My law on marriage

If we are to take the Biblical view, that marriage is between a man and a woman, we must look at what Biblical marriage stood for. Christians who oppose gay marriage, if they are going to use to the Bible to try to justify their prejudices, must be consistent and follow through with the Biblical guide to marriage. So perhaps we should use the Bible to structure a new Federal law on the Defence of Marriage. Let’s call it, Futile Democracy’s Defence of Marriage Act 2010. I took it upon myself to write it up:

Section 1 define marriage:
A marriage is defined as a union between a man and a virgin woman.
Deuteronomy 22:13-21
A marriage is also valid, in the eyes of God and so the eyes of the United States Congress, if it is between a man and his sister.
Genesis 20:1-14
The union also permits the man to take concubines whenever he sees fit.
2 Sam 5:13
2 Chron 11:21

Section 2 relating to women as captives:
If a man within the United States of America finds a desirable woman in a room of captives, he is entitled to marry her on the spot, without her consent.
After marrying a captive, it is required, by the consent of the United States Congress, that the man must first take her home, and shave her head.
Deut. 21:11-13

Section 3 relating to women as property:
Trading in women, is a perfectly acceptable form of property dealing, within the United States of America.
RUTH 4:5-10
Wives must not speak, or offer opinions, especially in Church, except in the company of her superior (husband) at home.
I Corinthians 14:34-35
If a man rapes a virgin, he shall pay fifty pieces of silver, and then marry her.
Deut. 22:28
If a woman is kidnapped at a party, this shall not fall under the law of the United States forbidding kidnapping, as long as the man marries the kidnapped woman.
Judges 21:19-25
When at war, is it permitted that you destroy their cities, kill all men and women and male children, take the female children for yourselves, and marry them.
Judges 21:7-23
Purchasing children of foreigners is acceptable in God’s eyes. You may marry them, as they are now your property.
Leviticus 25:44-46

Section 4 relating to adultery:
The punishment for adultery is stoning to death.
Death shall not be enforced before a quasi-trial is given for the wife. If the parents of the wife can prove that the wife is a virgin by spreading the cloth worn by the wife on a table to the City Elders, the husband must pay compensation to the parents and the wife is not permitted to see her parents ever again.
If she is found guilty, she must be put to death.
Deut. 22:22-30

Section 5 relating to pregnancy:
If a wife gives birth to a boy, she must spend a week in isolation because she is, by decree of the Congress of the United States, and God Almighty, unclean.
If a wife gives birth to a girl, she must spend two weeks in isolation, because she is, by decree of the Congress of the United States, and God Almighty, very very unclean.
Leviticus 12:5

Section 6 relating to the death of a husband:
Definitely don’t marry your dead husband’s brother.
Leviticus 20:21
Definitely do marry your dead husband’s brother.
Deuteronomy 25:5-10

Section 7 on divorce:
If a citizen of the United States of America abandons his wife and children, for Jesus, he will be rewarded.
Matthew 19:29
A woman who is divorced for a second time or widowed by her second husband, must not remarry her first husband.
Deuteronomy 24:3-4
Divorce and remarrying, is committing adultery against your first husband or wife in the eyes of Jesus and the United States Congress. This isn’t a law as such, just to let you know, if you get divorced, we think you’re scum.
Mark 10:2-12

Section 8 conclusion:
Marriage within the United States of America, is hereby described objectively as a union between a man, brother, rapist and a virgin woman, another woman, another woman, a few more women, a hostage, a rape victim, and the female children of parents who have just been slaughtered.
But NEVER let a homo marry. This is unnatural and immoral.

I think that just about sums up exactly what the new US law on Defence of Marriage should consist of, you know, if it really is about pleasing God, and not about simply being horrific bigots.

I found this poet, Alvin Lau, in a powerfully beautiful poem exploring the bullshit of Christian homophobic attitudes that are prominent on the American Right wing. I cannot think of a better way to put into words exactly how I feel on the subject of gay marriage, than Lau does:

The madness of British Politics

David Cameron is Prime Minister.

He wishes to cut the number of MPs whilst increasing the number of Lords.
We now can’t get rid of the Government with a no confidence vote in the Commons, for the first time, well, ever.

George Osbourne keeps saying “We’re all in this together” whilst walking out of his mansion, toward his Rolls Royce.

David Laws apparently thinks he needed to spend £40,000 of taxpayers money to hide the fact that he’s gay (Firstly, why does he need to hide the fact that he’s gay? We’re not all regressive Tories. We don’t care that he’s gay. And secondly, how will not spending £40,000 of taxpayers money, reveal that you’re gay?), whilst at the same time telling us all rather hypocritically that we should all prepare for mad spending cuts and a decade of Tory and Tory-lite Lib Dem inflicted misery. It’s sad that it took a Telegraph revelation for Laws to say he “regretted it“. He didn’t regret, for eight entire years. He suddenly has an attack of conscience, on coincidentally, the day it becomes public. This is the “new politics“? It looks ominously like the old politics.

Paddy Ashdown practically gave Laws an on-air blowjob, telling Sky News how wonderful the little fraudulent Lib Dem actually is. Apparently the story of millionaire David Laws ripping off the taxpayer by claiming £950 a month for almost a decade, to pay for his accommodation, that he rented, off of his gay lover, whom apparently his not his gay lover, despite the fact that they have been…….. gay lovers, since 2001.

EDIT: David Laws has just resigned. It’s a sad day for people who are secretly gay and apparently have to spend £40,000 to gay lovers, for no apparent reason, to keep it a secret.

Vince Cable has lost all credibility by suddenly becoming a Tory on the issue of spending cuts (apparently he “changed his view” because the “situation changed” which roughly translates to “I sold my soul for a bit of power“).

Cable then signified his intention to sell the roads, because NM Rothschild, have described how wonderful it will be to privatise absolutely everything. Today the roads, tomorrow the air, and next week; you’ll have to pay to smile because McDonalds or Starbucks will own the rights to smiling.

The Tories refused to let a Minister go on Question Time because Labour had chosen Alastair Campbell, who is not elected, to go on. Which suggest the Tories think they have a right to dictate the rules of Question Time. The Murdoch backed Tories trying to undermine the BBC? I’m only surprised it’s taken this long.

And now John Prescott will be given a Peerage.

Oh, and Thatcher is STILL alive.

British Politics has officially gone mad.

The National Insurance Row.

The big news this week politically, is that a group of business leaders have signed a document throwing their support behind the Conservatives, over Labour’s plan to increase National Insurance. The group of businessmen signed a document calling for the 1% planned rise, to be scrapped. The news media are treating it like a huge coup for the Tories. The news that business leaders support the Tories, is being treated, like huge surprising news. Surely this is less interesting and surprising news, than Ricky Martin telling the World he is gay, about fifteen years after we all figured it out any way. In other news, Jim Davidson is still shit, the BNP are still racist scum, apparently a bear shat in the woods today, Hitler was a bit of a git, and the sun might rise sometime tomorrow morning according to latest reports.

One of the business leaders who signed the document, is Paul Walsh. Walsh earns £3.6million a year as Chief Exec. of Diageo PLC, a huge wine and beer company based in London. It’s net income last year was £1,725,000,000. Now obviously, earning close to two billion pounds is not enough. A 1% N.I increase would apparently cripple them. Lucky for Diageo then, that they have a dedicated management team who do not really like to pay taxes. According to a Guardian report, Diageo over the past decade has paid a little over £43,000,000 in tax. That’s around £4,300,000 a year. In reality, they should have paid £144,000,000 a year. That equates to £1,397,000,000 tax loss. If you were to scrounge an extra few pound a week benefit payout, you’d be threatened with prison. Scrounge an extra £1,397,000,000 and you’re well on your way to being knighted for your services to “CREATING JOBS AND BEING ALL WONDERFUL!” That gap in the treasuries takings, according to the Guardian would take 20,000 households paying income tax to fill. So wondrous are Diageo, and so committed to the wellbeing of their workforce, that after posting profits of almost £2bn, they closed a Jonnie Walker blending plant which had been a community of Kilmarnock local historical institution, and made 700 people redundant. Around the same time, Mr Walsh’s salary increased.

Another businessman to sign the statement in support of the Conservative Party, is Justin King, chief executive of J Sainsbury. The President of J Sainsbury, is John Sainsbury, Baron of Preston Candover, with a net worth of £1.3bn, he is a Conservative Party donor, and member of the Conservative Party.

A third businessman to sign the statement in support of the Conservative Party is Simon Wolfson, chief executive of Next. Wolfson is a member of the Conservative Party and donated to David Cameron’s 2005 campaign, and named by the Telegraph as the “37th-most important British conservative.”

A fourth businessman to sign the statement in support of the Conservative Party is Philip Harris, chairman and chief executive of Carpetright. Harris is a Conservative member of the House of Lords, and is worth £285,000,000. He is considered a close personal friend of David Cameron, and has donated money to the Conservative Party.

Do you see a pattern forming?

The Treasury expects unemployment to fall by a quarter of a million, next year, despite the 1% increase. And whilst Tory donating Businessmen have come out against the increase, most economists appear to be suggesting that the businessmen are wrong. The Times says:

“Martin Weale, of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, pointed to the last time NI rose, in 2003. Rather than cut jobs, employers responded by paring back the growth in wages.”

