Saturday, March 13, 2010
Issues Etc Radio Interviews Ken Samples (of Reasons to Believe) About Testing Conspiracy Theories In Light of Truth Claims
If you have never listened to Issues Etc., I recommend them. They have free podcasts on iTunes and also a weekly radio broadcast. Enjoy.
This will undoubtedly be yet another out of the myriad of wins for "our side." But it takes MONEY!
'This letter will serve as a 10-day written notice to quit such use'The city of Gilbert, Ariz., has ordered a group of seven adults to stop gathering for Bible studies in a private home because such meetings are forbidden by the city's zoning codes.
The issue was brought to a head when city officials wrote a letter to a pastor and his wife informing them they had 10 days to quit having the meetings in their private home.
The ban, however, prompted a response from the Alliance Defense Fund, which filed an appeal with the city as the first step in its campaign to overturn a provision it describes as illegal.
"The interpretation and enforcement of the town's code is clearly unconstitutional, " said Daniel Blomberg, a member of the litigation team for ADF. "It bans 200,000 Gilbert residents from meeting in their private homes for organized religious purposes – an activity encouraged in the Bible, practiced for thousands of years, and protected by the First Amendment."
The appeal was filed on behalf of the members, all seven, of the Oasis of Truth Church.
Pastor Joe Sutherland had been told in a letter from code compliance officer Steve Wallace that the people were not allowed to meet in a home for church activities under the city's Land Development Code.
There had been no complaints about the meetings, which had been rotating among members' homes before the officer wrote the letter and ordered the group to "terminate all religious meetings … regardless of their size, nature or frequency," because he noticed signs about the meetings.
The town interprets its law so that "churches within its borders cannot have any home meetings of any size, including Bible studies, three-person church leadership meetings and potluck dinners," ADF said.
A city letter confirmed, "Given that the church is considered to be religious assembly, and given the LDC provisions prohibiting that use on Local streets without Use Permits and prohibiting it in single family residential structures, it follows that the church meetings cannot be held in the home."
"The assembly activities associated with the church, including Bible studies, church leadership meetings and church fellowship activities are not permitted," wrote Mike Milillo, the city's senior planner.
"This ban is defended based upon traffic, parking, and building safety concerns. However, nothing in its zoning code prevents weekly Cub Scouts meetings, Monday Night Football parties with numerous attendees or large business parties from being held on a regular basis in private homes," the ADF said.
UPDATE: Officials in an Arizona city where workers recently told members of a small church they are not allowed to hold Bible studies in a home and then backed up the warning with an official opinion from the city planner – an issue on which WND reported – say they now hope to make changes that will allow such religious activity.
I imported this with the hopes that people will include in their daily diet a weekly stop over at BlackFive, not to mention that for those who so not understand what Tom Hanks did over the past two-weeks... here you go. Tom is simply wrong, and people like Don Imus has every right to call him a "Panty-wearing Liberal Dickweed"!
Posted By McQ
I'm not going to go on a rant about Tom Hanks recent remarks about why we fought the Japanese during WWII, but I do have a comment or two to make. He said:Back in World War II, we viewed the Japanese as ‘yellow, slant-eyed dogs’ that believed in different gods. They were out to kill us because our way of living was different. We, in turn, wanted to annihilate them because they were different. Does that sound familiar, by any chance, to what’s going on today?It is easy to make ignorant statements like that when you decide you need to make a political point. We see it everyday in the three-ring circus we call politics. Bending history to fit your ideological point of view is nothing new and there's certainly nothing so special about Tom Hanks that he's somehow above such nonsense. But he ought to know better, especially after making this new HBO miniseries about the Pacific war.
My dad served in the Army for 36 years and was on Saipan, Leyte and Okinawa. Unlike Hanks, he actually fought the Japanese in some very tough battles - especially the last one. He never talked about it much when I was a kid, although when old friends would stop by at the posts where we were assigned, I'd hear some of the stories by getting myself in an unobserved position in the next room and quietly listening.
I don't remember he or any of his friends ever reflecting the sort of attitude Hanks would have us to believe was prevalent then. Sure, they referred to them as "Japs", but not because they thought it was derrogatory or because they believed them to be "different", but because, well, that's what they were. The story I remember most concerned his time on Saipan. As he told the story you could tell the memory had an effect on him. He told about Japanese families - women, kids - jumping off a cliff to avoid capture ("Suicide cliff" in Saipan). You could tell he thought it was awful and it was clear in the telling that the memory was vivid. They'd brought in Japanese speakers to try to talk the families out of jumping, but the indoctrination and the culture were so strong that they jumped anyway.
