American Gun Rights: Why are we fighting to keep guns in the hands of future criminals?

The idea that some person with guns is going to fight off the government isn't a sound one for arguing for gun rights. For one thing, the examples of Waco and Ruby Ridge should have pretty much summed up by now why that's a bad argument. If the government wants to take you out, they are taking you out. That in itself is a major problem that gun culture is not only NOT solving, its probably making worse by suggesting to people that having stores of weapons is somehow going to make them safe in a conflict, whereas we're probably just more likely to witness another standoff wherein children are put into danger and more often than not, killed.

In the same breath I hear "criminals don't follow laws so how is making guns illegal going to stop them", which lines "criminals" out like people that aren't any of "us" and that's ridiculous. Things that are perfectly legal in ONE state would make you a "criminal" in another. Criminality comes usually out of a place of desperation, lack of education and/or opportunity, existential threat, deprivation, etc. Most people are not born with a "criminal" mindset, and even the mentally ill are usually not specifically more dangerous to a society (some extremely rare exceptions do exist, but writing the mentally ill off as a whole is a careless and dangerous thing to do). A life circumstance beyond your immediate control could force you into engaging in "criminal" acts to save your life or protect your family. You know, like shooting a person (which is pretty much illegal).

For some, legal use of guns and legal gun ownership is considered more criminal than others. We have a law enforcement and judicial system that disproportionately impacts people of darker skin. Racism in relation to gun access and laws is a whole different Pandora's box of problems, as well. Philando Castile was not a criminal, informed an officer appropriately about having a gun that he was licensed to carry, and was shot to death as a passenger in a car in front of his girlfriend and her toddler. Had that jumpy ass officer aimed his gun so much as an inch to the right, he'd have SHOT that toddler in her car seat. More guns did not help that situation. Marissa Alexander was being abused and was in fear of her and her infant's life, so she fired a WARNING SHOT into the upper corner of a wall in her home to scare back her abusive husband and was GIVEN 20 YEARS in prison, while the next year in the same state George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin, whom he had literally stalked during the course of an evening and was told by law enforcement to stop following and he was let off on the same "stand your ground" defense that failed Ms. Alexander (whose conviction was thrown out on appeal after a few years, thank God). More guns are not helping in these situations either.

So, we have some incompatible ideas going on here. If you engage in a standoff against police (enforcement arm of government), that's pretty illegal and would be considered criminal behavior. Hell, I would think that planning for such an event in advance by its own nature would be considered conspiracy in regard to future criminal acts. Yet, I find that a commonality found with the pro-gun crowd is a pro-police mentality, yet at the same time, the pro-gun crowd tends to bandy about the idea that you have to have guns to fight off the government which would first be ..the police. So, you don't want "criminals" to be the only ones getting guns cause what.. if.. you.. need.. to do something.. criminal, too? I don't get it.

Rather, I do get it, but it's hypocritical as fuck and a dangerous mindset to feel that you're entitled to kill people but no one else is. Yet at the same time, lets make sure people have more guns.

Seriously, fuck this. Keep a lever-action rifle at home in case shit gets hairy or you have a maniac banging down your door. Tell me why you need to not only have guns, but an armory full of guns that can kill people faster than fuck, like rapid-fire weapons?

Who are these "criminals" again?

yeah, they probably won't, huh?

The Feminine Context

BEST. FAMILY. HALLOWEEN. COSTUMES. EVAR!!!!!!!!!!!!! Labyrinth FTW

Somewhere out there, David Bowie is old as hell and tickled pink.



Originally posted HERE:

Craigslist of Ridiculous Demands: Men Seeking Women for Godawful Reasons

If ever you are single and feeling down about it, all you need to do is pop over to Craigslist and take a good long look at who's looking for YOU..

Fo' real, bitches. Ten minutes into just scanning over a few posts in "Men Seeking Women" and I was seriously trying to figure out the logistics of getting my vagina stitched shut.

Let's look at some real winners from the Dallas area...

From the ad:

"First of all I'm in the Phoenix area, so if you are what I'm looking for, you'll also have to be willing to move here. It's a nice place actually and great weather. I'm SWM, mid 40s, professional, handsome, successful, 5'11" 185lb, non smoker, light drinker. I own a very nice home (though it could use a woman's touch) and have all kinds of fun toys. My interests include Harleys, Corvettes, Dirt Bikes, Motor Sports, Photography, Guns, Shooting, Home improvement and do it yourself projects. I'm upbeat and like to enjoy my free time as much as possible."

Translation: I GOTS MONIES. YEAH. THAT'LL GET EM.

