Pope And Paris Having A Baby

Before any Catholics get their panties all up in a wad, this is a joke so lighten up.

Check out The Spoof!! It's hilarious!!

Fox News Attacks Katie Couric

Fox News has attacked Katie Couric for going to Iraq to report on the situation there.

Fox News Bashes ‘Desperate,’ ‘Ambitious,’ ‘Single Mother’ Katie Couric For Traveling To Iraq

In two separate segments yesterday, Fox News attacked CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric for reporting from the ground in Iraq, calling it “a desperate move” and asking if it was a “ratings ploy or legitimate journalism.”

On Your World With Neil Cavuto, guest host Dagen McDowell featured Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America, who characterized Couric’s trip as “a clear act of desperation” by a single mother whose “priorities [are] so determined by her ambition rather than her children’s welfare.” Crouse pointedly accused Couric of being a bad mother for going to cover Iraq:

I would say the same thing if this were a man journalist going out there, a male anchor, because when you look at the choice she’s making, she’s saying my ratings are more important than my children. That’s the bottom line.“

Later in the afternoon, The Big Story With John Gibson hosted New York Post columnist Linda Stasi, who called Couric’s trip “a desperate move” to gain “some sort of credibility.” “You know and I know that she doesn’t have to be there for the report,” said Stasi.

During the Your World segment, law professor Susan Estrich came to the CBS anchor’s defense, noting that Couric is “a journalist” and that the war in Iraq is “a really important story” that hasn’t been covered “with the intensity it” deserves:

She’s a journalist. This is a war. It’s a really important story. It’s not like she’s going to camp out at Paris Hilton’s house. I mean the press has been criticized for not covering Iraq with the intensity it should. And really, that’s her decision.

In fact, Fox News is one of the biggest culprits of “not covering Iraq with the intensity it should.” As a recent Project for Excellence in Journalism study showed, the network consistently covers the war in Iraq roughly half as much as its rivals.

Fox has attacked journalists for covering Iraq too much. In February, John Gibson accused CNN’s Anderson Cooper of “news-guy snobbery” for his complaints that the death of Anna Nicole Smith was saturating the news when “there’s a war on.” Fox’s Bill O’Reilly has claimed “CNN and MSNBC are actually helping the terrorists by reporting” often on Iraq.

Hmm, Fox would go after the journalist if it were a man? Really? Did Fox News attack David Bloom (deceased journalist from NBC)? No!! Did Fox News attack Bob Woodruff (critically injured journalist from ABC)? No!! Did Fox News attack their very own Geraldo Rivera? No!!

Of course Fox News never attacked them. They wouldn't have the balls to attack a dead man, a man who almost died, and one of their own. But they certainly have no problem attacking a woman. You see, she's a bad mother for making the decision to cover Iraq from Iraq. I'm sure she didn't make this decision lightly. I'm sure she consulted her children before making this decision. It doesn't make her a bad mother. It doesn't make her desperate for the spotlight. She's doing her job, just as all the other journalists have done or are still doing.

Only a coward would dare to attack her from the comfort and safety of the news studio. Clearly the bitches doing the attacking don't have the cojones (yes that is the proper spelling of the word) to report from Iraq themselves. They may break a nail or get their hair messed up. Wait!! They might actually see what's really going on in Iraq and have to report it instead of lying their asses off on a daily basis!!

Catholic Church Goes After Sexual Abuse Victim

The Catholic Church has officially stooped to an all-time new low. The Church in Sacramento is suing a sexual abuse victim.

Sacramento Church Sues Alleged Sex Abuse Victim

Says Man Missed His Opportunity

(CBS13) SACRAMENTO In a move critics call bizarre and unprecedented, the Catholic Church in Sacramento is turning the tables. The church is suing a man who says he was sexually abused by a priest when he was a child.

The Sacramento Roman Catholic Diocese, headed by Bishop William Wiegand is suing Hector Rubio. Rubio says when he was a child he was sexually abused by father Gerardo Beltran who was once a priest in the Sacramento diocese. Advocates for those abused by priests are outraged.

“It's wrong for the bishop to play legal hardball. It's especially wrong for a bishop to sue a child sex abuse victim,” says Nancy Sloan with S.N.A.P.

Rubio, who now lives in Texas, says Beltran sexually abused him more than twenty years ago, when both of them lived in California. In recent months, Rubio has filed and then withdrawn civil lawsuits against the Sacramento diocese.

Bishop Wiegand and the diocese say Rubio has no right to sue them and that he has missed his opportunity. On Monday a diocese attorney, Andrea Miller told CBS13, "we believe this is barred by the statute of limitations."

