Only in Florida, right?

In DeFuniak Springs, FL, they’ve got a creche at the courthouse. For all you atheists, a creche is that arrangement of figures centered around the adoration of the baby Jesus. You’ve got the holy family there, Mary and Joseph, some shepherds who’ve seen the signs in the skies that a savior is born, and those wise men bringing gifts to Jesus. (I’m sure Jesus would have preferred a furby or a playstation over Myrrh, whatever that is. Heck, give the boy a hoola hoop or something.) This year’s creche is going to include a snowman. Yes, a snowman adoring the baby Jesus.

From the Northwest Florida Daily News:

The annual Nativity creche on the Walton County Courthouse lawn will look a little different this year.

The County Commission decided this week to include secular items such as a snowman to the display after Americans United for Separation of Church and State sent the county a letter in July claiming that the creche is unconstitutional.

. . .

In the letter to the county that included wording from one of the rulings, Americans United stated that by displaying only the Nativity creche, “Walton County has endorsed Christianity, improperly conveying the message to ‘nonadherents that they are outsiders, not full members of the political community, and an accompanying message that they are insiders, favored members of the political community.’ ”

I hate to clue them in, but snowmen are inanimate things. They cannot adore the Christ child. They don’t have brains. Besides, Jesus was born in the Middle East, and any snowman traveling there to pay homage would surely melt, and we don’t want to have children crying over a melted snowman, do we? I’d suggest putting a yeti in there instead, or something like that. An abominable snowman, if you were. Imagine! You could say it came all the way from the Himalayas or something, a long way to see and honor the Prince of Peace. That would be IMPRESSIVE!

Those of us who eat, drink, and sleep presidential politics have been perplexed since Rudy Giuliani announced his GOP candidacy: why is / was this guy basically getting a free pass on his past personal indiscretions, and why does the legacy media continue to perpetuate the “America’s Mayor” myth? If a Democratic Party candidate had the skeletons of Bernie Kerik and Judith Nathan rattling around in their closet, they would have been drummed out of the race a long time ago - by fellow Dems.

But for some reason, Rudy remains almost untouchable by his fellow GOP candidates and the legacy media. Is it his connection to 9/11? Does he have, errr, compromising pictures of Fred Thompson and Chris Matthews? While ShagGate has been kicking around on the fringes of the news cycle for most of this week, ABC broke the latest details on Thursday:

Well before it was publicly known he was seeing her, then-married New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani provided a police driver and city car for his mistress Judith Nathan, former senior city officials tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com.

“She used the PD as her personal taxi service,” said one former city official who worked for Giuliani.

Yet, when I was starting my day today, I turned on the TV, flipped back and forth through the various news networks for nearly an hour, and nothing. Bupkis. CNN, MS-NBC and Fox all had stories on the salt-in-food controversy, CNN went with a story of a homeless Salvation Army bell ringer being canned, everyone was still talking about Tuesday’s GOP debate, but nothing on ShagGate. Nothing.

Let’s make this really, really simple:

THE EX-MAYOR OF NEW YORK CITY, A LEADING GOP PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, DEFRAUDED THE TAXPAYERS OF NEW YORK TO PROVIDE AID, COMFORT, AND TRANSPORTATION TO HIS MISTRESS.

I know that my shout-out above won’t fit on a bumper sticker, but fer chrissakes, from a news reporting standpoint it just doesn’t get any easier. There’s not much need to further flesh out the story. We don’t even need any more dirt. Giuliani should be smart enough to withdraw from the race on the merits of this incident alone, before indictments are handed up. If the allegation of his misuse of taxpayers funds doesn’t rate an investigation by the New York State Attorney General, I’d be very surprised.

The details are still simmering and approaching a low boil, but still, I sit here wondering:

What in the hell is it gonna take to wake up a legacy media that’s apparently slept through the last seven years?

Welcome to the latest American renaissance…a loathsome return to the “dark ages”. A new poll tells us that more Americans believe in hell and the devil…literally…than believe in Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. The only good news…and I say as much with all available facetiousness…is that nearly two thirds of all Americans believe in miracles. Why is that good news? Because it now appears it’s going to take a miracle to get this country tracking on a set of rational rails and not hitching it’s wacky wagon to a messianic magic carpet.

More Americans believe in a literal hell and the devil than Darwin’s theory of evolution, according to a new Harris poll released on Thursday.

