Anger management, community service for anti-health care reform Miamian who assaulted pro-HCR man

I understand disagreeing with people. I do it all the time. But why is it that the unfettered anger, the hatred and disdain that causes one to react physically and violently, seems to be a nearly exclusive characteristic of the Right?

We've seen it in the "Teabaggers' Balls" (wait, that came out wrong....) and we've seen it at the health care town halls. One of these in particular resulted in criminal charges in Miami, but as Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) reported today on Twitter, the wingnut offender is getting off with a slap on the wrist.

A Miami-Dade man who punched a demonstrator at a healthcare reform rally has reached a plea deal with prosecutors and will take anger management courses and serve 50 hours of community service as part of his punishment.

Raul Anasagasti, 56, is scheduled to appear in Miami-Dade Circuit Court Thursday. He agreed to the conditions of a pretrial intervention program.

Back in September, Anasagasti punched a 65-year-old man in the face after a heated exchange.

Police said Luis Perrero was attending the rally outside the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce, headlined by [Sen. Nelson], when Anasagasti, driving by in his green pickup, stopped and began arguing with the crowd.

When Perrero uttered an offensive Spanish expletive, Anasagasti punched him in the face, knocking him to the ground.

Okay, maybe Mr. Perrero shouldn't have called Mr. Anasagasti a name. But words never justify physical violence, and there's no exception here. Maybe the anger management classes will help Mr. Anasagasti learn to control his temper and even see how the right-wing messages in which he no doubt immerses himself from Fox News and the like are driving him to such displays of anger and hate.

But I'm not getting my hopes up.

Teacher suspended for anti-Obama emails: it's NOT a free speech issue

Predictably, the wingnut commenters are out in force, decrying the suspension of Palm Beach County high school teacher Paula Prudente for sending numerous political emails critical of Barack Obama from her school-provided email account. The wingnut CW seems to be that any teacher who would have, say, criticized Drunky McStagger in an email would have been lauded, not disciplined ... but, needless to say, that's not only overly simplistic, it's just flat-out wrong.

Here's the basic scoop:

Administrators said Prudente defied warnings and repeatedly sent e-mails with "political innuendos" in violation of School Board policy. The e-mails included criticisms of then-presidential candidate Barack Obama.

In an interview, Prudente called the suspension a "wrongful retaliation" for her attempt to expose school district corruption.

Let me throw a little legal knowledge at all you mouth-breathers ranting about freedom of speech and urging Prudente to sue the school district for limiting her First Amendment rights: there's no case. Courts consistently recognize valid limitations to the time, place, and manner of speech, provided such limitations are content-neutral -- that is, they don't favor some content over others. You folks who think emails critical of Republicans would be permitted are, well, just wrong (again).

A government-owned mode of communication for political messages is not a public forum for First Amendment purposes. If the school district has a policy against political email on their system, they have every right to enforce it, whether the employee in question was criticizing Obama or praising him, or anyone else for that matter.

It's quite simple, and Prudente's discipline was well-deserved -- not because she's a wingnut, but because she broke the rules. But, then, I've never really expected right-wingers to care very much about rules ....

Surviving the Wingnut Family ... again

Thanksgiving is a time for sharing and conviviality, for family, food, and football. And for me, at least every other year, it's a time for trying to survive being the only liberal in a family full of arch-conservatives -- and not the basically harmless, small-government, Goldwater kind but the rabid, Beck-and-Palin-adoring neo-con kind.

If you've been reading this crappy blog for a while, you've seen me mention my own wingnut family on several occasions -- my mother, my aunt and uncle, even my estranged father. Well, once again I made it through another week with the Right Wing Gang, but it wasn't the smoothest sailing the whole time. Before heading north, I vowed to stay away from political discussions altogether ... and I almost did it. Almost.

You see, my ultra-wingnut aunt and uncle were in attendance this year, having moved to spend their winters near my widowed mother, and while I know Mom is a lifelong Republican, I hadn't realized the influence her sister and brother-in-law had been having on her. For starters, I had forgotten that Mom has become a loyal Fox News viewer. Several times I noted that she was watching "the propaganda channel," and each time, Mom retorted that "Fox [News] is the only one that actually does news." This probably comes as a surprise to CNN and, despite their all-criminal holiday weekend, even MSNBC. But when I noted that, she scoffed and said CNN was too "slanted." I think she actually meant slanted left, which is laughable, but I digress....

I also had forgotten that Mom had turned into somewhat of a climate change denier, which still troubles me because I always considered her intelligent. Even though her college degree was in speech, and she earned it in 1954 when, admittedly, science was a tad less advanced, Mom ought to be aware of the scientific basis for climate change, shouldn't she? Naturally, she called it "global warming," which is a classic right-wing misnomer, as it causes them to think it should be sweltering hot year-round or something (as though a blizzard in Buffalo in January is "proof" that climate change is hokum). I patiently explained that when you increase the temperature of any system, whether it's a manufacturing plant or a planet, you don't necessarily see it get hotter but rather more volatile, which Earth's climate undoubtedly is doing. But her Fox News-addled mind didn't grasp that, or didn't want to ....

The coup de grâce, however, was my avowedly wingnut uncle, who on the way to a holiday light display at a local botanical gardens was regaling us in the minivan with the story of how Army Maj. Nidal Hasan, the so-called "Fort Hood shooter," was "a homeland security adviser to the Obama administration." Recognizing a classic wingnut fantasy/talking point when I hear one, I innocently (well, kind of innocently) asked my uncle, "So where did you learn about that?" His response was almost too predictable: "I got an email about it."

So naturally, thanks to the magic of an Internet-enabled Blackberry, I immediately Googled it up and the first hit took me to Snopes.com, the definitive myth-debunking website, which not only had the text of the email my uncle received but all the evidence debunking it. Indeed, plenty of websites, like this one, have the truth -- which, of course, is that Maj. Hasan had nothing to do with the White House or the Department of Homeland Security whatsoever (big surprise there) -- and anyone with half a brain can investigate as quickly as I did and discover that the email in question is bullshit; Maj. Hasan attended a private think tank's task force meeting that was open to the public.

Sadly, though, apparently my own uncle, like so many wingnuts, lacks that half-brain. Odd, given his graduate degrees and having been an Air Force officer and pilot and all .... oh well. The topper, though, was my uncle's response after I read him the salient part of the Snopes post and concluded, "He attended a think tank meeting as a member of the audience!" Uncle sarcastically shot back, "Oh, I guess that's okay?"

Well, yeah, it is, actually.

If, like me, you suffer through a wingnut family, I know exactly how you feel. (You can vent about it in Comments....)

Coming full circle

I have an announcement to make: Blast Off! is undergoing another change of location. Or, to be more precise, I am.

