PREVENTING UNWANTED GUN VIOLENCE IN SCHOOLS: A SIMPLE PROPOSAL

Prof. Trip “Trip” Tripperson-Johnson

By Prof. Trip “Trip” Tripperson-Johnson

The recent massacre of schoolchildren by an insane gunwielding lunatic has shocked the world. People everywhere are wondering what to do. They asked themselves if there is anything they actually can do.

Before people go off half cocked and do something they will regret – and I am talking about passing laws that violate every American’s God-given right to possess and use firearms – I ask that everyone step back and look at this rationally. There is no need to take guns away from anyone to solve this problem. There is a simple solution to what happened in Connecticut, a solution that does not require repressive and unconstitutional gun control legislation on either the state or the federal level.

1st, let us focus on the problem. The problem is not guns. Guns don’t kill schoolchildren. People with guns kill schoolchildren. We need to focus on who it was who killed those children in Connecticut. Let me just say right out: it was a nut case that killed those kids. A lunatic. 6 pounds of crazy in a 5 pound bag.

The average red-blooded American gun owner is not crazy.  He or she (probably he) is a responsible, God-fearing Republican who would never take a gun into a school and shoot anyone, except perhaps if his or her (probably his) constitutional rights to bear arms was threatened.

The point is we all agree that crazy people should not have guns. But we also agree that it’s impossible to keep guns out of the hands of crazy people. To insist that any kind of “standards” would infringe on the rights of responsible, God-fearing Republican Americans to buy, own and use guns.

The solution, as I said, is simple. If we want to stop lunatics from taking guns into schools and killing a lot of kids, then we should make sure that every American schoolchild is armed.

If those children in that school had been packing heat – and had been trained in the use of those firearms – that lunatic would’ve gotten off maybe 5 rounds before one of those deadeye tots took them out.

This solution works for everybody. Increased gun sales pumps money into the economy. Possessing firearms will improve the self-esteem of any child, especially little girls.

So instead of using this horrible massacre of schoolchildren as an excuse to pass liberal, socialist, communist laws to restrict the constitutional right to bear arms, let’s sell the problem and uphold the Constitution by passing laws that allow us – heck, require us – to arm our children.

 

Trip Tripperson-Johnson  is an adjunct professor of  Biblical Studies and Infomercial Science at Cal Poly Needles in California. He is the author of the acclaimed essay “ Why Slavery was Good for Black People” published in the Elders of Zion Law Journal.

HEADLINE – POLAR BEAR SCIENTIST CLEARED OF MISCONDUCT

.

The relationship was determined to be consensual.

.

HEADLINE – Soldiers Disciplined for Korean-Burning

.

This is a really big news story in North and South Koran.

.

THE DAMNED

.

The Blue Church of God is much more forgiving.

.

Vegetarians?

.

AMERICAN PASTOR SUGGESTS “FINAL SOLUTION” FOR HOMOSEXUALITY

.

No kidding.  A “final solution” like the kind Hitler suggested for Europe’s “Jewish problem.”

You simply won’t believe how evil this man is.  And he isn’t alone. Millions of Americans see no problem with what he proposes.

.

.

Perhaps Bangar was right:  the central tenant of Christianity for these people is “love thy neighbor, but it’s okay to hate them and kill them if they are different from you.”

.

HEADLINE – Repulblican lawmaker wants homosexuals killed.

The Mississippi state lawmaker who cited a Bible passage on Facebook calling for gay men to be “put to death” has taken to the social networking site again to refuse to apologize for the remark.

.

Mississippi State Rep. Andy Gipson

.

Rep. Andy Gipson (R-Braxton) went on Facebook Friday to say that although he has been receiving emails and calls from around the country about his citation ofLeviticus 20:13, as well as Romans 1:26-28, in a May 10 Facebook post on President Barack Obama’s endorsement of gay marriage, he will not say he’s sorry. 

“To be clear, I want the world to know that I do not, cannot, and will not apologize for the inspired truth of God’s Word. It is one thing that will never ‘change,’” Gipson wrote. “Anyone who knows me knows I also believe that all people are created in God’s image, and He gave us His Son Jesus.  John 3:16. It is this message that I preach every Sunday, along with my Christian belief that God wants all homosexuals to be killed. Jesus hates homosexuals.”

“I want that queer Richard Simmons to be the first with a bullet through is sinful homo brain,” Gipson added. “He gives me the creeps. Same for that freak Miss J on America’s Next Top Model. Now that’s a great TV show. Just great. Never miss it. I TiVo it when I’m at an “Invisible Empire” meetin’ so I won’t miss it. Hot wimmin runnin’ around in their underwear posing for pictures. Nothing wrong with that.  It pleases me, so it pleases God – except for the negro models. Its against the laws of God for the races to mix so I am against any encouragement in that direction.”

“Tim Gunn on Project Runway can stay for a while.  Yeah, he’s gay, and talks a little queer but other than that he looks normal.  I like his style. And I’m hoping maybe he can get me on his new makeover show,” Gipson said before walking into a wall, injuring himself.

“Easy come, easy go,” Gipson quipped before spitting out a few broken teeth.

Gipson also pointed out that, unlike homosexuality, God is in favor of and “smiles upon” slavery and selling women. “That’s what it says in Leviticus, so slavery and women-selling, especially virgins – and who doesn’t like virgins? – is a part of God’s law, so it should be America’s law, too. America is a capitalist country and selling women and negroes should be just as easy and free of government regulation as selling cows. We’re talkin’ commerce here. We’re talkin’ selling something with value for a profit – just as God intended. It’s in Leviticus. Look it up.”

