Why I will vote for Hillary Clinton, without qualm

1. The email “scandal” is not an issue. She has admitted the private server was a mistake. The FBI had no indication that she intended to compromise classified information. Intent is 9/10ths of that law. By Presidential decree in 2009, the heads of the State Dept, Defense Dept, and CIA define what is and isn’t classified in their departments. As Secretary of State, by definition, anything she wrote unclassified is by definition unclassified. Conflict with other departments to be adjudicated by the President. Fact. That’s the way classified information works. The FBI’s opinion on the subject stopped at opinion. They had no evidence of a crime. Unintentional negligence is not a crime.

2. She has the experience required to be President acquired as Secretary of State, US Senator, and even as First Lady. She is qualified.

3. Her policies as Secretary of State more closely correspond to my own. Combating terrorism requires thoughtful and coordinated response. Open indiscriminate warfare against terrorism will not end it, it will breed more, as has been demonstrated by decades of Israeli/Palestinian conflict as only one example.

4. She has reversed position on TPP. That means she can listen to dissent, to the other side of argument, make reasoned positions and correct them when necessary.

5. She recognizes that tax cuts for the wealthy and spending cuts that cost jobs do not create jobs. People with money to spend do, particularly a healthy middle class.

6. She is pro-choice.

7. She objects to the Hobby Lobby decision that says religious corporations can avoid paying health care insurance costs.

8. She objects to the decision that removed voting rights protections.

9. She objects to the Citizens United decision that makes unrestrained spending of money on elections free speech.

10. She supports the marriage equality decision and objects to the other “religious freedom” bigotry sweeping through local governments.

11. She recognizes the need for national gun control laws and regulation.

12. She will likely be in position to select three Supreme Court justices. Her selections will better align with my views and the views of the majority of the people of this country.

13. Benghazi is not an issue. There was no “stand down” order. That was established through millions of dollars of Congressional investigation.

14. She has the personality to remain calm, to assess, and to respond intelligently to crisis.

15. People say she is a genuinely nice person one-on-one.

16. She is not running for President for personal glory.

Sure, she isn’t perfect. Her laugh makes me cringe sometimes but this isn’t a personality contest.

Nearly every one of these points is counter to Trump/Pence.

Voting for Hillary is easy for me.

Comment about free speech and campaign financing

Let me try to be clearer. Money to support candidates for election to the legislative and executive branches has become less restrictive due to the two Supreme Court decisions on free speech and campaign financing, especially with respect to corporate funding. Corporations have interest in getting candidates elected that favor their business. Corporations and people with a lot of money provide funds for the candidates and to PACs to support their candidates. The result is that those with money can drive who gets elected, possibly with some quid pro quo expectation. Money (corporations, PACs, wealthy) can say whatever it wants, true or not. That makes the side with less money spend its more limited resources defending, rebutting, correcting and less able to express its case to the voters. The purpose of campaign finance controls is to allow a fair exchange of ideas and positions on issues for voters to decide with. That is an ideal state that I have no expectation of ever achieving. To think that corporations have any right to back a candidate or provide campaign financing for a candidate is in my mind wrong. Government representation is for the people, not corporations. A corporation is not a person, does not act like a person, does not have interests like a person. I don’t think corporations should have any direct influence in the election of government representatives. They have plenty of indirect influence. People with money don’t deserve any more say in who gets elected than from anyone else. Basic nature of a democracy. Examples of issues are socialized medicine and climate change. One is a political/social choice the people should make for themselves. The other is a scientifically determined fact the people need to choose to respond to. Both through their elected representatives. The problem is when the few (wealthy and corporations) use their money steer the choices of representatives and ultimately the choices for the issues to their benefit by overwhelming opposition with lies, misinformation, and distortion. That does happen. The people are not getting clear debate to choose with. They may choose against their best interests (like a plumber voting for a small government tax cutter who eventually cost him his business) or don’t vote because they are confused or ambivalent due to the fighting. What I desire is a level debating field where positions can be laid out clearly for people to make educated decisions. There can be noise all around the field and being a free speech advocate I support that, but within the political campaign debate, it has to be limited so that all sides (liberals, conservatives, greens, libertarians, etc…) can get their points across. That means limiting money and who can donate. I think it also means who can speak within the campaigns. I think there have to be rules of evidence as well. Within the campaign sphere. Right now, there is no such thing. I suspect voting would be more prevalent with the ability of people to go straight to the candidates’ positions without the flak and noise and lies and misinformation the free-for-all we have today gives. That is not government control of any message, that is control of the election process to allow the people to make informed voting decisions.

