As you can see, it has been quite some time since I've written anything. This post, however, is needed. But the words to encapsulate my sentiments about Neil Ellwood Peart will not be enough.
Right now, the music world is heartbroken. Those of us who are fans of Rush are absolutely devastated.
I learned about Neil's passing from a text message yesterday afternoon at 4:20 PM from the very person who properly introduced me to them some time around 1992. I remember as a child absolutely hating Rush for reasons that I could never identify. I distinctly remember waking up one morning around the age of 13 hearing the classical acoustic opening of The Trees on WDVE and thinking to myself, "Wow. What is this?" Then Geddy started singing and I knew immediately it was Rush.
*click*
But in the late spring of 1992, I went over to Dave's house as I did on a regular basis. At any given time he would be playing either Yes, Pink Floyd or Rush. On one particular day, I pulled into his Dad's driveway, got out and walked into the garage where he had been cleaning his old, red VW Jetta (what a car!). As I walked into the threshold of the garage, he had just put Permanent Waves into his tape deck and The Spirit of Radio had just started.
And then magic happened.
For some reason, it just clicked. I finally understood why Dave loved Rush so much. Before I left that day, I asked Dave to borrow his tape. I think I ended up keeping that tape for the next three months.
And now, 28 years later, here I am writing about Neil's passing.
I think the real reason that I'm writing this is because I'm finally forced to face my own mortality. In 1992, I had every one in my life that I needed, loved, or even wanted. I had all of my brothers. I had my grandparents. I had my friends. But since 1992, things have changed. I lost a brother. I lost all of my grandparents (even though my maternal grandfather died before I was born). And some of the friendships that I thought would last forever are now but happy, distant memories.
Now, it seems that around this time of year, I just stare at the soft, warm glow of the Christmas tree giving due reflection of my life. And as I do, I usually think about my childhood and how good, yet horrible things were. And as I make my way down the hallway to go to bed, I'm reminded of the present and how life returns to normal. Work in the morning. Bills. What to have for dinner. Planning my garden for the year. Trying to be a good dad. Trying to be a good husband.
I hang on every day looking for some silver lining. But most days, I go through the normal motions of normal people. Fighting on in quiet desperation hoping that things change. And at night, when the house is quiet and dark, I often lay in bed with tears racing down my cheeks as I stare at a blank, voiceless ceiling.
Over the past few years we have lost some titans in the world of music. Keith Emerson. Chris Squire. More recently, Ric Ocasek. And as painful as it was to lose them, losing Neil is absolutely agonizing for me. His lyrics introduced me to concepts that I otherwise would have never even considered. They comforted me and brought me out of darkness when all I wanted to do was drive off a cliff or swallow a bucket of sleeping pills. The Pass, is one of those songs that made me hang on just a few seconds longer until light would shine on me again.
And his drumming just left me stupefied. As Stewart Copeland once stated, Neil is air-drummed to more than any other rock drummer. I've never been a drummer, always opting to be more like Alex and most recently, Geddy. The closest I ever came to being a drummer was playing Dave's kit every once in a while. Dave once said, try doing anything with your feet while trying to air-drum to a Rush song, then try to do anything with your hands. Try playing along, even without sticks, Neil's version of, The Drum Also Waltzes, and it won't take but a few seconds to understand how complex Neil's drumming was.
I can't pretend that I knew Neil personally. He was someone that I just watched from a bleacher in some arena on several occasions, just mesmerized at what I was seeing and hearing. The last time I saw him was on June 10, 2015 in Buffalo, NY. I have no shame in admitting I cried practically the entire time. Because I knew way deep down inside, that was the last time I would ever see Neil on stage again, let alone with Geddy and Alex.
My heroes are departing one-by-one. And Neil's passing leaves me without the words that are beautiful or crafted well enough to express how much his music means to me and how painful this is. I know that there will be happy memories that await me in the future as I listen to Rush again. But right now, my heart is severed right in two.
The tribute below is not mine. But if I had even the slightest ounce of creativity anymore, it would have been something like it.
This hurts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWoMIlivrtU
Saturday, January 11, 2020
Thursday, June 15, 2017
The Most Overrated Bands of All Time
So, I'm sitting here, had a bit to drink, and I decided that I should write about the most overrated bands of all time. Not that my blog ever gets any traffic or anybody really cares what I have to say, but hopefully I can piss somebody off because I have nothing better to do.
Now, I will freely admit that most of the bands on this list I absolutely detest. And there's a reason for that. It's not because I hate these bands for their looks or anything, but for their overall lack of musical genius. I just. Fucking. Hate them.
With a purple passion.
With each band, I'll explain why they suck so bad. Because if these musical shitburgers are what you call genius, then may I suggest that you are in dire need of a CAT scan.
10. Carlos Santana
Don't get me wrong. I like Carlos Santana. Does he have talent? Yes. Is it minimal at best. Not by a long shot. But Carlos' problem is that he hasn't innovated anything since the 70's. Same look. Same sound. Same Santana. It's gotten so bad for Carlos that he was doing stints with braindead musicians like Rob Thomas. No thanks.
9. Coldplay
Dafuq is this shit?
No. Seriously. Dafuq is that?
8. The Smashing Pumpkins
The only redeeming thing about Billy Corgan is that he spent his youth listening to bands like Rush. Somewhere along the line, someone actually convinced him that he really can sing and that he really has talent. The result was vapid, angsty music and not much else.
Awful. Just awful. The good news is that the band has faded into obscurity. See ya, Billy.
7. Sheryl Crow
What do you expect from a nitwit who wishes everyone would use just one piece of toilet paper after taking a dump? She is only ever-so-slightly talented than Tom Petty.
6. Beyonce
Holy sheep shit, I can hear it already.
"Beyonce!? Bitch, puh-lease!"
Last year, Beyonce released what is supposed to be a critically acclaimed album, "Lemonade." It has over sixty writer's credits and at least ten people to produce it. A lot of the album has samples from other shitty bands like Led Zeppelin, which I included in this list. In her song, "Don't Hurt Yourself," Beyonce included a sample from Led Zeppelin's, "When the Levee Breaks," which these rotten bastards plagiarized and passed off as their own song. So, it might not mean that Zep co-wrote the song with Beyonce but a sample stands as a credit, nonetheless. But at least she credited Zep for the sample.
Of course, Beyonce is not without her defenders like this braindead social justice warrior who infers that even criticizing Beyonce probably makes you a racist (without evidence, of course). Nevermind the fact that she has an entire army of writer's and producers for one album, doesn't play an instrument, or that many of her songs weren't even written by her in the first place. No, none of that matters. Just the fact that criticizing her makes you a racist; that's what really matters. Right, James?
Meanwhile, way back in 1977, Rush released "A Farewell to Kings." Six songs, three musicians, one lyricist, and one producer. That's it.
Comparing Beyonce to Rush is like comparing a Chevette to a Bugatti Chiron. There is no comparison.
And that's why Beyonce comes in at number six on this list. But hey, at least she really does have a lovely voice.
5. Ozzy Osbourne/Black Sabbath
Ozzy Osbourne has consumed so many drugs and bitten the heads off of so many flying mammals that he's lost practically virtually every cell in that empty, cavernous hole he calls a brain. That being said, I *very* begrudgingly must admit that (I think I'm about to puke) Black Sabbath broke fresh ground in the nascent stages of metal and helped propel it to what it is today.
Perhaps its because I never saw them live (I wouldn't want to anyway), but I find it very amusing when I hear people in their 60's espouse their views on what metal really is and how it should sound.
4. Tom Petty
This stoned, tone-deaf, uninspiring asshole has about as much talent as a retarded amoeba. What's truly perplexing about Tom Petty is that, in spite of the fact that he has little if any talent, he continues to convince concert-goers to buy tickets to his shitty performances. You would figure for as big as he is, he would have at least five albums and twenty songs that hit number one, but he never has. Ever. But for reasons that even God can't comprehend, Tom Petty's shows sell out year after year.
"But you really need to listen to him," you say. Listen, the last time I gave Tom Petty the old, college try I went into a convulsive state that lasted for weeks. There's nothing good about Tom Petty, except the knowledge that one day he will rid us of his presence.
*UPDATE* 2/26/2018 - Tom Petty is dead. Couldn't care less.
3. Kiss
Any band that has to dress up in stretched leather, platform boots, shitty make-up, and write lyrics that degrade women in order to attract fans sucks shit and aren't worth your time. Let's see here...
"I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day..."
Great lyrics, there, Gene. Or how about these lovely lyrics?
"Every damn time I walk through that door, it's the same damn thing.
That bitch bends over, and I forget my name - ow!"
Nice lyrics, asshole. You're a disgrace to music and humanity.
Anyway, not only are their lyrics shitty, so are their compositions. The chords progressions are a coma-inducing repetition of the same chords over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again, usually consisting of a A, C, D, and E-minor (especially E-minor). Neither Paul Stanley or Ace Frehley would know what to do with a guitar if it weren't for E-minor.
Anyway, shitty lyrics. Shitty musicianship. Shitty band. And don't give me this, "But they're one of the hardest working bands ever!" bullshit.
Kiss sucks. End of story. Next?
2. Led Zeppelin
Oh, God, here we go. I can hear it now. "What? You don't like Zep, little man?" "Led Zeppelin the greatest band of all time. Fuck you, asshole!"
Three words, jocko. Fuck. Led. Zeppelin.
I'm not saying that Zeppelin isn't without its contributions and accomplishments, but face it - those things came at the expense of a great many musicians who had been dead long before Page and Plant ever embraced each other behind closed doors. If it weren't for their blatant plagiarism, Led Zeppelin would have earned my respect. But they've plagiarized their way to super-success, and for that, they'll never earn my respect.
John Paul Jones is respectable, but he's not the greatest bassist that ever lived.
John Bonham was a visionary, but he's not the greatest drummer that ever lived.
Robert Plant is an amazing vocalist, but he's not the greatest vocalist that ever lived.
Jimmy Page is a fucking thief. Period. Therefore, he's not the greatest guitarist that ever lived.
Compare Led Zeppelin to the Charlie Daniel's Band. You can't. There is no comparison because Charlie Daniel's shit has more talent than Jimmy Page has in his entire body.
Compare Led Zeppelin to Tool (in spite of the fact that Tool covers No Quarter). You can't. There is no comparison because Tool are far more progressive and experimental than Robert Plant on a opioid binge.
Compare Led Zeppelin to Marduk. You can't. There is no comparison because Jimmy Page just wishes he were a visionary of darkness. Marduk lives it.
Compare Led Zeppelin to Fallujah. You can't. There is no comparison because Andrew Baird makes John Bonham look like an infant that just happens to be sitting behind a drum kit with sticks in his hands. Bonham on his best day would never be even close to Baird even if he were on his death bed.
Compare Led Zeppelin to Dream Theater. You can't. There is no comparison because the difference between the two is like comparing a Chevette to a Bugatti Chiron. One sucks. The other doesn't.
In short, there is no such thing as "the greatest band of all time." And even if there were, Led Zeppelin wouldn't even come within thirty magnitudes of it. So, get it through your thick, naive skulls, fanboys and girls; Led Zeppelin, although they left a rather sizable footprint in the world of music, ain't shit. If they were, they never would have had to steal a single song then pass it off as their own.
So fuck Led Zeppelin on a cracker. Sideways.
1. The Fucking Beatles.
Yeah, the whole point of this post was to hate on the Beatles.
The Beatles' entire career practically hinged on three chords. The whisper-thin fellow below illustrates how so many idiots have been fooled into believing the so-called Fab Four actually had talent. Twenty-one of their biggest hits were written with three chords.
Three.
Fucking.
Chords.
Now, if that wasn't enough to piss you off then let's put things into perspective.
The Beatles came along at a certain time in history in which people had been more or less repressed in every way imaginable, especially sexually. By the time the Beatles were playing coffee shops and bars in Liverpool, the constant barrage of sexual and spiritual purity by the likes of shows Leave It To Beaver, Father Knows Best, I Love Lucy, The Donna Reed Show (Donna Reed...*swoon*), and The Honeymooners had young women everywhere aching to leave the confines of the kitchen and stifled bedroom and into something a bit more liberating and comfortable.
By the end of the 50's, women had simply had enough. Elvis Presley's scandalous hip thrusts started the revolution during the 50's. But along came four of the shittiest musicians who ever existed, with their bowl haircuts and boyish good looks, they eagerly exploited these womens' desires. They were darling in the public eye and women found them simply irresistible for reasons I will never understand. Much like the young women of today who worship this motherfucker:
At least the women in the 60's had an excuse. Fans of the Biebs have no such luxury.
Anyway, did you see what I did there? Is it starting to make sense now? That's exactly right. If you said, "You made me realize that there really never was anything to the Beatles to begin with," you're absolutely right. In other words, if The Beatles came out today, they would be no more significant that Justin Fucking Bieber, simply because both of them had a fan base that found them extremely desirable sexually without the slightest hint of any measurable talent.
And that's what it's all about with the Shittl...errrr...Beatles. Take away the coma-inducing, spastic head-bobbing, the bowl cuts, the drugs, the pseudo-intellectualism of John Lennon, the suits, and you're left with nothing more than the likes of Justin Bieber, New Kids on the Block, or even Hanson.
FUCKING. HANSON.
Now, if you're screaming at me in a fit of sheer rage and some sense of misplaced sense of self-righteousness, this can come from only one place. And that place is classic rock stations across the country. Chances are if you turn on the radio right now and turn the dial to a classic rock channel, you're going to hear one of the following bands:
Led Zeppelin (as a matter of fact, I JUST turned on DVE to prove my theory and "Hey, Hey, What Can I Do" came on)
The Beatles
Ozzy/Black Sabbath
Lynrd Skynrd (whom I admire, even though I'm not a fan)
Bruce Springsteen
Bob Seger
The Who
The Police
Yes
Rush (bow your head, damnit!)
