Also, the now unseated Republican incumbent asserts, opponents of Kansas' recently enacted science standards derailed her campaign, even as they similarly attacked other conservatives running for re-election. "We just had a lot coming against us," she explains, including "a lot of well-funded, loud, obnoxious, rude people who have no ethics and morals, and they don't bat an eye at lying and manipulating the truth."
Nor do such liberal opportunists mind "slandering people and harming their families and their reputation and their business and their communities and their state," Morris continues. "It's a shame," she adds. "It's a shame, and I feel bad for them when they face God on Judgment Day."
You know for your information Ms. Morris just because somebody does not embrace your particular religion does not mean that the are without morals.
I have tons of morals.
Most of them are still in the original wrapper. I definitely plan to, someday, take them out and utilize them.
So there!
Thursday, August 17, 2006
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Scientists discover gene that might be considered the "missing link". Creationists stopped reading this headline at the word "scientists".
Scientists from the United States, Belgium and France identified 49 "human accelerated regions" (HARs) showing a lot of genetic activity.In the most active, identified as HAR1, they found 18 out of the 118 nucleotides had changed since evolutionary separation from chimps some 6 million years ago, while only two had changed in the 310 million years separating the evolutionary lines of chimps and chickens.
"Right now we have very suggestive evidence that it might be involved at a critical step in brain development, but we still need to prove that it really makes a difference," team leader David Haussler from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and the University of California, Santa Cruz told Reuters.
Do you see how measured and cautious scientists are when talking about such a world shaking discovery? That is the difference between zealotry and intellectualism.
How can you not love scientific discovery?
Attention perverts! There are new restrictions in place for bringing sex toys and lubricants onto airplanes. Well there go my vacation plans!
If you're thinking about joining the mile-high club, going on a second honeymoon, or taking a trip to rendezvous with your sex buddy, you'll have to be careful where you pack your lube and sex toys, or risk going through an embarrassing delay in the airport security queue. Traveling with sex toys has always been a bit dicey, but with recent events it's gotten even trickier.Lubes are still permitted if packed in checked luggage, but that won't help you any if you were hoping to use them in flight. If you want to get it on in the airplane lavatory, but don't want to do it dry, be prepared and carry a lubricated condom or two. And when packing your bottle of lube or massage oil in your checked luggage, put the bottle inside a sealable Ziploc bag to prevent any leaking caused by changes in altitude in a nonpressurized cargo hold. A handful of sealed "single serving" pillow packs of lube can also be handy for traveling.
In addition to the ban on liquids and gels, all electronic devices are now required to be removed from carry on baggage and placed in separate trays before screening. This means that while technically you still can bring your vibrator on the plane with you, you're expected to take it out and put it in full view in one of those plastic bins before it goes through the X-ray machine. Some people suggest traveling with "discreet" vibrators - vibrators made to look like a hairbrush or lipstick, for example. But these days, any electrical device that's disguised might seem more suspicious, so you might be better off going with a vibrator design that's simply abstract and nondescript.
Are you writing this down?
Now see how informative and helpful my little site can be? Where would you be without my timely advice?
Spread eagle against an airport wall while some underpaid security gestapo member holds up all of your sex toys for the whole terminal to see that's where!
You're welcome.
A blogger after my own heart gives 8 reasons that Jon Stewart should run for President.
I am just going to post the whole thing here but please hit the link above and visit this guys website.
8. He has The Daily Show.
This might seem like a minor point, but considering that political ad campaigns cost millions, and Jon Stewart probably doesn’t have that kind of money, having a nationally-viewable TV show with a fairly large audience is a decent starting point. It could allow him to raise enough money from loyal viewers to start an advertising campaign elsewhere.
Besides that, Comedy Central and Viacom could use his candidacy as an excellent plug for the show to draw additional attention to it. I’m no marketing executive, but even I can see that this would be a superb gimmick, especially if spun correctly.
7. There would be a media frenzy.
This ties in with the last point, in that they both have to do with media exposure. Besides the exposure Jon already has from his own show, his candidacy would be all over the news stations, especially if he announced it during a news-lull. Those 24-hour networks need something to talk about, and the “fake news anchor” turned Presidential candidate would probably get more attention than Hillary Clinton, John Kerry (attempt #2), John Edwards, or Barak Obama.
