Category Archives: Fox News

Are American Christian Conservative Bible-Toting Gun-Slinging Jihadists Any Different Than The Muslim Kind? Hobby Lobby Reaction Puts It To The Test

screen_shot_20140707_at_2.09.43_pm.png.CROP.promovar-mediumlarge.09.43_pm

Holly Fisher is a right-wing online agitator who posted a Twitter photo on the left above last week as an in-your-face image in support of the Hobby Lobby SCOTUS decision.

Her pose was soon compared to the image at right of Reem Riyashi, a mother of two from Gaza who killed four people and herself with a suicide bomb in 2004.

As was so correctly posited by online news editor Ben Mathis-Lilley… Holly Fisher isn’t a suicide bomber, but even so, after an American holiday in which we use huge explosions to celebrate a country that has and still does regularly kill people abroad with drones, missiles, and bombs, perhaps even the non-extremist patriots among us might see the aesthetic overlap between the two images above and engage in some self-reflection about the potential consequences of aggressive conservative nationalist pride.

I know, I know. It’s only a photo of an enthusiastic youngster (uh, “Millennial”). She is a cliché come to life: gun, bible, and flag. All that’s missing is the apple pie.

But each “cute” and thoughtlessly acceptable step forward in extremism is another step toward the dangerous extremism.

Someday, someone will cross the line and stand draped in the flag and embrace the bible to righteously justify using the rifle on innocent citizen lives who just happen to disagree, or live a life just a bit differently, or look just a little less white christian, or maybe just were some minimum wage workers riding public transit to work one tragic day.

We already have had Tea Partiers wanting the US to default on its debt obligations. We already have had Tea Partiers gather in protest groups fully armed with exposed automatic weaponry just outside Washington DC. We see American Conservatives wanting to impose a Christian version of Sharia Law on US Citizens.

How long until our radicals become activated like “their” radicals? I hope, never.

Chills…


Boehner Issues Op Ed Justifying Suing President; Rational Voice Says “Boehner: Do Your Job Instead”

I get that Republicans are frustrated with President Obama.

Hey, I’m frustrated with him, too, and I voted for him! Unlike Reps, though, I find he’s not liberal enough (on the Political Spectrum charts, Obama is nearly identical to Romney). More importantly, I find Obama doesn’t lead “from the front” enough, hasn’t built a relationship with even his supporters amongst the citizenry, and has remained too stoic and isolated.

I get that Boehner is stunned by the primary election defeat of his lieutenant, Majority Whip Eric Cantor, and needs to build up his “bona fides.”

Hey, I’m stunned, too — Cantor is a conservative through and through… he simply tried to govern, which was his job. But I shouldn’t have been. I know Tea Party members who have shut out non-conforming family members. I know Tea Party parents who have disinherited their adult children who refused thought allegiance. My little fraternity brother from college has ostracized me for my differing views. Tea Partiers are the most cruel and ruthless people, as a group — though I have some good friends who are nominal Tea Party advocates (I say they are “nominal;” they say “adherent”) that are more than accepting of me and supportive of me, though I am a liberal gay man partnered to a man-of-mixed race for a couple decades and who is non-religious if nominally anti-religious establishment… everything Tea Party folk loathe. Yet, they remain my friends, so exceptions wonderfully prevail at times.

So, now we have Boehner attempting to build his bona fides, or rather attempting to show Tea Partiers he has balls made for obstructionism. We all know this is a show, a sham. Still, Boehner makes the effort to add a semblance of credence at every turn, recently by issuing an Op Ed in CNN, where he assails the “utterly beneath the dignity of the office” President Obama. Really? You guys who wanted to have the nation default on its financial debt obligations talk about being beneath the dignity of one’s office? Get real. Such a sad lot.

After reading Boehner’s Op Ed, I felt the urge to write, but before I could get there, I read the most perfect rebuttal completely bathed in revealing truth. I could do no better. So with that I offer a word to Boehner expressed by Sally Kohn.

Sally Kohn is a progressive activist, columnist and television commentator.

Dear Speaker Boehner,

President Theodore Roosevelt enacted 1,081 executive orders during his presidency. President Dwight Eisenhower had 484. President Ronald Reagan had 381. And President George W. Bush had 291.

