Banging Blind

After a law was passed in Iowa in 2011 (why am I not surprised), allowing anyone to get a firearm permit on line, even blind people can now legally pack heat. A local sheriff has decided that as blind people are entitled to purchase firearms, they can learn to use them safely. He states, "People think that they are just going to shoot blindly, just start shooting at noises."
Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Right?
I mean, a blind person? "Just shooting blindly"? Why would people think that?
For his part, the blind man on the video states with confidence that he can "do whatever needs to be done, if the time ever came". He wants to protect himself and his wife from the... hmm... from "whatever" when "the time" comes.
How exactly is this going to work? Is his service dog going to call out the shots for him?

Scenario
Blind Man (waking suddenly and whispering): What's that noise? (He feels for his wife who is asleep in bed next to him; no way is HE going to do a Pistorius). Did you hear anything, Fido?
Dog: Woof!
BM: Do you see something, Fido? (He slips his Glock 20 with 15-round, high-capacity magazine and Storm Lake ported, stainless-steel barrel from under his pillow and flips off the safety)
Dog: Woof! Bark!
BM: Is it over there, Fido (Gestures to the left with his Glock held out professionally with two hands in front of him)?
Dog: Bark! Arf! Snarl!
BM: What is it, Fido? Did it move over that way? Shall I shoot?!!! (Waves gun back and forth menacingly)
Dog: Bark! Arf!! Bark!! SNARL! BARK!
BM: (squeezing trigger 10 times rapidly): TAKE THAT YOU VICIOUS HOME INVADER!
Did I hit him, Fido?
Did I?
Shall I shoot again?
. . . . . .
Fido? FIDO?!

It's a shame that so many people – sighted and now blind – think that owning a firearm will actually make them safer, enabling them to do "whatever needs to be done" when "the time comes". The time comes, but it's not the vicious rapist perpetrating a home invasion they shoot, but their daughter, sneaking in from a late date with her boyfriend.
Or the dog... if they're lucky.

The Romney Repression

I am blab... er... blogging about politics today. 
Yeah... yeah, I know. It's not funny, but it's FUN!
You will be delighted to know that both Mitt Romney (now running for President of the United States) and his running mate, Paul Ryan (now running for bucket of warm piss), are in the best of health! Mitt Romney (65) takes a "baby aspirin" everyday and is closely monitored for prostate cancer. Paul Ryan is also in the pink (not TOO red, right?), though his doctors feel that maybe he stretched the truth about his body fat. 

He said, they said; who you gonna believe, right?

So both of them are healthy specimens physically.

But what about their mental capacity?

What if they were suffering from serious mental illness; how would we know about it? 

The doctors who gave them their physicals didn't ask them questions related to mental health.

Scenario

Dr.: "So, Mr. Romney... you are running for President. How do you handle all the pressure and so on; are you OK?

Romney: I am fine... I am very fine! Why do you ask such a question? Running for President is challenging. My wife just said so! I mean... if you don't like what I am doing, why don't YOU step up to the plate and do something?!!
Dr: It's not about me... but why don't you talk about that for a while? Tell us about "stepping up to the plate".....
Romney: Yeah! My father told me, "Mitt, never get involved in politics if you have to win an election to pay a mortgage." So, I am in politics because I feel that the right person needs to come forward and step up to the plate, step up to the plate and DO the job that needs to be done! In the country.... and in Washington and around the World. I am that right person.
Dr: "Stepping up to the plate" seems important to you... why don't you tell me about "stepping up to the plate" in detail. What does that mean to you in your life?
Romney: In my life?
Dr: Yes... what does it mean?
Romney: Well... er ... what does one do at the plate exactly? 
Dr: I would like to know how you feel about it. What does "the plate" represent to you in YOUR life?
Romney: OK... I am ready to step up to the plate and eat whatever is on it! Even if it is ethnic or involves small varmints that I shot. 
When I was a missionary in France someone gave me this plate of ... never mind... Anyway... I will eat anything.

