Hillary Clinton on Bill O’ReiLly

30 04 2008

An excerpt from Clinton’s interview on the O’Reilly Factor, courtesy of Seth Grahame-Smith:

Bill: Level with me. Friend to friend here…if Obama’s elected, we can kiss the whole thing goodbye, can’t we? I mean, this guy’s gonna paint the White House gold — he’s gonna make Flava Flav Secretary of State, that wife of his is gonna go on tour with Mary J. Blige, and we’re all gonna be kneeling to a statue of Osama Bin Laden. Am I right?

Hillary: That may be the most racist thing anyone’s ever said.

Bill: No, no — the most racist thing anyone’s ever said is (omitted by Fox News).

Bill: Be honest…have you ever met a bigger d-bag than me?

Hillary: No, I haven’t.

Bill: Kind’ve weird that you agreed to be on my show, knowing what a misogynistic, racist, dim-witted, anti-American hypocrite I am, huh? Boy, you must be desperate.

Hillary: You have no idea.

Follow this link to read the full interview.


Jewing It Up

25 04 2008

There is a lot of pressure when trying to come up with an entry to such a influential blog, but here it goes.  As many of you well know, Mitch is what I lovingly refer to as an “evangelical atheist.”  (He hates that.)  I am a reconstructionst Jew.

First, I would like to give my own view on the difference between Judaism and Christianity.  Christianity focuses on faith.  The litmus test is accepting Jesus.  Everything else is secondary.  The hope is that from that faith, people will become better people, act nicer, be loving, etc.  Judaism, on the other hand, does not spend much time on faith.  Judaism focuses on actions.  The most important holiday (second to Shabbat) is one that asks everyone to review their own actions and  take responsibility for their consequences.  In some of the more orthodox denominations, I fear that this focus on action can sometimes turn into OCD, but in the more liberal synagogues, this can lead to thoughtful and introspective discussions.  In my synagogue, rather than a weekly sermon, there is a discussion.

Mitch struggles with religion, because afterall one has to admit that it is largely based on imaginary friends and historically dubious fairy tales.  Religion at its best can be a structure that encourages people to stretch and examine themselves and their community.  At its worst it can be a cult asking members to surrender personal thought to a corrupt power structure.  But does that mean that there is a problem with religion, or a problem with people?

The comparison I often think of is marriage.  We stand in front of our community and swear to be with one person for the rest of our lives.  We talk about the transformative power of love.  We wear silly outfits.  We spend thousands of dollars and sacrifice dozens of flowers, and all for an institution that we all know may not actually work out.  Love and monogamy can easily be explained as artifacts of evolution, selected for because it helped create community structures that allowed for successful procreation.  Marriage, at is best can be an opportunity for personal growth and joy.  At its worst it can be an oppressive, violent, and destructive force.  Marriage and love have lead to death and violence for eons.  So does that mean that we shun all marriages?  Or do we just try everyday to make our own marriages the best we can, and hope that other people can find their way.

I admit that I may be wrong.  The chances that there is a God may be slim.  But my faith brings order to my life.  It forces me to question my values.  It allows me to discuss my ideas with my family and friends.  And most importantly, it brings me calm.  And if I can have those things, I am willing to risk being wrong.


Kate – New Contributer

24 04 2008

Welcome to Kate, who will be contributing to Fear of Ignorance.  You’ll find that she’s different than me, which is good, because we are not, in fact, the same person.  But I hope her thoughts and opinions will add more dimensions to the ongoing discussions.

Stuff White People Like

22 04 2008

Stuff White People Like is a satirical blog about, you guessed it, stuff white people like.

What is most interesting though is the people who don’t understand satire, as demonstrated by this comment:

Aryan Brother on March 30, 2008 at 8:03 pm
David Duke is proud of everyone on this blog!! We need to celebrate chaining black people, killing off the indians and all other forms of genocide that makes this country great!!! Kudos for this blog!

People are really stupid.


Hat tip to Kate for submitting this gem.

Douglas Bruce – Violent and Bigoted

22 04 2008

Here‘s something that appropriately pisses me off:

A Colorado legislator who was censured for kicking a newspaper photographerin January was booted from the podium today after he called Mexican farmworkers “illiterate peasants.”

Republican Rep. Douglas Bruce’s remark, which drew gasps from the House, came during debate on legislation to help immigrants get temporary federal visas to ease Colorado’s shortage of farmworkers.

“I would like to have the opportunity to state at the microphone why I don’t think we need 5,000 more illiterate peasants in Colorado,” said Bruce, who represents Colorado Springs.

“How dare you!” snapped Democratic Rep. Kathleen Curry, who as debate chairwoman ended Bruce’s privilege to speak.

When not kicking people or making bigoted comments, Bruce enjoys long walks on the beech, candle lit dinners, and Garth Brooks.

Who elected this jackass?  I mean my god . . .

  Here he is, trying to contain his hatred of cameramen.

John Kerry: Don’t Forget Net Neutrality

21 04 2008

John Kerry wrote a good piece for the Huff reminding us that 4/22/08 is the Pennsylvania Democratic primary – but is also the day that the Senate Commerce Committee is holding a hearing on the future of the Internet, most of which has to do with net neutrality.

Look, I understand that there are issues with the amount of information flowing over our broadband infrastructure. But the key is to expand that infrastructure, not arbitrarily restrict traffic based on content. I don’t even really blame the corporations on this; this is a classic case where the government needs to step in and create sensible regulations to set the rules of the road. This doesn’t mean a prescriptive, heavy-handed approach to telling providers who to serve subscribers. But we need to insist on basic fairness and an open, content-neutral approach to how users can access the backbone of our telecommunications system. There have been a lot of excuses about why it’s difficult to do that, and frankly, most of those have turned out not to be accurate. There’s no reason why we can’t do this, and no reason why we shouldn’t.