President Barack Obama has enacted 182 executive orders — yet the GOP accuses him of being an “imperial president,” and Republican members of the House of Representatives are preparing to sue him for violating the Constitution.

With all due respect, Speaker Boehner, it’s as though the fog of extreme partisanship that has colored your dealings with President Obama since day one has suddenly turned into a full-on fever of irrationality.

Think about this for just a second: House Republicans are using taxpayer dollars to fund a lawsuit against a President who has literally done not only what every president before him has done but has done it less often and is doing so now only because House Republicans repeatedly refuse to even vote on legislation, let alone pass anything.

And you have the gall to accuse the President of being the one in violation of the Constitution?

Even more frustrating is how your repeated attacks on the President fall factually flat. In your essay for CNN, you write: “After years of slow economic growth and high unemployment under President Obama, they are still asking, ‘where are the jobs?'”

This is a particularly laughable assertion given last week’s jobs report, which noted our economy added 288,000 jobs in June, marking 52 straight months of continuous job growth. Overall, under President Obama’s leadership, the private sector has added 9.7 million jobs and an economy that was in free fall when he was elected is now in a steady recovery.

Don’t think that recovery is fast enough, Speaker Boehner? Then pass laws to help rather than jeering from the sidelines and rooting for America to fail so you can blame it on President Obama.

You assert that you have passed jobs bills that President Obama and the Democratic Senate are ignoring, but frankly the word “jobs” as you use it there is questionable. Your “jobs” bills include legislation to repeal Obamacare, through which 20 million Americans now have health insurance, cut food stamps for poor Americans and reduce government regulations on fracking.

Meanwhile, President Obama proposed an actual jobs bill that would have created construction jobs to modernize our deteriorating roads and airports, provided tax credits for employers that hired returning veterans, extended unemployment benefits, which also spurs spending, and cut payroll taxes for 98% of American businesses. But that jobs bill was killed by Republican opposition in Congress.

You also accuse President Obama of ignoring the law, of acting like “a monarch or king.” Yet the same article of the Constitution that vests power and authority in Congress vests executive power in the President. Since the founding of our country, that power has been interpreted to allow presidents to enact executive orders and determine how the duly passed laws of Congress should be prioritized and deployed.

If you’re looking for an example of stretching that authority to the point of breaking it, perhaps you shouldn’t scrutinize a former Constitutional law professor but instead his predecessors. “I believe in a strong, robust executive authority,” Vice President Dick Cheney said in 2005. “The president of the United States needs to have his constitutional powers unimpaired.”

Cheney, for instance, described the War Powers Act — in which a president must gain the approval of Congress before launching armed conflict — as an unconstitutional “infringement on the authority of the presidency.” In both number and scope, President Obama’s use of executive actions simply pales against this and other actions one could compare.

Franklin Roosevelt, the last president faced with a massive economic recession, ultimately enacted 3,522 executive orders. Even though his own party controlled both houses of Congress, FDR wasn’t sued. He was elected to a third term. And his policies, including his executive orders, helped rescue America from the recession.

In the face of obstructionist Republicans in Congress, President Obama’s executive actions also enjoy broad public support.

Some 57% of Americans supported his administrative relief for young undocumented immigrants brought to the United States when they were children. And according to a poll conducted by the LGBT advocacy group the Human Rights Campaign, 73% of Americans support an executive order to ban discrimination by federal contractors on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

If House Republicans don’t like these executive orders, then pass immigration reform and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. Don’t sue the President. Passing laws that our nation wants and needs is doing your job. Suing the President just because you don’t like him is irresponsible partisan petulance.

Speaker Boehner, you write: “If you look back over American history, there has always been a tension between the inherent powers of the executive branch versus the inherent powers of the legislative branch.”