The Eagles
The Grateful Dead (not even worth mentioning)
Guns N' Roses
Now, I'm not saying that these are the only bands that you'll ever hear on a classic rock station, but chances are that they'll be one of the first bands you hear.
And of those bands, you'll hear no more than five songs from them on average. Unless of course we're talking about Led Zeppelin or The Fucking Beatles, then they'll play every single song they ever written, had someone write for them, or flat-out stole. You know, in case you forgot that they're a thing.
Anyway, like I said, if you think that these are among the greatest bands this world has even produced, then you need to get out more often. There's more to life than classic rock and bands that are light years beyond The Beatles when it comes to pure talent.
I recommend you start with bands like Opeth, Ayreon, Dream Theater, Amplifier to see just how good music can really be. Your deprogramming begins now.
Now, I will freely admit that most of the bands on this list I absolutely detest. And there's a reason for that. It's not because I hate these bands for their looks or anything, but for their overall lack of musical genius. I just. Fucking. Hate them.
With a purple passion.
With each band, I'll explain why they suck so bad. Because if these musical shitburgers are what you call genius, then may I suggest that you are in dire need of a CAT scan.
10. Carlos Santana
Don't get me wrong. I like Carlos Santana. Does he have talent? Yes. Is it minimal at best. Not by a long shot. But Carlos' problem is that he hasn't innovated anything since the 70's. Same look. Same sound. Same Santana. It's gotten so bad for Carlos that he was doing stints with braindead musicians like Rob Thomas. No thanks.
9. Coldplay
Dafuq is this shit?
No. Seriously. Dafuq is that?
8. The Smashing Pumpkins
The only redeeming thing about Billy Corgan is that he spent his youth listening to bands like Rush. Somewhere along the line, someone actually convinced him that he really can sing and that he really has talent. The result was vapid, angsty music and not much else.
Awful. Just awful. The good news is that the band has faded into obscurity. See ya, Billy.
7. Sheryl Crow
What do you expect from a nitwit who wishes everyone would use just one piece of toilet paper after taking a dump? She is only ever-so-slightly talented than Tom Petty.
6. Beyonce
Holy sheep shit, I can hear it already.
"Beyonce!? Bitch, puh-lease!"
Last year, Beyonce released what is supposed to be a critically acclaimed album, "Lemonade." It has over sixty writer's credits and at least ten people to produce it. A lot of the album has samples from other shitty bands like Led Zeppelin, which I included in this list. In her song, "Don't Hurt Yourself," Beyonce included a sample from Led Zeppelin's, "When the Levee Breaks," which these rotten bastards plagiarized and passed off as their own song. So, it might not mean that Zep co-wrote the song with Beyonce but a sample stands as a credit, nonetheless. But at least she credited Zep for the sample.
Of course, Beyonce is not without her defenders like this braindead social justice warrior who infers that even criticizing Beyonce probably makes you a racist (without evidence, of course). Nevermind the fact that she has an entire army of writer's and producers for one album, doesn't play an instrument, or that many of her songs weren't even written by her in the first place. No, none of that matters. Just the fact that criticizing her makes you a racist; that's what really matters. Right, James?
Meanwhile, way back in 1977, Rush released "A Farewell to Kings." Six songs, three musicians, one lyricist, and one producer. That's it.
Comparing Beyonce to Rush is like comparing a Chevette to a Bugatti Chiron. There is no comparison.
And that's why Beyonce comes in at number six on this list. But hey, at least she really does have a lovely voice.
5. Ozzy Osbourne/Black Sabbath
Ozzy Osbourne has consumed so many drugs and bitten the heads off of so many flying mammals that he's lost practically virtually every cell in that empty, cavernous hole he calls a brain. That being said, I *very* begrudgingly must admit that (I think I'm about to puke) Black Sabbath broke fresh ground in the nascent stages of metal and helped propel it to what it is today.
Perhaps its because I never saw them live (I wouldn't want to anyway), but I find it very amusing when I hear people in their 60's espouse their views on what metal really is and how it should sound.
4. Tom Petty
This stoned, tone-deaf, uninspiring asshole has about as much talent as a retarded amoeba. What's truly perplexing about Tom Petty is that, in spite of the fact that he has little if any talent, he continues to convince concert-goers to buy tickets to his shitty performances. You would figure for as big as he is, he would have at least five albums and twenty songs that hit number one, but he never has. Ever. But for reasons that even God can't comprehend, Tom Petty's shows sell out year after year.
"But you really need to listen to him," you say. Listen, the last time I gave Tom Petty the old, college try I went into a convulsive state that lasted for weeks. There's nothing good about Tom Petty, except the knowledge that one day he will rid us of his presence.
*UPDATE* 2/26/2018 - Tom Petty is dead. Couldn't care less.
3. Kiss
Any band that has to dress up in stretched leather, platform boots, shitty make-up, and write lyrics that degrade women in order to attract fans sucks shit and aren't worth your time. Let's see here...
"I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day..."
Great lyrics, there, Gene. Or how about these lovely lyrics?
"Every damn time I walk through that door, it's the same damn thing.
That bitch bends over, and I forget my name - ow!"
Nice lyrics, asshole. You're a disgrace to music and humanity.
Anyway, not only are their lyrics shitty, so are their compositions. The chords progressions are a coma-inducing repetition of the same chords over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again, usually consisting of a A, C, D, and E-minor (especially E-minor). Neither Paul Stanley or Ace Frehley would know what to do with a guitar if it weren't for E-minor.
Anyway, shitty lyrics. Shitty musicianship. Shitty band. And don't give me this, "But they're one of the hardest working bands ever!" bullshit.
Kiss sucks. End of story. Next?
2. Led Zeppelin
Oh, God, here we go. I can hear it now. "What? You don't like Zep, little man?" "Led Zeppelin the greatest band of all time. Fuck you, asshole!"
Three words, jocko. Fuck. Led. Zeppelin.
I'm not saying that Zeppelin isn't without its contributions and accomplishments, but face it - those things came at the expense of a great many musicians who had been dead long before Page and Plant ever embraced each other behind closed doors. If it weren't for their blatant plagiarism, Led Zeppelin would have earned my respect. But they've plagiarized their way to super-success, and for that, they'll never earn my respect.
John Paul Jones is respectable, but he's not the greatest bassist that ever lived.
John Bonham was a visionary, but he's not the greatest drummer that ever lived.
Robert Plant is an amazing vocalist, but he's not the greatest vocalist that ever lived.
Jimmy Page is a fucking thief. Period. Therefore, he's not the greatest guitarist that ever lived.
Compare Led Zeppelin to the Charlie Daniel's Band. You can't. There is no comparison because Charlie Daniel's shit has more talent than Jimmy Page has in his entire body.
Compare Led Zeppelin to Tool (in spite of the fact that Tool covers No Quarter). You can't. There is no comparison because Tool are far more progressive and experimental than Robert Plant on a opioid binge.
Compare Led Zeppelin to Marduk. You can't. There is no comparison because Jimmy Page just wishes he were a visionary of darkness. Marduk lives it.
Compare Led Zeppelin to Fallujah. You can't. There is no comparison because Andrew Baird makes John Bonham look like an infant that just happens to be sitting behind a drum kit with sticks in his hands. Bonham on his best day would never be even close to Baird even if he were on his death bed.
Compare Led Zeppelin to Dream Theater. You can't. There is no comparison because the difference between the two is like comparing a Chevette to a Bugatti Chiron. One sucks. The other doesn't.
In short, there is no such thing as "the greatest band of all time." And even if there were, Led Zeppelin wouldn't even come within thirty magnitudes of it. So, get it through your thick, naive skulls, fanboys and girls; Led Zeppelin, although they left a rather sizable footprint in the world of music, ain't shit. If they were, they never would have had to steal a single song then pass it off as their own.
So fuck Led Zeppelin on a cracker. Sideways.
1. The Fucking Beatles.
Yeah, the whole point of this post was to hate on the Beatles.
The Beatles' entire career practically hinged on three chords. The whisper-thin fellow below illustrates how so many idiots have been fooled into believing the so-called Fab Four actually had talent. Twenty-one of their biggest hits were written with three chords.
Three.
Fucking.
Chords.
Now, if that wasn't enough to piss you off then let's put things into perspective.
The Beatles came along at a certain time in history in which people had been more or less repressed in every way imaginable, especially sexually. By the time the Beatles were playing coffee shops and bars in Liverpool, the constant barrage of sexual and spiritual purity by the likes of shows Leave It To Beaver, Father Knows Best, I Love Lucy, The Donna Reed Show (Donna Reed...*swoon*), and The Honeymooners had young women everywhere aching to leave the confines of the kitchen and stifled bedroom and into something a bit more liberating and comfortable.
By the end of the 50's, women had simply had enough. Elvis Presley's scandalous hip thrusts started the revolution during the 50's. But along came four of the shittiest musicians who ever existed, with their bowl haircuts and boyish good looks, they eagerly exploited these womens' desires. They were darling in the public eye and women found them simply irresistible for reasons I will never understand. Much like the young women of today who worship this motherfucker:
At least the women in the 60's had an excuse. Fans of the Biebs have no such luxury.
Anyway, did you see what I did there? Is it starting to make sense now? That's exactly right. If you said, "You made me realize that there really never was anything to the Beatles to begin with," you're absolutely right. In other words, if The Beatles came out today, they would be no more significant that Justin Fucking Bieber, simply because both of them had a fan base that found them extremely desirable sexually without the slightest hint of any measurable talent.
And that's what it's all about with the Shittl...errrr...Beatles. Take away the coma-inducing, spastic head-bobbing, the bowl cuts, the drugs, the pseudo-intellectualism of John Lennon, the suits, and you're left with nothing more than the likes of Justin Bieber, New Kids on the Block, or even Hanson.
FUCKING. HANSON.
Now, if you're screaming at me in a fit of sheer rage and some sense of misplaced sense of self-righteousness, this can come from only one place. And that place is classic rock stations across the country. Chances are if you turn on the radio right now and turn the dial to a classic rock channel, you're going to hear one of the following bands:
Led Zeppelin (as a matter of fact, I JUST turned on DVE to prove my theory and "Hey, Hey, What Can I Do" came on)
The Beatles
Ozzy/Black Sabbath
Lynrd Skynrd (whom I admire, even though I'm not a fan)
Bruce Springsteen
Bob Seger
The Who
The Police
Yes
Rush (bow your head, damnit!)
The Eagles
The Grateful Dead (not even worth mentioning)
Guns N' Roses
Now, I'm not saying that these are the only bands that you'll ever hear on a classic rock station, but chances are that they'll be one of the first bands you hear.
And of those bands, you'll hear no more than five songs from them on average. Unless of course we're talking about Led Zeppelin or The Fucking Beatles, then they'll play every single song they ever written, had someone write for them, or flat-out stole. You know, in case you forgot that they're a thing.
Anyway, like I said, if you think that these are among the greatest bands this world has even produced, then you need to get out more often. There's more to life than classic rock and bands that are light years beyond The Beatles when it comes to pure talent.
I recommend you start with bands like Opeth, Ayreon, Dream Theater, Amplifier to see just how good music can really be. Your deprogramming begins now.
Saturday, June 10, 2017
Follow-up: Team relocations, Nashville, and those damned Coyotes
When I last wrote about NHL expansion/relocation all the way back in 2011 (wow...six years ago already), I was wrong about a few things and right on a lot of things.
First and foremost, I was wrong about Nashville relocating. The fans have picked up the slack in sales and have developed a pretty feverish love for the Predators. In 2011 when I first wrote about the Predators, they were 21st in attendance with 94.3% in 2010-11 and 97.5 in 2011-12, while this year they're at 100%. Good job guys! I like what their fans have done (even though I despise country music). They've attached their identity to their team, and have made Nashville a different team than any other in the NHL.
Now, if you guys are going to insist on throwing catfish on the ice in Pittsburgh, please bear in mind I love mine deep-fried.
Another thing I was wrong about back in 2011 was not seeing the forest for the trees in Pittsburgh. It's no secret that Gary Bettman has not a fan in Pittsburgh, but what most fans (including myself) failed to realize back then is that Jim Balsille wanted to move the Pens to Kansas City, Gary Bettman put his foot down and told Balsille, "No." So, it wasn't just Lemieux who helped keep the Pens in Pittsburgh; Bettman also had a tremendous hand in keeping them there.
That being said, Bettman has now realized his dreams of expansion into the American southwest, and the NHL will now have a home in Sin City. Like I said back then, the Wranglers of the ECHL could muster little interest in their team in 2011. That season, they were only able to average about 3,700 fans per game. Welp, as it turns out, they tried to hold off during the 2014-15 season as they went looking for a bigger building. And guess what? That never happened. Now the Wranglers are no more.
Enter the Las Vegas Golden Knights. I'm going to call it now; the Golden Knights will be around one year before they start bleeding money like their cousins in Arizona. Speaking of the Coyotes, they've had a new owner since 2014 who paid $305 million for the team, and says that the team is looking to build a new arena. You know, even though they never filled seats at Jobing Arena to begin with.
Las Vegas' population has grown since 1990 from 740,000 to over 2 million as of 2015. Keep in mind that Atlanta has a population of over 5 million, and the Thrashers moved to Winnipeg after eleven years in the NHL. Again, the argument cannot be made that population makes all the difference in the world. Nashville is only the 25th largest city in the US, and Predators fans fill the seats consistently.
The lesson of this story? I was only partly wrong in 2011. It's only a matter of time before the Coyotes relocate to Seattle or Quebec, and the Golden Knights relocate to Seattle or Quebec.
While I've been extremely harsh on you in the past, Mr. Bettman, I have a new respect for you. But for the love of everything that is good in the world of hockey, please accept the reality that you can't go where you're not welcome. The Coyotes and now the Golden Knights will relocate. Stop prolonging the inevitable, Mr. Bettman, and bring the NHL back to Seattle and Quebec.