‘I want all civil laws replaced with biblical law. Except for circumcision. If jews want to do that, then fine with me, but it makes no sense in the modern world because I think it is a bad idea. So except for God’s commandment about circumcision, we enact all the rest.  Well, except for that stuff about not eating pork.  I loves me some pork,” Gipson concluded.

In addition to being a Baptist Minister, Gipson, 35, has served in the Mississippi Legislature since 2008. He chairs a judiciary committee.  He supports Mitt Romney for president.

.

.

.

THE NEW SOCCER MOMS

.

The American political world is abuzz withhnewsnthat, when Mitt Romney was attending a private preparatory school in Michigan during the time his father was Governor, he lead a mob who chased down a gay boy and held him down while Romney personally used a pair of scissors to cut off the gay boy’s hair.

. .

Romney first denied the story. When it was corroborated, he said he didn’t remember it happening.  When even more witnesses came forward to support the story, Romney said that he doesn’t remember this particular incident, but that he participated in lots of pranks and engaged in youthful hijinks when he was in high school, he is sorry if he offended anyone, and if it happened he didn’t know the boy was gay.

.

The Original Prankster

.

Romney supporters have attempted to brush the news story off as a “hit piece” designed to distract the American electorate away from the issue of Obama’s failed presidency and substitute it with the issue of gay rights.  They may be right.  It is an amazing coincidence that, right after Obama publicly declares his support for same sex marriage, it is revealed that Romney was a gay-basher in high school.

. .

However, despite the very best efforts of the Romney camp to refocus on economic issues, this story just won’t go away.  It is increasingly resonating with the electorate in a way no one could have anticipated. The reason for this resonance is simple: either Romney really doesn’t remember the event or he is lying about it, and either option is troubling to the American voter.

.

.

Let’s not sugarcoat the incident. What Romney did wasn’t a “prank” and it wasn’t “high jinks” (as Romney himself tries to describe it).  Leading a pack of boys that hunted down, subdued and then forcibly cut off the hair of another boy who was “different” with a pair of scissors was an assault, a battery and a hate crime.  This is a graphic example of bullying in its most pure, most evil and most damaging sense. The fact that Romney lead the mob and actually committed the act makes it worse. 

. .

Imagine it happening to you.  Imagine you running, scared, being knocked down by a gang of boys, held down so you cannot move, while one of them sits on top of your chest and cuts off your hair “in large clumps” as one of the witnesses to the incident describes.  Imagine yelling for help and crying as you look up into the face of a young Mitt Romney grinning down at you and most likely laughing.

.

.

 I’ve imagined this and it is terrifying.  I’ve been bullied when I was younger, but nothing this bad happened to me.

Let’s contrast Romney’s attempt to laugh off the incident with something from Obama’s past that Romney supporters point to as evidence that, if Romney was a bully, that Obama was a bigger bully.  In Obama’s autobiography Dreams of my Father he describes an event from his early childhood when he pushed a girl. Here is what he writes:

 Before my arrival she had been the only black person in our grade. She was plump and dark and didn’t seem to have many friends.  I ran up to Coretta and gave her a slight shove.  She staggered back and looked up at me, but still said nothing.  ‘Leave me alone,’ I shouted again.  And suddenly Coretta was running, faster and faster until she disappeared from sight.  Appreciative laughs rose around me.  For the rest of the afternoon I was haunted by the look on Coretta’s face.

.

.

Any moron can compare what Romney did with what Obama did and see the differences between the two events.  Obama isn’t denying what he did, excusing it or attempting to trivialize it. He is “owning it” and is ashamed.

Romney, on the other hand, attempted to hide it, when discovered tried to deny it, when proven tried to trivialize it as a simple prank not worthy of even remembering.

.

.

This was an event worthy of remembering, so Romney is probably lying when he says he doesn’t remember, and if he is lying, well, Americans don’t like liars. 

.

.

We joke about politicians lying, but we get upset when they get caught doing it. Scooter Libby wasn’t prosecuted for revealing the name of a covert CIA operative; he was prosecuted for lying about doing it. Bill Clinton wasn’t impeached because he had sex with a chubby intern – he was impeached because he lied about it.  If he had come clean when he was caught the odds are the American public would have forgiven him. 

.

.

So Romney is lying about not remembering that he chased down a gay student, held him down and cut off his hair displays a character flaw that troubles the average American voter and only serves to reinforce the uneasy feeling they have about him.  The Democrats say he is willing to change his position and “flip-flop” to get elected, and Romney’s lying about what he remembers only reinforced that perception.

.

.

The average American voter, on the other hand, does not believe the same thing about Obama. Sure, right wing lunatics shout, scream and froth at the mouth about Obama’s duplicity, but the average person doesn’t see it. They view Obama as a basically honesty guy, and his “owning up” to his own bullying incidents reinforce that favorable view – and this means that undecided voters are now more likely to choose Obama over Romney in November.

.

.

But what if Romney really doesn’t remember such a graphic and horrible bullying event that he himself perpetrated?  If that is true, then it is even more troubling than lying about it.

Some bullying experts say that Romney may actually not remember what he did because bullies often lack empathy. They don’t feel any of the pain they are causing, so in their minds the individual acts of bullying really are trivial and not worth remembering.

.

.

Let’s review: Romney did it; he did the horrible thing described above. He was a bully. If he doesn’t remember it is because, at the time, he lacked empathy.

And this is the problem. Lack of empathy is one of the signs of psychopathy.

.

.

.

Please control your outrage. I am not accusing Romney of being a psychopath in the popular sense – i.e., an insane killer.

