun, stating of David Cameron:
“What does he really feel in his stomach? Is he going to be a new Thatcher, which is what the country needs? The UK desperately needs less government and freer markets“
Cameron then made a speech, in which he said of Ofcom:
“So with a Conservative Government, OFCOM as we know it will cease to exist.“

When Murdoch says he wants “freer markets“, what he means is, he wants to control more of as many markets as he can. It also means he’d quite like to get away this time, with phone hacking, to get a story. A man named Andy Coulson, who was editor of News Of The World at the time of the phone hacking scandal, was responsible for the many many journalists who were untaking these criminal activities, in order to get publishable stories……… News Corp, then (because they’re free, and just love transparency) paid to cover up the full scope of their illegal dealings. Which, begs the question, why is Andy Coulson now in a position of quite intense power, as Director of Communications and Planning for the Conservative Party?

Without Ofcom, we in Britain are very much in danger of becoming a media circus, as is America, built on misinformation, bullying, misplaced anger, and an overriding right winged agenda, built around further empowering the Murdoch clan; where responsible journalism is very much a thing of the past. Through Cameron, England is likely to become Murdoch’s bitch.

Simply one more reason, why out of principle, I can never vote Conservative.

Murdoch VS BBC

In between spitting at tramps, and kicking orphans, James Murdoch (son of the Devil) has took a swipe at the BBC, calling it “state-sponsored news” and that only free market news organisations can produce “independent news coverage that challenges the consensus“. Murdoch, owns Fox News. Need I say more? Yes, Fox does indeed challenges the consensus; in the sense that Fox challenges intelligent thought and replaces it with Glenn “WE NEED TO TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK (but stay magically quiet when our right winged politicians illegally invade foreign lands, and magnificently destroy the economy in the first place)” Beck, and Bill O’Reilly. They then spend a few hours telling me that Obama (who they’ve referred to as a Fascist a few times recently) is planning a mass communist revolution, in between his efforts to kill your babies and let old age pensioners die in extreme pain. So yes, Murdoch’s idea of independent broadcasting does indeed challenge the consensus, insomuch as it creates a ridiculous parody of the news.

Murdoch’s main worry is that the size and scope of the Beeb, means that competitors are already at a disadvantage and struggle to compete. I’d assume, Murdoch is simply smoothing the path for an attempt to get us all to hate the BBC, whilst he and his devilish father start trying to convince us all that charging for news content, is in the spirit of “freedom” (that nasty little Right Winged word).

Murdoch also owns The Sun, the paper that (referred in to previous blog entry) puts it photographers on the streets to get up skirt shots of female celebrities getting out of a car. Perhaps that’s what the BBC is doing wrong. Perhaps what we need is BBC news to be a frequent Right Winged propaganda showing with the cameramen pointing their cameras up the skirts of the female news readers.
Or perhaps, if Murdoch gets his own way and the Tories after the next general election allow more Press independence by rolling back fairness as defined by the Broadcasting Act, Sky News will become the British version of Fox. I cannot imagine anyone in Britain wants to see that happen. There’s only so much of Glenn Beck crying on screen about how much he loves his Country, I can take. If Sky were to become more like Fox, we’d need new News Anchors. The likes of Adam Boulton are just far too middle of the road, not crazy enough to host a British Fox. Perhaps Richard Littlejohn; columnist for The Daily Mail might strike a chord? Littlejohn is our very own version of Bill O’Reilly. Maniacal, ignorant, unpleasant, despicable with an unhealthy need to be as cruel as humanly possible. Take for example, his article in 2006 about the murders of the five Suffolk prostitutes. Six months after their murders, Littlejohn felt it necessary to say….

“We do not share in the responsibility for either their grubby little existences or their murders. Society isn’t to blame.
It might not be fashionable, or even acceptable in some quarters, to say so, but in their chosen field of “work”, death by strangulation is an occupational hazard.
That doesn’t make it justifiable homicide, but in the scheme of things the deaths of these five women is no great loss.
At Ipswich Town’s home game on Saturday, there was a minute’s silence. We were supposed to believe that this was a true reflection of the community’s sympathy.
I don’t buy it. Most people went along with it in the spirit of emotional correctness and through fear of getting their heads kicked in if they didn’t.”

Ipswich VS Leeds, observing a minutes silence because they felt forced too by evil liberal political correctness? Reeaaally? Have Leeds fans become super sensitive to political correctness recently?
There was a minute silence, because five women had just been killed. People who happen to exert some form of compassion, notice that people should not be defined by how they make money. And i’d argue that being a prostitute, is far less disgusting a profession, than spewing hate filled right winged propaganda, and a rather disturbing attempt to destroy lives with words.
This deeply unpleasant, hateful little insensitive prick would fit in beautifully at a Murdoch run deregulated “news” channel.

“As Orwell foretold, to let the state enjoy a near-monopoly of information is to guarantee manipulation and distortion. The only reliable, durable and perpetual guarantor of independence is profit.“
- If Fox is anything to go by, that statement just there, by James Murdoch, could not be filled to the brim with any more irony, without a disastrous irony spillage.

Sky News isn’t a victim in all of this, as Murdoch seems to be suggesting. IRN recently dropped ITN as it’s content supplier, in favour of Sky News. Which, gives Sky (and Murdoch) pretty much a monopoly over commercial radio news. Sky is the sole news provider, to over 250 radio stations in the UK now. This, along with Channel 5 news (also provided by Sky) suggests that this worry of Orwellian State media monopoly, is disastrously hypocritical of the Murdoch’s.

