I know I haven’t been hearing enough on the news about the flooding in Tennessee. It was only last night I finally saw any kind of real coverage, and even then, they started babbling about the oil spill and the NYC bomb situation as quickly as they could after showing a few images of the awfulness going on with the flooding.

I’ve been keeping up with what’s been happening out in Tennessee at the Tennessean, and excellent resource for anyone interested in keeping up with the news on this subject.

And my thoughts and prayers are with those in the midst of this mess.

Governor Perry has been flapping his jaws again, this time on the subject of the oil spill in the Gulf.

“We don’t know what the event that has allowed for this massive oil to be released,” Perry said alongside several other governors on a panel Monday. “And until we know that, I hope we don’t see a knee-jerk reaction across this country that says we’re going to shut down drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, because the cost to this country will be staggering.”

Perry questioned whether the spill was “just an act of God that occurred” and said that any “politically driven” decisions could put the U.S. in further economic peril.

“From time to time there are going to be things that occur that are acts of God that cannot be prevented,” Perry said.
–Politico

As can be imagined, his comments caused a bit of an uproar in some quarters, like the one where rational and sane people live … people who know that God had nothing to do with the oil rig blowing out and bursting into flames. Therefore, Perry had to flap his jaws some more to attempt to explain himself.

“If you will go look up the definition of ‘act of God,’ we’ve used it in legal terms for a long time in this state,” the GOP governor, appearing annoyed, told reporters outside the Capitol when asked about his comments in Washington on Monday. “Nobody knows what happened, and I said that in my remarks, that there was a lot of speculation. It could have been an act of God, it could have been, you know, who knows?”

Asked what he meant by the phrase, Perry said, “Here’s what I want you to do. I want you to go look it up, the definition, in the dictionary. I meant exactly what Webster’s says by that.

“It’s something that no one can put their finger on, and it may be an accident, it may be something else,” he said, “I do think it is very intriguing that those of you in the media have focused in on one statement when the clear definition of that is pretty easy to get your hands on.”
–Houston Chronicle

I didn’t have to run to the dictionary to look up the definition, because as Perry states, it’s been a legal term in use in Texas for a very long time. It appears in every form of property insurance I have ever seen with my own eyes, and so I am quite familiar with the term and it’s definition. But let’s just look at what Webster’s has to say about it, since that’s the dictionary he suggested his definition matched.

Act of God
Date: 1783
: an extraordinary interruption by a natural cause (as a flood or earthquake) of the usual course of events that experience, prescience, or care cannot reasonably foresee or prevent

For added clarity, let’s also look at Wikipedia’s definition too.

Act of God is a legal term for events outside of human control, such as sudden floods or other natural disasters, for which no one can be held responsible.

In fact, it seems that the entirety of the internet as well as the books on my shelves all agree on the very exacting definition of “act of God” and none of them could be extended to include BP not wanting to spend the extra money to install a safety device or Haliburton screwing up during construction … things for which there is someone who can be held responsible. It’s not like a hurricane blew through or an earthquake happened and the oil rig blew out spewing crude all over the place.

I assure you, if I were to drill a water well in my yard and the end result was flooding my yard and house, my insurance company wouldn’t call it an act of god. They’d call it a f*ck up on my part. Any attempt I might make to argue that it was an act of god –because who knew there was so much water down there or that installing substandard parts and/or ignoring safety measures would lead to calamity– would fall on entirely deaf ears. In fact, they’d laugh in my face. Loudly.

While I am thrilled that Governor Perry knows of the existence of such things as dictionaries and definitions, I would suggest he either learn how to read them or take a course in reading comprehension so he’ll be better able to understand the dictionary definition he is desperately clinging to at the moment. Better yet, he could just stop flapping his jaws and spewing nonsense.

Last night, several of the talking heads on the usual shows we watch were bemoaning how stupid it is to drill for oil in locations too deep for problems to be easily and quickly solved. I agree, but we decided we didn’t want them drilling in the shallower and closer to shore locations, and we can’t have it both ways. Either they drill where they can safely and quickly solve problems on the ocean floor (and deal with the problems drilling closer in causes) or we have to take the risk that situations like the one we have right now might happen by drilling much, much further out at deep ocean depths.

As much as I’d like us to get off the oil teat, that isn’t going to happen overnight, and I can’t imagine Americans being willing to pay higher gas prices just to do the right thing. Everyone wants gas for their big gas hogs, don’t they?