Dr: Small varmints? I see... And you were a missionary in France? Can you talk a little more about that?
Romney: Yes... I ... er... I was working out of a Mormon Church and bicycling around with my helmet and necktie and trying to get people to come to my church?
Dr: I see... and... why were you doing this?
Romeny: Well... it was something we all did... ha ha... like going to dances or ... hanging out together... you know... like norm... er... other people do.... heh heh.
Dr: I see.... and you "stepped up to the plate" in France?
Romney: Oh! Yes.... I ate everything they gave me. I would eat EVERYTHING on the plate and I would not find it offensive even if it were ethnic or French. I mean – after all – my father was raised in Mexico! I am a Latino once removed! You cannot out-ethnic me! Ha Ha!
Dr: I see... So let me prescribe....

So... I know... I know... it's a dirty nasty job, but SOMEbody has to do it, right?

I volunteer to check out their mental health.

WARNING! Pterosaurish is not a mental-health professional.

Notwithstanding... (can you believe that is one word?) let's have a look at their mental health.

First of all, why don't we just eliminate Ryan from this investigation? Since both candidates are in such great health, even IF Romney is elected, he will likely serve out his full term and Ryan will not have to step into his Presidential shoes on account of sudden death.

So back to Mr. Romney.

He made that recently famous statement about the 47% of Americans who "are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them". And shouldn't they quit being whining, moochers on the "job creators", right? 

He is clearly ticked off about people, free-loading off of the rest of us tax-paying citizens. 

Who wouldn't be? 

Unless it was your own parents.

Oops! We have a problem.

1. Mitt Romney hates people mooching off the "job creators" who obviously pay ALL the taxes and even make government possible.

2. His own parents were mooching off the "job creators" who obviously pay ALL the taxes and even make government possible.

This sounds like a psychological issue to me, simple though I may be.

Especially since he was the youngest child in his family. 

Everyone knows the "baby of the family" is coddled relentlessly, so why did he develop these symptoms of hating his parents so much that he would not even allow them to mooch off his largess in the tax scheme of things?

Since I am not a mental health professional, at times like these, I consult the DSM IV (for you laypeople, this is holy scripture for the psychology community).

Apparently, last born children "may be more likely to experience personality problems later in life".

Why?

"This is the child who grows up knowing that he has the least amount of power in the whole family.  He sees his older siblings having more freedom and more superiority.  He also gets pampered and protected more than any other child did.  This could leave him with a sense that he cannot take on the world alone and will always be inferior to others."

Clearly Romney has unresolved issues related to his up-bringing that might impact his ability to function as President, and he is acting out his hostility towards his parents by denying them (psychically) their claim to government largess. He even said he would have a "better shot of winning" if his parents were Latino. By being hostile to the "moochers" in our society, he is finally "coming into his own" relative to his siblings, asserting his superiority over the accomplishments of his parents. He is definitely working through these serious mental symptoms, but at what cost? Even his wife is concerned about his "mental well-being" if he becomes President.
What IS it with Republican Presidential nominees these days?

George W. did this too, of course, wanting to outdo his father, even starting an unnecessary war over it (remember that?). Fortunately, Mitt is not in a position to start a war (yet), so what we see are these psychological chickens from his past, coming home to roost on his policies today. Mitt only wants to be elected President – very badly. He will say anything at all and adjust his positions 180° if necessary to get elected (and has), truly the etch-a-sketch man.

Compared to him, President Obama with his single-parent, bi-cultural, multi-ethnic background seems simple! Simple is something I can relate to.