To elaborate on that point, the man kindly leaves us another picture:

"You'll need to like weekend trips to Vegas or the California coast. I'm Looking for a girlfriend and possibly future wife 18-35 with a figure, no kids and also a lady who might enjoy (or would like to) model for hot high heel, mini skirt theme photos and video. Photography is a huge interest of mine and I'd like to find a partner who enjoys modeling and is very photogenic. Do you like to play dress up and pose for photos or perform for the video camera? Is this something you've fantasized about? Would like to find a husband who encourages your exhibionist tendencies? You are my type if you do. I'll spoil MY girl rotten, hair styling, manicures, pedicures, heels, hot outfits, etc. Yes, everything it takes to make YOU my hot little Model and beautiful girlfriend or wife. Send a pic with reply. You may be just the girl I've been looking for : ) "

Translation: I AM TOTALLY WILLING TO PAY FOR ALL THE SHIT THAT MAKES YOU LOOK AS PLASTIC AS POSSIBLE. THAT IS PRETTY MUCH ALL I AM LOOKING FOR SINCE I HAVEN'T SUGGESTED A SINGLE PERSONALITY TRAIT THAT I AM ALSO LOOKING TO FIND.

"Want huge implants as in DDD to G??? Major bonus points if you do because that's the look I want my woman to have. Yes, you need to want to be a huge boobs hottie!"

There better be a health plan involved, because some bitch is going to undergo early spinal failure trying to hold them things up. Oh, gentleman.. do you also plan on providing steel-reinforced breast scaffolds? Cause anyone with a waist as tiny as you seem to require is going to need some additional support keeping those boobs upright.

OH! and here's another..this guy's looking for a "country gal" who's all about breaking every cardinal rule of meeting someone over the internet..

"Ok so this the deal I am white male 34 years old and I am going on vacation the week of thanksgiving to my parents cabin. Were going to cookout hunt drink beer drink wiskey what ever the night unfolds. So im looking for a country girl that would enjoy this sort of thing this event can be platonic or romantic all depends on are vibe I guess. There are seperate beds and all that so dont have to worry about sleeping together if thats something your worried about. Really just want the company and too have a good time. So taking applicants lol send me email some info on yourself and some pics. Yee Yee!!!!! (Ps some of the pics are from when we have been working on it as we speak so its work in progress lol)..."

Oh, sure.. why not? I'll just pack up mah country bumpkin ass, get in your truck (which I assume you have), and just hit the road on a major family holiday out to your cabin! Yee...

wha?

Oh yeah, there's this picture that opens up the ad..

Three hours outside of town in a half-built cabin with someone I've never met? Yeah, I think I'll pass, buddy... that's a damn Lifetime thriller waiting to happen.

So having been completely creeped out by what Dallas had to offer today, I checked out Knoxville, TN

Then I found this:

Really, the creepiness of this speaks for itself. Even the babies look freaked out..

"Hi, are there any women on here who are at their point in life where they have not found the right person to have a family with, but time is running out for whatever reason and would like to make one now. Not in the next couple of years but rather sooner than later? I am an Asian man in the same boat and looking for someone to make a family or child together. I am not here to play games or beat around the bush. I dont care what race you are or maybe you have a kid already but must be open to having more. Please put "BABY" in the title so I know you are real and not a bot or spam. But more importantly tell me about you and send me some photos of you also, would like to see who I am talking to."

Love how seeing a photo of his breeding stock is a mere footnote to the whole post about impregnating her.. *shudder*

LOVE this one... real dream of a guy...

"Hello and no im not looking just for sex !

If you do drugs please do Not waste my time.

Why do u email me thin never email me back after I reply,,U women are so unpredictable .you all must like playing games!!"

Us women, we're such unpredictable, game-playing sillies! I bet I can predict how many dates you get when you heap the responsibility of all of your bad dating experiences on US! Could it possibly be that your poor grasp of the English language, paired with your excessive, aggressive, desperation-infused use of exclamation points is scaring the ladies away? Oh wait.. he goes on..

"Why is it so hard to find someone these days I will never no,,I dont understand what women want these days.please no judgemental women,,be nice"

You girls will never "no". Le sigh...

When Vaginas Attack: Wednesday Killer Ladyparts Edition (NSFW - duh)

Drugs are bad, mmkay?

The above video actually comes from "Sexual Parasite: Killer Pussy", an astonishingly terribly scream flick from Japan (where else?). I still prefer the "No means NO" scene from the movie "Teeth", which for clarification was about the timeless vagina dentata myth. I'm thinking this clip, disturbing though it may be, could possibly do a fair amount of good if shown to a few unprepared dudebros..




Of course, to read something utterly fucking hilarious about vagina panic in the nonfictional, real world, I'm going to suggest a visit to TheHoopla to read Corinne Grant's epic "Attack of the Killer Vaginas", written in response to THIS Australian Carefree Acti-Fresh commercial..


From what I understand, people went ape-shit down under at the mere mention of that highly unmentionable body part down under there.. THE VAGINA!