Yes, that’s true, and President Obama is simply exercising those inherent executive powers. Now please exercise yours and pass some laws to help America instead of wasting taxpayer money on a frivolous lawsuit that is nothing more than a flagrant partisan stunt.obama-boehner


Religious Liberty As Bigotry — Discrimination Historically The Purview Of Religious Zealots

“Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”
– Judge Leon M. Bazile, January 6, 1959

Yesterday it was “The Coloreds;” today it is “The Gays.”

macaulay_on_religious_bigotry_by_rationalhub-d54fhhz

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer today vetoed the License To Discriminate Against Gays law passed by Arizona’s house and senate. That’s a good thing. But what’s bad is that she did it for economic reasons as opposed to ethical and moral reasons (Apple, American Airlines, the NFL, all the tourism associations, etc implored her to veto the bill because implementation would inevitably mean economic boycotts against the state).

I agree with using all tools available to shoot down these religion-based bigotry bills, no doubt, yet it should be stated clearly that the greater and heftier rationale for veto are ethical and moral. In a land that espouses freedoms as a central premise, any legislation that codifies discrimination because an individual does not like another person’s life should be anathema and promptly shot down.

rel-fIn one’s religious realm (at their church or in their home), one may treat and allow in another in any way they would like (short of abuse and physical harm or death), but when running a business or interacting in daily life, one is in the social and civil realm, and here you may not violate another’s freedoms to live… that is the US Constitution. That means that one’s freedom to act discriminatorily is illegal. Don’t like that the constitution protects even those you don’t approve? As conservatives have said for years to protesters, etc… if you don’t like it here, maybe you should leave for some other country.

For far too long, conservatives have used the shield of religious freedom to enshrine bigotry and discrimination. It’s nothing new. The righteous must always have the unrighteous.

main-qimg-56f8e8e48eb89a1c7ed867b706a5f7b0

While LGBT Americans are the current target of this effort to repackage prejudice as “religious liberty,” we are hardly the first. As Wake Forest law Professor Michael Kent Curtis explained in a 2012 law review article, many segregationists justified racial bigotry on the very same grounds that religious conservatives now hope to justify anti-gay discrimination. In the words of one professor at a prominent Mississippi Baptist institution, “our Southern segregation way is the Christian way . . . . [God] was the original segregationist.”

In 1901, Georgia Gov. Allen Candler defended unequal public schooling for African Americans on the grounds that “God made them negroes and we cannot by education make them white folks.” After the Supreme Court ordered public schools integrated in Brown v. Board of Education, many segregationists cited their own faith as justification for official racism. Ross Barnett won Mississippi’s governorship in a landslide in 1960 after claiming that “the good Lord was the original segregationist.” Senator Harry Byrd of Virginia relied on passages from Genesis, Leviticus and Matthew when he spoke out against the civil rights law banning employment discrimination and whites-only lunch counters on the Senate floor.

1

Bob Jones University excluded African Americans completely until the early 1970s. The IRS revoked the schools tax-exempt status, and the school sued. When Bob Jones’ case reached the Supreme Court, the school argued that IRS’ regulations denying tax exemptions to racist institutions “cannot constitutionally be applied to schools that engage in racial discrimination on the basis of sincerely held religious beliefs.” Doesn’t that rationale sound familiar? But the justices did not agree. In an 8-1 decision by conservative Chief Justice Warren Burger, the Court explained that, “On occasion this Court has found certain governmental interests so compelling as to allow even regulations prohibiting religiously based conduct.” Prohibiting race discrimination is one of these interests. And in these modern times, prohibiting discrimination based upon sexuality has come to be one of these interests.

Importantly, in United States v. Lee, the Supreme Court has also ruled, “When followers of a particular sect enter into commercial activity as a matter of choice, the limits they accept on their own conduct as a matter of conscience and faith are not to be superimposed on the statutory schemes which are binding on others in that activity.”

A religious bigot’s decision to refuse to do business with someone — especially for reasons such as race or sexual orientation — can fundamentally demean that individual and deny them their own right to participate equally in society.

Religious liberty is an important value and it rightfully belongs in our Constitution, but we do not allow it to be used to destroy the rights of others. Hateful discrimination is wrong. And it doesn’t matter why someone wants to discriminate.

spanish_inquisition-1

Through their varied talking points, conservatives advance a narrative suggesting a “religious rights vs. gay rights” conflict, ignoring the fact that not all religious persons are anti-gay and the reality that many gay persons are religious. Moreover, it suggests an uneven playing field that is opposite of reality.

