Whining about bad PR they so damn well deserve

You may remember, in early October, when Al Franken passed a bill that would withhold government contracts from private defense contractors whose contracts included stipulations that basically prohibited their employees from bring cases of assault, such as rape, to court. Naturally, every single one of those who voted against this bill (and there were 30 of them) was Republican. Yeah, tell us again about how the Republican Party is a bastion of good, family-based morality, when they don’t even care to allow rape victims to have their day in court? That’s what this basically comes down to.

Obviously, this resulted in one heck of a harsh political backlash against the Republicans who voted against the bill – as it damn well should – and now, guess how these scumbags are dealing with this case of bad PR? You guessed it, in that typical Republican manner of dealing with criticism: whining about it as though it wasn’t their fault. You know, for voting against helping rape victims. Leave it to the Rethuglicans to turn rape into a partisan issue. From Crooks and Liars:

It should be tough voting against rape, but thirty Republicans did just that and now they are whining the night away because bloggers and some MSMers have highlighted their atrocity. And in their usual silly reality, they are blaming Sen. Al Franken because they are getting hammered over their malfeasance.

Al Franken fallout has GOP fuming

The Republicans are steamed at Franken because partisans on the left are using a measure he sponsored to paint them as rapist sympathizers — and because Franken isn’t doing much to stop them.

“Trying to tap into the natural sympathy that we have for this victim of this rape —and use that as a justification to frankly misrepresent and embarrass his colleagues, I don’t think it’s a very constructive thing,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said in an interview.

“I think it’s going to make a lot of senators leery and start looking at things he’s doing earlier on, because I don’t think it got appropriate attention ahead of time.”

[…]

“I don’t know what his motivation was for taking us on, but I would hope that we won’t see a lot of Daily Kos-inspired amendments in the future coming from him,” said South Dakota Sen. John Thune, No. 4 in the Senate Republican leadership. “I think hopefully he’ll settle down and do kind of the serious work of legislating that’s important to Minnesota.”

You could starve whole continents waiting for God to provide

What kind of mother would allow herself and her five children to go for eleven whole days without food?

The careless and (above all) religious mother, that what.

The money ran out first. Then the food.

Over three months in 2006, as her five children grew more emaciated and listless by the day, Estelle Walker made no move to find a job, no effort to scrounge up a meal, her kids told a jury yesterday.

"We were supposed to wait for God to provide," said Walker's oldest daughter, now 21. "And that's what we did."

At one point, the daughter said, she and her siblings went 11 days without food. When police were at last summoned to the Sussex County cabin by neighbors, investigators found the children so malnourished they had difficulty talking.

More than three years later, three of the siblings took the stand in a Newton courtroom, describing how their mother watched them nearly starve.

This is perhaps a great illustration of the famous Steven Weinberg quote: “With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil. But for good people to do evil – that takes religion.”. Not that I’m saying Walker was a good person, or a good mother – the fact that she would let her children starve for eleven days because she was too lazy, religious or both to even search for a damn job is evidence enough to the contrary – but truly, there is simply no greater force for evil in this world than religion, and how it twists and corrupts people’s minds.

Think about it: if Walker was sane and not filled with superstitious tripe, do you think she would’ve seen her children grow weak and emaciated with starvation and still fail to try and provide for them if she didn’t have that “God will save us” crap lodged in her head? It’s possible, of course, but far more unlikely.

However, she’s not the only one to blame; from what I can see, her church also has a hand in this atrocity.

In 2005, Walker and the children -- then ages 8, 9, 11, 13 and 18 -- had been placed in the cabin by their church, Times Square Church of Manhattan, to help them escape what Walker claimed was her husband's alcoholism. The cabin is owned by church members who open it for retreats.

Walker was due to leave the cabin in May 2006 but refused, saying God had told her to stay, church members have said. The church then cut off her support and began eviction proceedings.

So, her support (which I can safely presume included food) was ended in May of 2006, and later, she and her kids nearly starved to death. It’s rather obvious the heartless church had a role in this affair. They had all the right to cut them off, perhaps, considering the cabin was their property, but they deserve to be slapped in the same way the electric company would deserve a hard reprimand should kill someone by cutting power to a home in the middle of winter.