We need the BBC to provide the balanced reporting that 100% independent broadcasting fails to provide. It is a key resource for Global news, provided to millions across the Planet. The BBC provides sensible coverage, it doesn’t lean too far to the Left, and it doesn’t lean miserably to the Right (which is what Murdoch has a problem with, he’d clearly like to see it lean to the Right as much as possible). Whether Murdoch likes it or not, the BBC works. It is cherished by millions. That is why it’s a threat to Murdoch, because he can’t control it. The Murdoch family seemingly have a deep need to control everything we see, read, and hear, and when it doesn’t go their way, they get all critical and employ typical right winged fear tactics. Nevertheless, the BBC is a national treasure that should not, under any circumstances, become fully independent. We certainly do not need a British Fox News.

Extremism strikes

Not too long ago, Right Winged Americans everywhere were complaining that the Department of Homeland Security had a document entitled “Rightwing Extremism:Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment“, of which I wrote an article about. The American Right interpreted the document in an incredibly odd way, much like they do with the Bible. They appeared to have decided that the DHS document labelled all Right Wingers as extremists, which it doesn’t. They twisted the logic, they exploded in a fit of irrational hysteria, they made themselves look terribly ridiculous.

The document itself caused lunacy amongst the bitter American Right Wing, with the mention of:
“Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a abortion or immigration.“
Seems a perfectly reasonable summary from the DHS, to me.

The document merely pointed out that certain white supremacist groups, or disgruntled ex-soldiers, or single issue protesters such as anti-gay rights and anti-abortion protesters may be dangerous. It does not take a genius to work out that the Department of Homeland Security is tasked, with protecting the homeland and so will have documents relating to ideological extremism.

I’m sure you see where i’m going with this. For all the hopeless bitching the conservative brigade indulged in, since the document was leaked, attempting to suggest that anti-abortionists did not pose a physical threat, they appear to be silent over the recent, right winged extremism anti-abortion fuelled killing of late term abortion doctor, Dr George Tiller, in front of his wife, in a church in Witchita, Kansas.

Whilst I myself do not approve of late term abortion, (it is a dreadful procedure, although only accounts for around 0.17% of the 1.3m abortions performed a year in the U.S) killing the Doctor; a husband, father and grandfather, is just not in any terms acceptable, and to stop this sort of thing happening again, the Department of Homeland Security should be taking the threat from Right Winged extremist groups far more seriously than a document that annoys a few ignorant conservatives.

Since 2005, the O’Reilly Factor on Fox News, has used Tiller’s name on 28 episodes, with Bill O’Reilly calling Tiller, “Tiller the baby killer”. O’Reilly has called Tiller a Nazi, a Soviet, willing to kill children for $5000, and that Tiller’s “Judgement day would come“. Whilst Fox often complains about the bias shown within the “liberal media”, the conservative media and Fox, in this situation, have a lot to answer for. They portrayed Tiller as an evil elitist hell bent on destroying children, up there with paedophiles and rapists. Despite Fox not directly advocating violence, they surely knew that the anti-abortion lobby was responsible for killing of Dr Barnett Slepian in 1999, a blast at a clinic in Alabama in 1998, two dead receptionists in a clinic in Boston in 1994, attacks on clinics in the West in 1994 by Rachelle Shannon, and the killing of Dr John Britton along with his clinic escort and the serious injury of his wife, also in 1994. Fox knew how dangerous it would be to continually publicise the work of Tiller, especially when using such strong emotive language.

Pro-life advocates have long confused me. Pro-life conservatives. Anti-abortion, But pro-guns. Anti-abortion, but pro-death penalty. Anti-abortion but pro-torture. Anti-abortion, but pro-Iraq war. Anti-abortion, but anti-welfare. It seems that once the foetus is born, it’s on it’s own, conservatives aren’t that fussed. You may say that the death penalty involves those who are not innocent, whereas an aborted foetus is innocent. True. But then, you have to move on to say that for all the complaining the conservatives do about government interference, they don’t seem all that angered by the ultimate in government interference; government sponsored murder.

In 22 years, between 1979 and 2001, 90,000 children have died as a result of gun crime in the United States. According to The National Education Association, “The rate of firearm deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined.” Not only that, but “American kids are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times more likely to die from a firearm accident than children in 25 other industrialized countries combined.” Gun ownership, is strictly anti-life. Advocating gun ownership is anti-life. It is that black and white.

President Bush, signing the ban on late term abortions in 2003, said the ban “will help build a culture of life in America“. Read that again. President Bush, responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent lives, including children, soldiers, and women, torturing people on dubious charges purely to extract a link between Iraq and 9/11, wanted to help build a culture of life in America? A man who once described himself as a War President? I’m not entirely sure how anyone can reconcile support for a war designed to let anyone know that if they live within the walls of a City that America thinks is evil, they will be slaughtered, with pro-life.

The pro-individual wealth of the West by any-means-necessary brigade have redefined the meaning of “life” it would seem. Bi-lateral trade deals allegedly favouring stronger economies such as those of America and the EU whilst detrimental to less fortunate economies do not seem to worry the apparent “pro-life” brigade. Whilst hundreds of thousands die every day across the globe, the pro-life brigade advocate the right for a man to suck up the wealth and the resources that could otherwise be used to sustain life on dying continents; whilst 40+ million have no health insurance including 10+ million children, Republicans and pro-lifers would rather not have universal health care purely because of their irrational fear of anything even slightly “socialist” If universal health care could save just one child who would otherwise suffer without insurance, surely by definition, pro-lifers should welcome it? The pro-life Right Wing, but not be less pro-life if it tried.