6. He commands attention from and is adored by youth.Remember the 2004 election? Remember how John Kerry was supposed to get all the 18-24 year olds off their lazy asses and into the voting booths? Remember how he may have won had that happened? Personally, I can’t think of anything that would get them out more than Jon Stewart’s name on the ballot.
Besides getting the young voters to ballot boxes, Stewart would get the votes his thousands of fans. If he managed to get the Democratic nomination, he’d probably get pretty much all the registered Democratic and Independent vote, too. Combining that with an unprecedented young-voter turnout, he might actually win.
5. He has a fantastic bullshit detector.
In perhaps the most important consequence of him running, Jon Stewart would force candidates to have real platforms, not just empty rhetoric. One of the biggest problems with Kerry’s campaign was how he completely and utterly failed to have a real platform, while Bush just hammered home security. Stewart would cut through the bullshit, and make the other candidates actually have opinions and platforms. Who knows, America might finally have an election that’s actually about political and social issues…
4. He’s not afraid to say what needs to be said.
As he said about Al Sharpton in 2004, “The person who knows he’s not going to win is allowed to speak most freely.” This ties in with the above point. Jon would bring out the truth about candidates: their political histories; inconsistencies in their opinions and platforms; and how they fall short in areas that matter. This would force the other candidates to actually come up with consistent, logical, and reasonable platforms, which is the first step to getting someone competent into the White House.
3. He is a great debater.
Every time I see Jon Stewart interview someone he disagrees with or who holds inconsistent positions, he tears them to pieces. He even does this when he’s on their shows. (Crossfire, anyone?) He has the speaking and debate skills necessary to make use of the two other skills I mentioned above, and this trifecta makes him dangerous for the other candidates. When asked why politicians don’t answer straight, simple questions, he said, “Nobody holds their feet to the fire to do it.” If he were in the race, he would be able to hold their feet to the fire in spectacular fashion.
2. His middle-left positions.
At least as far as I can gather from the Daily Show, Jon is pretty center-left. While I doubt he could get the votes of more hardcore Republicans, especially the religious-right, the moderates and independents would likely be drawn to him. Especially if he applies his hatred of the absurd to his political philosophy. I can only imagine a candidate who chose their platform based on logical and sensible conclusions instead of partisan rhetoric, and I doubt I’m the only one.
1. If he wins, he would be a fantastic President.
All right, that’s pure speculation. But I’m a big Jon Stewart fan, and I want to believe, nay, must believe that he could do it. He might have no political experience whatsoever, judging from the politicians I see that might not be a bad thing. It would be very refreshing to have a President who sees the problems we have, and could deal with the crap other politicians spew. Here’s hoping for Stewart ’08.
I will not even bother trying to add to this comprehensive list of reasons. Great job!
8. He has The Daily Show.
This might seem like a minor point, but considering that political ad campaigns cost millions, and Jon Stewart probably doesn’t have that kind of money, having a nationally-viewable TV show with a fairly large audience is a decent starting point. It could allow him to raise enough money from loyal viewers to start an advertising campaign elsewhere.
Besides that, Comedy Central and Viacom could use his candidacy as an excellent plug for the show to draw additional attention to it. I’m no marketing executive, but even I can see that this would be a superb gimmick, especially if spun correctly.
7. There would be a media frenzy.
This ties in with the last point, in that they both have to do with media exposure. Besides the exposure Jon already has from his own show, his candidacy would be all over the news stations, especially if he announced it during a news-lull. Those 24-hour networks need something to talk about, and the “fake news anchor” turned Presidential candidate would probably get more attention than Hillary Clinton, John Kerry (attempt #2), John Edwards, or Barak Obama.
6. He commands attention from and is adored by youth.Remember the 2004 election? Remember how John Kerry was supposed to get all the 18-24 year olds off their lazy asses and into the voting booths? Remember how he may have won had that happened? Personally, I can’t think of anything that would get them out more than Jon Stewart’s name on the ballot.