Senior Rebellion

Recently a county judge in Texas (a Republican, of course) wanted to raise taxes to prevent the United Nations from invading his county. He himself was willing to stand in harm's way in front of their armored personnel carriers to prevent them from taking over. His seat is not in the fully upright and lock position, but there really is a much more serious threat.
A specter is haunting the United States, the specter of seniors rioting in the streets!
Yeah, you say?
Well... we are PISSED OFF and not going to TAKE it anymore!
Did you read this about the US Government buying up loads of ammunition to hold off a senior revolt when they cut off our Social Security and Medicare?
This is OBSCENE! They are buying hollow point ammunition so they can take on a senior insurrection.
HA! Do you know how out of touch they are?
We seniors .... first of all... are fat. Many of us. So we can absorb a lot of the hollow point ammunition without any effect! It will be like shooting huge marshmallows.
Not only THAT (don't mind the spittle on the screen here), we can also RETALIATE!
The government thinks we are helpless, old farts who can hardly walk.
HA!
We can do stuff back!
Yes!!
Stuff... like... well, we will think of it when the time comes.
But first we need to buff up and make sure we are physically in control. There is nothing worse than facing hollow point ammunition from the Social Security people when you cannot bend over backwards comfortably like that guy in Matrix and dodge the bullets.
So... the answer is... wait for it....
WINE!
Yes! We can overcome our adversaries by drinking more wine!
Apparently, if you drink red wine — a LOT of red wine — your balance will improve. With just a little work on our core muscles, we should be able to bend over backwards to avoid the bullets that the Social Security people fire at us when we man the barricades.
It is a lot of wine, however. We are talking something like several hundred bottles a day!
Yes... I know. No matter how good you are at drinking wine, there is no way that you can drink several hundred bottles of red wine a day to improve your balance. Four or five bottles is one thing (I have never noticed an improvement in balance. In fact I have fallen off my cushion on the floor with just 3 bottles), but when you get into the scores, this is a serious challenge.
So, here is the strategy.
When we seniors rise up, carrying our signs, "DON'T CANCEL OUR.... whatever it was!" or "LIVE FREE OR ... CHEAP AT LEAST!" or "DON'T TREAD ON .... my recently planted Hydrangeas", we also need to carry a lot of red wine too!
When the Social Security people come to suppress our rebellion, we must remember that they too are getting on in age and offer them some red wine. Tell them that the red wine will help them with their balance AND make them live longer and have more productive lives.
And THEN... when they are deep in their cups, swaying and singing kum-bah-yah arm-in-arm with us, we steal their guns and TAKE CONTROL!
We take control and STOP them from ending our... our.... what was it they were ending?

Our Big Fat Fuel Future

Before I get started here, I should say that I grew up in a foreign country and have missed out on a lot of popular culture in the US. Imagine my surprise then to discover that Beaver Cleaver was a child actor in a late 1950s comedy show and not a porn star!
Who could have guessed?

Anyway, according to the Center for Disease Control, 35.7% of Americans are obese. The news media is awash in articles and reports about how serious a health problem this presents to us as a nation and wrings its hands over what steps we can take to solve it.
It's easy to get sucked into this debate about health concerns, while ignoring the fact that there may be pluses to the growing waistlines of the American population. In an article last year, I promoted green energy through the mining of America's rich, untapped fuel-resource, fat.
There is no question that with rising gasoline prices and increasing dependence for oil on an unstable region of the world, this sort of forward-thinking is necessary to our future security and progress as a nation.
But that is not enough.
Scientists at Stanford University have developed a technique for turning fat into stem cells. Working with donated fat ("an abundant natural resource and a renewable one," according to surgeon Michael Longaker) scientists have used cutting-edge medical techniques to transform fat cells into stem cells. Stem cells are primitive cells which can be triggered to develop into any type of cell in the body. If your heart is failing, for example, in theory a stem-cell could be prodded into providing new heart muscle tissue which could be used to replace damaged parts of your heart, giving you a new lease on life. This means that the so-called moral issues of using embryonic stem cells from unused human embryos can be dodged. Moreover anyone can provide the "resources" for one's own stem-cell therapy, thereby avoiding tissue rejection problems.
Do you realize what this means?
As I explained in another article, the United States is collectively carrying around the total body weight of two Swedens in extra fat. While 5.28 billion pounds or 2.4 billion kilograms overweight may seem like a lot, in terms of total consumption, it doesn't go very far. The US daily consumption of oil is 18,690,000 barrels per day. Each barrel weighs in at 305 lbs (138.8 kg), so the total weight of oil consumed each day is around 5.7 billion lbs or 2.6 billion kilograms. Though I am not good at math, even I can tell that if we pumped all the fat that America has to spare, we would not have enough to cover even one day of our total oil consumption. People would be thinner, but houses would be cold; cars would run out of gas on the roads.
Clearly, simple extraction will not solve our fuel crisis or bring us closer to energy independence. If these fat-derived stem cells can be turned into any kind of human cell, it means that they can also be turned into more fat cells! Using this new breakthrough technology developed at Stanford University, we can use fat cells to grow more fat cells! According to the National Institutes of Health, one stem cell can be grown into millions – yes millions – of other cells which are themselves self-proliferating. If our total fat resources today can almost provide one day of oil consumption, having the ability to increase this amount by – say – even a thousand fold will insure that America can limit its reliance on fossil fuels, thereby reducing its carbon footprint with green energy, and finally achieving energy independence for a better tomorrow.