First and foremost, I was wrong about Nashville relocating. The fans have picked up the slack in sales and have developed a pretty feverish love for the Predators. In 2011 when I first wrote about the Predators, they were 21st in attendance with 94.3% in 2010-11 and 97.5 in 2011-12, while this year they're at 100%. Good job guys! I like what their fans have done (even though I despise country music). They've attached their identity to their team, and have made Nashville a different team than any other in the NHL.
Now, if you guys are going to insist on throwing catfish on the ice in Pittsburgh, please bear in mind I love mine deep-fried.
Another thing I was wrong about back in 2011 was not seeing the forest for the trees in Pittsburgh. It's no secret that Gary Bettman has not a fan in Pittsburgh, but what most fans (including myself) failed to realize back then is that Jim Balsille wanted to move the Pens to Kansas City, Gary Bettman put his foot down and told Balsille, "No." So, it wasn't just Lemieux who helped keep the Pens in Pittsburgh; Bettman also had a tremendous hand in keeping them there.
That being said, Bettman has now realized his dreams of expansion into the American southwest, and the NHL will now have a home in Sin City. Like I said back then, the Wranglers of the ECHL could muster little interest in their team in 2011. That season, they were only able to average about 3,700 fans per game. Welp, as it turns out, they tried to hold off during the 2014-15 season as they went looking for a bigger building. And guess what? That never happened. Now the Wranglers are no more.
Enter the Las Vegas Golden Knights. I'm going to call it now; the Golden Knights will be around one year before they start bleeding money like their cousins in Arizona. Speaking of the Coyotes, they've had a new owner since 2014 who paid $305 million for the team, and says that the team is looking to build a new arena. You know, even though they never filled seats at Jobing Arena to begin with.
Las Vegas' population has grown since 1990 from 740,000 to over 2 million as of 2015. Keep in mind that Atlanta has a population of over 5 million, and the Thrashers moved to Winnipeg after eleven years in the NHL. Again, the argument cannot be made that population makes all the difference in the world. Nashville is only the 25th largest city in the US, and Predators fans fill the seats consistently.
The lesson of this story? I was only partly wrong in 2011. It's only a matter of time before the Coyotes relocate to Seattle or Quebec, and the Golden Knights relocate to Seattle or Quebec.
While I've been extremely harsh on you in the past, Mr. Bettman, I have a new respect for you. But for the love of everything that is good in the world of hockey, please accept the reality that you can't go where you're not welcome. The Coyotes and now the Golden Knights will relocate. Stop prolonging the inevitable, Mr. Bettman, and bring the NHL back to Seattle and Quebec.
Thursday, February 2, 2017
Thoughts on the "Women's March", Islam and Rape Culture
A few weeks ago, about 200,000 women showed up in Washington DC and around the country to protest...well, know one really knows what they were protesting, but they sure were earnest. The march supposedly was to support immigration, women's reproductive rights, and access (a.k.a., get free shit) to contraception. But what really ensued was jackassery and stupidity of the highest order.
Take these women for example.
Here's a dyed-haired social justice warrior espousing the virtues of gender equality, which is a complete myth from top to bottom, inside and out. Women are not equal to men, and men aren't equal to women. Period. Oh, this red-headed harpy would love for you to think that women are equal to men, except for, you know, when they need some muscle to take care of a problem that they can't deal with on their own...
So, if a woman who seeks equality with she abuses a man and the man has had enough and hits her back, does she have the right to complain? I'm starting to wonder.
Anyway, here's a woman holding a sign of some her idols. Some, like Malala Yousafzai, deserve admiration from not only men, but the entire world. But only a few inches above Malala's picture is a picture of the Butcher of Germany, herself, Angela Merkel. You know, the one who cleared the way for undocumented rapis....*errr!*....migrants to waltz into Germany and destroy it from within? You know, the one who is repulsed by the very sight of her own nation's flag?
via GIPHY
Yeah, that Angela Merkel.
Oh, and a note to the snowflake standing behind her holding the sign about fascism - fascists don't urge their citizens to arm themselves to the fucking teeth. Quite the opposite. Read a history book.
Here's a picture of a woman holding a sign supporting...uh...well, we don't know who she's supporting exactly, but she's resolute in whatever is going on in her little head. And, dude - what's the the guy wearing a pornstache and a pussy hat? My God, man! Grow some balls! And to the women in the back with the red hat, I absolutely agree with you, ma'am - your pussy does deserve respect. That's why we throw rapists in prison where they belong.
Here's a woman holding a sign that infers that President Obama is a defender of freedom. You know, that same dickhead that sent us $20 trillion into debt, invited those who can't legally vote in the US to vote, that expanded Bush's wars from two countries to seven, threw more whistleblowers in jail than Bush ever dreamed of, and dropped over 23,000 bombs in his last month in office? Yeah, that dickhead. Oh, did I mention that he won a Nobel Peace Prize? Freeeeedooooom!
Anyway, here's woman reminding us that she is a woman, and not an object of desire. How much do you want to bet that she objectifies others on a daily basis?
Here's a lovely lady holding a sign that...well, I agree with. Seriously. Good stuff.
Okay, moving on. Here are two women holding signs showing their disapproval of the Donald. Umm...again, I agree. He's not exactly good to women. But I wonder if these same women ever called out the Obama's for inviting rapper after rapper into the White House who wrote songs about everything from sitting on some dude's face to flat out rape. Where were you on that one, hypocrites?
And where were you when Hillary stood on stage with a man who writes lyrics about abusing women and just discarding them like a piece of used toilet paper? All that and not even having the decency to treat them to at least a steak dinner. Keep it classy, Jay.
Speaking of the White House, here's a washed-up has-been who said she dreams about blowing it up. You shouldn't be surprised that she received a prompt response by the Secret Service. Only then did she tuck her tail firmly between her legs.
Sorry, asshole. But white liberals are the biggest racists of all.
Here's another one of those "Love Trumps Hate" signs. Love does trump hate. Unless you're a Sith Lord. Or any of these assholes who attacked Trump supporters throughout his campaign and will no doubt continue his presidency. Where are you social justice warriors when someone is being beaten simply for their political opinion?
And I'm sorry, but I just love this. Yes, cupcake, he is your president. You might not like it, but he's your president. He won the Electoral College. I never heard any of you bitch and moan about the Electoral College when President Obama was elected.
Okay, I'm almost done, but I wanted to show just one last pic. This is disgusting. Seriously. And no child who hasn't even been taught to think for themselves should ever wear one of these things.
Finally, we have this snake of a human being who helped organize the Women's March.
Yes, Linda Sarsour is a snake. She has the reputation of being called a cockroach because sarsour is Arabic for the tiny insect that carries disease wherever it goes. And while this may an accurate metaphor for Linda, I think the term snake is more befitting. Because a snake is cunning and conceals itself in plain view. And once the prey has been completely seduced, the snake strikes.
I'm sure that after being bored to death with all those pics, me calling Sarsour a snake must have shocked you out of your picture-induced slumber. I can practically hear it now. You're calling me a racist, aren't you? Bigot perhaps? Islamophobe? Please.
But why would I call her a snake? That's a pretty nasty thing for a guy to be calling a woman. Well, before you let your tempers flare beyond control, let's review some of Linda's thoughts and musings. But before we do, let's learn a little bit about her.
Linda was born in Brooklyn, NY in 1980 to two Palestinian immigrants. Nothing wrong with that at all. At the tender age of 17, she was forced into an arranged marriage and had three kids by the time she was 20. I wonder if she's ever had the balls to ask her husband for a divorce. Anyway, shortly afterward, her career in political activism began. And if you listen very closely to her carefully-crafted words, you will can practically hear the venom dripping from her forked tongue.
Being a Muslim, Linda would like for you to believe that she is the object of oppression in the United States. She recently posted on her Facebook account, "They criminalize our leaders. They criminalize our communities. Our faith. they make claims that we are less than. That our beliefs are backwards and somehow what we believe impacts others negatively. They will be consistent in their propaganda. Ordinary, well-meaning people will believe it. Horrible things will happen to said communities because people will believe it's justified."
Sorry, Linda. Your "faith" is drenched with blood of over 230 million people. Spare me your cries of victimhood.
See what I mean? Poor Linda. Every time she opens her mouth she acts like a traumatized dog that has been beaten for years and is just finding strength to fight back. Ask yourself, who is being criminalized? Where in the United States is it illegal to be a Muslim? Are the beliefs of Islam really backwards? I mean, they are. But if so, how are they backwards? Finally, Linda has the balls to talk about propaganda. This coming from someone who actively promotes Hamas. You know, the same terrorist organization that just allied themselves with Daesh?
Anyway, so Linda stands on a national stage spouting on about whatever goes on in that little head of hers. Her words were so well-crafted that those who were in attendance stepped forward to have a hijab wrapped around their empty heads without even the slightest apprehension. Of course, those hijabs were fashioned in the Stars and Stripes, something Article 4 of the US Flag Code strictly prohibits. But do you think any of those so-called patriotic women knew that? Nah. Probably not.
Okay, so why am I attacking Linda Sarsour? Well, for one thing, she is hiding behind our Constitution to promote a heinous ideology that leaves bloodshed and hatred in its wake. This reeeeaally pisses me off. Linda knows that the First Amendment will protect her in her efforts to lead the brainwashed sheep to slaughter, and she hides behind that fact very well.
See, Linda believes in Sharia law. Now, if you're a progressive, leftist, or whatever you want to call yourself these days, you're probably mindlessly accusing me of racism like Ben Asscrack did when he had his ass handed to him by Sam Harris on Bill Maher's show. Pay no attention to Maher, though. He barely has a handle on what being a classical liberal really means.
Sharia allows very little for men, but even less for women. Women who are raped but aren't able to produce four neutral witnesses are stoned to death (sounds legit, right?), are allowed to be beaten by their husbands, are not allowed to file for divorce, are considered half as valuable as men, and are genitally mutilated (as are men, mind you). Basically, if you're a woman living in a truly Islamic country, then you're subjugated and trodden underfoot by men.
Secondly, Linda's a coward. She knows that if she goes to a truly Islamic country like, oh, Saudi Arabia (You know, that country that stones rape victims to death and throws homosexuals from rooftops?), she would have her ass in a sling in a New York minute, not to mention face daily beatings, if not outright death, at the hands of her husband or family member. You know, because Islamic law forbids women to be without a male member of their family in their presence, right? So, empowering that Islam. Especially for women.
Which may prompt the question, if Islamic women aren't allowed to be outside the presence of a male member of their family, then why is she standing on a stage surrounded by women? Ah! Now you're thinking! Let's listen to Anni Cyrus tell us why. If you don't know who Anni is, she is a woman who escaped Iran to the United States under the penalty of death for leaving Islam. She faces death every second of every day and she knows it. She's suffered every punishment for women under Islamic law that a woman can take, except for death.
So, we learn that Linda may very well be practicing deception through the Islamic practice of taqiyya. And therein lies the problem. The sheep at the Women's March have no idea that they've been deceived. You know, the same sheep who are supposedly fighting against some mythical patriarchy in the United States? The same sheep who voted for a woman that has taken money from Saudi where there truly is a patriarchy? All of this in spite of the very religion that they're being duped into states explicitly that no country that has a woman as their leader shall ever prosper.
If all of this isn't enough for you to see the Snake for who she is, let's take a look at some of her tweets.
Here is one in which she dares to call Ayaan Hirsi Ali a hatemonger, someone who's actually lived in Somalia and Saudi Arabia, was in an arranged marriage to a man she never met, had her genitals mutilated, and now as a result of her apostasy, has a death sentence against her.
Sorry, Linda. You may fool the sheep, but you're not fooling the rest of us.
Finally, here's a tweet in which she's again trying to get women to believe that living under a patriarchal, supremacist religion is actually a good thing.
And what's really infuriating is that those same social justice warriors that are hell bent on either reducing or flat out eliminating white males from the public eye are the same ones inhaling the bullshit that the Snake is selling them - hook, line, and sinker.
Which brings me to the myth of rape culture. In spite of what third wave feminists may say, and how desperately they want you to believe it, there is no rape culture in the United States. Rape is punished to the maximum extent of the law in the United States. Yet, complete shitbags like Lena Dunham who has admitted to not only falsely accusing someone of rape, but to forcing herself up on her sister when she younger, everything from bribing her with candy in order to kiss her, to jerking off beside her in bed, to inserting her fingers inside of her.
Lena writes, "As Grace grew, I took to bribing her for her time and affection: one dollar in quarters if I could do her makeup like a 'motorcycle chick.' Three pieces of candy if I could kiss her on the lips for five seconds. Whatever she wanted to watch on TV if she would just 'relax on me.' Basically, anything a sexual predator might do to woo a small suburban girl I was trying. Maybe, I thought, she would be more willing to accept kisses if I wore the mask my grandmother had for when she did her dialysis (The answer was no.) What I really wanted, beyond affection, was to feel that she needed me, that she was helpless without her big sister leading her through the world."
Of course, since Lena is a raging social justice warrior of the feminist sort, the only people who are going to come to her defense will be those who would substitute delusion for objective reality. Besides, she's a professional victim.
Anyway, listen. If you're a third wave feminist who's been duped into believing that all white men are rape-happy, racists, then you seriously need to stop being angry at us and start being angry at your real enemies. You say you hate rapists? Great! So do I. So, if you really want to strike a blow against rape, then start speaking out against Muslims who rape women out in the open. If you want to see what these rotten bastards are doing to women in Europe, then watch the videos below,
Meanwhile, when Donald Trump expressed concern for what's happening in Germany, Sweden and all throughout Europe, you feminists labeled him a racist, scumbag, whatever you wanted. Even though later that week, news came out of Europe that groups of Muslims were raping women at will, something they'd been doing for decades but is only now starting to get the recognition it needs.
No, ladies, there is no rape culture in the United States, much less a patriarchy. Islam, however, it at its very nature highly patriarchal and permits rape of women, so long as they're a non-believer. In Islam, if you are a rape victim unable to produce at least four witnesses, you're in pretty deep shit. And before you label me a bigot and racist, you need to understand that Islam is not a race -- it is a dualistic ideology that is about 10% religious and 90% political. So, spend some time reading about the blood-soaked history of Islam since its birth in 622 A.D. It's killed more people than nazism, socialism, and communism combined.