Another FB battle. Lara Logan

Sorry for the formatting... just capturing another FB argument.

Catherine Gile likes an article on The Daily Beast.
Saturday at 5:15pm ·

She is an outstanding woman.
Lara Logan’s War Cry
www.thedailybeast.comThe CBS News and ‘60 Minutes’ correspondent stunned a Chicago audience with her interventionist critique of America’s response to the attacks in Libya. James Warren reports.

Catherine Gile It's refreshing to see someone in the mainstream media brave enough to speak out loudly.

October 13 at 5:17pm · Like

· 

Bob Stone She knows firsthand of the violence as she was attacked personally while in Egypt covering the situation there. She barely survived.

October 13 at 8:56pm · Like · 1

· 

Tom Hail She is an outstanding woman and I've always respected her reporting. I would have to question her impartiality after what happened to her in Egypt. She knows first hand we can't "Shoot ’em, bomb ’em, fuck ’em. They will kill your children." without killing their children. That makes me think she is on a revenge thing for the attack on her. What a mess. There is no solving it almost to anyone's satisfaction.

October 13 at 9:51pm · Like

· 

Bob Stone Tom of course she has a "Revenge thing" going on. I want revenge on the ones that attacked her and also the ones that killed our people in Lybia. It's not REVENGE it is called JUSTICE!!! Someday there will be a time you will have to stand and fight and protect your family and yourself, WILL YOU???

October 14 at 8:07am · Like

· 

Tom Hail And she'll get justice from who? She was attacked in Egypt by the religion of Islam with its medieval regard for women. Not by Al-Qaeda or the Taliban who are just parts of that religion of ignorance. Libya is, with it's Islamic drivers, a power struggle. Is justice being sought by the US? I think so! When has it not? By Obama's administration more so than the last administration who got distracted by Iraq. She advocates a level of conflict that would be global in nature. Against who? WWII was against specific countries and foes. Fighting Islam and its people with force will accomplish nothing, much like the war on drugs. Only education and time will end this and I don't see it happening with stupid shit like this. Will justice be achieved from everyone's point of view? No. Never. Only education and prosperity will end it. Stand and fight? That is what I do every day.

October 14 at 9:33am · Like

· 

Bob Stone FIGHT! For what and for whom. Actions speak louder than words and time is running out.

October 14 at 9:44am · Like

· 

Tom Hail Time is running out? What is the timeline? There is a deadline? We have all the time it takes to either solve the conflicts or destroy ourselves.

October 14 at 9:46am · Like

· 

Bob Stone The timeline runs out for every member of our armed forces that is killed or wounded and the people such as Lara Logan and the little 14 year old Pakistani girl who only wnated an education. Talk to a GOLD star family about timelines. You say you stand and fight everyday, again for what and for whom??

October 14 at 10:03am · Like

· 

Tom Hail Ha! And how many thousands more service men and women will die following Logan's path? Not to mention civilians. By your reasoning, time has already run out. I fight for a prosperous future for my kids, my community, my nation, my species. Prosperity brings justice. Education brings prosperity. Fighting indiscriminately does not. In the short term hunting the Libyan terrorists is necessary but it doesn't bring justice for everyone. Some satisfaction for some, but that doesn't solve anything.