If you want to "annihilate" someone, you don't make that sort of effort to save them. If you consider them as "different" in the way Hanks intimates, such things wouldn't shake you as it obviously did my father and those he had served with.
He said that the only Japanese captives they ever took were those who'd been either knocked unconscious before capture or were so badly wounded they couldn't avoid it. Certainly they were "different" in the sense that their honor and culture called upon them to do things American culture would never call on its soldiers to do. But that didn't make them less than human to my father. He certainly wasn't at all pleased with the way the Japanese treated prisoners of war and held a hell of grudge about that. But I got the impression that he considered the Japanese barbaric because of that, not less than human. He held them responsible for that conduct because they were human beings. And after the war, we shocked them with the most humane occupation imaginable and the rebuilding of their nation.
The reason my dad and hundreds of thousands of other Americans fought the Japanese wasn't because they were racially "different" or worshiped a different god. Nor did they do it with the aim of "annihilating" them. It was because the had attacked the United States, were the enemy and that enemy had to be defeated. Period. My father and his comrades would have fought the Germans with the same ferocity they fought the Japanese had they been in Europe.
Tom Hanks is a fine actor and an excellent film maker. But he should stick with what he knows. Deciding how those fighting the Japanese thought of their enemy isn't one of them. Making a film about them doesn't suddenly make him some sort of expert in that regard either. And, pretending to know what motivates those of us who fight our enemies of today is just as mistaken.
A sculptor in San Francisco makes urinals in the likeness of former President George W. Bush, and two American media outlets actually reported it last week. This disgusting story appears to have first surfaced Monday on CBS's San Francisco affiliate KPIX. The following day, CBS News felt it necessary to share this vulgar farce with Americans from coast to coast by publishing the segment at its website
Friday, March 12, 2010
Take note that some of these links are broken. Just shorten the link to its main website URL to explore. The following mainly comes from 9/11 Myths... Reading Between the Lies:
- Misquote Example #1
The cabal of war fanatics advising the White House secretly planned a “transformation” of defense policy years ago, calling for war against Iraq and huge increases in military spending. A “catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor”—was seen as necessary to bring this about.
- Misquote Example #2
The victims of the 9/11 attacks have been disaster for Muslims because 19 Arabs were named as hijackers of the planes, but they've been a dream come true for the PNAC 'think-tank' whose 2000 Statement of Principles stated a "catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor" would advance their policies, i.e. justify wars and "regime changes".
- Misquote Example #2
There is circumstantial evidence that some part of the US administration was involved in the attack. It is certain that there was a strong desire on the part of some members for a “catalyzing event”, like Pearl Harbor,3 in order to provide the impetus for the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq; however desire is not proof of complicity.
9/11 - Evidence Suggests Complicity: Inferences from Actions
Frank Legge, Journal of 9/11 Studies
These examples should suffice. So how does one respond to this tired old canard? with the real quote (the truth shall set you free).
...(read more)...So the first quote tells us it’s about war in Iraq and huge increases in military spending, the second says it’s about justifying war and regime changes, the third and fourth link the quote to war on Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems there’s broad agreement, so can they all be wrong? Let’s see.
First, the actual full quote is this."Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor".The odd word here seems to be "transformation". What do they mean? Let's look back to the beginning of the same chapter."To preserve American military preeminence in the coming decades, the Department of Defense must move more aggressively to experiment with new technologies and operational concepts, and seek to exploit the emerging revolution in military affairs. Information technologies,in particular, are becoming more prevalent and significant components of modern military systems. These information technologies are having the same kind of transforming effects on military affairs as they are having in the larger world. The effects of this military transformation will have profound implications for how wars are fought, what kinds of weapons will dominate the battlefield and, inevitably, which nations enjoy military preeminence".So "transformation" refers to the process of introducing more information technologies into the military. What does 9/11 have to do with that? Nothing at all. In fact, the attacks demonstrated that one of the PNAC's pet schemes, a global missile shield, is entirely useless when planes can become bombs.
Can you see why many get frustrated when talking to 9/11 "truthers"? They use the title without actually using the meaning... truth.
...(read more)...The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld two religious freedom cases in San Francisco.
The court ruled on Thursday that the phrases "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance and "In God We Trust" on coins and currency are both constitutional. The legal challenges had been brought by professed atheist Michael Newdow, who had claimed the references to God disrespect his atheist beliefs.