But hey, it's okay to punch nazis, just leave Mao and Stalin alone, right?
Take these women for example.
Here's a dyed-haired social justice warrior espousing the virtues of gender equality, which is a complete myth from top to bottom, inside and out. Women are not equal to men, and men aren't equal to women. Period. Oh, this red-headed harpy would love for you to think that women are equal to men, except for, you know, when they need some muscle to take care of a problem that they can't deal with on their own...
So, if a woman who seeks equality with she abuses a man and the man has had enough and hits her back, does she have the right to complain? I'm starting to wonder.
Anyway, here's a woman holding a sign of some her idols. Some, like Malala Yousafzai, deserve admiration from not only men, but the entire world. But only a few inches above Malala's picture is a picture of the Butcher of Germany, herself, Angela Merkel. You know, the one who cleared the way for undocumented rapis....*errr!*....migrants to waltz into Germany and destroy it from within? You know, the one who is repulsed by the very sight of her own nation's flag?
via GIPHY
Yeah, that Angela Merkel.
Oh, and a note to the snowflake standing behind her holding the sign about fascism - fascists don't urge their citizens to arm themselves to the fucking teeth. Quite the opposite. Read a history book.
Here's a picture of a woman holding a sign supporting...uh...well, we don't know who she's supporting exactly, but she's resolute in whatever is going on in her little head. And, dude - what's the the guy wearing a pornstache and a pussy hat? My God, man! Grow some balls! And to the women in the back with the red hat, I absolutely agree with you, ma'am - your pussy does deserve respect. That's why we throw rapists in prison where they belong.
Here's a woman holding a sign that infers that President Obama is a defender of freedom. You know, that same dickhead that sent us $20 trillion into debt, invited those who can't legally vote in the US to vote, that expanded Bush's wars from two countries to seven, threw more whistleblowers in jail than Bush ever dreamed of, and dropped over 23,000 bombs in his last month in office? Yeah, that dickhead. Oh, did I mention that he won a Nobel Peace Prize? Freeeeedooooom!
Anyway, here's woman reminding us that she is a woman, and not an object of desire. How much do you want to bet that she objectifies others on a daily basis?
Here's a lovely lady holding a sign that...well, I agree with. Seriously. Good stuff.
Okay, moving on. Here are two women holding signs showing their disapproval of the Donald. Umm...again, I agree. He's not exactly good to women. But I wonder if these same women ever called out the Obama's for inviting rapper after rapper into the White House who wrote songs about everything from sitting on some dude's face to flat out rape. Where were you on that one, hypocrites?
And where were you when Hillary stood on stage with a man who writes lyrics about abusing women and just discarding them like a piece of used toilet paper? All that and not even having the decency to treat them to at least a steak dinner. Keep it classy, Jay.
Speaking of the White House, here's a washed-up has-been who said she dreams about blowing it up. You shouldn't be surprised that she received a prompt response by the Secret Service. Only then did she tuck her tail firmly between her legs.
Sorry, asshole. But white liberals are the biggest racists of all.
Here's another one of those "Love Trumps Hate" signs. Love does trump hate. Unless you're a Sith Lord. Or any of these assholes who attacked Trump supporters throughout his campaign and will no doubt continue his presidency. Where are you social justice warriors when someone is being beaten simply for their political opinion?
And I'm sorry, but I just love this. Yes, cupcake, he is your president. You might not like it, but he's your president. He won the Electoral College. I never heard any of you bitch and moan about the Electoral College when President Obama was elected.
Okay, I'm almost done, but I wanted to show just one last pic. This is disgusting. Seriously. And no child who hasn't even been taught to think for themselves should ever wear one of these things.
Finally, we have this snake of a human being who helped organize the Women's March.
Yes, Linda Sarsour is a snake. She has the reputation of being called a cockroach because sarsour is Arabic for the tiny insect that carries disease wherever it goes. And while this may an accurate metaphor for Linda, I think the term snake is more befitting. Because a snake is cunning and conceals itself in plain view. And once the prey has been completely seduced, the snake strikes.
I'm sure that after being bored to death with all those pics, me calling Sarsour a snake must have shocked you out of your picture-induced slumber. I can practically hear it now. You're calling me a racist, aren't you? Bigot perhaps? Islamophobe? Please.
But why would I call her a snake? That's a pretty nasty thing for a guy to be calling a woman. Well, before you let your tempers flare beyond control, let's review some of Linda's thoughts and musings. But before we do, let's learn a little bit about her.
Linda was born in Brooklyn, NY in 1980 to two Palestinian immigrants. Nothing wrong with that at all. At the tender age of 17, she was forced into an arranged marriage and had three kids by the time she was 20. I wonder if she's ever had the balls to ask her husband for a divorce. Anyway, shortly afterward, her career in political activism began. And if you listen very closely to her carefully-crafted words, you will can practically hear the venom dripping from her forked tongue.
Being a Muslim, Linda would like for you to believe that she is the object of oppression in the United States. She recently posted on her Facebook account, "They criminalize our leaders. They criminalize our communities. Our faith. they make claims that we are less than. That our beliefs are backwards and somehow what we believe impacts others negatively. They will be consistent in their propaganda. Ordinary, well-meaning people will believe it. Horrible things will happen to said communities because people will believe it's justified."
Sorry, Linda. Your "faith" is drenched with blood of over 230 million people. Spare me your cries of victimhood.
See what I mean? Poor Linda. Every time she opens her mouth she acts like a traumatized dog that has been beaten for years and is just finding strength to fight back. Ask yourself, who is being criminalized? Where in the United States is it illegal to be a Muslim? Are the beliefs of Islam really backwards? I mean, they are. But if so, how are they backwards? Finally, Linda has the balls to talk about propaganda. This coming from someone who actively promotes Hamas. You know, the same terrorist organization that just allied themselves with Daesh?
Anyway, so Linda stands on a national stage spouting on about whatever goes on in that little head of hers. Her words were so well-crafted that those who were in attendance stepped forward to have a hijab wrapped around their empty heads without even the slightest apprehension. Of course, those hijabs were fashioned in the Stars and Stripes, something Article 4 of the US Flag Code strictly prohibits. But do you think any of those so-called patriotic women knew that? Nah. Probably not.
Okay, so why am I attacking Linda Sarsour? Well, for one thing, she is hiding behind our Constitution to promote a heinous ideology that leaves bloodshed and hatred in its wake. This reeeeaally pisses me off. Linda knows that the First Amendment will protect her in her efforts to lead the brainwashed sheep to slaughter, and she hides behind that fact very well.
See, Linda believes in Sharia law. Now, if you're a progressive, leftist, or whatever you want to call yourself these days, you're probably mindlessly accusing me of racism like Ben Asscrack did when he had his ass handed to him by Sam Harris on Bill Maher's show. Pay no attention to Maher, though. He barely has a handle on what being a classical liberal really means.
Sharia allows very little for men, but even less for women. Women who are raped but aren't able to produce four neutral witnesses are stoned to death (sounds legit, right?), are allowed to be beaten by their husbands, are not allowed to file for divorce, are considered half as valuable as men, and are genitally mutilated (as are men, mind you). Basically, if you're a woman living in a truly Islamic country, then you're subjugated and trodden underfoot by men.
Secondly, Linda's a coward. She knows that if she goes to a truly Islamic country like, oh, Saudi Arabia (You know, that country that stones rape victims to death and throws homosexuals from rooftops?), she would have her ass in a sling in a New York minute, not to mention face daily beatings, if not outright death, at the hands of her husband or family member. You know, because Islamic law forbids women to be without a male member of their family in their presence, right? So, empowering that Islam. Especially for women.
Which may prompt the question, if Islamic women aren't allowed to be outside the presence of a male member of their family, then why is she standing on a stage surrounded by women? Ah! Now you're thinking! Let's listen to Anni Cyrus tell us why. If you don't know who Anni is, she is a woman who escaped Iran to the United States under the penalty of death for leaving Islam. She faces death every second of every day and she knows it. She's suffered every punishment for women under Islamic law that a woman can take, except for death.
So, we learn that Linda may very well be practicing deception through the Islamic practice of taqiyya. And therein lies the problem. The sheep at the Women's March have no idea that they've been deceived. You know, the same sheep who are supposedly fighting against some mythical patriarchy in the United States? The same sheep who voted for a woman that has taken money from Saudi where there truly is a patriarchy? All of this in spite of the very religion that they're being duped into states explicitly that no country that has a woman as their leader shall ever prosper.
If all of this isn't enough for you to see the Snake for who she is, let's take a look at some of her tweets.
Here is one in which she dares to call Ayaan Hirsi Ali a hatemonger, someone who's actually lived in Somalia and Saudi Arabia, was in an arranged marriage to a man she never met, had her genitals mutilated, and now as a result of her apostasy, has a death sentence against her.
Here's a tweet from 2012 of Linda expressing pity, yet rage, toward Ayaan, because she simply has the ability to think for herself. Why would you feel toward rage when you pity the same person.
Here's one in 2011 in which she seems to take a threatening stance toward Brigitte Gabriel, yet another woman who was born in another Islamic country, and bears the scars to prove it.
Here's one that confirms that Linda is not above deleting controversial tweets, and wishes ill-will upon Ayaan.
But lest anyone believe that she's full of hate, which she is, and her religion is patriarchal and hateful toward women, which it is, she wants you to believe that Sharia law is actually a good thing. You know, the same law that says homosexuals should be put to death, adulterers should be stoned to death, anyone who walks away from Islam should be put under the sword, and states that it's perfectly okay for non-Muslim women to be raped because they're not Muslim.
Sorry, Linda. You may fool the sheep, but you're not fooling the rest of us.
Finally, here's a tweet in which she's again trying to get women to believe that living under a patriarchal, supremacist religion is actually a good thing.
Go peddle your poisonous ideology in Saudi Arabia where it belongs, Linda. It doesn't belong in the United States.
And what's really infuriating is that those same social justice warriors that are hell bent on either reducing or flat out eliminating white males from the public eye are the same ones inhaling the bullshit that the Snake is selling them - hook, line, and sinker.
Which brings me to the myth of rape culture. In spite of what third wave feminists may say, and how desperately they want you to believe it, there is no rape culture in the United States. Rape is punished to the maximum extent of the law in the United States. Yet, complete shitbags like Lena Dunham who has admitted to not only falsely accusing someone of rape, but to forcing herself up on her sister when she younger, everything from bribing her with candy in order to kiss her, to jerking off beside her in bed, to inserting her fingers inside of her.
Lena writes, "As Grace grew, I took to bribing her for her time and affection: one dollar in quarters if I could do her makeup like a 'motorcycle chick.' Three pieces of candy if I could kiss her on the lips for five seconds. Whatever she wanted to watch on TV if she would just 'relax on me.' Basically, anything a sexual predator might do to woo a small suburban girl I was trying. Maybe, I thought, she would be more willing to accept kisses if I wore the mask my grandmother had for when she did her dialysis (The answer was no.) What I really wanted, beyond affection, was to feel that she needed me, that she was helpless without her big sister leading her through the world."
Of course, since Lena is a raging social justice warrior of the feminist sort, the only people who are going to come to her defense will be those who would substitute delusion for objective reality. Besides, she's a professional victim.
Anyway, listen. If you're a third wave feminist who's been duped into believing that all white men are rape-happy, racists, then you seriously need to stop being angry at us and start being angry at your real enemies. You say you hate rapists? Great! So do I. So, if you really want to strike a blow against rape, then start speaking out against Muslims who rape women out in the open. If you want to see what these rotten bastards are doing to women in Europe, then watch the videos below,
Meanwhile, when Donald Trump expressed concern for what's happening in Germany, Sweden and all throughout Europe, you feminists labeled him a racist, scumbag, whatever you wanted. Even though later that week, news came out of Europe that groups of Muslims were raping women at will, something they'd been doing for decades but is only now starting to get the recognition it needs.
No, ladies, there is no rape culture in the United States, much less a patriarchy. Islam, however, it at its very nature highly patriarchal and permits rape of women, so long as they're a non-believer. In Islam, if you are a rape victim unable to produce at least four witnesses, you're in pretty deep shit. And before you label me a bigot and racist, you need to understand that Islam is not a race -- it is a dualistic ideology that is about 10% religious and 90% political. So, spend some time reading about the blood-soaked history of Islam since its birth in 622 A.D. It's killed more people than nazism, socialism, and communism combined.
But hey, it's okay to punch nazis, just leave Mao and Stalin alone, right?
Thursday, December 29, 2016
An Open Letter to Mark Bezos
Mr. Bezos,
You can lose $1 billion in a day and you hardly even feel it. Blue Horizon is a grand idea, and those of us who love space exploration applaud your efforts and hope you succeed.
We get it. You have vision.
Now take that the energy behind that vision and use it for a better workforce. Because the last thing the planet needs are giant floating warehouses marring our skies so that you can make even more fucking money. This idea is a one gigantic civil lawsuit just waiting and itching to happen.
In the meantime, get over yourself.
Regards,
Matt
You can lose $1 billion in a day and you hardly even feel it. Blue Horizon is a grand idea, and those of us who love space exploration applaud your efforts and hope you succeed.
We get it. You have vision.
Now take that the energy behind that vision and use it for a better workforce. Because the last thing the planet needs are giant floating warehouses marring our skies so that you can make even more fucking money. This idea is a one gigantic civil lawsuit just waiting and itching to happen.
In the meantime, get over yourself.
Regards,
Matt
Tuesday, June 21, 2016
Thoughts on Orlando and Gun Control
Wow. It's been a long time since I've been here. But in light of the massacre in Orlando, Florida, I feel compelled to say a few things.
I need to be clear that I do not take lightly what happened in Orlando. Nor Aurora. Nor Newtown. Nor any other place where gun violence took its bloody toll. I have no idea what it's like to watch my friends or loved ones die in a rain of bullets. However, it seems that there is a great deal of confusion with regard to not only gun laws, but the differences between guns themselves, particularly the AR-15.
