Tuesday, June 05, 2007

Just some more of my 'crazy' opinions!

Serena Williams is one of the all-time great women's tennis players. She's won all four Grand Slam tournaments, with eight titles in all. So why is it so hard to like her? Why does she so frequently get booed all the time? Because she is and always has been a classless bitch, unwilling to ever give even the slightest amount of credit to her opponents, even someone as good as Justine Henin. I don't think I have ever heard her quoted as saying "So and so played a great match, I take my hat off to her" or whatever. How hard is it to admit that someone else simply outplayed you?

Yes folks, this is a 'moderate' Islamic country. You see, I believe in a separation of church and state for all religions, not just Christianity. Most liberals see it otherwise until you call them on it. You can bad mouth Jesus until the cows come home but even the slightest questioning of any other faith is strictly off-limits or else! Don't even bother arguing with me on this one because I am 100% right.

This story and this one. This is why the Republicans must win the 2008 Presidential Election. This guy needs to be stopped and now. Someone with the guts and the stomach to do so has to be in the Oval Office and it ain't gonna be no Hilary or Barack Obama, I'll tell you that.

That's all I have for now. I ache and I'm tired and I drink too much and I still wish I had some coke.

11 Comments:

Blogger Andrea said...

A few things:

Would you call Rasheed Wallace a classless bitch? Interesting how people don't boo him or call him bitchy... Could it be that he's not a woman? Not that I think either of them should behave the way they do, just an observation.

Just to put it on the record, I am 100% for the separation of church and state. The two should only meet in order to legislate said separation. But, therein lies the paradox, doesn't it? I'm sure you're 100% right though...

So, the Republicans need to win in '08 to stop Iran... Because what they've been doing so far to address the situation has been ever so effective. I suppose you'd like the whole thing escalated to a full on nuclear standoff.

And finally - give it up with the fucking coke already! Unless you're referring to a refreshing glass of cola, because that I could understand.

June 06, 2007 12:20 AM  
Blogger Kid Icarus said...

I just happened to read the Serena story, so that was where my focus was. I could have just as easily done so about Rasheed Wallace (who is a bit of a nut fo sure) or anyone else. In fact I'm sure I've done so in the past with little bitches like Roger Clemens and A-Rod. Being a woman has nothing to do with it.

On the second point I was simply trying to raise the point that many people are very quick to criticize if the influence of the 'religious right' or whatever on US / Canadian politics while staying quiet about full blown theocracies like we have in many places.

And no, I don't think that steps against Iran have been satisfactory in the slightest. But something needs to be done and a John McCain is far more likely to get it done over one of the folks I mentioned. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad = Hitler with the possibility of nuclear weapons. Pretty scary. No one wants a nuclear standoff, that's why something needs to be done before they acquire said weapons.

And Coca-Cola is quite refreshing. I have some in the fridge and perhaps will grab a bottle right now.

June 06, 2007 11:24 AM  
Blogger Monica said...

I agree with you on Iran. Something has to be done now (not in 10 years as the Dems have suggested).

I like Giuliani, especially in the GOP debate last night; he doesn’t allow himself to be the religious-right’s bitch, but he’s still strong on foreign policy and domestic issues that actually matter, like immigration.

I think liberal secularists in Canada/US still associate criticizing Muslim, Jewish, Hindu etc. theology with racism and intolerance; which is ridiculous.

But there are lots militant atheists (scientists, philosophers) who are extremely critical of all faiths and don’t discriminate; unfortunately not enough people listen to them, or read their books, in order to make a difference.

I'm an atheist and I truly do despise all religions equally; but I can agree with you that it's become taboo to attack the Muslim and the Jewish faith, which is completely unfair.

June 06, 2007 3:17 PM  
Anonymous katie g. said...

there's a great article in Rolling Stone this week about how much Rudy sucks.

The man has done nothing but profit off the fact that he happened to be the guy in charge when NYC was attacked. I'm pretty fucking sick of hearing how awesome of a foreign policy guy he's going to be just because he happen to be mayor when our nation was attacked.

and by the way, Rudy doesn't play well in the south or the midwest, so doubtful he's getting the nomination.

McCain is crazy. plain and simple.

and the situation in Iran was escalated and caused in large part with our foreign policy for the past 7 years. I'm not a Barak or Hilary fan, but either option is better than the neo-con nonsense.

June 06, 2007 10:15 PM  
Blogger Kid Icarus said...

Monica: Though I do like the guy and I think he did a great job as an inspirational figure post 9/11, I have to agree with Katie on this one. He won't get the nom. In the primaries you have to play to the extremes, unlike the general election in which you run to the center. Is he the right man for the job? I'm not so sure. Though I'll have him over those other two (Bar and Hil) any day.

And I have to disagree with you somewhat in regards to the 'militant atheists' as you call them. I call them anti-Christians. As a non-denominational Christian myself I really do believe that it's down to one faith that you're not allowed to bad mouth and y'all know what it is. You know, the one which seems to dominate in regards to theocracies worldwide. Kudos though to the good people of Turkey in their steadfast support of a secular state.

Katie I will check out the article, though I do sort of (!!) agree with you already. Sort of. Though I do disagree with you about McCain, I think he'd be a fine president, though the guy I'd love to see in there (M.R.) likely won't get it. Though you never know. I personally think it's a pretty strong field on the GOP side. When it comes to the big guns on the right, I don't think any of the current Democrats can beat them in a general election. In fact, there's only one candidate I can think of who can. But I'm not going to tell you who that person is...why would I want to help your side? :P

June 06, 2007 11:28 PM  
Blogger Monica said...

