going. to. hell.

oh holy fuck. there is obama/biden slash. there is obama/biden/emmanuel threesomes. I... can manage the obama/ emmanuel (ah-hem YUM). but biden? no. just...no.  have pics. of emmanuel.

Shorter Mormon and Catholic churches: How DARE you call us bigots because we have removed yr rights!

Fuck this people to hell

Hypocrisy much? The Church of Jesus of Christ of Latter-day Saints is unhappy about the fact that the media spotlight is trained on its participation in making Prop 8 happen. In an official statement on the church's web site, bearing false witness and hypocrisy is the order of the day. It is disturbing that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is being singled out for speaking up as part of its democratic right in a free election. Members of the Church in California and millions of others from every faith, ethnicity and political affiliation who voted for Proposition 8 exercised the most sacrosanct and individual rights in the United States - that of free expression and voting. While those who disagree with our position on Proposition 8 have the right to make their feelings known, it is wrong to target the Church and its sacred places of worship for being part of the democratic process. Once again, we call on those involved in the debate over same-sex marriage to act in a spirit of mutual respect and civility towards each other. No one on either side of the question should be vilified, harassed or subject to erroneous information. Bzzt. Wrong answer. The people protesting the church's significant role in an another state's democratic process -- members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints gave millions of dollars to remove the civil rights of human beings -- are merely exercising their right to free speech to highlight that role. And what is this "erroneous information"?...

No one is telling the church and its membership not to believe whatever they want to believe about same-sex marriage, but they cannot foment discrimination and conflate church and state in their support of Proposition 8. The sole reason for backing the amendment is faith-based. That has nothing to do with civil law or government -- at least not in this country. If the LDS can, in the minds of its followers, be inspired by God to take away the civil rights of people in another state, then gay and lesbian families (wouldn't they also be children of God, or they not human to the LDS?) and their supporters, inspired by the Constitution, can call for the boycott of the state of Utah, where this hate was fomented and bankrolled. Tourism brings in $6 billion a year to Utah -- the state government and businesses in your state will not look kindly upon this rogue mini-theocracy hitting the bottom line of the state coffers. And the Catholic church is also lying boldly: Meanwhile, the Roman Catholic Church was also a target for supporting Proposition 8. "Proposition 8 is not against any group in our society. Its sole focus is on preserving God's plan for people living upon this earth throughout time," Cardinal Roger Mahony, archbishop of the Diocese of Los Angeles, said in a statement Thursday. WTF? Wait a minute. Prop 8 just removed an existing right from one specific group of people. There's no way to whitewash this. There's no spin that takes away the fact that religious institutions that backed Proposition 8 did so because of their faith -- interfering with the laws of California.

you know what?

So fucking WHAT if consensual polygamy does leads to marriage one day?I don't care WHAT grouping of people might want to tie themselves in the bonds of matrimony, providing they are of age and its consensual. Don't like it? DON'T FUCKING DO IT! This is the fucking problem with some sects of converting religions, this overwhelming insistence to dictate to other ppl what your fraking god wants them to do. You have to right to order your life as you see fit. Keep your hands OFF the rest of ours, you goddamned self righteous pestilences. You order your churches. Keep your greedy power hungry hands off the state!

The center right nation BULLSHIT myth and the numbskull journalists who perpetuate it.

On Tuesday, Americans chose as their next president an African-American named Barack Obama who campaigned on a near-universal health-care plan, allowing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to expire, and a move away from the belligerent foreign policy of the past eight years. Republicans, and some journalists, had spent months (falsely) saying Obama is the single most liberal member of the U.S. Senate -- and maybe even a socialist. The American people responded by electing him in a landslide.

This, naturally, is very good news for the Republicans, according to many pundits. It proves once again that America remains a "center-right" nation.

Right about now, you're probably scratching your head, wondering how the election of the "most liberal" member of the Senate, a man who campaigned on a promise of near-universal health care, could possibly be described as evidence of a conservative country.

To be sure, it requires some creative thinking.

NBC's Tom Brokaw, for example, looked at county-by-county election results and concluded that counties carried by John McCain account for greater land mass than those carried by Barack Obama. This would be meaningful, if only fields and streams and rocks and trees were conservative voters. But they aren't: They are fields and streams and rocks and trees. They are neither liberal nor conservative; they tell us nothing about the nation's political leanings. People tell us something about the nation's leanings -- and more people voted for Barack Obama.MORE

*Blink* Say wha????? THIS shit is what free trade is about?