It is the latest survey to highlight America’s deep level of religiosity, a cultural trait that sets it apart from much of the developed world.

It also helps explain many of its political battles which Europeans find bewildering, such as efforts to have “Intelligent Design” theory — which holds life is too complex to have evolved by chance — taught in schools alongside evolution.

It further found that 79 percent believed in miracles, 75 percent in heaven, while 72 percent believed that Jesus is God or the Son of God. Belief in hell and the devil was expressed by 62 percent.

Darwin’s theory of evolution met a far more skeptical audience which might surprise some outsiders as the United States is renowned for its excellence in scientific research.

Only 42 percent of those surveyed said they believed in Darwin’s theory which largely informs how biology and related sciences are approached. While often referred to as evolution it is in fact the 19th century British intellectual’s theory of “natural selection.”

What I find so baffling is that in real life you can’t get most of these people to accept hard and fast facts…but when it comes to faith, they’re willing to believe in the cookie monster. Global warming…not a chance. No connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11…not on your life.

If the above data isn’t enough to convince you we’re on the fast train to rampant regression, not to worry…there’s more data to report.

More born-again Christians — a term which usually refers to evangelical Protestants who place great emphasis on the conversion experience — believed in witches at 37 percent than mainline Protestants or Catholics, both at 32 percent.

OK, it was just a few months back when James Dobson and Focus on the Family released the following statement with regards to Harry Potter.

“We have spoken out strongly against all of the Harry Potter products.” His rationale for that statement: Magical characters — witches, wizards, ghosts, goblins, werewolves, poltergeists and so on — fill the Harry Potter stories, and given the trend toward witchcraft and New Age ideology in the larger culture, it’s difficult to ignore the effects such stories (albeit imaginary) might have on young, impressionable minds.

At the time, I assumed Dobson was opposed to Harry Potter because it glamorized “witches, wizards, ghosts, goblins […]” to children…leading young people to embrace irrational notions and engage in irrational fantasies while distracting them from their religious studies. Little did I know that nearly a third of all Americans actually believe that witches exist and probably think the Harry Potter books were written to recruit more witches.

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. Many of these same people believe that Tinky Winky and Sponge Bob Square Pants are characters created by militant homosexual sympathizers that are intended to indoctrinate children into the gay lifestyle. When did a duck stop being a duck?

I must admit I’m totally flummoxed at the number of foolish and fallacious fixations. Have they become the means by which people disconnect from the harsh realities that permeate their increasingly complex lives? Are average Americans so disconnected from the practice of reason and an understanding of the technology that surrounds them that they seek comfort in the simplicity of these virtual fabrications?

I don’t know the answers to my questions…but I do know it’s increasingly important for us to find them before we return to the logic that believed witches would float if tossed into a body of water…fully ignoring the fact that the accused was condemned to death either way. If they did float, they would be put to death for being a witch; if they sank and drowned, they weren’t a witch…but nonetheless dead? Frankly, we’re not that far from the wholesale suspension of cognition.

Makes a person want to dig out the Ouija Board and look into the future…but I’m going to stick with my Tarot Cards…I’ve found the results are much more to my liking.

Cross-posted at Thought Theater

After reading through some of the blog posts about last night’s YouTube GOP debate the consensus seems to be the candidates did pretty awful. This was no doubt in part due to the types of questions CNN chose. While the network had already assured ahead of time there would be no “gotcha” style questions because Americans can’t be trusted to pick good questions (as if CNN has any claim to fame in that area), outrage has nonetheless taken hold in Right Blogotopia. Not so much over the actual substance of the questions mind you. Most of them could care less about gays serving openly in the military or abortion unless, that is, it can be used as a wedge issue to divide Democrats. No what matters is always the messenger, in this case the supposedly ordinary Americans who were allowed to submit questions for the debate.

The righties have apparently taken to scouring the questions posed at last night shindig and finding that not all of the Tubers signed that loyalty oath that the Repubs are so fond of. Whether it was an openly gay ex-general asking about gays serving openly in the military being a Hillary supporter or an abortion questioner being an Edwards fan, righties are now saying this failure to disclose the political leanings of the Tubers is more evidence of liberal media bias. Some are even alleging that CNN specifically chose questions that would make conservatives look back.

Anyone else get the feeling they’re just ashamed that out of so many questions submitted, so few could be included that didn’t make the right look completely batshit crazy?