There are NO federal laws protecting gay citizens from discrimination in employment, housing, or public accommodations. Many states and cities offer their own laws to compensate for this national failure, but gays are still largely unprotected throughout the country. Conversely, religious discrimination has been prohibited under federal law since the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964!

Conservatives absurdly portrait gay nondiscrimination protections as “special privileges,” implying that religious people are thus at a disadvantage… even though the religious already enjoy those same protections! Based on this false premise, conservatives argue that religion needs its own extra protection to compensate for these “special” gay protections — a law like what was proposed in Arizona. In reality, such a law would give religion an unfair advantage, allowing religion to trump any protections gay citizens might enjoy through other state or local laws.

THIS is really what “Religious Freedom” means in these debates: it frames a discussion for conservative Christians wrestling with the emerging equality of a previously disadvantaged group.

Just as segregationists argued during the 20th Century that “God created the races” and “placed them on separate continents” for a reason, 21st Century conservatives similarly struggle to reconcile legal equality for the gay community with a religious tradition of condemning homosexuality.

Rather than “burdening” religious belief, the progression of gay citizens’ equality simply presents a new legal framework to ensure that anti-gay religious beliefs are not unjustly imposed upon others.


Faustian urGe Manifesto

Ensuring That Serving “Capital” Interests Must Also Serve To Broadly Improve The Lives Of “We The People”

manifesto

CORONARE MODESTUS FAUST often bemoans ethical failures while he also attempts to mitigate, in some minuscule way, the social damages he and too many other citizens suffer from “Traditional” American Values (social and business). Inappropriate personal agendas and indifference toward obligation and ethics are significant annoyances that he addresses by trying to learn more — what wags the world and why.

Given the circus of extremes on display in society and within the political realm since President Obama’s re-election, CORONARE MODESTUS FAUST is currently working through the conundrum of how so many intelligent, educated people manage to place their feet in their mouths while their heads are so firmly up their arses.

He’s frustrated, and believes the nation is threatened, by libertarianism — knowing the objectivist/libertarian belief system is inappropriate to a fruitful, functional society. Libertarians disregard a profound reality: We are responsible for the decisions we make, yes, but we’re not responsible for the options we’re given. Thus, CORONARE MODESTUS FAUST believes that we should create that “society we would want if we didn’t know in advance who we’d be.”

He sees that another libertarian delusion is establishment of the fanciful “self-made” individual. The laughable concept discounts external influence or inspiration and exhibits a blatant disregard for the interconnectedness that is the human condition.

He remains convinced that we humans do not have to destroy each other to survive (as in two wars extinguishing 100,000+ lives as revenge for the prior killing of 3000) but that we choose to do so… not the nonsense propounded that genetics or patriotism demands it. CORONARE MODESTUS FAUST knows we have the ability to reason and that too many simply choose the easier way of reactive non-thought.

Though imbued with a simmering cauldron of rage just below his deceptively pleasant (and not altogether unpleasant looking) exterior, he’s always willing to self-examine and learn — yearning for family, friends, community members to take the same ride.

The hope… the desire… the craving… for forward movement and betterment on cultural, political, and individual levels are woven into his personal fabric, with key objectives toward equality/equitability*, liberty, fraternity, justice-for-all, empathy, self-awareness, growth, momentum, compassion, and humor.

(*EQUALITY of advancement opportunity and treatment under the law and social memes — EQUITABILITY of rewards and outcomes [economic and social])

On EQUALITY:

It appears that a large number of citizens seeking minimalist government from the Right are for strong government, though, when it favors their perceived social interests, such as interfering with the reproductive rights of women, the marriage rights of non-heterosexuals, and the civil rights of non-whites.

CORONARE MODESTUS FAUST relishes challenging the authority of political, religious, and societal priests, as he liberally supports marriage for everyone, equal rights for everyone, less poison for the environment, progressive taxation, removal of corporate personhood, financial regulation enforcement up to and including criminal incarceration, the elimination of all “consensual crimes,” and many other positions that lead conservatives to squirm uncomfortably in their seats.