October 14 at 10:28am · Like

· 

Bob Stone By prosparity,do you mean money, wealth,being better than your neighbor, having more than anyone less fortunite? You will fight for yourself only, or will you stand and fight for all people who are not allowed to "Prosper" in the way you GOT YOURS. What if you were not fortunate to be born in America and have the opportunities you had all your life. Is justice being you and letting the less fortunate of the world FIGHT and DIE just wanting to get and education so they too can prosper same as you? Some people have to fight for their lives before they can fight for their prosperity.

October 14 at 10:59am · Like

· 

Tom Hail No, prosperity is living without fear with food and shelter and being able to grow and explore. The point is to understand that the need to FIGHT and DIE isn't the only way to prosperity. Education gets people there. Someday it may be clear to everyone. In the meantime people will continue to fight and die futilely. Logan's way.

October 14 at 11:34am · Like

· 

Bob Stone OK then. Some people have to fight for their lives before they can fight for an education to become prosperious. Freedom isn't free! It's paid for by the ones who have fought and died for it. That is fact not futile attemts.

October 14 at 12:06pm · Like

· 

Bob Stone ATTEMPTS.

October 14 at 12:06pm · Like

· 

Catherine Gile If you don't stand for something you'll fall for anything. Freedom is not free I don't care what university taught you otherwise. There are people out there who hate you because you do not think like they do and btw they far out number you.

October 14 at 1:00pm · Like

· 

Tom Hail Huh? It's pretty easy to say the old trope "freedom isn't free" and not really understand it. The cost of freedom isn't just fighting and dying in defense of it. You also have to fix the causes for the conflicts and military actions can not do that. Did I say not to defend yourself? To not bring to trial those responsible for terror or crime? Have I said anything like that? Have I not spent 30+ years of my life as a defense contractor engineer? I am not a pacifist. Sure they outnumber me, but you know what? This country is doing very little to solve the problems. Mainly because of attitudes of fear like yours. It prevents solutions. Believe it or not, progress is being made, prosperity is increasing around the world over the last 100 years. But I see that fear and irrational thinking can easily undo years of progress.

October 14 at 9:29pm · Like

· 

Catherine Gile My attitude is not fear based it is reality based. What progress are you talking about, the progress of progressive thinking people?

October 15 at 8:57am · Like

· 

Bob Stone HUH???? Defence Contractor Engineer( nice title). If fighting for freedom insn't an answer to keeping free and "prosrerious" what are you doing working for a DEFENCE CONTRACTOR? You must hate your job supporting and supplying the tools of war to this nation. I also put my entire professional life in service to keeping this country safe while working for the Dept. of Defence DARCOM, plus a tour in the U.S. Army in Vietnam seening the reality of what FIGHTING for freedom means . I most likely just don't get it.

October 15 at 9:09am · Like

· 

Tom Hail Fact. The rate of starvation in the world has decreased, military conflict decreased, health improved over the last 100 years. That is progress. If it improves for everyone, the fear and injustice declines. Your attitude does nothing to improve it and can cause it to set back. Here is an old trope " lead, follow, or get out of the way." If we aren't leading the world to improve, they will push us out of the way. We are leading today but barely. That can change easily with isolationist fearful thinking. Bob, you made my description of my job a title. I am the Milstar Flight Engineering Manager at in addition to being the spacecraft Certified Principle Engineer for on-orbit operations. Milstar is a communications satellite supporting all branches of the US DOD and State Dept. We strive for and achieve nearly 100% dependability of that constellation of satellites. I do not hate my job. Not the technical side anyway. I am proud of our support to the troops around the world whatever they are doing. I know what they have been doing. One of the most deadly things to a guy on the ground is to lose communications with his team, leadership, and command. The dependable flow of information also means that fewer innocent people get killed, that unnecessary destruction is not wrecked. I also know the flow of diplomatic information saves lives and helps find solutions. That is the part I can do. What they do with it in the Pentagon and White House can only be affected by my vote. Bush was an idiot, Cheney a crook, they killed thousands of our troops, squandered our resources in Iraq and fucked up Afghanistan. Why you would vote for Romney/Ryan blows my mind, they are the same idiots and not smart enough to be crooks! Fighting for freedom comes in many different forms, not just with military force. Occupy Wallstreet was a freedom fight. The blasphemy rights fights, civil rights, gay rights.... they are all freedom fights. You were part of a very violent fight but not the only fight.