..to quote Ms. Grant:

"Vaginas are way more dangerous than weather! Why do you think babies come out of them screaming?

There’s no point denying it any longer, ladies, what you keep between your legs is dangerous and must be stopped. Your fetid bits are the bringers-down of governments, the destroyers of morality and the breeders of lust.

Thank god the good people of Family First have had the guts to stand up and say, “Enough! The V word is hurty on my ears!”  Now all we can do is hope that something will be done to stop this evil scourge.

Believing that vaginas are a normal, acceptable part of the human anatomy is the first step towards eternal damnation."

you tell em, Bitch!

Enjoy your day ;)

Kentucky Church Works To Maintain State's Public Image As Butt Of Hick Jokes

From HuffingtonPost.com


"In a move to "promote greater unity" among its body and the Pike County community it serves, a small Kentucky church voted to ban interracial couples from membership and from participating in certain worship activities" 


click HERE for the rest of this story..


Oh, good godDAMN, people.. What about interracial worship? Does the church allow anything other than white people? Is it that the pastor is having vision problems and mixing up the colors in the aisles confuses him? This is ridiculous. 


Maybe this is a good time for all the Caucasian gay/lesbian pairings to break the news to the church. I mean, this might be their "IN"..


It must be hard to breathe in a place with that much stupid in the air...


The Feminine Context

By Request Of Readers - The Feminine Context for Kindle!

Yes, I was asked to do this. I figure, what the hell? Might reach some pissy broads like myself who are extra pissy because they're short on time to access the internet.

Enjoy, Kindlers!

The Feminine Context

Rick Perry 's Hilarious Episode Of Cranial Flatulence

Direct link to video HERE

At the start of this clip, Perry drawls on about how "we've got to have a PLAN". Yes! Watch as he asserts himself in "action mode", declaring that there are THREE agencies he would do away with immediately as President.

If only he could remember which three they are..

Ron Paul's actually happy, for once, to be standing next to him. In case voters feared that senility might accompany Paul's age, "HEY, take a look at this guy here!".

BONUS: Herman Cain and Mitt Romney struggling to avoid schoolgirl-style giggle fits

The Feminine Context

Saga Of The Sodden Stay-At-Home Moms

This is an actual facebook conversation, saved, names and identities removed. These are women whose "job" within the structure of their family is to stay home and care for their children. I seriously doubt their husbands get to drink at THEIR jobs.

I am a stay at home mother with about a billion other irons in the fire from working online, and somehow, it never occurs to me to get trashed while my child is under my care. I posted a bit about this phenomena HERE and HERE, and every time I think I was being unreasonable, I see something else that makes my stomach turn.

I hate to think of what these women would have to say about babysitters or teachers or childcare workers who drank "socially" or to "relax" while at their jobs. So what makes it different when the drinking is done by mom at home? Why is it "cute" because they're saying "glass of wine"? What if they said "Jack& Coke" or "Jello Shots"? It's the same thing except the public idea is that jello shots are stronger, so more caution might be taken when it came to pounding em down. I sincerely doubt anyone would find it remotely classy that women who don't work and bring in an income for the family are watching their kids hammered on whiskey or vodka, but somehow when it's wine, it's suburban chic?

Are we actually lamenting the fact that no one can get away with popping Valium like its candy? While caring for children?

The Feminine Context

Parents Generation v. Current Generation

Borrowed from the FABULOUS TequilaxMockingbird, the "Will" to my "Grace", who got it from God knows where.. hilarious in how tragically accurate it is..

The Feminine Context

God Save The Teens: An Intervention

This is an actual Facebook-comment conversation I had with my niece the other night. It is at times like this that I'm grateful for the long, lonely, isolated adolescence I experienced as a home-schooled student. At least I never had the opportunity to pick up dumbass habits like this.

Names and identifying information removed. Kids, if no one's slapped you for abusing the English language like this, please do what's right and slap the holy shit out of YOURSELF.

The Feminine Context

Topeka, Kansas. America's #1 Bitch-Slapping City

A budget war in Kansas between the city of Topeka and Shawnee County has resulted in city officials making good on a threat they'd issued in an effort to try and get their way. Because Topeka's leaders don't want to get stuck with the bill for arrests, jailing, and prosecution of misdemeanor cases, a law has been repealed and those suspects previously arrested on misdemeanor charges (over half of whom were suspects in domestic violence cases) are being set free without charges.

Many states are committed to jailing individuals who are arrested for domestic violence, and even when they are released they are often let go under "no contact" orders in the interest of protecting victims. A great number, if not most states, do not allow for victims to drop charges, instead taking the authoritative role and pressing charges against the accused as the state itself. This is ALSO done for the protection of the victim.

