Pat, Pat, Pat.

On Monday, evangelical Christian / fanatical agitator / Cartman look-alike Pat Robertson issued a redneck’s version of a fatwa against Hugo Chavez, heretical Venezuelan president and obvious terrorist wanna-be.

Robertson said - and I quote, of course:

“You know, I don’t know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we’re trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It’s a whole lot cheaper than starting a war, and I don’t think any oil shipments will stop. We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don’t need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It’s a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with.”

Naturally, this outraged liberal commie bastards the world over, including the likes of Bob Dole, Blanquita Cullum, and even the so-called “Christian” Coalition, whose spokesperson griped that, “When he speaks on politics, we hold our breath … you never know what he’s going to say.”

Somewhat disingenuously, Robertson backpedaled on Wednesday and claimed that he never said any such thing - even though his words were aired worldwide on his The 700 Club propaganda (sorry, I meant “program”):

“I didn’t say ‘assassination.’ I said our special forces should ‘take him out.’ And ‘take him out’ can be a number of things, including kidnapping; there are a number of ways to take out a dictator from power besides killing him. I was misinterpreted by the AP, but that happens all the time.”

Apparently realizing what a laughably childish excuse he’d concocted, Robertson later apologized outright. Being a “man” of God, he didn’t have the balls to actually do so himself, but rather issued the statement on his web site:

“I want to take this opportunity to clarify remarks made on the Monday, August 22nd edition of The 700 Club where I adlibbed a comment following a very brilliant analysis by Dale Hurd of the danger that the United States faces from the out-of-control dictator of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez…Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize for that statement. I spoke in frustration that we should accommodate the man who thinks the U.S. is out to kill him.”

Oh, Pat, you aren’t even fit to share Cartman’s Cheesy Poofs. Next time you plan on running off at the mouth, make sure you’ve got the cajonés to stick to your conservative, beaner-hating guns.

Screw you guys, I’m going home!

- K

Another week, another missed deadline. Get those divorces while you can, women.

Sorry for the dormancy, folks. Saturday was Shane’s birthday - the big 30! - and we took a much-needed four day weekend. Spent the weekend beating hookers and killing crack dealers. Virtual ones, of course. I’d much prefer pummeling pixelated politicians, but until Rockstar Games releases a “Bush or Chimp?” or “DNC” version of Grand Theft Auto, guess I’ll just have to keep busy with my hot coffee mod.

Anyhoo, I’m almost done plowing through those stacks of travel books I hijacked from the library, so I should be back to my regularly scheduled blogging soon. Until then, Ms. Musings has an enlightening entry on women’s rights in Iraq - and, more importantly, the Bushies’ attitudes towards women’s roles in the budding “democracy.”

A quick excerpt for my link-averse readers:

Meanwhile, an e-mail from the Feminist Peace Network points to this Meet The Press transcript, which reveals the extent to which women’s rights are a priority for the Bush administration. Reporter David Gregory asks his two guests — Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former Middle East specialist for the CIA and author of The Islamic Paradox, and Larry Diamond, former adviser for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq — about the role of Islamic law in the constitution: […]

MR. GERECHT: Actually, I’m not terribly worried about this. I mean, one hopes that the Iraqis protect women’s social rights as much as possible. It certainly seems clear that in protecting the political rights, there’s no discussion of women not having the right to vote. I think it’s important to remember that in the year 1900, for example, in the United States, it was a democracy then. In 1900, women did not have the right to vote. If Iraqis could develop a democracy that resembled America in the 1900s, I think we’d all be thrilled. I mean, women’s social rights are not critical to the evolution of democracy. We hope they’re there. I think they will be there. But I think we need to put this into perspective.

Nice, guys. Very nice.

A thoughtful commentator on the Ms. Musings board points out that a democracy that does not protect women’s rights isn’t a democracy at all - it’s an androcracy. Iraq is also on the road to becoming a theocracy - which is perhaps scarier than Saddam’s “terrorist” regime. After all, they have Allah on their side.

While we’re on the absurdity of religion, check out “Devilish Treatment At Christian Camp?,” from the latest TSG newsletter, and read all about Pat Robertson’s most recent bout with verbal diarrhea.

Is it just me, or does Pat look like Eric Cartman’s twin when he petitions God to strike down a Supreme Court justice? Same squinty eyes, same big round head, same black soul.
 

 
Respect my authority!
 

