Condescend Much?

Patrick McIlheran has a tingle going down his leg because some charter school is going to use a parable from the Bible in their curriculum. Apparently, he wouldn't be so tickled if they had also decided to teach the First Amendment, namely the Freedom of Speech:

My point is to add only this: Notice how striking it is when a public school proposes to teach a curriculum that, first, is traditional in content and, second, that actually tries imparting moral lessons of the non-denominational sort that would have been unremarkable in the Eisenhower era and that probably pass for mainstream ideals in the West Bend area.

(That’s religious! And that’s not mainstream at all! So shriek, momentarily, the roughly five militant agnostics who regularly shrill up any post on this blog that mentions faith. To them: Go back to Mommy’s basement and let the adults talk. Thanks.)

I wouldn't be surprised at all if McIlheran is plotting with co-zealot Dad29 to set about a plan to enforce the Catholic version of Sharia Law.

More at Illy-T's pad.

Father Hypocrite

On Friday morning, Charlie Sykes was squawking about Tom Barrett and his stance for women's rights. Sykes went to so far as to question Barrett's Christianity and Catholicism.

That is a rather bold move given that Sykes has broken at least two of the ten commandments: The one about not committing adultery and the one about not bearing false witness.

In fact, I don't think he's made it a day without breaking the commandment to not bear false witness. I don't really want to know how long he can make it without breaking the other.

There Oughta Be A Vaccine For This

Actually, the post in question is about the news article that Archbishop Weakland had shredded the reports he had received about his priests that were molesting children.

Paddy's main complaint is that this could open the door for the Church to get sued even more.

No sympathy for those that were molested, just for the Church's bank account.

Double Standards

From Harris Kane:

Their theory goes something like this. "The media" has given more attention to the murder in Kansas because "the media" is biased against the shooter, a radical, right-wing extremist.

The problem with this false argument is that the shooter in Arkansas is a radical, right-wing, extremist too. He is Muslim-convert who has embraced the Islamic jihad, something the wing-nuts incorrectly believe is a "left-wing" movement. It's not, but that doesn't fit their frame so they all parrot the misinformation in order to have it fit neatly into their "media bias" whine.

Read the rest here.

James Stays Classy

James T. must be missing his fifteen minutes of fame when he was promoted nationally as the fool he is.

In a desperate effort to regain national attention, he gives us this:

Well, now we get to deal with a couple of new firsts. First black President, first black presidential flub up of the Presidential oath. First President to acknowledge non-believers as a religious group.

This can’t be good. How do we know they used a Bible at the do-over and not a Koran? Hey, I’m just asking!

Update: Obama didn’t use the Bible or the Koran! Oh shiggedy! Another first? Which swearing in should count? The one with the Bible or the one without?

First of all, would someone kindly point out to James that John Roberts is the white Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, not a black president?

Secondly, would someone please tell me how Obama can be a Muslim, which reject the teachings of Christ, and at the same time, have gone to one of those hateful Christian churches for 20 some years? It's one or the other, unless your schizophrenic. Then you can believe in both, I guess.

Dolt29

Dolt29 put up a post today about coathanger abortions. I'm sure he felt it was a strong argument against coat hangers or something, else he wouldn't post it. What he did do, whatever his intent may be, is prove himself to be capable of great insensitivity, and a general misunderstanding of women, and of mental health issues.

It's not the first time his insensitivity has shown through. He made the assertion that women in the military were being raped because they were women in the military. This the same miscreant that also seemed OK with a Christian cult in Texas to groom young girls to be sexually abused by much older men. Seems to be like a rationalization for misogyny, using the Church. But I digress.

He cites some site named "CosmoLiturgy" which makes the presumptuous claim that coathanger abortions are a myth, and the symbology of it was used by those dang liberals to justify abortion. I won't get into the whole abortion issue in this post, but it needs to be pointed out that the fabled folkbum proved that the assertion that coathanger abortions are a reality, whether or not the right wants to admit it.

What is equally as bad, if not worse, is the way he miscontstrues a serious psychiatric illness. He quotes the cited source:

Those who develop a Borderline Personality Disorder are predominately angry women (with histories of sexual abuse) who are consciously or subconsciously driven to deliver a hurtful revenge onto others. They typically have poor self images and are consequently highly sensitive to rejection and constantly haunted by the fear of being abandoned. As a result, they are willing to take drastic measures to avoid loneliness and solitude, which can often include self mutilation, suicide threats and attempts.

He then adds his own little quip:

It's a grown-up version of the 2-year-old's temper tantrum (albeit for
those who were abused, it is differently-caused.)