Domestic violence is a crime of arranged opportunity, for lack of a better description. Violence in these cases is most often precipitated by long periods of abusing the victim in ways that demoralize, isolate, and demean. By way of methods that slowly alter the perception of reality of both the victim and the abuser, an opportunity to control and perpetrate violence toward the victim is afforded to the abuser. In turn, the codependency of the relationship between the abuser and the victim sends BOTH PARTIES spiralling into a dangerous living situation that can result in long-term damage to their emotional and mental well-being, if not a deadly outcome for one or both of them. The most painful yet helpful method of breaking this cycle is to separate the abuser and the abused for some period of time, if not permanently. Unfortunately, the secrecy due to shame and guilt on the part of both parties makes it often NECESSARY that law enforcement intervene.

Often, the abuser has gone so long unchecked by anyone, that they bear very strong opinions and often feel persecuted themselves due to the power-imbalance that has existed in their homes for far too long. An abuser KNOWS their actions are incorrect, and the guilt often causes their reactions to conflict to become MORE excessively violent and paranoid as they develop exaggerated defense mechanisms. The abuser's guilt mounts, and s/he seeks to justify their actions by seeing a threat or insult in almost everything the victim does. The fear of exposure for their mounting misbehavior grows more intense as time goes on, making them, paranoid, jumpy, hyper-aggressive, and the abuser will sometimes turn to drugs or alcohol to cope, leaving them now mentally imbalanced AND inebriated.

The victim of the abused usually begins accepting and tolerating the abuser's behavior out of a place of love and concern. Excuses are made for their loved one's abuse, such as "He's under stress", or when things begin to escalate further, "He's not well. I can't leave someone who's sick or having a problem. If I stick it out, I can help them". Domestic abuse suffered as children translates into a higher tolerance for it in an adult relationship. For example, if your father was abusive, to condemn or judge your partner unworthy for engaging in the same actions your father did, means to some degree that you are also condemning the father that you know, love, and accept. The abuser will shift blame to the victim when he is wrong, just as most people shift blame (when remotely possible) when they are wrong.  Before it becomes a physically or sexually violent relationship, the abused person has most often become conditioned by the hostile environment to the extent that they may feel they deserve the abuse or that it's "not that bad". As the abuse escalates, so increases the victims' likelihood to excuse or rationalize it.

This is why law enforcement is SUPPOSED to step in and separate the victim from the abuser. The two parties have become so adept at and codependent in rationalizing horrendous behaviors and a lifestyle that emotionally healthy people would find abnormal and alarming, that they literally need to be forced apart before death or major physical injury occurs (or occurs AGAIN). Both the victim and the abuser are so isolated from healthy relationships, that they will seek to cling to each other AND their unhealthy lifestyle because everything outside of it has become foreign and terrifying.

That's why states and cities have to protect the victim long enough that some mental and emotional clarity can be found, and a healthy decision about the relationship can be reached. This protects not only the victim, but the ABUSER. If the abuser is not stopped, held, and given adequate time to collect him/herself, the anger at being exposed and challenged may often be enough to result in a murder, suicide, or both. Its not uncommon for abused persons to feel wracked with guilt over asking for help and getting their abusers into trouble. Remember, over time, the victim comes to see the abuser as the central figure in their whole world, and maybe the only person they have had to even talk to in a long time. Remove that from someone's life abruptly, and it's going to be like losing a limb.

This might not be a popular opinion, but there is something to be said for protecting the abuser as well as the victim. The person who abuses another is still someone's child, brother, relative, or most likely the much-loved partner of the very person that domestic violence laws are enforced to protect; the victim. There's no EXCUSE for abusing another person, but there should be an expectation that the abuser is not playing with a full deck if they've managed to convince themselves that what they are doing is justifiable. That in mind, this isn't someone you can turn loose, expecting them to make appropriate decisions without any chance to get their heads straight.

Someone who gets caught committing an act of physical injury to someone they live and share a life with needs to be punished for it, certainly. What's the purpose of punishment, though? Are we, as a society, about causing harm for harm, or are our punishments going to be enacted in a more thoughtful way as to try and rectify the problem that eventually warranted punishment? Forcing an accused abuser to spend a night in jail and calm down doesn't hurt them. Sure, it's embarrassing and it can probably make them more angry, but that's what that whole aforementioned "no contact" order is for.. so that the angry person cannot go an exact revenge upon someone who they blame for their embarrassment and anger. It's also to allow that person a chance AWAY from the individual who, in their altered viewpoint, they see as responsible for causing them so much anguish.

