Gay Exorcism - That's Not All - Updated

So, Drudge Report has a link to a story about a church in Connecticut performing a "gay exorcism", where they were casting out demons of homosexuality. The article had a picture of the church's sign, which had its web site. Upon visiting the site, I noticed a few other tidbits that some might find interesting.

Supposedly, on January 14, 2009, a member had a vision of a terrorist attack on the United States. The member, Ebony Clark, wrote, "I sensed there was an attack on the United States in route. I saw the face of President Bush, and sensed him working with some people that was plotting against the USA, and also saw workers of Bin Laden."

I guess Bush has come out of retirement to assist on a terror attack. This same member, Ebony Clark, also had another dream of a terror attack on the Capital. She saw people running and screaming, and what did she do? "I had taken more pictures as I walked away." She took pictures. Hope she gets some good ones.

The thing I don't like most about this is that it gives dreams, visions, and exorcisms a bad name.

Update: a New Zealand site has much more detail on the story than the Drudge link. The video is here.

Risky Post On Racism

Last week I heard WSPD (yes, I have started listening again after a 2 year hiatus) mention that it was being called "racist" because of some clips they played. The clips came from a utility assistance fair that was held at the Erie Street Market. In the clips you could hear individuals who were very upset that the fair was nothing more than informational in nature. That is, they were not actually given any actual assistance that day, other than info on how to get help.

Now, WSPD is a radio station. They, of course, do not show pictures or video. So, my first thought was, "why would the person (or group) making this accusation automatically think the people speaking in the clips were black?" I mean, come on, we're not supposed to believe in stereotypes, right? So, what was it in those clips? Was it the incredibly poor grammar? The frequent use of the word "ain't"? Was it the way words were pronounced? Was it that the people were complaining about others trying to help them...the sound of entitlement in their voices? Were any of those things the reasons the accusers thought they were black? If so, doesn't that make accuser the one guilty of stereotyping? Doesn't that make the accuser the racist? Or, is that WSPD was simply reporting the news and the people who complained at this event were just fools?

On a similar note, some d-bag website is saying that the movie "Transformers" is racist. Why? Because some of the characters are depicted as having "a simian appearance, with wide faces and huge ears." The website author then goes on to mention that one character has a gold tooth, speaks with a "crunked up street accent", and uses "jive" language. Now, I don't know what "crunked up" or "jive" language is, but evidently they are black stereotypes.

Again, why does the blogger make the assumption that the robots are black caricatures? Is it because black people are fond of gold teeth, speak with crunked up street accents and use jive language? I'm just asking.

Frankly, I'm getting sick of all the name throwing and accusations. If someone is actually living out a stereotype, especially a bad one, maybe they deserve to be called a fool. But calling out an individual or an isolated event is by no means a condemnation of an entire race.

Ben Konop Remains A D-Bag

The Gravel Throat known as "Ben Konop", is now slinging ridiculous accusations. Gravel Throat, the guy who promised run an ethical campaign, the guy who promised that he wouldn't run for another position until after his stint as County Commissioner was over, is now blaming mayoral candidate and rival, Mike Bell, for the problems with the fire hydrant pressure.

If you don't know, a lady's house burned to the ground last week, even though firefighters were on scene within five minutes of receiving the call. At first the reason given for not being able to put out the fire was that the fire hydrants weren't putting out enough pressure. Evidently, firefighters tapped one hydrant, which was fine, but wasn't enough to put out the blaze. So, the guys tapped another hydrant, but that pressure was low because the two hydrants were on the same water line.

However, fire reports are now saying that it would have been nearly impossible to put the fire out because it had spread inside the walls before the fire trucks arrived. The homeowners didn't know that because they couldn't see anything. Firefighters surmised that the fire may have been caused by faulty electrical wiring when the fire first occurred. Looks like that was probably the case.

In any event, Ben Konop has been, and always will be, a d-bag. He blames everyone else for every bad thing that happens in the region, while offering nothing but hair-brained ideas and finger-pointing.

Toledo Is On the Drudge Report Again

Carty Finkbiner's idiocy and Susan Frederick's abuse of power, has landed Toledo in front of millions again. The issue of ticketing people for parking in their own driveways is listed as an article on the Drudge Report today.

It links to this Fox Toledo story.

Yay Toledo!

Dick Durbin - Insider Trading

So Tricky Dick Durbin is under suspicion because of the timing in selling over $100,000 worth of stock last year. He sold $116,000 in stock the day after meeting with the FED and Treasury officials about troubled banks. Hmmm.....

Sarah Palin Needs To Shut Up

I am really getting tired of this whole David Letterman - Sarah Palin thing. David Letterman tells a joke about A-Rod impregnating "Sarah Palin's daughter" and all hell breaks loose. The Palins, both Sarah and the Todd, complained that Letterman was making a joke about their younger daughter, Willow, because she was the one at the Yankees game. Of course there was no way that Letterman was making a joke about the daughter who actually got knocked up, Bristol.

Then Palin says she's not going to go on Letterman to talk about it. Fine. But then she does something even worst and goes on the Today Show and interviews with The Ego, aka, Matt Lauer. When The Ego tries to suggest that Letterman was talking about Bristol and not Willow, Palin tells him that he and the rest of the main stream media that would believe that are beyond naive. Really? The people who have common sense are naive? The people who drew the connection between knocking up a kid with the kid who was knocked, they're naive? Really? Shut up Sarah Palin.

On a similar note, I saw the video of Palin's interview with Sean Hannity. Let me ask, could a person who runs a state be any less articulate? Seriously. I heard sentences that made me feel embarrassed for her. I'm not kidding. I was actually squirming in my seat listening to her answers to his questions. And what was worse was that Hannity was acting like it was the most profound, right-on stuff he had ever heard. That's why he's a goon.