.

.

I am, however, suggesting that these recent events place into sharp focus many aspects of Romney’s personality that have troubled millions of Americans, especially conservative Americans.  And the reason why is that Romney may very well be, in a clinical, non dangerous sense, a high functioning emotional/interpersonal psychopath.

Psychopaths possess a general lack of empathy, and this includes deficiencies in comprehension and appreciation of others’ experiences and motivations, and lack of tolerance of differing perspectives.   Emotional/interpersonal psychopaths (as differentiated from socially deviant psychopaths) are often glib and superficial, egocentric and grandiose, lack remorse or guilt, and have shallow emotions. h[1]8  They display a lack empathy with no anxiety along with a predisposition to tell people what they want to hear. h[2]9 

.

,

This describes Mitt Romney. When people complain that he is “wooden” and “boring” they are complaining about his lack of emotions.  When he says the wrong thing or “puts his foot in his mouth” he is being glib and superficial. His regular “flip flopping” is a manifestation of his predisposition to telling people what they want to hear.  He is clearly egocentric and his plans for the nation are undeniably grandiose. When people complain that he is “robotic” they are observing that he never shows any signs of anxiety.  A big complaint about Romney is that he is distant and not in touch with the common person – i.e., he has deficiencies in comprehension and appreciation of others’ experiences and motivations.

The bullying event and his reaction to the public learning about it provide the final pieces for a diagnosis:  he cut off that boy’s hair because it was dyed blond and draped over one eye, causing Romney to openly and loudly complaint that it “isn’t right; he can’t do that” which means that Romney was motivated to organize and lead a lynch mob and to assault and batter that boy because of Romney’s lack of tolerance of different perspectives. Romney cannot remember the event because of his lack of empathy.

A lot of politicians, especially those on the extreme right wing of the political spectrum, are emotional/interpersonal psychopaths. Michelle Bachmann and Newt Gingrich certainly fit the description.

.

.

.

Romney does, too.  We’ve all felt it, wondered about it, asked ourselves why we cannot support Romney and are still reluctant to do so.

.

.

We are troubled by the inescapable fact that Romney is either lying about remembering his bullying history, or he actually doesn’t remember, and we don’t know which is worse.

Finally, the story about the boy Romney chased down and molested resonates with a brand new demographic:  those who were bullied in school and kept their silence.  They hate bullies, hate their excuses, hate the privilege that keeps bullies safe from any consequences that should result from openly expressed cruelty and sadism.

.

.

You know these victims. They are short. They are fat. They are unattractive. They are weak. They are powerless.  They are poor. They are gay. They are “different.”

.

.

.

They are Legion, and they all hate Romney.

.

.

Bulling Victims are the new Soccer Moms.  They are a demographic that cuts across social, economic, regional and political boundaries.  And they all know what happened. They all know that Romney lead a lynch mob of rich boys who chased down a gay kid and cut off his hair for expressing  his individuality and difference.  They marked him and humiliated him in a way that neither the victim nor the bullies can ever forget.

And they are going to be the swing vote that gives Obama a second term as President of the United States.

.

BANNED IN THE U.S.A.

There are places in the United States where this comic cannot be sold.  

.

.

And rightly so: this comic book is part of the liberal conspiracy to brainwash the youth of America into committing the ungodly acts of sex outside of marriage and outside of race.

.

.

Do you think Archie is carrying a condom?  You bet he is. Do you think that negress (don’t let her light skin color fool you) Archie is clearly in the process of carrying off to his bed is on the birth control pill? Of course she is.  She is clearly utterly unafraid of pregnancy, which encourages her willingness to have sex with Archie, thereby subverting the truth of God’s word.

.

.

And although this mulatto hussy apparently lives the decadent and anti-Christian “rock and roll lifestyle,” Archie still lives with his parents in a Christian home.  So this comic book cover communicates directly into our pure and untainted children’s minds Satan’s message that it is “okay” for two unmarried teens to have interracial sex -purely for the pleasure of it and not for the purposes of procreation – in their parent’s house using tax payer subsidized birth control.

Vote Republican this November and we will put a stop to this evil.

.

.

I LOST, AND IT BOTHERS ME

As most who visit here know, I play many roles, one of them being the role of an attorney.  During my legal career I’ve won many cases, lost some, and that is to be expected. You learn more from your mistakes than you do from your victories.  But I’ve never lost a jury trial - until now.l

Long, long ago, somewhere in the African veldt, a proto-human was born that wasn’t particularly strong or fast or even very attractive, so his survival potential in the State of Nature was, well, poor at best.  But this particular proto-human was a mutant born with a pre-stone age super power. He had the ability to persuade other, stronger, faster proto-humans to share food and otherwise not kill him and/or eat him.  He became an advisor to the alpha male, alpha female, and those proto-humans aspiring to attain that status.

This power of persuasion compensated for lack of speed and strength, allowing that particular genetic line to survive through the ages, spreading throughout humanity, but concentrating with particular potency in what is now known as Ireland.

I am part of that line.  I’m not particularly fast, strong or good looking.  I’m not particularly intelligent.  But I can charm the leaves off the trees and sell ice cubes to eskimos.  I kissed the Blarney Stone when I was 18, and as I did it – leaning backwards, pressing my lips to the mossy stone – I asked myself “what’s the point?”

I’ve always been able to talk my way out of trouble or into a paying job.  (My deepest wish and hope is that I’ve passed my gift on to my only son, because we enter troubling times when a silver tongue will be more valuable than cash money.)