It's a win-win to enforce these laws for both parties, abused and abuser, even though at the time that the situation comes to a head and law enforcement has to become involved, everyone (victim included) is going to feel violated, exposed, hurt, and desperate. Sometimes you just have to rip off the bandage if you want a wound to heal, rather than leaving it covered and festering. In most (if not all) states that STATE charges are brought against an accused abuser, pre-trial intervention (PTI) programs are offered for first time offenders. This program requires offenders to plead "no-contest" and agree to random drug screenings, counseling and anger management classes, and some amount of community service. This is offered as an alternative to trial, jail time, and fines. PTI programs, when completed successfully, also allow most offenders an opportunity to get their offense eventually expunged from public record.

But if the state, city, or county can't be bothered to maintain enforcement of laws to properly handle domestic abusers and their victims, who is anyone supposed to call for help? I sincerely doubt that police would let a relative off the hook for enforcing "vigilante justice" (potentially at the barrel-end of a shotgun) to protect a loved one. So where are abused persons in Topeka going to go for help?

PSA:

If you believe that you or a loved one may be suffering in an abusive relationship, take a look at this site for a start.

LoveIsRespect.Org

According to Seattle Pastor, 100% Of Men Are Gay.

According to Mark Driscoll, a popular Seattle pastor and head of the Mars Hill Ministry, masturbation is an act of homosexuality.

You heard him, guys. You're all totally fucking gay. Every last pud-pulling one of you.

Appletinis and Cosmos for all!!! It's rainin' men! Hallelujah!

Driscoll has apparently decided to kick his anti-porn campaign into high gear with his free new e-book, "Porn-Again Christian: A Frank Discussion on Pornography & Masturbation". While I have to hand it to the guy for being able to come up with a catchy title, he's clearly trying to take advantage of heterosexual men and their "OMFG I'M NOT GAY" knee-jerk reaction in an effort to scare people into supporting his own biblical interpretations. Within this e-book, Driscoll writes:

"...Masturbation can be a form of homosexuality because it is a sexual act that does not involve a woman. If a man were to masturbate while engaged in other forms of sexual intimacy with his wife then he would not be doing so in a homosexual way. However, any man who does so without his wife in the room is bordering on homosexuality activity, particularly if he's watching himself in a mirror and being turned on by his own male body."

According to Driscoll, the only way to whack it straight is in the physical company of your own wife, or by looking at her pictures. He really doesn't touch (ha!) on the idea of women masturbating, so I guess he thinks it doesn't really happen enough to condemn it.

Yeah. This is clearly a worldly and educated man. He'll write a book about the spiritual pitfalls of internet porn, but he's somehow managed to miss all the vibrator ads that come side by side WITH the porn.

Driscoll's known as being hardcore in his old school interpretation of scripture, actively fighting against feminism, premarital sex, and modern-style interpretations of the Bible such as his assertion that in his church Jesus will NOT be viewed as ""a Richard Simmons, hippie, queer Christ... a neutered and limp-wristed popular Sky Fairy of pop culture that . . . would never talk about sin or send anyone to hell."

..but seriously, how effective are your auto-eroticisms going to get with a limp wrist?

Rick Santorum Works His Ass Off To Prove Continuing Obsession With Gay Sex

I don't think there's anyone on Earth more obsessed with gay sex than Rick Santorum.

Every time I think this guy's stopped worrying himself into a tizzy about male homosexual practices, he puckers up over something else. Here he goes again...

From HuffingtonPost.com

"Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum touted his support for anti-sodomy laws and said gay marriage supporters wanted to "drive faith out of the public square" in an interview with controversial preacher Bradlee Dean, founder of You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International, a Christian punk-rock youth ministry based in Minnesota.

"And I stood up from the very beginning back in 2003 when the Supreme Court was going create a constitutional right to sodomy and said this is wrong we can't do this," said Santorum, according to the Minnesota Independent. "And so I stood up when no one else did and got hammered for it. I stood up and I continue to stand up."

Yes, that's right. He said "hammered". It's pretty scary that Santorum is allying himself with folks like Bradlee Dean. The "You Can Run But You Can't Hide" ministry is known for some pretty fucked up shit..

From HuffingtonPost.com

"Dean himself has made numerous controversial comments about homosexuality, including saying executing homosexuals is moral and alleging that Thomas Jefferson and George Washington wanted to make homosexuality illegal."

... and by the way, I've never met a heterosexual man that I could see being okay with his name being published as effeminately as "Bradlee". Just something to think about..

Will the people with the Streisand fetish please step forward?

Sorry. I'm about to out you, you sick bastards.

I happened to take a gander at my blog's stats this morning, and now I'm sitting here laughing my ass off at what sort of traffic I've managed to attract.

In case you're not aware of what information you can review for web traffic statistics, it breaks down to referring sites, URLs from those sites, and what keywords were entered into a search engine that eventually led visitors to your site.

Care to guess what search phrase has been drawing a surprising number of people here?

"streisand ass"

No, I'm completely fucking serious.

People are entering "streisand ass" into Google, and coming up with a link to this blog.

STREISAND ASS? WTF you guys?

