A great movie that anticipates what Bush’s State of the Union Address will be, with a guy doing a dead-on impression of Bush. It’s hilarious.
Our children must be literized, don’t forget.
I’ve seen humorous takes on “The Gay Agenda” before… in fact I have an example of it on my site. But this recent column from the San Francisco Gate is nicely written:
Do you want to know the real gay agenda, what 96.8 percent of all gay couples wish for every single day including Sunday? Here it is:
From what I can glean and above all else, the gay people of America seem to want this simply inexcusable level of boundless, unchecked normalcy. It’s true. For some reason, they believe the utterly disgusting idea that they should be able to live their lives in peace and trust and health, with full support and assistance from their schools and hospitals and government, just like everyone else. I know. Shudder.
It is, in fact, remarkably similar to what heteros want. And women. And black people. And immigrants. And dwarves. That is, to be able to fall in love and maybe even get married (or at least have the option) and have decreasing amounts of sex and raise a family and hold down a good job and pay their taxes and argue with their lovers over who the hell spent 200 bucks on long distance to their mother, all while not having to worry about getting the living crap beaten out of them with tire chains by Arkansas and Alabama and most of Texas, or secretly loathed by small-minded pseudo-Christians who wouldn’t know Jesus’ true message if it bit them on the other cheek.
Ah, the deviousness of it all, the sheer nerve to desire the same sort of lives as everyone else. But do you want to know the kicker? The true aspect of the “gay agenda” that makes the religious right’s skin really crawl? Here it is: When all of that normalcy is in place, when these repulsive gay beings who like to walk around in public and eat at restaurants and drink their lattes and laugh out loud and stick things into each other’s bodies for sexual pleasure, well, they want the most appalling thing of all: They just want to be left alone.
I know. It’s hideous. How dare they! How dare most gays ask not to be harassed and not really care to flaunt their sexuality or convince anyone that homosexuality is cool or righteous or the only way to be, beyond reassuring children that it’s OK to be whatever religion or sexual orientation your mind and body and heart and soul guide you to be. Can you imagine? What horror. Ignorant, intolerant schoolteachers should protest that nasty idea right now.
Representative Thompson withdrew his amendment today to House Bill 1010 which would have eliminated local human rights protections in cities throughout Indiana. The House reconvened at 1:30 pm today. Rep Thompson withdrew his amendment and the House was recessed until 5:30pm tonight.
This amendment may be only temporarily dead; it could still be attached to another bill sometime during the legislative session, and rumors are that Republicans intend to try just that, potentially at a very busy point in the session to reduce the chance of it being noticed or to reduce the ability of opponents to act on it.
Indiana Equality is still asking people to attend the gathering at the Statehouse at 5 p.m. tonight, to thank legislators for killing the amendment behind the scenes and to help make legislators aware that opponents of the amendment are keeping tabs on the legislature this session.
Also, don’t forget that Indiana Equality is sponsoring a rally in the Statehouse North Atrium (indoors!) on February 9th from 1-3 p.m.
TODAY the Indiana House of Representatives will debate an amendment to House Bill 1010 that would prohibit cities and counties from providing equal rights protections based on sexual orientation or gender identity — like the Human Rights Ordinance we worked so hard on here in Indianapolis.
Please Contact your State Representative immediately (TODAY!) and tell them you oppose this amendment. Municipalities must retain the right to pass the laws that are appropriate and needed for their community and their citizens. Seek help from sex discrimination lawyers to fight for your rights. Basic human rights should be ensured for all Hoosiers.
In reaction to the recent update of Indianapolis’ Human Rights Ordinance and other local non-discrimination laws throughout Indiana – the Religious Right, led by Advance America’s Eric Miller, tapped Representative Jeff Thompson (R) to author an amendment to HB 1010 (eminent domain). The proposal, Amendment #12, specifies that local government may not extend protections for employment or housing that is “greater than those protections or opportunities offered by the Constitution of the State of Indiana, the Constitution of the United States, or federal law, except as expressly granted by statute.”