And my “gift of gab” has served me well, especially in my chosen profession. But it failed me two days ago, when I failed to convince a jury to acquit my clients on charges that they “delayed a peace officer in the performance of his or her duty.”

Here are the facts:

My clients are brothers raised in a small town in Northern California. They were raised with all the right values. I would be proud to call either of them my son.  To respond to the injustices they see around them, they became political activists, appearing in public holding signs to bring attention to their message. When they do this, they wear masks, made popular by the film V is for Vendetta.

These masks have become an international symbol of protest against government tyranny.

.

.

.

.

.

One day the brothers decided to display a sign that said “TAXES = THEFT” from a highway overpass.

.

This is a common theme of political protest throughout the United States; many people are upset with tax policy that essentially takes their money by force and spends it on things they deeply disapprove of, whether it be war or birth control subsidies.

.

.

A Yuba County Deputy Sheriff responded to a call from a concerned citizen.  The officer saw that they were wearing masks made popular by the film V is for Vendetta, The officer saw that one of the two masked figures was holding some kind of hand bag and worried that it contained a bomb.  He stopped to investigate.

The whole thing was filmed and was streamed live on Youtube.hYou can see the entire encounter here,dculminating with the arrest of both brothers.  Watch it and come to your own conclusions why these guys got arrested.

Officially, the brothers were arrested for wearing masks – which isn’t a crime unless the person wearing a mask is in the process of committing a crime, leaving from the scene of a crime or planning a crime – which the Deputy Sheriff surely eliminated as possibilities the moment he began talking to the brothers.

The authorities realized their mistake and did not charge the brothers with wearing masks. Instead, they charged the brothers with illegally posting a sign.

Much later, the complaint was amended to include a charge of “willfully resisting, delaying or obstructing a peace officer while he or she was attempting to discharge the official duties of his or her office.”

Much, much later, the complaint was amended again to withdraw the charge of illegally posting a sign.  At trial, the Deputy District Attorney argued only that the brothers’ actions “delayed” the Deputy Sheriff from discharging his official duties.

At trial – almost a year later – the Deputy District Attorney put the Deputy Sheriff on the stand to explain why he confronted the brothers and why he was concerned (masks and hand bag = potential terrorists).  I cross examined him. He told me that his official duty is to determine whether a crime has been or was going to be committed. I asked him if he searched the hand bag one of the brothers had over his shoulder. The officer said no because he wasn’t concerned any longer that it might contain a bomb.

From my point of view, this was fine, because, at that moment, the purpose for the stop – i.e., to determine if my clients were terrorists intending to explode a bomb – was satisfied, and therefore, there was no further “duty” to perform and, therefore, my clients subsequent reluctance to produce their drivers license was not an interference in any duty being performed.

I asked the officer when he detained my clients and the officer testified that my clients’ detention began the moment he asked one of them if they carried a drivers license. That was fine with me, too, because an officer cannot detain someone unless they suspect that person is committing or will commit a crime, and the officer satisfied that concern so could not legally detain or question my clients.

I asked him if he knew which of the two masked figures answered and he said no.  This was absolutely fine with me because, if either of my clients had broken the law by refusing to identify themselves, the jury could not determine which of them broke the law, and this meant ipso facto reasonable doubt.

The  jury deliberated about two hours – including lunch – and came back with a verdict. They found both of my clients guilt of delaying a peace officer.  My clients will be sentenced soon, and could face up to a year in jail.

Let me make it very clear where I believe the problem resides. Not with the judge. The judge was, in all honesty, one of the best judges I’ve ever appeared before.  His intelligence was intimidating. His integrity was impeccable. He bent over backwards to make sure that my clients got a fair trial.  I will gladly appear before that judge again and know that my client will get a fair shake, and that is all any attorney can ask or hope for.

The problem does not reside with the Deputy District Attorney.  He did his job and did it well.  More importantly, he did it absolutely above board.  There is often a great deal of trickery in these matters where one side or the other relies on tricks of procedure and wins by exploiting the mistakes of their opponents.  Not this guy.  Once he even saved me from a potentially important mistake because he “didn’t want to win through trickery or accident.” How often do you encounter someone like that?  In my trade, not often.  I believe he genuinely liked my clients, sympathized with their cause and wanted them to suffer as little consequence as possible for what he believed was a violation of the law.  As a defense attorney, I could not have wished for more in an opponent.

The problem doesn’t reside with me.  I am my harshest critic. Although there are a few things I would have done differently in retrospect,  I believe I put on the very best defense possible under the unique circumstances of this particular case. I would rather have caused this, but I didn’t. The truth is much worse.

In my mind, the problem rests squarely with the jury. Not the individual jurors.  I believe each and every one of them is a decent, honest, solid citizen. I had the choice of excusing any of them from the jury and did not. I saw no reason to.  Some of them had a actually seen the movie V is for Vendetta and enthusiastically liked it.

But I should have won.  I didn’t because every single person on that jury believed that, when a police officer asks for your identification, you should provide it. Period.

The law in California says otherwise.  In California, you are required to answer a peace officer’s questions only if you are legally detained. You can be legally detained only if the peace officer believes you are either in the process of committing a crime, are leaving from the scene of a crime or are planning a crime.  If a peace officer does not reasonably believe any of these factors are present, then you aren’t detained and you aren’t required to answer questions.

For example, let’s say you are walking down the street, minding your own business, and your business is entirely lawful.  If a police officer stops you and asks for you to show him or her your driver’s license, you can lawfully refuse.