The Tories claim that they will stop the rise, and instead cut £12bn of public sector waste. Apparently, that isn’t classed as attacking jobs. Even though, according to Professor Colin Talbot at Manchester University, Britain’s foremost academic expert on public sector efficiency, even £6bn would cause 120,000 job losses in both the public and private sector, because the Tories planned “savings” include hitting small private I.T firms. The business leaders don’t seem too bothered by that. Because, afterall, it doesn’t affect their huge salaries.

Of course business leaders have backed the Tories. We’re all fully aware that a 1% rise in National Insurance is not going to destroy Britain in the way these big bosses say. It is the same rhetoric they used to attack minimum wage introduction legislation; businesses everywhere will go bust; riots on the street because poor people love big businessmen and don’t wish to be paid a minimum standard of wage in order to stay alive, if it means those poor businessmen can’t afford a new yacht; England (which will be renamed Ingsoc) will set on fire; Dorset will be completely submerged beneath a sea made by evil socialists; and gay people will rule the World, all because of minimum wage. In other words, fear tactics built on empty rhetoric. Because twelve years later, minimum wage is one of Labour’s greatest achievements.

The letter says:

“In the last few years, the private sector has improved its productivity by around 20%, while productivity in the public sector has fallen by 3%.”

Not surprisingly, they didn’t offer any evidence to back that claim up.
Firstly, if that is true, that’s quite an impressive statement from a conservative section of society toward a Labour government. (Although, i’m not sure how you actually measure public sector productivity, given that it isn’t a product based sector, nor is it profitable) Surely, that is indirect backing for Labour? Secondly, whilst the private sector may have improved productivity by 20%, but whilst wages have been kept low, bosses salaries, according to Incomes Data Services firm investigation, have risen 18.3% to now 150 times greater than the average employee. Sir Peter Bonfield CBE, FREng, C.U.N.T of BT saw BT share price go from £14, to £5, under his control. He then left BT with over £6,000,000 whilst thousands of workers lost their jobs. This was in 2002, before the recession struck.

So wondrous has the private sector been over the past few years, it has brought the entire financial system to it’s knees, demanded bailouts from all of us, and those responsible are now living in luxury whilst their employees are struggling to find work and keep their homes heated.

The letter goes on to say:

“Cutting government waste won’t endanger the recovery – but putting up national insurance will.”

When you’re in a position to be able to resist all government “waste” because you earn over £1,000,000 a year, you can say things like that, and continue on your deeply ignorant path in life. Many people rely on social services, that would be put under major threat under another Tory government. Of course, the huge salaries of the big bosses wouldn’t be under threat, and so the bosses don’t appear to care. It is obvious that under a Tory government, the way to cut the deficit will be to hit those who cannot afford to feed themselves the hardest, whilst the wealth of the very wealthy will be protected. That is the legacy of the Thatcher government. The business leaders’ priority is not the public good, nor is it maintaining the wellbeing of the Country that allowed them such obscene profitability at the behest of others (No matter how much they say a 1% N.I rise is a huge “tax on jobs”); their priority is handing a healthy amount of money over to the shareholders who actually don’t do any of the work that brings the wealth in themselves (Corporate Socialism, I call it).

The idea is to create a business haven in the UK. And that’s fine. If it is supported by a top class public service and a decent infrastructure. You can go to a third World country and do business uninterrupted and deregulated to the extreme. You can be a real businessman. Use children. No National Insurance. No equal rights. Don’t pay too much out in wages. No work hour limits. Real Capitalism.

The CBI, the guys who actively protested against the introduction of minimum wage, the guys who want students to pay far more for their education whilst they themselves went to University when it was free, the guys who suggested cutting any educational courses that they deemed to be “micky mouse”, said:

“We applaud the decision by a number of Britain’s most senior business leaders to take a public stand against the planned rise in national insurance – which is a clear and unequivocal tax on jobs.”

I would like to take this opportunity, to say just how much I despise the CBI. Thatcher killed off the Unions because they had too much power of the Government. Well, she opened the door for the CBI, arguably the most powerful union of them all, and they keep flexing their puss filled muscles every chance they get. Why are we listening to people who campaigned for banking deregulation, and a free-for-all attitude to banking? They should disgust us. They have damaged us far more than the Unions ever could. The very same people who are telling us how best to deal with the recovery, were the people who contributed to the mess we’re all in, in the first place. We were deceived by these people, playing with fake money, for years, and now they are running the show again? Has nothing changed?

Growth is an interesting concept. Growth when it comes to the business World is neither moral nor immoral. It is amoral. Growth and “giving jobs” as is often the defence of big business. But what does this apparent wondrous philanthropy actually mean? Well, it means that the cunt businessman at the top wants to protect his millions, the shareholders who do nothing for the good of the company or humanity in general get a healthy pay cheque every so often, the workers are paid as little as physically possible, and the producer is paid even worse. We’re then encouraged through the constant raping of our minds to buy pointless shit we don’t need, purely to prop up businesses that shouldn’t actually exist, and buy another lovely house in a sea side resort for the business man who only uses it once a year and so contributes to the destruction of the once healthy and happy sea side town (See Beadnell in Northumberland for confirmation). I’m all for growth, when it extends the public good, feeds the hungry, and creates affordable drugs. Growth to me, does not equate to greed. I am not for a manipulated and diseased form of growth by big business, who then claim they are “creating jobs“. Growth, within the system that we live, equates to nothing more than a lovely big return on investment, regardless of the public good.

These businessmen are not worried about their businesses. Their businesses are doing just fine. They are not worried about the little people, as proven with Lloyds group and over 10,000 unemployed recently whilst their boss makes more money than every before, they are also not worried about the deficit and the Country. They are worried about their own wallets. They want more. If they are seen to back the Tories, and the Tories win, you can bet a mountain of deregulation and further destruction of the public sector will follow. Another generation of people from poorer backgrounds who are taught they are worthless, and should resign themselves to a job at McDonalds.

The problem is, the system failed. The private system. These top businessmen sucked it dry for all it is worth for years. They used their new found immense profits to pay workers as low as possible, keep the money away from producers, create offshore accounts to avoid tax, fund the Tory party, but on the plus side, buy a lovely new Mercedes. And now, once that gravy train failed, they have washed their hands of it, and will blame everyone else. Socialism, or lazy people, or Governments, or Unions. Business will never blame business. The Tories will never blame business. Business afterall, “give us jobs!!”. The workers, to these people, are dispensable and just cogs in machinery. Their lives are not important. I hope the entire stinking system fails miserably. I secretly hope for a workers revolt, in which expensive business suits are thrown onto bonfires and a form of Anarcho-syndicalism is proclaimed.

Tea Bagging

Somewhere between 1500 and 1600, an unknown Author penned The Voynich Manuscript. It has over 250 pages, is incredibly detailed, and has many illustrations to accompany the writing. The one problem is, no one knows what it says. Its language, its place of origin, as well as its author, are completely unknown. Top cryptographers spanning the last century have been unable to decipher the manuscript. It remains one of Humanities great secrets. It is not a coded manuscript, because the writing flows beautifully, like elegant prose, which suggests the author knew what he/she was writing, as it was written. A mysteriously unknown language, that perhaps, we’ll never know.

That being said, the Voynich Manuscript is not even half as baffling as the current American “Tea Party” movement. Essentially, what the tea party movement is, for those of you who are unaware, is a group of redneck protesters who think they know how to run a Country far more impressively than the current administration. What is striking though, is that most of the tea party brigade themselves, don’t know what they’re angry about….

According to cbs, 44% of the Tea Party movement, believes that their taxes have gone up under Obama. Which, they haven’t. Somewhere along the line, these mad tea party people have decided that tax cuts, equals Socialism. Which, is doesn’t. So what do they want?

They want liberty for all!!!! – unless you happen to disagree with them. Or you’re gay. Or a left winger. Or you can’t afford healthcare. Or you’ve had an abortion. Or you’re from Mexico.

They are, for all intents and purposes, Neo-Cons. Which means, they are Reaganite Republicans. They seem to have an issue with the idea of universal Healthcare (We in the UK have universal healthcare – mainly because we still care for our sick and injured – and our standard of health is ranked 18th in the World by the World Health Organisation, whilst America is ranked 36th. The USA also spends more than the UK on healthcare, and has a higher infant mortality rate, and a lower life expectancy than the UK…. but still, they insist Socialised healthcare is bad…….. although socialised policing, fire protection, and road building, they don’t seem to have a problem with) They are also, very undemocratic by nature.

The Tea Party Website, has the following to say…
“ Our mission is to attract, educate, organize, and mobilize our fellow citizens to secure public policy consistent with our three core values of Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets.“
All Right Winged proposals. Why do these people assume that the entire Country wants to live in a Right Winged Nation? They may as well just say “We want a Constitutional amendment banning any political party unless they’re Republicans and very Right Winged…. oh and the gays aren’t allowed to marry either, they’re all icky and stuff… oh and God is real“. Not everyone puts all their faith in a free market system.
Constitutionally limited Government is also an interesting point. Why is this being raised now? Why not under Reagan? Reagan increased the number of Federal Executive Employees by 0.10% during his two terms in Office. In fact, he was the only President to increase the number of Federal Executive Employees, from the era of Kennedy, to Obama. The guy who shrunk Government the most, since the 1960s…was Bill Clinton. A Democrat. The number of Federal Employees is at its lowest, in over 70 years. So where is this huge scary socialist government?