Anyway, all five kids are alive today and Walker, having undergone several psychiatric exams, has been found fit to stand trial. She’s being charged with four counts of second-degree child endangerment (she didn’t get charged for her eldest child, who was 18 at the time). Considering her defense rests entirely on “God is my defense”, though, I don’t see much trouble ahead for the prosecution.

(via Fark.com)
Technorati tags: religion · children · God · Estelle Walker · child endangerment

Phil Plait on Climategate, now with more badassery

A few days ago, Phil Plait (the Bad Astronomer – and I still have no idea why he calls himself that, other than perhaps short for “badass”, which he and his blog arguably are) gave his own take on “Climategate”, the dispersing of thousands of hacked eMails that Anthropogenic Global Warming denialists love to orgasm over as being the “proof” that there is a major conspiracy or cover-up amongst scientists. Plait’s post was a little lackluster and vague at times, though, and quickly became a target for denialists and other cranks accusing him of “not being a true skeptic” and other such nonsense. Well, he decided to make a more thorough write-up, and I’m thankful he did, because now we have this great read to revel in. The whole thing, below.

The comments in that post have been interesting. Most of them — and there are a lot — completely missed the point I was making, which isn’t terribly surprising. I called this whole thing a non-event because it’s manufactured drama. It is not the smoking gun, it doesn’t discredit climatological research showing the Earth is warming, and it doesn’t show that scientists are some sort of priesthood guarding their domain. As Real Climate points out, it’s not what’s in the files that’s interesting, it’s what’s not in them: nothing about huge conspiracies, nothing about this all being faked. If this is such damning evidence, where’s that evidence?

What these files do show is scientists trying to deal with data, software, and science, all the while also trying to figure out what to do with attacks on their work that are largely ideologically driven. I don’t think they handled that all that well, and that doesn’t surprise me. They’re scientists, not wonks. Of course, if you look at the files from the point of view of giant conspiracies it seems very racy, and clearly a lot of the commenters on my original post feel that way. But to reiterate, this does not call into question the reality of global warming in general.

To further show that, look at some of the things being said. Many people — and some who should really know better — are saying Phil Jones, the head of the group whose files were hacked, has been "fired". That’s simply not true. He has stepped aside, temporarily, while the situation is being investigated. The news reports on this were very clear. So why would someone say he was fired? I submit it’s because they are trying to spin this situation up into more than it is.

Again, as I thought I made clear in the earlier post, the methods being used by the scientists in question don’t look to me like they were faking data. In software it’s common to test out different methods, see what works, and what doesn’t. A piece of software I wrote for working with Hubble data went through hundreds of iterations and edits before going live (and was updated quite a bit after that as well). Software used to analyze data is a little like science itself: it changes as you learn more and find better ways to do things. If you found an early version of my code you might wonder if I was faking the data too! The examples of code in the hacked files may have been early versions, or had some estimations (called, not always accurately, fudge factors) used in place of real numbers… the thing is, we don’t know. Drawing conclusions of widespread scientific fraud from what we’ve seen is ridiculous.

Another evolution expert destroys a dishonest nobody

Aron Ra, known for his many enlightening videos on YouTube featuring the crushing of Creationists and their pathetic arguments, was recently accused of being dishonest by another YouTuber (who, arguably for his own protection, Aron has elected to keep anonymous). What follows is arguably one of the best dissections of Creationism and defenses of Evolution ever produced by a non-expert on YouTube, not only in its substance, but in style and eloquence.

I think a certain sockpuppet (oh, the many ways in which that fits …) just got its little ass handed to it. You just don’t attack someone who is this intelligent, well-spoken and knowledgeable about Evolution without coming out with your head ripped off.

(via Pharyngula)
Technorati tags: Aron Ra · Evolution · Creationism · Creationists · dishonesty

Because I just love tearing bigoted morons apart

I don’t usually engage in taking on random twits and cranks around the Web for spewing meaningless tripe, if only because small-time kooks just don’t usually interest me all that much. But ever since discovering the likes of Pat from Political Byline when he launched what has to be the single most hilarious flame-war I’ve ever seen in my decade spent on the Web, I’ve found myself almost holding my sides in breathless laughter as I watch him spread his imbecility, then get torn apart for it, and (subsequently still) respond like a 4-year-old with distemper to any dissent or criticism by hurtling feces made of “FASCISM!!!11!” at his critics. He’s truly a barrel of laughs. (I mean, seriously: not to resort to ad hominem, but the guy is literally the culmination of just about every possible “loser” stereotype in one: fat, jobless, middle-aged dude living in his mother’s basement, doesn’t have a car, and is stupid, vile, ignorant, bigoted, dishonest, cowardly, and has anger management issues, all at once, I shit you not. And all this is through his own admission, except for the last few, which are gleamed through his posts and rants.)