If I laugh any harder, I'm going to need new pants.

I would imagine that those two keywords (entered together as "streisand ass") are pulling up the link to this post about the Kardashians, how fake they are, and how different people look with the right makeup. I happened to pull up a few celebrity photos in which said celebrities were not wearing makeup, and one of them happened to be Barbara Streisand. I'm morally certain without even looking that I wrote the word "ass" in at least four or five places.. hell, it was a fairly long post, after all. I've been known to toss some asses about, you know.

Let the record state that I never said anything about Barbara Streisand's ass in particular.

You people and your sick fucking fetishes. HAHAHA. I love you. I love you, you nasty Streisand ass worshipping freaks. Keep coming back, I'll find something else to tickle you with, I'm sure.

Veteran Marine PWNS NYPD for Police Brutality

From YouTube.com

"United States Marine Corps. Sgt. Shamar Thomas from Roosevelt, NY went toe to toe with the New York Police Department. An activist in the Occupy Wall Street movement, Thomas voiced his opinions of the NYPD police brutality that had and has been plaguing the #OWS movement.

Thomas is a 24-year-old Marine Veteran (2 tours in Iraq), he currently plays amateur football and is in college.

Thomas comes from a long line of people who sacrifice for their country: Mother, Army Veteran (Iraq), Step father, Army, active duty (Afghanistan), Grand father, Air Force veteran (Vietnam), Great Grand Father Navy veteran (World War II)."



Sgt. Thomas is on the street, and he is pissed.

The point he makes is a valid one. These have been non-violent protests. Perhaps people find the protesters annoying, but they're not actually hurting anyone. The protesters aren't armed, nor are they looting or breaking windows or anything of the sort. Sgt. Thomas shows up and sees police physically pushing the protesters around and can't take it. He asks some pretty valid questions here on the street, such as..

Why are police in riot gear, armed, and pushing unarmed civilians around?

I find it interesting that not one of these policemen could really confront him for the whole five minutes he was speaking. Hell, they wouldn't really look him in the face, for the most part. From the perspective of a man coming home from war, the idea of bearing any sort of arms against unarmed civilians that he's been told he's suffered to fight for, has got to be pretty fucking rage-inducing.

Good on you, Sgt. Thomas.

Just in case you doubt the validity of his claim that he saw police pushing and beating on protesters.. well, check this out. Here's a video of a policeman cold-cocking a young woman who appears to be in her 20's and weigh less than 140lbs. Oh, did I mentioned she's unarmed and standing STILL when he does it?


Here's a video of three Asian-American protesters being moved, one of whom has a bloodied nose from being shoved on the ground by police. If you take note of their surroundings, its fairly clear that these three had instruments set up and were playing music. If you really WANTED to move someone and you had that many hands to help you do it, why not pick the man up and restrain him, rather than break his face open on the ground?


Here's another, where the police not only beat an already restrained protester with a baton, they shove another and pull yet another by her hair over the police line, and then follow up the hair pulling with mace.


You know.. I understand that the police have a shitty job, especially in the face of a situation like this where they are ORDERED to try and contain a very determined mob of people who have no compunction with insulting those policemen and, let's just be really fucking honest here, doing their damndest to INCITE bad behavior out of the police so that they can film it. Like I said, let's be honest.. this video footage of police brutality is a strengthening the resolve and anger of the protesters, and that's good for the Occupy movement. That said, no amount of taunting and irritation by the protesters can excuse bad behavior on the part of the police. Maybe if you're the police, it doesn't feel fair... but the sad fact of the matter, is that its not supposed to be fair. The NYPD are a collection of individuals who have sworn to uphold the law, and the civilians are not bound to that same oath.

Most people, and I do mean MOST, don't have the self-control and strength of composure to take people getting up in their faces and insulting them when they are trying to do a difficult job. I can guarantee you that in the reverse position, the protesters wouldn't be able to contain themselves that much better than the police seen here. However, I believe that when your sworn duty is to "protect and serve", you have to uphold that sworn duty, which MEANS that you have to be BETTER than your peers. Authority figures cannot be afforded the right to lose their tempers as easily as those they are supposed to be guardians of. A parent, who is the authority over their child, doesn't have the right to knock that child around because the child irritated or annoyed them. A parent doesn't have the right to impose punishment without cause, just as a police officer doesn't have the right to arrest a citizen they are supposed to protect and serve without informing that citizen of what they are being arrested for.

From Jenna Marbles.. What Boys Do In The Car..

have I mentioned I love you, Jenna? Cause I do

For anyone reading this through Salon.com, here is a direct link..

Extreme Reversionist Report 2011! - Part 3 - Rick Perry

Alrighty, let's stomp some more points into the ground... First, let me re-cap on what this post is about..