My position on abortion, is one closer to pro-choice. Religion should not enter into this discussion. No one has the right to push their religious nonsense onto the body of anyone else. I do not believe life begins at conception. I believe life begins when both the heart is beating and the brain is functional. This can be as early as 40 days after conception. After the heart is beating and the brain is active, I believe that a late term abortion is nothing but a horrid way to dispose of a human being. I believe a woman has the right to choose whether or not she is to keep on with pregnancy, up until a set date. It is 24 weeks here in the U.K. That is far too long. I’d drop it to six weeks maximum. In cases where the woman’s health is at risk, or the pregnancy is the result of a rape, or incest, then abortion must always be an option. Abortion must not be made illegal, because when forced to choose an unsafe route, 80,000 women die every year.

The killing of Dr Tiller, is right winged terrorism. Nothing more. Whilst extremist Muslims may suggest that they strike Western citizens in response to the killing of family members and friends in Middle Eastern Countries at the hands of the West; it is no different to a Christian fundamentalist killing a doctor for his abortion practices. Tiller’s practice, was ethically flawed, that is undeniable. American foreign policy, is fundamentally flawed, that is also undeniable. But the response to both of those, be it Islamic terrorism, or the murder of Dr Tiller, is equally as flawed, and as dangerous, and as unethical and as despicable as the practice they are fighting against.

Right Winged extremism is alive and well in America. I applaud the Department of Homeland Security for pointing it out so bluntly.

The Sinking Republican Ship

You have to feel slightly sorry for Republicans recently. They’re like a collective version of Elliot Roosevelt. Useless. Unable to admit just how useless they have been, and still are. A terrible role model for their youthful counterparts. Unable to accept responsibility for anything. And seemingly attempting to commit suicide. Looking on at their much more loveable brother with jealousy and rage. Whilst that much more loveable brother, the Democrats act as the pragmatic force behind the reinvention of America. Or, Theodore Roosevelt, if you will.

Surely someone in the Republican Party must be thinking to themselves “Please Cheney, just let it go. The damage is done!“. If they aren’t crossing their fingers that Bush doesn’t turn up with an equally insignificant opinion aired across the media, then they should be.

Whilst the GOP attempts to deal with the fact that Republican of 29 years Senator Arlen Specter has lost complete faith in a Party slipping further to the Right every day, choosing instead to move to the Democrat benches, Democrats look set to start work on complete (Oh MY GOD SOCIALISM ARGH!) healthcare reform after their $3.4tn Budget passed through the House beautifully by 233 to 193, marking Obama’s 100th day in spectacular fashion.
Specter’s move means the Democrat Senate Majority is taken to 59. When Minnesota’s Supreme Court finally votes in favour of Democratic Senator Al Franken, that takes the Democrats in the Senate up to a lovely round 60. And if that lovely round 60 is reached (which it will be), that means the Democratic controlled Senate becomes filibuster-free. Which is fantastic.

Specter leaving the GOP is two fold in the damage it’s likely to cause. Firstly, it makes the GOP look weak, disunited, out of touch and relatively pointless. Secondly, it seems to have sparked off a fight between Republicans themselves. Utah Senator Orrin Hatch blamed Chris Chocola (who ran a campaign based on the slogan “Fuck the environment” – or words to that affect, when he voted to allow oil companies to drill in the protected Arctic National Wildlife Reserve)and the rest of the rather comically named “Club for Growth” for imposing strict right wing rules over the party. Chocola himself, a big fan of President Bush, which suggests that “Club for Growth” must be an ironic term. The equivilant to calling a tall man “shorty”. “The Club For Growth” themselves blamed Specter for ruining the GOP and then leaving. South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham blamed Michael Steele and the RNC for pushing moderates out the way. And Michael Steele himself, decided to take on the role of a new WWE superstar named “The Black Republican” (again, another ironic name) and said …
“If Sen. Specter survives in the fall — get ready to go to the mat, baby, because we’re coming after you and taking you out“
I’m not joking, he actually did say that, to CNN. Look.
So obviously, this was also a chance for that perfectly round headed orange ignorant idiot Rush Limbaugh to have his say. Limbaugh on his radio show, is quoted as saying:
“Well, Specter, take McCain with you. And his daughter. Take McCain and his daughter with you if you’re gonna…”
Good idea! Take all the moderates to the Democrats. Meghan McCain is far too intelligent to be a Republican anyway. Take the few popular Republicans, and hand them to the Democrats. For once I agree with the fat prick. If that were to happen, the Republicans wouldn’t see Government for a very long time. You’d essentially have a popularly elected Democrat Dictatorship for decades. It’s perfect. Perhaps Rush could go live in the soon to be New Republic of Texabillies. Republicans in this new Republican are free to be as “Conservative” as they please. They can be as racist, homophobic, small government, guns to every man, woman, child and pet as they could possibly imagine.
It amuses me greatly, that the GOP has now taken to discrediting Specter by releasing a video, that shows how Specter was close to George Bush. It’s almost poetic that the only way the Republicans can discredit an ex-Republican, is by aligning him with a failed Republican President. You really couldn’t make this shit up.

Not only that but Republicans are finding themselves in a tough position when it comes to Democrat plans for new regulations placed on Wall Street. On the one hand, they could follow their out of date principles, keep yelling Socialism, and decide to ignore the problems that 25 years of Reaganomics has created deciding instead to obstruct any form of recovery. Or, they could put aside their wasted ideology, tell Glenn Beck that if he’s trying to be the Right Wing’s version of John Stewart… it’s never going to happen, and accept the need for regulatory rules as soon as humanly possible. That would of course risk hurting the feelings of apparent Republican Leader Rush Limbaugh, and be forced to apologise from the heart at a later date. So it’s a tough situation for Republicans.

We all knew torture is wrong, but we needed something to confirm our belief. Enter Dick Cheney and Karl Rove. It’s like meeting someone who thinks they might be gay, and then pushing them over the edge. Did Cheney and Rove really think anyone would take their side in this? The moment he showed his murderous little face, we all squirmed. Obviously there are those like Beck, Hannity, and Limbaugh “Conservatives” who think the way to defeat terrorism, is by being a terrorist, but in the real World there is no way a human being with any moral compass would ever consider using the phrase “You know, I think Karl Rove and Dick Cheney are right.”