Finding it difficult to secure gainful employment in my desired locales (greater Orlando, the Tampa Bay area, or south Florida in particular) while residing all the way up in Taintville™ (the honorary capital, naturally, of America's Taint™) and, more importantly, finding it increasingly difficult to handle being 520 miles from my children (not to mention the rigor and expense of the 1,000-mile-plus round trips to see them a couple of times a month), I have decided to move, at least temporarily, back to central Florida -- or, in Blast Off! parlance, about mid-Wang™.

In fact, in the grandest spirit of "never say never" -- a phrase with which I have become all too familiar -- I actually am moving back for the time being to the place where it all started: Brevard County. Yes, it was there that Blast Off! got its start and, indeed, from which it got its name, as I sorely needed to "blast off" at the crazy wingnuttery in which I was immersed there from 2004 to 2006. I once swore I'd never live in Brevard again -- nothing against the sane people there, but merely a recognition that sanity unfortunately is scarce there. But, as noted above: never say never.

(Truth be told, in hindsight, I would be hard-pressed to ascertain whether Brevard County is more or less wingnutty than northwest Florida. I guess ultimately they're about equally wingnutty -- which is to say a lot -- but the character of the wingnuttiness differs, with northwest Florida being somewhat more fundie Christianist wingnutty than Brevard. It's true that both, though, have a heaping helping of militarist wingnut ... but I digress.)

Anyway, as a result, blogging and radio-ing will be somewhat sporadic for the next week or two as I get settled. I also should add for anyone concerned that my beloved Miss July supports my decision completely, which is a big load off of my mind, and of course I'll continue to be a regular visitor to greater Taintville™ to see her and the many other friends that I've had the good fortune to get to know during my all-too-brief sojourn here in The Land That Time Forgot.

But, as of next Sunday, it will be farewell to America's Taint™ for me and hello again to the birthplace of Blast Off! (well, at least until someone hires me). As always, though, if anyone is looking for an experienced and accomplished attorney/fundraiser/commentator/curmudgeon ... well, you know where to find me.

Pace: the final frontier, chapter 14 — Windfall for the wingnuts

When last we visited the constitutional clusterfuck that is the Pace (Fla.) school prayer issue, we learned that after securing a remarkably undeserved victory in federal district court, the crazed fundies who populate Santa Rosa County next planned to go after the consent decree itself -- the very agreement the county school district signed wherein they vowed to, you know, obey the U.S. Constitution and not have organized prayer in public schools. Leading this fight, as they did for the three Pace High School administrators cleared of wrongdoing, would be Orlando-based Liberty Counsel, a legal organization (in the loosest sense of the term) made up of fundamentalist whackjobs who actually want nothing whatsoever to do with liberty. Instead, according to their website, they are focused on "restoring the culture one case at a time by advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of human life and the traditional family," which naturally means intruding into our bedrooms, our classrooms, our bodies, and our very lives to push their special brand of Christianist uniformity. (Obviously their definition of "culture" differs from that of normal people.)

Well, thanks to all those good folks in Pace and elsewhere who ponied up over $73,000 for the administrators' defense, which cost barely more than $8,500*, Liberty Counsel will get the difference:

The Lay-Freeman Defense Fund, headed by Milton insurance agent Robert Smith, raised $73,388 for Lay and Freeman's defense against charges that they violated a court order to discontinue the practice of faculty-led religious activities at school events and on school property.

"From the outset, we told people who contributed that any money left over from the legal defense fund would be donated to Liberty Counsel," Smith said.

[...]

"We're certainly pleased with the donation," Mathew Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, said on Thursday.

[...]

"There's a lot more activity we will do on this case," he said. "We expect to spend more to prepare for this trial that is coming up."

Liberty Counsel is representing Christian Educators Association International, which is seeking to change the agreement between the ACLU and the School District. A hearing is set for Dec. 2 at the federal courthouse in Pensacola.

Yeah, I'm sure you're pleased with the donation, Mat. Just in time to do more of your nefarious, freedom-hating work, like trying to push Christianist prayer back into public schools or encouraging your deluded followers to pray for a liberal (see logo at right). What a bunch of sick fucks.

But you've definitely got one thing going for you on December 2, Mat: home-court advantage. It's clear the political and personal pressure your followers put on the federal court in Pensacola -- not the law -- won you the earlier decision ... and you're probably going to turn the screws again. So much for freedom.

---

* Curiously, the article says $8,908 went to Pensacola attorney Barry Beroset, but according to the same article, $73,388 was raised and $64,840 was donated to Liberty Counsel -- a difference of $8,548. Not sure where the discrepancy comes from ... or whether it really matters. Just an observation ...

Stuff you may have missed

I keep saving little bits of tid to use on the blog and then I manage to let it go because more timely things come up. Please allow me to clear my saved browsers and hit you with some knowledge about, well, how deranged the Right is in this country and this state.

First, everyone should read this op-ed by Neal Gabler, "Politics as Religion in America," from the October 2 Los Angeles Times. In it, Gabler neatly deconstructs why the wingnuts continue to push their destructive agenda even in the face of all factual evidence and sense to the contrary: they don't see it as politics anymore, but as a religion -- they believe the things Rush and Glenn and Sean and related gasbags say as a matter of blind faith:

When politics becomes religion, however, policy too becomes a matter of life and death, as we have all seen.

That is one reason our founding fathers opted for a separation of church and state. They recognized that religion and politics could coexist only when they occupied different domains. Most denominations, which preach and practice tolerance, have rendered unto Caesar what is Caesar's. Religious groups may have found a community of interest with a political party to further their aims; they have not, by and large, sought to convert the political system into a religious one. Until now.

The tea-baggers who hate President Obama with a fervor that is beyond politics; the fear-mongers who warn that Obama is another Hitler or Stalin; the wannabe storm troopers who brandish their guns and warn darkly of the president's demise; the cable and talk-radio blowhards who make a living out of demonizing Obama and tarring liberals as America-haters -- these people are not just exercising their rights within the political system. They honestly believe that the political system -- a system that elected Obama -- is broken and only can be fixed by substituting their certainty for the uncertainties of American politics.

As we are sadly discovering, this minority cannot be headed off, which is most likely why conservatism transmogrified from politics to a religion in the first place. Conservatives who sincerely believed that theirs is the only true and right path have come to realize that political tolerance is no match for religious vehemence.

So, no, it's not you. They really don't care that facts have a liberal bias. They'd rather believe their High Priests of Prevarication.

Meanwhile, here in America's Wang™, our old friend Jeb! Bush recently threw a little hissy fit because those mean American people keep picking on his big brother and they should just stop because he's been out of office for a whole 8½ months (or, as Fox News douchebag host Brian Kilmeade distorted said, "ten months" (emphasis added)):

KILMEADE: It’s been 10 months. Should Leader Hoyer be looking backwards, and is he accurate?