Fiscal Responsibility? Were these Republican homophobic racist redneck idiots Tea Party attendees asleep over the past eight years? Record deficits under Bush. Where was the complaining then? Why aren’t they complaining about the amount of money being spent on defence? I’d guess it’s because the Right Wing says it’s acceptable to spend tax payers money bombing Nations and torturing on the basis of a lie…….. but if that money was being offered to help sick people get treatment, they take to the streets to complain.
And how ironic it is that fiscal responsibility, includes paying Sarah Palin, the laughing stock of America, £100,000 to read notes off the palm of her hand live on TV. Very responsible. Palin went on TV, to announce that Republicans had defeated Democrats “3-0″ in elections in New Jersey, Massachusetts and Virginia recently. “3-0″ she proudly exclaimed. Clearly the lady who can see Putin from her house in Alaska chose to ignore Bill Owens win in New York, the first time a Democrat had won that district in over 140 years recently. Or John Garamendi’s California 10th Congressional District win. Or Terry Mills’ winning Kentucky’s 24th State House district. 3-3 so far. Scott Murphy wins in New York. 4-3 Democrats. But then, do we really expect more from a woman who made numerous complaints about Obama using a teleprompter, whilst she herself had notes written on her hand to prompt her throughout the night? Perhaps if George Bush had used a teleprompter once or twice, he wouldn’t have single handedly turned the GOP into a party of the mentally disabled.

“A free market is the economic consequence of personal liberty.“
Why are they posing subjective opinion, as objective reality? There are millions upon millions of us who would disagree with the statement they make there. Millions of Americans would disagree. How democratic is it, to suggest these people should be shut out of Political America?

“The founders believed that personal and economic freedom were indivisible.”
No they didn’t. American Capitalism put huge limitations on Corporations. Limitations that no longer exist today. If Obama were to suggest reintroducing these limitations, Well, Glenn Becks head might explode in a fountain of “OMGZ COMMUNIZM IS HERE!!!!!!!!!” rage. Corporate charters had fixed periods of time to operate. If Corporations were thought to cause harm to the public good, they’d have their licence revoked. Corporations had to obey certain operational duties that fulfilled their charter pledges. If they failed to, they’d have their licence revoked. Owners of Corporations could not own stock in other Corporations, because they were only allowed to be in business in order to fulfill the role they had been set up to fulfill, and nothing more. They were not allowed to interfere with elections, or influence public policy in any way. In fact, incorporation was only available to those who wished to set up a company that would benefit the public, rather than for mere profit. Corporations could not make any long term decisions, without the agreement of legislators.
These rules were employed across State governments, and because the founders feared another East India Company emerging, they were always very suspicious of unchecked free markets. So no, the founders did not believe that personal and economic freedom are indivisible.
In fact, early America, the colonies, was a very egalitarian, community based, supportive economy.

The Tea Party movement takes the Founders sentiments out of context. It would be easy for me to start a Socialist movement and claim the Founders were Socialist, given their apparent adversity toward the power and wealth of Corporations. But it’d also be naive of me. The truth is, opinion among the founders was deeply divided. Capitalism was still a very young idea. Socialism, was a very young idea. They had no evidence as to which system is better….. neither do we, now. They could only work with what they knew at the time. And what they knew at the time, can not, in any such way, apply to what we know today.

James Madison, arguing in Federalist Papers Number 10, stated that a strong central government was needed to protect citizens against controlling, partisan, extreme factions. Madison says:
“By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.”
No one is suggesting that the Tea Party brigade are not entitled to their opinion. They are. Regardless of how abhorrent I find their views, they are entitled to them. But, to suggest that the USA was built on their views, is strictly not true. It’s a manipulation of the American sense of Patriotism. Madison warned against these people.

I don’t want to be the one who suggests racism has a part to play in this, but right from the word go, the far Right had decided Obama was the worst President in history. They wanted his birth certificate, they called him a muslim, they said he was a terrorist sympathiser, They said he was indoctrinating kids when he spoke at their school. They said he hated the white race. And now, they’re attacking him, because he bailed out a failed Capitalist system.
The Tea Party brigade is not fighting for American values. The Tea Party brigade is fighting for insurance companies, who are without a doubt directly responsible for the deaths of thousands upon thousands of people who simply couldn’t afford to pay their health insurance needs.

The irony of the situation is that whilst these idiots have such distrust in Government and such trust in the free markets; the free markets have allowed a situation to arise in which Government is effectively fun by big business. The Republicans attempting to tell people what it is to be a “Patriot” in terms of political and economical opinions, is so horrendously manipulative, but vaguely familiar. One recalls the Republicans during the early months of the Iraq War making everyone aware that if you didn’t support the War, you weren’t a Patriot. Fox News referred to Anti-war demonstrations in 2003, as those of the “loony left“, yet referred to the tea party demonstrations of 2009, as “true Patriots”. It’s despicable. But then, that’s the nature of the right wing.

I have no idea why anyone takes the far right seriously; they shouldn’t be trusted with a pair of scissors. And whilst they are certainly less understandable than the Voynich Manuscript, the Republican supporting rednecks who are still ridiculously bitter than they aren’t in a position of power any more, should DEFINITELY be allowed to keep their signs…………..

Ignorance labels….

In my warped mind, a noun is simply another word for label. And this is partly the reason why I’m spending today, angry at nouns. We all have far different qualities to the labels we find attached to us. And yet, certain labels are used to almost describe us in our entirety. Now, whether the manipulative nature of language, and specific labels are to blame for this, or whether humanity with it’s simplistic vision of the World (to the point where we’ve come to accept adjectives, almost more as nouns….black, gay) is to blame, is a different matter. A Muslim is viewed simply as that, and nothing more, purely because of the word itself. A Jew, carries certain connotations that others do not like. When used as nouns, Fat, thin, Liberal, Conservative, Black, Immigrant, British, Pakistani, Transsexual, Gay, seem to be used as a single mould, making up what we are, which simply isn’t true. “You’re British and you’re white“…. well yes, among a lot of other more important things that make up who I am.
A label acts to strip away the qualities of an object, the intrinsic beauties, whisking them together to form a single category. It doesn’t apply purely to humanity either.

It is difficult to cast our eyes onto a simple tree, and not just immediately think “That’s a tree“. The qualities, the natural beauty, the essence of what makes the tree, is condensed into that single word “tree” and so we do not begin to fathom the spectacular nature of it, our imagination, is manipulated by that single noun. It becomes meaningless, a word. We seemingly forget that natural beauty is far removed from anything man has created. Where does this beauty come from? It is only when we stand to look, to really look, that we open a box of new emotions. Perhaps, also the fact that you see a tree every day, takes away it’s beauty. “Every thing is spoilt by use.“

Sea. It’s a simple word that we all recognise. A common noun that evokes no feeling of extreme beauty, or tranquillity, it’s simply a word; a word that seemingly covers all situations for the particular object it is labelling. And yet, when we observe the sea, we observe something different every time. Everybody gets something out of it. A fisherman will have a different emotion attached to the sea, than a Thalassophobic. The sea on a calm summer’s morning, is far removed from that same body of water on a stormy day. The sea on an overcast boring grey day, is far removed from the sea on a clear star filled night, glistening. I should know! I’ve sat on enough coast lines in the midst of a starry night. The Sea is not simply a word, it is a description, a story unique to everyone.

“Immigrant” is a word that I have come to despise. It encompasses everything that is wrong with the World. It evokes a feeling of superiority. Suddenly an immigrant is simply that. Not a human, not someone who wishes the same as you and I wish, or dreams of a better life like the rest of us dream, or cries, or loves, or laughs. They are suddenly something alien to us, because that’s what the word immigrant has come to represent. They are hostile, different, a mystery that arouses intense suspicion, and for what reason? There is no logical reason.
Recently, in Belfast, a string of racist attacks against Romanian families has taken place. Some are suggesting that certain Romanians provoked the attacks. How that justifies smashing the windows of innocent families, purely because they happen to come from the same Country as the people provoking the Irish residents, is beyond me. But it does go a long way to prove that the label is to blame. The category of “Romanian” is to blame. An us vs them mentality, that has gone so far as to create a worryingly growing far right sympathy across the UK.

We are not all destined to be successful business men and women; we are not all cut out for a life of “hard work” making money for others in the hope of securing a holiday once a year every summer; we do not all care about owning the most luxurious car; we are not all obsessed with the Country we were born as if it were actually important; we are not all religious; we are not all white, or black, or asian; some of us are attracted to women, some to men, some to transsexuals, it does not matter; we are not all work minded, some of us are spiritually minded; some of us can sit for hours under the clear and serene world of the stars, others prefer to be tucked up in a nice warm bed; some of us love standing with our eyes closed and our arms wide open in the pouring rain; some of us see the beauty and the astonishment in a simple oak tree, others do not waste their time with such hippy nonsense; some of us pray five times a day, others only concern is money; some of us find it hard to trust or to love, others fall in love at the glimpse of a smile from a girl on the train station platform; some of us enjoy nothing more than tanning ourselves on sun loungers across the World; some of us are not burdened by narrow minded ancient Religious notions of what is decent and correct, others cling onto faith as a guide for life; some of us get that inner most feeling of life when we’re jumping out of a plane or rock climbing, others feel it within the simplistic nature of early Autumn mornings when gazing at ripening fruit “Blushing through the mist and dew“; some of us want to save ourselves for that one special person, others bask in a life of promiscuity; the World is a magnificent place because the level of diversity far outstrips the man made idea of common identity and categories. We are all different. Yes we have certain traits and features that bind us to others, but that similarity is far outweighed by the differences between us. The truth is, as long as you are not intentionally out to cause harm, then you are free to be as different and as diverse as you could possible imagine.
“Diverse” is the one label, I do not have a problem with.