The only way to cope, is to have an insignificant “Tea Party” (nothing strikes fear into the enemy more than words “Tea Party“) to complain how Obama is both, paradoxically, a Socialist (3% tax increase on the rich, bringing it still beneath that of the first six years of Reagan……… Barack Stalin, obviously!) and a Fascist by announcing the biggest middle class tax cut in history. Or, just continue to fight amongst themselves until they push everyone other than the actual Right Wing Extremists (Rush, Hannity, O’Reilly, Beck) out of the GOP for good. Either way, it’s so incredibly entertaining, i’m just as happy as ever. Whilst the majority of Americans significantly approve of President Obama’s running of domestic policy, foreign policy, economic policy and now with the outbreak of Swine flu, 66% approve of how the Administration is dealing with the outbreak – you have to come to the conclusion that in a Nation finally embracing Liberal principles, the GOP moving further to the Right and edging out moderates is going to be the ultimate death of the Party. (I literally had a smile on my face as I typed that, weird).

The GOP Ship is sinking more and more every day. It’s crew are now fighting each other and appear to have decided that only the most extreme Republicans, the most racist, anti-environment, homophobic, fox news worshipping crew members are good enough. Fine by me. It means those ignorant shits go down with the ship.

At the start of this entry, I mentioned feeling sorry for Republicans. I take it back. Bask in the entertainment of a dying breed of ignorance, is what I meant to say.

I don’t want American freedom.

As a rule, the Roman Empire did not respond too kindly to criticism. They believed they were the most civilised and forward thinking Nation on the planet. Everyone else, they considered to be far inferior to themselves. Any sort of criticism hurled their way resulted in swift attack. The Christians for example bore the brunt of the might of Rome (according to Tacitus) when Emperor Nero managed to gain enough popular support to blame the anti-Roman Christians for the 64AD fire of Rome…. and so the Christians were quite brutally punished. Rome could not handle criticism. Truth had become a threat.

Whilst I was sat, drinking a finely made cup of England’s finest tea, I turned to channel 509 – Fox News.
A man with a mind-numbingly boring voice on Fox News, attacked Obama for not “standing up for America” and that “Obama didn’t stand up for freedom” when he met with Hugo Chavez recently. I listened tentatively, hoping that Fox would enlighten me as to when America ever stood up for freedom?

America is not on the side of World freedom. It’s a very odd claim to make. It appears only the American right wing still hold that assumption close to their rose tinted hearts. America is on the side of whatever works for America. America decides what is best for your Nation, based entirely on how you benefit America economically. If you don’t, you’ll be labelled evil.
The ridiculously narrow minded and diseased statements from Fox, attacking President Obama increased in spectacular fashion for the next few minutes:

“The American position is to help Cuba and the Americas rid their people of communist dictatorships that forced themselves on the country fifty years ago…… Obama didn’t say that, does this man’s narcassicism know no bounds?”

Let’s not forget that America supported the pre-Castro regime of Fulgencio Batista after he and his military associates took control of Cuba in ’52. Batista called off all elections and suspended the Cuban constitution, creating a dictatorship. Now, usually the USA would have something to say about that, but no, it was a Right Winged dictatorship and it benefitted American trade, so Eisenhower and Truman both recognised Batista’s authority. Freedom is only freedom when it suits America.
The reason America didn’t appear to have a problem with Batista’s dictatorship, is the regime in 1952 gave out contracts to several U.S Corporations for train lines, a power network, highways and an airport. The Cuban people did not concern America, their freedom, did not concern America. The only thing that concerned America, was and still is…. money. Outside of Havana, the poor were under the worst conditions ever known in Cuba, the literacy rate was appalling and health care extended to the rich only. But that’s okay, because America was benefiting economically. America owned a quarter of bank deposits in Cuba by 1958. 90% of Electric Services and the Telephone Services were American. So of course it didn’t matter that Batista was killing off political rivals, calling off all elections, torturing, being pictured with mafia associates and acting like a Right Winged version of Stalin…. because it benefited America economically.

Not only that, but America supplied the Batista regime with arms and napalm to kill off the Castro faction a few years later. After the USA forced Cuba to go to the polls, in 1954, Batista won. Vice President Nixon went over to congratulate Batista on his victory….. choosing to ignore that Batista was the only candidate.

So I fear Fox are once again being a little bit hypocritical when they seem to profess just how wonderful the U.S has been with Cuba. Castro didn’t “force himself” on the Country. If Obama were to abandon the US Constitution and call off all future elections, I figure Fox would go out of their way to provide support to a rebel army.

It suited America to support the Taliban once. Freedom and human rights, didn’t appear to matter. It suited America to support General Pinochet in Chile once (for all the complaining John McCain does about sitting down without preconditions with dictators, he has no problem visiting General Pinochet in 1985, for what he later described as “warm and friendly”) Freedom and human rights didn’t apppear to matter. It suited America to support Saddam once. Freedom and human rights didn’t appear to matter. In fact, at the height of Saddam’s tyranny and murderous rampage, it was America who were supplying the weapons and the funding to make such tyranny possible. Saddam wasn’t given a fair trial, because if he had been given that freedom, he would have had a field day describing the help and the encouragement given by the Reagan and Bush administrations. Both of which, should have gone on trial too. In fact, half the Presidents ever to occupy the White House, by their own logic, should go on trial for crimes against humanity. But of course America got their own back by destroying half of that Country…. because it suited American interests. When it suits America economically in the 1980s, they’ll help you. When it suits America economically in the 00s, they’ll utterly destroy you. That’ll teach you to stop trading oil in US Dollars. But hey, that’s the price we all pay for this odd brand of “Freedom” America seems to be trying to sell us all.