BUSH: I was on the plane coming up to Washington yesterday, and I heard someone complaining that their child’s acne was because of George Bush. Of course, last week the Olympics didn’t come to Chicago — that was my brother’s fault. And at some point, people are going to have to put on their big-boy pants and assume responsibility for the great challenges and opportunities our country has. I don’t know how much longer leaders — responsible leaders in Congress — can continue to say these things.

Well, Jeb!, excuuuuuuuse us if it takes longer than 8½ months to undo the eight disastrous years your brother had to fuck things up. I mean, think of it like the eight years you had to drive Florida into the ground, except we still have to wait another year-plus before our cleanup crew (led by Alex Sink) can get to work. It takes a while, y'know?

No, Jeb!, I guess you wouldn't know. Seriously, it's unconscionable to hear the same people whine "why hasn't Obama fixed the economy yet?" (or whatever the issue may be) and in the next breath speculate whether the Dow Jones hitting 10,000 is indicative of a "Bush recovery." You can't have it both ways, folks.

But it sure is hard to dissuade the religious zealots of the Church of Batshit Crazy.

Wingnut tactic: when in doubt, intimidate

The right-wing in this country has been using intimidation as a means to their nefarious ends for decades. Whether it's poll taxes or literacy tests for voting back in the '50s and '60s, active intimidation at the voting sites as recently as last year, or threatening letters to voters and officials, trying to "scare" people is the wingnut trump card.

And they're doing it again in Naples, with the support and, likely, involvement of the crazed radicals at the National Rifle Association (NRA).

Naples mayor Bill Barnett recently joined a group called Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG), which seeks to rid America's cities of illegal weapons and to have gun owners comply with the law regarding registration and possession of firearms. The group, led by New York mayor Michael Bloomberg (a Republican), wants to work within the Second Amendment, recognizing a right to bear arms* but trying to ensure that the right is exercised legally.

More than a year and a half after Mayor Barnett joined MAIG, though, the NRA got wind of his involvement and sent out a "legislative alert" -- otherwise known as a "dog whistle," calling their followers to attack -- "warning" Naples citizens that their mayor was part of (gasp!) an anti-illegal-gun group. And predictably, the nutjobs who got the "alert" responded by confronting the mayor.

“I believe very strongly in the Constitution put forth by our forefathers, including the Second Amendment. I do not believe, for one minute, that Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his ‘MAIG’ group are doing what is best for the citizens of his community, and he is trying to expand the liberal New York mentality to the rest of the community,” Naples resident John H. Rothert said in a Sept. 14 letter to Barnett.

“As a member of NRA, I was sent notice that you have joined the group. Please don’t! What Mayor Michael Bloomberg is attempting to do fits right in with the extremely liberal establishment that is trying to get a choke hold on this country. I, for one, will not allow that to happen.”

Rothert wasn’t the only Naples resident to send Barnett an angry e-mail or letter about his decision to join.

Barnett’s office received hundreds of e-mails.

“I am saddened to learn of your enrollment in Gov. (sic) Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns. I can understand how you could consider this movement because of its title, which is very misleading,” Naples resident Wayne Jenkins said in a Sept. 10 e-mail to Barnett.

“I too, am opposed to illegal guns, but I also support lawful gun ownership of citizens. I would like to urge you to consider checking the facts, and if you agree with me that this is a disguised anti-gun organization, that you would withdraw your membership.”

That isn’t happening, Barnett said, even though the coalition has lost some members since the NRA began its campaign against the group.

Post said he was unsure how many of the 450 mayors have backed out of the organization, but said the coalition has continued to see its membership grow.

“I did this because I felt for the cause,” Barnett said.

A close cousin of intimidation, of course, is fear. Fear allows intimidation to be effective. And fear appears to be one thing Mayor Barnett doesn't feel in this instance, even if Neapolitans like John Rothert and Wayne Jenkins express their fear that their guns will be taken away (which they won't -- and can't) and that there's some "extreme liberal" takeover going on (which I would applaud, but which isn't happening). Even though the NRA has sent out the marching orders and their minions are responding, their intimidation tactics aren't working, and here's hoping they don't work.

The problem is that these ideological freaks, who see President Obama as evil incarnate and any attempt to regulate gun ownership as anti-American, have far too much of a voice in our country today. I urge Mayor Barnett and all members of MAIG to stand strong in the face of wingnuttery and recognize that these people, sadly, have a very skewed view of what's going on in our country today ... the kind of skewing that necessarily results from a steady diet of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh.

---

* I personally do not believe there is a constitutional basis for a right held by every citizen to own firearms, since the Second Amendment expressly makes such a right subject to the formation of a "well-regulated militia," but since that is how the courts presently interpret the Amendment, that's the law.

More stupid from The Land That Time Forgot

Yeah, I'll be talking about the rise of The Stupid in America on Blast Off! Radio tonight, but just to whet your appetite, I found some choice examples in (unsurprisingly) the Northwest Florida Daily News, and specifically the letters to the editor there. The NFDN, which touts itself as "A Freedom Newspaper," proudly proclaims its batshit-crazy wingnuttery ... but, to give credit where credit is due, at least they know their audience.

Two members of that audience had letters published in today's paper. In the first, titled "Race isn't an issue," Patti Thornhill of Crestview argues that if we claim that the ubiquitous (but poorly attended) tea parties are racist because the protesters aren't taking Drunky McStagger to task, well, then we're all wet.

I resent the insinuation of the letter writer (“Late to the party,” Sept. 19) who wondered where the tea party patriots were during the Bush administration. He wrote: “What kind of people are you? I think I know.” If he is implying we’re racists, he is deeply wrong and should apologize.

The fact is, many signs at the D.C. protest denounced George W. Bush as well, including a couple of him with the infamous Joker makeup. I know. I was there.

I assume Ms. Thornhill is referring to the 9/12 fisting party Beckgasm protests in Washington, which she presumably attended. Well, I wasn't there myself (although I had to laugh this weekend when a friend of a friend, who also wasn't there, swore that 1.7 million people attended, rather than the 70,000 reported by D.C. authorities ... if there were that many, why weren't roads and the Metro jammed beyond capacity ... like, say, at the Obama inauguration?), but I did search the Internets for pictures from tea parties criticizing Drunky and -- guess what? -- I couldn't find any. Sure, there may have been one or two ... even "many" (which I guess would be, what, five?) ... but (a) I doubt there were any at all and (b) even if they were, that doesn't negate the inference that most teabaggers are just mad that there's a Scary Black Man in the White House. I mean, how dumb do you have to be to think that a few isolated signs that you can't even prove exist would support the argument that most teabaggers are NOT racists? Ah, wingnut logic ...

