Nailed the Trifecta!

Before I write about anything else, I want to mention that somehow, one of my blog entries got added to StumbleUpon. I don’t know if one of my friends did it, or if it was merely random, but let me just say “Thank you!” On the day it happened (I believe it was for my entry about Bachmann and the HPV vaccine), I got almost 1,400 page views. Whoa! I’ve gotten a lot more hits after that (although nothing at that level), and I don’t know if it will continue, but I really appreciate the traffic. Thank you, friend, or anonymous stranger, who liked what I wrote!

Okay, here’s the deal. I’ve been watching the Republican debates when I’ve been able to, and we’ve seen some rather interesting [exaggerated finger quotes] moments. In one, the crowd cheered for Rick Perry’s stellar execution record in Texas. Over 200 executed on his watch! Yeehaw! In the next debate, the crowd cheered at the prospect of letting a 30-year-old without insurance (by his own choice) die rather than the state or federal government financing his poor decision at not obtaining health insurance. Yay, death!

At the most recent debate, we didn’t get cheers from the audience about a particular topic. In a video question, a gay soldier, Stephen Hill, who was finally able to serve openly only this week asked how any of the candidates would deal with the recently repealed Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy. In yet another What The Fuck moment, there were people in the crowd who booed. Yes, they booed this soldier who is currently serving in Iraq. See for yourself:



Paul Begala wrote, “I may start a betting pool on what the Republicans will boo in the next debate: puppies? Ronald Reagan? Ronald Reagan’s puppies?” Ha!

I watched someone trying to say that it was only a couple of people in the audience who booed the soldier, and the rest of the people in the audience were booing those people. It sure doesn’t sound like that to me, and knowing how many of these people feel about the repeal of DADT, it wouldn’t surprise me a bit if several booed the soldier. And if so many Republicans condemn these people disrespecting this soldier, as many have said (and good for them for speaking up), why didn’t one single person on that stage step up and say, “Whoa, wait a minute there. This guy is serving his country in Iraq right now, so show some goddamn respect! How dare you boo this soldier?!” Instead...crickets.

Rick Santorum answered the question, though.

Hill: “In 2010, when I was deployed to Iraq, I had to lie about who I was, because I'm a gay soldier, and I didn't want to lose my job. My question is, under one of your presidencies, do you intend to circumvent the progress that's been made for gay and lesbian soldiers in the military?”
(BOOING)
Santorum: “Yeah, I — I would say, any type of sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military. And the fact that they're making a point to include it as a provision within the military that we are going to recognize a group of people and give them a special privilege to — to — and removing 'don't ask/don't tell' I think tries to inject social policy into the military. And the military's job is to do one thing, and that is to defend our country.
“We need to give the military, which is all-volunteer, the ability to do so in a way that is most efficient at protecting our men and women in uniform.”
(APPLAUSE)
“And I believe this undermines that ability.”
(APPLAUSE)
Moderator Megyn Kelly: “So what — what — what would you do with soldiers like Stephen Hill? I mean, he's — now he's out. He's — you know, you saw his face on camera. When he first submitted this video to us, it was without his face on camera. Now he's out. So what would you do as president?”
Santorum: “I think it's — it's — it's — look, what we're doing is playing social experimentation with — with our military right now. And that's tragic.
“I would — I would just say that, going forward, we would — we would reinstitute that policy, if Rick Santorum was president, period.
“That policy would be reinstituted. And as far as people who are in — in — I would not throw them out, because that would be unfair to them because of the policy of this administration, but we would move forward in — in conformity with what was happening in the past, which was, sex is not an issue. It is — it should not be an issue. Leave it alone, keep it — keep it to yourself, whether you're a heterosexual or a homosexual.” (source)

That’s right. Santorum would tell this man, who not only has the courage to serve in the military and serve in a war zone but also has the sheer balls to come out in front of the entire country on national TV, that he is incapable of serving and is not wanted by the U.S. military. And he would tell every other homosexual that they are not acceptable to the U.S. military, simply because of their sexual orientation. He also seems to think that a person’s sexuality should not be mentioned at all, that you need to keep that to yourself, so I presume he would issue a rule stating that no one is to mention their husband or wife, boyfriend or girlfriend, and while we’re at it, no one should mention their kids, either, because that implies that they have had sex. (Believe me...as a former Air Force wife, and based on comments from other friends who have served or been military spouses, if you think there isn’t rampant fuckery going on in the military, you don’t know jack.)