Tanning salon owners in Austin are complaining about the new 10% tax on tanning sessions. They can complain all they want about this sin tax targeting them unfairly, but until said tax rises to the level of the sin tax on cigarettes, they can pretty much shut the hell up about it. Excessive use of tanning beds is a risky behavior, and in the long run do no one any good. I used to have friends who used them all the time. Some of them are now dealing with skin cancer problems, and all of them have skin that looks like poorly preserved leather. Sure, that tan may look great when one is twenty years old, but a years of intense UV radiation will make anyone using tanning beds look like they are fifty years old by the time they celebrate their thirtieth birthday.

Then there’s this:

On a recent weekday at Aruba Tan, Rylee Case, a 25-year-old UT sophomore from Lubbock, grimaced at the thought of paying more money for an evenly bronzed complexion. But she said remaining tanned for various events throughout the school year is important enough to her to pay the extra cost. “I’ll probably be doing the same thing,” she said. “It’s still something I’ll want to do.”

What sort of “event” requires one to have a skin tone other than their own natural one? And you know, there’s this thing up in the sky called the sun, and it’ll give you a tan for free. Of course, that would require actually being outside, and apparently people who use tanning salons can’t be bothered to be outside.

Seriously, stay away from the tanning beds. They are totally not worth it the temporary awesomeness of the all-over tan. You’ll eventually regret it, even if you do avoid having to deal with cancer … unless you want to look way too old for your age or like looking like a farmhand.

Don’t kids today know that it was always the fair-skinned maidens who were considered upper class, because they DIDN’T have a tan, proving they didn’t have to work out in the fields all day? My how things change.

I’m sure you’ve heard about the car bomb in Times Square, because I’m pretty sure it would be impossible for anyone to not have heard about it, but I had to chuckle at this line in this news story:

Kelly said it was too early to determine whether the device was crude or not.

Well, everything I’ve heard and seen about the bomb makes it sound like something I would put together … meaning a podged together mess that will likely not work exactly as intended. It really just seems like the person didn’t know what they were doing.

What really shows the person hasn’t got a brain was the fact he parked illegally, left the car running, and had the flashers on. Anyone with a brain would know that if one wants a car to go undetected, parking legally, turning the thing off, and not having the flashers on would mean the thing could sit there forever and not be noticed. How many legally parked, non-running, non-flashing cars do you ever notice? Probably none, unless it’s some sort of unusual or really cool-looking vehicle. I know I don’t really notice normally parked vehicles downtown. Now one that’s sitting somewhere it shouldn’t be, is running, and has the flashers on? Yes, I’ll give that one a look, if for no other reason than to roll my eyes and grumble about stupid Austin drivers.

So whoever did this –I’m not entirely convinced it was the Taliban, no matter what they say– is both dumb and crazy.

If you use Facebook, and likely even if you don’t, you’ve no doubt heard Facebook is making some changes again. The kvetching about it on the internet is so loud, I wouldn’t be surprised if it could be heard all the way to Alpha Centauri or beyond. It’s really much ado about nothing. Seriously. I’m not even going to bother explaining why nothing much is really changing in how user data is being used and shared, because people who want to panic will continue to do so anyway, and everyone else has probably already figured out it isn’t much of a big deal at all.

What I’ve been finding particularly amusing is the fact that some of the loudest and most panicky voices shrieking about invasions of privacy –because someone might find out what books, movies, and whatnot they like, or what town they live in– are coming from people who have web sites and blogs with biography pages that provide all that information plus a whole lot more (much of it more personal than movie preferences) … and from people who own domain names and don’t pay extra to keep their registration data secret (thus supplying the whole world with a name, address, and phone number). What kind of mental disconnect is necessary to have private data and information plastered all over one’s web site (and whois searches) and then complain that Facebook is going to tell people and possibly web sites what things you like and where you’re from? Seriously?

My Facebook profile was converted to the new system today, so I went through and checked that all my settings were the same way I had them set before, and sure enough they were. The only information Everyone can see (the public at large) is my name, city, interests and likes, my email address, and my web site address. More information about me than that can be found within a few minutes of randomly clicking links on my blog, as it is with most blogs and personal web sites. Not to mention the great receptacle of all knowledge … Google. I assure you, when I am trying to find relevant and important personal information about someone, I do not turn to Facebook for said information. I check out their web site, if they have one, and I search Google. If I am really serious about it, I turn to public records. I have to think if the people bleating the loudest about their likes and dislikes on Facebook being too public knew how much information I could find about them using public records, their heads would explode on the spot.