Unfortunately, the second letter I want to share with you, titled "A lazy majority" and written (I use that term loosely) by one William J. Roberts of Fort Walton Beach, isn't available online. But I'll transcribe for your entertainment just the opening paragraph, so you get a taste of the kind of stupid on display here:

The writer of "It's not an option" (letter, Sept. 13) wrote that because the Declaration of Independence delineates the right to enjoy life/health, there exists a right to health care. Why, then, aren't food, clothing, shelter and transportation rights? Surely there are more immediate requisites as one pursues liberty and happiness.

Well, Mr. Roberts, let me answer your question as simply as I can: health care is critical to life and must be provided to people by others, unlike food, clothing, shelter, and transportation. Food? You can grow your own, hunt, whatever ... clothing -- not necessary to life ... shelter -- again, create your own ... transportation -- also not necessary to life. Jeebus, is it that difficult to figure out? You selfish bastards are so bent on refusing to help your fellow man (didn't I read something about that in the Bible?) that you have to do these logical contortions just to preserve your twisted, insurance-company-enriching status quo. This kind of stupid makes my head hurt.

Besides, we don't look to the Declaration of Independence for any of our rights. Those come from the U.S. Constitution, which provides that the federal government should "promote the general welfare" ... and that undoubtedly includes health care, particularly for those who cannot secure it themselves.

But, you know, I should learn not to argue facts and logic with radical rightists. They'll never learn.

(More to come on tonight's Blast Off! Radio at 7pm Eastern.)

Blast Off! Radio PRIMETIME tonight, 7:00 pm EDT: The ongoing battle against stupidity

I don't know whether it's the fact that we have a Scary Black Man in the White House or merely the complicity of the right-wing gasbags in the mainstream corporate media or something else altogether, but there seems to be an inordinate amount of stupid in America today ... and, predictably, the vast majority of it is coming from Republicans. Whether it's the ignorant ramblings of U.S. Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Dumbfuckistan), the neo-Confederate idiocy of GOP state legislators Carey Baker and Scott Plakon, or the astonishing lack of knowledge displayed by U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-You Kidding Me?), there's just a lot of morons out there, and unfortunately many of them have been elected to office by even dumber people.

Now you may be asking yourself, "Who is this blogger ... this DFH blogger at that! ... to be telling members of Congress and the Florida Legislature that they are dumb?" Well, that would be a legitimate question, but by any objective measure of intellect, these "rightards," who rely more on rhetoric and "talking points" than sense, clearly are on the lower end of the intelligence spectrum -- anyone can see that, including some other Republicans. So, we'll be discussing the increase in imbecility on tonight's special PRIMETIME edition of Blast Off! Radio, and I invite your input and participation.

It's quite easy to be a part of the show -- here's how:

SPECIAL TIME: 7:00 pm Eastern TONIGHT

Click here to listen

Call in number: (646) 716-7543

E-mail: blastoffradio-at-gmail-dot-com

It's long past time to take the country back from the stupid. And we're going to get it started on Blast Off! Radio tonight -- please make plans to join me for this very special episode. And don't forget to bring your wrath for the moronic and delusional among us ...

(cross-posted at FPC Blog)

More like this, please

With all the crazed rhetoric and selfishness and hate from the right-wing, especially here in America's Wang™ with the radical Christianists and warmongers and racists and just plain stupid people we must endure on a daily basis, it's easy to forget that there once was a group of people we might describe as sensible Republicans. Oh, they still exist -- I even know one or two of them myself, personally -- but they are pretty scarce, browbeaten into submission or silence by the whackjobs in charge of the GOP in this state and the country.

And sometimes, we have to go clear across the country to find them ... all the way to our old friend Huggy Bear's own back yard:

A hundred and sixty-seven Republicans in the U.S. House recently voted that they think it's fine that some Democrat do to the next Republican president what Joe Wilson just did to President Obama?

This is not "just politics."

It is becoming more and more difficult for reasonable Republicans to hold our heads high.

U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson's outburst during the president's speech on health-care reform was an illustration of what is increasingly and correctly seen as the rabid reflex of the radical right.

It was "rabid" because most of us saw no reason, merely "fangs bared" visceral hatred in an unprovoked personal attack. It was reflex because it was preceded by no thought. It was radical because it was miles and miles outside decorum and responsible "discussion."

It was made worse by Wilson's effort to turn the episode into a fund-raising opportunity. It was made a total travesty by the Republicans who voted against a very modest "censure" resolution.

These egregious indignities come on top of the irresponsibility of shouting down anyone who might be offering a differing viewpoint during health-care town halls; the national Republican Party's suggestion that if health-care reform passes, Democrats might try to deprive Republicans of health care; and the astounding opposition to the president intending to tell children to stay in school and study hard.

It has become painfully clear why the Republican Party is not really a relevant force in terms of potential to capture a majority of public elections anytime soon. When your response is little more than rabid reflex, people simply conclude you aren't really interested in being taken seriously and they simply stop listening to you. That's what's happening to the Republicans now. Oh yes, the "base" is energized by this vitriol, but the important point is that the base continues to shrink. Real bright, guys.

It's about time that someone on the GOP side of the aisle said "Enough already!" This missive -- and there's more at the link -- was written by an attorney in Arizona and published in the Arizona Daily Star. More than likely, the author will be shouted down by precisely those whom he was trying to reach with his column. Indeed, it's already happened, dozens of times, in the column's online comments, which rely on the same falsehoods -- the president really did lie when Joe Wilson made his now infamous outburst ... ACORN is being allowed to control American government ... Obama is a socialist, a Marxist, a liberal -- that the column accurately challenges.

Oh, well. It was a nice try, anyway. Back to the pitchforks and torches for the wingnuts, I guess ...

(h/t to FOBO* -- and fellow Sinfonian -- scourtright)

---

* Friend of Blast Off!

Remember "states' rights?" Republicans in Florida do

Students of American history learn that while slavery per sé may not have been a root cause of the Civil War, certainly the dispute over states' rights was a key factor ... and one of those "rights" over which the states fought was slavery. Well, the wingnuts never really have let go of the states' rights argument, which they've applied to the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, education issues, gay rights .... and now, the debate over health care reform.

Two Florida legislators have introduced a bill that purportedly would keep the state's employers from having to follow any federal health care system:

Sen. Carey Baker, R-Eustis, and Rep. Scott Plakon, R-Longwood, are behind the Florida Health Care Freedom Act. Twenty-four House members, including Peter Nehr, R-Tarpon Springs, are co-sponsors.

Legal scholars question whether such an amendment would have the desired effect, and backers acknowledge the challenge. But they see the measure as consistent with a larger campaign to combat expansion of federal power.

"This amendment draws a line in the sand about socialized medicine," Baker told a crowd of about 60 people at Tucson's Southwest Grill in Clearwater [Sept. 15].