The best of worst of Britain

Thankfully, and with great admiration for my parents, I was brought up to view people as just that, people. I was not brought up to distinguish people, like breeds of animal, based on race or cultural background. I was brought up to respect the differences between us, whether white or black or Asian; gay or straight; Christian or Muslim. We’re all human, we’re all reliant on each other. It is humanity that has made great breakthroughs socially, scientifically, and medically, not a particular race. As a result of my liberal upbringing, the idea that we must “preserve” the “white race” is as ridiculous as claiming to be desperate to preserve the blue eyed race.

The local elections, pushed the agenda of the British National Party to a much bigger audience, angered at the recent expenses scandal and the growingly powerless Prime Minister. They certainly look set to make gains in the E.U Parliament, come tonight’s results, which will indeed put added pressure on the Prime Minister, and Alan Johnson over at the Home Office.

The most abhorrent political Party to exist in the U.K at the moment, preying on the Working Classes, gained a seat in Leicestershire’s, Coalville Council. It saddens me, because this is the City I grew up in. I love the diversity. The Diwali celebrations that attract thousands to the City every year, is great for cultural awareness, education, and the local economy. It’s a mixed culture, I’m privileged to belong to.

Amusingly, the BNP have been using pictures on their websites, of ordinary families, and quotes about why they will be voting BNP. Except of course, that the photos are from different websites, not affiliated with the BNP, and the quotes are made up, by the BNP. You couldn’t make this shit up.

The BNP, last month, held a day to celebrate the work of the armed forces of Britain, and tried to portray themselves as the “only party that supports our troops”.
And so this brings me on to the truly shocking response by the BNP, to the to the heroic British soldier, Lance-Corporal Johnson Beharry.
Born in Grenada, Johnson Beharry is already among the people that the British Nazi National Party consider to be detrimental to British society, given that he’s foreign, and he’s black.
On March 18th 2005, he was awarded the Victoria Cross for valor. A year earlier, whilst driving a Warrior Tracked Armoured Vehicle in Iraq, his vehicle was ambushed; hit by several rocket propelled grenades, the platoon commander along with a number of soldiers were badly injured and radio communication was destroyed along with the periscope – used by the driver to see where he’s going. Beharry therefore, had to open the hatch and drive whilst exposing his face to enemy fire. He drove the broken machine to the edge of the ambush zone, and extracted all of his wounded comrades, to safety, whilst all the time, he himself was exposed to enemy fire.
A month later, in the area of Al Amarah, the convoy was ambushed again. And again, his comrades were badly injured. Beharry himself received serious shrapnel injuries to the face and brain. Despite those serious injuries, he drove to safety, through rocket fire, which in turn, saved the lives of all of his men. He then lost consciousness and had to go through brain surgery.
He was rightfully reward the distinguished Victoria Cross for bravery in the face of such extreme adversity.

A BNP article, stated of Beharry “All he did was drive away very fast from a combat zone.” The article then stated “The politically correct Ministry of Defence decided to elevate this particular occasion to something worthy of the VC.” Suggesting that Beharry was awarded the Victoria Cross, simply because he’s black. Nick Griffin claimed that all Beharry had achieved, was “routine” and then went on to call him an “immigrant“, refusing to acknowledge Beharry’s bravery and courage, saving the lives of many men, for Britain.

They speak of “politically correct Britain“. Yes, I suppose we have become overly politically correct, given that sixty years after the Holocaust, we’re allowing Nazis to represent the British public.
Given that Griffin has spent his life getting grotesquely overweight, and pathetically Hitler-esque in his disgusting views, having fought for nothing, saved no one, promoted racial tension and violence, I’m not sure where he gets the nerve from, to criticise the absolute bravery and honour of a British Soldier. The BNP are not patriotic, nor are they standing up for Britain, they are an ideology. Britain is not based on an ideology. Especially one of such hate and suspicion. The BNP are simply an ideology catering to thugs and those members of society that do not engage brain activity. They absolutely disgust me. For anyone that voted BNP at these Council and E.U elections. You too, disgust me.

The Church of Me

“I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature.” – Thomas Jefferson

I’ve always wondered where the line between inventive cult nonsense, and respectful religion is crossed. If I were to say I believed in a talking prophetic snake that lives in a cave on Saturn, i’d be told i’m crazy. Yet, a story in which a man is born to a woman who has never even so much as had sex, lives a miracle filled life, dies, raises from the dead like a zombie messiah, walks around for a while, and then ascends into Heaven, is highly respected, and actually has political influence, purely because billions of people believe in it? A factitious God of an old Testament that appears to resemble tyrannical dictators throughout history, filled with gratuitous hate, than a loving God; but it must be respected? Why? It is illogical to be disrespectful to another human being based on their sexuality or their race or their gender, something they have no control over, however their religious belief is simply a concept, an idea, ideas do not demand respect inherently.

Religious indoctrination, is somewhat unnerving and in my humble opinion, impossibly detrimental to the workings of society and the relationships we form. Homosexuality is looked down upon for no justifiable reason; kids are made to say prayer in school without actually given the choice of what they want to believe; non-believers are condemned to hell regardless of great humanitarian works they may undertake; candidates for President have their religious beliefs tested before facing election; Gospels that contradict each other, leave out important parts of the Story (Jesus virgin birth is only mentioned in two gospels); the wars it causes, the lies it thrives on, the terrible acts people have taken in it’s name. It’s all so wrong.

It amazes me that the line between absolute nonsense and respectful religion is not crossed because there is any sort of empirical evidence, but crossed simply because more people chose to believe it. Some of those, will regard anyone who dares to question them, impertinent heathens destined for hell. The restrictions the system of what it’s followers deem to be universal God-given facts, places on the World have not improved the World. It hasn’t made the World a safe haven. We’re not peaceful, we’re not safe, we’re at the most dangerous point in history. Religious dogma and the intolerance it lives off to feed it’s outdated traditions, is living in the middle ages.

For me, spirituality is an inward manifestation of insecurities, imperfections and a deep desire for guidance. I myself, rely on the Tao Te Ching when my own personal insecurities demand guidance and reassurance that my philosophical and sociological thoughts and opinions are both logical and respectful. Spirituality is not something to be forced onto society as a whole. I would not dream of telling people that they either conform to my way, or be damned. I do not condemn Christians, they are entitled to believe as they wish. I merely condemn the need to force religion onto others, through political process and the education system.

I cannot prove that there is no God. Nobody has that authority. But similarly, I cannot prove that there is a God. I am simply against mass indoctrination based on superstition and out dated tradition. You and I have equally unknowing minds, whether you’re a preacher or an expert in Biblical studies or an Atheist. You have no deeper understanding of the workings of the Universe than I do. You are not an expert.

It is my general belief, my own deeply held Philosophy that you should act always according to the maxim, that you do to others that which you have problem having done to you. If you wish to sleep around, fine. If you wish to be straight or gay or a transsexual, fine. If you wish to do drugs, fine. If you wish to drink, fine. It is your decision. As long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else, there is no problem. As long as you’re friendly, polite, and well intentioned, then nothing else matters. A bigoted, supremely prejudice myth based God certainly doesn’t matter.

Of course the Story of Jesus, and what he wants and expects, has been hijacked by the Right Wing, for it’s “freedom” agenda, which apparently doesn’t take into account the fact that the wealthy preachers, Popes and ministers are as unlikely to get into their heaven as an agnostic such as myself is. I may be a bit controversial here, but judging by Jesus’ standards, i’d say he’d be condemned as a Socialist by today’s standards. Otherwise those lepers would have had to produced their insurance documents before being cured. The bread and the fish would have been distributed to the hardest working, or those who were the sons of the hardest working. Acts 2:44-45 reads like a section of a Socialist manifesto: “All that believed were together, and had all things in common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.” He certainly didn’t preach the message of ruthless competition and winner takes all wealth. I’d go one step further, and say that by Biblical accounts, Jesus was executed, because he supported the less fortunate and so threatened the wealth of the rich.

It amazes me that Christianity (especially American Christianity) has developed almost an entirely separate sect, to the teachings of Jesus. They some how manage to combine the teachings of Jesus, with Nationalism, with Capitalism, and with the odd skewed understanding of “traditional marriage“, despite all three of those, going against everything Jesus ever taught. If you’re going to insist that gays shouldn’t be allowed to be married on religious grounds, then perhaps I could count on your support when I try to marry six wives, like King David. Or when I try to pass a law requiring all the brothers of dead men, to marry their dead brother’s widow and have children, as sanctioned in Matthew 22:24. (“Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for him“). Why just go after homosexuals? Why not the brothers of dead men, who haven’t married their brother’s widow? Surely they’re sinning too? Christianity itself was a product of it’s time. It has no relevance today. The only basis it has, it to allow those with deeply held prejudice and intolerant views, to cite the Bible for justification. Much of the time (as is the case with the entire Catholic Church), they are so far off the mark of Biblical teachings, i’m almost inclined to believe i’m more of a Christian than the Catholic Church could ever be.

