Evolution is Just a Theory.

 If you clicked on that link faster than a priest with an invitation to NAMBLA, you're in the right place. I haven't yet decided which is the lesser of two evils: insincerity in the promotion of good and just purposes, or sincerity in the promotion of false and intellectually offensive ones. This is one of many reasons I suspect I'm at least half Vulcan.

 Insincerity in the promotion of good purposes offends me on an emotional level. I find it repulsive that certain people will copy and paste dull, vapid, generally accepted platitudes on their Facebook walls and Twitter accounts and accompany them with thinly veiled threats or insults to the convictions of the people reading them. It's asinine.

 "If you or someone you know knows of anyone that has dealt with cancer, repost this for an hour to help find a cure."

 No.

 Nearly everyone knows someone who at least knows someone who's dealt with cancer. If they haven't, they're either too young, or too far out of touch with reality to make use of the internet anyway. I will not repost this, because reposting this and leaving it as my status message for an hour will not cure cancer. You know what will? Action on research, that's what. If people would stop throwing money away to study the flow rate of ketchup or rent politicians, and start putting it to use to enable research and development, we could get closer to a cure exponentially faster. I don't see how giving your ego a handjob is going to help with this.

 "99% OF YOU WON'T REPOST THIS, BUT..."

 Stop this banal self-serving bullshit. Sometimes, I wish every computer would come with a little troll inside that lives under the keyboard. Every time someone goes to hit Ctrl+C on one of these ridiculous, insincere statuses of which they've only read the first line, he would pop out, draw a tiny scimitar, and take a finger. Anyone who's literate and has the capability of free independent thought that has seen what cancer, AIDS, racism, sexism, homophobia, bigotry, the far right, the far left, communism, fascism, consumerism, terrorism, and Newt Gingrich can do to someone knows how morally wrong these things are. There's nothing your guilt-laden copied and pasted post is going to do about it, and we all know you're not really going to delete any of your friends that don't copy / paste your status message. That's just an idle threat you've thrown in there in hopes to boost the rate at which your bromide is copied and pasted, and what's worse, YOU didn't even add it, you've copied and pasted it.

 Now, for the other problem: sincerity in the promotion of false and intellectually offensive purposes.

 On the other end of the scale, there are people who truly and wholeheartedly believe that Jesus has a Facebook. I assure you, he does not. Don't misunderstand me, I appreciate and respect that you have a religion, and it's an important part of your life, but there comes a point where you simply MUST yield to scientific fact in lieu of superstition. Your god is NOT going to descend to Earth and rapture you on the basis  that you've posted more trite religious crap than the other members of your cult... er... church. Furthermore, the Earth is FAR older than six millenia. It's been proven. People constantly remind me that "evolution is just a theory," but so are heliocentrism and gravity. Furthermore, if that's the basis of your argument, where, prithee, is your concrete, indisputable evidence to the contrary that you so vehemently present as fact? I'm all for a lively debate. I welcome intellectual discourse, but when your side begins to falter, you simply can not retreat to the bible as the apex of your argument. Ironically, it seems an awful lot of staunch, gun-toting, tan-hating, homophobic rednecks do the same. I've not really included them here because while they definitely need to be watched (lest they hurt themselves, or others defending our great country against the invading gay, black, Jewish horde of evil democrats that will ultimately spread the zombie virus throughout the world and remove us from god's love), they also amuse me, and a majority of them aren't literate enough not to have already been lost by this article yet.

 As for those that are ever vigilant in warning us that Facebook has access to all of your status updates, your friends list, and all your information, a wonderful, albeit old and cliched, phrase comes to mind.

 No shit, Sherlock.

Es Lebe Das Word Reich!

 Okay, so my ears are hot. No, really, like red hot. If you cracked an egg and let it ooze into my ear, you would get a nice, waxy omelette. I may have mentioned, or you may have gleaned that I'm a writer (imagine that!) As such, I have been blessed be-knighted with an awesome job doing what I love to do...  writing.