First of all, Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a serious illness, with its own set of diagnostic criteria set forth by the DSM-IV. It can be caused not only by being sexually abused, but also by genetics and natural chemical imbalances in the brain. It also has many symptoms besides self-mutilation. These can include:

• Impulsive and risky behavior, such as risky driving, unsafe sex, gambling sprees or taking illicit drugs
• Strong emotions that wax and wane frequently
• Intense but short episodes of anxiety or depression
• Inappropriate anger, sometimes escalating into physical confrontations
• Difficulty controlling emotions or impulses
• Suicidal behavior
• Fear of being alone

As you can see, nothing to be trifled with, and definitely more than a "temper tantrum". Most of the people with BPD that I've worked with did the cutting not only for attention, but to remind themselves that they are real, else they become too disconnected from the real world. Another reason was that they found the physical pain easier to deal with than the emotional suffering they are experiencing.

On a sidenote: I can find no indication that "Caenis Syndrome" is even a formally recognized psychiatric diagnosis.

As I said earlier, I am not going into the whole abortion issue. He thinks it's wrong, and I can respect that. I don't personally necessarily disagree with that view, but that's for another time, another place.

What I do resent, and will not allow to pass, is when someone feels the need to minimize people with mental illnesses, of any sort, to justify their inexplicable need to oppress women, children, or anyone else. No matter their ulterior motives may be.

Dad, I don't know what your issues are, or if it's just some part of the Catholic indoctrination, or what, but you really ought to knock the crap off, before someone calls you "Dipshit29".

Oops, too late.

A Poll

As I am trying to do some research, I foolishly have the radio on. James T. Harris is trying to do a fear and smear routine against Senator Barack Obama.

He is calling for people to sound off on whether he should continue to refer to the Senator at "the Chocolate Jesus." (It always struck me as highly hypocritical that a man that professes to be such a good Christian and puts all the blame on "not having God in your life," would not take the Bible seriously.)

Of course, his audience is not the most representative sampling of the people that one could hope for. So here is your opportunity to go ahead and let James know if you feel it's OK to do this or not. Just keep the comments appropriate folks, that's all I ask.

School Of Hard Knocks

Hey, kids! Did you ever want to grow up and be a conservative blogger? Did you ever want to learn how to:

• Insult major religions?
• Make racist statements?
• Make sexist statements?
• Make a buffoon of yourself by getting your facts wrong, and then trying to hide the evidence, insteading of being an adult about it?

Well, if you answered yes to any or all of these questions, here's your big chance!

Americans Fed Plentifully is presenting a free seminar, just for you! We'll hand it over to Other Side for the details.

Hurry and sign up now! Spaces are going fast!

But there are two disclaimers. One, it is free, and you usually get what you pay for. Two, Whallah bloggers are eager for the fresh meat.

The Beat Keeps On

John Hagee has apologized to the Catholics for his anti-Catholic remarks. There is no word if this was due to a crusade or not. Either way, there are some on the right who feel that this takes the wind out of the pro-Obama camp, and that they will have to find a new talking point.

Not really.

Hagee's anti-Catholic remarks was just the tip of the iceberg for him. He has a whole slew of hits, including:

"Your daughter can get an abortion in public school without telling you but she
can't get an aspirin without your approval."

He also feels that Harry Potter is a precursor to witchcraft. Last time I checked, the Mathiases and friends haven't turned anyone into a toad, but if they can, I have a few suggestions for them.
And if Hagee is too boring for you, there is always another McCain supporter, the televangelist Rod Parsley, who brings in his own bit of foolishness to the McCain campaign:




H/T to BM

Why The Right Is Wrong About Wright

Sykes and McIlheran and others in the echo chamber continuously try to make the point that the Reverend Wright is a millstone around Senator Barack Obama's neck. Their talking point consists of trying to say that Obama attended this church for twenty years, was wedded by Wright, and stated that he saw him as a father figure.

They laughingly try to argue that the bigoted Hagee's endorsement is different somehow, even though McCain actually sought out the endorsement of this fool, who rants even include anti-Catholicism. (Can we expect McAdams to mount his charger and lead a crusade against McCain anytime soon?)

But the right wing media's main talking point, the part of Obama belonging to this church for so long must show that he's racist, is easily disproved. And all it takes is a look at the right.

After all, Sykes, McIlheran and their acolytes all claim to be good Christians, many of them Catholic. So that would mean, one can suppose, that they go to various churches of their choice, and own Bibles, and that this has been going on for a rather long time as well.

Yet, they apparently haven't grasped the lessons they should have learned in church. They don't pay head to the seven deadly sins, especially lust, greed, wrath, envy, and pride.

And sheesh, if that wasn't bad enough there's the ten commandments. Here too, they have problems. They habitually break the first one by worshipping money. They also seem to have problems with bearing false witness, as they're always spinning to the point of lying.

And, I would be completely be remiss if I failed to mention the big A.

So if Sykes, McIlheran, and the others, after all this time, haven't been able to internalize the basics of Christian teaching, why would it be impossible for Obama not to be able to disagree on some points with Reverend Wright?