Fox do not appear to accept any criticism hurled at America, unless it’s hurled at the Left wing. For example, today they spent at least twenty wasteful minutes on the fact that Chavez presented Obama with a book by Eduardo Galeano, entitled “Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent” which has “anti-American sentiment” written deep into it’s core. It’s like a dad who beats his child complaining when his child writes a book about the abuse he suffered. I realise Fox want to rewrite history in which America is the freedom loving, peaceful angels of the World, but that simply wouldn’t be true. However, the moment French President Nicolas Sarkozy decided to verbally attack President Obama, Fox suddenly fell in love with the French.

President Obama seems humble. He appears to recognise that America has been a bit of a shit over the past century, and that when Fox and Republicans refuse to acknowledge just how disgraceful America has acted, it strikes me as ignorant and cowardly. The World, for a very long time has recognised that the USA is not the beacon for hope and freedom that it’s right wing claims to be. It’s a selfish Nation whose economic interests far outweigh the interests of freedom and human rights. Death tolls have never bothered America if it means advancement in business ties. The sanctions placed on Cuba have nothing to do with trying to help the people of Cuba resist Communism. The sanctions on Cuba have nothing to do with anything other than the economic growth of American business. Obama is doing the right thing. America is still horribly blinded by it’s obsession with it’s own unique, perverted form of “Freedom”. The freedom that is equivilant to me punching a man in his face, taking his money, and then spending it on my family.

It’s wonderful to see such deep hypocrisy and ignorance alive and well in the American Right Wing. Right now Fox came back from it’s commercial break, to the sentence “Is this the end of freedom of speech?” (this, two hours after telling us all what Obama SHOULD be saying, how ironic), discussing why Obama is trying to control the internet, wants to kill off the first amendment and might want to run for three terms. It’s the single most ridiculous channel ever made. And i’m including “GODtv” in that.

Hugo Chavez described America in 2005, as the “most savage, cruel and murderous empire that has existed in the history of the world.”
Hard to argue with that.

Republican Day III

Now, I could just about cope with the BIG INFLATED SOCIALIST state en acting laws preventing me from stoning my dad, for working on the Sabbath, clearly going against the Bible and Exodus 35:2. I was even able to cope with the fact that the Commie Atheist law tells me that whether my slave dies today, or in two days time, it’s still punishable, even though the rightful word of my loving God tells me in Exodus 21:20-21 that if he dies in two days time, it’s okay and that I shouldn’t be punished (did you know, that the State in it’s increasing attempts to block my religious freedom, have ACTUALLY banned slavery? It’s outrageous. What next, a ban on laughing except for black people and gays?).

However, I cannot quite believe what i’m hearing, when a friend informed me that Gayowa, ConnetiAIDS, Bummingchusettes And Homont aren’t the only States to be allowing those who want to give AIDs to my children, to get married. New York, New Jersey, New Hampshire, and Maine (notice they’re all in Satan’s part of the U.S.OF Awesome) are all expected to vote in favour of the homogays very soon.

In 2006, the greatest President the USAwesome has ever known, George W Bush (Whose first name, begins with the same letter as God’s. Coincidence?) called for a Constitutional Amendment banning same sex marriage. He said quite beautifully, and tolerantly that “A constitutional amendment will put a decision that is critical to American families and American society“. And he’s right!!! American Heterosexual families in Gayowa are now victims. They can’t go outside without men in pink shorts and leather BDSM clothing chasing them with their cocks out and the butt flap on their shorts wide open, forcing them to listen to George Michael. Is this what you want America? You want your children exposed to this?

It’s just unnatural. So horribly unnatural. Nothing about homogay marriage is natural. But my belief in a man who was born to a Virgin, who was visited by three men who followed the words of an angel, and who grew up to perform miracles, was crucified but rose from the dead, walked around for a few days and then flew up to a bearded man in the sky (Who by the way, supported the election of John McCain in 2008….. which means Democrat voters are going to hell)… will allow me to beat those unnatural bastards.

By allowing Homofags to get married, the U.S Senate is undermining the marriage between man and woman. Before the queers were allowed to marry, no men or women ever got divorced. FACT. Britney Spears would not have felt forced into marrying a man for twenty four hours. FACT. Anti-gay Republicans like Richard Curtis would not have accidentally fallen on top of a man in a hotel room whilst they both just happened to be naked (there clothes were stolen by gay democrats!!) and then dressed up like a woman. FACT! And Fox News’s (the only fair and impartial news channel in the World) Sean Hannity would not have been FORCED by the Gays to pose with hookers even though he’s married. FACT!

This is all part of the Gay agenda, designed to destroy heterosexual marriage eventually. Did you know for example, that every time a gay couple marry, a heterosexual couple have to divorce. Heterosexual people are being forced to give up their Religious principles based on Jesus spending a lot of intimate time with twelve male disciples, in order to accept that gayism as anything but a disgusting child abusing aids spreading society killer.

Well I for one wont let it happen any more. And i’m not the only one! Over at the insightful and fully FACT based freedom loving website Americans for Truth have opened my eyes to the truth. They are the “leading resource for exposing and countering the homosexual activist agenda. ” And that’s exactly what it is! An agenda! A Satanist agenda at that. Heterosexuals have no agenda. We just want to be able to get married, whilst oppressing preventing those who engage in sexual acts that we deem inappropriate. (and for those of you who say that truth is subjective…. erm… WAKE UP! ….. The Bible says otherwise…. take that Liberals!!).
They highlight an email they received from a liberal Christian (which is just another way of saying “working undercover for Satan)…

“Grow the [f–k] up. My god your an [a–shole]. I can see that look on your balding head. Probably in the closet all these years trying to deny your mysioginistic [sic] way. God can\’t save you from the [f–cking] miserable choices you make in interpretating his rules as literal, not figurative mesaages [sic] on ways to live your life. I went to sunday school for half of my life – I should know. The name of this site should not be Americans for Truth, but Americans for Lies. People do not force themselves to like other people, amd [sic] only a thickheaded person like you deserves to rot in the depths of hell if there is such a place. Another good name for this site would be mainly [yourana–hole.com]. Perfectly suits you afterall.”