The Poppy Purchase Solution

It is a well-known fact that insurgent operations in Afghanistan are subsidized by the opium trade. Even the Taliban which suppressed opium agriculture during its reign in the country is now feeding off its production, buying weapons and recruiting soldiers with the enormous flow of funds.
So how much money are we talking about here?
Best estimates place the total annual value of Afghan opium production in the $4 billion range of which only about 25% goes to the farmers who raise the offending poppies.
US efforts to eradicate opium production have not been successful nor have policing measures, trying to interdict traffic or arrest major traffickers. The Afghan government has not been willing to take measures to stop opium cultivation since so many farmers depend on it for their livelihoods. Replacing the lucrative poppy trade with saffron or other crops has also seen a less than stellar performance. Traffickers are withholding supplies to keep the price high – this fact proven by the fact that legal opium for morphine and other drugs costs much less than its illegal counterpart which is sold as heroin in the developed world.
What should be done?
It's very simple. The US should buy up all the opium in Afghanistan.
The war costs the United States over 40 billion dollars a year. An additional $1 billion to buy opium directly from the farmers (25% of the total annual value) would probably pay for itself in reduced supplies of money to insurgent forces and thus a reduced combat level in the country. Establishing economic links to poor Afghan farmers who account for about 70% of the population would also undercut Taliban recruitment efforts and give the farmers a stake in a successful UN mission. Illegal dealers would not be able to offer higher prices to the farmers, since they are already withholding supplies to keep the international price high, and in any case there is no way they could outbid the US which should be willing to go as high as $4 billion a year, still a pittance relative to the costs of waging war there.
The US could then destroy the product it received from the farmers and with their newly established contacts, slowly wean them away from opium production and into something less destructive internationally, such as hashish or how about llamas which are also very cute.
In this way the US and its allies could slowly win over the population, undercutting the insurgency's access both to weapons and to recruits, and buy its way out of a difficult and interminable war.

Pat Robertson, My Hero

It has been hard for me over the past several weeks, trying to come to terms with serious cognitive dissonance. For those of you unfamiliar with this symptom, it is a condition of "a discomfort caused by holding conflicting cognitions simultaneously". It means my appreciation of one thing, causes a contrary feeling that it must be wrong.
So when Pat Robertson who is basically the embodiment of religious fruitcake-dom comes out in favor of legalizing marijuana, I am at a loss for words and lie awake nights worrying about liking him.
As many of my readers understand, I have issues with religious "leaders" who want to inflict their deranged ideas on us. Yes, we progressive types know they are nut cases, but so many others don't! I think the whole Roman Catholic Church leadership is ready for commitment to some sort of asylum, but amazingly some people still listen to what its leadership has to say. And never mind the hypocrisy.
So for many years, I have been able to dismiss Pat Robertson with his insane comments on Haitian dealings with the devil, tornado victims not praying enough, or knowing who God will pick in the US Presidential election (but not telling us). He is clearly barking mad, bat s**t crazy as some would say.
But then he comes out in support of legalizing marijuana, not because he is a pothead (heaven forbid), but for the essentially progressive reasons of reducing prison populations and not incarcerating people for non-violent crimes. I mean... this has even been discussed in the notoriously liberal Atlantic Magazine!
What am I to think! On the one hand Pat Robertson is so clearly in profound need of some sort of medication, but on the other he spouts something that is so totally coherent and reasonable. It reminds me of a story my father told me many years ago. It probably is apocryphal, but he did work as a doctor at a "mental institution" (he met my mother there), so it is plausibly true.
The story goes like this.
A car has a flat tire outside the mental institution where my father worked. The driver gets out and, cursing all the while in frustration, begins to change the tire. He removes all the lug nuts and puts them into the hub cap behind him in the street while he struggles with the heavy tire. While he is removing the tire, another car comes breezing past and just nicks the edge of his hubcap, sending the lug nuts spinning off into the drainage ditch or wherever, unrecoverable.
The driver stands up and presses his hands to his face in frustration.
Then from behind the barred windows of the asylum, a man in hospital garb calls down to him, "Hey! You at the car!"
The driver looks up. The man behind the bars looks ominous. "What do YOU want?!" He exclaims in exasperation. "Can't you see I am in trouble here?!" He is on the verge of tears.
The man behind the bars says calmly, "Why don't you take one lug nut off each of the other 3 wheels and attach your spare tire with them? That would be good enough to get you to a gas station or service garage."
The driver is incredulous. "Oh... you're right! Oh my, I can do that! What a great idea! Thank you so much!"
The man behind the bars responds, "I may be crazy, but I'm not stupid."
Maybe that is what is happening with Pat Robertson?