An attorney with the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) summarizes the court's ruling. "The court saw that both the Pledge of Allegiance and the National Motto -- "In God We Trust" -- do not violate the Establishment Clause, but rather they acknowledge the initial premises of our founding, which is that God gives each citizen inalienable rights," explains Kevin Snyder.
The rights of atheists and agnostics are included in those inalienable rights, Snyder notes, but not at the expense of people of faith. The court stressed that there is no violation of the so-called "separation of church and state," and Snyder reports that cases such as this continue to crop up periodically because "a segment of our society, particularly in law schools...wants to remove all semblances of religion from public life."
BEHAR: Well, there`s a difference between being trusting and being naive.
MOORE: Well, that`s, I`m just saying that`s the good side of the coin. The bad side of the coin is we have created a society of ignorant and illiterate people. Our schools have done this, our media has helped to contribute to this. We have 40 million adults in this country right now who are functional illiterates. That means they can`t read and write above a fourth grade-level. When you have a society that dumb, so to speak, that ignorant-
BEHAR: Well, ignorant, yeah.
MOORE: -that, well, dumb, I mean, dumb in the sense of-
MOORE: -well, they`ve been kept that way.
MOORE: I mean, it`s an enforced dumbness by a system that doesn`t value education that puts it low on the list of priorities. And I was just watching CNN here earlier today, and they had this guy on talking about this in terms of how the college tuition has gone up and kids, kids who come from the poor and working class, they were told to work hard in school all of these years and the ones who did, now they can`t afford to go to college.
Michael Moore comes to mind first off. All his books are full of misstatements and misquotes put forward as truths. This is a great example he is still parroting:
According to Moore in his book Stupid White Men, “the entire nation is composed of morons”. He writes: “There are forty-four million Americans who cannot read and write above a fourth-grade level – in other words, who are functional illiterates. How did I learn this statistic? Well, I read it."
Moore should have read better. His endnotes attribute the figure to the U.S. Deptpartment of Education’s national Adult Literacy Survey. Yes, that survey found that 40-44 million Americans performed in the lowest level of literacy. But the survey doesn’t end there. In the next paragraph, it goes on to note that 25% of the people who scored in the lowest literacy category were immigrants who have learned little or no English. And in classic Moore fashion, he also fails to disclose that nearly 19% of the group he includes in the uneducated masses are actually people who have “visual difficulties that affect their ability to read print.”
Surprise: Functional English literacy is not high among the blind, and people learning to speak English may be highly educated, but only able to read their native language. This hardly makes the United States a nation that, writes Moore, “GOES OUT OF ITS WAY TO REMAIN IGNORANT AND STUPID” (capitalization in the original).
Just Two More Examples
Just Two More Examples
- Page 67 of Dude Where’s My Country: Moore claims that, in building the famous Maginot Line, France "built the bunkers facing the wrong way and Germans were deep into France before you could say 'garcon, stinky cheese, please!'" In fact, the Maginot Line was built with many of the heavy weapons facing back and to the flanks of the line, to allow the bunkers to support each other, and the German invasion avoided it entirely, coming through the Ardennes north of the line.
- Page 69 of Dude Where’s My Country: Moore misrepresents US contributions to the United Nations oil-for-food program in Iraq as "trade." He writes, "There were claims that the French were only opposing war to get economic benefits out of Saddam Hussein's Iraq. In fact, it was the Americans who were making a killing. In 2001, the U.S. was Iraq's leading trading partner, consuming more than 40 percent of Iraq's oil exports. That's $6 billion in trade with the Iraqi dictator." Most of the money, however, was used to purchase food and other UN-approved humanitarian aid; the rest went to pay war reparations and administrative fees for the program. (For details on the program, see this report to Congress.)
Some ~ Michael Moore ~ Links
Some ~ Michael Moore ~ Links
- 59 Deceits in Fahrenheit 9/11
- Truth About Bowling for Columbine
- Deconstructing Michael Moore
- Moore Watch
- Bowling for Truth
- Moore Exposed
- One Moore Stupid White Man (Spinsanity)
- Unmoored from Reality (Wall Street Journal)
- More Lies from Moore (NY Daly News)
- “Shooting” Michael Moore (New Film)
- Unfahrenheit 9/11 (Slate)
- Quacking for Columbine
- Michael Moore is Fat and Wrong
As authorities tell it, Colleen R. LaRose wasn’t joking on June 20, 2008, when she posted a comment on YouTube using the screen name “JihadJane” and saying that she was “desperate to do something somehow to help” suffering Muslims.