October 15 at 9:00pm · Like

· 

Bob Stone Tom, thank you for your clarification of your job description. Keep um flying. The decisions that are made in the White House affects what happens in this country and now the world over. As far as the flow of dipllomatic information saving lives goes ,One Ambassidor and three others dead and no solution in site!! Another four years of Obama and company is all the reason needed to change leadership . Hope your satellite can find an answer.

Death for damaging a book

Tom from Cognitive Dissonance Podcast had this rant on the InKredulous podcast episode #015.  This is in reference to the little girl in Pakistan who was arrested and could have been tried for damaging a Qur'an, the penalty possibly being death.  Turns out the cleric who accused her may have actually planted the damaged book, so he is arrested and may suffer that fate.  I had to transcribe it...  the audio is better with the feeling he puts into it.

Death for damaging a book.

A book made of paper.

A stupid fucking book.  

All that matters is that there is a place of solemnity and respect in the hearts of people for religion and religiosity and religious leaders and we are all supposed to kowtow to this idea that these religious ideas are valuable and the diversity of spirituality and ya-da ya-da ya-da and meanwhile an eleven year old girl is mobbed and nearly killed because people have taken that shit far too seriously for far too long and we are in two thousand and twelve and we live in a world that condemn people to death for violence against books!  Holy books made of paper!  And because of this non-sense, this utter fucking non-sense, my heart is filled with dirty filthy atheist rage when I look on that mindset.  And I give de-facto respect and adulation for religious ideas and religious leaders a hale and hearty "fuck you".

Awesome rant.

There is some good news... the case seems to be opening up the debate in Pakistan about their blasphemy laws.

Sikh Temple Killer

I don't want to know the killer's name.  I don't want to see his face.  I'm not interested in his motive.  I don't care.

I  Don't  Care

I don't care because who he was and why he did it is irrelevant.  Unimportant.  Meaningless.  He removed his relevancy when he chose to commit this act.  He removed himself from our society and attacked it without provocation.  His actions are probably a symptom of our our society's failure to educate but that doesn't mean he needs to be glorified (even negatively) by the media.  The best way to fight against this form of terrorism is to ignore the killer.  Don't give him relevancy since he has none.

I only care about the innocent people who were murdered and their families and community.  They are relevant.  Who were they?  What did they do?  What will they do now?

Free Speech and Feminism

Speaking Out Against Hate Directed at Women: Matt Dillahunty

"When someone expresses a concern that something is making them feel unwelcome, we need to address it. Period."

"When someone expresses a concern that something is making them feel unwelcome, we need to address it. Period."

"When you hear a complaint that someone has raised, you might think that they’re expressing an irrational, emotional, over-reaction to the situation. You might even be correct – but it doesn’t matter, and here’s why:
You don’t get to decide what someone else finds offensive.
You don’t get to decide what someone else finds uncomfortable, unwelcoming, disconcerting, stressful, harassing, troubling or painful."

I fully support Dillahunty's position here.  How to reconcile this with the value that no one has the right to not be offended?  (I'm just trying to process his words here)

• Women are being excluded from the skeptical/atheist community by some ingrained and outdated attitudes that get expressed.  Mostly there is no intent to exclude but because of a lack of empathy, there is insensitivity to what is offensive, excluding, and threatening.
• The community wants women involved and active.  Any who don't aren't really part of the community.
• If I offend someone in the community who I want to ally with, then I need to understand why.  Not take offense that they took offense.
• This doesn't mean my free speech rights are curtailed or have limits. 
• It doesn't mean women have the right to not be offended.  
• It means I need to re-look at what and how I say things.  Or reassess my membership in the community.
• Is this censorship?  Not if it is an increase in understanding and knowledge.

Obama is destroying America?