Leaders of a group called S.N.A.P., which stands for ‘survivor’s network of those abused by priests’, say bishop Wiegand is trying to intimidate victims of priests.

“The bishops money could be used for something better than suing a child victim and it could be spent better trying to get the perpetrator back to Sacramento to face justice,” says Joey Piscitelli with S.N.A.P.

The perpetrator in the case is Gerardo Beltran, a priest who fled Sacramento in the early 1990's after a warrant was issued for his arrest for molesting children. Less than a year ago CBS13 went to Iqualita, Mexico, a small village where Beltran has been hiding from U.S. authorities and saying mass for years. For nearly 15 years Sacramento County prosecutors and federal authorities have not been able to bring Beltran back to Sacramento to face justice.

CBS13 requested interviews with Bishop William Wiegand and the diocese lead attorney in the case James Sweeney. We never heard back from either of them. In fact, CBS13 first requested an interview with bishop Wiegand way back in January after returning from Igualita, where Gerardo Beltran is reportedly hiding. He said “no” then, and Bishop Wiegand continues to refuse to talk to CBS13 about Beltran.

Missed his opportunity? Missed his opportunity for what? To sue the Catholic Church, the diocese, the Bishop, the priest? The truth of the matter is, he missed an opportunity at a normal childhood. He missed an opportunity at a life free from abuse. He missed an opportunity to be able to hold his rapist accountable for his crimes. He missed all of that because of the Catholic Church. How dare the Catholic Church hide behind the "statute of limitations" excuse to justify their disgusting, reprehensible treatment of this man who did absolutely nothing wrong, and has only gotten abuse in return.

Like it has been suggested, the Church could use the money spent on this ridiculous lawsuit to bring this man's rapist back to the United States to face punishment for what he did. However, I won't be holding my breath on that one. I'll end up dying because it will be a cold day in hell before the Catholic Church would ever dare to lift a finger to help the victims of sexual abuse at the hands of priests. And by helping the victims, I don't mean throwing cash in their faces to keep their mouths shut!!

As if Catholics aren't ridiculous enough, I heard a lie being spewed by a Catholic today about the whole Catholic Church sex abuse scandal. It's not like I haven't heard this lie a million times before from Catholics. But, the fact that the lie is still being touted shows how truly ignorant some people still are. This person said, "The priests who were involved in the sexual abuse scandals were homosexual, or had homosexual tendencies."

In other words, they were gay so what did you expect? After all, don't you know that gay people like to prey on innocent children? Don't you know that all gay people rape innocent children? Don't you know that sex is the only thing that gay people think about? I mean, they were all gay. How else can you explain the abuse?

One of the problems with that argument is that some of the children who were raped by priests were FEMALE!! Thus, the priests were NOT HOMOSEXUAL!! Oh, but I forgot. They must have had homosexual tendencies. Yes, that's right!! That's the story we'll go with!!

It's absolutely asinine that some Catholics would rather essentially justify the coverup and the abuse itself by claiming that the abusers were all gay instead of facing up to the fact that the Catholic Church stood by and let it happen. They would rather make shit up and blame it on being gay instead of acknowledging the TRUTH. Who is being ignorant now?

"I'm Not Gay" Says Sen. Larry Craig

Senator Larry Craig just got done holding a news conference. His defense for his crime is apparently "I'm not gay"!!

First of all, nobody gives a damn whether or not he is gay. Or, at least I don't!! The point is, he committed a crime. He basically attempted to solicit a police officer for sex. That's a crime!! Period!!

Now he claims that he's hired an attorney to review the matter. What does he think is going to happen here? Does he honestly think that he can just go back and have the whole thing reversed? He CHOSE to plead guilty to disorderly conduct. He was sentenced. He's paid his fine. He can't get a do-over because now he says he's not guilty...er...um...gay!! And honestly, are we really supposed to believe that a U.S. Senator wouldn't consult a lawyer after being charged with a crime? What kind of fools does he take us for? Nobody is that stupid, and if he is that stupid it's his own damn fault.

In case you don't have a clue what I'm talking about, check out the story!! Here's another story about the same thing.

If you read in the second story, as part of his plea he had to state that he wouldn't plead innocence for the crime in which he was pleading guilty to. By coming out and saying that he's innocent, he's violated the terms of the plea.

Insanity Defense For Nowak!!

I knew this was coming from the moment that Lisa Nowak was arrested.

Ex-Astronaut Planning Insanity Defense

ORLANDO, Fla. (Aug. 28) - Former astronaut Lisa Nowak is pursuing an insanity defense on charges that she assaulted and tried to kidnap a romantic rival, according to a document released Tuesday.