Mike, I have to disagree with you on atheists. Chistopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins (just to name a few) have had no problem debunking the Muslim faith, they're more than happy to do it. It's not their fault that most Christians refuse to read their work. Hitchen's and his family have even been bullied/threatened by extreme Muslim groups because of his strong opinions on their faith.

The people who hate the religious-right do so mainly for political reasons, which are completely seperate from
from atheist ideology.

June 07, 2007 12:27 AM  
Blogger KatieG said...

the GOP candidates are all weak. the fact that the GOP fans are fawning all over Fred Thompson.... please!!!! Fred Thompson?????!! Give me a break.

Mitt Romney has two problems....one, he was moderate on social issues throughout his years in massachusetts....so by all of his "I love guns" and "i hate gays" and "No more abortions"commentary, he's pretty much disputing all of his campaign items which helped him win in Massachusetts only a few years ago. So, either he was lying then, or he's lying now.... and ultimately, what this nation needs, is someone who doesn't lie so much.

second, of course, he's a Morman. ANd people freak out about that.

third, he's got 5 sons between the ages of 35-25. All healthy, able-bodied young men. Not one has any military service.... Don't think as this war-debacle goes on, and the election comes closer that this won't become a hot-point topic. especially if he's running agatinst a veteran. (i.e., mccain.)

BUt, actually, of all the GOP candidates, and even with his lying, I think Romney would make a decent President. There was a great article last week about him in the NY Times last week about him running Bain & Co. venture capital firm. It gave me a lot more confidence that he could probably run a country.

Oh, and if I were Romney's campaign manager, I'd totally play that metaphor. Romney's the guy who's company showed up to save Failing COmpanies - kinda like our nation in Washington.

But then again, people in Kansas think he has 5 wives or something. So, that's a problem.

AL Gore would win the Democratic nomination. And I'm certain he'll enter the race...sometime around December.

ALso, if Bloomburg enters the race as an independent - watch out, its a free-for-all Ross Perot style 92 campaign all over again...

June 09, 2007 11:09 AM  
Blogger Kid Icarus said...

Well, I am glad that Messrs. Dawkins and Hitchens have no problems hating all religions equally...it's just too bad that one of those in particular seems to be the most likely to do harm to them.

I don't think Fred Thompson is any sillier a candidate than Hilary Clinton, sorry. The fact that this sad coattail riding, carpetbagger is the Democratic is leading her party's polls is far worse than the dude from Law & Order generating a bit of buzz.

I still like Mitt. Yes his flip-flopping (lying is such a harsh word) is a little troublesome, but I would be satisfied if he clarified himself on a few of these issues. As for his sons, they're all adults and their own men. What they do is their own deal, not their father's. It should be a non-issue. Of course I do agree with you that others might not see it what way.

And yes, Gore is the only sane choice on the other side. Not that I like him, but if the party has any smarts (and if he cares at all for his party) they'll nominate him. What a no-brainer there!

Too bad that the one person who could truly 'pump up' this race isn't eligible to run...

June 09, 2007 11:22 PM  
Blogger KatieG said...

trust me, when the war is only issue as November 2008 rolls around, it will be a HUGE issue that none of his 5 young chiseled sons have done nothing to serve their country. sure, they're "their own men" as you put it, but the American public will think differently...

Mitt is certainly the most competent.

Hillary - who i don't like - is supremely qualified, highly intelligent, and whether you agree with her carpetbagging or not, you cannot say she's not experienced. Plese - she's been in Washington for 15 years, and highly active in domestic and foreign policy issues.

Fred Thompson - I have no idea what his opinions are on most anything - that's why i find it ridiculuos that everyone loves the guy already. he's said nothing.

Where's Wesley Clark?

Bloomburg - Clark would be perfect.

June 10, 2007 12:22 PM  
Blogger Andrea said...

I have to agree with Monica: Those against the religious right are less so on the basis of religion or faith (i.e. in the atheist sense), and more so in the sense that the religious right tends to support the notion that the rights and freedoms laid out to all citizens under the American constitution should be overruled on the basis of biblical doctrine. I wouldn't say it it's really so much an anti-Christian thing, so much as it ends up reflecting negatively on Christianity as a byproduct of the fact that the religious right in the U.S. is mainly comprised of Bible thumpers and Christianity is the religion most intrinsically woven into the fabric of civic life, at least in a historical sense.

I think that those who confuse that fact and think that Judaism and Islam should not be subjected to the same restrictions under secularity as derived from the First Amendment are just a little less with it than we are. So, of course the more primitive interpretation is the one put forth by the mainstream media and eaten up like so much ice cream by the borderline retarded public. Unfair, but not altogether unexpected.

June 10, 2007 10:48 PM  
Blogger Kid Icarus said...

Sweet Jesus, I can't take any more of this post. Sorry, but when these things drag on I lose interest. I'm sure I'll start another one soon enough though.

Quickly though:

I totally agree with the fact that Mitt's sons not serving WILL be an issue, I just don't think it should be. And yes, I'd love to see a strong third party ticket, though I'm not a fan of Bloomburg or Gen. Clark. And who would have the top billing on that one anyways?

And Christianity is the one most 'woven' or whatever in North America (obviously), but it's nowhere near the level of the extreme theocracies in many other places. That's what I'm really opposed to. As for those other two, I think it's just a matter of political correctness or an unwillingness to stir up shit that leads them to being untouched and given a free ride. One far more than the other though...

Anyways, that's it. I'm tired of this thread. If anyone wishes, I'll continue in a new post soon enough.

June 13, 2007 11:30 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

eXTReMe Tracker