Predictably, there has been a myriad of articles being written after Omar Sateen took 49 lives and injured 53. Most of the authors mean well, writing with such passion and conviction as if their words would summarily end gun violence once and for all. Over at Rolling Stone, there has been at least one such article written by constitutional scholar, David S. Cohen. In the article, "Why It's Time to Repeal the Second Amendment", Cohen provides examples of constitutional faux pas that needed to be repealed. However, Cohen's claim with regard that the Founder's "blatantly wrote racism" into the Constitution is well off the mark. Cohen is, of course, referring to Article I, Section II, Clause III, which states:
"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may include within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."
Cohen's interpretation of this clause is based on the long-held falsehood that the Constitution determined that black people are only three-fifths human. This is patently and demonstrably false, as the clause has nothing to do with race, but political representation. Happily, however, the 12th Amendment repealed the aforementioned clause.
But the main premise of Cohen's article is that the Second Amendment is something that is a "threat to liberty and a suicide pact" and needs to be repealed post haste. Instead of making a sound reason for why the Second Amendment needs to be repealed, he makes an appeal to emotion by inferring that the Founders were mere musket-toting revolutionaries that never could have foreseen that technology would someday make weapons that could kill multiple people by simply squeezing the trigger once. Not surprisingly, Cohen is wrong about this myth as I will elaborate on shortly. He furthers his emotional appeal by stating that we should just be allowed to enjoy our liberties to enjoy a night out with friends.
Meanwhile, another article at Rolling Stone has resurfaced since Orlando that was written by feminist and social justice warrior, Amanda Marcotte. This inanity of Cohen's article is a work of genius compared to Marcotte's. Entitled, "4 Pro-Gun Arguments We're Sick of Hearing", it continues Rolling Stone's ongoing agenda to destabilize the American society and replace it with a socialist utopia.
As the title describes, the article provides four pro-gun arguments which Marcotte attempts to destroy. But she unwittingly destroyed her own argument by displaying her ignorance of common sense, let alone anything that is based on fact.
Let's review Marcotte's article, one pro-gun argument at a time.
1. "Guns don't kill people. People kill people."
The very first objection Amanda puts forth isn't based on fact, but emotion. The last time I checked, a gun of any kind can't just get up by itself and kill anyone. Someone had to obtain the weapon, learn how to shoot it, think about the person(s) they wanted to kill, find them and put all of that knowledge into action. By Amanda's logic, no one should be allowed to own a car, rope, knife, Louisville Slugger, or even water. Either way, if someone has the intent to kill, they're going to find a way with or without a gun.
So, say it with me, Amanda - Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Period.
2. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."
Of all the gun owners I've even known, I've never heard any of them say this. Marcotte would like you to think that there hasn't been an example of an armed civilian that stopped an active shooter.
If Marcotte had done as much as a Google search, she could have fact-checked her statement about law-abiding citizens stopping gun-wielding murderers thereby saving herself the embarrassment of looking like a complete fool.
But let's suppose that Amanda's right. Even if her premise was true, take into consideration the fact that places where mass shootings occur have the tightest gun restrictions. If a law-abiding citizen were allowed to carry weapons in those places, there wouldn't be as many people shot dead as a result of a gunmen that has lost his mind. Why should Marcotte or any other liberal be shocked when shooters go for the softest targets where no one can shoot back because of the laws their braindead legislators passed won't allow them to?
Marcotte is hoping that her readers are stupid and lazy enough to do their own research to verify if she is telling the truth. I am happy to disappoint you, Amanda.
Examples of good guys with guns stopping bad guys with guns can be found here, here, and here. One of which just happened last month. Almost all of them happened in the past 30 years, Amanda.
Oh, by the way - there are some reports that it took the Orlando Police Department three hours to respond, Amanda. If someone inside Pulse had a firearm, there may have been fewer lives lost on June 12, 2016 in Orlando, FL. And if anyone should garner at least some of the blame for what happened in Orlando, the FBI definitely deserves some. They've received multiple warnings about Mateen years before June 12, not to mention the fact that he was their terrorist watch list. Funny that they took him off.
3. "But, mental health!"
Law-abiding citizens who are of sound mind and body do not arm themselves to the teeth and spray bullets, Amanda. How else should address the mental state of assassins, Amanda? Cuddle them and tell them it's not their fault?
4. "Second Amendment, baby!"
Shortly after I started my blog, there was a shooting in Pittsburgh in which three police officers were killed. This one hit close to home because I'm from the Pittsburgh area. I was inspired to write a blog post about this shooting in which I questioned if the Second Amendment should be repealed, not unlike Cohen's premise.
But the more educated I become about the nature of mass shootings and the frequent failure of gun laws that are supposed to protect us, the more I'm convinced that concealed carry is a viable option for stopping active shooters. So much to the point, that I'm actually considering arming myself. Which is a tremendously huge decision for me. My wife is vehemently against guns in any way, shape or form, other than using rifles for putting food on the table. But primarily because I have a boy that loves getting into places and touching things he knows that he shouldn't. These two reasons are the only ones that have prevented me from purchasing a firearm.
What's that? I don't own a gun? You mean, I'm not a gun-crazed lunatic like this troglodyte?
No, I don't own a gun and I have more respect for my flag and country than Ted Nugent ever dreamed of.
But this line from Amanda's article astounds me the most:
The irony here is thick like a stinky cologne.
First, notice that Amanda nailed the problem right on the head in the last sentence without her even realizing it. Because we all know that people that who happen to not be maladjusted are in dire need of psychiatric treatment and should be banned owning guns. But I have to ask - do you know how many gun laws are on the books, Amanda? The short answer is over 16,000. And how many of those gun laws did Omar Mateen observe on June 12, 2016? Yep. You guessed it; zero.
So, when are you going to realize that the Dylann Roofs and Omar Mateens of the world don't give a flying shit about law, Amanda? And when are you going to learn that soft targets like Pulse night club, a place where guns are strictly prohibited, attract active shooters like moths to flame?
Orlando, FL. Charleston, SC. Aurora, CO. Blacksburg, VA. San Bernardino, CA.
Newtown.
How are those gun laws working for you, Amanda?
I need to be clear that I do not take lightly what happened in Orlando. Nor Aurora. Nor Newtown. Nor any other place where gun violence took its bloody toll. I have no idea what it's like to watch my friends or loved ones die in a rain of bullets. However, it seems that there is a great deal of confusion with regard to not only gun laws, but the differences between guns themselves, particularly the AR-15.
Predictably, there has been a myriad of articles being written after Omar Sateen took 49 lives and injured 53. Most of the authors mean well, writing with such passion and conviction as if their words would summarily end gun violence once and for all. Over at Rolling Stone, there has been at least one such article written by constitutional scholar, David S. Cohen. In the article, "Why It's Time to Repeal the Second Amendment", Cohen provides examples of constitutional faux pas that needed to be repealed. However, Cohen's claim with regard that the Founder's "blatantly wrote racism" into the Constitution is well off the mark. Cohen is, of course, referring to Article I, Section II, Clause III, which states:
"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may include within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."
Cohen's interpretation of this clause is based on the long-held falsehood that the Constitution determined that black people are only three-fifths human. This is patently and demonstrably false, as the clause has nothing to do with race, but political representation. Happily, however, the 12th Amendment repealed the aforementioned clause.
But the main premise of Cohen's article is that the Second Amendment is something that is a "threat to liberty and a suicide pact" and needs to be repealed post haste. Instead of making a sound reason for why the Second Amendment needs to be repealed, he makes an appeal to emotion by inferring that the Founders were mere musket-toting revolutionaries that never could have foreseen that technology would someday make weapons that could kill multiple people by simply squeezing the trigger once. Not surprisingly, Cohen is wrong about this myth as I will elaborate on shortly. He furthers his emotional appeal by stating that we should just be allowed to enjoy our liberties to enjoy a night out with friends.
Meanwhile, another article at Rolling Stone has resurfaced since Orlando that was written by feminist and social justice warrior, Amanda Marcotte. This inanity of Cohen's article is a work of genius compared to Marcotte's. Entitled, "4 Pro-Gun Arguments We're Sick of Hearing", it continues Rolling Stone's ongoing agenda to destabilize the American society and replace it with a socialist utopia.
As the title describes, the article provides four pro-gun arguments which Marcotte attempts to destroy. But she unwittingly destroyed her own argument by displaying her ignorance of common sense, let alone anything that is based on fact.
Let's review Marcotte's article, one pro-gun argument at a time.
1. "Guns don't kill people. People kill people."
The very first objection Amanda puts forth isn't based on fact, but emotion. The last time I checked, a gun of any kind can't just get up by itself and kill anyone. Someone had to obtain the weapon, learn how to shoot it, think about the person(s) they wanted to kill, find them and put all of that knowledge into action. By Amanda's logic, no one should be allowed to own a car, rope, knife, Louisville Slugger, or even water. Either way, if someone has the intent to kill, they're going to find a way with or without a gun.
So, say it with me, Amanda - Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Period.
2. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."
Of all the gun owners I've even known, I've never heard any of them say this. Marcotte would like you to think that there hasn't been an example of an armed civilian that stopped an active shooter.
If Marcotte had done as much as a Google search, she could have fact-checked her statement about law-abiding citizens stopping gun-wielding murderers thereby saving herself the embarrassment of looking like a complete fool.
But let's suppose that Amanda's right. Even if her premise was true, take into consideration the fact that places where mass shootings occur have the tightest gun restrictions. If a law-abiding citizen were allowed to carry weapons in those places, there wouldn't be as many people shot dead as a result of a gunmen that has lost his mind. Why should Marcotte or any other liberal be shocked when shooters go for the softest targets where no one can shoot back because of the laws their braindead legislators passed won't allow them to?
Marcotte is hoping that her readers are stupid and lazy enough to do their own research to verify if she is telling the truth. I am happy to disappoint you, Amanda.
Examples of good guys with guns stopping bad guys with guns can be found here, here, and here. One of which just happened last month. Almost all of them happened in the past 30 years, Amanda.
Oh, by the way - there are some reports that it took the Orlando Police Department three hours to respond, Amanda. If someone inside Pulse had a firearm, there may have been fewer lives lost on June 12, 2016 in Orlando, FL. And if anyone should garner at least some of the blame for what happened in Orlando, the FBI definitely deserves some. They've received multiple warnings about Mateen years before June 12, not to mention the fact that he was their terrorist watch list. Funny that they took him off.
3. "But, mental health!"
Law-abiding citizens who are of sound mind and body do not arm themselves to the teeth and spray bullets, Amanda. How else should address the mental state of assassins, Amanda? Cuddle them and tell them it's not their fault?
4. "Second Amendment, baby!"
Shortly after I started my blog, there was a shooting in Pittsburgh in which three police officers were killed. This one hit close to home because I'm from the Pittsburgh area. I was inspired to write a blog post about this shooting in which I questioned if the Second Amendment should be repealed, not unlike Cohen's premise.
But the more educated I become about the nature of mass shootings and the frequent failure of gun laws that are supposed to protect us, the more I'm convinced that concealed carry is a viable option for stopping active shooters. So much to the point, that I'm actually considering arming myself. Which is a tremendously huge decision for me. My wife is vehemently against guns in any way, shape or form, other than using rifles for putting food on the table. But primarily because I have a boy that loves getting into places and touching things he knows that he shouldn't. These two reasons are the only ones that have prevented me from purchasing a firearm.
What's that? I don't own a gun? You mean, I'm not a gun-crazed lunatic like this troglodyte?
No, I don't own a gun and I have more respect for my flag and country than Ted Nugent ever dreamed of.
But this line from Amanda's article astounds me the most:
"But sure, if you think it's that precious, we can compromise: If you love the Second Amendment that much, feel free to live in a powdered wig and shit in a chamberpot while trying to survive off what you can kill with an 18th century musket. In exchange, let those of us living in this century pass some laws so we can feel safe going to class, or the movies, or anywhere without worrying that some maladjusted man will try to get his revenge by raining down death on random strangers."
The irony here is thick like a stinky cologne.
First, notice that Amanda nailed the problem right on the head in the last sentence without her even realizing it. Because we all know that people that who happen to not be maladjusted are in dire need of psychiatric treatment and should be banned owning guns. But I have to ask - do you know how many gun laws are on the books, Amanda? The short answer is over 16,000. And how many of those gun laws did Omar Mateen observe on June 12, 2016? Yep. You guessed it; zero.
So, when are you going to realize that the Dylann Roofs and Omar Mateens of the world don't give a flying shit about law, Amanda? And when are you going to learn that soft targets like Pulse night club, a place where guns are strictly prohibited, attract active shooters like moths to flame?
Orlando, FL. Charleston, SC. Aurora, CO. Blacksburg, VA. San Bernardino, CA.
Newtown.
How are those gun laws working for you, Amanda?
Sunday, August 24, 2014
Ice bucket challenge? No, thanks.
I'm going to make this a brief entry into my blog, which nowadays really hasn't seen much action. I've lost interest in blogging, but every now and then, I feel the need to say something. So, if you know me, whether you're a friend or family member, and this pisses you off, then sobeit.
Unless you've been living under a rock over the past month or so, there has been a feverish pitch for you to accept the Ice Bucket Challenge. One of the dimwits that conceived this idea just drowned in supporting this insipid idea. Sorry, I'm going to be one of those cold-hearted bastards that says there's one less idiot that we have to worry about.
So far, I have received two challenges; one from a family member and one from a dear friend. I have yet to raise a finger to accept either challenge. Here are the reasons why:
1. First and foremost, I couldn't give a shit less about ALS. Yes, it's a horrible disease that robs even the strongest of men of their strength. But, frankly, I simply couldn't care less about it.
2. If I give to charity, it's going to be something that I truly care about, like St. Jude's, the Four Diamonds Fund, soldiers in need, the homeless, and light pollution awareness.