The Nasty Truth: Free Trade Agreements May Scuttle Green Jobs Plans

That's what "free trade" deals are about: limiting by treaty the policy space in which lawmakers can operate. As such, both of the presidential candidates are boxed into a cage of their respective parties' creation. It's the dirty secret of the 2008 campaign.

Recently, AlterNet asked Van Jones, founder of Green For All and author of The Green Collar Economy, about this issue, and he responded with defiance. "I want the WTO to tell us we can't do this," he said, "because then we won't have a WTO. I want the free traders to stand up in front of the world and explain to Americans why some people are going to tell you that you can't have clean energy and you can't have your home retrofitted (with American-made products) because it is more efficient for it to be made in Asia or Germany, that you can't bring Detroit back to build wind turbines. I want the free traders to defend having an overseas body to declare this agenda illegal. I want that fight."

It's a fight that might finally help achieve public awareness about what "free trade" really means. When most people hear the word "trade," they picture ships filled with goods crisscrossing the world's oceans. But the reality is that "free trade" is simply a well-tested euphemism for agreements between governments that limit their ability to intervene in the private sector, ostensibly to unleash the awesome "power of the free market."
They don't just cover trade between countries, but also a host of issues that most ordinary people would consider to be purely domestic matters, as long as they have some tenuous connection with international commerce, no matter how far removed.
Activists from across the developing world have been trying for years to call attention to that reality but have largely been ignored by a media and political establishment devoted to promoting the so-called "Washington Consensus."

Now, with Americans hungry for new approaches to the economy, health care, energy policy and a host of other issues, the "free trade" deals advanced by both Democrats and Republicans over the past 30 years may very well come back to haunt them.
According to a report by the watchdog group Public Citizen (PDF), "Many WTO rules have little or nothing to do with international trade," but every WTO country is still "required to 'ensure the conformity of its laws, regulations and administrative procedures'" with the WTO's orthodoxy. Failing to do so is not a meaningless act of diplomatic defiance; the WTO has an enforcement arm. As the report explains:

Domestic policies that extend beyond the WTO constraints are subject to challenge by other WTO signatory countries -- often at the behest of their affected industries -- before WTO tribunals. Of the 137 cases decided to date at the WTO, challenges to domestic laws have been successful nearly 90 percent of the time, with countries moving to alter their laws as ordered except in a single instance, where a country instead chose to pay indefinite trade sanctions to keep its policy in place.

...

Consider Obama's plan, "New Energy for America" (PDF). At its heart is a proposal to "invest in a clean energy economy" and "create 5 million new green jobs, good jobs that cannot be outsourced." But most can be. While installing new solar panels would be a job that would stay in the United States, building those solar panels would not be. According to the WTO's Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, any financial contribution by a government to the private sector that would give a preference to "domestic over imported goods," either by law "or in fact," is a no-no. Article 5 of that agreement allows a WTO challenge to "any subsidy (tax credit, funding for R&D, and other[s] ...) deemed to ... carry a benefit that has the effect of causing serious prejudice" against goods or services provided by another country. There was an exception for "environmental upgrades," but it expired in 2000.

When it comes to the government, "Buy American" is itself WTO illegal. Obama promises to "help nurture America's success in clean technology manufacturing by establishing a federal investment program to help manufacturing centers modernize" by using federal funds to provide the "critical up-front capital" to modernize "manufacturing facilities to produce new advanced clean technologies." It wouldn't stand a chance if challenged.

MORE


What happens to the Progressive Movement now?

It Is Time to Change from Fighting Against Something to Fighting for Something

What Is this "Clean Coal" Obama and McCain Support?

Pigs with Mouse Genes: How GM Animals May Be Entering the Food Chain without Labeling

Three Things Obama Should Do First

(no subject)

Moby - Natural Blues

LGBT roundup

Their Own Receive Them not: On Black Homophobia


Police beat Progay marraige protestor in West Hollywood

No dignity for Tyrone Gardner

Julie Bindel and the Trans vs. Feminism Tug-of War

ENDA, marriage equality and moving the ball forward

New womb control advocacy: Personhood USA

GLBT winners in this election

Obama/Biden is hiring -- and bans discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity

20,000 marchers take to the streets in California over Prop Hate

Some Education for Those Who Need It: Prop 8, Marriage Equality and State Recognition of Gay Unions

A bit of hope


Pics of protest

(no subject)

Will Smith on Oprah

New Rules 07/11/2008 Bill Maher

From 2:39 onwards....

WHAT????

WHAT?

And police are pushing for TRIAL BY ADULT EVEN AS THEY CHECK FOR ABUSE????


WHAT????


WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THEM????? AND WHAT THE FUCK WAS WRONG WITH HIM???