First of all, Satan worshipper, bald men can use their heads to absorb more of God’s light. So what do you have to say now? He then appears to suggest that the word of God is up for interpretation. Which it isn’t. It clearly states that Gays are an abomination. Notice he refers to the “A-hole” a couple of times? Do you know why that is? That’s right, it’s because he loves men. He seems to be suggesting that “Americans for Truth” are picking and choosing what they wish to take literally from the Bible. Which is false again!!! Because I happen to know for certain, that their new website, entitled “Americans for giving AIDs to Atheists” is going to be a massive hit! It’s based purely on Exodus 15:26, which clearly states that if you disobey God, you should be punished with horrible disease. To be fair though, it’s only a matter of time before they get AIDs anyway, given that they’re all gay anyway.

The gay days are numbered! Republicans are going to kick ass!

Republican Jamie Day II

Oh very funny Liberals.
That’s all you Liberals are isn’t it? Joke after joke. Never serious! Well was Jesus funny? NO! Is it funny that Cheney’s daughter is a lesbian? NO! Was it funny when George Bush was hit with a shoe? NO! Is Glen Beck funny? NO! I don’t need to be funny. We Republicans don’t need humour. Humour is for Socialists.

I’m sure you’re all familiar with the passage in the Book of ultimate Truth:
“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.“
Quite clearly the perverts who made the above photo are baby killing homosexuals. Because either you support the God inspired work of President Bush and the Republican Party, or you’re a Liberal, and Liberal means homogay in the Republican Language. (If there were actually a Republican Language, we’d spread it around the World, just like we’ve spread McDonalds Democracy!!).
Is it a coincidence that the homogay San Francisco is the homeland of Nancy Pelosi? I don’t think so! Much like it’s quite clear that it isn’t a coincidence that Abomber isn’t white….. neither are terrorists. The Liberal Agenda is being exposed!!! They want to control the media, control the minds of innocent Christian children into believing that Gays are anything but disgusting, and control the idea that George Bush was a terrorist, rather than a Christian hero. WE SEE THROUGH THE BULLSHIT LIBERALS! America is waking up to the idea that we’re the true party of Christ (he hates muslims, we hate muslims, he hates gays, we hate gays, he performed miracles, we got George Bush election… twice!… see a pattern?), we’re the true party of freedom….if you’re white, heterosexual, a Republican, a Christian, and hate abortion…. you’re entitled to as much freedom as you could possibly want! We’re an open book, filled with blank pages for you to fill up with whatever you want (as long as it’s not hippy gay muslim evolutionist jewish lies) freedom! Open your eyes! Abomber’s approval ratings accoring to Gallup have gone down from 63%, to a measly, pathetic 62%…… you’re days are well and truly numbered, Liberals.

The above picture, made by homogay jewish muslimists is just another attempt to divert attention away from the real Issue. Barack Isane Abomber has pledged to cut the taxes of anyone earning less than $250,000 a year. So that means that ordinary families keep a larger chunk of their hard earned money, whilst Abomber continues to waste money on those scumbags who don’t have a job and homofaggays. Well we showed him!!! We struck back against wasteful spending, by using the money he saved us, to buy one million tea bags. That will show Washington that we’re serious about cutting wasteful spending!

What about those people earning above $250,000. They’re people too! How the fuck do you think they’re going to be able to afford another Yacht now? The Yacht they have at the moment is going out of date. It doesn’t even have a built in heater in the on board swimming pool. And now they can’t afford a yacht WITH a built in heater? It’s like the Third World has came to America!! Barack Obama? Barack Stalin more like.

As for the above picture of George Bush; the Liberals are clearly trying to suggest that he’s the terrorist we should all be aware of. Oh really Liberals? Well I’ve got news for you! George Bush has been a truly courageous leader, fiscally responsible, a uniter or people, and warrior of Christ! Those people in Iraq weren’t even Christian. Do you think they deserved to live? He tried to convert them! He gave them the chance to find Jesus, and they just threw a shoe in his face! WELL YOU WORSHIP THE WRONG GOD MUSLIMISTS! Why do they worship Alliyah anyway? Her songs aren’t even that good.

Abomber seems to be apologising for America’s actions over the past eight glorious years. Why? We don’t need a President to be “tolerant”. Were the muslimists tolerant when they refused to accept Jesus as their lord and saviour? NO! Were the homogays tolerant when they refused to accept that they’re disgusting? NO! Were countries filled with natural resources tolerant when The United States of Awesome freed them and made it cheaper for them to live, by blowing the hell out of some of their family members? NO! Were the Darwinists (Satan worshippers) tolerant when we beat them with logic and intelligence by showing them the Bible? NO! Were Liberals tolerant when you voted for a black man (AKA criminal) even though Sarah Palin has much better eyesight and can see Russia from Alaska? NO! Were the panzy Lefties tolerant when we rightfully supported Pinochet? NO! At least George Bush gave the military something to do! Liberals would be happy to see the military not in the middle of a war zone. Soldiers without jobs… what does that remind me of….. oh yes…. the STUDENT HIPPY UNEMPLOYED SOCIALISTS!! Why don’t you Darwin lovers do us all a favour and evolve into a hard working Republican!!

Checkmate Liberals!