As A Wise Man Said...

If McAdams wants to give some credence to his ongoing crusades of being offended, perhaps he should lose what some may consider to be the racist name of his blog.

Update on L'Affaire D'American TV

Here is a round up of this morning's inputs on yesterday's hypocrisy storm:

folkbum's shows another example of the double speak that comes from the right.

Dan Cody points out it's just another silly day for the tens of extremist right wing bloggers.

Here's an overdue acknowledgement of Mike Plaisted's work. (Sorry, Mike.)

The Illy One has an open letter to Wyn Becker at American TV.

And grumps has found the secret logo of the Perpetually Officially Offended Right (POOR):

Hypocrisy And Selective Outrage--They're Not Just For Talk Radio Anymore

This past weekend Illy-T noted that John McAdams was getting his selective outrage on. Why? Because WKLH, the Shepherd Express and American TV had the audacity to sponsor a show with Bill Maher. Apparently McAdams felt this was terrible, because Maher cracked a few jokes at the expense of Catholics, or something.

Sykes picked up on that, and our own kr picked up on Sykes.

Today, there was a firestorm put up. On one side, their was McAdams, Sykes, Belling and several others, putting up such a stink that American responded, rather politely. Unsatisfied, and smelling blood, they kept up their assault until American acquiesced and pulled their sponsorship.

Fair enough. Freedom of speech is protected under the Constitution.

But that wasn't the end of it, really. McAdams, apparently feeling more ornery than usual, decided to take umbrage with this post of mine. He feels that it is OK for him to show his disapproval of an event, but that the left is not allowed the same privilege.

To make his arguments even more ridiculous, McAdams, who claims to be offended by Maher's anti-Catholic jokes, proudly links to those who readily insult Islam, women, homosexuals, Mexicans and people who want to give peace a chance.

Others have caught this grand act of hypocrisy:

Illy-T has been tracking it here, here, here and here.

Jay Bullock has also noted the selective outrage and the hypocrisy.

Other Side cuts to the chase, and notes their shamelessness.

But we are not helpless, my friends. If you feel that enough is enough, there are a couple of things we can do.

One is to show your support for Bill Maher. You can do so by simply going to this site and leaving a message expressing your outrage over the way the right wants to trample his rights.

You can also call American TV at (608) 271 1000 or email them through this site, and let them know that you're disappointed that they gave into a handful of vainglorious hypocrites.

SIDENOTE: Ironically, I received an email from my self-described neocon father. The email contained an old joke involving Forrest Gump entering heaven. He received this joke from someone in his church. At the end of the email was this:

Give me a sense of humor, Lord.
Give me the ability to understand a clean joke,
To get some humor out of life,
And to pass it on to other folks.

This is something that McAdams, Sykes, and the rest of the perpetually offended right wingers should add to their daily prayers.

Fischer Is All For Violating The Constitution

Fischer is in full support of a bill that is currently going through the Florida state legislature. The bill would allow drivers to have yet one more specialized plate to put on their cars. This time it is one that promotes Christianity:


Now, I fully believe in the Constitution. This includes the first amendment. This amendment allows people the right to freedom of religion, meaning they can worship, or not worship, as they see fit. It also means that the state would not endorse any specific religion.

So, unless Fischer is so unpatriotic and unAmerican as to want to willfully violate the Constitution (even though he probably is), I am sure he won't mind a license plate for those that practice Islam:

or for those Devil Worshipping Atheists:

Mixter has other suggestions for license plates over yonder.

It's Not OK, Even If Done In The Name Of God

I'm going to go off on a slight tangent here, but this ticks me off to no end.

Dad29 had put up a post the other day regarding the stuff going on in Texas with the polygamist cult in Texas. His general gist is that what was going on in that complex was just OK, because they were Christians. He also laments about what he figures thus:

Yes. This is, without a doubt, the most egregious example of Statism since Waco, and although less deadly (so far), it's just as portentous.

Even more disturbing are the comments put up by readers "Amy" and "Dan". They actually defend the cultists, because, you know, they are religious. They complain that the cultists' rights are being violated, that they are not given the benefit of presumed innocence, and that the kids weren't really being abused in any way.

I'm sorry but that is the biggest pile of cow manure this side of any twenty dairy farms.

I will not pretend to be familiar with the specifics of the Children's Code in Texas, but I cannot imagine it all that different from Wisconsin's laws, which I am rather familiar with, from working in the child welfare system for seven years.

First of all, cases of this sort are not criminal cases. There is no guilt or innocence. There is just cause. These cases had to be investigated by social workers, and the allegations had to be found to be substantiated that the children have been maltreated, or at great risk of being maltreated. I am sure that a case of this magnitude was closely supervised by supervisors, department heads and all the way up the chain before action was taken. Then it had to be reviewed by the District Attorney's office and found to be up to snuff before they would file the petitions for the children's removal. Finally, the judge would have to determine that the facts presented were sufficient before any orders would have been issued.