From my first "Extreme Reversionist Report 2011" post

"This post is one of a series that I plan to post over the next week or so. The purpose of these posts is to pick at the social conservatism of several American politicians who are each campaigning for the endorsement of the Republican party for the 2012 Presidential election. For this, I offer no fucking apology whatsoever.

The candidates that I have chosen for this tarring and feathering are throwing their political weight behind ideas and policies that endanger the rights and lives of many, many people in this country. Their "talking points" promote radical theories that are ignorant, shortsighted, and diminish the personhood of many American citizens. You don't have to be gay to know that you want a good life for your brother who is. You don't have to be a woman to want proper health care and reproductive options for your daughter. You don't have to be (insert any religion other than Christianity/Catholicism) to agree that if you don't want your own faith to determine how the state treats YOU, that it wouldn't be appropriate for anyone else to be treated that way"

That said, let us move onto the NEXT Texas Good Ol' Boy that thinks his accent and his propensity for becoming befuddled when asked a direct question may be JUST charming enough to get him the Republican endorsement.

If you've read this blog for a few minutes, or paid even the slightest attention to the HUGE collection of keywords to the left of this post, you've probably figured out that I am a strong supporter of American citizens' access to sex education and birth control. Typically, conservatives vote for abstinence-only sex education programs, which have been proven again and again to be ineffectual in preventing teen pregnancy or circumventing disease. The idea of the abstinence-only programs were to affirm that sexual abstinence before marriage was the only acceptable standard of behavior for young people in America. Sounds like a freakin' fairy tale, doesn't it?  Rick Perry doesn't think so. His strict abstinence-only sex-ed policies in Texas  high schools resulted in MORE teens having sex and more births to teenage mothers in as little as a year.

From a Huffington Post article by Shawn Lawrence Otto:

"Instead of providing fact-based information, the programs use fear and Jesus -- over-emphasizing the risks of sexually transmitted diseases leading to cervical cancer, radical hysterectomy and death, together with Christian morality.

One Texas public school district's sex ed handout is entitled "Things to Look for in a Mate:"
I. How they relate to God
A. Is Jesus their first love?
B. Trying to impress people or serve God?

Another public school district uses this:

Question: "What does the Bible say about sex before marriage/premarital sex?"

Answer: Along with all other kinds of sexual immorality, sex before marriage/premarital sex is repeatedly condemned in Scripture (Acts 15:20; Romans 1:29; 1 Corinthians 5:1; 6:13,18; 7:2; 10:8; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:3; Colossians 3:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; Jude 7).

The results? Teen pregnancy in Texas went up -- higher than before "abstinence only," and more than 50 percent higher than the national average. Even more troubling was that repeat teen pregnancy went up -- to the point that it, too, led the nation. It turns out that Texas kids thought that "if birth control doesn't work, why use it?"

It's also extremely tough for teenagers to get contraceptives in Texas. "If you are a kid, even in college, if it's state-funded you have to have parental consent," said Susan Tortolero, director of the Prevention Research Center at the University of Texas in Houston."

What the holy hell, man? Abstinence-only programs are as effective at deterring hormonally-charged, horny teens from sex about as well as most anti-drug commercials deter people from smoking pot. The point made by Otto is quite valid in that if people are taught that birth control doesn't work, there's no reason to use it. Additionally, these abstinence-only programs are well known to use misleading curriculum to scare young people away from sexual activity, as well as outright lies that could incite hateful attitudes toward students who are NOT Christian or adherent to Christian lifestyles. Some of the misinformation that ab-only programs are known to teach are as follows...

Educational fictionalizations that are racist in nature

The Holy Bible cited as a "medical reference"

Abstinence-only education ignores lesbians, gays, bisexual, and transgendered people

Same-sex behavior is only discussed in the context of disease and promiscuity

Half of all gay male teenagers test positive for HIV

Pregnancy can result from touching another persons genitals

If you don't believe me on the last one, try reading this desperate question from Yahoo Answers.  This kid knew enough about sex to know she'd had some variety of it, but too little to determine her actual risk factor.

Yeah, That's really fucking healthy, right there. Are we really wondering why kids are suffering from anxiety problems at that age?

Rick Perry's answer? Well, he doesn't really have one other than "abstinence works". This is his roundabout way of saying it when confronted with the fact that teen pregnancies had actually INCREASED in Texas with the implementation of these programs.



From AdvocatesForYouth.org:

"On one side are those that support comprehensive sex education—education that promotes abstinence but includes information about contraception and condoms to build young people's knowledge, attitudes and skills for when they do become sexually active. On the other side are those that favor abstinence-only-until-marriage—programs that promote "abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard of behavior. Proponents of abstinence-only programs believe that providing information about the health benefits of condoms or contraception contradicts their message of abstinence-only and undermines its impact. As such, abstinence-only programs provide no information about contraception beyond failure rates.
....
..Abstinence-only programs show little evidence of sustained (long-term) impact on attitudes and intentions. Worse, they show some negative impacts on youth's willingness to use contraception, including condoms, to prevent negative sexual health outcomes related to sexual intercourse. Importantly, only in one state did any program demonstrate short-term success in delaying the initiation of sex; none of these programs demonstrates evidence of long-term success in delaying sexual initiation among youth exposed to the programs or any evidence of success in reducing other sexual risk-taking behaviors among participants."