Besides getting the young voters to ballot boxes, Stewart would get the votes his thousands of fans. If he managed to get the Democratic nomination, he’d probably get pretty much all the registered Democratic and Independent vote, too. Combining that with an unprecedented young-voter turnout, he might actually win.
5. He has a fantastic bullshit detector.
In perhaps the most important consequence of him running, Jon Stewart would force candidates to have real platforms, not just empty rhetoric. One of the biggest problems with Kerry’s campaign was how he completely and utterly failed to have a real platform, while Bush just hammered home security. Stewart would cut through the bullshit, and make the other candidates actually have opinions and platforms. Who knows, America might finally have an election that’s actually about political and social issues…
4. He’s not afraid to say what needs to be said.
As he said about Al Sharpton in 2004, “The person who knows he’s not going to win is allowed to speak most freely.” This ties in with the above point. Jon would bring out the truth about candidates: their political histories; inconsistencies in their opinions and platforms; and how they fall short in areas that matter. This would force the other candidates to actually come up with consistent, logical, and reasonable platforms, which is the first step to getting someone competent into the White House.
3. He is a great debater.
Every time I see Jon Stewart interview someone he disagrees with or who holds inconsistent positions, he tears them to pieces. He even does this when he’s on their shows. (Crossfire, anyone?) He has the speaking and debate skills necessary to make use of the two other skills I mentioned above, and this trifecta makes him dangerous for the other candidates. When asked why politicians don’t answer straight, simple questions, he said, “Nobody holds their feet to the fire to do it.” If he were in the race, he would be able to hold their feet to the fire in spectacular fashion.
2. His middle-left positions.
At least as far as I can gather from the Daily Show, Jon is pretty center-left. While I doubt he could get the votes of more hardcore Republicans, especially the religious-right, the moderates and independents would likely be drawn to him. Especially if he applies his hatred of the absurd to his political philosophy. I can only imagine a candidate who chose their platform based on logical and sensible conclusions instead of partisan rhetoric, and I doubt I’m the only one.
1. If he wins, he would be a fantastic President.
All right, that’s pure speculation. But I’m a big Jon Stewart fan, and I want to believe, nay, must believe that he could do it. He might have no political experience whatsoever, judging from the politicians I see that might not be a bad thing. It would be very refreshing to have a President who sees the problems we have, and could deal with the crap other politicians spew. Here’s hoping for Stewart ’08.
I will not even bother trying to add to this comprehensive list of reasons. Great job!
You know that terrorist threat that the media used to scare the shit out of you the other day? Well it was not a terrorist plot after all. Ooops?
The three Dallas-area men arrested in Michigan on state terrorism charges are well-known to cell phone wholesale and retail shops here, where managers said Monday they are part of a brisk trade in buying phones from Wal-Mart and other discount stores and reselling them to smaller shops.
In Michigan, meanwhile, the FBI said it has no information to indicate that the three Palestinian-Americans arrested with about 1,000 cell phones in their van on Friday had any connections to terrorism.
Wolf! There is a wolf coming! Hurry, run, hide the sheep! Hah Hah, just kidding. But next time I might not be. And you will never be sure.
In Michigan, meanwhile, the FBI said it has no information to indicate that the three Palestinian-Americans arrested with about 1,000 cell phones in their van on Friday had any connections to terrorism.
Wolf! There is a wolf coming! Hurry, run, hide the sheep! Hah Hah, just kidding. But next time I might not be. And you will never be sure.
Things are looking up.
Men outnumbered women here for at least the last 40 years, and probably from the city's creation, but the gap has slowly closed. Population estimates released Tuesday finally invalidated the old Anchorage dating truism for women: "The odds are good, but the goods are odd."New U.S. Census Bureau data show Anchorage's gender split is exactly 50-50.
Good. I like it when I don't have to work too hard.
My last couple of forays into the dating world have not exactly been stellar. I think my standards might be kind of high.
Let's see, I want a woman who is not crazy. She should take care of herself and be healthy. She should be self sufficient and not too needy. She should love public displays of affection. She must like movies, music, and deep intellectual conversations.
Let's see is there anything else? Oh yeah she must have the libido of a navy seaman on shore leave.
Now how hard will that be to find?
As the war machine devours our children the military recruiters are breaking laws to feed the beast.