On EQUITABILITY:

The Right will argue that allowing the free market to function will fix our problems. But, the free market doesn’t guarantee social outcomes, merely economic ones. Yes, it may provide more efficiency on the whole and grow the economy faster as a whole, but by itself doesn’t guarantee how wealth is distributed. The Right cannot be indifferent to the consequences of a middle-class life undermined, nor can it be indifferent to half the population’s inability to buy the products and services that businesses sell.

The Left would argue that the solution is for laws to transfer wealth from the rich to the middle class. But, while that would increase consumption, depending on the scope, it could threaten the amount of capital available to investment by the transfer itself and by eliminating incentives to invest. The Left cannot be indifferent to the fact that one can’t invest what they don’t have, and that no one will accept the risk of investment if the payoff is transferred completely away.

CORONARE MODESTUS FAUST understands the take away to be that “reasonableness” must prevail as to the extent, but transfers of some wealth should ensue as a part of the solution. So, let’s avoid extreme redistribution and focus on finding the correct amount that ameliorates the problems at hand (which will improve sales and garner more aggregate profit for firms, shareholders, and stakeholders… alike) while retaining enough incentives to invest and risk take.

As a Social-Capitalist/Social-Democrat**, CORONARE MODESTUS FAUST favors smart government — a government as big or as small as needed to achieve progressive social and capital ends, ensuring that serving “capital” interests must also serve to improve the lives of “We the people” broadly (hence, “Social”).

“Our” government’s job is best done when it benefits all of the people, and not just capital interests — as he interpretes the right favors.

(**Social Democracy is exhibited as an economic precept of Social Capitalism. The contemporary social democratic movement seeks to reform capitalism to align it with the ethical ideals of social justice while maintaining the efficient and wealth-building capitalist mode of production, as opposed to creating an alternative socialist economic system. Practical modern social democratic policies include the promotion of the commonweal, and the creation of economic democracy as a means to secure stakeholders’ rights.)

“This vast number of worlds, the enormous scale of the universe, in my view, has been taken into account, even superficially, in virtually no religion, and especially no Western religions.” – Carl Sagan

Taking exception with the very concept of “American Exceptionalism,” CORONARE MODESTUS FAUST feels compelled to explore these issues in rambling-though-coherent thoughts and an adventurous assortment of arbitrary amusements.

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Liberalism is “Life.”

It is an unrelenting pursuit of freedom from physical dangers that can kill or disable us.

  • The Liberal believes it is a nation’s job to protect its citizens from physical harm, whether from external sources, such as hostile nations, or internal ones, like crime, disease, or hunger. Without the solid ground of physical wellbeing, our nation and its citizens cannot enjoy the benefits of being free.
  • Liberals believe in a strong military, well suited to defend the nation.
  • Liberals believe in good laws, hard-working police, and a just legal system to protect its citizens from crime.
  • Liberals believe in affordable health care for everyone, to keep our people strong.
  • And Liberals believe in the availability of food and shelter for its needy, not as a hand out but as a reasonable step in moving all Americans toward self-reliance and the freedom that comes with it.

Liberalism is “Liberty.”

It is the freedom to do as your conscience dictates without impeding another’s rights. Liberalism established a nation where personal belief and self-determination are protected, not persecuted; where hard work is rewarded, not demanded; and where each person is bestowed with the ability to better his or her life because of citizenship, not class.

  • Liberals believe in freedom of speech to protect us from political oppression.
  • Liberals believe in sound regulations to protect us from economic oppression.
  • Liberals believe in just laws to protect us from social oppression.
  • And Liberals believe in quality education to protect us from the oppression of ignorance.

Liberalism is “The Pursuit of Happiness.”

It is the freedom to create an environment where the individual can excel. What is freedom if it cannot be used to better our lives? A truly free society must be one where its members can rise above their limitations and expand their futures — it is “The American Dream,” and it’s alive and well in the heart of the Liberal.

  • Liberals believe in equal opportunities for all to rise above our means.
  • Liberals believe in equal opportunities to rise above our education levels.
  • Liberals believe in equal opportunities to rise above our social status.
  • And Liberals believe each and every family should have an equal opportunity to make this world better for their children.