Not to be facetious, but here's a little clue about what happens with poor sex education...


I'm really not trying to beat anyone's head into the ground with this issue, but it's extremely important. Misinformation about a natural biological function that bears as many potential ramifications as sex does, is dangerous, ignorant, and I truly believe this misinformation is a major cause of so much fear and hatred in our society.

Right now, none of the major contenders for the 2012 republican candidacy are talking about this subject at all. To support abstinence-only education would leave them open to a full-assault on its ineffectiveness, to condemn it would risk their base of conservative voters. I'll leave it to you to decide.. do you really think that any of the GOP nutcases would agree to fund comprehensive sex education should they win the presidential election?

It's a pretty safe bet that they won't, actually. It would increase the awareness level of a whole generation of young, future voters, and they can't have that. They wouldn't be as easy to manipulate anymore through fear or guilt.

The only thing that I can say that's remotely positive about Rick Perry and sexual health is that I do agree with his Texas mandate regarding HPV vaccinations, which he's now trying to downplay as much as humanly possible.  He's AT LEAST one of the few GOP candidates that believes in abortion rights for incest/rape victims and in the case of maternal health risk, but that sad part is that almost all the rest of them seem to want to eliminate abortion rights completely. By comparison, Perry comes across as almost human.

Oh wait. Perry thinks that homeless people are homeless by choice...

"When Los Angeles passed an ordinance prohibiting people from camping out on city streets and sidewalks throughout the day, the ACLU sued; the ordinance was ruled unconstitutional. Recognizing that some people suddenly find themselves homeless because of tragic, unanticipated circumstances, I would not say that all homeless people are voluntarily in their predicament. Many homeless have chosen their lifestyle--not as a conscious lifestyle choice made in prior years of sobriety but through a series of decisions that not only led to their homelessness, but also perpetuate it. They choose to drink, they choose to get high, they choose to engage in a life or crime, and often they choose to do it all on the streets instead of in shelters where there is strict enforcement of prohibitions on such behavior. The homeless need help. But the help they need is to make some of their behavior more difficult to engage in. If you take a hard approach to blight, then you create a disincentive for continuing blight "


Source: On My Honor, by Gov. Rick Perry, p.127-128 Feb 12, 2008  

I'm sure the (more than) 15% of Americans living in poverty are really going to appreciate that sentiment. Especially when you compare the civil rights movement to the Republican struggle for lower corporate taxes..

Yeah, seriously. Check this out..

Now that's a guy who cares about the plight of Americans!

Perry likes to brag about all the jobs that have been created in Texas under his administration, but what he carefully avoids mentioning is that nearly all of those jobs pay minimum wage. Perry's job creation "accomplishments" have been called "one stage away from slavery", because although the people of Texas may be working, they are largely working for minimum wage with no medical benefits. The national average of Americans living in poverty is 15.1%, whereas in Texas that average stands at 18.4%. I suppose when someone breaks a limb, that's some sort of subconscious choice to be homeless, according to Perry's views on these matters.

"I'm Governor Rick Perry. And I'm proud to be here today with the Tea Party Express. And I simply want to get America working again and make Washington, D.C., as inconsequential in your life as I can. "

Source: 2011 GOP Tea Party debate in Tampa FL Sep 12, 2011   

Shit. Maybe it IS time for "class warfare".. Rather, maybe it's time for the subjugated class to actually fight BACK.

In case you haven't heard of her.. Jenna Marbles, everyone!

Jenna Marbles, sharing some thoughts that I happen to agree with, put in a way that only Jenna Marbles can..

Jenna details her view of what I often call the Barbie/Ken Complex.



'Don't sit around and fucking complain to the rest of us (girls) how no one wants to buy you fucking shoes and clothes, and give you a free ride for life because you have tits and a vagina, unless you want to be TREATED like a PAIR OF TITS AND A VAGINA" - Jenna Marbles.

Please see her YouTube Channel, and Her Blog.

you can also follow her on Twitter. I know I do, cause the bitch is crazy and I love her.

PSA: Lingerie model and I care about your balls.

Lingerie model Rhian Sugden wants your attention. She wants it BAD...

Are you listening? She wants you to touch yourself and she's going to show you how.

Watch this video. I assure you, you'll never forget it.



Was it a bumpy ride, guys? If so, you might want to check out this site.