Conservative? There's a pill for that now.

Progressives like me have often stood back in awed incredulity at some things conservatives say they believe: the Earth was created 6000 years ago, guns at home will protect you from the government, a second-class status for women is God's will, President Obama is not an American, on and on. When I say "conservative" here, I am not talking about conservatives like President Eisenhower or even Ronald Reagan. I am talking about the gay-hating, gun-toting, racist, tea party, misogynist, creation-thumping conservatives. You know the ones – the "bottom line" supporters of Rick Santorum.
For so long, we thought that this was an enlightenment problem; they just needed to be dragged out of the 12th century and into the modern world by education, and all would be OK.
How wrong we were.
Even a four-year, college education only helps 62% of them, according to Rick Santorum; it didn't cure him, obviously.
Recent research conducted by Dr. Gordon Hodson, a professor of psychology, shows that conservatives have fearful ideologies, "because such ideologies feature 'structure and order' that make it easier to comprehend a complicated world. Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice."
Moreover, it seems that conservatives' very brains are different. Other research done in the UK points up the fact that conservatives have larger centers of the brain associated with fear. The researchers caution that whether this is a cause or an effect is not clear. Indeed, being "born again", an experience shared by many turbo-conservatives has been linked to atrophy of the hippocampus, the "part of the brain critical to learning and memory".
Then comes along this study done at Oxford University, no less, which seems to show that racist and probably other "fearful" conditions can be treated by a common medication for heart disease. Racism and sexism have already been linked to certain personality disorders associated with other conservative views, so it might well be that a whole array of conservative symptoms might be a part of a bigger but treatable condition.
Clearly we need to stop thinking of conservatism as something that more time in the classroom will ameliorate but rather as a mental health issue. Medications like those mentioned above need to be developed so that they specifically target the fears of right wingers. This way doctors can prescribe a pill to cure someone of – say – an irrational fear that President Obama is a Muslim, or that gay marriages somehow affect straight life. Maybe – with luck – a pill could even be developed to cure creationism and other extreme Old Testamentarian views!
Of course, getting these cantankerous people to take their medications for their own good (and ours) might be difficult, but a doctor's orders will carry a lot of weight. Since conservatism is so clearly a mental disorder, it should be included in the DSM IV, so that these palliative medications can be prescribed as a part of a health insurance plan. I certainly would not have a moral objection to THESE pills being covered by health insurance.