Unlike some public discussions of Obama's plan to revamp health care, the tone of Tuesday's gathering remained civil, though it was certainly spirited. Those gathered overwhelmingly supported the amendment.

"Do you really want to put your life, your health care, into the hands of some weenie up in Washington?" asked Steven F. Burden, a 53-year-old software engineer from Lutz.

Under Obama's proposal, large businesses — those with more than 50 employees — would be required to provide insurance for their employees or pay a fee, and individuals would be required to purchase health insurance. Tax credits would be available to help cover the cost for individuals. Those unable to afford insurance could get hardship waivers.

The proposed amendment seeks to nullify these provisions by barring employers and individuals from being compelled by law to "participate in any health care system."

I guess the idiots who support this proposal, like the above-quoted Mr. Burden (how's that for an appropriate name for someone opposed to health care reform?) would rather have their life and health care in the hands of "some weenie" in an insurance company -- you know, like it is now. Said idiots also are completely ignorant about the law -- again, how is it that people who don't understand the law keep getting elected to make our laws? -- because they obviously fail to understand that, under the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause, any state legislation in this area would be superseded by federal law. In other words, the bill proposed by Baker and Plakon can have no effect -- by definition. If there's no health care reform, their bill is moot, and if there is, the bill is "preempted" by the federal scheme of legislation.

Hold on, though ... Carey Baker? Where have I heard that name before?

Oh, yeah! Baker is the gun nut who wants to be Agriculture Commissioner ... so he can oversee the gun permitting process! I knew I remembered him from somewhere ....

Anyway, the grandstanding is great red-meat for the radical Republican base, the "21-percenters" who still think Drunky McStagger was a great president, but it's ultimately useless. Kind of like the space Baker and Plakon are taking up in Tallahassee. But, you know, it's just another day at the office for the wingnut-dominated Florida legislature, where "common sense" is a four-letter word.

UPDATE (10:37 am 9/23/09): Here's another historical take on the futility of what Baker and Plakon are trying to do, courtesy of FOBO (Friend of Blast Off!) Ray Seaman of Progress Florida. Nullification fever: CATCH IT!

Blast Off! Radio today at 4:00 pm EDT: Why do wingnuts still control American discourse?

Considering that the United States is pretty clearly split more or less evenly on ideological grounds, while polls repeatedly show that Americans -- even many right-of-center ones -- favor health care reform, same-sex marriage, and other so-called "liberal" ideas, it's somewhat puzzling to me that the Radical Right still controls so much of what we see and hear on a daily basis. In the past -- the ever-more-distant past -- the minority would be able to state their positions, but more often than not a pat on the head and a "that's nice, dear" would be about the only response needed. In 2009, though, the minority controls nearly every major media outlet and their often-insane rantings (against ACORN, gay rights, and the Scary Black Man in the White House, among others) not only are given credibility, but indeed they get their way far more often than they should (why the President is even giving them the time of day on ACORN is beyond me -- so much for socialism).

So, today on Blast Off! Radio, we'll take another look at the right-wing noise machine, locally and nationally, and talk about how they have turned what once might have been reasonable debate into the hate-and-fear-mongering prevalent today. In a saner time, there wouldn't be any dispute about the constitutionality of a court order banning organized prayer in public schools -- today, it's not only disputed, but the Christianist side is winning. In a saner time, people wouldn't shout in the faces of members of Congress on the issue of providing health care to the less fortunate among us -- today, it's encouraged. In a saner time, nutjob fringe radicals like Glenn Beck would be writing for some underground fascist rag -- today, he's the face of a major cable news network and the cover story in Time magazine. In a saner time, wingnut douchebags (self-loathing and otherwise) who ought to be in jail end up on reality TV game shows or with their own radio talk shows.

I really want to hear your thoughts on this today. Tell me your thoughts and whether or not you think sanity ever can be restored to political discourse in America.

It's very easy to be a part of the show. Here are the details:

TIME: 4:00 pm Eastern TODAY

Click here to listen

Call in number: (646) 716-7543

E-mail: blastoffradio-at-gmail-dot-com

So, please get your thoughts together, on this or anything else that's on your mind, and I'll catch you this afternoon on Blast Off! Radio.

Too stupid to breathe: Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Dumbfuckistan)

The stupid is strong with this one.

Sometimes I wonder how U.S. Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Chumuckla ... that's right, Chumuckla) got elected to Congress in the first place. Then I remember who elected him ... what his district looks like. And suddenly I get it.

You see, one can keep one's mouth shut and be thought a fool. But yesterday, Jeff Miller got up on the floor of the House of Representatives and removed all doubt with regard to himself. And believe it or not, his fellow whackjob Christianists in Congress, the "Prayer Caucus," actually put the speech up on YouTube so the whole world could enjoy the lunacy:

Pandering is one thing, but making a complete travesty of fact and logic in order to do so, well, that takes special talent ... a talent Jeff Miller obviously has in copious amounts. You don't suppose the fact that Frank Lay and Robert Freeman are going to trial today had anything to do with Miller's epic oratory yesterday, do you?

Anyway, I'm going to have to give you the transcript of the speech, so you can get the full effect (italicized emphasis in original; boldface emphasis is mine):

Mr. Speaker, there is trouble brewing in the small community of Pace, Fla., a community of less than 8,000 people just south of my hometown, and full of hard-working Americans, where I believe that a federal judge has gone well outside the bounds of the Constitution to declare that prayer offered among adults is illegal. That's right: the judicial branch is once again trying to act like the legislative branch, and in doing so is hindering the First Amendment rights of Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I'm not a lawyer -- this is not a courtroom -- but as a member of Congress, I swore to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, so help me, God. That's what I intend to do.

The facts of the case in Does v. School Board of Santa Rosa County are clear. The federal district court, without a hearing, issued an injunction preventing any school employee from promoting or facilitating prayer at any school-sponsored event. That action alone tramples upon the First Amendment rights of a specific group of people, denying them the equal protection that's provided under the very Constitution that we believe in.

The same federal district court has now gone on to prohibit all employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities. The same court now thinks that Pace High School principal Frank Lay and athletic director Robert Freeman violated this injunction at a private event, with zero student participation. That the court would somehow consider this action to be criminal behavior [is un]conscionable. However, Frank Lay and Robert Freeman now face criminal contempt charges for praying before a meal that was to be shared. All of this despite the fact that the Supreme Court itself has found that the Free Speech Clause protects private religious speech. The Supreme Court has further gone to find that not all religious speech that occurs in public schools or at a school-sponsored event is attributable to the government.

As lawmakers, we cannot sit idly by and let this happen. As members of Congress, we must act to uphold the Constitution. And as Americans, we must fight to ensure that our rights to freedom of religion and freedom of speech are not taken away.