Republican Jamie

For one day only, i’ve decided to embrace the art of being a Republican.
And so for all you lefties (closet homosexuals) and those of you who like to engage brain activity (Satan worshippers) it’s probably best you look away now.

Thank god for Texas Gov. Rick Perry (A true Patriot, perhaps even the ACTUAL 2nd coming of Christ), who suggested Texas could secede from the Union. Texans should be proud! They don’t need evil socialist gay loving social security, medicaid, highway repair, medicare and anything else the Union offers them. Texas doesn’t need to be included in the same list of States as Gayowa. Take your Socialist Federal infrastructure back! Take back Department of Defence funding! Texas doesn’t need that commie bullshit. God will replace it all! And as for the new Texan economy, it’d be amazingly strong! Because we’re the party of fiscal responsibility you know! Plus, Bush is a Texan, so considering he’s been a fiscal genius over his eight years (I like to call them, America’s Golden Years), he can be the brand new Nation of Texas Treasury Secretary. YEAH! Texas doesn’t need your commie Union.

For the past three months a black man (I believe they are referred to as “bruvas“) has occupied George Bush’s house. It seems a little unfair. Bush had successfully managed to lower house prices SO much, that anyone (including lazy “bruvas from da hood“) can afford to buy, so much so that a bruva has taken Bush’s house from him. That’s gratitude for you. The lying liberal media (with the exception of the totally fair and unbiased Fox News) have lost control when it comes to Barack HUSSAIN (yes, Hussain!!! It sounds like insane!!! Coincidence?) Obama (YES!! Obama!! It sounds like a bomber!! Coincidence?…. Barak insane Abomber*….. God warned us!!). They’re everywhere. The BBC over here with it’s Trotskyist approach to news reporting …… i’ve never once seen them refer to homosexuals as dirty sinners, who shouldn’t be allowed near children, and are on their way to hell… even though that’s exactly what they are. The liberal media with it’s homosexual agenda must go!

Earlier I pointed out that Bush had managed to destroy push down house prices so much so that even those weird coloured people bought them up. Which in turn, lead to the crises we’re in today. George Bush, Dick Cheney and Phil Gramm just tried to help. The Liberal media and it’s muslim loving homosexual agenda will have you believe that those three helped deregulate so much that the entire market became one big mess. Well it wouldn’t have become a mess if blacks hadn’t started paying for things they couldn’t afford bringing their crime and “shiz” into crime free happy joyful white neighbourhoods!!!! We all know that the only way to deal with a fire is to set it on fire. And so logic dictates that the only way to deal with this crises is more deregulation!! Much like the only way to deal with increase in gun crime is more guns!!!

Liberals will have you believe that a woman has the right to choose whether or not she has an abortion. As an outsider looking into the Freest country on the Planet, I wonder, where is the freedom for a Christian to block a woman deciding what she thinks is best for her body? She’s clearly wrong if the she wants an abortion. She’s going against God. Like the gays and the jews and brown people. The true followers of Jesus Christ (Republicans) have a moral duty to correct this. It wont be long before they actually want to abort children AFTER they’re born, have left college and got a job. The liberals will say it’s the mothers right. Could they be any more in cahoots with the anti-christ (who, coincidentally, is Barak Insane Abomber)? Liberals would allow a child to grow up, and indulge in premarital sex…… homosexual sex nonetheless, with same sex hookers, and then for fun, they’d go out and perform an abortion.

We fight for the right of life! Children are precious and should be treated as such! Even before birth. In fact, even before conception. Every time you masturbate you’re killing potential children, and God hates you for it, you fucking murderers. And don’t tell me that we’re baby killers just because a few Iraqi children died in our bombing. They don’t even believe in Jesus. And, they’re Iraqi, so they’d only grow up to be terrorists anyway.
We protect children! Which is why we vetoed the SCHIP program, an evil leftie commie hippy program designed to give five million poor children health insurance. Do you know how Clinton wanted to pay to cover those poor lazy kids? That’s right! He wanted to raise tax on cigarettes. Which, in turn would lead to less smoking, and less State tax revenue. He actually thought it was Constitutional to help lazy kids whilst at the same time cut smoking. All it’s doing is teaching kids to be commies and that’s un-American. “Help” is un-American.
Luckily Senate Majority Leader at the time, Trent Lott said that it was just a large inflated Government program that would not pass! Hate lazy kids but love cigarettes? Vote Lott! Perhaps if the children weren’t lazy or black or muslims, Jesus Christ would love them enough to give them more money for health insurance. But he didn’t. Because they’re lazy. And the money I spend on cigarettes I DO NOT want going to helping Satan’s children, who will probably grow up to be homosexuals or criminals any way.
Luckily Bush was on hand to veto any attempt to pass such a bill, saying that it would “federalize health care” and we don’t want no fucking evil commie healthcare system like the gayropeans in countries like Gay Britain have.
But then Barack Insane Abomber became President (America’s first Terrorist President, who will undo all the humanitarian work that Bush has achieved), and suddenly four million more children including (and this bit sickens me) the children of legal immigrants are now covered!!!! Commie Mexican kids, taking up YOUR tax dollars to fund their health care? What next? A Socialist police force covering all areas regardless of who can afford it? Some of those kids don’t even believe in Jesus. Should we be paying for them to recover? Boo hoo, they’re ill…… if they weren’t so heretical and lazy, perhaps they wouldn’t need your tax money!!