Based on these tenets, Liberalism is not the monster it’s made out to be by the opposition.

  • It is pro individual and pro family.
  • It is pro community and pro country.
  • Liberalism is, by its very definition, the heart and soul of what it means to be an American.
  • It stands against tyranny of any kind, whether international or domestic.
  • It works to remove abuse and fight crime.
  • And it strives to eliminate the idea of a wasted life by not wasting resources and opportunities.

Gun Slingers Overreact To Proper Presidential Executive Orders. Really?

Rand Paul Vows Gun Challenge… State Rep. Proposes Bill Targeting Federal Agents… Mississippi Gov: I’ll Block… Second Congressman Floats Impeachment… Wyoming Lawmaker: Make Assault Weapons Enforcement A Felony… LONE STAR LOON: Rep. Tries To Ban Gun Laws… LAWLESS SHERIFFS: We Won’t Enforce Gun Laws… NRA UNHINGED: Ad Targets Obama Children… ‘Fight Of The Century’

Wow. The president sets out to use his executive powers to enforce laws already on the books and gun slingers across the US react as only the uncontrolled, unbalanced and obsessed are able.

Truly, when YOU say that, “Guns aren’t the problem… People with guns are the problem”… I agree, and I now know it’s you with whom we must be concerned and must fear. You are the threat to my freedoms. You have proven yourselves incapable of restraint and clear thinking under pressure.

Time to send in the jack-booted thugs to confiscate your guns and make the nation safe for civilized citizens. (Oh, that’s right, we don’t have jack-booted thugs you fear nor an effort to collect your weapons you don’t deserve and can’t responsibly handle… crap!)

cartoonguns

The PROPER Part Of The Second Amendment That Gun Slingers Ignore:

A WELL REGULATED MILITIA being necessary to the security of a free State…

Not A Well Regulated Militia

Nope, not this either…

Nope, Not This

Oh, God no!

Oh God, No

And… well, this is the point, isn’t it?

And… well, this is the point, isn't it?

536933_10151230510236275_1525504878_n

See a past Faustian urGe — The Art of Guns, God, and Country — for another interpretation.


Post-Election Republicanism… “I Don’t Recognize My Country Anymore”

The post-election rant of some of my conservative, Republican family, friends, and associates continues.

They just simply do not comprehend how they could have mis-read the election outcome and absolutely can’t fathom that so many Americans see the world differently than they… as “everyone [they] knew felt exactly the way [they] felt about Obama and our fast decent into ‘socialism.'”

Perhaps they should develop friendships and interaction outside of their gated suburban communities, isolated corporate halls, and self-selecting church sanctuaries.

To listen to our congresspersons speak from “the other side of the aisle,” it’s clear they haven’t stuck their heads outside the window either.

To be fair, my closest personal conservative, Republican friends [meaning that they are a different sort, as they live in the urban residential heart of a major city within a highrise community of shared living], have issued forth no rants… just casual and respectful thoughts of, “Well, my guy didn’t win, but that’s democracy in action and how it goes.”

One business associate said he started an online conversation that has run into the hundreds of responses agreeing with him… His piece is titled, ” I Don’t Recognize My Country Anymore.” Oy Vey! It’s NOT YOUR country; it’s OUR country. This is exactly what YOU don’t understand.

In post-election commentary, too, Republican leaders have made no mention of the changing electorate, the expanded voter base despite the obstacles deliberately placed in the way, and the need to repair relations with different ethnic voters.

I think this cartoon sums up things well…


The 2012 Screwtape Letters — Satan’s Op-Ed Regarding The GOP

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR: Not Even a Single Mention of My Infernal Glory? What Gives? By Satan

(Inspired by Cultural Correspondent on February 28, 2012)

All the buildup and excitement was for naught. The broadband cable I had installed throughout the dark reaches of Hell so my minions and the damned could watch the GOP candidates debate each other… for nothing. I thought I’d be the man of the hour, the name on everybody’s lips, the only guy that everyone hoped CNN Debate Moderator John King would ask about.

But did he ever mention my name?