“Special privilege?” Really? “Inject social policy” into the military? Really? Oh, you mean like Harry Truman issuing an executive order in 1948 that desegregated the U.S. military so that blacks could serve with full benefits and honors? Kind of like that?

For all those people who think those dirty homersexticals shouldn’t be allowed to serve, I wonder why you haven’t gotten riled up about the numerous charges of rape occurring among heterosexual men raping female soldiers? Rapes that either are reported and not prosecuted, or not reported because the women know that it will probably ruin their career if they do. Where is the outrage? I find it infuriating (and humorous in a disgusting sort of way) that some people--both military and non-military--don’t get all that upset about female soldiers being abused, but if there is the slightest possibility that an openly serving gay man will slip up behind them in the shower for a booty call, they scream bloody murder. Like being able to serve openly is a license for getting all rapey and junk. Women have been putting up with such abuse for decades, so pardon me if I don’t have much sympathy for you and your whiny heterosexual ass.

Santorum subsequently came out (so to speak) and said that he did not hear those boos, and if he had, he’d have told those people not to do that, that we should be thanking him for his service. You know what, Ricky? I don’t believe you. I think you heard those boos loud and clear, and you just stood there with all your other lame colleagues and chose not to say anything. Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson (it was his first debate in this race) said, “That’s not the Republican party I belong to.” Oh, yes it is, Governor.

And until people like you start stepping up and soundly renouncing such bigoted behavior, doing it at the time rather than after you find out that many Americans were appalled by it, you and your party will continue to own it. It’s really not hard to do. I’ve done it quite a few times. You just step up and say, “You know what? That is wrong of you to say, and I completely disagree with you.” Basically, you have to have courage and stand up for what you think is right.

Kind of like the courage that soldier that you booed displayed.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss

Most teabaggin' folks I encounter online seem to react badly to a few things. First is being called a teabagger, although they were the ones who started calling themselves that before someone informed them of the meaning that most of the rest of us already knew about. Second is being called a racist. As Bill Maher said, "There are two things that teabaggers hate. One is being called a racist. The second is black people." Ha!

Another thing I've noticed they don't like is someone saying that they're overly concerned about social issues or value judgments. "Oh no," they protest, "our main concern is with big government and out-of-control spending! That is what we're all about!"

I think we can put that little delusion to rest right now. Over the weekend, the Family Research Council held their Values Voters Summit. I understand that this was not a Tea Party-sponsored event, but virtually every speaker was kissing some major teabagger ass, so to speak. Many of them mentioned the Tea Party, and teabaggin'-talk abounded. Make no mistake about it. The teabaggers are firmly committed to values voting and social issues. Check it out.

Newt Gingrich:

On the one front, we have a secular socialist machine led by Obama, Pelosi and Reid. And on the other front, we have radical Islamists who would fundamentally change this country into a system none of us in this room would recognize.

This is not about religious liberty, if they want to build that mosque in the South Bronx, frankly they need the jobs. But I am totally opposed to any effort to impose Sharia on the United States, and we should have a federal law that says under no circumstance, in any jurisdiction in the United States, will Sharia be used in any court to apply to any judgment made about American law.

Actually, Newt, there already is a federal law on the books that prohibits the government from promoting Sharia law, or any other religious law. It's called the First Amendment.

Sen. Jim DeMint:

There is a relationship, and I think there is a strong faith component in the Tea Party movement. But it's very different than what I've seen before or of things like the Moral Majority. They're not pushing religion. They're not even pushing morality. They just consider bankruptcy as a moral issue.