In God They Trusted

In an earlier posting – way back in November, we looked at how so many of the Republican candidates for the Presidency were called by God. I didn't make it up; they were the ones who claimed this.
But since then (as all of you are aware), a number of them have slipped from the calling and either fallen by the wayside or dropped in the ratings.
So, what are we – the average lay people – to think?
Let's look at Herman Cain. God "convinced (him) to run for President". And yet, and yet... he has fallen from grace, having not lived up to God's message perhaps. The sexual harassment and the affair along the way – the trials and tribulations of this mortal coil – all of these have conspired to turn him from the perfect path and lead him astray into the desert of his penitence with his wife. God called, but Herman Cain did not answer in a way to achieve God's will! Can he ever repent enough to be saved?
How about Michele Bachman? God has been a big part of her platform. In fact, it would not be unreasonable to say that she even tried to stand on God's shoulders to make her case in Iowa. She certainly felt the calling. But, alas. She garnered only five percent of the caucus polls! FIVE percent! But she did not have any personal failings? There is no evidence that she took on a lover or accepted bribes or anything nefarious. Why would God let her down so?!
We can only say that God moves in mysterious ways!
And then there is Rick Perry. Granted, it was his wife who said God called him to run for President, but he has not denied it. Nonetheless, despite the calling of the Great Creator, Rick Perry achieved at a lack luster level. True, he was a poor debater, failing in so many ways, but then God took on other people of even more desperate handicaps, and they fulfilled their destinies. So what was it about Perry that caused God to turn his face from him and harden his heart against his candidacy?
We can only guess, because God moves in mysterious ways!
Who's left?
Mitt Romney is currently in the lead. What is his relationship with the Almighty? To be honest, we have no idea since he is a Mormon, and we don't know if they get "called" to run for President. We DO know that they wear interesting underwear. The underwear "signifies a covenant between the wearer and God", so maybe that accounts for his victory? Huntsman is technically a Mormon too though, and he is fading.
Rick Santorum came in second and he is definitely on the God side! He even gave a "public thanks to God". Despite running on the God platform, the Deity singled him out as only being worthy of second place. Santorum does not wear the proper underwear perhaps, but – hey – the silver medal is still worth something!
Ron Paul? He is definitely in God's camp, even to the point of believing that the scripture is God's word literally. Forget evolution and science, etc. So for his God commitment, he gets third place, the bronze.
Newt Gingrich? He has never claimed (as far as I know) to have been called by God, but he wrote a book about rediscovering God in America. He came in 4th. Why he did better than those actually called by God is anyone's guess.
God moves in mysterious ways!
Next up is the New Hampshire primary and on to the South. We can follow God's will in the successes or failures of the Republican candidates.
Tabulating the results so far (and this is only preliminary, mind you), the leader, Romney, has not claimed to have been called by God, number two, Santorum, has, number three, Paul, is definitely on God's side but has not claimed a direct calling (as far as we know) and number four is Newt who is rediscovering God.
We also know that Pat Robertson claims to have been told by God who the next President will be but is keeping it a secret. No point in ruining all the fun for the rest of us.
As I mentioned in my last posting on this subject, I concluded that God is a Democrat this time around, meaning that President Obama will be elected again. God could be swayed by Mormon underwear though, so this is something to look forward to as we watch the political process unfold!

In God We Trust

It's official. Most of the Republican candidates for the Presidency claim to have been called by God to step up and run for office. Herman Cain is the latest of the group chosen by God to make the chase for the highest office in the land, but Michelle Bachman, Rick Perry and Rick Santorum (whose name has become part of the urban dictionary) have also heard the call from heaven.
Naturally, I was curious about why God would call so many of them to campaign for office. I needed to find out why, but how?
Obviously prayer, the kind of sustained effort employed by Herman Cain, would be one way to find out what is behind God's apparent shotgun approach to Republican opposition. Unfortunately, however, I have not prayed since I was a very small boy, and even then I was not all that convinced that my requests for a pair of soccer boots were making much headway, so some other way would be required.
The power of deductive reasoning!
Now here is a technique I might be good at. I am well educated and of average intelligence, surely I could apply my God-given brain power to this issue and arrive – like Sherlock Holmes – at an answer. To quote the great detective, "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
So, we must first eliminate the impossible.
One cannot doubt the sincerity of the Republican field in their claims of being called by God. They all must have heard "something", and the still, small voices in their hearts were not telling them to "go ahead... eat the fruit of knowledge!" There is no evidence of knowledge-fruit eating among them. No, the voices were telling them to run for office, the highest office in the land.
So in conclusion, they all did receive the call. It must be true.
If there is no question of veracity on the part of the receivers, then, we must consider the sending end of the conversation. Why would God call on four Republicans to run for office? After all, in the Bible, God only called on one Job, one Noah and one Moses to save his chosen people from lack of faith, flood, and the Egyptians. There must be some reason that we can deduce from the evidence at hand.
Would an all-knowing God need to "cover his bases", so to speak, by fielding an array of candidates in case one of them proved unworthy?
Impossible.
Would an omnipotent God call so many so that the best among them would rise to the top?
Never happened before. And what about Romney?
Could a creator God be trying to muddy the Republican field (have you EVER seen so many people "debating" before?) to sow confusion in the opposition ranks?
Bingo!
With the impossible eliminated, the improbable rises like sweet cream to the surface.
God is a Democrat.