 "What a fortuitous turn of events!" you might say; and you'd be right.
 "What an unholy pain in the ass!" you might say; and you'd also be right.

 Every professional scribe has to do one thing that is the bane of professional scribes:
submit their work for approval.

 Hey! Where are you going!? I know it's scary, but come back here! I didn't say you had to submit your work for approval! Relax, I know how frightening that phrase can be.

 So I do this. This whole "submission" thing (and I might add that it's an apt word for the action), and for the first time ever, a fistful of assignments comes back. I was floored. I know, I know, "first world problems" but hear me out. I wasn't floored because the assignments came back, I (as any wordsmith should) accept this as an occasional inevitability. I found myself prostrate and cooling my countenance on the oak slats in my living room because the "edits" and "changes" and "suggestions" were what I can only describe as rife with typographical, grammatical, and mechanical errors. There was a sea of what in earlier days would have been red ink. A cruel, wild, untamed sea full of retarded dolphins and three-legged sharks. It was awful. I fell apart like a leper with epilepsy.

 After a fair bit of stomping, swearing, and pulling my hair out, not to mention a shot of Jack Daniels walk around the block, I calmed down, and began examining the "changes" that the other "writer" recommended. Through tears, and bloodshot eyes, I accepted them, or at least their spirit. I know edits and changes will, on occasion, be necessary. It just comes with the territory. What I will not abide, is someone submitting changes that require me to put my name on a piece that appears to have been written by a four year old, or worse, that new cancer-causing agent, Newt Gingrich (I know he's irrelevant, but I can't pass up a cheap shot at someone who so concretely epitomizes failure and hypocrisy).

 The moral, if there is one, is this:

 There will be times when you have to bend and compromise what you do, especially if you're doing it for approval by a third party, but never, ever compromise who you are. There's always something in between, and part of who I am is a card carrying member of the Word Reich.

Caveat Emptor

  No, seriously... what the fuck? How do people honestly still back right wing escaped lunatics like Mitt Romney, Newt Getrich, and yes, dare I say it, Ron Paul? I don't get it. Is it because the job market sucks? Do you really think these bajillionaires are going to help you? Have you seen their track records?  None of these people would spare a kind word to Red Skelton, let alone offer any substantial support to a REAL poor person. You know what they'll do? They might offer to pray for you, or suggest that you pray yourself.  The job market sucks EVERYWHERE! It's been sucking LONG before the current president, and it will continue to suck for a while. Am I saying you can't be critical? No. Not at all. You have the right to do so, no... you have an obligation to do so according to the U.S. Constitution (still one of my favorite pieces of literature). Am I saying you're better off fucking yourself with a concrete dildo wrapped in barbed wire and capsaicin than putting another republican in the office?

 Um... yes.

 Did you see what happened with the last one? You think maybe it's a good idea to recover a little, and maybe get this country on its feet before we test its strength with incompetent assholes again? I'd recommend it. 

 Look, here's the thing. No candidate regardless of the current political faction to which s/he claims allegiance is going to please the entirety of the voting age population, but there are some out there that are simply not a good fit if we, as Americans wish to progress and quell the hatred that far too many other countries (you do remember that there ARE other countries, right?) feel in the pit of their stomachs for us.We have an astronomical portion of our population in ill-health with little to no hope of recovery just on the basis of their income. They're too poor to be healthy. Do you understand how glaringly cro-magnon that is?! They don't have enough MONEY to get proper medical treatment! Meanwhile, the whole of Europe, and even that homogeneous, barely consequential little town called CANADA cock their collective heads to the side like a dog that thinks it hears a high pitched whine as if to say, "what the fuck?"

 Let's not go trying to throw out a guy who's trying to clean up the last guy's mess. That's not how you fix things. And let's not go screaming for his head, and whining because our incessant need for instant gratification demands we do so. There's a nifty little saying:

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me.
I lift my lamp beside the golden door."