If it is true, that hell is going to be packed with Atheists, sexually promiscuous women, scientists, those who undertook great acts of kindness but weren’t Christian, Democrat Presidents, anyone who has ever touched pigskin, among others – then Hell is the fun and happy place to be! If the option is “Become a gay hating Republican, or go to Hell“, then i’m afraid it’s Hell every time. If my mother, my father, my grandparents, me, and all of my friends who do not subscribe to Christian doctrine are damned to an eternity in a torturous Hell, then the God that created these ridiculous rules, is a God I want nothing to do with.

And so with all of that in mind, I have decided to formulate my own religious system of beliefs, based on the following points.

Thou shall treat others, regardless of age, gender, sexual orientation, race, nationality, religious belief, as equal to yourself.

Wednesday is to be the day of sex. This is important to my new Religion because sex is the binding essence of all life. And let’s face it, we’d all quite like to have sexual freedom.

A man can lie with another man as he would a woman, if he so wishes. To ignore your true feelings and to oppress your sexuality, for this is unnatural. (Leviticus 18:22)

Anyone who offers their daughters up to be raped by towns people (even if it is to save angels) is not the good guy! (Genesis 19:8)

No one shall ever say “My country is a Christian country“. Especially when (as is the case with the U.S.A), it isn’t, and never was.

There will be no list that says “Thou shalt not murder“, because it’s common sense, it didn’t need writing down, it isn’t morality based on Religious beliefs. Instead, we shall replace pointless Jealous-God Commandments like “Do not have any other gods before me“, and replace with much more principled and practical moral codes (which the Catholic Church could really benefit from) like “Thou shalt not rape, molest, slaughter, torture, or intentionally hurt another“.

If you’re a Politician, your belief in this religion, shall not interfere with your duties to the public. You shall not try to influence policy in the direction of religious dogma.

My birth will be determined, three hundred years after i’ve died, by Roman dictators.

Touching pig skin is not dirty, any God who says it is, is just being pedantic.

Two thousand year old scribblings, do not constitute “absolute truth“.

Creating light, after the Earth and Heavens, is just ridiculous. God (me) created light first. I’ll create the sun first. Because there would be no way to distinguish day from night otherwise, and that’d be a ridiculous way to spend, let’s say, the first three days. (Genesis 1:16)

When I die, please Gospel of Jamie writers, let’s agree what my last words were. I don’t want three different versions, like with Matthew, Luke and John.

Homosexuals can marry. Why should they be excluded from the misery of marriage?

Just so you know, I probably wont spend more than an hour a day, blessing America.

Good deeds will get you into my heaven!

Believing, by blind faith, rejecting all evidence to the contrary, is the great catastrophe of mankind.

If something good happens to you, you will not be required to say “God blessed me, thank you Lord“, whilst ignoring the plight of millions in extreme poverty. I’d be a shit God to bless Britney Spears with the ability to get rich and win awards, and yet ignore millions of others. If good things happen to you, I really don’t need you to thank me on National Television.

Money is not the driving force of life. Less is more.

You cannot charge money for anything with my name on it. There will be no huge Vatican like building. Any money donated will go on community projects (Communist God?).

You may wear clothing woven from two different types of material. It would be a most ridiculous and pointless rule ever suggested (Leviticus 19:19).

Women are not created for the servitude of men. To suggest otherwise, is just more prejudice, bigoted nonsense (I Corinthians 11:8-9).

Women may be in a position of power (1 Tim 2:12).

You may not sell your daughter, nor any person, into slavery. (Exodus 21:7).

You may lust after whomever you wish, because it’s perfectly natural, everyone does it (Matthew 5:28).

You may associate with Atheists (2 Corinthians 6:14-16).

Let’s please not celebrate the traditional marriage. Between man and woman. And between the man and his concubines (II Sam 5:13). And that marriage between a believer and non-believer is forbidden(Gen 24:3). And that if there is no decent man, single women should get their father’s drunk, and sleep with their dads (Genesis 19:31-36). Biblical marriage is just a nightmare.

It is not acceptable to pick and choose passages, just to attempt to justify your own hatreds.

Please understand, that Evolution doesn’t mean your great grandfather once slept with a monkey. That’s not how it works.

It is okay if you do not take the Bible seriously. You are a free, rational thinking, entity. You are free to believe whatever you so wish, you are free to think, without fear of punishment for those beliefs.

Join the Church of Jamie today!

The impracticable me

I’m no expert in anything, but from what little I do know…….

I can confidently walk you through events leading up to the collapse of the Roman Republic and the beginning of the Roman Empire.
I can talk you through the life of Emperor Trajan and a little about Emperor Nero.
I can offer you advice on why big Government is no better or worse than small Government.
I can explain The Origin of Species and how a slug is just as evolved as Humanity.
I will argue against you until you cannot take it anymore, when you tell me a Fox is “vermin”.
I can recount sections of the life of Winston Churchill from his time as First Lord of Admiralty, to his Premiership.
I can explain Taoism and it’s positive spiritual softness on life.
I can tell you why I believe Thomas Paine’s The Rights of Man is one of the most important documents in history.
I will defend the right of any man or woman to fall in love and marry whomever they wish – gay or straight without a bigot telling me that their actions are “immoral”.
I’m able to gratuitously absorb words that cannot be used in every day conversation, because no one else understands the meaning of.
I can tell you why I don’t believe a 3% tax hike on those earning above $250,000 is somehow Socialist.
I can seemingly make people believe i’m ACTUALLY a gay hating racist Republican.
I’m happy to call myself a sexually immoral, agnostic, left wing, liberal hippy.
I judge you when you spell “lyk dis” because it’s horribly lazy.
I’ll probably chose to ignore you when you tell me that “immigrants are taking all our jobs” because your ignorance makes me pity you.
I believe in your right to believe in whatever you chose, but when you try to tell others that according to YOUR God, they’re immoral, I suddenly lose all respect for you.
I can explain to you the events surrounding the Protestant Reformation in Europe in the 16th Century along with Tudor history.
I can spend all night reading Rene Descartes, or Kierkegaard, and although I understand their principles, I still find myself utterly confused.
I can explain why Franklin Roosevelt is my favourite President of the 20th Century.
I can tell you why I admire Tony Benn.
I can argue with you that the dominance of the American economic empire might not last too much.

I scratch the service of many different subjects; able to do, tell you, walk you through, explain, advise and argue, and yet I have absolutely no idea what I want to do with my life, no career, no profitable practical skill, and no reasonable path to follow. I cannot fix a radiator, I cannot make bread, I cannot make a desk, I cannot change my voice to suit office life, I have a terrible phone manner with customers, I wouldn’t make a good boss, I’m judgemental, I have a trust issue with “management”, I have puerile, misplaced resentment toward authority, I have the rather fatuous need to question absolutely everything that I’m told, and I cannot save lives.
I have an inexplicable need to learn the obscure and pointless; with which no one else cares to understand. It doesn’t help life. It doesn’t provide income. It’s largely pointless. But no matter how insecure or worried I may feel, my mind has a calming, felicitous way of telling me everything will be okay, despite that fact that I always – rather obsessively – need to be told it’ll be okay by someone else.
I can talk about a lot of different subjects, I just cannot possibly commit to one life path. And yet, I have to admit, I quite like being Futile.

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.

Right Winged Extremism

So whilst Conservative America still hasn’t come to terms with the fact that it is no longer in control (of anything, including a grip on reality), the rest of us sit back and watch with joy as poll ratings show President Obama higher than any President in recorded history two months into their Presidency.

It would appear that Republicans across America have suddenly decided that they, and only they know how to deal with the economy. “More spending is wrong!!” they shout. As if they have had a change of heart, given that they twice empowered a President in George W Bush who spent billions of Dollars killing over 1,000,000 people in Iraq, whilst doubling the deficit in the process. They were okay with that. But suddenly, they’ve had a change of heart, bless them.

They’ve complained daily since January, about everything. From Obama not wearing a jacket in the Oval Office to Obama being some sort of warrior addicted to letting Cuban Communists take over the World (rather than rightfully hoping to lift failed sanctions that have contributed to Cuban misery for fifty years). Oh and not forgetting those Republicans who seem to have drank a bottle of “over dramatic juice” when they explode in a fit of blogging rage with statements such as “Barack Obama has declared WAR on the youngest members of our human family!” over at Rationshed (I can’t seem to find the blog where they defend the hundreds of thousands of dead children as a result of the Iraq War, perhaps i’m missing something).