Military recruiters have increasingly resorted to overly aggressive tactics and even criminal activity to attract young troops to the battlefield, congressional investigators say.
According to service data provided to the GAO, substantiated cases of wrongdoing jumped by more than a third, from about 400 cases in 2004 to almost 630 in 2005. Meanwhile, criminal cases — such as sexual harassment or falsifying medical records — more than doubled in those years, jumping from 30 incidents to 70.
There are some 22,000 personnel working for the military's recruiting program, which cost more than $1.5 billion this year. On staff are some 14,000 "frontline" recruiters who must enlist two applicants per month.
"Given the large numbers of service members DOD must recruit every year, there is ample opportunity for recruiter irregularities to occur," the report said, using the acronym for the
Department of Defense.
The military's desperation is growing and it falls to every parent to keep their children safe from these predators. Allowing our children to be recruited during this time, would be allowing them to engage in the criminal behavior that we find our country conducting in Iraq.
Haven't we lost enough of our children?
I support our military when it is protecting our country and providing assistance to other lands but I will not support what is happening in Iraq, and I will certainly not allow my children to take part in it.
According to service data provided to the GAO, substantiated cases of wrongdoing jumped by more than a third, from about 400 cases in 2004 to almost 630 in 2005. Meanwhile, criminal cases — such as sexual harassment or falsifying medical records — more than doubled in those years, jumping from 30 incidents to 70.
There are some 22,000 personnel working for the military's recruiting program, which cost more than $1.5 billion this year. On staff are some 14,000 "frontline" recruiters who must enlist two applicants per month.
"Given the large numbers of service members DOD must recruit every year, there is ample opportunity for recruiter irregularities to occur," the report said, using the acronym for the
Department of Defense.
The military's desperation is growing and it falls to every parent to keep their children safe from these predators. Allowing our children to be recruited during this time, would be allowing them to engage in the criminal behavior that we find our country conducting in Iraq.
Haven't we lost enough of our children?
I support our military when it is protecting our country and providing assistance to other lands but I will not support what is happening in Iraq, and I will certainly not allow my children to take part in it.
July sees most Iraqi deaths yet.
July appears to have been the deadliest month of the war for Iraqi civilians, according to figures from the Health Ministry and the Baghdad morgue, reinforcing criticism that the Baghdad security plan started in June by the new Iraqi government has failed.
An average of more than 110 Iraqis were killed each day in July, according to the figures. The total number of civilian deaths that month, 3,438, is a 9 percent increase over the tally in June and nearly double the toll in January.
The rising numbers indicate that sectarian violence is spiraling out of control and seem to bolster an assertion that many senior Iraqi officials and American military analysts have been making in recent months: that the country is already embroiled in a civil war, not just slipping toward one, and that the American-led forces are caught between Sunni Arab guerrillas and Shiite militias.
110 people dying each day! Can we even fathom what living in these conditions must be like?
How is this not a civil war? How many more have to die per day for this to be acknowledged as a civil war? The fact that this administration believes that by ignoring a problem it will disappear has certainly not served us or the Iraqi people very well at all.
It is long since past the time for grownups to start making the decisions in this crisis. The overgrown children have made a horrible mess of things.
An average of more than 110 Iraqis were killed each day in July, according to the figures. The total number of civilian deaths that month, 3,438, is a 9 percent increase over the tally in June and nearly double the toll in January.
The rising numbers indicate that sectarian violence is spiraling out of control and seem to bolster an assertion that many senior Iraqi officials and American military analysts have been making in recent months: that the country is already embroiled in a civil war, not just slipping toward one, and that the American-led forces are caught between Sunni Arab guerrillas and Shiite militias.
110 people dying each day! Can we even fathom what living in these conditions must be like?
How is this not a civil war? How many more have to die per day for this to be acknowledged as a civil war? The fact that this administration believes that by ignoring a problem it will disappear has certainly not served us or the Iraqi people very well at all.
It is long since past the time for grownups to start making the decisions in this crisis. The overgrown children have made a horrible mess of things.
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Forget body armor. If you want to be protected from rocket attack you need silicone breast implants. Our soldiers want boobies!