“But, but, but…” they say. “I don’t want the fact I support marijuana legalization/like sucking toes/am a Tea Party Patriot/etc. to be public knowledge!” Well, I’m going to give you a free clue … a bit of advice from someone who lives a rather open and public life: if there is something about yourself you don’t want the public (or anyone) to know about you … something you would not stand on a street corner and discuss loudly enough for passers by to hear, never EVER type it into a text input box anywhere on the internet. It’s inevitable that as soon as you do, someone you don’t want to know about it will know about it. Furthermore, if you don’t want web sites tracking where you are going and what you are looking at, disconnect your computer from the internet and leave it disconnected. It’s virtually unavoidable that someone somewhere is going to know where you have been and what you have been doing, and it starts with your internet service provider. It’s the nature of the beast to leave breadcrumbs of our comings and goings all over the web.^†

Anyone who wants to continue to panic about Facebook and privacy can go right ahead and do so. I’m sure they will. Once a frenzy sets in, no one pays attention to whether or not something is actually worth getting outraged or panicked about. I find it entertaining so do please continue with the wailing. The weekend is coming up, so I’ll have plenty of time to read the bleating and laugh … while looking up personally identifiable information on the loudest bleaters that’s already out in the wild on the internet.

I mean really, one guy wrote a screed in a comment box at a news web site about how “Facebook has gone too far!!!” and then links his web site in his comment. His web site, with his own domain name, that lists his full name, address, and telephone number. I guess he just didn’t want to miss out on one single hit to his site! But Facebook? Yeah, it’s gone to far for him, what with sharing what movies he likes and which actresses he finds attractive.

1. † Oh sure, you can jump through a bunch of hoops and attain some level of anonymity, but I guarantee your web surfing experience will be diminished somewhat and even then, someone somewhere will still be tracking some information about you. [↩]

Adam Ant is making a comeback. For those of you who don’t know, which would probably be just about everyone, I am a HUGE Adam Ant fan in all his various incarnations. I even loved his last album when most people thought it was awful. Sure, it wasn’t exactly punk rock, but it was good. Well, I liked it anyway.

Anyway, hope this comeback works well for him and that he turns out an album I’ll enjoy. I’ll be buying the thing anyway –I have them all, even the imports and special releases– and it would be nice if I actually enjoyed it. Mostly though, I hope he puts behind him all that mental institution stuff and gets on with his life again, because he’s really a sweet person who deserves some goodness in his existence again.

Just south of Fifth Street in Downtown Austin, 16 blue panels line either side of the Lamar Boulevard underpass.

The panels are reflective and some mistake them as traffic signals, but the collective work of art is called “Moments.” Art in Public Places commissioned artist Carl Trominski to create the mixed-media work of art in 2003.

“When I first saw them, I was sort of perplexed by them,” Austin artist Magda Sayeg said. “When I found out that it was an art project, I really liked it. It made me want to think about it more.”

So Magda has temporarily covered them with knitting (and crochet)! Much better looking than the reflectors are all by themselves. I’d always wondered what those ugly blue reflective panels were on that underpass. I would have never guessed they were public art. They look so much better covered in yarn. Doesn’t everything? LOL!

You can read more about Magda -apparently the mother of Yarn Bombing- in the local newspaper, or visit her blog.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation that sets forth a clear, comprehensive policy for the detention, interrogation and trial of enemy belligerents who are suspected of engaging in hostilities against the United States. This legislation seeks to ensure that the mistakes made during the apprehension of the Christmas Day bomber, such as reading him a Miranda warning, will never happen again and put Americans’ security at risk.

Specifically, this bill would require unprivileged enemy belligerents suspected of engaging in hostilities against the U.S. to be held in military custody and interrogated for their intelligence value by a “high value detainee” interagency team established by the President. This interagency team of experts in national security, terrorism, intelligence, interrogation and law enforcement will have the protection of U.S. civilians and civilian facilities as their paramount responsibility and experience in gaining actionable intelligence from high value detainees.
…
A key provision of this bill is that it would prohibit a suspected enemy belligerent from being provided with a Miranda warning and being told he has a right to a lawyer and a right to refuse to cooperate. I believe that an overwhelming majority of Americans agree that when we capture a terrorist who is suspected of carrying out or planning an attack intended to kill hundreds if not thousands of innocent civilians, our focus must be on gaining all the information possible to prevent that attack or any that may follow from occurring. Under these circumstances, actionable intelligence must be our highest priority and criminal prosecution must be secondary.
–Senator John McCain, Arizona