I think I outlined Republican bitter misery beautifully in a previous blog, situated here. He’s pro-choice, Republicans refer to him as a murderer. He’s a democrat and not a Conservative, so Republicans label him a Socialist. He’s liberal, and so Republicans suggest he’s destroying the rights of men and women by being pro gay marriage. To sum up, they’re ridiculous people. And now, they’ve gone further into the realms of pathetic, with their attack on the recently published “Rightwing Extremism:Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” from the Department of Homeland Security. Now bare in mind the same Republicans didn’t seem to have a problem when Bush was spending billions of dollars on an unjust war leading to the unnecessary deaths of over 1,000,000 innocent people; that, they were fine with. But this latest publication, they seem to feel is an attack on their rights. They didn’t seem all that concerned when Bush was tapping phones of whomever he wished. The Conservatives have had no problem in labelling anyone who disagreed with Bush for the past eight years; a “commie” or “anti-American” or even worse an “extremist”, all the time referring to themselves and only themselves quite ridiculously as “patriots” and now suddenly the tables have turned, they cannot control their bitter rage. So, let’s examine what they appear to be angry at……

“This product is one of a series of intelligence assessments published by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch to facilitate a greater understanding of the phenomenon of violent radicalization in the United States. The information is provided to federal, state, local, and tribal counterterrorism and law enforcement officials so they may effectively deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States. Federal efforts to influence domestic public opinion must be conducted in an overt and transparent manner, clearly identifying United States Government sponsorship.”
- Sounds reasonable to me. The transparency that “must” be present when domestic policy is to be influenced would never have existed in a Bush document.

“(U//LES) The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic rightwing* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment.”
- This is true over here in the UK too. With recession, comes anti-immigration sentiment. Suddenly people start calling for protectionism, for immigrants to be sent home, and the British National Party is gaining such growing support that Labour’s Deputy Leader Harriet Harman even mentioned the BNP threat to the Independent. I can only imagine it would be a hell of a lot worse if our Prime Minister were black. And given that race relations in the UK are not even half as tense as the U.S, it’s no surprise that this has been included. Ridiculous White Supremacists, like a guy I have argued with on a Facebook group recently, he I can quote as saying…..
“It is an historical fact that every nation in the history of the world in which the White population mixed its gene pool with that of the lower races lost its civilization. While we do remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the White race.”
….. it’s this kind of attitude that is monstrously dangerous within modern, civilised society and which leads to rational Centrists and Lefties having to fight.

“(U//FOUO) During the 1990s, these issues contributed to the growth in the number of domestic rightwing terrorist and extremist groups and an increase in violent acts targeting government facilities, law enforcement officers, banks, and infrastructure sectors.”
- Again, perfectly logical. They are fighting groups that may potentially contribute to acts of extreme violence.

Every item on the document I read, I found myself agreeing with, not understanding why any Conservative (unless they’re white supremacists recruiting easily influenced kids and planning some violent attack on government buildings) would have a problem with it? I’m certain they wouldn’t have complained if Bush had issued a similar document against Left Wing extremists. So I decided to search the Blogosphere for reasons that Conservatives have resulted to bitter online crying once again. Kelly Conaty MD.MBA.NFL.WWE.YOUCANDOITIFYOUBnQIT didn’t seem to want to highlight the part she disagreed with, choosing instead to appear to disagree with the entire document, and so seems to support white supremacists. She refers to the people villified in the document as “Patriots”. How very manipulative. I was hoping Right Winged America would stop using that word now that their eight year reign of terror is over. But apparently not.

Samsoldier goes one step further, and as he claims to (quite over dramatically seeped in ridiculous typical Right Winged hysteria) have become “imbued with a creeping feeling of dread” whilst reading the document, he marks out his issue with the document, which is on page two……

“The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.”
- Samsoldier interprets this passage in quite an odd and obscure way (but then, later he admits he’s a Christian, so obscure interpretation is his way of life)….

“Excuse me, but I am a returning military veteran. You have just told me that I am damaged goods”
- No they didn’t. That’s not what it said at all. They did not say “Military veterans are not to be trusted.” They were merely outlining potential threats, of which pissed off military veterans could on occasion, even the odd occasion (as they have in the past) certainly be part of that. It is worth preparing for every possibility.
“You are telling communities that I am dangerous and some sort of raging lunatic. “
- No they didn’t. Given that the document was leaked, it was supposed to be secret, and so communities were not supposed to be told anything. They merely stated that returning military personnel could be a threat, now that’s not all of you. I know Republicans like to make sweeping judgements about gays, atheists and anyone with a slightly darker skin complexion, but this document did not make any sweeping judgement.
” Now you are inciting the nation to treat me with suspicion and fear. “
- No they’re not. That’s almost ingenious a suggestion as when Christians say “Are you saying somewhere along the line my granny fucked a chimp?”. It isn’t what was said, it was your obscure reading of a perfectly legitimate document. What if a returning Veteran shoots someone tomorrow because he’s finding it difficult to reintergrate? What if there is another Timothy McVeigh lurking in the darkness? What if he explodes a bomb killing thousands, wouldn’t you want to know that there were precautions in place just in case the worst were to happen? The document is not saying that all military personnel returning from duty are fearless killing lunatics, it’s saying that the odd one or two may pose a threat. And so surely it’s only right that the Department of Homeland Security, the very machine which exists to secure the Homeland from ANY potential threat, do just that? I’m pretty sure most Republicans wouldn’t have a problem with a similar document that stated Muslims may pose a threat.

Other bloggers, such as Michelle Malkin appear to have ignored the content of the document itself, and just decided to invent their own document to comment on. Michelle says…. “The piece of crap report issued on April 7 is a sweeping indictment of conservatives.”
-Yes, yes it is…….. that is if Conservative America consists of white supremacists hell bent on destroying government buildings.

Another major bone of contention is…
“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.”
- And yet, it makes perfect sense. Firstly, it’s a side note, it’s explaining right winged in terms of the asterix present in the phrase “domestic rightwing* terrorists“….and so, logic tells me that it isn’t stating that you shouldn’t believe in local authority over federal authority, as the ridiculously named “Nobama” blog claims it to mean. It is merely suggesting that if you have Right Winged beliefs, and you intend to cause terror in the name of those Right Winged beliefs, then you’re an extremist. I would have thought that is pretty self explanatory. It isn’t stating that Jefferson is an extremist because although Jefferson may have been pro-state, he did not condone acts of terror to achieve that goal. The document is not anti-Jefferson (like the rather naive CSBurks suggests in a fit of melodramatic idiocy). The document is anti-Bomb-strapped-Jefferson.
The word “rejecting” makes this particularly clear to me. If you suddenly decide to stop paying taxes, reject all federal laws, start plotting a revolution based on splitting up the Union, then you’re an extremist. The dictionary defines “reject” as “refuse to accept or acknowledge” and so yes, if you refuse to acknowledge or accept federal authority, i’d say you’re an extremist. Rejection is different from disagreeing with. But why should I have to explain that, when the report itself explains it here…
“(U) A recent example of the potential violence associated with a rise in rightwing extremism may be found in the shooting deaths of three police officers in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on 4 April 2009. The alleged gunman’s reaction reportedly was influenced by his racist ideology and belief in antigovernment conspiracy theories related to gun confiscations, citizen detention camps, and a Jewish-controlled “one world government.”

So having said all of this, bloggers like Generic rant, Cdat 88, Nukegingrich (whose point, I can’t decipher especially when he appears to claim that the document is suggesting that all heterosexuals are considered extremists) and every other Republican blogger who now identify themselves as “extremist” by their interpretation of the Homeland Security Document…… which by my interpretation, is merely all of the right winged angry bloggers merely agreeing that they’re white supremacists who intend of rejecting all federal authority and instigating attacks on government buildings.

It appears to be just another Republican bitter attack on a President far more popular than any one the Republicans could have put forward to run the country. A few days ago, they were all complaining that Obama bowed to the Saudi King Abdullah, that he “embarrassed” America rather than a show of respect and decency not heard of over the past eight years of bombs and secrecy. Obama bowed to the King out of respect. George Bush metaphorically masturbated the Saudis for eight long years, but that doesn’t seem to bother Republicans. Instead, they waited for the black guy to do it, and then insisted that he must be a Muslim. You couldn’t make this shit up.

Does anyone take Republicans seriously any more? Do Conservatives really matter nowadays? Or are they all just hypocritical, bitter, ignorant little people left over from the past eight years of bully tactics, hysteria and fear? Where were these outcries from Republicans when Rush Limbaugh said “I mean, let’s face it, we didn’t have slavery in this country for over 100 years because it was a bad thing. Quite the opposite: slavery built the South. I’m not saying we should bring it back; I’m just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark.” Limbaugh suggests an entire race of people are inherently violent and that slavery wasn’t necessarily a bad thing, and Republicans cannot wait to defend this overweight, uneducated, bigoted, repugnant turd. But when the tables have turned, they cry out in mass hysteria. It’s so hypocritical, it’s almost amusing.

One thing is for sure, every time a Republican whinges like a bitter child throwing a tantrum in a store, it goes to show that Obama must be doing something right. It makes me proud to be Liberal.

The hypocrisy of Freedom

It’s become wildly hypocritical; It’s largely based on out dated tradition; It’s horribly fickle; and it has no coherence or general moral standing. I’m speaking of course, about the Republican idea of “Freedom“. Freedom appears to only apply when it suits Republican America. Republican Freedom is a skewed, manipulated form of the ideals of American Freedom in general. For example, and i’ve spoke about this one before; The Freedom to own a gun whether you’re merely a law abiding huntsman, or whether you’re a 21 year old with an enraged grudge against class mates and teachers; you’re protected by a 2nd Amendment that clearly didn’t expect to be the subject of debate. Although i’m certain Jefferson and Franklin didn’t propose that anyone should be allowed to keep an arsenal of sub machine guns; that the words “well regulated” in the 2nd Amendment shouldn’t be ignored. If I were President, i’d make bullets ten times more expensive than they are now, tax them massively. But what do I know.