All of this apparently has occurred, or events wouldn't have unfolded in the way that they have. This is not the final step, but just the first. Each case will be reviewed by the court individually, to determine if further action would be needed, like a full order keeping the children out of the parents' home until certain conditions are met, or in home services would suffice, or that the children can be returned without any further action.

Given the fact that it is abnormal for a teenage girl to feel romantic attraction to someone old enough to be their father or grandfather, one could logically conclude that there was grooming going on, such as a sexual predator would use. And much like a local case, it would not be surprising to find out excessive use of corporal punishment was used on the children as well.

Dad29 and company also argue that the original source of the allegation is unreliable. So what? The fact is, referrals can even be made anonymously. If social services and investigates and finds a reasonable cause for concern, the referral source is irrelevant. Remember, criminal court standards don't apply to these sorts of cases.

And it really doesn't matter if these people worship God, Allah, the Great Spirit, Buddha or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Child abuse is child abuse, and there is never justification for it, no matter what religion, if any, the people might practice.

It is equally disgusting to use said religion to not only justify this horrendous and inexcusable behavior, but to rationalize one's own conspiracy theories and paranoia of black helicopters.

Threatened By A Decal

The right wing media sure gets spooked easy. Even bumper stickers and decals seem to get them all riled up.

McIlheran links to some other right winger who thinks that the Darwin fish is hypocritical and cowardly. They encourage them to join their ranks in ridiculing Islam and those that follow that faith. And to think they call us intolerant.

Now, since I'm not an atheist, I won't get into the whole creationism vs. evolution debate here. I will leave that to other bloggers.

But I must point out how ludicrous McIlheran's expectations are.

This is America, and as the right is fond of pointing out, supposedly founded on Christian principles. The national anthem was changed to include "under God", not "under Allah." Likewise, our currency is embossed with "In God We Trust", not "In Buddha We Trust".

The nation shuts down to celebrate Christmas and Easter, but no one gets off just because it's Channakah or Ramadan. And just imagine the looks you get if you wished someone a Blessed Seder or a Blessed Eid.

If someone feels oppressed by the majority, they will rebel against that majority. Of course, that sort of logic would escape many on the right, who only want us to conform to their ideals.

Lastly, I think it also says a lot about one's strength of faith, or lack thereof, to feel threatened by a decal.

I Hope Their Rosary Beads Hold Up

In the news yesterday, the Vatican came out with a list of new mortal sins that Catholics need to avoid. This list can be summarized as:

1. 'Bioethical' violations such as birth control

2. "Morally dubious'' experiments such as stem cell research

3. Drug abuse

4. Polluting the environment

5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor

6. Excessive wealth

7. Creating poverty

McIlheran, Fischer, Sykes, McBride and the rest of the good Christians and adherents of the Catholic faith are OK with the first three, but they better pull out the industrial-strength rosary beads for the penance they'll be doing on the last four.

Losing His Religion

Earlier today, I had the misfortune of being in the car just before noon, with the radio on to TMJ.

I heard that James T. Harris was going to be filling in for the ailing Jeff Wagner, and he was on Sykes' show, giving a promotional of what topics he was going to blather on about for the next two hours.

During the exchange, Harris referred to the "Chocolate Jesus," as is his wont. Sykes found this funny, and asked if Brett Favre could be known as the "Cheddar Jesus."

I was astonished that Sykes was being so light-hearted over a religious slander, and then making one himself. After all, wasn't this the same Sykes that just five months ago, was joining McBride in foaming at the mouth because a group made a poster spoofing a painting regarding a Bible story?

I guess he only gets upset about people spoofing art, and not actual blasphemy.

An Answer For McIlheran

McIlheran poses a question, which was stimulated by another conservative blogger (What? You thought McIlheran has original ideas of his own? It is too laugh!):

Freedom Eden wonders why, when George W. Bush says he prays a lot, it's enough to make Madeleine Albright freak about his "certainty," while when Barack Obama says he prays to Jesus every night, it's a whole different ball game.

Here's your answer, Patrick: It's probably because Obama won't use his God as an excuse to cause unjust wars that cost hundreds of thousands of people their lives.

Brawler Beat Me To It...

...and, as usual, did it better. So, I will cheat and just copy and paste, as usual.

Is Journal Sentinel columnist Patrick McIlheran a bad Catholic?

What do we owe people who lose their jobs to globalization?

Quoth Patrick McIlheran: Nothing!

Pope John Paul II had a different point of view:

''Unemployment that is not the fault of the unemployed becomes a social
scandal when available work is not distributed fairly and the profit of the work
is not used to create new work for as many possible.''

What a communist!