 Ironically, it comes from the oft-made-fun-of French. Are you going to tell me that those swarthy, suave, cretins know more about social responsibility than we do?!

 Oh wait... it seems they do. 

 All I'm saying folks is this: Put the fucking torches and pitchforks down, okay? 

 I've been accused (if you can believe it) of having too much patience. One of my all time favorite people in the world continually calls me a Zen master (and frequently gets angry at me for not getting angry about petty things). You don't have to be a Zen master, or "have the patience of Job" to see that we're in a better situation in general now than we were four, eight, or even twelve years ago (Jesus Hernandez Cristobal, has it been that long already?!). Make your decision wisely. Do not put someone in office who will continue to whittle away your rights because it affects their bottom line too much. 

Eye of Newt; Tongue of Dog.

I've been asked to tackle the issue of Newt Gingrich. More specifically, why we should be afraid of him. My knee-jerk reaction was "we shouldn't. He's innocuous enough, and more or less a joke." Then I sat back and thought about it for a minute. There must be something inherently wrong with him on a fundamental level. Why? Well, for starters, his name is Newt. I thought, how can a simple charmander, who does nothing be any threat to anything? Then I remembered that if you leave charmander to its own devices, it become charizard, and that, my dear readers, is bad fucking news.

Newt Gingrich is a witch. You want proof? Okay, for starters, his name rhymes with witch. Not only that, if you set fire to him, I'm certain he'd burn, and is therefore made of wood. See? Obviously a witch. There's only one solution... BURN HIM!

I mention this because I recently looked up Newt's voting record... and it reminded me of Monty Python. Now, while I absolutely adore, worship and idolize enjoy the occasional Monty Python skit, I don't feel he, like Newt, has any place in American politics. For starters, Monty Python isn't a real person (and I'm not entirely convinced Newt is), but simply the name of a troupe of terribly funny clowns. Hmm... I digress.

To be honest, I'm not certain where to begin with out dear friend, Newt. Do I examine is voting record? FYI, do NOT click on that link if you have a weak stomach! Let me sum it up for you: From '92 to '98 there were 433 votes our salamander-like friend could have voted on. He was present to vote on 219. That's about 50% of the time he was doing his job. As a matter of fact, it seems he didn't vote on nearly ANYTHING important. Abortion, free trade, juvenile crime, nothing. So let's just focus on the time he was present and earning half of what we, as citizens, paid him, shall we? Oh, wait... we really can't. It seems Mr. Gingrich is a little too busy running around on / divorcing / ignoring his wives to be bothered with anything the American people hold dear. Looking at his voting record, it seems like he's a bit too busy destroying the sanctity of marriage with one foot in his mouth, while running away from accountability with the other.

So where does he stand on the latest turd the senate has squeezed out? Let's see: Oops... looks like we can't.

Okay, fine, so let's take a look at his "solutions" then, shall we?

Well for starters, it looks like Newt wants to beg borrow and steal notions that worked for bygone presidents in bygone eras. On Jobs and economy, he says:

America only works when Americans are working. Newt has a pro-growth strategy similar to the proven policies used when he was Speaker to balance the budget, pay down the debt, and create jobs.

Now, while I agree to a certain degree with the first seven words of that statement, it seems to me (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that when charmander was Speaker, Clinton was president. A democrat, by the way, who not only balanced the budget, but left office with a surplus that his successor promptly obliterated. In this same "solution" area, he claims a want to "Strengthen the dollar by returning to the Reagan-era monetary policies that stopped runaway inflation." Really, charmander? Reaganomics? That's your bold new idea?

Hey, Newt? The eighties just called, they want their economic policies back.