Instead, LaRose, 46, formerly of Pennsburg, Montgomery County, and a U.S. citizen, was about to embark on a plot to recruit terrorists and commit murder in Sweden, according to federal prosecutors.
Authorities unsealed an indictment yesterday alleging that LaRose and five unindicted co-conspirators recruited men and women over the Internet to be terrorists in South Asia and Europe and to finance terrorism.
A Department of Justice spokesman wouldn’t confirm that the case was related to a group of people arrested in Ireland earlier yesterday on suspicion of plotting against a Swedish cartoonist who depicted the prophet Muhammad with the body of a dog.
But a U.S. official speaking on condition of anonymity said LaRose had targeted the Swedish cartoonist and had online discussions about her plans with at least one of the suspects in Ireland.
LaRose, also known as “Fatima LaRose,” was arrested in Philadelphia by the FBI on Oct. 15, and appeared before a federal magistrate the next day and agreed to pretrial detention.
She did not enter a plea, but U.S. Attorney Michael Levy said he expects LaRose to be arraigned soon.
LaRose has been charged with conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists, conspiracy to kill in a foreign country, making false statements to the FBI and attempted identity theft.
If convicted of all charges, LaRose could potentially face life behind bars, authorities said....
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Albert Mohler Sermonizes a Major Emergent Error - "Why Do They Hate It So? The Doctrine of Penal Substitution" (77-minutes)
This sermon is with thanks to Fighting for the Faith. I highly suggest you go to the link in the "widget" below and if possible support this ministry. If you are unfamiliar with Pirate Christian Radio... this would be a good starting point.
Health-Care, Democratic Socialists, and Single-Payer Goals ("I would like to sign the insurance companies out of existence with my pen")
Democracy is indispensable to socialism. V.I. Lenin
Democracy is the road to socialism. Karl Marx
The goal of socialism is communism. V.I. Lenin
Democracy is the road to socialism. Karl Marx
The goal of socialism is communism. V.I. Lenin
“The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government…”
I told my son to hold off on a school project until this apparent discrepancy is resolved. I am telling him that we do not have a democracy as his homework demands him write about, but a republic, and I am basing this on the Constitution and the authors/signers/early prognosticators of understanding of it (commonly referred to as “original intent”).
Our Founders had an opportunity to establish a democracy in America but chose not to. In fact, they made very clear that we were not – and never to become – a democracy:
- James Madison (fourth President, co-author of the Federalist Papers and the “father” of the Constitution) – “Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have, in general; been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”
- John Adams (American political philosopher, first vice President and second President) – “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”
- Benjamin Rush (signer of the Declaration) – “A simple democracy… is one of the greatest of evils.”
- Fisher Ames (American political thinker and leader of the federalists [he entered Harvard at twelve and graduated by sixteen], author of the House language for the First Amendment) – “A democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction. These will provide an eruption and carry desolation in their way.´ / “The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness [excessive license] which the ambitious call, and the ignorant believe to be liberty.”
- Governor Morris (signer and penman of the Constitution) – “We have seen the tumult of democracy terminate… as [it has] everywhere terminated, in despotism…. Democracy! Savage and wild. Thou who wouldst bring down the virtous and wise to thy level of folly and guilt.”
- John Quincy Adams (sixth President, son of John Adams [see above]) – “The experience of all former ages had shown that of all human governments, democracy was the most unstable, fluctuating and short-lived.”
- Noah Webster (American educator and journalist as well as publishing the first dictionary) – “In democracy… there are commonly tumults and disorders….. therefore a pure democracy is generally a very bad government. It is often the most tyrannical government on earth.”
- John Witherspoon (signer of the Declaration of Independence) – “Pure democracy cannot subsist long nor be carried far into the departments of state – it is very subject to caprice and the madness of popular rage.”
- Zephaniah Swift (author of America’s first legal text) – “It may generally be remarked that the more a government [or state] resembles a pure democracy the more they abound with disorder and confusion.”
Bernie Sanders on Reconcilliation:
Make sure you listen to this whole screed. Socialist Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders lays out how the Left plans to use reconciliation not just to achieve the government health care takeover, but several other big-ticket, big government items including child care and education.
I’ve transcribed a key passage:
(1:01) Host: To do all those things by majority rule in the Senate with 51 votes, do they have to be broken out as individual pieces of legislation?
Sanders: No, no, no, no. I think, to the best of my knowledge, you have lawyers working on this, you can put it all in one reconciliation bill, which at this point can only cover health care and education.
Host: Right. Fascinating.