An Israeli woman's breast implants saved her life when she was wounded in a Hizbollah rocket attack during Israel's war with the Lebanese group, a hospital spokesman said on Tuesday.Doctors found shrapnel embedded in the silicone implants, just inches from the 24-year-old's heart.
"She was saved from death," said a spokesman for Nahariya Hospital in northern Israel. The woman has been released from hospital.
There are so many choice here I cannot pick just one. Go ahead, make up your own joke.
(Okay I have no doubt that those things could stop a round from a tank.)
Dr. Dobson is herding his sheep into place to support the Republicans.
As discontent with the Republican Party threatens to dampen the turnout of conservative voters in November, evangelical leaders are launching a massive registration drive that could help counter the malaise and mobilize new religious voters in battleground states.
The program, coordinated by the Colorado-based group Focus on the Family and its influential founder, James C. Dobson, would use a variety of methods — including information inserted in church publications and booths placed outside worship services — to recruit millions of new voters in 2006 and beyond.
The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, called the evangelical voter registration drive a "blatant effort by Dobson to build a partisan political machine based in churches."
"He has made it abundantly clear that electing Republicans is an integral part of his agenda, and he doesn't mind risking the tax exemption of churches in the process," Lynn said. "Dobson wants to be a major political boss, and this is his way to get there."
This is why the Republicans have tried to relax the rules about the seperation of church and state. I have even heard some who believe that there is not such amendment:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Whoops there it is!
If the Republicans had their way the polls would be placed in the churches and only conservative christians would be allowed to vote. And any of us who may have other viewpoints would just be shit out of luck!
Well it is not going to work this time. We are not going to sacrifce our children and our country so that these fanatics can further their bullshit agenda to the detriment of our country.
As Peter Finch in the movie "Network" would have said, "We are mad as hell and we are not goig to take it anymore!"
Damn straight!
The program, coordinated by the Colorado-based group Focus on the Family and its influential founder, James C. Dobson, would use a variety of methods — including information inserted in church publications and booths placed outside worship services — to recruit millions of new voters in 2006 and beyond.
The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, called the evangelical voter registration drive a "blatant effort by Dobson to build a partisan political machine based in churches."
"He has made it abundantly clear that electing Republicans is an integral part of his agenda, and he doesn't mind risking the tax exemption of churches in the process," Lynn said. "Dobson wants to be a major political boss, and this is his way to get there."
This is why the Republicans have tried to relax the rules about the seperation of church and state. I have even heard some who believe that there is not such amendment:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Whoops there it is!
If the Republicans had their way the polls would be placed in the churches and only conservative christians would be allowed to vote. And any of us who may have other viewpoints would just be shit out of luck!
Well it is not going to work this time. We are not going to sacrifce our children and our country so that these fanatics can further their bullshit agenda to the detriment of our country.
As Peter Finch in the movie "Network" would have said, "We are mad as hell and we are not goig to take it anymore!"
Damn straight!
Here is the article about the plan to invade Hezbollah that was conceived well before the kidnappings.
Citing a US government consultant with close ties to Israel, Hersh also reports that before the Hezbollah kidnappings, several Israeli officials visited Washington "to get a green light" for a bombing operation following a Hezbollah provocation, and "to find out how much the United States would bear".
"The Israelis told us it would be a cheap war with many benefits," the magazine quotes the consultant as saying. "Why oppose it? We'll be able to hunt down and bomb missiles, tunnels and bunkers from the air. It would be a demo for Iran."
US government officials have denied the charges.
Of course they deny it, but when have they ever been on the side of the truth?
And Bush keeps saying that Hezbollah "provoked" Israel, and that Israel had not choice but to respond militarily. Nothing is what it seems with this administration. They are warmongers through and through. The only solution to any problem is to kill! Or to encourage others to kill!
(By the way I must give a shout out to peace chik'n who brought this article to my attention. Thank you very much, I appreciate the assist.)
"The Israelis told us it would be a cheap war with many benefits," the magazine quotes the consultant as saying. "Why oppose it? We'll be able to hunt down and bomb missiles, tunnels and bunkers from the air. It would be a demo for Iran."
US government officials have denied the charges.
Of course they deny it, but when have they ever been on the side of the truth?