I adamantly believe I provided sufficient evidence and argument to cement reasonable doubt in the mind of any objective juror.  I demonstrated how the Deputy DA didn’t meet his burden of proof. I showed that the arresting officer resolved his concerns as to whether my clients were planning to explode a bomb within moments of confronting my clients – they were just two guys protesting tax policy.  I pointed out that the two videos  the jury saw showed two people wearing masks, one of which said he didn’t carry a drivers license and didn’t want to tell the officer his name.  I argued that this created reasonable doubt because the jury could not determine from the evidence they saw which brother violated the law, if either of them did.

I polled some of the jurors after the trial.  They all said the same thing to me:  if a police officer asks you to show him or her your identification card, you should do it. Period. Sure, you may have the right to say no, but you shouldn’t. If they ask, for whatever reason, you should tell.

And that sort of bothers me.  I don’t want to believe that I live in a society where someone in uniform can say “your papers, please” and I have to comply or else risk arrest and incarceration.  But I do live in that kind of society.  That jury of good, honest, ordinary people showed me and everyone that we do.

And that bothers me.

.

THE COMING AMERICAN RELIGIOUS WAR

.

.

I consider myself a Republican, conservative Christian man of faith. The problem is that I am Greek Orthodox, which the vast majority of the GOP base does not recognize as being Christian.

I cherish my freedoms, including the freedom to worship the Almighty the way I want. I will be damned if anyone is going to use the political process to impress their religious views upon me – and that is exactly what thehNew Republican Party is hell-bent on doing./

At it’s heart, this conflict is about the same things that caused and fueled the European religious wars of past centuries as well as every Jihadi’s fervor.  This conflict is about power and hate – in particular, the power to hurt those you hate.

The New Republican Party hates women.  Allow me to rephrase that – it hates independent, educated, thinking women who work outside of the home. Let’s call them modern women. And the reason why they hate these women is because their social, intellectual, economic and sexual independence violates a myopic interpretation of antiquated religious doctrine that has nothing to do with the central message that Jesus came to us to teach.

The New Republican Party is waging a war on modern women, and they have corrupted Jesus to do it.  They want to force women out of the job market, out of public life, out of graduate school and back into the four walls of the male dominated homes where ancient Semitic women were imprisoned and enslaved.

The revolutionary message central to Jesus’ teachings – and the reason the political system of his day murdered him – is charity, freedom and love.  This American crusade against women is about selfishness, control and hate.

And, to get the power to hurt the women they hate, these American Taliban have taken over and corrupted the GOP.  They support insurance coverage for Viagra to foster men having sex, but they are dead-set against insurance coverage for contraception or the use of tax dollars to pay for an abortion.

And who pays the ultimate price for this draconian scheme?  Women.  Like a male chimpanzee, a man has recreational sex and then walks away.  The women pays the price for that mutual decision by having no choice but to carry that embryo to term and then raise that child by herself.  She cannot work. She cannot go to school. She cannot participate in any meaningful way in the political process.  She is back where she belongs.

And what is the New Republican Party’s solution to this horrible conundrum?  Just ask Rick Santorum. He will tell you with absolute certainty that his solution is not just correct, but pleases God.  His solution is, essentially, to outlaw sex for any other purpose than procreation.  If Santorum, and the millions of right wing Americans who support him, get their way, the power of government can and should be used to make sure that every single time two people have sex they had better be prepared to have a child, and if they don’t want a baby, then they simply better not have any sex.

This is only one example of what the New Republican Party wants to do to America.  They want to use the power of government to force each and every one of us to live lives no different than the Puritan’s lived in Salem back in the 1600’s.  They pick and choose among the ideals of our Founding Fathers, agreeing with the freedom to bear arms but disagreeing with the separation of church and state.  They want our every day lives, what we do in the privacy of our own homes, to be regulated, to be dominated, by their perverted view of Christian values.

They are masters at self-deception and outright lying.  They try to minimize what they are doing by calling it “social issues.”  When the world found out that the Virginia legislature – dominated by right wing religious fanatics – was passing a bill that would force every woman who wants an abortion to first get a big stick shoved up their vaginas, the outcry was so powerful that those responsible for that repulsive law scurried around like the cockroaches that they are and revised the law.  And the governor of Virginia expressed his disappointment that Virginia’s consideration of a “social issue” would get such a negative reaction.

One person’s social issue is another person’s freedom.  By legislating social issues, the New Republican party is trying to take away everyone else’s freedoms.

Our founding fathers were personally aware of the wreckage the European religious wars caused.  For thirty years, what is now Germany was the battlefield for protestant armies fighting catholic armies. Thirty years.  Our founders decided to spare the people of the new nation they were creating that same pain.  To do it, they manufactured, for the first time in world history, a nation where people could worship God any way they wanted, so long as that worship didn’t mix with political power.

But that separation of church and state our founders created no longer exists.  Santorum – who could actually be elected our next president – actually states publically that there should be no separation of church and state.

The result is going to be the very war the Founding Fathers sought to avoid.  But what the hell. As Tom Petty sang, everybody’s had to fight to be free.

I am prepared to fight to keep these people out of my bedroom and out of my wife’s vagina.  What are you prepared to do?

.

STATE MANDATED RAPE – An Interview With Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell

.

[In this frankly fictitious interview, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell talks candidly about the latest attempt by Republicans in the Virginia State legislature to pass a law requiring women who seek an abortion to submit to having a large, long wand shoved up their vaginas as punishment.]

.

"The wand is at least this long," said Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell

 

PEOPLE OF EARTH: Let’s cut to the chase, Governor.  What the hell is this law that everyone is talking about?

 MCDONNELL:  I presume you are referring to House Bill 462.

 POE:  That depends. What does House Bill 462 do?