For those of you who prefer to read actual legislative language rather than the public announcements of politicians. From the bill:

INAPPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN STATEMENT AND RIGHTS- A individual who is suspected of being an unprivileged enemy belligerent shall not, during interrogation under this subsection, be provided the statement required by Miranda v. Arizona (384 U.S. 436 (1966)) or otherwise be informed of any rights that the individual may or may not have to counsel or to remain silent consistent with Miranda v. Arizona. (link)

So said individual only needs to be suspected of being one of these new “enemy belligerents” in order to not be informed of any rights they may or may not have. This would, I should think fall far afoul of one of the great laws of our lawful land: innocent until proven guilty.

PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION BY HIGH-VALUE DETAINEE INTERROGATION GROUP- The high-value detainee interrogation group responsible for interrogating a high-value detainee under subsection (b) shall make a preliminary determination whether or not the detainee is an unprivileged enemy belligerent. The interrogation group shall make such determination based on the result of its interrogation of the individual and on all intelligence information available to the interrogation group. (link)

Said individual is determined to be an “unprivileged enemy belligerent” and therefore being eligible for interrogation by the high-value detainee interrogation group (explained starting here) only after being stripped of any rights this individual may or may not have and being interrogated by said high-value detainee interrogation group. That’s some circular logic for you. Paradox much?

CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION OF INDIVIDUALS AS HIGH-VALUE DETAINEES- The regulations required by this subsection shall include criteria for designating an individual as a high-value detainee based on the following:

(A) The potential threat the individual poses for an attack on civilians or civilian facilities within the United States or upon United States citizens or United States civilian facilities abroad at the time of capture or when coming under the custody or control of the United States.
(B) The potential threat the individual poses to United States military personnel or United States military facilities at the time of capture or when coming under the custody or control of the United States.
(C) The potential intelligence value of the individual.
(D) Membership in al Qaeda or in a terrorist group affiliated with al Qaeda.
(E) Such other matters as the President considers appropriate. (link)

The bit in bold rather destroys all pretense of checks and balances and the division of governmental powers in order to keep any one branch of becoming a little too god-like. Never should there be a law of any sort that says anything like “oh, and whatever the President thinks should be included.” Much too open-ended and fraught with danger of abuse.

But finally, we come to something of true importance for any American citizen to consider:

An individual, including a citizen of the United States, determined to be an unprivileged enemy belligerent under section 3(c)(2) in a manner which satisfies Article 5 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War may be detained without criminal charges and without trial for the duration of hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners in which the individual has engaged, or which the individual has purposely and materially supported, consistent with the law of war and any authorization for the use of military force provided by Congress pertaining to such hostilities. (link)

Bad enough McCain and his fellow co-sponsors are more than willing to throw away “all men are created equal” (not just Americans) and innocent until proven guilty for non-citizens of the USA, but they are also more than willing to do so for American citizens, and as we’ve read earlier in the bill … pretty much at the whim of whomever happens to be living in the White House. If I were these Senators, I think I’d be wondering if handing such an open-ended and easily abused law to the current administration might not lead to being named an enemy belligerent for having created the thing. It does say the President gets the final say on who is and is not an enemy belligerent, after all.

And back again to McCain’s announcement:

Mr. President, it should come as no comfort to any American that nearly eight and a half years after the attacks of 9/11 we still don’t have a clear mechanism, legal structure, and implementing policy for dealing with terrorists who we capture in the act of trying to bring about attacks on the United States and our national security interests at home and abroad.
–Senator John McCain, Arizona

Yes, we do. The USA has this thing called a legal system that we’ve been using for some time now to lock up people who do stupid, crazy, or evil stuff, and it seems to mostly work not just for your common street thug but also for those pesky terrorists (who are obviously supermen since normal prisons and normal trials are too puny to hold or try them). One of the cornerstones of our country has always been our belief in the right of everyone –citizen or not– to a far trial and certain rights … and that in order to be found guilty of some crime a person has to be found to actually be guilty, instead of some single someone (say, the President) just deciding they are. This bill jumps up on that cornerstone and craps all over it.