And Bush keeps saying that Hezbollah "provoked" Israel, and that Israel had not choice but to respond militarily. Nothing is what it seems with this administration. They are warmongers through and through. The only solution to any problem is to kill! Or to encourage others to kill!
(By the way I must give a shout out to peace chik'n who brought this article to my attention. Thank you very much, I appreciate the assist.)
Scientists who apparently have never seen "Jurassic Park", consider using Wooly Mammoth jizz to recreate the creatures.
Bodies of extinct Ice Age mammals, such as woolly mammoths, that have been frozen in permafrost for thousands of years may contain viable sperm that could be used to bring them back from the dead, scientists said yesterday.Okay but why?
Why do we need giant furry elephants running around when our planet is heating up at every change of the season? Do we just want to watch this animal suffer? Are these scientists Mammoth haters?
I sometimes just feel that men do things just because they can, with no thought to the usefulness or potential problems that might occur if they proceed with their plans.
On the other hand, how cool would it be to see a real Wooly Mammoth? Pretty fucking cool!
(By the way for those keeping track, I do believe that this is the first headline in Immoral Minority history that used the word "jizz". Broke a little new ground today.)
Part two of Jill Carroll's terrible ordeal.
After some 20 minutes, the car stopped and a woman's gloved hand grasped mine, guiding me out of the car and into a house. My heart was racing; the adrenaline hadn't stopped in 24 hours. Barely a day had passed, and I was a broken, quivering, fearful shell.
Jill does nothing to make her self sound brave or put herself in a better light. She comes across as a terribly frightened young woman who believes her life may end at any time.
Every word rings true.
Jill does nothing to make her self sound brave or put herself in a better light. She comes across as a terribly frightened young woman who believes her life may end at any time.
Every word rings true.
Monday, August 14, 2006
Bush claims that Israel won the battle against Hezbollah. Also says the South beat the North and that the indians never had a chance against Custer.
Bush admonished Iran and Syria for backing Hezbollah, which captured two Israeli soldiers on July 12 igniting the conflict. Both sides claimed victory Monday, hours after a U.N.-brokered cease-fire took effect, while Bush said Israel prevailed.
"Hezbollah attacked Israel. Hezbollah started the crisis, and Hezbollah suffered a defeat in this crisis," the president said at the State Department after a day of meetings with his top defense, diplomatic and national security advisers.
The United States backed Israel in the war, and Bush made clear he was determined to help the Israelis in the post-fighting struggle of words about who wound up on top.
Have you heard the latest news reports that Israel and America planned to attack Hezbollah months ago and just used this latest kidnapping as an excuse? I cannot find the source yet but when I do I will link to it.
"Hezbollah attacked Israel. Hezbollah started the crisis, and Hezbollah suffered a defeat in this crisis," the president said at the State Department after a day of meetings with his top defense, diplomatic and national security advisers.
The United States backed Israel in the war, and Bush made clear he was determined to help the Israelis in the post-fighting struggle of words about who wound up on top.
Have you heard the latest news reports that Israel and America planned to attack Hezbollah months ago and just used this latest kidnapping as an excuse? I cannot find the source yet but when I do I will link to it.
Our boys did not even get the damned sand out of their uniforms yet.
About 300 U.S. soldiers who just weeks ago returned home to Alaska after a year in Iraq are being ordered back to try to help bolster security in Baghdad, the U.S. Army said on Monday.
The soldiers are part of the 3,900-strong 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team from Fort Wainwright in Alaska. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on July 27 ordered the unit to remain in Iraq for up to four months past its scheduled departure.
The order provoked anger and disappointment among some of the soldiers' families in Alaska. It also made clear that any significant reduction in the 135,000-strong U.S. force in Iraq was unlikely in the immediate future.
The brigade was so far along in the process of flowing out of Iraq after its yearlong tour that 380 soldiers had returned home to Alaska and 300 had arrived in Kuwait en route home, the Army said.
All of the brigade's soldiers who had reached Kuwait were sent back into Iraq, the Army said. And now, 300 of the 380 who made it to Alaska will be sent back to Iraq within the next couple of weeks, said Paul Boyce, an Army spokesman at the Pentagon.