I was reading some comments (trolling) at CNSNews (yeah, what was I thinking?  The stupid! It burns!) and kept seeing the comment "Obama is destroying this country".  Really?  How so?  The right has been saying this for years and I finally wanted to try to understand why they think that.  It wasn't hard to find some blogs and articles but the paragraph below from biggovernment.com seems to nail a basis for the fear.

"Liberals think that the U.S. is arrogant and needs to be taken down a notch or three. Liberals think that U.S. history is filled with nothing but evil and any attacks on the U.S. are richly deserved. Liberals think that theU.S. was founded by evil, selfish, hateful white men who were only interested in their own power and didn’t want to empower others. So, liberals want the founder’s memory eviscerated. Liberals think that ourcapitalist system needs to be eliminated. In short, liberals value nothing about the U.S. except its tradition of self-actuation, liberty, and its freedom to re-make itself and they want to use that capacity to erase everything that makes the U.S.A. the U.S.A. Once that is done they want to build a U.S. to their own liking using the very freedoms they used to lay her low."

So, I want to take this apart.   My opinion here as a liberal, not doing any research.

• The US is arrogant and needs to be taken down a notch:  I think the US has made some mistakes and backed some bad people for purely selfish reasons.  We have done and I expect we will do much good in the world and want to continue to do more good with fewer mistakes.
• US history is full of evil:  No, we have done many good things and we do not deserve punishing attacks like 9/11 or whatever they imagine.  We do deserve criticism like any other country.  Because we are the most influential, we are the biggest target and get more than other countries.  Are we perfect?  No.  Can we improve?  Yes.  
• US was founded by evil selfish white men:  It was founded by white men, yes.  Evil?  Not at all!  Jefferson, Pain, Madison, Adams, Franklin and others weren't evil!  No liberal thinks that!  The Constitution has got to be one of the greatest documents ever written.  Certainly greater than any holy book.  The fact that this is a capitalist country is not evil in itself, but it is evident that capitalism requires control by government.  The trick is to balance the control properly.  Don't want to empower others?  If I like the Constitution and don't think corporations are people how is that not wanting to empower others?  This makes no sense.
• Liberals want the founders memory eviscerated:  Wow.  I think he is making stuff up out of his own fears.  Where has a liberal said that?
• Our capitalist system needs to be eliminated:  No.  It needs controls to prevent corporations from abusing the power they have over people.  Unchecked capitalism has no morals.  Again, the power of government is a tricky thing and in this country, we haven't succeeded in getting it right and because of the fears the right has about government, it is hard to get consensus in this divided country.  Capitalism isn't perfect but I know of no better economic system.
• Liberals value nothing about the US:  No, not at all!  What makes the USA the USA?  Is it the fact that health care is a for-profit industry?  That corporations are people?  That education is mediocre? That corporate profit is all important?  That most wealth and wages are concentrated in 1% of the population?  I don't think so.  I think these things need to change because they are not American values and goals and certainly not the America the founders were founding.  I do value highly my rights to opinion, not to have religion, freedom of speech, freedom to pursue my way of life and ability to go where I want.  Fearful right wing policies have done more harm to these freedoms and rights than anything Obama has ever done.

So Obama is destroying America?  If you really believe the above is what liberals think and want, then you would think Obama is doing this.  The things the right thinks he is doing to accomplish this is mostly exaggerated and fear based.  Like growing government.  Santorum said Obama is "expanding federal government" out of control.  Really?  Federal employment has been dropping for years.  The budget has been falling with respect to GDP.  How is government expanding?  Regulations?  Is that it?  Then say it.  But that is what capitalism needs.  Uncontrolled capitalism has no morals.   If this is what Obama  and liberals are against, then so be it.  But uncontrolled capitalism is not America.

There must be a god because I don't know how things work.

There must be a god because I don't know how things work.