Now, how about healthcare? There's a big topic. What's Newt's big new idea on this? Oh... there really isn't one. It's the same nonsense that the right has been spouting since day one, and it all boils down to: privatize health insurance, and let the poor people sort it out. That's no solution. I'm still waiting on a solution, charmander, the damned heading of the page is called solutions, now give me one! Newt seems to think "We must repeal and replace the left's big government health bill with real solutions that will lower costs and improve health outcomes." You know what would be a great real solution that will lower costs and improve health outcomes? UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE! Dare I say it? Some of you may want to cover your eyes... SOCIALIZED MEDICINE! There's a reason Canada and the United Kingdom (not to mention a few other places) have one manifestation or another of socialized medicine. It fucking works! Have you ever seen a Canadian digging through the garbage for a peach pit, taking their child to the emergency room for a cold, or dying from some minor affliction simply because they didn't have the money for the good medical care? I haven't.

One of the more glaringly disturbing pieces on this hemorrhoid of a website is the section where charmander talks about protecting life and religious liberty. I'm going to tackle these piles of shit one by one. Ready?

"Nominate conservative judges who are committed to upholding Constitutional limited government and understand that the role of the judges is to interpret the law, not legislate from the bench."

See, there's again, a fundamental flaw here. Conservatives, in your definition, mean right wing nutjobs. Right wing nutjobs Think it is their sole charge in life to legislate morality. Either you're full of shit, or you're an idiot.

"Combat judicial activism by utilizing checks on judicial power Constitutionally available to the elected branches of government."

1) Stop using the word "combat." it's a concept a draft dodger like yourself would never know. B) That's what the branches of government were set up for in the first damned place, any grade-schooler knows this! You might as well be telling me you're going to institute a program that will officially declare water to be wet!

"End taxpayer subsidies for abortion by repealing Obamacare, defunding Planned Parenthood, and reinstating the “Mexico City Policy” which banned funding to organizations that promote and/or perform abortions overseas."

Wow... just wow. Yeah, there's a great idea, let's roll back any progress we've made as a civilized society, what are we, Wal-mart?! De-fund planned parenthood? Seriously?! What's going to happen when you do this, and in 2 years you have 14 interns beating down your door to serve you with child support orders, naughty, naughty Newt? Funding for planned parenthood minimizes the need for women to go overseas to get abortions, and abortions are NOT the only service planned parenthood provides. They also provide education for young women to avoid getting pregnant in the first place.

"Protect religious expression in the public square such as crosses, crèches and menorahs."

Religious expression, and religious freedom are not the same thing. I will direct you to an interesting piece written quite some time ago for reference, it's called the 1st amendment.

"Protect healthcare workers right to conscience by making sure they are not forced to participate in or refer procedures such as abortion."

You know, for a guy who rarely voted on any abortion issues, you sure have a lot to say about it. Healthcare workers are bound by the Hippocratic oath. Healthcare workers who don't want to participate in or refer such procedures need not practice that area of medicine. However, if a woman's doctor finds that pregnancy will endanger the life of the carrying mother, s/he is bound by that oath to offer alternatives to death. It's a first, do no harm kind of thing.

 "Protect the rights of home-schooled children by ensuring they have the same access to taxpayer funded, extra-curricular educational opportunities as any public school student."

They already do. Not only that, in most states, the home-schooling parent is obligated to follow a curriculum, and several set guidelines to ensure that their children are being adequately educated.

"Protect the rights of teachers to use historical examples involving religion in their classroom. Nor should they be discouraged from answering questions about religion or discussing it objectively in the classroom."

The key word here is objectively, and unfortunately, I've found atheists to be the most objective when dealing with religion. Unless the class is about religion, it need not enter the curricula except as explanation. If you muddy these waters, you WILL have teachers proselytizing.

"Protect the frail, infirm and the elderly from the state’s arbitrary decision to terminate life."

I'm sorry, when has this ever been the state's decision? Perhaps in case where the patient was a ward of the state, but how long has that been?

Okay, you know what? Yes. Yes, we need to be afraid of this... "man." Why? Because right now, he's too close to the GOP nomination for my comfort, not to mention the comfort of millions of gay, black, Hispanic, and female Americans. If he gets into office and does nothing, we're fucked, and if he gets into office and does what he says he will, we're definitely fucked. Educate yourselves.