3. The more someone tries to guilt me into do something I don't really want to do, then I'm going to become more resistant to that cause. Stop begging me for money.
4. I care about light pollution, but you'll never see me give a passionate plea to raise money to try to end light pollution pouring out of my neighbors sodium lamp.
5. Finally, what about other diseases that people don't know or care about? If every time some poor afflicted soul of some wasting disease makes an impassioned plea for money, and we like fools come running to throw money to that cause, we would eventually go broke. But even so, so what? What about lupus, any number of flu viruses, cyclopia, or anencephaly?
So, instead of giving your money to a cause with a bunch of celebrities pulling at your heart strings, give your money to a cause that you care about, not Jimmy Fallon. Don't give in to a guilt trip by your friends and family just because you want to look like a nice person.
And here's another thing, and it's about the phoney, self-aggrandizing Bill Gates. This fraud is worth $76 billion. He makes so much money that if he were to bend over and pick up a $100 bill, he'd actually be losing money. As of this writing, the Ice Bucket Challenge has raised about $50 million dollars for ALS research. In other words, Bill Gate's single-handedly has the ability to donate enough money to pay for all the money that the Ice Bucket Challenge has raised 1,520 times. Not to mention that this is the same Bill Gates who donates money to eugenics causes. Bill Gates might fool others, but he damned sure doesn't fool me.
So, if by not pledging myself to be a part of the aura of false piety known as the Ice Bucket Challenge makes me an asshole, then I guess I'm an asshole, and I'll wear that title like a badge of honor.
Unless you've been living under a rock over the past month or so, there has been a feverish pitch for you to accept the Ice Bucket Challenge. One of the dimwits that conceived this idea just drowned in supporting this insipid idea. Sorry, I'm going to be one of those cold-hearted bastards that says there's one less idiot that we have to worry about.
So far, I have received two challenges; one from a family member and one from a dear friend. I have yet to raise a finger to accept either challenge. Here are the reasons why:
1. First and foremost, I couldn't give a shit less about ALS. Yes, it's a horrible disease that robs even the strongest of men of their strength. But, frankly, I simply couldn't care less about it.
2. If I give to charity, it's going to be something that I truly care about, like St. Jude's, the Four Diamonds Fund, soldiers in need, the homeless, and light pollution awareness.
3. The more someone tries to guilt me into do something I don't really want to do, then I'm going to become more resistant to that cause. Stop begging me for money.
4. I care about light pollution, but you'll never see me give a passionate plea to raise money to try to end light pollution pouring out of my neighbors sodium lamp.
5. Finally, what about other diseases that people don't know or care about? If every time some poor afflicted soul of some wasting disease makes an impassioned plea for money, and we like fools come running to throw money to that cause, we would eventually go broke. But even so, so what? What about lupus, any number of flu viruses, cyclopia, or anencephaly?
So, instead of giving your money to a cause with a bunch of celebrities pulling at your heart strings, give your money to a cause that you care about, not Jimmy Fallon. Don't give in to a guilt trip by your friends and family just because you want to look like a nice person.
And here's another thing, and it's about the phoney, self-aggrandizing Bill Gates. This fraud is worth $76 billion. He makes so much money that if he were to bend over and pick up a $100 bill, he'd actually be losing money. As of this writing, the Ice Bucket Challenge has raised about $50 million dollars for ALS research. In other words, Bill Gate's single-handedly has the ability to donate enough money to pay for all the money that the Ice Bucket Challenge has raised 1,520 times. Not to mention that this is the same Bill Gates who donates money to eugenics causes. Bill Gates might fool others, but he damned sure doesn't fool me.
So, if by not pledging myself to be a part of the aura of false piety known as the Ice Bucket Challenge makes me an asshole, then I guess I'm an asshole, and I'll wear that title like a badge of honor.
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Members of Reach America, please sign in
If you are a member of the Christian youth organization, Reach America, whether you are a student, staff member, or Gary Brown himself, welcome.
You might have noticed that your Facebook page has come under a bit of verbal abuse lately, from the likes of those like YouTuber, TheAmazingAtheist. However, you will not find that here. However, what you will find, admittedly, is a disdain toward religion, particularly Christianity. Why Christianity? Because, being a former member of the flock, I am more familiar with it than any other religion.
You may say to yourself, "There is no such thing as a former Christian," to which I say, bologna sauce. No one spends hundreds of dollars on books, tapes, and going to lectures if they don't really believe it. No one gets up at 7:00 AM on a Sunday morning to go sit in a pew for 2 hours, then Sunday school for one more hour, then fellowship afterward, if they don't really believe it. No one spends hundreds of dollars on Evangelism Explosion lessons if they don't really believe it. No one spends hours per week in the prayer closet if they don't really believe it. No one gives 10% of everything they earn if they don't really believe it.
After hearing all of that, you might say to yourself, "No wonder you left Christianity; you were miserable in trying to earn your way into Heaven," to which I might remind the reader, faith without works is dead (James 2:14-17).
Before we go much further, I have a question for you. Have you noticed anything about Reach America's Facebook page that might seem a little odd? Like everything there is a little "too" perfect? Have you noticed that there aren't a whole lot of opposing ideas there that last more than 24 hours? Have you noticed that there is no free exchange of conversation or ideas? That the only people who are allowed to post comments there are Christians?
I made a post there a few days ago that was a little unpopular. In that post, I challenged the youth of Reach America to begin asking tough questions, and I even accused the Reach America staff and Gary Brown himself of indoctrinating them. I stand firmly by that sentiment, and offer any of them, including Gary, to take me to task over this.
Trying to get any kind of dialogue going with Gary Brown and the staff members at RA, I sent an e-mail directly to Gary, himself. I even posted the video below for Gary, hoping that he would respond.
I waited for a few days, fearing that he wouldn't respond, until one day I logged into my Facebook account and saw that he did e-mail me. However, the gist of his e-mail was that he did not want to correspond to me, nor did he want to have any kind of contact with me, either through Youtube or e-mail.
I sent him one last e-mail, wished him farewell, but also informing him that I would be monitoring RA for factual errors and holding his feet to the fire, and if there was a site that was running their information, I'd be there to challenge their beliefs and claims.
Anyway, if you're a member of Reach America, welcome and feel free to browse the information you find on this blog. If you so desire, please feel free to challenge any of the things that I have posted.
Regards,
Matt
You might have noticed that your Facebook page has come under a bit of verbal abuse lately, from the likes of those like YouTuber, TheAmazingAtheist. However, you will not find that here. However, what you will find, admittedly, is a disdain toward religion, particularly Christianity. Why Christianity? Because, being a former member of the flock, I am more familiar with it than any other religion.
You may say to yourself, "There is no such thing as a former Christian," to which I say, bologna sauce. No one spends hundreds of dollars on books, tapes, and going to lectures if they don't really believe it. No one gets up at 7:00 AM on a Sunday morning to go sit in a pew for 2 hours, then Sunday school for one more hour, then fellowship afterward, if they don't really believe it. No one spends hundreds of dollars on Evangelism Explosion lessons if they don't really believe it. No one spends hours per week in the prayer closet if they don't really believe it. No one gives 10% of everything they earn if they don't really believe it.
After hearing all of that, you might say to yourself, "No wonder you left Christianity; you were miserable in trying to earn your way into Heaven," to which I might remind the reader, faith without works is dead (James 2:14-17).
Before we go much further, I have a question for you. Have you noticed anything about Reach America's Facebook page that might seem a little odd? Like everything there is a little "too" perfect? Have you noticed that there aren't a whole lot of opposing ideas there that last more than 24 hours? Have you noticed that there is no free exchange of conversation or ideas? That the only people who are allowed to post comments there are Christians?
I made a post there a few days ago that was a little unpopular. In that post, I challenged the youth of Reach America to begin asking tough questions, and I even accused the Reach America staff and Gary Brown himself of indoctrinating them. I stand firmly by that sentiment, and offer any of them, including Gary, to take me to task over this.
Trying to get any kind of dialogue going with Gary Brown and the staff members at RA, I sent an e-mail directly to Gary, himself. I even posted the video below for Gary, hoping that he would respond.
I waited for a few days, fearing that he wouldn't respond, until one day I logged into my Facebook account and saw that he did e-mail me. However, the gist of his e-mail was that he did not want to correspond to me, nor did he want to have any kind of contact with me, either through Youtube or e-mail.
I sent him one last e-mail, wished him farewell, but also informing him that I would be monitoring RA for factual errors and holding his feet to the fire, and if there was a site that was running their information, I'd be there to challenge their beliefs and claims.
Anyway, if you're a member of Reach America, welcome and feel free to browse the information you find on this blog. If you so desire, please feel free to challenge any of the things that I have posted.
Regards,
Matt
Saturday, July 21, 2012
DiscoTute stepped in it again
I read an article yesterday by PZ Myers titled, Forever Disappointed. The gist of the article was the inability of the Biologic Institute, funded by the Discovery Institute, to provide evidence for their claims. In this case, they deny that fusion in chromosome 2 in humans, by which they branched off from other primates ~6 million years ago, ever took place. Biologist Carl Zimmer, among others, took exception to DI's ongoing jackassery, and asked them for the evidence to their claims on BI's Facebook page. It wasn't long before the BI went from going on the offensive to damage control, insisting that they were being "pestered" by Zimmer.
After a few attempts at getting an answer, followed by deafening silence, BI finally gave sneering reply to Zimmer, asking "Carl, you write books for a living. Do you rehearse their content on your blog for anyone who asks?" BI later stated that Facebook is no place intended for debate. They ultimately threatened to put the kibosh on the whole conversation, then stated that their comments would be moved to BI's website. Of course, you shouldn't be surprised there are no public comment threads at their site.
We don't want any kind of true scientific inquiry, do we, DI?
DI's David Klinghoffer has since invited Zimmer to a "debate", to which Zimmer has said no. As Myers asks, why should he? He asked for evidence to DI/BI's inane claims in an open forum, which they denied providing that evidence, and then sneered at him. Now they're proclaiming victory, and I won't let that happen in light of their flagrant dishonesty.
I'm no mathematician, physicist, or biologist. I am simply a guy from Pennsylvania who cares deeply about the pursuit of science and detests when science is intentionally misrepresented by creationists in order to indoctrinate the public.
Take notice of a few things here:
1. Intellectual dishonesty by DI.
2. The inability to provide evidence to their claims.
3. Lack of real scientific research by DI.
4. BI does not welcome scrutiny by the scientific community (1, 2, 3).
Also, keep in mind that chromosome 2 was used as evidence in the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial in 2005 by Kenneth Miller, a professed Catholic and evolutionary biologist. Furthermore, the judge, John Jones III, is a professed Christian who ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, stating that the teaching of creationism in a high school science class was unconstitutional.
As of the time of this writing, Zimmer is still asking BI to disclose the source from which they base their denial of chromosome 2, and they're still not answering.
After a few attempts at getting an answer, followed by deafening silence, BI finally gave sneering reply to Zimmer, asking "Carl, you write books for a living. Do you rehearse their content on your blog for anyone who asks?" BI later stated that Facebook is no place intended for debate. They ultimately threatened to put the kibosh on the whole conversation, then stated that their comments would be moved to BI's website. Of course, you shouldn't be surprised there are no public comment threads at their site.
We don't want any kind of true scientific inquiry, do we, DI?
DI's David Klinghoffer has since invited Zimmer to a "debate", to which Zimmer has said no. As Myers asks, why should he? He asked for evidence to DI/BI's inane claims in an open forum, which they denied providing that evidence, and then sneered at him. Now they're proclaiming victory, and I won't let that happen in light of their flagrant dishonesty.
I'm no mathematician, physicist, or biologist. I am simply a guy from Pennsylvania who cares deeply about the pursuit of science and detests when science is intentionally misrepresented by creationists in order to indoctrinate the public.
Take notice of a few things here:
1. Intellectual dishonesty by DI.
2. The inability to provide evidence to their claims.
3. Lack of real scientific research by DI.
4. BI does not welcome scrutiny by the scientific community (1, 2, 3).
Also, keep in mind that chromosome 2 was used as evidence in the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial in 2005 by Kenneth Miller, a professed Catholic and evolutionary biologist. Furthermore, the judge, John Jones III, is a professed Christian who ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, stating that the teaching of creationism in a high school science class was unconstitutional.
As of the time of this writing, Zimmer is still asking BI to disclose the source from which they base their denial of chromosome 2, and they're still not answering.
Thursday, July 5, 2012
The Promise of Living
Speaking of Americana, take some time during this hot, humid, summer day to enjoy some beauty from the greatest American composer that ever lived.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLVyRvp2Qbg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLVyRvp2Qbg
Proper flag etiquette
Like any other town in the United States, State College is patriotic. Drive around town and you're sure to find flags being mutilated as they are torn apart by the wind on the back of a Harley, cars with red,white, and blue ribbon magnets with messages that admonish us to remember P.O.W.s/M.I.A.s and "Support Our Troops" -- those magnets are probably made in China.
If you're lucky enough, you might even find a house with a flag proudly displayed that is frayed with holes in it, bleached by the elements, no lighting on it at all, or dragging on the ground. But if you're really lucky, you might find that there are a few of us who actually know a thing or two about proper flag etiquette.
Last night at the Central Pennsylvana 4th Fest, there were a few things that got on my nerves. Fast.
First, as the National Anthem was being sung and the order was given for all to rise, there were a few around me who bitched and moaned about having to get off their rear end. Second, as the Star-Spangled Banner was being sung, I noticed that the most patriotic of those in attendance (you know, the ones wearing red, white, and blue and wearing t-shirts with some patriotic commentary), did not place their right hand over their heart. Rather, they opted to put their hands in their pockets or fold their arms.
While these two things irritated me, I wasn't ready for the douchebag with Old Glory draped over his shoulders and a flag bandana wrapped around his head, running around like he's some sort of neo Captain America. For those of you who know me, you know that while I tend to bitch a lot, I rarely get heated enough to say anything about things that upset me; I tend to keep my mouth shut. But this time, I had to say something. I simply yelled to this malcontent that it wasn't a cape. He turned, looked around quizically, then summarily blew me off.