Not once!

You have to go back to the early 19th Century to see my name being used as a weapon against another candidate as frequently as it is today.

If my name were a registered trademark, Rick Santorum would owe me big time!

I don’t mind being interjected into politics, per se. I get sort of a vicarious thrill out of it. But when Rick Santorum said that I was specifically targeting the United States of America, I nearly spit out my brimstone biscotti.

I look at the warlords of Africa as they steal and hoard food sent by humanitarian organizations while their people die miserable, starvation-induced deaths; I look at the former Soviet Union as their Mafia fiat governs more than their legally elected representatives. All you have to do is take a look at the Middle East. Nice people, but here they are, killing each other because of the name they use to refer to “You Know Who.” (I am technically forbidden from using His name.)

With all of that said, Rick Santorum still thinks I’m targeting the United States of America for special treatment?

I haven’t actually done anything in America since placing James Brady between John Hinckley and Ronald Reagan back in 1981. Reagan had much more work to do for me, and damned if I was going to let some little piss ant with a “Taxi Driver” fixation spoil that.

Let’s put it this way: the United States is in my crosshairs but so are all peaceful, freedom loving people. The sooner I can get you all fighting each other over stupid things like the proper way to say the word “route,” the sooner my plans will be realized.

I’m probably giving away more than I should, but this is the reason I made such a point of getting Barack Obama elected in 2008. And no, it’s not for the reasons you’re thinking. He is neither evil nor Muslim nor Kenyan. He’s a good man and a fine singer.

I got him elected because I knew what it would do to my unwitting servants in the United States — they just can’t stand having a “Head-(N-word)-In-Charge.” You know these folks, the people who can spout chapter and verse from the Bible and just as easily go against the very things their Big-Guy-In-The-Sky commanded them to do during their time on Earth!

This is precisely why I invented the Tea Party.

I knew that the very presence of a black person (HNIC) in their precious White House would so infuriate my unwitting racist minions that they would go absolutely crazy and start saying the most ridiculous things.

My willing servant, Rupert Murdoch, used his worldwide conduit to your brains to help spread this message. And believe me, nothing makes me happier than to see you idiots fighting with each other over The Other Guy’s name.

But still, imagine my infernal anger after being the subject of such controversy over the last few weeks. First, New Jersey Governor Christie (he is mine!) blathers about me and Whitney Houston in the same breath! Then, Santorum even called me “the father of lies.”

Santorum just won’t get off it; consider these remarks he made in a speech back in 2008, for example:

“This is not a political war at all. This is not a cultural war at all. This is a spiritual war,” said Santorum. “And the Father of Lies has his sights on what you would think the Father of Lies, Satan, would have his sights on: a good, decent, powerful, influential country: the United States of America.”

And you can’t forget what he said about homosexuality and the Democratic Party: “Woodstock is the great American orgy. This is who the Democratic Party has become. They have become the party of Woodstock. The prey upon our most basic primal lusts, and that’s sex. And the whole abortion culture, it’s not about life. It’s about sexual freedom. That’s what it’s about. Homosexuality. It’s about sexual freedom.”

Right, because that’s how I plan to drag America and all its precious souls screaming and kicking to Hell: By making them realize that “You Know Who” created them with organs that make them feel good when they love each other, and that it doesn’t matter who you love as long as you love.

Yeah. That’s me. I’m corrupting the human race by making them all love each other.

So, my little idiot from Pennsylvania has been in the news for a week now, using my name at every opportunity, and that damn John King from CNN doesn’t even ask a single question about me during Tuesday’s debate? He doesn’t give Santorum the time or airspace to glorify me, to spread more falsehoods, to – if you will – spray his foamy, frothy jets of deception all over the faces and bed sheets of the American public?

What happens instead? He gets softball questions.

John King has displeased me.

CNN has displeased me.

Rick Santorum is my most useful tool in America and he will be heard.

- Satan, formerly known as Lucifer, is the dark lord of the underworld and creator of all pain and suffering. He also is a cribbage aficionado.

___________________________________________________________

Santorum -

“I don’t believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute,” he said. “The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country.”


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 256 other followers