They are most definitely pushing religion and their definition of morality. And bankruptcy is a moral issue? I know there are some people that overspend and live beyond their means. But 60% of bankruptcies in this country are due to medical bills. I've had relatives who were brought to that point because of their medical bills. DeMint and his cronies are once again painting those who declare bankruptcy or draw unemployment or get food stamps and welfare as lazy and devoid of morals.

More DeMint:

We know what’s happening in this country. We know that this idea that you need to separate your politics from your religion and from your values and from your economics, it just doesn’t work because America is the most prosperous, the most compassionate, the strongest nation in the history of the world because it rests on a set of principles that sit on a foundation of Judeo-Christian values.

Think about what Judeo-Christian values do in that environment. The people that believe that they’re accountable to God, and because of that, they’re honest. They have integrity. They care about others. They practice charity. They’re volunteers. They have a strong work ethic. They’re not only self-controlled and responsible for themselves, but they feel a responsibility for those around them. They’re committed to marriage and family and their church.

Think about a nation where millions of people are like that. They don’t need a big government to control them. These are the people that build our community and build our strength and have the vision for what works in our country. But think about a culture that doesn’t have the values, the restraint of being accountable to God.

We see it all over the world. We don’t have to guess at what it looks like, where your economy works with bribes and corruption. Your politics is completely corrupt because the people have no values and morals. And then you need a bigger and bigger government to control a violent people, a violent and disruptive people.

This is such a huge steaming pile of bullshit that it's difficult to address it all. Let's just say that I know plenty of non-religious people who have integrity and have a strong work ethic, who volunteer and help others, not because they fear the punishment of God, but because it's a good thing to help your fellow human being and your community. I would also like to mention a few "men of God": Jim and Tammy Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, Robert Tilton, Ted Haggard, Benny Hinn, Paul and Jan Crouch...need I go on?

Sen. Jim Inhofe:

I didn't think it'd work at that time, but it did. It was called Don't Ask, Don't Tell. And some of you - if you are gay and you want to serve in the military, they don't ask you about it, you don't tell it, you're not doing it openly so that the problems that we all know about. And I think that they mentioned it in my introduction that I was an Army veteran, and I think any of the veterans in this room - I don't have to tell you the problems that would happen if you have an open gay situation there, where it allows people to use the military as a forum for their liberal agenda.

A forum for their liberal agenda? Oh, you mean gays who sign up for our volunteer military and go overseas to fight and die for their country? Is that the liberal agenda you're talking about, Jimmeh?

This from an NPR reporter interviewing a summit attendee:

Mr. Todd Dexter: I think the truth is, these people care very deeply about pro-life issues, care very deeply about the sanctity of marriage and kind of the moral values that we believe are the foundation of our country.

Reporter: You mean the Tea Party believes that?

Mr. Dexter: I believe so. I believe many do. It may not always be the official position. But those who go to those rallies, they very much embrace that.

Reporter: Dexter has attended Tea Party events. Pollsters bear out his assertion that no matter what slogans the Tea Party vocalizes, a large majority of their members happen to be anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage.

Former Senator and Internet sensation Rick Santorum:

And what is necessary in our society if we are to be free? Well, our founders had it right. John Adams said, our constitution is made – our constitution is made for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the governance of any other. You see, we can only be free as long as we are virtuous. And we can only be virtuous as look as there are vibrant faiths in the public square.

Go into the neighborhoods in America where there is a lack of virtue. What will you find? Two things. You will find no families, no mothers and fathers together in marriage and you will find government everywhere. Police, social service agencies, why? Because without faith, family and virtue, government takes over.

I would like to know his definitions of morality and virtue. Apparently it does not include anyone who is not religious, and it does not include single parents. And darn those pesky police and social services meddling in the people's business!

Batshit crazy Rep. Michele Bachmann:

I think the one thing that these high-and-mighty types, part of the ruling class here in Washington, D.C., just don’t seem to understand – they live at the wine-and-cheese parties, you know, here in D.C. As for me, I prefer tea parties, just so you know.