I don't know how these brave men are feeling, but I can imagine that their families must be torn up at the possibility of their loved ones not making it back this next time after surviving the first deployment. How many times can you whistle past the graveyard before your luck runs out?
I think that the November election should be very eye opening indeed. It is time to send a message.
The soldiers are part of the 3,900-strong 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team from Fort Wainwright in Alaska. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on July 27 ordered the unit to remain in Iraq for up to four months past its scheduled departure.
The order provoked anger and disappointment among some of the soldiers' families in Alaska. It also made clear that any significant reduction in the 135,000-strong U.S. force in Iraq was unlikely in the immediate future.
The brigade was so far along in the process of flowing out of Iraq after its yearlong tour that 380 soldiers had returned home to Alaska and 300 had arrived in Kuwait en route home, the Army said.
All of the brigade's soldiers who had reached Kuwait were sent back into Iraq, the Army said. And now, 300 of the 380 who made it to Alaska will be sent back to Iraq within the next couple of weeks, said Paul Boyce, an Army spokesman at the Pentagon.
I don't know how these brave men are feeling, but I can imagine that their families must be torn up at the possibility of their loved ones not making it back this next time after surviving the first deployment. How many times can you whistle past the graveyard before your luck runs out?
I think that the November election should be very eye opening indeed. It is time to send a message.
Terrifying toy causes Alaska Airlines to evacuate plane.
An Alaska Airlines flight was evacuated on landing at Los Angeles International Airport on Monday after the flight crew became suspicious of a toy found on board.Alaska Airlines Flight 281 from Guadalajara, Mexico, landed normally at LAX but taxied to a remote part of the airport, where passengers were quickly taken off while police using bomb-sniffing dogs investigated, an FBI spokesman said.
"The device was identified as a type of toy transmitter and a thorough search of the plane and cargo hold for explosives came up negative," he said.
He declined to elaborate on the nature of the device.
I can't help wondering if it was a sex toy. Because that is just the way my warped little mind works.
I find common ground with Christians again. Except they think it is a problem.
A poll conducted by what bills itself as "the world's most visited Christian website" indicates a surprising number of Christians are addicted to pornography.
"The poll results indicate that 50% of all Christian men and 20% of all Christian women are addicted to pornography," said Clay Jones, founder and President of Second Glance Ministries.
The group defines "addicted" as applied to pornography as use on an ongoing basis.
"We are seeing an escalation to the problem in both men and women who regularly attend church," said Bill Cooper, President of ChristiaNet.com.
The poll, conducted at ChristiaNet.com, used a self-selected sample, and is therefore not a scientific study. Over 1,000 users responded to the survey.
Additionally, 60% of the women who answered the survey confessed having "significant struggles with lust." 40% admitted to being "involved in sexual sin" in the past year.
"No one is immunized against the vice-grip clutches of sexual addictive behaviors," reads a release issued by the site. "The people who struggle with the repeated pursuit of sexual gratification include church members, deacons, staff, and yes, even clergy."
Even clergy? You mean priests and ministers have sexual urges as well? Well gosh I hope this doesn't lead to any inappropriate behavior!
Maybe if they let these people fuck consenting adult partners without feeling guilty they might not need to resort to looking at naked pictures on the inter-tubes.
Now I only look at porn for educational reasons myself (You cannot believe what you can learn looking at that stuff!), but I certainly do not have any "addiction" problem. I don't have to look at porn everyday or anything.
I mean I don't "have" to do it.
And when I do see something pornographic on the web it is usually completely by accident. ("Accident" is what I named my wireless mouse.)
These people are going to end up going to hell! I sure hope they are not in my section because they are a bunch of perverts!
"The poll results indicate that 50% of all Christian men and 20% of all Christian women are addicted to pornography," said Clay Jones, founder and President of Second Glance Ministries.
The group defines "addicted" as applied to pornography as use on an ongoing basis.
"We are seeing an escalation to the problem in both men and women who regularly attend church," said Bill Cooper, President of ChristiaNet.com.
The poll, conducted at ChristiaNet.com, used a self-selected sample, and is therefore not a scientific study. Over 1,000 users responded to the survey.