Sanders: Now, the other thing is, once you do that, you can go through another reconciliation package, and so long as instructions are given to the relevant committees, you can include a lot more. So the next time around, after you pass health care and education, you could do, for example, creating millions of jobs, transforming our energy system…you can start investing in jobs in rebuilding our infrastructure…et cetera, et cetera.
Obama comforts House liberals: Don’t worry, this bill is just the beginning of what we’ll do with health care
Don’t look surprised. The left has been remarkably candid about this over the past year or two. Again and again and again and again and again and again and again they’ve warned people that the dream is bigger than universal coverage or even the public option.
Memo from The One to progressives: Keep the dream alive.Obama argued to the group of progressive members that his health care reform bill should be looked at as the foundation of reform, that can be built on in the future. He asked them to help gather votes for the final health care battle and promised that as soon as the bill was signed into law, he’d continue to push to make it stronger. But in a matter of weeks, he stressed, he could sign into law legislation that would lead to 31 million new people being insured, including the woman who wrote him…“He just said that the public option, something that he has supported along the way, is not something that we can pass. And he emphasized the fact that the decision now is between doing as much as we can do and doing nothing. That’s it. He thought the whole foundation thing — that this is definitely something we could be proud of, something we could build off [of],” said Schakowsky.Woolsey told Obama that she’d be introducing legislation to create a public option and Obama said he encouraged the effort, according to Schakowsky.Here’s an especially fun passage. Remember, Obama was self-described proponent of single-payer as recently as 2003 before deciding that it’s simply too impractical to pass. For now.None of the members, including Kucinich, indicated that they would vote any differently this time around. “I think [Kucinich] left the meeting leaving the impression with the president that he’s a no-go,” said Schakowsky.But, said one attendee, Obama pointed Kucinich toward single-payer language that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) was able to get into the bill. Kucinich fought for an amendment that would allow states to adopt single-payer systems without getting sued by insurance companies. Obama told Kucinich that Sanders’s measure was similar but doesn’t kick in for several years. “He definitely wrote it down,” said one member of Kucinich, suggesting that he’d look into it.I can’t decide between thinking that he’s saying this earnestly — if so, given the fallout in November, he’s going to be waiting awhile for ye olde public option — or just telling these idiots what they need to hear to vote for the much-despised Reid bill. This would, in theory, give him some cover even if he goes ahead and stabs them in the back by dropping reconciliation. After all, if this is just the first small step towards socialized medicine, who cares how small that step is? Pass anything. Just get a foot in the door so that you can swing it open in a decade or two when the wheel turns towards progressivism again.
Exit question: Think anyone in the White House press corps will lean on Gibbs tomorrow to explain what, specifically, this bill is a “foundation” for?
Are you getting it yet? This is not a giant conspiracy but like-mided statists getting together to try to make their worldview viable. Of course this worldview never works and always becomes "one of the greatest evils" (Benjamin Rush), but that has never stopped these people before.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
(Red Eye Added) Great Question About Massa from HotAir About "Junk" -- per Washington Times & Glenn Beck, Text Messages
Mr. Beck homed in. "Are there Tiger Woods phone calls that are going to happen, or text messages?"
In the show's most newsworthy moment, Mr. Massa said frankly of his interactions with staff members: "I'm sure there are text messages because we bantered back and forth all the time."
Does climbing into a guy’s bunk and tickling his junk while he fends you off count as a “tickle-fight”?(HotAir, "New details emerge: How Massa tried to, er, 'snorkel' his Navy shipmates")
According to Peter Clarke, a Navy shipmate, Massa was notorious for making unwanted advances toward subordinates. He tells the story of his friend Stuart Borsch, with whom Massa shared a hotel room while on leave during the first Gulf War. “Stuart’s at the edge of the bed,” Clarke says Borsch told him at the time, “and [Massa] starts massaging him. Massa said, ‘You’ll have to get one of my special massages.’ He called them ‘Massa Massages.’” Ron Moss, a Navy shipmate and Borsch’s roommate, confirmed that Borsch told him this story at the time.Borsch, now a history professor at Assumption College in Worcester, Massachusetts, didn’t addresss that specific incident, but did confirm to me in an email that he was groped by Massa: “In 1990, aboard the U.S.S. Jouett, I was awakened when a senior officer, Lt. Commander Massa, seemed to be groping me. (I was a lieutenant at the time.) I believe he may have been drinking. I shouted at him and he left. I mentioned the incident to several other officers. I did not officially report it.”Clarke says that Massa’s roommate, Tom Maxfield was also assaulted. “Tom lived on upper bunk,” Clarke say. “When you’re on ship, you’re almost exhausted 24-7. So a lot of times you sleep with your uniform on. Tom and Massa shared a stateroom together. Massa climbed up on the top of his bunk, which is hard to do–you never crawl up on somebody else’s bunk. He wakes up to Massa undoing his pants trying to snorkel him.” Ron Moss also confirmed hearing this story from Maxfield. Maxfield did [not] return calls and messages left for him–I’ll update if he does.Why waste a post on this when, thanks to yesterday’s fiasco, this guy’s credibility is already destroyed? Three reasons. One: The snorkeling euphemism deserves a link, damn it. Two: I linked that Bob Lonsberry piece reciting the allegations against Massa during his naval career several times and figured you guys might want to compare and contrast. Lonsberry’s account is strikingly similar to what the Atlantic heard — except that the Atlantic notably now has people willing to go on the record. And three: To no one’s surprise, because of Massa’s resignation, the less-than-worthless House ethics committee has ended its investigation into his alleged misconduct. Barring a sexual harassment lawsuit by one of his victims, the only justice this guy’s going to get is from reporters. The Atlantic is the beginning but probably not the end.