America is a nation of principles. We can sit here all night and argue about whether we are a nation of Judeo-Christian principles or of secular principles. But the fact is that our Constitution protects all Americans, and a court has no place deciding that some Americans do not warrant those protections. The Founding Fathers would be appalled, and I certainly am as well. I yield back ...

Now, it's tempting to take apart Rep. Pander's Miller's speech point-by-point, but anyone with half a brain can do that. Still, for the benefit of the wingnuts who lack that half-brain, a few pertinent points:

• If you're not a lawyer, then don't argue the law, dumbass. You "believe" the court went beyond the bounds of the Constitution? Do you believe in Santa Claus, too? You'd be just as credible if you do.
  


• No one makes the judicial branch act more like a legislative branch than some of the wingnuts on the U.S. Supreme Court, like Justice Antonin Scalia, who are notorious judicial activists. Bush v. Gore, anyone?


• The Constitution doesn't exist to protect the rights of the majority, Rep. Miller, but of the minority. No one's rights are being "trampled" by being forbidden to conduct organized prayer at a school-sponsored event; rather, the rights of non-Christians to not be subjected to such prayer ought to be the paramount concern. You should have learned that in civics class, congressman. Aren't you smarter than a fifth grader?


• A private event, with no students present? According to the complaint originally filed, the congressman is just flat-out wrong here:
  
  

  During a school-day luncheon on Wednesday, January 28, 2009, at the Dedication of the new Field House at Pace High School, Defendant Principal Frank Lay asked Robert Earl Freeman, Pace High Athletic Director, to offer a prayer to bless the food. See Ex. 86-02 at 1-4 (“In a traditional manner [Mr. Lay] asked Athletic Director, Robert Freeman to bless the food for the adults in attendance. Respectfully he responded to [Mr. Lay’s] request.” Id. at 1. “Principal Frank Lay asked [Mr. Freeman] to give thanks for our lunch, which [Mr. Freeman] did.” Id. at 2. “[Mr. Lay] asked Robert Freeman to ask a blessing on the food. [Mr. Lay] shared that [he is], and [was] at the date of this incident, aware of the court injunction and aware that this type of action is not permissible under the injunction.” Id. at p. 3.).
  
  Upon Mr. Lay’s request, Mr. Freeman offered a prayer at the event. Pace High students and faculty and community members were present at the Dedication of the new Field House. In response to Mr. Lay asking Mr. Freeman to pray and Mr. Freeman praying at a school event on Jan. 28, 2009, Defendant Superintendent instructed Mr. Lay and Mr. Freeman to “avoid this type of action as it not permitted or [sic] as per the attached injunction.” Ex. 86-02 at 3-4. Although the actions of Mr. Lay and Mr. Freeman appear to be in violation of the court’s preliminary injunction, Defendant Superintendent nevertheless ends his “reprimand” by thanking them “for [their] leadership at Pace High School.” Id.

  Seems pretty clear to me that the event was not private and students were there, unless Rep. Miller astonishingly has access to evidence that shows otherwise. I can't imagine the plaintiffs would have included it in their complaint if it weren't true, since it's so easy to prove or disprove objectively. Besides, even if students were not present, the luncheon still would be a "school-sponsored event," not a private one as he alleges, and this obviously is not "private religious speech" as Rep. Miller suggests. Again, Jeff: not lawyer? Don't argue law.


• It should go without saying that courts decide all the time that some Americans don't warrant certain protections. Time, place, and manner restrictions on free speech are just one basic example of how courts and the law restrain constitutional rights. I shouldn't expect Jeff Miller to know this but, as a member of Congress, it sure would be nice if he did.
  


• Finally (for the purposes of this post), the Founding Fathers would be delighted, not appalled, that their wishes had been carried out. For starters, read Jefferson's Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, a significant source for the First Amendment, which spells out precisely why people should be free from having a particular set of religious beliefs imposed on them. Bottom line: this isn't a freedom-of-speech issue, and the only part of the First Amendment implicated here is the Establishment Clause, which the court is trying to uphold.

Sure, I'm a lawyer, but it took me all of five minutes to find most of this stuff on the Internet. You'd think a freakin' member of Congress could do it pretty easily, too. But, apparently that's not the case for my very own congresscritter, Jeff Miller, who clearly and painfully is too stupid to breathe.

UPDATE (9/17/09 11:17 am): I see someone from Reston, Va., near D.C., just stopped by to read this post, having found it on something called "ReputationConnect.com." You don't suppose Jeff is checking to see what people think of him, do you?

Ah, never mind ... I'm not even sure he knows how to pull stuff through the intertubes, because if he did, he could have debunked his whole speech in minutes, even before he delivered it.

A representative sample of the right-wing response to President Obama's speech today

Yeah, I'd say that pretty much sums up the deranged wingnuttery leading up to today's speech. But now that it's over, I only have one question: Is our children socialist?

(Video by Mark, who was a high school classmate of mine. And, yes, he is being satirical.)

Blast Off! Radio today at 4:00 pm EDT: Taking deranged wingnuttery to the next level

In a litany of outrage over the last decade or so, this one may take the prize as the most outlandish, most nonsensical, most hateful campaign of idiocy I've ever seen from the radical right-wing loons. I'm talking, of course, about the rhetorical detritus that is these wingnut protests against President Obama's speech to schoolchildren tomorrow.

Yes, the Right has managed to embarrass the country yet again, this time by a systematic propaganda effort to label a president's speech as "indoctrination" and "socialist" -- they've even demanded that schools seek parental permission to allow children to listen to the president of the United States! And, this being the Wingnut States of America, many schools and districts are caving to the Glenn Beck-led crusade against patriotism and decency, either refusing to show the speech at all or allowing parents to insist that their kids be given an "alternate activity" during the address. Talk about polarizing a student body ....

I never would have believed it if I hadn't seen it myself. And yet, this is the level to which the right-wing in this country has sunk: their abject fear and hatred of the Scary Black Man in the White House somehow makes it acceptable to hinder the entire public education system with their ludicrous claims.

Well, I have plenty to say about this lunacy, and I'll deliver the ranty goods in a truly epic way (if I do say so myself) this afternoon on Blast Off! Radio. And you're cordially invited to partake. Here are the details:

TIME: 4:00 pm Eastern TODAY

Click here to listen

Call in number: (646) 716-7543

E-mail: blastoffradio-at-gmail-dot-com

I want to hear what you have to say about all of this, too -- so please make plans to call in, chat, or otherwise participate. Hell, if you're on the other side of the ideological aisle from me, please feel free to tell me how far off I am on this, and how President Obama is only using this as a way to, à la Hitler, push his destructive agenda on the impressionable minds of our youth. Or whatever.