No social agenda in that quote, but it shows her embrace of the teabaggers. It also highlights a recurrent theme in this summit, the "Washington elites," the "high-and-mighty types," attendin' their wine and cheese parties, actin' all high-falutin' and fancy. Like an education is a bad thing. I suppose for some of these people it is, because it makes them realize their inadequacies. That's one of the worst things, in my opinion, to have come out of this peculiar movement: the idea that it's a bad thing to be an intellectual, or to rely on logic and education rather than instincts and a religious text.

Mike Huckabee:

The basic idea is that there is no such thing as a person who is more valuable than another, that all of us have the same intrinsic worth. that no person is worth more because of his last name, or land ownership, or occupation, or who his father was or grandfather was. Or what city he came from, or what color he is, or what gender he or she may be.

We know that every life is important before God and to each other. And we know that marriage matters. We know that marriage hasn't changed, that it still means what it means.

Note the glaring omission of sexual orientation. In the Huckster's world, I guess there are no homosexuals, and if there are, they aren't deserving of the same rights, and they don't have the same "intrinsic worth" as the rest of us.

Then there is Indiana Congressman Mike Pence, who won the straw poll for the Republican nominee in 2012:

A political party that would govern this great nation must be able to handle more than one issue at a time. We must focus on our fiscal crisis and support our troops. We must work to create jobs and protect innocent human life and defend traditional marriage. To those who say that marriage is not relevant to our budget crisis, I say you would not be able to print enough money in a thousand years to pay for the government that you would need if the family continues to collapse.

To those who say we should focus on cutting spending, I say, okay. Let’s start by denying all federal funding for abortion at home and abroad. You want to find savings? Let's cut funding to research that destroys human embryos in the name of science and let’s deny any and all funding to Planned Parenthood of America.

That is all horrible, but I find his desire to end funding for Planned Parenthood especially egregious. The vast majority of clinics do not perform abortions; Planned Parenthood provides basic health care including Pap smears and family planning for millions of women. It also works hard to educate young women about birth control and STI prevention. Calling for no funds for Planned Parenthood is like throwing the baby out with the bath water. So to speak.

As if all of these things didn't make it clear that the teabaggers are all about the social issues, not just about being anti-government, part of the straw poll included a question about what issue is most important to them:

1. Abortion
2. Government spending
3. Repeal of “Obamacare”
4. Protection of religious liberty
5. National Security

I think that says it all right there. I also wonder why "protection of religious liberty" is in the top five. No one--no one--is trying to stop anyone from worshiping the way they wish to. Unless it's these people who would stop a cultural center being built a couple of blocks away from the Ground Zero site because someone of a different religion is building it. Keeping this group's fundamental religious beliefs--I'm talking about the teabaggers here--out of our government does not constitute persecution. They do not get to dictate what the rest of us must believe. They do not get to legislate based on the ten commandments or anything else in the Bible. They do not get to decide what is moral and what isn't, based upon their religious beliefs.

This reminds me of Jerry Falwell's creation of the Moral Majority in the '80's, and Ralph Reed and the Christian Coalition in the '90's. There is nothing wrong with anyone and everyone getting involved in politics, but these groups would insert their religion into the political landscape, and I have a problem with that. Their religion is not everyone's religion. They cannot and must not speak for all in this country. We've been through this before; they are offering nothing new.

For any teabagger who says it's not about religion and social issues, that it's all about economics...I beg to differ. The GOP is obviously courting the teabaggers, and in the process, they are taking us back to the culture wars of the '80s and '90s. The problem is that they would be the deciders on everyone's morality, not just their own.

This country is no longer the domain of rich white Republican men. We are a diverse nation, and will not and cannot return to how these people would define us. We are more than that, much more. I don't want these teabaggers running my country and discriminating against my friends because they love someone these people think it is wrong to love. I don't want them hating my friends because they look different. I don't want them censoring me because I don't believe the way they do, or dictating how I and my female friends deal with our bodies.

We've been there and done that, and I'll take progress over regress any day.