I got to thinking about this, and then I realized that it might not entirely be his fault. Maybe nobody took the time to tell him that doing such a thing was a grave disrepect to the flag, veterans, prisoners of war, those killed in action, or active duty members of the military. With that in mind, if you'd like to become more savvy about the flag, I direct your attention to United States Code, Title 4, Chapter 1 - The Flag.
If you're lucky enough, you might even find a house with a flag proudly displayed that is frayed with holes in it, bleached by the elements, no lighting on it at all, or dragging on the ground. But if you're really lucky, you might find that there are a few of us who actually know a thing or two about proper flag etiquette.
Last night at the Central Pennsylvana 4th Fest, there were a few things that got on my nerves. Fast.
First, as the National Anthem was being sung and the order was given for all to rise, there were a few around me who bitched and moaned about having to get off their rear end. Second, as the Star-Spangled Banner was being sung, I noticed that the most patriotic of those in attendance (you know, the ones wearing red, white, and blue and wearing t-shirts with some patriotic commentary), did not place their right hand over their heart. Rather, they opted to put their hands in their pockets or fold their arms.
While these two things irritated me, I wasn't ready for the douchebag with Old Glory draped over his shoulders and a flag bandana wrapped around his head, running around like he's some sort of neo Captain America. For those of you who know me, you know that while I tend to bitch a lot, I rarely get heated enough to say anything about things that upset me; I tend to keep my mouth shut. But this time, I had to say something. I simply yelled to this malcontent that it wasn't a cape. He turned, looked around quizically, then summarily blew me off.
I got to thinking about this, and then I realized that it might not entirely be his fault. Maybe nobody took the time to tell him that doing such a thing was a grave disrepect to the flag, veterans, prisoners of war, those killed in action, or active duty members of the military. With that in mind, if you'd like to become more savvy about the flag, I direct your attention to United States Code, Title 4, Chapter 1 - The Flag.
Sunday, July 1, 2012
Ray Comfort's ongoing lies and plagiarism.
Hey -- guess what! I caught Ray Comfort in yet another tangled web of lies and plagiarism!
Shocked? Neither am I.
Over the past week, Ray has been leading a very cherry-picked study of the Book of Job, which used to be my favorite book in the Bible, followed very closely by The Book of Esther. In June 2009, I wrote my own study on the Book of Job, and gave you my personal opinion on what the book is really about -- a fictional tale of an innocent man who lost nearly everything, including his children, as a result from a cosmic pissing contest between Jehovah and Satan.
True to form, Ray would have you believe that he's more of an astrophysicist than Stephen Hawking, conveniently skirting the overwhelming evidence that supports the Big Bang theory. In his blogpost on Thursday, June 28th, Ray resumes his arrogance and smug sense of superiority by inferring that those of us who do not subscribe to his spiritual point of view have "a few intellectual problems."
He goes on asking questions that have already been answered hundreds if not thousands of times, but Ray just keeps ignoring the answers. Yet Ray continues, "What was in the beginning? What produced this huge, incredible natural world in which we live? If you say it was the 'big bang,' then where did the materials come from to make the big bang? If the Big Bang was the product, who or what was the producer?" Ray has received answers to these questions repeatedly and he knows it, but like a terrified puppy, he just runs with his tail tucked firmly between his legs.
Something about Ray's writing at this particular post didn't feel right. Not that it ever does, mind you. But I just had a feeling the words I read weren't his. I copied just one sentence from that post, pasted it into Google, and hit enter. Sure enough, I was right.
When Ray talks about science, his audience, Christian or non-Christian, must research what he says because when he speaks on matters of science, he lies. All the time. I don't just mean some of the time -- I mean all of the time. Ray likely lifted the forementioned sentence from this article written by Fraser Cain, publisher of Universe Today, and co-host of the AstronomyCast podcast. I could beat Cain with a wet trout for a week due to his shoddy writing; Cain should know better. Cain's article is based on this paper published in Astronomy and Astrophysics, May 2011.
Ray:
Having my suspicions confirmed that Ray is a plagiarist, I did a simple Google search on Ray's plagiarism, and even I was a bit surprised at how much of this clown's work is not his. You may recall that in 2009, Ray pulled a stunt by releasing his version of Charles Darwin's "The Origin of Species". In Ray's bastardized version, he offered a brief biography of Darwin. As it turns out, large portions of the introduction were lifted from a paper entitled "A Brief History of Charles Darwin" written by Dr. Stan Guffey, Ph.D., professor of biology at the University of Tennessee. Read more about this story here.
They don't call it the Information Age for nothing, Ray. All I have to do to learn about any topic is punch in a few words and entire digital libraries are at my fingertips. Why, then, do you think that you're the only person who's smart enough to use a search engine? How stupid do you think the rest of us are?
We all know that you're a cowardly, lying, thief, Ray. By your own admission, lying thieves will be sent on a one-way ticket to Hell. Are you willing to finally face your opponents, look them in the eye, and admit that you're a charlatan? Have you ever apologized to Cain, Guffey, or anybody else for presenting their work as your own?
For a person who implores us to examine a religion you claim is the ultimate guide to morality, which condemns lying and stealing, why do you resort to these things, Ray? Do you ever feel even slightly ashamed for your intellectual dishonesty?
To the followers of this charlatan, how much of his intellectual feces are you going to eagerly consume while ignoring the fact that Ray is a liar? You readily accuse atheists and agnostics of being lying thieves without evidence, but you don't dare raise an accusatory finger at somebody who actually deserves it like Ray. A child could tell you that Ray's a lying thief, but grown adults give him carte blanche for no other reason than he professes the same faith that you do. If you know he's a liar, and you still refer to him is a good Christian, you're just as much of a liar as he is.
Here are some cosmological and astrophysical terms for Ray, other creationists, and even Fraser Cain to research:
For a list of Ray's lies, click here.
Just for fun, watch the video below to see just how much of a dishonest, hypocritical douchebag Ray really is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbBYUgurfRU
Shocked? Neither am I.
Over the past week, Ray has been leading a very cherry-picked study of the Book of Job, which used to be my favorite book in the Bible, followed very closely by The Book of Esther. In June 2009, I wrote my own study on the Book of Job, and gave you my personal opinion on what the book is really about -- a fictional tale of an innocent man who lost nearly everything, including his children, as a result from a cosmic pissing contest between Jehovah and Satan.
True to form, Ray would have you believe that he's more of an astrophysicist than Stephen Hawking, conveniently skirting the overwhelming evidence that supports the Big Bang theory. In his blogpost on Thursday, June 28th, Ray resumes his arrogance and smug sense of superiority by inferring that those of us who do not subscribe to his spiritual point of view have "a few intellectual problems."
He goes on asking questions that have already been answered hundreds if not thousands of times, but Ray just keeps ignoring the answers. Yet Ray continues, "What was in the beginning? What produced this huge, incredible natural world in which we live? If you say it was the 'big bang,' then where did the materials come from to make the big bang? If the Big Bang was the product, who or what was the producer?" Ray has received answers to these questions repeatedly and he knows it, but like a terrified puppy, he just runs with his tail tucked firmly between his legs.
Something about Ray's writing at this particular post didn't feel right. Not that it ever does, mind you. But I just had a feeling the words I read weren't his. I copied just one sentence from that post, pasted it into Google, and hit enter. Sure enough, I was right.
When Ray talks about science, his audience, Christian or non-Christian, must research what he says because when he speaks on matters of science, he lies. All the time. I don't just mean some of the time -- I mean all of the time. Ray likely lifted the forementioned sentence from this article written by Fraser Cain, publisher of Universe Today, and co-host of the AstronomyCast podcast. I could beat Cain with a wet trout for a week due to his shoddy writing; Cain should know better. Cain's article is based on this paper published in Astronomy and Astrophysics, May 2011.
Ray:
"Sound travels in waves as does light and heat, but unlike light and heat, sound moves by making molecules vibrate. So, for sound to travel anywhere there must be molecules for it to travel. Sound travels on earth to our ears by vibrating air molecules, but there are no molecules in space."Fraser:
"Sound travels in waves like light or heat does, but unlike them, sound travels by making molecules vibrate. So, in order for sound to travel, there has to be something with molecules for it to travel through. On Earth, sound travels to your ears by vibrating air molecules. In deep space, the large empty areas between stars and planets, there are no molecules to vibrate."Ray was then properly educated by the guests at his blog about cosmology and physics, which he will probably ignore. I'm still waiting for his response to my question regarding the source is for his claims.
Having my suspicions confirmed that Ray is a plagiarist, I did a simple Google search on Ray's plagiarism, and even I was a bit surprised at how much of this clown's work is not his. You may recall that in 2009, Ray pulled a stunt by releasing his version of Charles Darwin's "The Origin of Species". In Ray's bastardized version, he offered a brief biography of Darwin. As it turns out, large portions of the introduction were lifted from a paper entitled "A Brief History of Charles Darwin" written by Dr. Stan Guffey, Ph.D., professor of biology at the University of Tennessee. Read more about this story here.
They don't call it the Information Age for nothing, Ray. All I have to do to learn about any topic is punch in a few words and entire digital libraries are at my fingertips. Why, then, do you think that you're the only person who's smart enough to use a search engine? How stupid do you think the rest of us are?
We all know that you're a cowardly, lying, thief, Ray. By your own admission, lying thieves will be sent on a one-way ticket to Hell. Are you willing to finally face your opponents, look them in the eye, and admit that you're a charlatan? Have you ever apologized to Cain, Guffey, or anybody else for presenting their work as your own?
For a person who implores us to examine a religion you claim is the ultimate guide to morality, which condemns lying and stealing, why do you resort to these things, Ray? Do you ever feel even slightly ashamed for your intellectual dishonesty?
To the followers of this charlatan, how much of his intellectual feces are you going to eagerly consume while ignoring the fact that Ray is a liar? You readily accuse atheists and agnostics of being lying thieves without evidence, but you don't dare raise an accusatory finger at somebody who actually deserves it like Ray. A child could tell you that Ray's a lying thief, but grown adults give him carte blanche for no other reason than he professes the same faith that you do. If you know he's a liar, and you still refer to him is a good Christian, you're just as much of a liar as he is.
Here are some cosmological and astrophysical terms for Ray, other creationists, and even Fraser Cain to research:
For a list of Ray's lies, click here.
Just for fun, watch the video below to see just how much of a dishonest, hypocritical douchebag Ray really is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbBYUgurfRU
Sunday, June 24, 2012
CreationTalk, you guys are absolutely pathetic
Believe it or not, I was once a creationist. I believed in a Universe that was no older than 10,000 years and that evolutionary biology was a lie that professors and scientists used in some sort of secret kabal to keep funding coming in while blinding us to what I thought was the truth. I always wrestled with astronomy and the Big Bang, though. It was the knowledge I had of astronomy, as well as mythology and symbolism, that freed me from the mind-numbing cult known as creationism.
Around 2001-2002, I became a member of a little-known creationist website, CreationTalk.org. The site has gone through some changes since I became a member. As a matter of fact, I can't even find any of the posts that I made long ago. I can't even find my profile. You used to be able to log in and discuss all matters on evolutionary biology, cosmology, cosmogeny, Big Bang -- you name it. Now, however, you need one thing in order to talk about any of these topics -- a statement of faith in Jesus and belief in creation as is stated in the Bible. As the site says, "All applicants must subscribe to a belief in the Biblical creation to join this group. A promissory statement verifying this profession is submitted before membership is granted."
That's it.
Apparently, these halfwits have had enough of having their asses handed to them by those who know a thing or two about science. Now they have can have a feel-good party of their own without even the slightest hint of reality by having a bunch of non-believes raining on their parade.
As is typical of creationism, you are not required to have even the slightest clue about mathematics, taxonomy, botany, biology, astronomy, physics, geography, chemistry, or paleontology. You need to have absolutely no knowledge of science at all. All you need to accept is a myth built up on myth after myth after myth.
Once again, why is it that some agnostic blogger stuck in the middle of Pennsylvania have to be the one to stand up for freedom of speech, no matter how offensive it might be or how much it challenges your beliefs?
Science is a bitch, guys. Learn to love her.
Around 2001-2002, I became a member of a little-known creationist website, CreationTalk.org. The site has gone through some changes since I became a member. As a matter of fact, I can't even find any of the posts that I made long ago. I can't even find my profile. You used to be able to log in and discuss all matters on evolutionary biology, cosmology, cosmogeny, Big Bang -- you name it. Now, however, you need one thing in order to talk about any of these topics -- a statement of faith in Jesus and belief in creation as is stated in the Bible. As the site says, "All applicants must subscribe to a belief in the Biblical creation to join this group. A promissory statement verifying this profession is submitted before membership is granted."
That's it.
Apparently, these halfwits have had enough of having their asses handed to them by those who know a thing or two about science. Now they have can have a feel-good party of their own without even the slightest hint of reality by having a bunch of non-believes raining on their parade.
As is typical of creationism, you are not required to have even the slightest clue about mathematics, taxonomy, botany, biology, astronomy, physics, geography, chemistry, or paleontology. You need to have absolutely no knowledge of science at all. All you need to accept is a myth built up on myth after myth after myth.
Once again, why is it that some agnostic blogger stuck in the middle of Pennsylvania have to be the one to stand up for freedom of speech, no matter how offensive it might be or how much it challenges your beliefs?
Science is a bitch, guys. Learn to love her.
Saturday, June 16, 2012
A Response to Rep. Rick Saccone
If you live in Pennsylvania, you have probably heard by now that the state House of Representatives has passed legislation to recognize 2012 as the "Year of the Bible". The bill was passed after some sleight of hand. Some who voted for it later stated that they were deceived into voting for the bill.
