Pastor Asks God to Give President Brain Cancer

(h/t SANFU-ed)

Summary only...

Ron Paul, Representing the Lunatic Fringe

Ron Paul has become the latest darling of the pajama media and generated what appears to be a true grassroots following. Accounting for this are some of his atypical-for-a-Republican positions on front-line issues. The popularity of his opposition to the war policies of the Despicable Cretin, his activist support for personal privacy (including opposition to the Patriot Act and the national ID card), his supposedly "principled" defense of Constitutional limits, and his in-your-face attacks on the intellectual inconsistency of his fellow Republican candidates, have given him the 2008 "straight-talk" mantle.

But Ron Paul's attractiveness is only skin-deep. Unfortunately, for a significant portion of voters, skin-deep is as far as they go. A closer look at some of his other positions, especially on social issues, reveals a different and, frankly, disturbing picture of the candidate.

Ron Paul not only opposes the right to choose, but he opposes any federal support for family planning, including counseling, sex education, and contraceptive advice or support.

And, of course, Paul wants Roe v Wade overturned. While Paul likes to promote himself as a defender of personal privacy and liberty, he ignores the privacy and liberty issues at the heart of the abortion issue and the Roe v. Wade decision -- his support for personal liberty and privacy only extends to liberty and privacy invoked in favor of those portions of the christian mythology he has adopted. In other words -- In Ron Paul's America, your personal privacy and liberty choices are protectible to the extent that they happen to coincide with Paul's personal choices.

As with a women's right to control her own body, Paul's concept of personal liberty also requires that your civil liberties stop at his personal gag factor. Ron Paul opposes equal rights for gays. And, of course, if Ron Paul is personally opposed to queers getting married, his so-called "principled" defense of the Constitution becomes irrelevant. Thus, despite his precious Constitution clearly requiring all States to honor give "full faith and credit" to the laws of their sister States, Paul favors abandoning that provision when he and his personal mythology doesn't like what they have done.

The full faith and credit clause is what allows you to drive in New Jersey with your Pennsylvania license; it is what permits you to live as husband and wife in New York, although you got married in Florida; it is what allows you to collect a judgment against a company in Iowa issued by a Delaware court. But that same clause, Paul insists, can't be used to "force" bigots like him to recognize gay marriages because, well, because he doesn't want to. Paul supports the Defense of Marriage Act and wants to strip the federal courts of their power to apply the federal Constitution to state laws on such matters. Indeed, Paul wants to deny the federal courts the power to decide all First Amendment controversies.

Paul opposes stem-cell research because, he says, that taxpayers shouldn't have to fund projects that they find "ethically abhorrent". I haven't found "ethically abhorrent" in my copy of the Constitution. But, if that were the test, well, then, I find faith-based government programs "ethically abhorrent", I find prayer "ethically abhorrent", as well as tax-relief for churches. I know, I am in the minority. But, so are the people that find stem-cell research "ethically abhorrent". Paul's argument is just cover for his desire to impose his personal set of values, his christian mythology, on the rest of us.

Paul wants to drill for oil in ANWR and everywhere else he can. His excuse -- to reduce our dependence on Middle-Eastern oil. But, that important "principle" stops at the economic interests of corporate America, as Paul opposes strict fuel economy standards.

Ron Paul wants a christian nation, and he is willing to lie about the Constitution to convince you. Among the false statements in his little tome on christianity is that the United States Constitution is "replete with references to God". Umm, no it isn't. In fact, the word "god" appears no where in the text. Either Ron Paul doesn't know that -- which puts the lie to his pretense of advocacy for the Constitution -- or he does -- which puts the lie to him. Either way . . . .

But what would you expect from someone who says that "a separation of church and state has no historical or constitutional basis", or a guy who wants to teach creationism in public schools?

Ron Paul comes from the lunatic fringe of American society. When he speaks of his "principles", he means his dogma. When he advocates for freedom and personal liberty -- he means just as long as it is consistent with his brand of christian mythology.

Paul also has a questionable history on race issues (and much has been made of the level of support which he enjoys from the white supremacy crowd). In 1996, the Houston Chronicle questioned him and his staff about comments Paul made in his newsletters in 1988 and 1992. At the time, neither Paul nor his staff disowned the comments. Instead, according to the article, Paul tried to explain some of them away, "saying his written commentaries about blacks came in the context of 'current events and statistical reports of the time.'"

Here, according to the Chronicle, are some of Paul's written statements based on those "current events and statistical reports":

“[O]nly about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions"

"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

[W]e are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."

And they called Mike Gravel loony?

Fortunately, ideologues like this guy don't go away and he'll be around to siphon scarce Republican money, likely through the convention. Hopefully, he'll then run third-party and continue to help the Democrats.

Summary only...

God is Great

and who are we to question -- even if it amounts to pedophilia and infanticide in His service.

Summary only...

In Hell

Burning, if there's a just god.