This proposal would make illegal human rights protections based on sexual orientation or gender identity, including those that have been enacted in Bloomington, Fort Wayne, Indianapolis, Lafayette, Michigan City, West Lafayette, and Tippecanoe County.
On Tuesday afternoon Democratic House members argued that the amendment was neither acceptable nor relevant to the bill. Nevertheless, the amendment was ruled germane and debate began. After intense questioning of Rep. Thompson by a number of Representatives (both Democratic and Republican), Speaker Brian Bosma adjourned House for the day without taking a vote on Amendment #12. As there was no vote, the House will continue discussion on the proposal when they re-convene at 5:30 pm on Wednesday, January 25th.
1.) Contact your State Representative immediately and tell them loud and clear that this proposal is simply not acceptable! Municipalities must retain the right to pass the laws for that are appropriate and needed for their community and their citizens.
2.) Join Indiana Equality at the Indiana State House on Wednesday evening, January 25, 2006 and deliver a message in-person to your Representative to reject Amendment # 12. Meet at 5:00 pm at the State House Rotunda.
Join Indiana Equality for the “Our Families Count” rally. February 9, 1:00 pm – 3:00 pm at the Statehouse. Don’t miss this historic event.
Alberto Gonzales just claimed that the Bush Administration shouldn’t have to get warrants to spy on American citizens because “we’re at war, and there has to be a measure of secrecy.” But the court they get the warrants from, the FISA court, is a SECRET court. They have top-secret clearances, and everything is done quickly and secretly out of the public eye. There’s no chance that any enemy combatants would learn about the wiretapping from the court system.
Bush said he had a team of lawyers go over the program — but a team of lawyers isn’t going to protect us. Only the courts can make sure that people’s rights are not being compromised in the process. And as I’ve pointed out many times, the court is there not just to protect the rights of American Citizens, but to protect BUSH from criticism, and to provide him back up to show that what he’s doing is above board.
If he went around the courts, he’s doing it because he knows he can’t get warrants for what he’s doing. Which means the spying he’s doing isn’t on TERRORISTS at all. It’s on his political enemies. He’s spying on Democrats. He was spying on John Kerry and Kerry’s election team.
Bush should be impeached, then jailed.
Chris Matthews also had this to say about the movie Brokeback Mountain on the Don Imus radio show:
MATTHEWS (1/18/06): Have you gone to see it yet? I’ve seen everything else but that. I just—
IMUS: No, I haven’t seen it. Why would I want to see that?
MATTHEWS: I don’t know. No opinion on that. I haven’t seen it either, so—
IMUS: So they were—it was out when I was in New Mexico and—it doesn’t resonate with real cowboys who I know.
MATTHEWS: Yeah—
IMUS: But then, maybe there’s stuff going on on the ranch that I don’t know about. Not on my ranch, but you know—
MATTHEWS: Well, the wonderful Michael Savage, who’s on 570 in DC, who shares a station with you at least, he calls it [laughter]—what’s he call it?—he calls it Bare-back Mount-ing. That’s his name for the movie.
IMUS: Of course, Bernard calls it Fudgepack Mountain…
Notice he called Michael Savage wonderful? That’s really frightening.
(original link, no longer active – http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1221/dailyUpdate.html) Christian Science Monitor, 12/21/2005:
US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said Wednesday that he doubts Osama bin Laden is in any position to command the worldwide operations of Al Qaeda. The BBC reports that Mr. Rumsfeld told reporters on a flight to Pakistan that bin Laden could still be hiding along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, but it was hard to know since the terrorist leader had not been heard from in more than a year…
And the (original link, no longer active – http://www.nationalreview.com/ledeen/ledeen200601090808.asp) National Review, January 9, 2006:
And, according to Iranians I trust, Osama bin Laden finally departed this world in mid-December. The al Qaeda leader died of kidney failure and was buried in Iran, where he had spent most of his time since the destruction of al Qaeda in Afghanistan.