Why can't conservatives start promoting intelligent, articulate representatives. We need more Newt Gingrichs and...well, I can't think of any other articulate conservatives. And I'm really getting sick of conservatives talking about how awesome Palin is.

Bloomberg Article on the Horror of Obama Economic Policy

I don't know where all of this criticism was before the election, but it seems the media is turning on Obama with great frequency. Here is a commentary on Bloomberg.com basically saying that Obama's economic policies are the death of American jobs and prosperity.

More Thoughts On Sonya Sotomayor

I have made the following comments on various blogs, but not my own. So I thought I would go ahead and do so.

Sotomayor's comments about her "rich latina heritage" are overblown. Now, I don't believe that a person is more capable of making wise decisions by virtue of their upbringing in a particular ethnicity. But that is not really the point. I really don't believe that Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, etc think that judges are without bias in their decision making. If they do, they're idiots. But I don't think they're idiots.

What I think the problem is, is that Sotomayor admitted out-loud to having bias, or the potential for bias in her decisions. In other words, she said what everyone knows to be true, but has refrained from saying before...at least as directly as she did. Justices O'Connor, Alito and Scalia have all said that their backgrounds, religions and upbrining would play some role in their decision making processes.

Furthermore, Sotomayor appears to be completely competent. There has been much said about her so-called "60% reversal rate." But such a label is disingenuous at best. First, the 60% figure comes from the fact that 3 of 5 opinions she authored were reversed on appeal. However, for an opinion to be a majority opinion, there must be at least another judge concurring. That means that another judge agreed with her assessment. Secondly, Sotomayor was a concurring judge in many other opinions that were NOT reversed. So her record is actually much better than pundits have been letting on.

Does this mean that I would vote for her, not necessarily. But it does mean that I wouldn't spend countless hours trashing the woman with no real basis to do so. It means that I wouldn't go spouting criticisms because of a single quote, rather than the dozens and dozens of opinions she has authored or joined in the last 20 years.

Update On California Persecution Case

The Western Center for Law and Policy forwarded me a copy of a press release that they issued today. This post is a follow up to my prior post.

Here it is:

SAN DIEGO COUNTY RESCINDS CEASE AND DESIST ORDER FOR HOME BIBLE STUDY, APOLOGIZES AND COMMITS TO CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

June 3, 2009

San Diego, CA—The San Diego County Counsel and its Chief Administrative Officer have issued an apology and rescinded the citation issued to the Jones family stemming from the weekly Bible study held in their home. In a letter to the Joneses’ attorneys at the Western Center for Law & Policy, the County’s attorney stated that the Joneses’ Bible study “is within the scope of the residential use” and the County therefore “rescinds the Administrative Warning/Cease and Desist Order.” The County also stated that a major use permit is not required for meetings such as the Joneses’ Bible study.

In addition to the letter from County Counsel, County Chief Administrative Officer Walter Ekard issued a formal apology to Pastor Jones, his wife, and his congregation. Mr. Ekard also committed to take several corrective measures as a result of this case. Specifically, Ekard stated that he has directed the County Department of Planning and Land Use and County Counsel to “conduct a thorough review of ordinances regarding all assemblies to clarify meetings such as [the Joneses’] may continue without regulation by the County.” Mr. Ekard also promised that the DPLU would immediately develop measures to improve internal code enforcement procedures and provide updated training for all code enforcement officers.

“We are very encouraged by the County’s response and their commitment to immediate corrective action,” stated Dean Broyles, President and Chief Counsel for the Western Center for Law & Policy. “We look forward to working with the County to ensure that the clarification of its ordinances and training of its personnel are implemented promptly and efficiently so that all citizens of San Diego can be assured that their constitutional rights are protected. We are confident that, as a result of the County’s statements, Bible studies and prayer meetings held in homes throughout San Diego County will be free from government regulation, as is guaranteed by the First Amendment.”

7th Circuit Upholds Handgun Ban In Chicago

Just a year after the US Supreme Court struck down a District of Columbia ban on handguns as a violation of the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ban on handguns in Chicago.

The 7th's reasoning was that last years USSC ruling dealt only with an enactment on Federal land (since D.C. is controlled by the Congress and is not a state), and not states. The 7th also claimed that they were upholding USSC precedent.

The precedent to which they refer is a case from 1876, U.S. v. Cruikshank. In that case the USSC said that the 2nd Amendment was meant to keep the National government from infringing that right, nothing more. The 7th interprets this to mean that the 2nd Amendment, while it cannot be infringed by the Feds, can be infringed by the states. This is idiocy. For that very same case states, "The right there specified is that of 'bearing arms for a lawful purpose.' This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence."

In other words, the right to bear arms existed before the ratification of the Constitution and that the amendment was meant to prevent infringement of a natural right. It would be ludicrous to then deduce that the right may be infringed by the states. Imagine that the Constitution would prevent infringement of the right to bear arms, but that Illinois banned all firearms. What right, then, would the Constitution be protecting from infringement?

It's sort of like having the right to free speech, but then allowing states to restrict all speech. Of course, the difference is that the USSC has "incorporated" the First Amendment, but not the Second. Incorporation, in this sense, means that the guarantee is to be enforced against the states as well, and not just the federal government.

In light of last years ruling, the 7th Circuit should have reevaluated cases that were more than 100 years old. Fortunately, there is disagreement between the 7th Circuit and 5th Circuit on this issues. That means the USSC may once again have the opportunity to rule on a gun issue.

Obama Says - June is LGBT Pride Month

No kidding...June, 2009 is now LGBT Pride Month. For those not in the know, LGBT stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered. Yay for the USA celebrating homosexuality and sexual ambiguity.

And if you don't like it you might as well just burn Bigot onto your forehead.