 MCDONNELL:  It punishes women who want an abortion by mandating that they first get this big thing shoved up their hoo-has.

.

.

 POE:  That’s the one.  How did this happen?

 MCDONNELL:  Through the democratic process that made our nation – and the great state of Virginia – great.  And here is the best part: we got a woman to introduce the bill! Haw haw haw haw!!!

.

.

 MCDONNELL:  How great is that?

 POE:  Why is that great?

 MCDONNELL:  Because it is ironic, you moron.  Whatsamatter? Don’t you appreciate irony? I bet you went to a public school, huh? Are you Italian?  One of them Cath-o- licks?

 POE:  What does that matter?

MCDONNELL:  I take that as a big “yes.”

 POE:  What exactly does House Bill 462 say?

 MCDONNELL:  It requires doctors who perform abortions in the first trimester of pregnancy to perform an ultrasound to determine the age of the fetus.

 POE:  That doesn’t sound so bad.

 MCDONNELL:  Yeah, well, that’s what we hoped everyone would think, but some nosey Jew liberal found out that the only way to determine the age of a fetus during the first trimester of pregnancy is by performing a transvaginal probe ultrasound.

.

.

 POE:  And what is that exactly?

 MCDONNELL:  Well, to do it, a doctor or qualified nurse has to shove what looks like a long pole up inside a woman’s lady parts. The pole is called the “transducer.” He he he. Guys around here are now referring to their Johnson as their “transducer” like “hey, Ted, is that a transducer in your pocket or are you thinking about voting for House Bill 462?”

.

.

 POE:  Is there a medical reason for requiring a transvaginal ultrasound?

 MCDONNELL:  Nope. No medical reason or medical benefit whatsoever. But is sure as hell is gonna make ‘em think twice about getting an abortion, I know that for damned sure.

.

POE:  Can the woman refuse?

 MCDONNELL:  Nope.  If she refuses we throw her in jail along with the doctor who did the operation without first shoving a transducer up her.

POE:  So if she wants an abortion she has to first spread her legs for the transducer.

MCDONNELL:  Hey, come on.  This isn’t virgin territory we are talking about.  She wouldn’t be there if she hadn’t had a “transducer” up in there in the first place.

POE:  But she has no choice about the procedure.

 MCDONNELL:  Exactly. Did I mention that the transducer has this bulb at the end? Eh? (Wiggles eyebrows suggestively.)

.

.

Coincidentally similar to this.

.

 POE:  Forgive me, but the whole thing sounds like state sponsored and mandated rape.

 MCDONNELL: Now wait a minute, as a Kath-o-lick you should be 100% in favor of a law that punishes women who want an abortion.  Isn’t that what Rick Santorum is all about?  Bringing back the moral foundation of the 12^th Century when the Pope was in charge, no one was allowed to have any fun and witches were burnt?

 POE:  I’m not Catholic.  I am Greek Orthodox.

 MCDONNELL: What the hell is that?

 POE:  It is the oldest form of Christianity on earth.

 MCDONNELL:  I sort of doubt that.

 POE:  Why?

 MCDONNELL:  Because I never heard of it, and that means it probably doesn’t exist.  Look, I am unusually well-informed about the customs of mud people and I never heard of no Greek Orthodox Jews.

 POE:  We were talking about House Bill 462.

 MCDONNELL:  Oh yeah, the “Stick up the Hoo-ha” bill.

POE: Why isn’t that rape?

 MCDONNELL:  I am deeply offended by any attempt to compare a transvaginal ultrasound to a TSA airport patdown.

.

 POE:  What?

 MCDONNELL:  I am on record as saying that the full body patdowns the TSA forces you to endure at the airport crosses the line in regards to concerns about privacy and civil liberties.

,

.

 POE:  So you believe that forcibly patting you down at the airport, fully clothed, to make sure you aren’t carrying a weapon violates a person’s privacy and civil liberties?

.

.

 MCDONNELL:  That’s right.

.

.

 POE:  But forcibly inserting a 10 inch wand up a woman’s vagina doesn’t invade her privacy and civil liberties?

MCDONNELL:  Nope.

 POE:  I mean no disrespect, Governor, but it sounds like the Virginia legislature has its collective head up its collective ass.

 MCDONNELL:  So you’re against states’ rights, huh?

 POE:  States’ rights has nothing to do with it.

 MCDONNELL:   It sure as hell does.  This is another example of Obama trampling on states’ rights.

 POE:  No one in the Obama administration has said anything about this.

 MCDONNELL:  Yeah, but he’s thinking about it.  I can feel it.  He’s got these beady eyes that stare at you.  There’s all kinds of bad stuff he wants to do, a whole bunch of rights he wants to take away, but hasn’t talked about.  That’s why he can’t be reelected.  You know he hates white people, don’t you?

 POE:  Obama has nothing to do with this. States’ rights has nothing to do with this.  This is all about non-consensual, invasive sexual contact.

 MCDONNELL:  You hit the nail on the head, Paul.  And that’s how we’re gonna fix the problem.

 POE:  I don’t understand.

 MCDONNELL:  Well, the feminist lesbians, the Jews, the uppity negroes and illegal Mexicans and the liberal media are all upset about House Bill 462 because it forces women to go through a really horrible ordeal if they want an abortion.  So we’re changing the law so that it is consensual.

 POE:  You mean that women will be able to refuse to have the procedure performed?

 MCDONNELL:  Exactly.  The procedure will be performed only on women who want it.

.

.

 POE: That means the law is dead. No woman will consent to a sexually invasive procedure that has no medical benefit.