 
- K

Sorry for the leave of absence, folks. Your featherhead has been a bit preoccupied as of late. Shane & I are finally thinking about buying our own place, and rather than staying in Kansas, we’re considering moving out of state. It’s just too damned humid here - we could both use some nice dry desert air. Maybe then I could actually leave the house in the summer without developing some kind of hideous skin condition. I mean, really, how many times can one shut-in get poison ivy in a month? If there were a God, I would be cursing him right about now.

Anyway, the second “relocation” was mentioned, of course I got a bit overzealous and ordered every state/travel guide I could find at the library. Obsessive, yes. If I were a guy, I’d probably get a semi-erection at the mere thought of moving. And, I never thought I’d say this, but Texas seems to be the leading contender. Hell, I already live in a red state with possible ID curriculum and mega-churches galore - how much worse could Texas be?

Getting back to the topic at hand, in all my fixation on travel guides and Chamber of Commerce web sites, I’ve kind of been slacking on the blog front. Bad Kelly, bad!

First, a word on a few site updates, then on to the news. As many of you’ve already noticed, I uploaded a number of sample letters to the Get Active section of the site. Currently, these are all focused on animal rights/welfare topics, but I hope to tackle some other issues in the distant future. Also, I’ve added a number of articles that I’ve been hoarding. Cannibalism, incest, Nigerian scams - lotsa interesting stuff up there. And…guess that’s it for now.

Well, August 15 came and went, with no Iraqi constitution to be seen. The deadline was pushed back to August 22 - so looks like the women of Iraq get one extra week of freedom. Better party it up while you can, girls.

The chief point of contention is cultural differences between the Shiite majority and the Sunni minority; the Shiites want the right to self-govern according to the rules of Islam - and they want to exercise their autonomy in the south region of the country, which coincidentally (or not so) has the richest oil deposits. Interestingly, most media outlets have overlooked the dire consequences this could hold for Iraqi women, instead preferring to focus on the deliciously addictive black gold. If the Shiites get their way - a prospect that’s more likely than not - then the US will be indirectly responsible for massive human rights abuses and religious oppression. So it seems a bit queer that only the NY Times has consistently covered the plight of Iraqi women.

Elsewhere in updates, looks like those morons who “claimed” the items from Kris Bryan’s house could - theoretically - be charged with theft, despite their dubious excuse of the classified ad. Bryan also reached a settlement with the paper, although the details have not been disclosed.

Newspaper Settles With Woman Who Got Robbed After Error in Ad

A newspaper has settled a complaint with a woman who came home to find her belongings being taken away because her address was mistakenly listed in a legal ad. […]

…others had already made off with an estimated $3,300 worth of possessions — everything from a TV and a DVD player to video games and Bryan’s 7-week-old kitten.

Police are still trying to find those items, and despite the ad’s confusion, those who took them could face charges.

The Journal-World’s chief operating officer, Ralph Gage, said the matter has been settled though he would not elaborate on the terms.

Personally, I’d be suing them to Iraq and back if any of my furbabies were stolen as a result of their carelessness.

Speaking of which, my dogs are cool. Well, except in the winter, of course…then they’re hot.

- K

Well, a date’s been set - Iraq expects to have their Constitution up and running by August 15. So far, the dreaded Article 14 remains intact. (New readers might want to backtrack to a post I wrote about this topic on July 20.)

Interestingly, US Women Without Borders offers the following observation:

US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice recently said on PBS’s “Newshour with Jim Lehrer” that she supported women’s rights, but that if the Iraqi people didn’t, there was little she could do about it.

Nice, Condie - you’ve got the entire United States armed forces at your disposal, and there’s “little you can do about” massive human rights abuses? That’s the spirit!

Looks like the women of Iraq, at least, are worse off under our regime than they were Saddam’s.

The Women’s Funding Network is sponsoring an earth-to-Condie petition at the Petition Site - click here to kick some sense into her. Maybe threaten to vote for Hillary in 2008 - perhaps that will spur the otherwise-militant Condie into action (seems like “the vote” is all these dipshit politicians respond to lately). Women Without Borders also recommends contacting the NY Times in order to urge them to keep covering the topic. This is an important one - with the ‘round-the-clock breaking details in the Natalee Holloway case, all other news not involving twiggy white teens with vaginas is in constant danger of obliteration.

- K

Talk about a shitty day.

Woman Blames Newspaper Typo For Theft

Ad In Lawrence Paper Had Wrong Address

POSTED: 5:15 pm CDT August 1, 2005

LAWRENCE, Kan. — A Lawrence woman who had her possessions stolen blames the city’s newspaper.