Oh, we may have time to cover some other topics, but I don't know. I'm feeling pretty ranty. Stay tuned, and buckle up ... this could be a bumpy ride.

(cross-posted at FPC Blog)

Too stupid to breathe: PolitiFact's mailbag correspondents

The St. Petersburg Times' Pulitzer Prize-winning political fact-checker website, PolitiFact, recently took on the right-wing idiots protesting President Obama's upcoming speech to students, and they correctly gave the GOP leadership, notably chief douchebag Jim Greer of Florida, the "Pants On Fire" designation for their lies that the president will "indoctrinate [students with] socialist ideology."

Yesterday, PolitiFact explained that their "mailbag" filled up with the angry responses of the rabid, deranged wingnuts:

Our item on a Republican complaint about President Obama’s upcoming speech to schoolchildren triggered some strong reactions:

"You people (the press) wouldn’t know the truth if it jumped up and bit you in the butt. We have avowed communists and racists in the White House. We have a regime that wants kids to pledge allegiance to Obama. We have a president that wants to destroy the business core of the country so he can redistribute the wealth.

"We have the worst unemployment in decades – and getting worse. We have a guy in the White House who want those that work to pay for those that don’t want to work and you want us to believe that he just wants to tell the kids to stay in school? What for, if they just quit school and do nothing – he’ll make sure they get a house, car, insurance and food. You folks (press) have lost your direction . . .

"Stand up, defend the country, defend the constitution, and defend the values that made this country the greatest country in the history of man. Then people will come back to you – I truly believe this."

I truly believe that whoever wrote this has no idea what the Constitution actually says. I also truly believe that this person gets his or her information pretty much solely from Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. I'd love to ask this brain-dead moron exactly who the "avowed communists and racists in the White House" are ... but, you know, backing up their assertions with actual facts is beyond the limited mental capacity of these degenerates.

The remainder of the unhinged, baseless diatribe basically speaks for itself. All in all, though, it proves beyond any doubt that this person would have been better served by not sending the email at all ... because by doing so, the correspondent demonstrates quite clearly that he/she is too stupid to breathe.

Just when you thought the right-wing couldn't sink any deeper....

....they find a way to do exactly that.

I'm truly outraged by the demented, uninformed, baseless, bigoted, hate-filled ravings of the lunatics on the Right who are opposing President Obama's speech to schoolchildren next week. I just wanted to share a sample of what I've seen with you, so you can see firsthand the slimy detritus that rests where their hearts should be.

First, meet Oklahoma state senator Steve Russell, who fears a "cult of personality," adding, "This is something you’d expect to see in North Korea or in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq." I want you to consider what Russell is saying here very, very carefully: he's saying that a speech to schoolchildren by the president of the United States -- something Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush did with little if any controversy -- is tantamount to the actions of vicious, totalitarian regimes. The minds of all sentient people must boggle at the cognitive dissonance displayed by the pustulent mind of Steve Russell.

Next, let me share a few comments sent my way by an anonymous source ... okay, a friend of mine (from outside of Florida, so don't go thinking you know who it is!) who copied down this idiocy from her Facebook news feed. The names have been omitted to protect the unfathomably stupid and the emphases are mine ... but the spelling and grammar have been left just as they were written originally, to make it painfully obvious what kind of people we're dealing with here:

POLL: Should President Obama be allowed to do a nationwide address to school children without parental consent?
- Yes
- No

[Person A]
Hell - Hell- no!!! The time for the days for public education & schools is over. The country could save a LOT of money ! Talk about the expense of Health Care! Most school work is done at home anyway "homework". Computers are issued at school, cut out busing-save gas & safty issues. No one is exposed to swine flu, don't have to eat school lunches... Read More, sex ed at home all kinds of issues are solved. Teachers salaries, electric, janatorial, buildings - isn't the bottom line to save taxypayers dollars.You can do it all at home - Honest Abe did and by candle lite no less.

[Person B]
Plus, there are many I would rather my daughter not be around and learn all their ignorant ways from!

[Person A]
We could eliminate some durg problems, sex with teachers, video's in the gym plus all the fights on the school buses.We could also save some money on free condoms not to mention abortion pills and abortions without parents consent!

[Person C]
He alone, who owns the youth, gains the Future!
-- Adolf Hitler, speech at the Reichsparteitag, 1935
Critics Decry Obama's 'Indoctrination' Plan for Students - Political News - FOXNews.com
Source: www.foxnews.com

[Person D]
Obama will deliver a national address directly to students on Tuesday, which will be the first day of classes for many children across the country. The address, to be broadcast live on the White House's Web site, was announced in a letter to school principals last week by Education Secretary Arne Duncan. <<>>If my kids were in public school I would have them not participate in that at all! Who is he to think he can do this?? It's getting worse the longer he's in office! We have 3 years to go :(

[Person E]
The more I look at this stuff the madder I get!

[Person A]
Talked to her Dad awhile ago, he didn't know about the school thing! He does now!!! Fred told him he was gonna have to take his gun and guard his plug! LOL!!!

[Person F]
One more reason to homeschool

[Person C]
You are right, [Person F]. I do not want any politician, regardless of political affiliation, to have direct access to the young school children. The content of the speech is less important than the precedence it sets.

[Person G]
..or another reason for Christian school..

[Person C]
True, [Person G] :)

I could spend all day decrying the so-called thought processes of these deranged people, but let me sum up with a handful of key points about some of these imbeciles:

• Person A, besides being completely unable to put together a coherent sentence, would like to eliminate public education altogether. "Hell," "Honest Abe did [it] by candle lite," so it makes perfect sense. ("Honest Abe" also issued the Emancipation Proclamation, a document with which I'm certain Person A would have disagreed vehemently, had she been around in 1863.) She also has a peculiar obsession with sex, "durgs," and violence, although she doesn't seem to care as much about apostrophe usage. Good thing Fred has his gun (but what is "guard his plug?")!


• Person B may wish to review a definition of the word "ignorant." She can begin with a mirror.


• Person C loses automatically. Godwin's Law. Thanks for playing. As a result, we needn't even address her contention that no politician, "regardless of political affiliation," should speak to students; one wonders if she felt, or would have felt, the same when St. Ronnie of Simi Valley spoke to kids about tax cuts.


• To Person D: "If my kids were in public school?" We're all grateful they aren't, and since they aren't, you have no standing to protest and you now are cordially invited to shut the fuck up. Also, "Who is he to think he can do this?? (Extra points for two question marks.) Um ... the president, I think?

Anyway, you get the idea. Truly, the stupid, it BUUUUURRRRNNS.

I'm not your friend anymore!