Thank Intelligent Design for Republicans

Donald Trump is fading from the Republican Presidential race, proving once again that like with Kim Jong Il bad hair will take you only so far. Fortunately for us, however, the Republicans have more than one joker up their sleeves.
Here comes Michele Bachmann!
Candidate Michele Bachmann has come out in support of teaching "intelligent design" in the nation's schools, saying, "What I support is putting all science on the table and then letting students decide. I don't think it's a good idea for government to come down on one side of (a) scientific issue or another, when there is reasonable doubt on both sides."
I don't even know where to start with this.
The "reasonable doubt on both sides" part?
How about "putting all the science on the table"?
Yes, let's do that! Our children need exposure to all the science, so they can make up their minds as to which is more persuasive.
Take voodoo for example.
There is no question that teaching of voodoo science has been completely ignored in our youngsters' education! How will they be able to decide which is more convincing if they don't get "all the science on the table"? And why is the government limiting discussion of this important scientific knowledge?
But when talking science, what could be more scientific than Scientology, especially when major celebrities and movie stars believe it?
And what exactly do they believe?
Scientology claims that there was an alien ruler called Xenu and that 75 million years ago (to us non-scientists, the late Cretaceous Period) Xenu brought billions of people to Earth in spacecraft resembling Douglas DC-8 jetliners, piled the people around volcanoes and set off hydrogen bombs in the volcanoes. Their spirits, called "thetans", survived the blasts and inhabit the living even today! (CAUTION: Despite scientific similarities, this is not tied to the voodoo belief in zombies.)
Yes, YOU have a thetan inside you, even as you read this!
The Scientologists claim that their science can help you "resolve" the issues you have with your inner thetan through diuretics. No... sorry... that is for something else... It's dianetics. Like diuretics, however, dianetics will help you "clear" yourself and bring you to a higher state of equilibrium.
Can you believe that this important science is not being taught in our classrooms today? Michele Bachmann wants intelligent design to be presented to our children side-by-side with Scientific Revolution science, but the theory of intelligent design is so clearly moronic, we should not pollute our youngsters' minds with it. Intelligent designers believe that some intelligent force "guided evolution" and created the complexity of life today.
Intelligent? Ha!
Never mind obvious engineering failures, such as humans breathing and eating through the same orifice, causing thousands of choking deaths each year; I have two irrefutable arguments against this theory.
Hey, guys! Show us your chests! See those nipples? One, two!
I rest my case.
No, we need Scientology taught side-by-side with traditional science. If John Travolta and Tom Cruise believe it, can it possibly be wrong?!

- - - - - - - - -
Pterosaurish note: I almost couldn't think of anything to write this week and was planning to fall back on ever-funny North Korea, but once again the Republican Party came to my rescue! I want to thank the Intelligent Designer for coming up with Republicans.