TUES, MARCH 9, 2010
FOXNEWS O'REILLY 3,499,000
FOXNEWS BECK 3,406,000
FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,901,000
FOXNEWS BAIER 2,686,000
FOXNEWS SHEP 2,243,000
FOXNEWS GRETA 2,027,000
MSNBC OLBERMANN 1,004,000
MSNBC MADDOW 994,000
CNNHN BEHAR 785,000
CNN KING 699,000
CNN COOPER 582,000
This woman almost got 86'ed!
The copycat who stopped live tweeting her abortion.
Here are a few of the posted Tweets in Jill Stanek's column:We learned together Jackson was grossly uninformed about the medical abortion process.
For nine days Jackson tweeted about recurring headaches, nausea, vomiting, bleeding, pelvic pain, backaches, and cramping so bothersome she went through an entire bottle of 20 Tylenol with codeine in a week and had to ask for more (which she was apparently denied, tweeting Feb. 27, "This is definitely the most pain so far. It's distracting & makes me unhappy… Ibuprofin is a joke, ya'll").
Maybe coming out of codeine la-la land caused Jackson to realize tweeting the painful details of her abortion did not bode well for her RU-486 promotion campaign, because it was on that day she stopped, also noting with aggravation that I was blogging what she wrote.
Meanwhile, a copycat named Next Thursday, inspired by Jackson, decided to begin tweeting her RU-486 abortion on Feb. 25.
Next Thursday wanted to abort because "[t]his pregnancy was unexpected. We cannot afford another child, we do not have room for another child, and my body is not ready to experience pregnancy again so soon after our last child."
Next Thursday had three children, the youngest being 9 months old and still breast-feeding.
(I read "breast-feeding" and winced. Among many things for which RU-486, aka mifepristone, has not been tested is breast-feeding. The labeling indicates, "It is not known whether mifepristone is excreted in human milk. Many hormones with a similar chemical structure, however, are excreted in breast milk. Since the effects of mifepristone on infants are unknown, breast-feeding women should consult with their health care provider to decide if they should discard their breast milk for a few days following administration of the medications." Was Next Thursday told that?) ...
This is where she quit Tweeting. Jill hopes she is all right.
Yesterday I was at my local COSTCO buying a large bag of Purina Dog chow for my loyal pet, Biscuit the Wonder Dog, and was in the checkout line when a woman behind me asked if I had a dog. What did she think I had, an elephant? So since I'm retired and have little to do, on impulse I told her that:
"No, I didn't have a dog, I was starting the Purina Diet again. I added that I probably shouldn't, because I ended up in the hospital last time, but that I'd lost 50 pounds before I awakened in an intensive care ward with tubes coming out of most of my orifices and IVs in both arms."
I told her that "it was essentially a perfect diet and that the way that it works is to load your pants pockets with Purina nuggets and simply eat one or two every time you feel hungry. The food is nutritionally complete so it works well and I was going to try it again." (I have to mention here that practically everyone in line was now enthralled with my story.)
Horrified, she asked "if I ended up in intensive care because the dog food poisoned me.
I told her "No, I stepped off a curb to sniff an Irish Setter's ass and a car hit us both."
I thought the guy behind her was going to have a heart attack he was laughing so hard. Better watch what you ask retired people. They have all the time in the world to think of crazy things to say.