Saturday, February 24, 2007

Constituents are Dangerous

Oregon Sentor has dangerous elderly terrorist women arrested for attempting to speak with him in his office.

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Cleaning the Rolls

This is how you clean voting rolls. Well before any election, with plenty of time for people to fix any mistaken removals.

Monday, February 19, 2007


Video about Iraq. Forty-eight minutes long.

Supporting Our Troops

The problems at Walter Reed need to be fixed, NOW. Anything else is showing a severe lack of supporting our troops.

Friday, February 09, 2007

An Iraq Interrogator Speaks

Eric Fair was there, and committed the crimes. Now he can't sleep at night.

Wednesday, February 07, 2007

A Note To Readers

If you read this blog via RSS feed or some other site syndication, please make sure you turn off any options to reload entries if they are updated. I will be shortly making multiple changes in older entries, and if you have your feed set to show you updated entries, you will likely get flooded with posts.

If you do not read this blog via a feed, don't worry. Nothing will change.

Monday, February 05, 2007

According to These Folks, I'm Not Married

Washblog has the text of a completely insane initiative proposed in my state:
Ballot Title
Statement of Subject: Initiative Measure No. 957 concerns eligibility for marriage.

Concise Description: This measure would limit marriage to those couples who are biologically capable of having children together, and would invalidate the marriages of couples who fail to procreate children within three years after marrying.

Ballot Measure Summary
This measure would restrict marriage to a male and a female who are capable of having children together. Couples would be required to declare their ability to procreate children together in order to obtain marriage licenses. If a couple failed to procreate children within three years of marriage, their marriage would be subject to annulment. All other marriages would be defined as "unrecognized." Persons in unrecognized marriages would be ineligible to receive any marriage benefits.
In short, no kids, no marriage. Absurd? Yup. Go read the reasoning behind this. I'm not sure whether to be outraged or laugh my butt off. But discussion of the subject is what they want, so go... read and discuss.

A relative of mine told me that he always votes "NO" on citizen initiatives. I'm definitely coming around to seeing his point on the subject. Political theater like this just helps push me to the same conclusion he came to long ago.

Saturday, February 03, 2007

More on Blaming the Victim

Read it. If you believe the propaganda that Fox is putting out about that poor kid, taken from his family at 11 years old, then you are enabling the abusers who kidnap children.

Friday, February 02, 2007

Mary's Baby

The child of a politician is generally off limits in political discussion, unless they themselves get involved in the debate. Mary Cheney was involved directly in her father's campaign, serving as the director of vice presidential operations for the Bush-Cheney 2004 Presidential re-election campaign. Her direct involvement in electing a man whose politics are DIRECTLY OPPOSED to her lifestyle makes her fair game in political discussion. She IS a political figure.

Discussing how her father feels about her pregnancy, when her father's big supporters claim that homosexual couples should not have children, is absolutely acceptable.

She made herself part of the debate. Hopefully, by the time her child is old enough to understand what's happening, the whole issue will have blown over and been resolved. But at the moment, her life is fair game. She involved herself in politics, as part of a party that HATES her and everything she stands for. As long as she supports Republicans who think she's morally deficient for simply existing, her life is part of the debate.

If she has a problem with that, maybe she should've thought twice before working to elect people who think she's a second-class citizen.

Thursday, February 01, 2007

Terrorist Mayor

Ok, the whole Boston lite-brite terrorism thing... I'd be more impressed if the things hadn't already been up around town for THREE WEEKS before anyone noticed one, wet pants, and called police. If they had been bombs, the whole town would've been levelled before anyone reacted. Sheesh. And I really don't think the guys who put the artwork up should be punished. The mayor and media who overreacted and caused gridlock and terror should be punished instead.

Meanwhile, in usually overreacting Seattle, the things showed up and provoked little response. Apparently there were even three of them in Bothell, where I live. Makes me wish I'd seen it. Kind of a surprise when Seattle shows more common sense than Boston...

We're a paranoid society, with our so-called leaders screaming about terror so much that a portion of the populace can't see anything unusual without wetting pants and calling police. The truth is your more likely to die in a car accident caused by some idiot using his cell phone while driving to notify police of a suspicious box than you are to die in a real terrorist attack. In the meantime, this quote from the Associated Press article sums it all up:
"It's almost too easy to be a terrorist these days," said Jennifer Mason, 26. "You stick a box on a corner and you can shut down a city."