A Weiner by Any Other Name

The Weiner scandal in the US has captivated the nation as Americans shake their heads and wonder how anyone could be so stupid. If you have not been keeping up with the news, a US Congressman by the improbable name of Weiner (pronounced "weener") has been caught sending explicit photos of his... well... wiener to women around the country. This despite the fact that he is recently married. One can only sit in stunned amazement at this gold medal level of stupidity on display. In the old days, scandals would come and go with the fading of the print media's interest, but photos on the internet are forever. Congressman Weiner was considered an up-and-coming political star and one of the more intelligent members of the House. His star has clearly faded, but if he is one of the more intelligent members, I feel squeamish about what else might be going on in the House of Representatives.
Which brings me to my point (yes, there is a point in here somewhere). The poetic wonderfulness of someone named Weiner getting caught in a wiener scandal is just beyond words, so I was wondering what other names might be on the list that would create a similar uproar.
Top on the list of silver medal candidates, of course, is Rep. John Boehner of Ohio. I can hardly WAIT for the headlines when he is caught with "his pants down" in some sex scandal. Rep. Norman Dicks (Washington) would get the bronze medal, but the plural aspect to his name could be troubling for news writers. Why so many? Of course it could be used as a verb.
If you needed a drinking scandal, there are several out there to excite the headlines with their monikers. Rep. Bachus from Alabama would be fun to bandy about in a heavy partying incident, or how about Rep. Boozman from Arkansas? Better not get caught drinking and driving. Rep. Corker (Tennessee) and Gov. Brewer (Arizona) would also be obvious for some headline fun as would Gov. Mead of Wyoming.
It's not a scandal, but who wouldn't want Rep. Fudge (Ohio) in office? I would vote for her on name alone! If she threw a fit while in office though, the headlines would have fun with "Fudge Goes Nutty". On the food theme, Rep. Goodlatte (Virginia) better not get too wired on coffee and do something unseemly.
Rep. Rush of Illinois should mind his Ps & Qs around drugs. Others such as Rep. Hurt of Virginia should keep away from accidents, and Rep. Slaughter (New York) had better not get caught up in a murder investigation.
Rep. Heck (Nevada) might want to avoid "doing a Weiner" and sending messages to his tweethearts around the country or the news media will have fun with "What the Heck Was He Thinking?".
And finally, no scandals pop to mind with these names, but did you know there is a Rep. Labrador along with a Gov. Otter both from Idaho? I knew Idaho was rural, but electing people with animal names? Idaho is not alone, however, as Delaware has a Rep. Coons also.
Finally, hearkening back to an earlier age of innocence, I am reminded that when Lyndon Johnson and Hubert Humpfrey were running for President and VP, we on the Eugene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy wing of the Democratic party used to kid, "Vote for Johnson and get a Humpfrey". Such was the nature of our humor then. Ah... weren't those the days? Weren't they? Does anyone else not remember them, too?

Donald Trump for Republican Nominee

I have decided to take an early and dramatic step and come out and endorse someone to be a Presidential candidate in 2012. I would like to stand four-square and up-front for Donald Du... no, Donald Trump to run as a Republican for President in 2012.
He has proven his mettle by standing up to President Obama and calling for the "long form birth certificate" which proved beyond any doubt that Obama was born in Hawaii which, apparently, was not a part of Indonesia or Kenya at the time. (It wouldn't hurt to get the long form of Hawaii's birth certificate to make sure of that.)
He has demonstrated a strong commitment to international engagement by suggesting the US simply "take Iraqi and Libyan oil". I, for one, cannot believe we haven't done that sooner. When "W" was President, he tried his best, but it didn't turn out the way he had "planned". The Republicans need Trump to start that ball rolling again and take up where "W" left off. We could simply march in with BP and other drillers and start drilling! This would have the secondary benefit of pacifying the tree hugger types in the US, because it would obviate the need to drill in Alaska.
Trump has also demonstrated that he is willing to call out the Saudis for their unwillingness to give the US all the oil it wants. He said, "There’s so much oil, all over the world, they don’t even know where to dump it." He doesn't buy the idea of declining resources and never mind global warming! This posture will really go down well in the Middle East. They will realize that our President is not some wimp and will line up to see who can give us the most oil at the cheapest possible prices.
He has promised to really put the Chinese in their place too! Starting with sending them out to McDonald's instead of playing host to them at a state dinner, he wants to show them (and the rest of the world) who is boss: nothing like a Big Mac to make THAT sort of statement. Then he will tax them 25%. Boy, won't they be surprised! If they don't choke on the Big Macs, they might have trouble swallowing the sudden tax! Of course, the American consumer will also be delighted to pay 25% more for just about everything including Trump products. And if you think his language was bad when he gave his speech in Las Vegas last week, he promises even worse when negotiating with the Chinese!
Finally, I support him for his obvious intelligence and high moral standards. It's time the Republican Party has someone in a leadership role who can really represent its constituency.
Republican states are among our nation's fattest, and The Donald at 105kg (232 lbs) is someone who can weigh in for their interests. Since Republicans have a higher divorce rate than Democrats, Trump clearly shines as a moral leader with two divorces and three marriages (admittedly Newt Gingrich presents a challenge here with an identical record). Being an ignorant buffoon, of course, can be nothing but a plus when a majority of Republicans across the nation are noted for their belief in creationism and Republican Congressional members do not think humans are responsible for global climate change.
It's for these impeccable reasons that I feel I have to come out and support him now to be a serious candidate for the Republican nomination for President of the United States. I hope all of you will join with me in this endeavor, so that we can see him on TV during the debates with the other Republican candidates. His natural leadership qualities and hairstyle will surely shine through!