Friday, May 20, 2005

Sex Cult!! 

What's up across the lake in Ponchatoula?

The child sex investigation of a small town church continues to grow. From the pastor to the piano player, detectives have now arrested eight people. Charges range from sex with children to sex with animals.

Arrested late Thursday night was Robbin Lamonica, the pastor's wife, 21-year-old Paul Fontenot, and Lois Ann Mowbray. Detectives say Mowbray was arrested for trying to cover up the abuse.

It's more than a spiritual shock for former members of Ponchatoula's Hosanna Church. Former member Carolyn Krout described it as, "Pure amazement. These people were supposed to love God, and they did this to babies and animals."
An insider tells 9 News the list of victims from the Hosanna Church could grow to as many as forty before this is all over.

Just thank goodness they weren't gay or pro-choice.

I wonder if Archbishop Alfred Hughes will ignore this story of molestation. Wouldn't be the first time.
2 comments DiggIt!

Thursday, May 19, 2005

"There's nothing more pathetic-- or frightening-- than a welfare queen disguised as an avenging angel" 

A trillion here, a trillion there...
0 comments DiggIt!

My apologies 

To friends like PusBoy who used phrases like "post-Constitutional" with utmost seriousness, I must say that part of me was always disinclined to believe such an era was actually at hand. I still thought there were enough conservative grown-ups and "embedded patriots" in the bowels of government who would prevent a wholesale hijacking of our founding document by Roveco.

Well, no more.

Truly, far from exaggerating, guys like Pus were accurately reading the contours of the future. I still have some faith in the political process because the non-political alternative is still to gruesome for me. But that's an argument based more and more on sheer hope. Now one can only wait for the radical overreaching to be carried to the extreme, until it finally wakes the moderates from their ether (with untold damage in the interim).

Via Norbizness, this excerpt from Russ Feingold captures the stakes:

Mr. President, debate -- even bitter, partisan debate -- over judicial nominations is nothing new. What is new is that the Senate is now poised to break with its rules and traditions. For the first time, the desire of one side to win a nominations battle has become so intense and so unyielding that it threatens the very rules by which this body has operated for centuries. In all of the previous controversies I mentioned, which I think most serious students of Congress and the courts would agree were more significant than the current debate over a handful of circuit court judges, the rules of the Senate have allowed the battles to be fought fairly. Only today, must those rules give way so that one side can have its way.

The Majority Leader and those who support his extraordinary plan to change the Senate rules by fiat seek to cloak their grab for power in the source of our nation's loftiest principles -- the Constitution. This is not just a silly public relations effort to change the name of their plan from "the nuclear option," the term coined by the Majority Leader's predecessor, because that term fares poorly in public opinion polls. It is a cynical effort to distract the public from the extra-constitutional nature of the plan by invoking the Constitution itself.

Your intrepid bivalve trembles at this arrogance of power. Again: what great senator in all of history would stand with the Weepublicans on this measure?

Jefferson, Clay, Taft, Russell, Moynihan...?



Yeah, prolly.
0 comments DiggIt!

Wednesday, May 18, 2005

Dick Cheney likes to ask "Questions" 

and so does Michael.

I have a couple, too.

1) Considering the entire history of the Republic, which U.S. Senator do you most admire?

2) Where would he or she stand on this matter?

So-called Southern conservatives who exercise this "nuclear option" on Senate rules and history should not be allowed to hold office in the Richard Russell building. Despite his racism, Dick Russell had more parliamentarian honor on his worst day than these Weepub ideologues will ever have on their best.
0 comments DiggIt!

Monday, May 16, 2005

Evidence that improvised hair gel may kill brain cells. 

As an appreciator of the well-crafted title, YRHT loves Michelle's work at You Can't Make It Up. One of her correspondents recently filed the following report:

The true highlight of the [human rights award show] came when Cameron Diaz pranced out on stage. Waving and blowing kisses she tottered in her stilettos and skintight jeans over to the podium. Struggling to read the speech prepared for her, she gratefully welcomed interruptions of high school kids screaming, "You're so hot Cameron!! I want you Cameron!" "Come on you guys," she said tossing her shiny blond hair over her shoulder, "Please. I mean, it's totally awesome that you're here." Wink.
She then read her bit about Carlos Rojas, a videographer documenting violent atrocities against his indigenous ethnic group in Oaxaca. "Brutalized, attacked, imprisoned and tortured by the Mexican military, the Mixe found themselves without a voice," Cameron read. Then, looking up at the audience, puppy dog eyes wide, she ad libbed, "I think we all know what that feels like, right guys?" From the back of the auditorium came the response, "I want to do you, Cameron!" She smiled and waved. "You guys are so awesome!"

Uggh! Is there any doubt this didn't happen verbatim? Can't you just see it?

Whatever celebrity "starpower" Diaz brings to a cause is not worth this sort of insipid buffoonery. She's a chronic embarrassment for the left, and does far more harm than good when she speaks. Could a friend advise her to just donate money and not make public statements until she learns something?

And by the way, in addition to Carlos Rojas' video efforts, there were others who fought to give indigenous peoples like the Mixe a voice.

More quotes and pictures here.
0 comments DiggIt!

Didja wear red ink for Penta-cost Sunday? 

Today, Rumsfeld will defend the Pentagon's base-closing recommendations that will save nearly $50 billion over twenty years. Let's remember what we're dealing with here:

The Pentagon operates 4,000 accounting systems with 2,000 databases, most of them incompatible. Thus, none of the armed services would be able to pass an independent financial audit. The "fundamentally flawed business systems" used by the Pentagon are wide open to "fraud, waste and abuse," according to the General Accounting Office.

$19 billion per year is spent trying to "keep track" of supplies, people and finances. It's as if all these various systems were speaking in different tongues.

At this rate, the Pentagon will have spent $380 billion on faulty bookkeeping while communities across the country absorb the pain of base consolidation for a fraction of the savings.

Couldn't 90% of their problems be addressed with a modified version of Wal-Mart's supply-chain management software? Seriously.

I was highly pissed the last time I wrote about this.
0 comments DiggIt!