(X-posted at The Xsociate Files)

The Washington Post is acting as a proxy for the GOP again - not catapulting propaganda, mind you, but enabling the wingnut rumor mill (and therefore lending the WaPo’s credibility to the stupidity).

Is Barak Obama an Islamic sleeper agent in the U.S.? Apparently, there’s enough whispering in the turgid waters of the wingnutosphere that the editors of the WaPo are willing to lend their megaphone to the idiotocracy. Jill deconstructs the story in a Brilliant at Breakfast posting:

This is how it works, folks. Wingnuts put something “out there” — Obama is a Muslim spy. Hillary is fucking her female Arab assistant. John Edwards had an affair. It doesn’t have to be true; it doesn’t even have to have anything to it other than what’s pulled out of wingnut ass. All Republicans have to do is put something “out there” and out-and-out lies become just an “alternative view” deserving of equal time to facts. Because as Stephen Colbert said, facts have a liberal bias.

Meanwhile, Rudy Giuliani DOES have ties to terrorists by having a government that harbored Khalid Sheikh Muhammed as a business client, and it’s nowhere to be found in either Washington Post or New York Times…

Yeesh.

I don’t know how progressives combat this kinda horsepucky. As we all know, stupid rumors like this will circle the wingnutosphere (and the world) ten times before the truth even wakes up.

And this is how Conventional Wisdom™ is born…

It’s the end of the world. Trying to top opposites day, and that thing where kids wear their clothes inside out, a Des Moines School has cross dressing day. Seems like a harmless way to spend a day during “Spirit Week,” but not according to some. To them this is a cause to be alarmed about. Straight from WorldNetDaily, attempting, as always, to take the title from the late great newspaper WeeklyWorldNews as the only accurate news source:

One parent, writing on a blog shortly after the cross-dressing promotion, hardly could contain the outrage.

In bold red type, the parent wrote, “TUESDAY AT ONE OF OUR LOCAL HIGH SCHOOLS THEY HAD WHAT IS CALLED ‘GENDER BENDER DAY!’ IF YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT THAT IS THEN LET ME EDUCATE YOU REAL QUICK … IT IS WHERE THE BOYS DRESS LIKE GIRLS AND VICE VERSA!!”

The author continued, “THIS WAS ALLOWED AND CARRIED OUT AT OUR SCHOOLS!!! … I IMMEDIATELY PULLED MY CHILD OUT OF THE DES MOINES PUBLIC SCHOOL! WE ARE NOW HOMESCHOOLING ALONG WITH SEVERAL HUNDRED OTHER PARENTS!”

“I AM GETTING MAD WHILE I TYPE THIS … SO I NEED TO SHUT IT DOWN…”

Barb Heki is a board member for the Network of Iowa Christian Home Educators, and was ecstatic about the parental response.

“I’m just praising God there is a church with so many families that would take a biblical stand and decide that we’re not going to put our children under anti-Christian indoctrination any longer. That’s refreshing and encouraging,” she told WND.

I can remember having all sorts of dress-up days back in the day, and that was over 30 years ago. Get a grip, folks. This is neither news nor is it something to be alarmed about.

You know, the alarm here may be Bill O’Reilly’s fault. Isn’t he late in ramping up his annual “War on Christmas” shtick? If he had that campaign going, maybe it would give some of these folks something to do.

I’m sorry but stupid was just brought to a new low. The tubes are abuzz over the fact that CNN allowed a question about “don’t ask, don’t tell” from a gay man who serves on a committee for Hillary Clinton. Perhaps I’m mistaken, but the YouTube format didn’t require a disclosure of party affiliation. Granted, the incident makes CNN’s vetting process appear rather careless, but are we to believe that the question is invalid because the questioner isn’t a card carrying Republican?

If that’s the case, then shouldn’t Anderson Cooper be disqualified from moderating a GOP debate since he is gay? Maybe we should only allow Republican moderators at Republican debates and Democratic moderators at Democratic debates? I swear, we’re becoming more of a banana republic each day. I suspect the debate process for electing an eighth grade class president may have more substance and credibility…and certainly less whining from the inane partisans.

Speaking of substance, I guess I’m wondering why asking the GOP candidates their position on gays in the military is off limits for a former officer simply because he will apparently vote for a Democrat. Think about it…how many gay people do we expect to vote for a party that routinely opposes most, if not all, measures that would afford gays more rights and greater equality?