But anyway. Thanks to Ed Brayton also being interested in mocking the little dolt for assured lulzes, here is the latest bit of racist dumbassery from Pat’s blog, on the subject of the four police officers who were ambushed and murdered by a man who was later killed himself. This really is the epitome of far-right-wing crankery:

For putting a hamburger-headed looking Negro thug out of his own damned misery, the Seattle Police Department deserves a huge medal, maybe even a raise. That is right, I said it, I am glad as hell, that this black thug is dead. Truth is, this black bastard should have been executed, long ago, for his damned crimes in the first place. This is why; I believe that death penalty is a sane solution to our Prison overcrowding system. However, because we live in a liberal society, that believe that dirtball thugs like this have rights too; most States in America do not have a death penalty in them and dirt bag black bastards like this continue to roam the streets and fill our already overcrowded prisons.

Stay classy, Pat.

Couple of notes, though: it sounds like Pat is confusing the death penalty with getting shot by cops. They aren’t the same thing, ya know. (Yeah, I get that capital punishment being called the “‘death’ penalty” can be a bit confusing for the simple-minded like Pat, but really, not all death is capital punishment.) And also, yes, “dirtball thugs” like this man do have rights when it comes to due process and fair trials and all that “liberal” stuff. I know hate-filled little cranks like Pat would just love to have them all lined up and shot execution-style, but thankfully, most people are a bit more humane than that. (Oh, right – they’re more “liberal”, right, Pat?)

But careful, liberals, ’cause next, Pat gets all (sorta-)defensive and prepares to counter any logic you may use against him:

I know, some of you, most likely liberals are going to say that this is a racist posting. I got one thing to say; I am a white and proud motherfucker and I am sorry that you are not. Besides, we all know that the black race is not exactly made up of civilized human beings anyhow.

Shorter Pat: “You liberulz are gonna accuse me of saying racist shit, so let me just say even more racist shit to make sure I fall right into it.”

Churches closing due to a lack of God

Forget being forced to marry gays (and subsequently, animals and aliens); the real danger to Christian houses of worship is the increasing realization that God doesn’t exist. Or so says that bastion of popular knowledge, The Onion:

The little old church-lady’s bit was particularly insightful, wasn’t it?

Somehow, though, I have the feeling most churches are gonna keep on fuckin’ that chicken^[1] nonetheless.

[1] Yeah, I’m totally stealing that from Jon Stewart now.

(via Friendly Atheist)
Technorati tags: The Onion · churches · God · religion · humor · satire

Friday Canine: Shoulda checked the thickness of the ice before doin’ that …

(via Guy-Sports.com)

Why New York should have voted for marriage equality

Just yesterday, the New York State Senate voted down a same-sex marriage bill 38-24. As you can expect, whilst some Democrats said “nay”, every single Republican voted against marriage equality for LGBT people. Sen. Diane Savino (D-NY) truly said it better than I or most people could ever hope to when she gave her remarks on the debate before her vote (“aye”). This is a speech that every American citizen (and, to a somewhat lesser extent, any citizen from any country that doesn’t yet allow same-sex marriage) should hear; hell, it ought to be made mandatory for all I care.

The best part of it all is near the end when she rails against what has been done to marriage these days, especially with such shameless crap as the Wedding Channel, The Bachelor, and etc. They have turned an institution intended to unite two people in love, two soul-mates, into nothing but bastardized and commercialized hogwash. It’s disgusting, and Savino conveys the message with a force and clarity like few can.

It’s still a very sad day for LGBT people (and anyone who vies for social equality) in New York, but keep in mind: only this one battle has been lost. The war shall never end until equality is at hand for everyone, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, and anything else. There are simply no valid arguments of any kind against gay marriage. None at all. There never have been. The sooner everyone understands this, the better, for all.