Freedom is etched into the American way of thinking. Since the very beginning, the fight that America has undertook has been one dedicated to freeing it’s people from tyranny. “We hold these truths to be self evident; that all men are created equal” cries the Declaration of Independence. There is no mistaking that Thomas Jefferson composed a beautifully written document when he drafted the Declaration. Of course, it hasn’t troubled America that the term “all men are created equal” written at a time when even Jefferson had over 150 slaves of which many received regular beatings may have been slightly ironic. And so the hypocrisy of American Freedom was born. Frederick Douglas speaking in 1852 managed to reconcile America Freedom and the abolition of Slavery quite beautifully. “That which is inhuman cannot be divine.“

In 2009, Republicans appear to take that general level of “Freedom Hypocrisy” to a new level. Freedom today, appears to apply only to economic freedom, for those who already have a significant amount of money. Bloggers like Free America appear to be under the impression that Obama and Pelosi are systematically working to purposely destroy America with their pesky much needed Liberal policies, despite the fact that over the past eight years America has been involved in an unjust illegal war leading to the deaths of over 1,000,000 innocent people; displacement of a further 4.5 million and 5 million orphaned children. Hurricane Katrina striking New Orleans saw the end of the lives of over 1,800 people whilst 80% of the City was flooded, which lead to further deaths of many people who merely couldn’t get to food or shelter because the Republican Government’s response was pathetic at best and ignorantly genocidal at worst. Then of course, you have the worst economic crises in ….well…. ever. When Clinton left the White House, he left a budget surplus of over $230bn. Eight years later, eight years of Republican Government, and America is in the mist of an economic crises. Of course, Republicans like to suggest that Clinton’s surplus was inherited from the Reagan tax cuts. Fine. But then, surely they must admit that Obama therefore inherited a miserable legacy that it will take more than two months to correct. I swear, Obama was in the White House less than a day before Republicans started blaming him.

Anyway, back to “freedom”. Whilst the word itself connotes the ultimate in human existence, it isn’t quite as black and white in Republican America. It suits Republican America to ascribe Freedom to economics. To pay as little in the way of taxation as possible. Whilst a child may inherit a few million dollars, another may be unlucky enough to be one of the 35 million Americans who inherit nothing but the dilapidated and forgotten poverty stricken lifestyles encouraged by poor educational standards and lack of health care, that the Republican Americans are quick to suggest is some sort of perfect system choosing to ignore that “all men are created equally” when it suits them. To this day, at 23 years old, i’m struggling to understand how a system that allows the poverty line for children under 18 to increase from 12.1 million, to 12.9 million between 2001 and 2003; yet at the same time allows those earning over $1,000,000 see their taxes drop with the Bush Tax Cuts, as the mark of a great economic system…. it quite clearly isn’t. I repeat Douglas’ sentiment “That which is inhuman cannot be divine.” Ignoring the plight of those in poverty or dismissing them as “lazy“, whilst simultaneously choosing to ignore the problem of Climate Change despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary – purely because it might affect their “freedom” to exploit resources for business opportunity, is not real “freedom“.

Freedom to claim that universal healthcare, is some evil socialist manifestation that never works, whilst ignoring that you have universal policing and universal fire protection – just adds to the hypocrisy of “freedom” that Republican America only clings to when it threatens them, regardless of the fact that it may actually help other people. A legacy of “self before others” left by Thatcher and Reagan. Forgive me for not buying into it.

I’m not too sure why Republicans chose to draw the line on personal freedom, at the right for Homosexuals to get married. All of a sudden Republicans have decided that Gay people are sexually immoral devils, promiscuous by nature, AIDs ridden, unable to keep a relationship going, and a danger to children. As if that only exists in the homosexual community. They chose often to quote Leviticus 18:22; “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” As proof that God hates gays and so gays shouldn’t marry. They fail however to acknowledge that if we’re to take the Old Testament into consideration when debating such issues, we must conclude that Leviticus 11:8 with regard to pig skin, stating: “Their flesh you shall not eat, and their dead bodies you shall not touch; they are unclean for you” should mean that anyone who plays American Football, is doomed to hell, a long with gay people. But of course not, because in true Republican fashion, Leviticus 11:8 doesn’t appeal to them because it threatens their life style, and so they pick and chose which areas of the Bible appeal to their prejudices already.

Of course, whilst talking Christianity, it isn’t difficult to come to the conclusion that if God truly did support the Republicans, as ex Senator Norm Coleman suggested, when he told Mike Gallagher; “God wants me to serve“, then you can bet that Jesus would have charged a fortune for all those free EVIL SOCIALIST miracles he supposedly performed.

When you come to the conclusion that Republicans only appear to support ideas like “Freedom” and Religious belief when it suits their prejudices, you have to take a look at the “Pro-life” lobby. “Pro Life” only seems to appeal to Republicans when someone is set to have an abortion. When the Country is destroying a Nation and killing over 1,000,000 of it’s citizens, Republicans don’t seem all that concerned. When stem cell research could lead to the scientists providing mankind with a better understanding of complex cell division, which in turn could lead to life saving treatments and cures…. real pro-life investments….. Republicans tend to oppose it. Minority Leader John Boehner even went so far as to suggest that embryonic stem cells are American lives too, rather than cells. He suggested that Obama lifting the ban on federal funding for Stem Cell research, he had “rolled back important protections for innocent life”. It’s nice to see that Boehner has such deep concern over cells, yet doesn’t seem too fussed about the loss of American military lives, when he stated in 2007 that dead U.S Troops was a “small price” to pay to win the war in Iraq.

The concept of freedom is interestingly two toned, when you contrast the U.S obsession with the word, and how the U.S works across the World, especially with Nations that it disagrees with philosophically.
According to a speech made by Dan Griswold, to Rice University in Houston, in 2005…. “If the goal of U.S. policy toward Cuba is to help its people achieve freedom and a better life, the economic embargo has completely failed. Its economic effect is to make the people of Cuba worse off by depriving them of lower-cost food and other goods that could be bought from the United States. It means less independence for Cuban workers and entrepreneurs, who could be earning dollars from American tourists and fueling private-sector growth. Meanwhile, Castro and his ruling elite enjoy a comfortable, insulated lifestyle by extracting any meager surplus produced by their captive subjects.“
The underlying fact is that whilst America seeks “freedom” (in this case, freedom means the right of American businesses to take over the resources and land of as much of the foreign World as possible) across the World based on it’s own flawed values, it will attempt to achieve it by any means necessary, which explains the disastrous war in Iraq and the inhumane embargo against Cuba. As shown in my last blog, America’s economic dominance may not continue for that much longer, given that Iran have already ceased trading oil in U.S dollars with Russia looking likely to follow.

Economic “freedom” in the guise of pure Capitalism, is not to be considered in the same area as Freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of opinion, freedom to assemble peacefully. Those are the inalienable rights built into the Declaration of Independence, not the idea that over 12 million children below the poverty line who will never benefit from the resources available to the 5% of top earners who own more than 50% of the entire Wealth of the Nation, as being true “freedom”.

American Freedom, whilst a lovely idea, is horribly flawed, ignorant, racist, inhumane, discriminatory, religiously bias, hypocritical, manipulative, and has been twisted into the skewed mess that Republican America holds so dear today. The idea that “all men are created equal” is a sentiment long lost. If you’re gay, want an abortion, demand action on climate change, or support stem cell research……. freedom doesn’t seem to extend as far as you. Sorry.

The Britain in “Tate Britain”

It isn’t a feel, it isn’t a tantalising smell, it isn’t a mellifluous sound, it isn’t a piercing glance. The truly underlying concept of what Britain is to me is that there is not a static concept of “Britishness”. It is not a finger print that never changes. Britain is forever changing to meet different challenges and expectations. We are black, we are white, we are gay, we are straight, we are rich and we are poor, we are business minded, we are family orientated, we are liberal, we are conservative, we are moody, we are loving. Britain is constantly changing, updating, and moving with the times. We are a dynamic nation, and whilst we hold slight conservative principles we are essentially a liberal nation. That which may be “British” to me, may not be a wholly “British” ideal to the next person, and so the true concept of “Britishness”, as a static concept, just doesn’t exist. I set out to investigate this with regard to the “Tate Britain”.

Strikingly, the exterior of Tate Britain; the stairs leading up to the pillars that heroically support the entrance of the building, had a profound affect on me, that is to say that I felt that for a building named “Tate Britain” there was very little “British” influence. As ones eyes start scrupulously scanning the building from the bottom upwards, there is an air of Roman-esque influence and so consequentially, Greek influence. I was reminded of The “Temple of Saturn” in the Roman Forum. A broken building with merely the supporting pillars remaining. “Tate Britain” is like looking into the past and experiencing the power of an empire, a fully functioning ‘Temple of Saturn’ with its history and it’s power. And so this led me to consider the concept of power and the past.