Nice attempt to tie bin Laden to Iran so we can invade there, huh?
Some news people, though, seemed to think it was less important to talk about what it means that bin Laden’s alive, and more important to play politics, thus prompting outrage. Chris Matthews on Hardball: “I mean he sounds like an over the top Michael Moore here, if not a Michael Moore. You think that sells…”
And Chris Matthews sounds a lot like Joseph Stalin. I’m just saying.
John Kerry responds to Chris Matthews:
“You’d think the only focus tonight would be on destroying Osama Bin Laden, not comparing him to an American who opposes the war whether you like him or not. You want a real debate that America needs? Here goes: If the administration had done the job right in Tora Bora we might not be having discussions on Hardball about a new Bin Laden tape. How dare Scott McClellan tell America that this Administration puts terrorists out of business when had they put Osama Bin Laden out of business in Afghanistan when our troops wanted to, we wouldn’t have to hear this barbarian’s voice on tape. That’s what we should be talking about in America.” — John Kerry
And if the last story wasn’t enough to make want to laugh and cry at the same time, try this one: not content with fumbling the ball in Iraq and listening in on you while you talk to your family members in England, the Bush Administration is demanding Google’s search records, according to numerous news sources, including the Mercury News.
The Bush administration on Wednesday asked a federal judge to order Google to turn over a broad range of material from its closely guarded databases.
The move is part of a government effort to revive an Internet child protection law struck down two years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. The law was meant to punish online pornography sites that make their content accessible to minors. The government contends it needs the Google data to determine how often pornography shows up in online searches.
In court papers filed in U.S. District Court in San Jose, Justice Department lawyers revealed that Google has refused to comply with a subpoena issued last year for the records, which include a request for 1 million random Web addresses and records of all Google searches from any one-week period.
The Mountain View-based search and advertising giant opposes releasing the information on a variety of grounds, saying it would violate the privacy rights of its users and reveal company trade secrets, according to court documents.
Nicole Wong, an associate general counsel for Google, said the company will fight the government’s effort “vigorously.”‘
“Google is not a party to this lawsuit, and the demand for the information is overreaching,” Wong said.
The site American Rhetoric displays the text and audio of America’s famous speeches, including this farewell speech by Dwight Eisenhower, delivered three days before the end of his presidency, that is attracting renewed interest due to the documentary film by Eugene Jarecki “Why We Fight.”
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades. In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers. The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present — and is gravely to be regarded.
According to the New York Times, today:
WASHINGTON, Jan. 16 – In the anxious months after the Sept. 11 attacks, the National Security Agency began sending a steady stream of telephone numbers, e-mail addresses and names to the F.B.I. in search of terrorists. The stream soon became a flood, requiring hundreds of agents to check out thousands of tips a month.
But virtually all of them, current and former officials say, led to dead ends or innocent Americans.
F.B.I. officials repeatedly complained to the spy agency, which was collecting much of the data by eavesdropping on some Americans’ international communications and conducting computer searches of foreign-related phone and Internet traffic, that the unfiltered information was swamping investigators. Some F.B.I. officials and prosecutors also thought the checks, which sometimes involved interviews by agents, were pointless intrusions on Americans’ privacy.
…
“We’d chase a number, find it’s a school teacher with no indication they’ve ever been involved in international terrorism – case closed,” said one former FBI official, who was aware of the program and the data it generated for the bureau. “After you get a thousand numbers and not one is turning up anything, you get some frustration.”
…
F.B.I. field agents, who were not told of the domestic surveillance programs, complained they often were given no information about why names or numbers had come under suspicion. A former senior prosecutor, who was familiar with the eavesdropping programs, said intelligence officials turning over the tips “would always say that we had information whose source we can’t share, but it indicates that this person has been communicating with a suspected Al Qaeda operative.” He said, “I would always wonder, what does ‘suspected’ mean?”