What if those kids grow up to be scientists (faggot Jesus deniers)? How guilty will you feel if you helped cure a kid who insists on Darwin’s idea that your grandma was an ape? What if he teaches YOUR kids that gays are not evil satan worshippers? What if he teaches that the Earth isn’t 6,000 years old? What if he grows up to tell us all that Polar bears are worth saving instead of letting Dick Cheney grow richer from his oil ventures? What if he grows up to support action on climate change (it’s really cold here today, Global Warming? More like Global liberal homosexual jesus hating bullshit) Could you live with yourself if all that happened? I certainly couldn’t. The liberal media would win, and that can’t happen!! Why haven’t they questioned where Abomber gets his suits from? I tell you why…. because he gets his suits from terrorist homosexuals in Iran which is near Eurogaycommieland. That’s why!

The fact remains that Abomber wants to let muslims with bombs straight from Gitmo (liberals say that some of those inmates are “innocent”….. they come from outside the U.S.of.AWESOME, so they’re not fucking innocent. They deserve it! The Satan worshipping homos) live next door to you. It’s no surprise. He’s never once came out in public and denied that he’s a terrorist, which means he’s a terrorist. Like all muslims are terrorists. He wants to let homos into the military. Yeah that’s just what they need, whilst the REAL men are killing as many dirty terrorist arabs as possible, suddenly a man dancing to George Michael records sits next to them and starts talking about shoes.
He wants your kids to be bummed in school by the gays. He thinks it’s ok to allow teachers to say “Darwin” instead of “Satan” and teach that farfetched ridiculous impossible concept of evolution. Luckily It wont last long, we have Jesus on our side….. he was the son of a virgin and God, who was killed for our sins, rose from the dead, walked around for a bit, and then ascended into heaven. And worst of all Barack Insane Abomber has never once said “I’m not a muslim and i’m not an atheist“. Logic must conclude that because he’s never said those words, he must be a muslim and an atheist aswell as being a homosexual, a jew and black (so much for racial equality, change we can believe in?). We need to stop this. Already “Gayowa” has given into to the fags and given them the right to get married (which means I never want to get married, because if I did, i’d be a bit like the gays, and that’s disgusting) turning their state into as Humanevents calls it “A mecca” for aids lovers. Our children are the real victims here (not the lazy ones mentioned earlier, they’re already going to hell). They’re going to grow up thinking that it’s acceptable for two men to get married (two women is hott!), and so rejecting Jesus Christ in the process. And everyone knows if you reject Jesus our lord, you’re going to hell. As this chart shows.

See that! Satan is a pacifist. A leftie. A liberal. A homosexual. He doesn’t believe in violence. We have God on our side. He isn’t afraid to kick ass! FUCK YEAH!

Do I feel safer with Barack Insane Abomber in the White House? No. Whilst he and his home boyz sit chillin’ to 50 Cent, talking using a teleprompter (Bush didn’t have to do that, and his speeches are just as awe-inspiring and beautifully eloquent – even more so than the terrorist who took over) the World is laughing at America because we’re the wimps now! At least Bush and Jesus kept us in the West safe from terrorism (Madrid, London, 9/11, Turkey, Tunisia, and Morocco don’t count as proof that the World is more unsafe because if the Gayocrats had been in charge since 2001, those places wouldn’t even exist now!!! They’d all be muslim….. London would now be Londonstan… Bush stopped that from happening). Barack Insane Abomber is one of those who want to hurt Americans. When end of days is upon us (Republicans vs atheist homosexual muslim jews), Insane Abomber will have a lot of explaining to do.

Thank goodness for Republican bloggers! Like Sure Sense, who rightfully warns that after the Homeland Security Document covering Right Winged extremism (it is my freedom and the freedom of the other Republican bloggers, to completely ignore the fact that a report was also released on Left Wing Extremism) is bringing about THE END OF THE WORLD! Sure Sense doesn’t like that the DOHS Document, especially line “It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration“
Sure Sense, tries to analyse the line, with his own magical synopsis…..
“So what this is saying is that all Evangelical Christians, who hold homosexuality and abortion to be a sin are now potential terrorist threats. “
- YES! That’s exactly what it says. I didn’t notice it before, because I was too busy focusing on the actual words. When I read it over and over, that’s exactly what it says! They are putting all Christians down as terrorists! Which we’re not! That’s the muslims! Luckily Sure Sense is on track to be much more understanding toward us Christians, much more accepting, much less vile…
” I do not hold that Buddha, Confucius, or Mohammad can get people to God. Sure, they may help you be “religious”, but all of their teachings are about how you have to be good enough, and you can’t be.”
- That’s fucking right! How dare the DOHS attack us. Those damn intolerent, ignorant bastards. It’s everyone else, who aren’t American Christians, who’re going to hell!!! We tried to tell that to the Iraqis, they hate us for it. So fuck them!
He doesn’t stop there! He continues with his well thought out logic!!…
” From there, we’ll see Christians being jailed, and eventually martyred.“
That’s right!! As well as being a gay loving commie, Abomber is also a big fan of the works of Emperor Nero. I fear for the future of Christians.

The only way to clean up the mess that Abomber has created (It’s a new mess, totally unexpected, definitely was not the fault of the previous incredibly competent Administration, despite what Liberals might tell you), is by having tea parties and talk of secession!!! That’s the way forward for the glorious GOP! Chuck Norris/Rush Limbaugh for President/Vice President of Texas!!!!!

Right, i’m off teabagging with the other ten Republicans (which the Liberal media wont cover by the way!!!) We don’t want our children inheriting such a huge tax burden!!!!(that’s not to say we wont accept the tax cut they’re giving us… the biggest in middle class U.S History apparently…..which makes them SECRET communists or fascists. One of the other!) Our children have a right to inherit an overly polluted earth free from tax burden!! We’re revolting for the sake of FREEDOM and that makes us Patriots! Unlike when those Lefties protested the Iraq war, the un-American homosexual Jesus hating muslims.

For true freedom (we freed Iraq baby!!) vote Republican in 2012. If you don’t, then you’re going to hell.

*Watching too much Abomber increases the risk of cancer.