In many ways, I dislike the Republican party more than I do the Democratic party; the Democrats do not even bother trying to hide their totalitarian agenda.  Granted, they wrap it up in sweet-sounding words – like fairness, social justice, equality, yadda yadda yadda – yes, the words are pretty, but when examined, they tell you exactly what the Democrats want: control.  For example, do a Google search on Margaret Sanger, then run a comparison of the number of abortions sorted by socio-economic classes, and compare the results to Sanger’s (and Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsberg’s) rhetoric.  The results might (or might not) surprise you.

Republicans, on the other hand, claim to uphold the values of personal responsibility, then proceed to blame all of societies ills (and their own many foibles) on someone else.  They claim to uphold common sense fiscal discipline, then frivolously spend money in a manner that would make even a drunken sailor green with envy.  They claim to believe in individual liberty, then attempt to pass Constitutional amendments to force their beliefs on others.  The claim to represent strong family values – at least when they’re not with their multitude of mistresses.

I could go on all day, but I think you get my point.

The Republican party has earned its current place as the minority party.  The complete betrayal of the values they claim to represent, combined with an epidemic of noodle spine-itis has made this possible.  Maybe one day when the Republicans start walking their talk (and find their testicles), they’ll be less deserving of their state of disgrace.

h/t: Hot Air

Sadly, even my most pessimistic prediction of the reaction fell short of the reality.

Before I go into the analysis of my observations, I want to make one thing explicitly clear: I whole-heartedly oppose the idea of government sanctioning of same sex-marriage. However, I also whole-heartedly oppose the government sanctioning of opposite-sex marriage.

I will give all of you a moment or two to allow the red haze of rage to fade and to pull yourselves together.

Feel better? Probably not, but I shall continue anyway.

Despite my objection to government recognition of marriage, I do support the California ruling. My support of the ruling stems from a Constitutional basis rather than from personal bias. Laws regulating marriage are already on the books, but those existing laws discriminate against same-sex couples merely to pander to the prejudices of the majority. These laws are in direct violation of the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution which guarantees that all citizens are equal under the eyes of the law.

As a strict Constitutionalist, I support the California Supreme Court’s ruling. I would be even more supporting of a ruling that would tell Uncle Sam to get out of marriage all together, but the likelihood of that is practically non-existent. There is revenue to be made in granting blessings on matrimonial unions, and the Government will not willingly part from that revenue.

More disturbing, though, is the reaction from those who oppose the ruling. It would be a gross understatement to call the reaction vitriolic. In fact, the reaction is such that even Fred Phelps would be jealous of the rhetoric.

Such a reaction has caused me to reevaluate my opinion of religionists, which is sad, really. I happen to know a few very decent people of Christian faith, but what I have seen over the last 24 hours combined with the experiences of my youth makes me wonder if they are decent people in spite of their religious beliefs rather than because of them.

Even more, if such all-consuming hatred towards others is as prevalent as what I have been witnessing, then perhaps it is time to reevaluate some decisions I have made in the past – decisions that I would rather not revisit because it would mean going back to living in a state of mind that I spent many years trying to shake off.

I am not going to go too much into the details of that mindset, but in a previous post, I had mentioned that I had survived affiliation with a couple of churches, and I was not speaking metaphorically. I would rather not go back to constantly looking over my shoulders and worrying from which direction the next attack would come.

The Theocratic Republican party, predictably, is lapping up Huckabee’s comments with relish, as he has just passed the Moron Mormon in the national polls.

Again, no surprise there.  It is just more proof that what I have been saying about the theocratic takeover of the Republican party has been accurate.

Yesterday, Ms. Coulter said in an interview:

COULTER: Well, OK, take the Republican National Convention. People were happy. They’re Christian. They’re tolerant. They defend America, they —
DEUTSCH: Christian — so we should be Christian? It would be better if we were all Christian?
COULTER: Yes.
DEUTSCH: We should all be Christian?
COULTER: Yes. Would you like to come to church with me, Donny?…
COULTER: No, we think — we just want Jews to be perfected, as they say.