Further, after hearing the answers to the question…especially Duncan Hunters diatribe on not wanting to upset the predominantly religious conservative members of the military…why on earth would gays vote for the GOP? His answer is wrong on so many levels such that I refuse to waste any more of my time and energy detailing the reasons. Those who understand the reasons get it…and those who don’t, aren’t unable to; they simply don’t want to.

I just love the argument that we can’t consider allowing gays to serve openly because we’re at war. Using that same logic, gays ought to be exempt from a draft if America ever determines it needs more troops because they can’t attract enough volunteers. Sounds good to me…let the straight people protect us all from harm. We gays will plan the ticker tape parade if and when we ever win one of these wars.

Moving on, if the rank and file of the GOP agree with the answers given, why be afraid to have these candidates spell out their positions? Who are they trying to fool anyway? Should we believe that if the Republican candidates can avoid expressing their positions with regards to gays, no one will be the wiser or attempt to discern where they stand? That’s the funny thing about bigotry these days…people know when it exists and they get testy when someone forces them to acknowledge or demonstrate it.

Following the debate and the “exposure” of CNN’s duplicity, I went and read comments on a number of right leaning blogs. While the bigotry amazes me, the belief on the part of countless straight men that every gay man is interested in ogling them is mind-boggling. We scorn the Saudi’s for their absolutely antiquated treatment of women…highlighted by the recent sentencing of a rape victim to 200 lashes and six months in prison…treatment that is premised on the fear that every women is so vulnerable to her carnal desires that her body must be completely hidden from view and she must be forever forbidden from being in the presence of any unrelated male…unless accompanied by “her man”.

Now let’s break this down…is it the women they’re worried about or isn’t it more probable that these men don’t trust themselves to act appropriately…so clearly they can’t leave their women alone with another man? Truth be told, I’m sure they’re lack of trustworthiness is justified…but why in the hell should women be punished because these men are pigs? Last time I checked, it takes a boat load of man-sluts to make a whore. The absurdity is overwhelming!

The same mind set is at play when it comes to gays in the military…most of these men commenting on these sites apply their own sexual habits and thoughts to gay soldiers…totally failing to realize that gays have spent their entire lives demonstrating restraint and appreciating each other for more than just getting off. We have too if we want some semblance of a normal social life. We’ve learned that it’s possible to find friendships with people who could otherwise serve as sexual partners…and therefore we don’t have to approach each other and all males as nothing more than sexual objects.

Many of these straight men are unable and unwilling to grasp this concept because they see all women as objects for sexual gratification. It’s the cattle mentality…as long as they erect (no pun intended) fences to keep themselves from succumbing to their desires, they (the bulls) won’t breed every woman (the heifers) they see. That’s why they are so intimidated by the thought of showering with a gay man or sharing the same barracks. They can only visualize what they would do in a similar situation with women. So they see gays in the military as lacking the barriers they’re reliant upon to maintain their fragile notions of propriety and fidelity.

Forgive me for generalizing, as I realize the following may be an unfair assessment…but why should women and gays be forced to suffer the inability of these straight men to evolve beyond their noticeably arrested and obviously immature sexual constructs? As I think about it, that may be the best argument for electing a woman or a gay president.

Cross-posted at Thought Theater

I was watching the GOP debate, and was struck by one particular question submitted via YouTube. If I recall correctly, the question was answered by Romney and Grandpa Fred Thompson, but that’s really irrelevant. Actually, the question itself was largely irrelevant.

Watch the 20 second question below, and ask yourself: What element of this video simply has no place in a GOP debate? After CNN’s “gotcha” experience with the Dem debate, you’d think they’d be more careful. You’d be wrong.

Was CNN sandbagged? Or did Anderson Cooper pick this video on purpose? Either way, it was no accident that this eminently forgettable question was plucked out of the thousands submitted via YouTube. I’ll wait a few moments to see if anyone saw the same weird thing that I picked out, then I’ll post the answer in the comments…

Update: A quick observation on the debate itself - when Mike Huckabee comes across as the sanest, most articulate banana in the GOP bunch (granted, the bar has been set pretty low in the past seven years), and the only candidate who has actual convictions, you know the Republican Party is in a heap ‘o trouble. He was the only one of the candidates who was truly speaking from the heart and not faking it or putting on a facade. [[Sorry, supporters of Ron Paul, but your guy was exceptionally shrill tonight and seemed to get lost in his answer on Iraq. He should have had that one down pat.]]

The difference between Huckabee’s presentation and the rest of the crowd was absolutely striking.