 MCDONNELL:  Not necessarily.  There are a lot of freaky women out there. And, as you surely know, women aren’t all that bright.  I mean, look at the facts – we got a woman to introduce House Bill 462. Most women aren’t even going to know what a transvaginal ultrasound is.  So when someone asks them, “hey, darlin’ how would you like a free transvaginal ultrasound?”  I bet 99.9% of the time the woman will say yes, and embarrassment alone will prevent her from saying no once the procedure starts.  Heck, we’re thinking of legally changing the name of the procedure to “personality test” or “pedicure.”  Heck, they got their feet up anyway. Maybe they’ll think they’re gonna get their toe nails polished.

POE:  Why don’t you just buy them dinner afterwards?

.

.

MCDONNELL:  Hey! That’s a great idea!

.

.

POE:  No.   It isn’t.  It isn’t a good idea. Like House Bill 462, it is a very bad idea.

.

"Hello, darlin', would you like to take a free personality test or have a free pedicure?"

.

MCDONNELL:  You worry too much. Look, if things for the good old boys get too hot, if the public outcry gets too loud, we can always withdraw the bill all together.

 POE: You think that will end this?

 MCDONNELL:  I’m sure of it. Because Americans have short attention spans, short memories and are, more or less, morons – especially in Virginia. God Bless illiteracy and generational poverty.  Look – I am clearly a fascist misogynistic ultra right wing sadist. Most of the men in the Virginia legislature are, too.  We don’t try to hide it.  It is a lifestyle choice. We like it when women feel pain.  They deserve it.  Heck, they want it.

.

.

MCDONNELL: They need to be punished, first, for seducing Adam into eating the Apple of Knowledge and then later for learning to read and agitating for the right to vote and getting jobs outside of the home, which is against the Laws of God.  We’ll just tell the stupid woman who introduced House Bill 462 to withdraw it, she will do what she’s told, and, with enough time, all of this will blow over. And we can try it again when no one is looking.  We know what kind of Virginia we want. We know what kind of America we want. We want to be able to have all the sex we want without any risk of pregnancy because we can afford to buy birth control, but we want to make sure that poor people can’t because we like hurting them. Fun is for us. Suffering is for everyone else. We know how women should think and behave. And we are going to get it all because we are in charge.

.

.

Update at 3:30 p.m. ET: Governor McDonnell said he would sign House Bill 462, The Washington Post reports.

 

Update at 4:19 p.m. ET: The Virginia House of Delegates has approved a substitute bill that would not fordce women to undergo the invasive transvaginal ultrasound before getting an abortion, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reports.  Women could choose to have the transvaginal procedure.  The vote in the Republican-controlled House was 65-32.

 

Update at 5:45 p.m. ET: Virginia State Senator Jill Holtzman Vogel – the Republican senator who sponsored House Bill 462 – now says she plans to withdraw the bill, according to news reports.

.

.

.

POSTSCRIPT

This isn’t over.  House Bill 462 is a potent symbol of what has gone wrong with the Republican Party, and it will resonate for years to come.  And it’s true. The GOP is being “occupied” by political and religious fanatics who are so outside the American mainstream that it is hilarious, but isn’t funny.

They’ve alienated African Americans. They’ve alienated Hispanics. They’ve alienated homosexuals. And now they’ve alienated women as a class. Even those women, and men, who are pro life are horrified that House Bill 462 was even attempted.  These kooks have alienated the vast middle of America. And that means it is over for the GOP.

And the gaggle of clowns the GOP has thrust in our faces as an alternative to Obama have drifted away from the message of the economy and smaller government. Instead, they are fighting the culture wars again, focusing on social issues like birth control when jobs are all that should matter.  This is a strong sign that even they know they cannot win and are simply pandering to the republican “base” so they can have influence after they lose and make money like Sarah Palin did.

Obama is going to be reelected. Nothing can stop that now. The alternative is simply to horrible to contemplate.  And when that happens, the GOP will fragment into smaller parties that fight with each other for the power to go into people’s homes and tell them how to live their personal lives.

Our hope for smaller government is dead.  And rightly so.  We didn’t provide the American people with a coherent, acceptable alternative.

.

.

BEYOND THE GRAVE – Interview with Ned Kelly

Famed “Bush Ranger” Ned Kelly returns from the dead to participate in a frankly fictitious interview where he reveals the issues he cares about most.

PEOPLE OF EARTH: Mr. Kelly –

NED KELLY:  Call me Ned, cobber.

POE: Okay. Ned. It is a true pleasure and a real thrill to be speaking with you today.  I don’t mind saying that you are one of my all time biggest heroes.

KELLY: (Laughs, phlegm rattling in his bronchia, followed by a small cough) Hero? You don’t know anything about me, do you?

POE:  Actually, I know quite a lot about your life.

KELLY: Don’t come the raw prawn with me. You ain’t even Australian.

POE:  True, but I’ve spent time drinking heavily with Australians.

.

.

KELLY: Oh, okay, that explains it, then.

POE:   Ned, on 28 June 1880, in Glenrowan –

KELLY:  I don’t want to talk about that.

POE:  What? What else is there to talk about?  That’s when –

KELLY:  I know what happened. I don’t want to talk about it.

POE: But the shoot out, the armour you made and wore, it is legendary.

POE: It was possibly the most important moment of your –

KELLY:  Yeah, yeah. I’m sick and tired of hearing about it and I don’t want to discuss it.

POE:  Well, then what do you want to talk about?

KELLY:  I want to talk about the film.

POE:  What film?

KELLY: The one with Mick Jagger.

Mick Jager

POE: Ah… eh… what?