Kris Bryan said the Lawrence Journal-World printed a mistake in a street address, causing her apartment to be cleaned out by thieves.

Bryan told KMBC’s Donna Pitman that she returned home after work and saw strangers loading up her belongings into their vehicle. When she asked what they were doing, they showed her a classified ad in the newspaper. The public notice stated that all things at 1319 Tennessee St., Apt. 3 would be thrown away if unclaimed.

“It was just a real shock!” Bryan said. “I was freaking out. I told them that’s my apartment — there’s been some mistake.” […]

She said she wants the newspaper to pay $3,500 for the stolen items, but that can’t replace her lost kitten.

Not surprisingly, the few news reports I was able to find were pretty skimpy on the details. I’m left wondering how the thieves got into the apartment to begin with - was she seriously dumb enough to leave her place unlocked all day? (I mean, I know ya live in Lawrence, lady, but c’mon!) Or did the pseudo-thieves actually break in? Are the police looking for the people who “claimed” her property? If the apartment was unlocked, could they be charged with theft? How about the moron landlord - wasn’t he just asking for trouble by placing an ad inviting people to come onto his property and take whatever they wanted? Shouldn’t he at least have been around to supervise? And what about the idiots who didn’t find the whole situation a wee bit strange? Did they really think the guy would give away working TVs, DVD players, and movies - not to mention leave a live kitten in a vacated apartment? Sue Kris, sue!

This reminds me of an “incident” we had on our local freecycle list about six months back. “Freecycle” (I should say “Freecycle™,” lest I be sued) is a non-profit grassroots group - a series of local groups, basically, hosted on Yahoo - in which members can give and request unwanted items. Shane & I founded the local KC group a few years ago, but aren’t quite as active as we used to be - we stopped moderating after the first 16 months or so. Without getting into the backbiting details, let’s just say that people can get a bit pissy when free stuff is involved.

Anyway, a member made a posting in which she said that she’d won the lottery and wanted to give away all her possessions because she was going to upgrade. It was much like the classified ad - “come and take whatever you want” kinda thing. She gave a real phone number and address - they just weren’t hers. Totally fake. Total evil genius.

Naturally, people showed up at the address by the hundreds (further proof that few Kansans have common sense). The woman who lived there had never even heard of freecycle, hadn’t won the lottery, and - duh! - wasn’t giving away jack shit. Of course, this worked the moderators (including yours truly) into a tizzy, trying to figure out who posted the message. The woman who got punk’d even called the police, with the intent of filing harassment charges.

Come to find out, the person who made the fake posting did so as an act of retaliation. Apparently, the “poor, elderly woman” who was as the receiving end of the ass-whoopin’ had a nasty habit of cold-calling people to sell them on Jesus. She freely admitted to doing this for decades, and had already worked her way through several Kansas City area phone books. This wasn’t the first time she had pissed the heathens off, either - she’s been lectured by the cops a few times herself. Unfortunately, what she’s doing is totally legal (grrrrrrrrrr!), so they couldn’t tell her not to pimp her God - but they did warn her to “be careful.” Because, duh, something like this was bound to happen.

Annoyingly, the local news media picked up on her story and did a piece on her - in which she was painted as the saint, of course. Nothing bad was said about her phone solicitations, and she played the part of triumphant victim very well. “Poor and elderly” my ass - she was recently retired 65-year-old! It’s not like some bony 85-year-old with a walker had to fend off thieves at the front door. Quite the contrary, actually - she eagerly seized the opportunity to lecture the visiting freecyclers on religion!

Man, talk about a kick in the nuts. We secularists never win.

- K

Your resident featherhead nearly spewed her Pumpkin Spice tea all over her monitor when she found a link to this article on CSICOP’s Creation Watch site:

Leading Republican differs with Bush on evolution

By Jon Hurdle Thu Aug 4, 3:19 PM ET

Republican Sen. Rick Santorum, a possible 2008 presidential contender who faces a tough re-election fight next year in Pennsylvania, said intelligent design, which is backed by many religious conservatives, lacked scientific credibility and should not be taught in science classes. […]

“I think I would probably tailor that a little more than what the president has suggested,” Santorum, the third-ranking Republican member of the U.S. Senate, told National Public Radio. “I’m not comfortable with intelligent design being taught in the science classroom.”

Vaaaaaaaaaaaaat?

Could it be? Is Santorum actually…making sense?

