If the Ku Klux Klan is a group based on Christian values (albeit warped almost beyond recognition), why do they burn the cross? I mean, really. Jingoistic patriots don’t burn flags, so why would extremist Christian groups burn crosses?
It’s been bothering me all day. Well, not really. It just reinforces my theory that bigots aren’t exactly the sharpest knives in the drawer.
Generalizations really tick me off. The subject in question here is the 9/11 Truth movement. Dead horse, I know, but I happen to like beating things. Anyways, I was browsing around some sites recently and began to notice a trend. Among sites that discussed 9/11, the ones that supported the idea that it was an inside job and/or that the government perpetrated the attacks on the WTC and Pentagon were heavily liberal (of the far left flavor). Sites that debunk such conspiracy theories or simply make fun of them tend to be heavily conservative (moderate to far right). I can kind of understand the split here, but after reading through the comments on certain sites, I really wish this wasn’t how it was split up.
I am a libertarian at heart, but I tend to lean more liberal than anything. I also believe that 9/11 was an act of terrorism caused by the hijacking of airplanes by fundamentalist Muslims. The government wasn’t involved in any way and failed to act properly due to shoddy intelligence and confusion surrounding the events. In other words, I’m no 9/11 truther.
This puts me in a rather awkward position. Because I’m fairly liberal, conservatives tend to assume that I’m off my rocker and think that little green aliens told George Bush to fly remote control airplanes into American buildings. And because I don’t believe in the conspiracy theories, liberals tend to assume I’m a neo-conservative government crony and/or brainwashed. Both are clearly wrong and are a direct result of the oversimplifying of the situation here.
9/11 truthers are composed of people from all over the political spectrum. Some, like Alex Jones, are conservatives. Others, like the 35% of Democrats who think Bush knew about the attacks beforehand, are more moderate or liberal. I wish people would realize this, especially on the conservative side of things. Perry Logan (no relation) is a lot more liberal than I am, but he also debunks the claims of 9/11 truthers. Even so, he’s still attacked by more conservative blogs (especially DUmmie FUnnies) for being a liberal, which means he must be a truther. Exhibiting other traits often connected with truthers (such as being against the conflict in Iraq) also garners a person a reputation as a weed-smoking hippie truther.
Blogs like Screw Loose Change seem to be a little smarter when it comes to realizing that not all liberals are moonbats (my research indicates that word is only used by conservative blogs with nothing important to say), but that’s not saying much for the commenters, who still seem to be of the type to criticize anyone with a slightly liberal slant. Honestly, people. It’s all well and good to have an opinion, but attacking anyone who varies from that opinion in the least is bad form and makes you look like a jackass. I’m talking to both sides here. Truthers need to stop thinking I’ve been brainwashed or that I’m too ignorant to see their truth, and debunkers need to stop assuming I’m a truther because I’ve always thought the invasion of Iraq was a bad idea. False correlations are the sign of someone with a big mouth and a little brain.
And please, if you’re a truther, stop getting all surprised when you tell me to make my own conclusions and don’t agree with your version of events. Expecting me to believe everything you say makes as much sense as believing everything the government says, wouldn’t you agree?
I still get a little bit of a shock every time I hear about someone getting booted out of the armed forces for being gay, even though I know that the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy is still alive and well. I guess I just wish it wasn’t. It seems…archaic, even for the military. The logic behind it doesn’t even make any sense. The idea is that openly gay people in the military will…lower morale? How exactly does that work? Are people so homophobic that they’re afraid of gay people raping them in the night? Being a homosexual does not mean you’re out for a piece of ass all the time. Just like straight men don’t go chasing after every lady they see (okay, some do), gay men don’t chase after every guy they see, especially if that guy is straight.
The idea of forcing a discharge from the service simply for being outed as gay is ridiculous, especially when the Army is at recruitment levels lower than those when the draft was ended. I mean, it makes perfect sense to kick people out of the military when you need everyone you can get…
A person should have the right to serve in the military regardless of their sexual orientation. If you’re brave enough to fight for your country and you just so happen to be gay, so what? Does that make you less of a person? It’s just stupid when you get down to it. Of course, the policy does have it’s advantages. Should there ever be another draft, you can expect the number of gay Americans going through the roof…
EDIT: Heh, this article has produced gay dating ads in my AdSense. Contextual ads have their drawbacks, don’t they?
I’m sure you’ve heard of the Westboro Baptist Church. Heck, I’ve even ranted about them before. Great folks, aren’t they? Got a habit of picketing the funerals of dead servicemen and servicewomen, claiming their deaths are a result of our tolerance of gays. That part is ironic enough. Clearly, they’ve never been to the South.
Anyways, someone finally up and sued them. A father of a fallen Marine sued the church for an unspecified amount of money for their invasion of the family’s privacy and “emotional distress” caused by the church picketing the Marine’s funeral. Normally I don’t like emotional distress suits (“You hurt my feelings, now give me money!”), but I think I can make an exception for this. As it is, punitive damages are doled out to prevent something from happening, and I think the amount awarded ($11 million) should discourage WBC and their “circus of hate” from ever going to Maryland again.
It should be noted that Westboro has nowhere near that amount of money. Shirley Phelps, the pastor’s daughter, had only $306 in her bank account, according to (questionable) financial papers. I wonder where they get the money for all the travel they do…
They’re a fact of life, like telemarketers and snotty-nosed kids who sneeze on your pants. I’m talking about tax evasion, er, settlement commercials, the bane of late-night TV.
These commercials always bug me. I mean, just seeing the people on there going “I can’t believe the government is threatening to take away my house because I have huge tax debt!” makes me want to hit something. Uh, hello? Why are you in tax debt? Whose fault is it? Honestly.
Your finances are your own responsibility. There are consequences for mismanaging them. This applies for credit cards (I can’t even count the number of people who I’ve heard complain about their credit card debts as they wax their fancy car, listen to their brand-new iPod, and surf around on their shiny laptop). Taxes are even more important, considering there are even bigger consequences than falling behind on loans or credit cards. Failing to pay taxes can result in jail time. If you can’t keep up, it means you’re buying too much stuff without the means to pay taxes on all of it. In other words, if you have a minimum wage job, you shouldn’t be buying a new house. And I don’t care if you think it’s unfair to pay taxes. Either you pay taxes or your roads fall into disrepair and you’ve got Mr. Johnny McFeely in your elementary school “teaching” your kids. That’s only a slight exaggeration.
The thing that really bugs me about tax settlement commercials is the idea that people can avoid paying all the taxes they owe. It’s an easy out, which results in people paying less than they really owe. It just doesn’t seem fair to the people who pay their taxes on time and in full. Heck, I don’t even see how this is legal. No wonder the government is in such debt if they allow their own citizens to get away with paying a fraction of their taxes…*grumbles*
Whatever the case, debt is always avoidable. People would do well to remember that and avoid buying what they can’t afford or pay off in a reasonable amount of time. It’d mean less annoying commercials about “unfair” wage garnishment and foreclosure when I’m watching TV.