Every day is feels more and more like McCain has lost some of his previously functioning brain cells. Take for example all those years he called himself a “maverick” to only recently saying he never considered himself a maverick at all. Was he lying back then (during the 2008 elections and before), lying now, or has he gone senile? Me, I’m voting for having gone senile, because this piece of crap bill doesn’t sound like anything the McCain of the past would have anything to do with. My how things change when one either goes bat-crap crazy or starts playing entirely too much to the far right base.

You know, a couple of days after the health care bill had been signed into law Obama ran around all over the country saying, “Hey, you know, I’m looking around. The earth hadn’t opened up. There’s no Armageddon out there. The birds are still chirping.” I think the earth has opened up. God may have replied. This volcano in Iceland has grounded more airplanes — airspace has more affected — than even after 9/11 because of this plume, because of this ash cloud over Northern and Western Europe. At the Paris airport they’re telling people to head to the train station to catch trains out of France, and when people get to the train station they’re telling people, “There aren’t any seats until at least April 22nd,” basically a week from now. It’s got everybody in a shutdown. Earth has opened up. I don’t know whether it’s a rebirth or Armageddon. Hopefully it’s a rebirth, God speaking.
–Rush Limbaugh

Yes, Rush. You’re absolutely right. God doesn’t want poor people or anyone to be healthy. Doesn’t want anyone helping to take care of anyone else. Funny then that he sent Jesus down with his miracle healing powers and then allowed Jesus to heal poor people while simultaneously telling everyone to love each other and take care of each other, isn’t it?

It’s really odd how I, someone who would not describe themselves as Christian, seem to understand their god and Jesus better than they do. These people are less Christian than I am.

Arizona has decided to allow concealed carry of firearms without a permit, which means no background checks or training. I do not approve. Hope they know what they are doing.

The Temple, Texas school district is bringing back paddling. Once again, I do not approve. Those who rule by fear and force usually end up regretting it, even if the short term results seem to work.

While Israel is being somewhat silly and not allowing any iPads into their country, the Prime Minister of Iceland loves his and is currently using it to deal with the volcano crisis and run his country. Cool!

There’s a crucifix crisis at a Warr Acres church. People with penii on the mind are upset about a very classic iconographic painting.

The first thing insurance companies did after health care reform passed was look for ways to not cover sick children. Now they are playing with the numbers on their books and pretending paper shuffling and administration work is actually medical care … while also investing heavily in fast food corporations. This is why there needs to be a public option. I don’t want to be forced to give these jerks any of my money.

I always find it entertaining, to say the least, how news trickles down from the people making the news to the people reporting the news to the man on the street. It really is a game of Telephone. Didn’t you play that as a kid? One kid whispers something in another kid’s ear, and it passes around to everyone, and then they all get a big laugh out of how messed up the original statement was by the time everyone mishears or misunderstands what they heard. Anyway, the same thing seems to happen with news. Something happens, the reporters add some spin or are too dumb to really know what’s happened, and then the man on the street hears about it and really takes it to all new heights.

Yesterday, the rumblings from the man on the street was “OMG!!!! Obama has canceled the National Day of Prayer!!! Socialist! Communist! Heathen!!!” Now it wouldn’t break my heart at all if he had, because I don’t think it’s the government’s place to be asking us to pray (which is a small step from telling us to pray, really), but the fact is no such thing is true. Obama has not canceled the National Day of Prayer … no matter what the crazy man on the street is saying.

White House officials say President Obama will recognize a National Day of Prayer this year after a federal judge ruled that the proclamation is unconstitutional.

US District Judge Barbara Crabb, in Madison, Wis., ruled yesterday that the day violates separation of church and state. The ruling comes in a lawsuit filed against the federal government by the Freedom From Religion Foundation. Crabb said her order does not block a prayer day until after all appeals are exhausted.

Obama spokesman Matt Lehrich agreed that the ruling does not prevent the president from issuing a proclamation for the day next month.
— AP, source

So if the man on the street would please kindly stop losing their minds about Obama the horrible atheistic socialist communist, I’d appreciate it. And if we could do away with the National Day of Prayer all together, I’d be just fine with that too, because not everyone believes in gods and not everyone who does believes in praying. I know, crazy ain’t it? In the view of many, a national day of prayer is just as obnoxious as I am certain the overtly religious would find a national day of non-religion when everyone is told NOT to pray. So how about we leave the religion out of our government on the whole?

So how is refusing to obey orders working out for Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, an Army doctor who won’t believe Obama is his rightful Commander in Chief until he sees the birth certificate for himself? He’s now facing a court martial, as I expected.

