Thursday, February 12, 2009


Every time I think the Republican Party in Oklahoma can't go any lower ...

they surprise -- and appall, and disgust -- me yet again.

GOP extremists shun gay pastor -- on the floor of the Legislature. This was an attempt to silence this man, and an attempt to change the permanent record.


I have always contended that 20% of any population is NUTS. Indeed, the Oklahoma House is a random distribution.

Can they go lower? I dare not challenge them. They may follow Rush L. into hell if we did.

Did you see that the greatest threat to the U.S. security is the economy?

Economic crisis tops list of US threats

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The economic crisis has trumped bullets and bombs in the intelligence agencies' latest assessment of threats to the United States.
Blair also reported the cascading threats that could flow from global climate change; struggles for energy resources, food and water; an exploding population; and the threat to U.S. information networks from hackers."

Can you imagine that the Republicans are now anti-American-security?
Later that night, Rep. John Wright, R-Broken Arrow, asked that the aperitif be stricken from the record, and demanded a recount on the number of lima beans in the succotash.
Oklahoma's becoming quite the hotbed of increasingly anti-gay BS, isn't it? Sally Kern, these nutjobs, etc., etc.
Their world is changing, they're losing their grip on power, and they feel threatened. The more threatened people feel, the scuzzier they're willing to act. That's an explanation -- not an excuse. They're still pond scum.
Rather amusing, BTW, that there's a big controversy about some TV stations airing a piece of AFA drivel called "Silencing Christians" at the same time that folks in OK are in fact, silencing a Christian.

But then, if the fundies were actually smart enough to understand irony, that would take all the fun out of mocking them.
Nan: "They're still pond scum."

Nah, that's way to far up the chain of life.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
All you nut-bars should move up north here, where you will be welcomed with open arms, and together we can drive out the cowardly, anonymous conservative wackos we got around here too and create a liberal paradise. :-)

I'll bake y'all cookies.
Screw the revolution, I'll come just for the cookies.
I read the prayer. Usual bland stuff so prevalent nowadays. The "many names" at the end is the one thing that stands out as needing clarification. That is, I'm aware of the many names throughout the Judeo/Christian tradition, but is that all he meant? Haven't seen much in the way of reasoning on the part of the twenty who voted against and the 17 who abstained (why, I wonder? Do you not include those as well?). The only thing I saw was a mere procedural thing. Is it routine to include the prayer into the record, or is there always a vote? There was some confusion on that.

Overall, I see no reason to ban the prayer itself if only the prayer is what is entered. But without further explanation regarding the 37 who didn't vote to include it, I have no comment on them. Perhaps you all know more details that you haven't made available. If not, you're doing the mind-reading thing with which I know Alan has a really hard time.

In addition, I will remind you haters that standing against bad behavior is not bigotry or discrimination as it is meant in the usual sense. Whether or not you believe a lifestyle isn't bad behavior is besides the point. The worst you can call those of us who believe so is that we might be mistaken, though we aren't. But you are that which you accuse us of being for your intolerance of our position. Shame on you.
BTW, I saw the hour-long version of the 14 part series "Silencing Christians". You all might want to watch it, and if any of you know this poor minister that was so horribly dissed, you might want to get him to watch it as well. You see, I went to his site and saw a piece where he speaks of what he calls "the real agenda". Well, this hour-long series speaks of the source of the agenda he claims doesn't exist, one that I've mentioned more than once on various blogs, and it shows to some extent how it has been working.
Yes, yes, yes... MA is talking about the Protocols of the Elders of Zion ... oops, I mean the "gay agenda."

You'll let us know, won't you MA, when you start following Rev. Lou Sheldon's notion of rounding us all up and putting us in "cities of refuge". That's *your* agenda.
"Silencing Christians"

Notice MA wasn't even clever enough to get the irony here.

Not surprising.
There's nothing merely "procedural" about the Oklahoma House of Representives taking the unprecedented step of trying to censor activity on its own floor! In this case it was a prayer. But the prayer wasn't the alleged offense, MA. They did what they did because the man is gay -- and yes, they've said as much.

No hate here, ya dork. Just grief, for all the people who would be Christians if not for the likes of you. Harsh words, true. But they come with being the territory when anyone sets himself up to be a judge, whether yourself, other homophobe biblical literalists, or the Oklahoma House Republicans.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?