“Grown men should not be having sex with prostitutes unless they are married to them”

“I had a student ask me, "Could the savior you believe in save Osama bin Laden?" Of course, we know the blood of Jesus Christ can save him, and then he must be executed”

“Christians, like slaves and soldiers, ask no questions”

“AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals”

“Billy Graham is the chief servant of Satan in America”

“The idea that religion and politics don't mix was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country”

“If you're not a born-again Christian, you're a failure as a human being”

“Textbooks are Soviet propaganda”

“The ACLU is to Christians what the American Nazi party is to Jews”

“It appears that America's anti-Biblical feminist movement is at last dying, thank God, and is possibly being replaced by a Christ-centered men's movement which may become the foundation for a desperately needed national spiritual awakening”

More, if you can stomach it . . .

“The whole (global warming) thing is created to destroy America's free enterprise system and our economic stability”

“Homosexuality is Satan's diabolical attack upon the family that will not only have a corrupting influence upon our next generation, but it will also bring down the wrath of God upon America.”

“I do not believe we can blame genetics for adultery, homosexuality, dishonesty and other character flaws”

“[Homosexuals are] brute beasts...part of a vile and satanic system [that] will be utterly annihilated, and there will be a celebration in heaven.”

"I believe that global warming is a myth. And so, therefore, I have no conscience problems at all and I'm going to buy a Suburban next time."

“I listen to feminists and all these radical gals - most of them are failures. They’ve blown it. Some of them have been married, but they married some Casper Milquetoast who asked permission to go to the bathroom. These women just need a man in the house. That’s all they need. Most of the feminists need a man to tell them what time of day it is and to lead them home. And they blew it and they’re mad at all men. Feminists hate men. They’re sexist. They hate men - that’s their problem.”


(h\t ThinkExist)

Summary only...

Why Hasn't Pat Robertson Been Confined?

There are only two possible explanations for the things he says -- he is intentionally defrauding millions of deluded believers, or he is insane. Either way, he should be taken off the street, just like any other madman shouting in the public square.

"Robertson said God spoke to him during his annual [!?] one-on-one prayer retreat with the Almighty." Who could say such a thing and not have their competence questioned? Instead, it is the subject of "serious" news reporting:

The TV preacher claims the Lord told him to expect a terrorist attack on the United States by the end of 2007 that will result in "mass killing." "I'm not necessarily saying it's going to be nuclear," Robertson said yesterday . . . . "The Lord didn't say nuclear. But I do believe it will be something like that," said the 76-year-old preacher and one-time presidential candidate.

Oh, that's nice. Not "necessarily" nuclear. Com'on folks. Let's pretend that there is an all-powerful, permanent, invisible man in the sky, who decided that he had an important message for humanity. Would he pass that message through a dumb fuck like Robertson -- I mean, there's the pope (maybe not much better), but what about King Carl (Sweden), or the UN, or why wouldn't he just take over all the airways everywhere and broadcast his message.

And let's not get started on the caring, loving god of the christians, who revels in blood, gore and unleashing evil:

"God said he's going to restrain the evil, but he isn't necessarily going to restrain it in the beginning," Robertson said.

Why is this guy walking around free -- On November 7, 1999, on his TV show, he supported armed rebellion against the United States:

Ladies and gentlemen, I want to say this very clearly. If the people of the United States of America . . . decide that they're not going to allow the Supreme Court to dominate their lives . . . . [t]hey are not going to be able to overturn the will of a hundred million American people. And I think the time has come that we throw off the shackles of this dictatorship that's been imposed upon us. We had a war in 1776 that set us free . . . . And I think the time has come that we do that.

But no one raised a voice to question his sanity, or his patriotism, even Newt Gingrich was silent. And then, of course, there was his big hit -- god made 9/11 happen to punish us for hurting god's feelings. This is the same christianista who advocated assassination:

[Y]ou could send a squad in to take out somebody like Osama bin Laden, or to take out the head of North Korea, but isn't it better to do something like that, to take out Milosevic, to take out Saddam Hussein, rather than to spend billions of dollars on a war that harms innocent civilians and destroys the infrastructure of a country?

(I guess George wasn't listening to that last part.) But, at least Robertson is enlightened on equal rights for women:

The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians.

Oh. Nevermind, then.

(Photo credit: El Nuevo Cojo Ilustrado Media LLC)

Summary only...

Sadly, This Didn't Surprise Me

Washington, DC — Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted to give an official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to pressure from Bush administration appointees. . . . “In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National Park Service is under orders to suspend its belief in geology,” stated PEER [Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility] Executive Director Jeff Ruch. “It is disconcerting that the official position of a national park as to the geologic age of the Grand Canyon is ‘no comment.’”

The report goes on to discuss that, after rejecting dozens of scholarly scientific books and articles for sale at the Grand Canyon National Park, the sole new item approved for sale was a book claiming that the Grand Canyon was suddenly cut out into the earth by Noah's flood.

(h/t to A Spork in the Drawer)

Summary only...