That is Stephen Colbert's assessment of Bill O'Reilly's reasoning for why there must be a god.
O'Reilly had this guy on to complain about a billboard in Alabama that said "You KNOW it is a SCAM" with icons for the 5 biggest religions.  He considered this an insult.  Silverman from Atheist.org was trying to explain that these words were their opinion and is not insulting to the people who are members of these religions.  Is it insulting to the religious to say their religion is a scam?  The statement isn't directed at the people themselves, just the institution of religion.  But that doesn't matter I guess.  People invested in their religion are insulted if their religion is criticized.  I  guess they are going to have to learn that all thoughts are open to debate.  There are no privileged ideas immune from criticism.  Not to mention no one has the right not to be offended.

Have they won?

4thamendmentwear:


TSA being able to take x-ray pictures of us, possibly in violation of the 4th amendment, sort of means the terrorists have won? I kind of think so.  I think the TSA has gone a bit too far, not to blame them for it, but I think that is what has happened.  They have been charged with protecting us and they are trying to do the best they can as they were tasked to.  So, the American people have to decide how much risk we are willing to take for our liberties.  Do we stop this and accept the risk that a non-metalic weapon (shoe bomb, underwear bomb) could get through and we may have another disaster?  Or do we accept this as part of life and not an infringement on our rights against unreasonable search?

I for one would accept the risk.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The Digital Cuttlefish: Blasphemy Day Again?

The Digital Cuttlefish: Blasphemy Day Again?:
Calloo, Callay! It's blasphemy day!
When we tug on the beard of the prophet;
When we say to the pope, "you're a miserable dope;
That ex cathedra chair? Just get off it!"
We point out that god is an impotent sod--
If indeed we assume god exists--
Just a vanishing fable, forever unable
To step from mythology's mists.
Here's your chance to express what you think of this mess;
If you haven't before, you should try it!
If you try just one bite, just one blaspheme, you might
Find a welcome new dish for your diet!

I've been celebrating International Blasphemy Rights Day:

• Commenting at Holy War: Should Americans Fear Islam?    about my fear of losing my rights to free speech. "Islam seems to have a component that allows for violence more than Christianity or Judaism, but I am not afraid of that. I am very afraid of losing my ability to comment and criticize Islam or any other religion. President Obama and others have said I have to respect other people's beliefs. No, I do not. This country stands for the right to reject religious belief, that is why many of the founders came to America. That is why religion was separated from government. Fear of Islam is stifling our right to criticize all beliefs and that is unacceptable. The only way to fight religious extremism is through open dialog, debate, criticism, and education. Nobody has the right to not be offended. Do I need to fear the loss of free speech?"
• Wished all my FB friends a happy Blasphemy Rights Day and got some responses. Mostly silence. 
• Wished a few Christian friends at work a happy Blasphemy Rights Day, may have stirred a germ of thought in one of them. 
• Finally I got a cortisone shot in my wrist so I could continue to blaspheme.

Come and get me, al-Awlaki!

Zinnia Jones on the death threat against against cartoonist Molly Norris. Who is going to stand up to al-Awlaki and others with him?

I drew a picture for Lets Draw Mohammed day. It was a nice picture. But since al-Awlaki has forced the cartoonist who kicked off Draw Mohammed day into hiding, trying to silence free speech with fear, I'll have to do something to fight back.  Free speech is not negotiable, nobody has the right to not be offended.

A homosexual transvestite defending American free speech.  Lets see if FOX Noise has anything to say about this.

The Ground Zero Mosque

I've finally formed an opinion on the "Ground Zero Mosque."  At first I was insulted and disgusted.  Then I thought that was hypocritical and was thinking I would have to support their right to build where they wanted, constitutionally there were no grounds to prevent it.  But then I realized it isn't the government trying to stop it, it is the Fearful Right who oppose it.  And making a bunch of noise in the process, causing a lot of division and strife.  Using it for political gain it appears.   Building the "we aren't soft on Islam" credibility for future elections.  So basically I think what I have to do is ignore it.  Ignore the Ranting Right and their "fears" about Islam.  Ignore the blithering of liberals about how the center is a place of peace or whatever.  I doubt that.  Contributing to the noise about it only contributes recruits to radical Islam, gives them ammunition for their cause.  It also gives the Fearful Right power and followers.  Ignoring both gives liberals nothing to say in return, nothing for the Ranting Right to howl about, and nothing for the radicals to recruit with.  Al-Qaeda doesn't want it built, it wants it to continue to tear at our society.  Our best response is to ignore it.  Quiet ridicule of the money wasted on it and those who go inside it is the most it deserves.