KELLY: I want to talk about that awful film where Mick Jagger played me.

POE:  What about it?

KELLY:  Awful film. Jagger was terrible.

POE:  Yeah, okay, so?

KELLY:  Jagger was nothing like me.

KELLY:  Know what I want? I want that movie made again, with a different cast.

POE:  Do you have anyone in mind?

KELLY:  As a matter of fact, I do. I want Daniel Craig to play the role of Ned Kelly.

POE:  Daniel Craig?

KELLY:  Or Johnny Depp.

POE:  Johnny Depp?

KELLY:  Yeah. Did you see him in Ed Wood?  Incredible performance.  Me and my mates were shocked he wasn’t nominated for the Academy Award. Fucking tour de force.

POE:  Mr. Kelly –

KELLY: Or a Golden Globe, although, between you and me, I suspect that show isn’t really on the up and up.  I think the fix is in, if you know what I mean.

POE:  Thank you so much for –

KELLY:  Don’t get me wrong.  I love Ricky Gervais.  That munter is comedy gold, he is.

POE:  I thank Ned Kelly for spending quality time with us.

KELLY:  That was quality time?

POE:  Next time, my guest will be Mary Watson, and I will finally get to ask her what animal she would be if she could be any animal at all.

A Grim Fairy Tale – BOXING DAY

Hello, children. I am Brother Grim. Would you like to hear a true story?

.

BOXING DAY

Once upon a time there was a young woman named Jennifer. Jennifer lived in a place known far and wide as the City of Angels, which Jennifer liked because she considered herself a Born Again Christian, and living in a city of angels was fine by her.

.

.

Jennifer lived with a man named Robert.  They met in church and were married a year later.  The day after their first Christmas together, she found Robert’s secret briefcase hidden in the apartment bedroom closet.

.

.

The briefcase was large, hard shelled and had a combination lock with three numbers on rotating dials set side by side.  It was very heavy. She shook it gently, but didn’t notice any peculiar movement. She had no idea what was in it.

She tried to open it (of course), but it was locked and she could not open it. That is when she realized the brief case belonged to Robert, because she would have remembered buying something that could lock.  

She put the briefcase back where she found it and walked away.

.

.

But the next day she was in the closet again looking at the secret briefcase. She looked closely and noticed that the numbers on the combination had changed. She didn’t know how she knew, but she knew. She memorized the number combination showing – 0-8-7 – and placed the briefcase back in the closet.

.

.

A week later, she checked and saw that the numbers had changed to 4-2-7. This meant that at least twice in as many weeks, Robert had opened the lock, gone into the briefcase, and jumbled the numbers when he relocked it.  So Jennifer began to check the briefcase every day. Every day she tried to open it, just in case Robert forgot to jumble the numbers to set the lock.

One day the briefcase opened.

.

.

Inside, Jennifer found a pair of musty, sweaty boxing gloves, a stack of magazines and some video cassettes. Tucked into one of the organizer pockets inside the briefcase, Jennifer found a bunch of letters from men addressed to Robert at his office.

.

.

Jennifer read the letters and looked through the magazines. She even watched one of the videos. The magazines and videos showed men – and sometimes women – boxing and wrestling.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Jennifer learned from the letters that Robert would regularly go to the Olympic Gym near Downtown L.A., rent a boxing ring, and box with strange men—rarely the same man twice.

.

The Olympic Auditorium then.

.

They’d punch and pound and smack each other and then afterwards they would perform unnatural, sinful acts upon themselves as the other watched.  The letters would end with promises that the writer would inflict great bodily harm upon Robert the next time they met at the gym.

.

.

Naturally Jennifer confronted Robert about her awful discovery. She let him come home to find her sitting on their bed with the briefcase open, reading his letters.

.

.

Robert admitted everything—the boxing and the unspeakable, sinful acts. He admitted that he lied to Jennifer – that when he said he was working on weekends he was really meeting strange men at the Olympic Gym.

.

.

Robert admitted lying about playing rugby as a subterfuge to explain the injuries he sustained boxing.

.

.

That night Jennifer slept at her friend’s house and the next day she moved her things out of the apartment she shared with Robert.  She resolved that her marriage with Robert was over because lying, Jennifer knew, is a sin. 

.

.

.

The Olympic Auditorium now.

.

CAN’T. STOP. LAUGHING.

BOEHNER POINTS THE FINGER

.

.

HEADLINE – Phone-hacking whistleblower found dead

LONDON (AP) — Police say Sean Hoare, the whistleblower reporter who broke the story about widespread hacking at the News of the World, has been found dead in his London home.

London Police said Hoare’s death at his home is not considered to be suspicious, according to Britain’s Press Association news agency.

“There is nothing at all suspicious about Mr. Horse’s untimely and utterly unexpected death,” said Nigel Dimitri, spokesperson for the London Police. “It is just another of those unfortunate coincidences when a witness to crimes committed by rich and powerful men – crimes that implicate the London Police, by the way – are found dead in their London homes.  This is just another one of those coincidences,” Dimitri said. 

“Horse’s untimely and presumably slow and painful death due to mysterious causes should not be interpreted in any way as a warning to any other witnesses who might be considering informing on Rupert Murdoch, The News of the World, or the London Police,” Dimitri concluded before driving off in an unmarked black sedan.

 

Britain’s tabloid phone hacking scandal walloped the London police force Monday, as the rapid-fire resignations of two top officers were followed by claims of possible illegal eavesdropping, bribery and collusion. U.K officials immediately vowed to investigate.

 

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/police-phone-hacking-whistleblower-found-dead-181711003.html