The bill's sponsor, Rick Saccone, states that the purpose of the bill is simply to illustrate the importance that the Bible has had with regard to the founding of the Commonwealth and the nation as a whole. Like most ardent Christians in America, Rep. Saccone tries to distort history and would have you believe that our nation and it's founders were absolutely immersed in the blood of Jesus. But even a brief glance at history proves otherwise.
A page at Saccone's website about his bill offers up evidence from some of our founders about what he believes is proof of their Christian faith. While it is true that many of our nation's founders were Christian, Saccone simply can't accept the fact that many were also deists, including George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Thomas Paine, Ethan Allen, and James Monroe.
Honestly, Mr.Saccone -- of all the bills that you could have sponsored that might have had any real impact on the well-being of the Commonwealth, you choose this? Nothing more than a silly resolution in an attempt to make yourself feel good and promote yet another opportunity to shove your religion down the throats of your constituents? Our governor is raping our state's education system, we're drowning in debt, we're 27th in the nation in unemployment, and you want to eviscerate the First Amendment by reminding us that we're in your god's hands? Do you're damned job, Mr. Saccone: start taking care of your Constituents and not your fragile ego.
To the House members who voted in favor of the bill, only to later realize that they've been duped and apologetically distanced themselves from the bill, good for you. Now, from now on, read the damned bill, especially when it says "non-controversial"!
To the House members who voted in favor of the bill and stood firmly by their vote, you have slapped the face of non-believing taxpayers across throughout the Commonwealth, violated the First Amendment, and continue to promote a religion that is based on a book is filled with rape, murder, incest, abortion, child abuse, genocide, child sacrifice, and war. Most, if not all of you, have no absolutely no idea of the true, mythic origins of your religion. If any of you want true equality and freedom in Pennsylvania, then start by repealing or amending Article 4, Section 1 of the State Constitution.
The bill's sponsor, Rick Saccone, states that the purpose of the bill is simply to illustrate the importance that the Bible has had with regard to the founding of the Commonwealth and the nation as a whole. Like most ardent Christians in America, Rep. Saccone tries to distort history and would have you believe that our nation and it's founders were absolutely immersed in the blood of Jesus. But even a brief glance at history proves otherwise.
A page at Saccone's website about his bill offers up evidence from some of our founders about what he believes is proof of their Christian faith. While it is true that many of our nation's founders were Christian, Saccone simply can't accept the fact that many were also deists, including George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Thomas Paine, Ethan Allen, and James Monroe.
Honestly, Mr.Saccone -- of all the bills that you could have sponsored that might have had any real impact on the well-being of the Commonwealth, you choose this? Nothing more than a silly resolution in an attempt to make yourself feel good and promote yet another opportunity to shove your religion down the throats of your constituents? Our governor is raping our state's education system, we're drowning in debt, we're 27th in the nation in unemployment, and you want to eviscerate the First Amendment by reminding us that we're in your god's hands? Do you're damned job, Mr. Saccone: start taking care of your Constituents and not your fragile ego.
To the House members who voted in favor of the bill, only to later realize that they've been duped and apologetically distanced themselves from the bill, good for you. Now, from now on, read the damned bill, especially when it says "non-controversial"!
To the House members who voted in favor of the bill and stood firmly by their vote, you have slapped the face of non-believing taxpayers across throughout the Commonwealth, violated the First Amendment, and continue to promote a religion that is based on a book is filled with rape, murder, incest, abortion, child abuse, genocide, child sacrifice, and war. Most, if not all of you, have no absolutely no idea of the true, mythic origins of your religion. If any of you want true equality and freedom in Pennsylvania, then start by repealing or amending Article 4, Section 1 of the State Constitution.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
The Duggars. Again.
Everytime I even hear the name "Duggar" my knuckles turn white and I grit my teeth. I don't know whether to shrug them off, laugh at them, take pity upon their kids, or take issue with their latest episode of inane bullshit.
As if their previous miscarriage wasn't enough to teach the halfwits known as Jim Bob and Michele Duggar that eventually, the female womb reaches a time that it just won't produce anymore children, these assholes have decided to give it a shot at having yet another kid.
You might remember my first post way back in 2008 about Jim Bob and the brain-washed sheep he calls a wife. In that post, I told you that he claims his house is a church and therefore claims tax-exempt status. Can you say crook, boys and girls? I knew you could.
I also told you that only the boys are allowed to attend college, meanwhile the girls are meant to stay at home with their slavemaster husbands and pump out a baby every nine months.
Do I lament for the child that would have been? Absolutely. Do I lament for Jim Bob and Michele? Absolutely not. They continue to ignore science, basic human biology and common sense for the sake of dogma, and continue pushing their parental duties upon kids who are still in grade school. Meanwhile, they continue to continue to be absolute media whores. Anything for a buck -- right, JimBo?
Michele, if you're reading this, stop being such a sheep and live your life for your children and not your abusive, scumbag husband.
If you're a child of the Duggars, do not live by your parents' example. They are frauds and charlatans, and have completely brainwashed you to the point that none of you have any hope of thinking for yourselves. You should be embarrassed and ashamed to call them parents.
If you're a member of the media, stop caving into these assholes everytime Michele gets knocked up. They're media pigs and can never get enough attention. The more spotlight you give them, the more it pisses me off. Stop wasting your time and energy on them because they don't deserve it. There are far greater people and issues to spend your time and energy on. Besides, all you're doing is encouraging even more charlatans to pursue the same path.
If you're an employee or executive at The Learning Channel (there's a joke), then do what TLC is supposed to be about -- learning! Any American with a brain and decency doesn't give a shit about:
- Insecure mothers who live vicariously through their daughters by shamelessly parading them in front of cameras in skimpy, whorish outfits.
- Somebody that ate to the point that they need to be lifted by a forklift after a hole was cut through their bedroom wall just to get to the hospital for emergency gastric bypass.
- Somebody who's too lazy and/or chemically imbalanced to get off their ass and clean their home.
- Somebody who has way too much time on their hands.
- The mentally ill.
And they damned sure don't give a shit about the Duggars.
You might ask, "What difference does it make to you if the Duggars decide to have more kids?" to which my response is my eldest nephew. He's in his mid-20's and has impregnated his wife four times, going on five. They recently stated that they wish to have at least ten kids. The kicker is that he has no solid, full-time employment, no advanced education of any kind, yet parades himself around as an ordained Baptist minister. Even more, he receives $20/hr in compensation by local retirement homes because he continues to lie to them by convincing them that he's fully ordained and legally recognized by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to spread his lies and dogma as a part-time job.
One of these days, the state will catch up to him and when it does, he will spending a long time inside a jail cell.
And where does my dear, brainwashed nephew and his wife get the idea of having so many children? Yep, you guessed it -- JimBo, Michele and the Quiverfull Movement. Oh, and the mass media that keep feeding him this crap which he readily gobbles up like candy.
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Want to kill America? Join the Occupy Movement!
You might have noticed that I haven't written much in the past year. Although there has been plenty to write about, I just haven't been inspired to. Who wants to listen to some shadowy figure living in State College via Pittsburgh?
Anyway, it took the extreme opposite of the Tea Party to get me inspired. Way to go, morons.
Democrats who once ran to your side suddenly can't run away from you fast enough. Like I said, what once was a movement that people could get behind has become a massive black eye for the country, and the rest of the world.
I watched a uStream video today as some guy walked around the streets of NYC aimlessly recording the day's events. I watched for about 30 minutes, and in all that time I saw David Icke throwing his support behind the movement. For those of you who don't know, Icke believes that reality really isn't reality at all, rather what our minds perceive to be reality. He also believes that Queen Elizabeth II is a shape-shifting, reptilian space alien, hence the design of this t-shirt over at Wear Science!
Also in the forementioned video, I saw people walking around with a socialist flag, a Soviet flag, meanwhile dragging the flag of the US of A on the ground. Somehow dragging Old Glory through the mud is patriotic.
Most of you who did go to college have degrees in disciplines like art history, literature, and puppetry of all things. Some of you might have actual degrees that make a difference in life, but those of you who went to college just to get a degree in a discipline that is the equivalent to basket weaving need to stop blaming Wall Street for your inability to find a job and start blaming yourselves for being absolute morons to begin with. As my father once told me, sometimes you need to forget about your dreams, find a job and get to work.
Anyway, the problem with those of you in the OWS movement isn't that you're unemployed; it's that your unemployable.
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Okay, guys -- enough is enough.
First it was the Tea Party. Now it's the Occupy Whatever-neck-of-the-woods-you-happen-to-be-living-in Movement.
I'm going to say this to both parties. You have much more in common than you realize, but you're both going about it the wrong way. You clowns over in the Tea Party can peruse my blog to find out exactly what I think of you. But you goons over in the Occupy Movement, what do you really think will happen by taking a nice, steaming dump on some sidewalk in a public park? Or destroying public and private property (that would be property that does not belong to you)? Or murdering somebody? Or running around naked?
I'm all for free speech, the freedom of assembly, sticking up for the little guy and giving the finger to multi-national corporations like Monsanto, but what you're doing is wrong. There's nothing even remotely patriotic or American about stopping a local business from functioning, interrupting the free flow of goods to people, violence, and now, murder. What was once a movement that many Americans could identify with has become yet another social and civil rights embarrassment for the country, and it's only going to get worse.
And will you please stop referring to yourselves as the "99"? You're nowhere near that. You might be somewhere around 8% if you're lucky. Also, you would be wise to take a lesson from history; occupations always fail.
And you rightwingers thought I only spoke out about rightwing violence. Shame on you!
I'm going to say this to both parties. You have much more in common than you realize, but you're both going about it the wrong way. You clowns over in the Tea Party can peruse my blog to find out exactly what I think of you. But you goons over in the Occupy Movement, what do you really think will happen by taking a nice, steaming dump on some sidewalk in a public park? Or destroying public and private property (that would be property that does not belong to you)? Or murdering somebody? Or running around naked?
I'm all for free speech, the freedom of assembly, sticking up for the little guy and giving the finger to multi-national corporations like Monsanto, but what you're doing is wrong. There's nothing even remotely patriotic or American about stopping a local business from functioning, interrupting the free flow of goods to people, violence, and now, murder. What was once a movement that many Americans could identify with has become yet another social and civil rights embarrassment for the country, and it's only going to get worse.
And will you please stop referring to yourselves as the "99"? You're nowhere near that. You might be somewhere around 8% if you're lucky. Also, you would be wise to take a lesson from history; occupations always fail.
And you rightwingers thought I only spoke out about rightwing violence. Shame on you!
Saturday, November 12, 2011
So long, Harold!
After three doomsday prophecies failed to come to fruition, the most recent of which was on October 21, Harold Camping has finally decided to call it a career and withdraw from the public eye.
The alarming thing is, even after the last prophecy failed, Camping still had followers who dedicate their lives to his teachings. Quite sad, really.
Anyway, I hope that Harold has at least one shred of honesty left and will reimburse all the millions of dollars that he duped his followers into giving to him so he could afford his mini kingdom. I doubt he has anything left but bitterness and resentment, but it never hurts to hope.
Good riddance, Harold.
Saturday, October 8, 2011
Christianity = cult, Pastor Jeffress
I hate when I'm forced to rush to the defense of a Republican, but when it comes to defending Republicans from religious persecution, I have to step up.
Enter Pastor Robert Jeffers, Senior Pastor at First Baptist Dallas in Big D, and his self-perceived need to step in and take aim at the fact that Mitt Romney is Mormon. According to Jeffers, Romney should not be considered as a legitimate presidential candidate because of his faith -- that only people he deems "Christian" are worthy of holding office.
"Do we prefer somebody who is a believer in Jesus Christ, or somebody who is a good moral person, but part of a cult? I know it's not politically correct to say, but it's true -- Mormonism is a cult."
So, basically what Jeffress is saying is that he would rather a murdering rapist president, just long as that person believes in Jesus Christ, over a morally upright person who happens to have a different faith. I know Satanists that are of a higher moral calibre than Jeffress. Personally, I want a president who knows what the hell they're doing and prefers to do the will of the people over the wills of corporate interests and captains of industry, and especially the will of some elusive spirit.
Anyway, here's an English lesson for you, Mr. Jeffress. It is the definition of the word "cult" from several dictionaries, including Webster's dictionary. This is important because Noah Webster sought to Christianize the United States.
cult: 1. Attentive care; homage; worship. 2. A system of religious belief and worship; esp., a system of rites employed in worship. - Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, pg. 212, 1892
For a more modernized description of cult, click here.
Go to sleep now, Mr. Jeffress. Tomorrow may be a brighter day.
Friday, June 17, 2011
A message for you, Gov. Christie.
I came across this clip today by one of my friends on Facebook. My friend stated that New Jersey governor, Chris Christie, should run for president and that this clip proves that Christie is a genius. I watched the video, and I'm absolutely dumbstruck.
Christie is co-host of "Christie: On the Line", a televised program where he takes questions from viewers on the air. One such caller named Gail recently asked Christie why he wants to cut funding for public education, while sending his children to a private school. Not an unreasonable question, right?
Not if you're Chris Christie. Watch Christie's reaction below:
Did you notice that Christie did everything except answer the question?
Gail didn't ask you why you send your kids to private school, asshole. She simply asked why you want to cut spending for public education while you send your kids to a private school. That's it. There was absolutely nothing offensive or inappropriate about her question. You're just angry that somebody actually called you out on your bullshit. You're right -- where you choose to send your kids to school is none of her business. But it is her business that you chose to cut spending for public school, and that concern was at the heart of her question.
Is this how you always treat the people in your state, governor? Just blow off a reasonable question while slamming the person asking the question? Then again, should I be surprised that this is the way a Christian Republican treats people?
If I were the Governor of Pennsylvania and I treated any Pennsylvanian this way, I'd likely be tossed out of Harrisburg at the end of my first term.
Please, governor, display your genius to your constituency and the rest of America by explaining how cutting funding for public education is going to improve the quality of education in New Jersey, or any state for that matter. That is, of course, after you're done explaining why you used a NJ State Police helicopter to get to your son's baseball game.
Chris Christie -- one more reason I'm glad I don't live in New Jersey.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