Hedges: The Christian Fascists Are Growing Stronger

Shit...

The rise of this Christian fascism, a rise we ignore at our peril, is being fueled by an ineffectual and bankrupt liberal class that has proved to be unable to roll back surging unemployment, protect us from speculators on Wall Street, or save our dispossessed working class from foreclosures, bankruptcies and misery. The liberal class has proved useless in combating the largest environmental disaster in our history, ending costly and futile imperial wars or stopping the corporate plundering of the nation. And the gutlessness of the liberal class has left it, and the values it represents, reviled and hated.

and the Tea Baggers call Obama fascists. I need to spell out fascism and make a side by side comparison of what Tea Baggers represent and what the left represents. I am quite disappointed by what progress Congress and the President have achieved since 2006 when the left has started to take power.

What I Learned from Everybody Draw Muhammad Day

Ms. Watson discovers how ignorant many people are about what free speech really is about. I can reference Black Americans as niggers as my right of free speech. It is rude and hateful and I would never do it meaningfully since I hate what it stands for. But I have the right to use it. The Westboro Baptist Church says hateful things at funerals of soldiers and they disgust me with their beliefs and hate. But I have to defend their right to say what they say. A holocaust denier has the right to deny the holocaust. A flat-earther has the right to deny the earth is round. A creationist has the right to say god created the earth in 7 days. I don't have to agree with any of it and it should not be considered an endorsement of their message on my part if I defend their right to free speech. I have the right to say god does not exist. If you support free speech, you have to support my right to say that. I have the right to draw a picture of what I think Mohammed looks like. If you don't like it, fine, tell me about it. But you can't stop me from drawing it and making it public. Not legally. Not in this country. Today. I worry about tomorrow.

Everyone Draw Mohammed Day

Well, I had to do it also. Made a picture and then a video to play it with. Islam has to grow up if it wants to succeed in this world. The control of thoughts and speech just isn't going to fly. You can't have meaningful discussion if ideas, words, phrases, pictures are off limits due to "sensibilities."

I know... the picture stinks. I have no drawing ability or proper tools. This is a powerpoint special since I am PowerPoint God at work.

Also, my video abilities are pretty feeble as well. :-)

Lars Vilks Attacked at Uppsala University

A quick point. Free speech is NOT negotiable.

NOT. AT. ALL.

Dog Mohammed.

Mohammed as a dog.

Mohammed drawn as a dog.

Mohammed is a dog.

A poor dog with a head that looks like Mohammed.

The dog Mohammed about to be run over by the modern world.

The modern world confuses the old dog Mohammed.

Fuck Mohammed and the asshole in the background of the video chanting while his scared daughter cries. This is child abuse.

Bill Maher slams Islamic extremists

Bill is a kook for some things (like vaccinations) but I like his politics and ridicule for religion.

Free speech is not negotiable.
Separation between church and state is not negotiable.
Women are allowed to work and you can't beat them, not negotiable.

Celebrating life beyond belief

"I may refrain from publishing a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed, but it's because I fear you. Don't for one moment think it's because I respect you."

I wish I could have gone to Australia to this convention, but then I'm sure there will be more in this country since the organizer is American.

Yamani or Your Life

A nasty attempt to coerce Danish newspapers into apologizing for the cartoons of Mohammed.

http://www.slate.com/id/2247256/

"It's not enough that faith claims to be the solution to all problems. It is now demanded that such a preposterous claim be made immune from any inquiry, any critique, and any ridicule."

Free speech is not negotiable as far as I am concerned. I think I'll go find a muslim to argue with on YouTube! :-)