Is this Birther nonsense ever going to end? No, I suppose. Obama’s birth in Hawaii has been vetted better than any other birth ever, but the only birth certificate Birthers would believe is real is one that says Kenya on it. He could produce the ancient copy of the original, which he likely still has (I have mine), and they’d still insist it was a fake.

That woman who was piercing cats’ ear was sentenced to a year in the county’s Intermediate Punishment Program for one count of animal cruelty. While I think putting 14 gauge barbells in cats’ ears is stupid, she wasn’t torturing the animals while doing it, and it’s no more stupid or cruel than bobbing a dogs tail or clipping their ears, and those things go on all the time. If I had my way, no cats with pierced ears AND no dogs getting bobbed and clipped, because it’s all stupid. Having a double standard about it is even more stupid.

Two female ophthalmologists went on a verbal rampage aimed at Barney Frank over the health care reform legislation while they were all stuck on a plane in flight.

“The women had been drinking, and they were crying and shouting,” Sexton said. “They were clearly the antagonizers, and Mr. Frank was kind of minding his own business.” Finally, the parties calmed down and remained quiet for the rest of the flight.

Said Frank: “It reminds me of the joke about the woman who’s in a restaurant and Clark Gable’s there. She complains to the waiter, ‘Clark Gable is annoying me.’ The waiter says, ‘He’s not even talking to you,’ and she says, ‘Yes, and I find that very annoying.’”

When is it OK to make a scene in public over legislation you don’t agree with? Or for any reason? Well, apparently it’s OK when you’re a woman and perhaps not brown in coloring. There have been endless stories in the news about planes landing immediately for situations less bothersome to an entire airplane full of people, and I imagine, had they been men (or heaven forbid “swarthy” looking) that plane would have been landed in an instant, they have been taken off in shackles, and been forced to spend some time with the FBI.

And really, how much more childish can one get than to start yelling at people in public and making a huge scene on a plane?

The Vatican’s second-highest authority says the sex scandals haunting the Roman Catholic Church are linked to homosexuality and not celibacy among priests.

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican’s secretary of state, made the comments during a news conference Monday in Chile, where one of the church’s highest-profile pedophile cases involves a priest having sex with young girls.

“Many psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relation between celibacy and pedophilia. But many others have demonstrated, I have been told recently, that there is a relation between homosexuality and pedophilia. That is true,” said Bertone. “That is the problem.”

As far as I am concerned, no one in the Vatican has more than two brain cells working or they are just a bunch of liars. Probably a little of both. Anyway, the supposedly true “relation between homosexuality and pedophilia” is totally not true. Could the Catholic hierarchy shut up now? And could they get a new Pope while they are at it? I usually don’t give a damn one way or the other about Popes, because I am not Catholic, but I’m actively starting to really dislike the current one.

Frustrated by recent political setbacks, tea party leaders and some conservative members of the Oklahoma Legislature say they would like to create a new volunteer militia to help defend against what they believe are improper federal infringements on state sovereignty.

What does Oklahoma intend to do with its militia? The proper way to deal with legislation one disagrees with is to work to reverse it through the political process. A militia isn’t going to help with that as the only thing an ARMY is good for is starting a war. Does Oklahoma actually intend to use force to make it’s point? Force against the federal government? Oh, I can’t wait!

The American Family Association are up to their usual bigotry. This time they want all Muslims kicked out of the USA, because as we all know (Not!) all Muslims want to eradicate our freedoms and our way of life.

Those who are willing to convert to Christianity and renounce Islam, Allah, Mohammed and the Koran may be welcomed, for they can become not just good Christians but true Americans.

I find that statement somewhat in contradiction to this one:

Muslims continue to have as their objective the Islamization of the entire world, including the U.S., and are taught by their god to use force where necessary to accomplish the goal.

In what way is saying convert or we will kick you out against your will not also a use of force used to accomplish a goal? Seems to me the god of the AFA and the god of the Muslims they think they are talking about have a lot in common … other than, you know, actually being the same god. In fact, I’d say the god of the AFA and the god of the radical Muslims (a minority of all Muslims on the planet) are even more one and the same than the god of Christianity and Islam is just in general, owing to these particular iterations of god being all about the hate and using of force to accomplish goals.

I wonder, if the AFA got their wish and all Muslims were removed from the USA, who would they go after next? My guess would be the atheists. Or maybe the Jews. Those people have some funny ideas too that don’t fit into AFA’s grand picture of life in America.