Bush’s endorsement of unIntelligent Design on Monday has already made the blogosphere rounds; no doubt my atheist readers have been rolling their eyes all week. Then again, we atheists are all mean-spirited misanthropes who reside under rocks with the other creepy-crawlies, so for those of you who just crawled out today, a recap:

Bush: Schools Should Teach ‘Intelligent Design’ Alongside Evolution

AP, Monday, August 01, 2005

During a round-table interview with reporters from five Texas newspapers, Bush declined to go into detail on his personal views of the origin of life. But he said students should learn about both ideas […]

“I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought,” Bush said. “You’re asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes.”

Idiot.

Santorum, being the bigoted, sexist, home-schoolin’ Neanderthal religious zealot that he is, should love, love, love unIntelligent Design, no? I mean, I’m sure his slave - sorry, wife - preaches ID and shuns evolution while brainwashing - excuse me, teaching - their gaggle of toeheads. So where’s the love, Rick? Why you be dissin’ ID?

Silly featherhead that I am, it took me a few read-throughs before I caught on to Santorum’s scam: he’s pulling a reverse-Hillary.

Hillary wants to run in 2008. Hillary’s too left-wing to appeal to a wide enough range of voters. Easy solution - politically posture yourself on over to the middle. Attack evil left-wing hedonisms like, I dunno, free speech. Just make sure it’s “for the children.”

Santorum’s pulling a Hillary; the only difference is that he’s moving left instead of right. That and, unlike Hil, he has absolutely no chance of winning a Senate re-election, let alone snagging the Republican ticket. Especially not against contenders like Condie and McCain (hell, even the evil Dr. Frist).

Why so cynical, you ask?

Well, this ID skepticism comes from a man who, in 2001, pimped an anti-evolution amendment:

On June 13, 2001, the US Senate adopted a Sense of the Senate amendment to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Authorization bill, S 1, then under consideration. Proposed by Senator Rick Santorum (R–PA), the amendment read:

It is the sense of the Senate that (1) good science education should prepare students to distinguish the data or testable theories of science from philosophical or religious claims that are made in the name of science; and (2) where biological evolution is taught, the curriculum should help students to understand why the subject generates so much continuing controversy, and should prepare the students to be informed participants in public discussions regarding the subject.

“But wait,” you might be thinking, “he’s not pushing ID; in fact he doesn’t even mention the ‘theory.’ He just wants our kids to be critical thinkers!”

Oh, contraire! Keep reading:

As Eric Meikle explained (RNCSE 2000 Nov–Dec; 20 [6]: 4), the fact that evolution is singled out as uniquely controversial amply indicates the amendment’s anti-evolutionary intention. There were several indications that “intelligent design” proponents were instrumental in framing the resolution. In proposing the amendment, Senator Santorum cited a law review article coauthored by “intelligent design” proponent David K DeWolf, Professor of Law at Gonzaga University and Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture. And the godfather of the “intelligent design” movement, Phillip Johnson, was quoted in the June 18 Washington Times as having “helped frame the language” of the amendment.

Of all the crap we teach kids in school, evolution is the only theory that’s ever been challenged? As if.

So, no, Rick still isn’t making sense. He’s set his sights on the presidency, when he doesn’t stand a hot dog’s chance in Michael Moore’s fist. Bitch, please! We are so unimpressed.

- K

Oh, and click here to tell Bush where he can shove his ID BS.

Today, a lesson in political (il)logic, courtesy of AFP (Aging and HIV key challenges over next 50 years, 7/24/05):

1. “This month the world’s population crossed the 6.5 billion mark. But the increase has slowed from a two percent annual rise in the 1960s to 1.2 percent today — with the nine-billion-mark expected to be cracked around 2050.”

2. “However in Africa fertility rates remain high and populations are predicted to rise rapidly, tripling by 2050 in a number of countries…”

3. “Population increase could contribute more to deepening poverty than HIV infection in sub-Saharan Africa, where the population is predicted to rise from 750 million to 1.7 billion during this period.”

4. “20 percent of today’s population in developed countries are over 60 and by 2050 that proportion is projected to rise to 32 percent.”

5. “‘If nothing is done, the aging of the population will lead to a reduction in the workforce, a fall in economic growth and large shortages of labor,’ said Martine Durand, an economist with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).”

6. “Raising the retirement age is one of a number of politically difficult policy options facing governments along with increased immigration, encouraging people to have more children and employment creation, as they try to counter the economic effects of having a shrinking workforce and growing number of retirees.”

Yes, guys, brilliant strategy! More elderly citizens than the younger laborers can support? Simply “encourage” the young’uns to have more chil