Tidying up a week of detritus

I apologize for my absence of a week, but believe it or not, I'm still fighting this stupid cold! I honestly don't feel too bad now, just tired and with a lingering cough. I tell ya, this was a sledgehammer to the head reminding me of why I quit smoking. If you recall, they told me I had the beginnings of emphysema, at the tender age of about 45. I've been generally healthy since I quit, but for some reason, this sucker really got a hold on me (and not in a good way like the cool Miracles song). My cough reminds me exactly of the cough I had when I was still smoking, and I've had to take a cough suppressant and use my inhaler a couple of times. What a drag. Anyway, I think you'll forgive me for not having a whole lot of energy lately, and I do hope to be on the mend soon.

I'll play a little catch-up here, with a few bits and pieces I wanted to mention.

It's football season! As much as I hate to see the summer come to an end, I'm always happy to be watching football again. Notre Dame's season opener was on Saturday, and they beat Purdue 23-12. I am cautiously optimistic for their season.The Colts play this Sunday, and I'm under the assumption that their 0-4 preseason record will not translate to the regular season. I don't pay much attention to preseason football anymore, other than having it on just for the sights and sounds, because I know it's mostly just a way to trim the roster. Peyton still looks awesome (I read an article a while back that made the case for him being the best athlete in sports right now, and I won't argue with that), so I'm looking forward to seeing how they do this year.

~~~~~

One of my Facebook friends has published a book! Woohoo! The lovely Diana Agorio is the author of Sex Rites: The Origin of Christianity. I already have my copy (signed...thank you, Diana!), but haven't started it yet (I'm in the middle of two other books right now). Diana discusses the use of drugs, sex, and human sacrifice in ancient religious rituals, and the persistence of these elements in today's Christianity. I know that she's been working on it for some time, and her research is thorough and extensive. I look forward to reading it, and I'm certain that I'll learn a lot. Congratulations, Diana!

~~~~~

The non-mosque that isn't at Ground Zero continues to make news, most notably with the recent spate of anti-Muslim violence. A mosque was damaged in Tennessee, and it was determined to be arson; a mosque and its playground equipment sustained $20,000 in damage in another fire suspected to be arson. A pastor in Florida is going forward with his plans to burn copies of the Koran. Way to win friends and influence people, dude.

Get a grip, people. We are better than this. The people running these mosques—or the children attending their schools—are not the perpetrators of 9/11. This is absolutely appalling, and the people committing this violence against innocents should be ashamed of themselves. These are nothing less than hate crimes, and it needs to stop before someone gets seriously hurt.

~~~~~

On a related note, a recent poll showed that one-fifth of Americans polled think that President Obama is a Muslim. It would seem that a significant portion of our populace has lost their collective minds. This is just beyond stupid. Remember how they were all pissed off because he was a member of Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church? Not just for a little while, but for two decades? Did they forget that part? You know, at this point, I think I'd like to hear one of these people just stand up and declare, "You know what? I don't like the guy 'cause he's colored. There. I said it." It would be somewhat refreshing, and it might help them overcome the weight of denial that is crushing them as they try to come up with excuse after excuse to hate the guy. As I've said before, it's one thing to dislike his policies, although many of these people seem to not have a full understanding of what those are. It's quite another to try to brand him as "Other," whether you think he wasn't born in the United States or is a closet Muslim.

That one-fifth of Americans believes this fallacy is bad enough. The fact that the media continues to report on it without addressing the larger issue is equally as bad. Remember the No Religious Test Clause of the Constitution? Article VI states:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

What that is basically saying is that it is none of our fucking business as to what religion a public official is or is not. Of course, Americans being the bunch of Nosy Parkers they are, you can bet there will always be questions about a candidate's or official's private life, and that includes religion. Wouldn't it be great to hear someone say, "It's none of your goddamn business what I believe"? I would enjoy that.

~~~~~

Finally, it seems that former Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania is really barking up the ol' Presidential run tree. Unfortunately (for him), he has a little problem with the continued existence of the website Spreading Santorum, which was started in response to his hateful, homophobic comments. If you do a search for Rick Santorum, you'll get that site right towards the top. I feel that it is my duty to link to the site and make sure that it gets plenty of hits, staying right up there at the top of results returned on a Google search. You're welcome, Rick.