(via Bad Astronomy)
Technorati tags: Diane Savino · gay marriage · same-sex marriage · speeches

A reenactment of the latest silly little sports scandal

For anyone who is still in the dark about what happened to Tiger Woods recently (yeah, yeah, we know, no-one cares – whatever), here’s a rather well-made CGI reenactment of both Woods’ original account of being rescued from a crash, and then the later details that surfaced and launched the whole scandal to begin with. Who said the Chinese can’t do good CGI?

By the way, in case you were asking: what do I think about Tiger Woods allegedly cheating on his wife, getting smacked around when she discovers it, fleeing in his vehicle, then crashing and sustaining minor injuries? Well, to be succinct, my feelings range anywhere from “It’s his friggin’ business” to “Who cares?”. I know virtually nothing about him and his personal life (which is all the more reason why I couldn’t care less about this thing), and even if I did, it wouldn’t be my place to judge, nor anyone else’s.

(via The Agitator)
Technorati tags: Tiger Woods · scandals

An accurate overview of the gay marriage debate

Taken from the results of various Facebook polls, this pretty much sums it up.

[Click for full size]

Most amusing are the actual quotes, denoted with asterisks (*), which include such gems as “What’s ‘Non Sequitur” mean? Do I look it up in a Fag-to-English Dictionary?”, that studies that show how children raised by gays wouldn’t turn gay themselves “Were Conducted By Fags!”, and that, of course, straight people are so because that’s how “God made [them]”.

*Sighs*

(via Pharyngula)
Technorati tags: gay marriage · same-sex marriage · debates · polls · Facebook

Limbaugh: true right-wing crank and amoral wretch

I once had a conservative friend who asked me why I hate and deride the likes of Rush Limbaugh so much. (At least, I think she did. My memory’s tricked me before.) Well, there are understandably many solid reasons to dislike him – he’s an odious, dishonest, fear-mongering and propagandizing gasbag (and is readily exposed as such), but those are just part of the equation. One of the real reasons why I loathe people like him, is because they’re so incredibly morally bankrupt. Here’s an example: watch as Limbaugh, debating on the healthcare issue with William Shatner on (what I believe is) Shatner’s Raw Nerve, openly and shamelessly compares the basic fundamental humane right that is access to healthcare, to buying a luxury home and further claiming that it’s perfectly normal, even preferable, for wealthy people to get better healthcare than less financially able folks who are, and should be, left with the rest.

That sink in yet? Okay, now watch the vid for yourselves.

SHATNER: ‘Here’s my premise, that you agree with it or not: that if you have money, you’re gonna get healthcare; if you don’t have money, it’s more difficult.’

LIMBAUGH: ‘If you have money, you’re gonna get a house on the beach; if you don’t have money, you’re gonna live in a bungalow somewhere.’

SHATNER: ‘Right, but we’re talking about healthcare.’

LIMBAUGH: ‘What’s the difference?’

SHATNER: ‘The difference is that we’re talking about healthcare.’

LIMBAUGH: ‘No, no – you’re assuming that there’s some morally superior aspect to healthcare than there is to a house –’

Shorter Limbaugh: “Rich people have more money, so just like we get better houses, we should get better healthcare. Poor people are, and should be, stuck to living in bungalows and, as far as getting medical treatment goes, they can kiss rich people’s asses.”

He even accuses Shatner of believing that there’s a “morally superior aspect to healthcare” than to real estate. Uh … big fucking DUH?! Seriously – what the hell?? Buying a home is one thing; people can live in small apartments or even in shelters. It’s certainly not preferable or fair, but at least they can survive that way, if only until they’re able to get back on their feet and get some proper lodging. I’ll tell you what they can’t survive: getting struck by illness or injury and not having access to healthcare. Healthcare being a “morally superior” issue isn’t just granted, it’s inherent. To honestly claim that there’s no difference at all, morally, in between rich people being able to afford fancier homes and rich people getting the best healthcare while the rest of us get the rest … that takes some truly remarkable mental acrobatics, oiled by an equally remarkable amount of amorality.

He ends by saying that he “[want] America to be the best country it can be”. That would be a United States where there are no poor people to suck up all that precious rich-people’s healthcare, of course. (And, considering this is Limbaugh, probably no Blacks, immigrants and non-Christian people, either.)

(via Dispatches from the Culture Wars)
Technorati tags: Rush Limbaugh · healthcare · William Shatner · vileness · amorality

Dysfunctionality | “Dating Pains”

This entry has been removed from Preliator and can now be found over at Creativitas. (See here for more info.)