New York’s semi-smarmy super hero, the drag queen wannabe who no doubt wishes he could campaign wearing Annie Oakley-esque outfits complete with a pair of precious plaid holsters sporting a set of sassy squirt guns, apparently left some rather large loose ends in his winsome wake…and I’m not talking about the backsides of his bevy of former Frauleins. It appears that Rudy made a number of trips to the Hamptons to shack up with Judy “Make Room For My Vuitton” Nathan on Gotham City’s dime.

As New York mayor, Rudy Giuliani billed obscure city agencies for tens of thousands of dollars in security expenses amassed during the time when he was beginning an extramarital relationship with future wife Judith Nathan in the Hamptons, according to previously undisclosed government records.

The documents, obtained by Politico under New York’s Freedom of Information Law, show that the mayoral costs had nothing to do with the functions of the little-known city offices that defrayed his tabs, including agencies responsible for regulating loft apartments, aiding the disabled and providing lawyers for indigent defendants.

At the time, the mayor’s office refused to explain the accounting to city auditors, citing “security.”

The Hamptons visits resulted in hotel, gas and other costs for Giuliani’s New York Police Department security detail.

Now one can speculate what America’s mayor meant by “security” when deflecting questions about these rather suspect expenditures…perhaps his psyche was subconsciously pondering the problems he might encounter if the woman holed up in Gracie Mansion had the goods on her cousin kissin’ diddly dallying husband?

I could include additional excerpts but I’m having way more fun sharing my silly and snide snark. When I read about Rudy’s amorphous accounting, I couldn’t help but harken to the head-scratching that followed his loquacious telephone interludes with wifey number three while standing at the podium to deliver a speech. Perhaps the current Mrs. Giuliani wants to keep account of her hubby…after all, she knows all too well about her hubby’s clandestine capabilities.

Truth be told, I doubt Rudy could afford the crown wife number four might require should he elect to discard his current tiara topped trysterina. Besides, can the leader of the free world be found out to be kitty kaptured? I think not. Anyway, I suspect he will have to keep his untrustworthy tallywhacker in toe for the time being.

In the meantime, it looks like Rudy Rudolpho, the ever morphing mayor, has got some splainin’ to do…and I’m not sure he’s all that capable of selling his version of “vitameatavegamin”.

Cross-posted at Thought Theater

I just love watching “fundies” use god to explain and justify their every action…whether it be good or bad. For those who haven’t heard, Richard Roberts, the son of Oral Roberts, now reports that he resigned his position as President of Oral Roberts University because god told him he must (on Thanksgiving Day no less).

Apparently god wasn’t speaking loud enough or Roberts was ignoring him while he and his family were milking the University to enable their lavish life of excess…or perhaps god was simply too busy at the time to tell him to stop. And by all means we can’t have expected Roberts to do the right thing of his own accord. How would a man of god know the difference between right and wrong without proper consultation from the heavenly father? It just goes to show that heaven is understaffed and it’s leading to all sorts of improprieties and numerous lost souls here on earth.

Richard Roberts told students at Oral Roberts University Wednesday that he did not want to resign as president of the scandal-plagued evangelical school, but he did so because God insisted.

Roberts told students in the university’s chapel that God told him on Thanksgiving that he should resign the next day.

Roberts said he resisted the idea, and that “every ounce of my flesh said ‘no,’” but he prayed over the decision with his wife, Lindsay Roberts, and his father, Oral Roberts, and decided to step down.

Roberts has previously said that God told him to deny the allegations. The week the lawsuit was filed, Richard Roberts said that God told: “We live in a litigious society. Anyone can get mad and file a lawsuit against another person whether they have a legitimate case or not. This lawsuit … is about intimidation, blackmail and extortion.”

Apparently god is one savvy attorney as well as an omniscient and all knowing creator. Given sufficient time to review the case against Roberts, god apparently decided Roberts lacked a plausible defense. I can’t wait for god to impose a dollar amount to settle the lawsuit…and if past experience holds true, I’m sure god will insist Roberts deliver one of those tearful tell all confessions.

You see, without the oft seen mea culpa, how would Roberts be able to continue to live off of the donations of those who place far too much faith in mere mortals…manipulative mortals who have learned that one can do anything one wants as long as one attributes it to god’s will?

Did I mention I’m in training to be a minister? And by the way, don’t blame me, it was god’s idea.

Cross-posted at Thought Theater