Additionally, 60% of the women who answered the survey confessed having "significant struggles with lust." 40% admitted to being "involved in sexual sin" in the past year.
"No one is immunized against the vice-grip clutches of sexual addictive behaviors," reads a release issued by the site. "The people who struggle with the repeated pursuit of sexual gratification include church members, deacons, staff, and yes, even clergy."
Even clergy? You mean priests and ministers have sexual urges as well? Well gosh I hope this doesn't lead to any inappropriate behavior!
Maybe if they let these people fuck consenting adult partners without feeling guilty they might not need to resort to looking at naked pictures on the inter-tubes.
Now I only look at porn for educational reasons myself (You cannot believe what you can learn looking at that stuff!), but I certainly do not have any "addiction" problem. I don't have to look at porn everyday or anything.
I mean I don't "have" to do it.
And when I do see something pornographic on the web it is usually completely by accident. ("Accident" is what I named my wireless mouse.)
These people are going to end up going to hell! I sure hope they are not in my section because they are a bunch of perverts!
This evangelical is throwing away perfectly good Ethiopian children.
Actually I think he is baptizing the little heathens. Because you know whatever their religious beliefs were they were just not acceptable to their white benefactors.
"If you don't believe what we want you to believe then we will not give you that new school."
Dr. Obvious releases some new findings.
A woman's sex drive begins to plummet once she is in a secure relationship, according to research.
Researchers from Germany found that four years into a relationship, less than half of 30-year-old women wanted regular sex.
Conversely, the team found a man's libido remained the same regardless of how long he had been in a relationship.
Wow! This is really groundbreaking stuff!
I am sure that it is news to anyone, that has been living alone in the mountains of Tibet for the last forty years!
I understand that the next scientific breakthrough will prove once and for all that bears, really do shit in the woods. Stay tuned kids.
Researchers from Germany found that four years into a relationship, less than half of 30-year-old women wanted regular sex.
Conversely, the team found a man's libido remained the same regardless of how long he had been in a relationship.
Wow! This is really groundbreaking stuff!
I am sure that it is news to anyone, that has been living alone in the mountains of Tibet for the last forty years!
I understand that the next scientific breakthrough will prove once and for all that bears, really do shit in the woods. Stay tuned kids.
Oh goody a new manly trend! Menaissance?
And now, God help us, the Menaissance.
What's this all about? Well, it's a reaction against the gentle, concerned male with the moisturiser and the pink sweaters. It's back to machismo manhood and fearsome jumping on your mate's bones. Carnivorous caveman is back. We're talking retrosexual here. A bible of the new movement is Jim Belushi's Real Men Don't Apologise. It's all about unreconstructed masculinity advocated by men (and some women who have tired of emo-boys with Kleenexes) who believe that males have been emasculated in the course of the gender wars.
The new/old battle cry is for masculine assertiveness, bravery and a willingness to beard the psychological wild beasts in their lairs.
At its best it's about dignity and manliness, at its worst it's about beer bellies, flatulence and "spontaneous" (ie drink-fuelled) bad behaviour. Attractive and exciting, ladies?
And you ladies thought it was tough for you?
I will stick to who I really am if it is all right with the trend masters.
If you want me I will be sitting here writing some poetry. You know, manly poetry.
What's this all about? Well, it's a reaction against the gentle, concerned male with the moisturiser and the pink sweaters. It's back to machismo manhood and fearsome jumping on your mate's bones. Carnivorous caveman is back. We're talking retrosexual here. A bible of the new movement is Jim Belushi's Real Men Don't Apologise. It's all about unreconstructed masculinity advocated by men (and some women who have tired of emo-boys with Kleenexes) who believe that males have been emasculated in the course of the gender wars.
The new/old battle cry is for masculine assertiveness, bravery and a willingness to beard the psychological wild beasts in their lairs.
At its best it's about dignity and manliness, at its worst it's about beer bellies, flatulence and "spontaneous" (ie drink-fuelled) bad behaviour. Attractive and exciting, ladies?
And you ladies thought it was tough for you?
I will stick to who I really am if it is all right with the trend masters.
If you want me I will be sitting here writing some poetry. You know, manly poetry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)