I can think of several words that would describe this diatribe:  stupid, ignorant, etc.  Offensive, however, is not a word I would attribute to this.  Ms. Couter was asked what she believed, and she responded with what she believed.  Nothing more, nothing less.

Granted, I believe Ms. Coulter is misguided and misinformed as to the nature of religion, particularly in the area of tolerance, but that is her right – just as it is my right to hold my aforementioned opinions.  Yet, many people are too busy getting their diapers all twisted up in knots to stop and think about what Ms. Coulter just said, or more specifically, the question to which she was responding.

When someone says something I don’t like, I am faced with a number of choices.  I can choose to a) get offended and get all huffy puffy about it, b) roll my eyes for a moment then move on, or c) just plain shrug, say “oh well,” then move on with life.  Sometimes, if it is something particularly stupid, I wll blog about it and poke fun at it.  Personally, I think option “a” is a waste of time and energy, so I rarely let myself go that far.

This is not to say, of course, that I think I am perfect.  I have made (and continue to make) my share of blunders, so I am far from perfect.  I do, however, realize that I can take a moment between stimulus and response to evaluate the context of the stimulus, then to take another moment to formulate an appropriate response.  Apparently, this is a skill that is no longer taught.  Sticks and stones and all that jazz.

But, I have digressed from my initial point.  Yes, Coulter is an attention whore.  You know it, I know it, and most importantly, she knows it.  She thrives off the controversy she generates with her stupid statements.  The best way to deal with attention whores is to roll your eyes at them, then move on with your life.

Oh, and grow some damn skin.

A couple of days ago, a story broke about financial mafeasance at Oral Roberts University.  A lawsuit against the university was filed by three former professors, accusing university president Richard Roberts, son of the university’s namesake, and his wife of using university funds to purchase private vehicles, cell phones, and the offerings of nonacademic scholarships to children belonging to friends of the family.

Naturally, when the story broke, the first thing I thought of was Oral Roberts making his absurd claim on a nationally televised sermon.  Charlatans like Oral Roberts, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, et al, have turned religion into a lucrative industry supported by the gullible.  They have created these so-called “universities” as their own personal fiefdoms as a means of sopping money from their students while at the same time subjecting them to a half-baked religious indoctrination masquerading as an education.

The second thought to run rampant through my head was the realization that I wasn’t at all surprised.  I was actually surprised at my total lack of surprise.  The staff and the students of Oral Roberts “University” either knew their school was founded by a charlatan or never bothered to properly investigate the “school” before spending their money there.  I honestly cannot tell which option is worse than the other – willful ignorance or gullibility.

Speaking in defense of the university and his own head, Richard Roberts is on Larry King tonight claiming that “God” is speaking to him, as he once did to his father.  Only this time, God is not telling the younger Roberts to scam money from the gullible, but rather that the lawsuit is unwarranted.  Though, I am sure if any gullible folks out there are willing to donate money to the Roberts’ defense, they will not complain overmuch.

Oh, well.  All I can do is shake my head at the absurdity, and try to ignore Richard Roberts and his wife telling their sob story to the obsequious Larry King.

Here we are today, some seven years later, and the much-hyped War on Terror has become anything but.  President Ken Doll Bush is more concerned with fellating Mexico’s president than he is with maintaining national security.  Having failed to learn the lesson of Vietnam, we are making the same mistakes that cost us that war so long ago.  That lesson is as simple as it is true: you don’t win a war by being the nice guy; you win a war by making the enemy wish he never pissed you off in the first place.

There is only one kind of effective warfare, and that is Total War.  General George Patton understood this, which is why his enemies feared him.  The Islamists of today also understand this, but somehow in the years between WWII and today, America, along with the rest of the so-called civilized world, has forgotten this fundamental truth. 

As a result of President Ken Doll Bush’s lack of testicular fortitude and the Democratic Congress doing everything they can to provide moral support for a murderous ideology, we may end up facing the same disgrace we faced when we withdrew from Vietnam.