Britain itself has deep Roman roots, dating back to the Emperor Claudius invasion of Britain in 43AD. And so British Ancestry is drowning in Roman influence. Furthermore, the pillars themselves are a universal symbol of grandeur and power. Suddenly, I was linking a Roman-esque style building, the the power and influence of the British Empire. Perhaps the exterior of “Tate Britain” was much more “British” than previously considered. The multiplicity of influences on the building itself stands as a beautiful metaphorical reminder that our culture is actually a multiplicity of cultures, from Roman, to Anglo-Saxon, from Catholic to Protestant in the 16th and 17th Centuries, to the influx of Islam, Hinduism and other influences we see today.

On entering “Tate Britain”, and noting the boring lackluster interior, I wanted to see some real British artwork.
I took myself immediately to the Turner Prize exhibition. I felt that I had failed immediately in recognising the significance of the work of, for example, Turner Prize Nominee Cathy Wilkes. Her mannequins and shopping conveyor belts did little but confuse me. I turned to the description on the wall, which dubiously read ……
“Wilkes’s installations apprehend an end point in our understanding. A point in which words become insufficient and the naming of objects is disconnected from our experience of them.”
With this, I realised that I wasn’t at all confused; I was merely outside of the circle of modern artists whose very consumerist essence acted not to show me the brilliance of British contemporary art, but more like a used cars salesman pretentiously trying to sell me a heap of junk as something of profound beauty. The “deeper meaning” for me, was nothing but the artist asking “I wonder what I can get away with calling art.”

However, considering my deep disapproval at the Turner Exhibition, it further cemented my belief of Britain as a Liberal, ever changing culture. What one may see as art and beauty, someone else will see as nonsense. And seemingly vice versa. Everyone, although in essence we have similar traits, is different entirely with regard to our preferences in life, and nothing sums this general feeling up as perfectly as “Tate Britain” it is the very essence of liberal Britain. Nothing is guaranteed. It doesn’t promise masterpiece, it doesn’t promise grandeur. It isn’t the National Gallery in that respect.

Contrasted with art work in the Vatican Galleries, which one expects to be strictly religious and Catholic in origin. “Tate Britain” one would expect to find British flags, portraits of Henry VIII and Churchill, the National Anthem constantly on loop throughout, football fans everywhere, Shakespearian actors quoting lines from Hamlet, cups of tea laying around the place, senior citizens complaining about the youth of today, and the French. I expected anything stereotypically British. But what “Tate Britain” manages to do, is break convention, break stereotypes, to say “Britain isn’t a static concept, it’s progressive and free” and it succeeds masterfully.

The Francis Bacon exhibition shows an art form trying to advance with the times. Portraiture that doesn’t act in the same way that Photography acts now; Francis’ portraiture is different and very unique. And so the argument that Britain is not a mere static concept grows ever thicker. Francis seems to want to connect to the essence of his subject rather than just what he sees on the outside. Something as different and unexplored as perhaps the Renaissance artists of old attempted to depict Saints and holy figures as mere mortals. Breaking convention and charging down limits. Slashing the very essence of what “Portraiture” means. And in doing so, adding to the notion that Britain is ever changing and updating, nothing is ‘absolute’.
At worst “Tate Britain” represents the idea that art “superiors” are aware of something within a specific art work that the rest of us aren’t, which gives them ample opportunity to condescend those of us outside of their circle, the same can be said for Government, for business, for the media, and so certainly represents Britain in that way. At best, “Tate Britain” through the essence of the building itself, to the surreal and unexplainable works (unexplainable to me) exhibited for the Turner prize, to the seemingly progressive nature of portraiture from the 2006 “Tate Britain” exhibition of the works of “Holbein” such as the infamous piece “Henry VIII” through to the 2007-2008 exhibition of Francis Bacon and his surreal, progressive, and unique “Portrait of Henrietta Moraes”.

As suggested previously, “Tate Britain” does not promise you works of art that you will find incredibly masterful. In most cases, I found the works in the Tate to be contrary to that. They appeared nothing more to me, than a waste of perfectly good canvas. The Tate doesn’t promise any different. It promises differences in opinion and values. Differences in attitudes toward art works. And above all, differences in that which each individual person, whether a British national or otherwise, considers in their own unique way, to be an idea of “Britain”.

The Minority Republicans

It was the first time i’d heard of Bobby Jindal, and my instant reaction after his speech was “And this man is actually allowed to talk?” He should be banned from talking, he’s an insult to those of us who can talk without sounding patronising. He’s an insult to oratory. Cicero died all over again last night, this time with shame.

So President Obama made a great speech again, oozing with the same confidence that helped win him the White House, to a joint session of Congress. Fantastically eloquent, and full of exactly what needed to be said. He was absolutely right in blaming the problems America faces, on the greed of short term gains. He was right when he suggested that the distorted world of International Capitalism has lead to making the rich richer instead of investing in the future.

And the Republicans response? Bobby Jindal, the Governor of Louisiana. A man who once said “Transparency inspires confidence, and confidence promotes cohesion” and then his own office ranked last in the Country’s transparency ratings. A man who was referred to by The Wall Street Journal as…. “a boy wonder of the party. At 25, he was appointed to fix Louisiana’s failing Medicaid program, and succeeded.“… despite the fact that since taking over Healthcare in Louisiana, they dropped from 48th in the league, to 50th largely due to the fact that all he did, was cut spending, and made it harder for poorer patients to see a doctor. A man who voted against Gay marriage. There’s nothing like the Civil rights of one minority gaining the right to oppress another. He’s totally against abortion, and voted against all forms of stem cell research. So, to sum up, he’s against gay marriage, abortion, stem cell research, helping the poor, and because he refused to take some of the bail out money to help workers in his state claiming it will lead to tax rises on the wealthy, he’s also a big business suck up. So wait, isn’t that pretty much what the Republicans have stood for all the time? This guy isn’t new or exciting or different. He’s the same shit. He’s begging for the same failed policies. He’s asking to restore confidence with the American people, by offering nothing new. He’s basically saying “We set the country on fire, so I propose we put the fire out, with this new and exciting ….. fire.”

Jindal would only be “new” if he recognised the hypocrisy of stating just how wonderfully pro-life you are, but then cutting all costs that help sustain life for those who are less fortunate than the horribly rich.
He basically said “Hey, The Republicans understand ordinary Americans…….. and that’s why we wont support any plan that is made to help you!!! But we WILL help the rich become even richer!!…..oh, and i’m black by the way, in case you didn’t notice.”

So I wonder, of all the people who could have spoken for the GOP, and knowing their track record on disastrous eloquence, surely Jindal isn’t the best they have? I mean, watching his response to Obama was cringe worthy. He spoke as if addressing a class room of five year olds. Even Fox News didn’t like it. When Fox News don’t like something a Republican has to say, then you know you’re in trouble.

So given that he’s no different to every Republican who came before him, given that he’s offering nothing new, given that he claims his health reforms were some how magnificent because it saved money rather than measuring the level of healthcare on the fact that people, actual humans, not money, but people – suffered more under him than they did previously, and given that he’s a horribly patronising speaker, why did the GOP choose him? I suspect for the same reason they chose Palin when Hilary Clinton was commanding the vote of the Female population. I suspect for the same reason that they chose Michael Steele when Obama had commanded a landslide of the vote of the Black population. Because they represent minorities. There is no other reason why Jindal would be chosen ahead of all the Republicans out there, other than he’s young (to counter the idea that the GOP is full of old men) and of a minority (to counter the idea that the GOP is full of old… white men). It really doesn’t matter how utterly detestable the man is, he’s a minority and that’s the GOPs way of yelling “LOOK WE’RE NOT RACIST!!!.. Despite the fact that we’ve spent decades ignoring anyone who isn’t rich and white“. Jindal started his speech, stating all his minority status credentials. To me, this proved just how important it is to Republicans that they have a spokesman who happens to have a different skin colour, to counter the love for Obama. They failed massively to chose someone of a minority who is actually talented in the field of Politics. The Democrats chose wisely with Obama. The Republicans failed to chose wisely with both Palin and now with Jindal. It’s like they’re saying “Well he’s black, what more do you want?” The alternative of course, is that they picked Jindal for his intelligence, which makes me think that if he’s the best they have, if Palin is one of the best they have, if Michael Steele is one of the best they have, if George Bush was the very best choice the Republicans had eight years ago, the rest of the Republicans must share the combined intelligence of a goat, a retarded goat…. as unfair to retarded goats as that is.

The Democrats should counter with a gay Atheist guy at the top. The GOP could never match that. A gay GOP member (i’m not talking about those many, many undercover Gay GOP members like Glenn Murphy who found his mouth accidentally around a penis. Or Bob Allen who mysteriously offered to give a cop $20 to suck him off) would have to start every speech with “I realise i’m unnatural, disgusting, and God hates me, but…..“

Obama clearly has a talent for eloquence, and I think we’d all agree, also has a great mind. Similarly, although he doesn’t have the talent for oratory that Obama has, John McCain has a great mind. By comparison, Bobby Jindal is a disaster, much like Sarah Palin was a disaster. The GOP need to stop trying to show just how inclusive and diverse they are, and start showing that they understand why America didn’t want them anywhere near Government for at least the next four years.

Good luck to them.