I'm encountering an interesting phenomenon these days on Facebook. I enjoy the popular social networking site, although I don't spend nearly as much time on it as I used to, because it appeals to my interest in keeping up with friends old and new and especially finding long-lost friends from college, high school, and before (a trait for which some have criticized me in the past, for whatever reason). In fact, my girlfriend and I had dated briefly in high school but had no contact thereafter until Facebook brought us back together after 26 years, and I'm so grateful for that.

But the "interesting phenomenon" to which I refer is being "dumped" by erstwhile friends after posting something that pertains to my liberal viewpoints -- which, I might add, I seldom do. But when I do ... hoo boy, do I hear about it.

Just yesterday on Facebook, I linked to a hilarious post by our old blogfriend Gen. J.C. Christian of the blog "Jesus' General." The post, on which I stumbled more or less by accident (not having read "Jesus' General" as much as I'd like lately), was a satirical eulogy of Jerry Falwell ostensibly written by the infamous object of Falwell's scorn, Winky Tinky of the Teletubbies. I heard back from one of my old high school friends simply asking me, "Why are you such a basher?"

Well, I hadn't really considered myself much of a "basher" -- maybe here at Blast Off! in my "blog persona" as Sinfonian, but in meatspace, not really. Then I saw that said friend had de-friended me from Facebook, so I felt free to reply in detail:

Well ..., I was debating about whether to reply with the short, funny version or the long, detailed version, but since you apparently dropped me as a FB friend over this, I'll go with long. You weren't the first to dump me on FB over politics, and I'm sure you won't be the last. So much for open-mindedness; pity people take these things personally.

I don't really consider myself a "basher;" in fact, I posted this because it's hilarious. But, for now, I'll go with the label.

I'm a "basher" because I've seen how the Radical Right has destroyed so much of this country. How the hate and distrust of people who are "different," whether gay, non-Christian, African-American, etc., and so on has created a nation where people actually defend their "right" to openly take assault weapons to presidential appearances. How the people who by all rights SHOULD be most tolerant, based on their professed beliefs, are usually the LEAST tolerant.

So, yeah, I'm perfectly willing to "bash" people who are hypocrites. People who, for example, pray for the death of the president, as a pastor recently has done. Or, in this case, a nationally-renowned pastor who publicly blamed 9/11 on "the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively ... Read Moretrying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way...." That kind of attitude is abominable, and living in Florida, I see it far too often.

So I guess posting a piece that I didn't even write here somehow justifies being labeled a "basher" and chided for my opinions. As I said above, I'm just sorry people take this so personally. Many of my friends, on Facebook and otherwise, have ideologies different than mine; I choose not to denigrate them for their views and instead maintain the friendship. Even my girlfriend is a Republican, and somehow we survive. I'm sorry to have offended you and anyone else affected.

This isn't the first time this sort of thing has happened. It's not even the first time in the last couple of weeks: one old high school friend, who since has become an evangelical Christian, explained to me a short time ago in no uncertain terms that she would not stand for my "bashing [her] brothers and sisters in Christ" because of a Facebook post (referring to Blast Off!) wherein I referred to the pro-prayer forces in Santa Rosa County as "radical Christianists." She then dumped me from her Facebook friend list. (Hmmm ... maybe I really am a "basher.")

I'm sorry to lose friends over politics. I guess ultimately it's inevitable, but it's hard to hide my opinions permanently on a forum (Facebook) that is so personal. However, my sorrow comes more from the idea that people would take such things so personally; I acknowledge my differences from many of my friends, even those who proudly display "McCain-Palin" or "Bush-Cheney" stickers on their cars. We disagree, even debate, but that doesn't make them my friends any less.

I really do have a lot of Republican friends. My girlfriend is a Republican. Nearly everyone in my family is Republican. Most of my Republican/conservative friends -- well, those who know about this sucky blog -- tell me they enjoy reading the blog now and then, and occasionally they even comment here. Good -- I welcome dissenting opinions. But I'm never going to apologize for my sincerely-held beliefs and opinions ... nor will I ever ask my friends to do so.

People who publicly wear T-shirts proclaiming "Islam Is The Devil," though ... well, that's an entirely different story altogether ....

UPDATE (11:42 am 9/1/09): Just saw that one of my Facebook friends posted her response to a poll, "Which of these candidates would you vote for if there were a 2008 Presidential Election Do-Over?" She answered Mike Huckabee, commenting, "This is who I voted for in the FIRST place!!" Now, I wouldn't even think of defriending her (although I might think of recommending professional help for her obviously delusional behavior).

(Just kidding!)

A graphical message to all the Obama-hating wingnuts

Yeah, that pretty much sums up my feelings.

(courtesy Printfection.com, where you can get this image on a T-shirt; h/t to Alli via Twitter, who also gave us the immortal phrase, "Abstinence makes the church grow fondlers.")

An open letter to teabaggers and others who hate our government

Saw this posted on Facebook the other day and thought I'd share it with you. It's made the rounds and actually is a little dated, so perhaps you've read it already, but it bears repeating, and it's pretty much spot on.

I AM AN AMERICAN ANTI-GOVERNMENT SHITHEEL

This morning I was awakened by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the US Department of Energy. I then took a shower in the clean water provided by the municipal water utility. After that, I turned on the TV to one of the FCC regulated channels to see what the national weather service of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration determined the weather was going to be like using satellites designed, built, and launched by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. I watched this while eating my breakfast of US Department of Agriculture inspected food and taking the drugs which have been determined safe by the Food and Drug Administration.

At the appropriate time as regulated by the US Congress and kept accurate by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the US Naval Observatory, I got into my National Highway Traffic Safety Administration approved automobile and set out to work on the roads build by the local, state, and federal departments of transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality level determined by the Environmental Protection Agency, using legal tender issued by the Federal Reserve Bank. On the way out the door I deposited any mail I had to be sent out via the US Postal Service and dropped the kids off at the public school.

After spending another day not being maimed or killed at work thanks to the workplace regulations imposed by the Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, enjoying another two meals which again did not kill me because of the USDA, I drove my NHTSA car back home on the DOT roads, to my house which had not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building codes and fire marshal's inspection, and which had not been plundered of all its valuables, thanks to the local police department.

I then logged on to the internet, which was developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Administration and posted on freerepublic.com and Fox News forums about how SOCIALISM in medicine is BAD because the government can't do anything right.

The only reason government doesn't work is because conservative Republican administrations defunded and/or patronage staffed it with people with ties to special business interests --for example, the last FDA, Dept. of Interior and Agriculture under Bush. No one in the halls of modern "conservatism" seems to have had a problem with pumping over $500 Billion to the Defense Department, which last I hear is a socialized entity.

Just saying.

Really, I just want to throw this in the face of every smarmy little punk who rails against the supposed excesses of government. You don't even know what socialism really is.

You don't like government? Fine, then pave your own roads and put out your own fires and police your towns yourselves, assholes ....