Defense attorney Donald Lykkebak wrote that Nowak suffered from major depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, insomnia and "brief psychotic disorder with marked stressors." He noted that the already-petite Nowak had recently lost 15 percent of her body weight.

"This notice does not challenge competence to stand trial, but only raises insanity at the time of the offense," he wrote.

Nowak, 44, was charged with attempted kidnapping, battery and burglary with assault after allegedly driving nearly 1,000 miles from Houston to Orlando to confront Colleen Shipman, the girlfriend of a former space shuttle pilot Nowak had been involved with. She was dismissed from the astronaut corps a month after her arrest.

Nowak has pleaded not guilty, and her trial is set for September.

Circuit Court Judge Marc L. Lubet unsealed the notice of intent to rely on the insanity defense on Tuesday. Florida law requires such a notice before trial to let prosecutors prepare.

So, she's innocent and did nothing wrong. But she also has "major depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, insomnia and "brief psychotic disorder with marked stressors",and thus she's innocent of the crimes she committed because she was insane at the time? Which is it? She's innocent and did nothing wrong, or she committed these crimes but should be let off because she was insane? She can't have it both ways, so she better pick a story!!

Forgive me for not having an ounce of sympathy for this lunatic!! Clearly she's insane, but not in the legal sense of the word!! The insanity defense is a cop out in my opinion. She knew what she was doing. If you need any proof of that, look at how planned out it was. It was planned, right down to the diapers. Literally!!

I hope that she's found guilty, and that she rots in prison for a long time. She deserves it!!

A Challenge!!

I warned all "Anonymous" bloggers that if you were going to be ignorant, your shit wouldn't be posted on my blog. Having said that, I will respond to an "anonymous" comment because it requires a response.

You DARED me to explain what I meant by an American mentality. It's simple really. It's called IGNORANCE!! Whenever someone dares to speak out against something or someone in this country, the response is always the same. It's always, "Well, if you don't like it maybe you should leave this country and go somewhere else." My personal favorite is, "Only in America are you free to speak your mind. You would never get away with it anywhere else, especially not in a Muslim country." If you speak out, you're being "ruthless" towards America. If you speak out, you're being ungrateful. If you speak out, you're a traitor. If you speak out, you're the enemy.

The problem with some people in this country is that they were raised to think that they are superior to others. They're afraid of that which they DO NOT UNDERSTAND, so instead they HATE!! They don't want to learn about other countries, cultures, and religions. They live in this fantasy world where everyone is the same, and being different is wrong.

You are the perfect example of someone with an American mentality. You know absolutely nothing about this Muslim woman, yet you're so filled with hate for her. In one breath you profess to be tolerant of people and their faith. In the next breath, you call her an ungrateful pig and a cancer because she dared to speak out against an ignorant asshole. Your stereotypical remarks about her and her family are pathetic!! You say that you don't hate all Muslims. Yet, you feel the need to trash their religion. Clearly, you know nothing about Islam. You know nothing about Muslims. And, your attitude about Muslims is very bigoted!!

I would comment further, but your ignorance and rhetoric is beyond obnoxious!!

I Don't Give A Damn!!

When I was reading this story, I got a bit pissed off.

The part that pissed me off the most was the following:

Attorney Harland Braun, who has represented celebrities on drug- and alcohol-related cases, said the public doesn't consider how much the stars have to lose.

If they are deemed uninsurable, they will lose acting roles. "If the public gets tired of them, it could really hurt their careers," he said.

Braun said he represented a high-profile actor with drug problems who could no longer get top roles because of insurance problems.

"He's now reduced to doing small parts and productions overseas," Braun said.

He also recently represented actor Lane Garrison, who pleaded guilty to vehicular manslaughter and drunken driving in a crash that killed a teenage passenger, a case that highlights the possible consequences of drunken driving.

Garrison faces a maximum sentence of six years, eight months in prison. Los Angeles County prosecutors have asked for four years and eight months.

Why should the public consider what the stars have to lose? Quite frankly, I don't give a damn what they have to lose. They all should have thought about that before they decided to get behind a wheel and drive while drunk or high. It's their own fucking fault if they lose their careers, not mine!!

And for the record, the public is tired of them. We're tired of them getting off with a slap on the wrist while EVERYONE else gets thrown behind bars for the same crimes. How dare this jackass imply that the public is somehow to blame if their careers get hurt!! They have hurt their careers all on their own by doing what they did. It's their own damn fault if they can't get hired. But we're supposed to take pity on them? I don't think so!!

On another note, ask me if I have any sympathy for Lane Garrison. Go ahead!! Ask me!! The answer is simple. HELL NO!! He chose to get behind the wheel of a car while intoxicated. He chose to drive with passengers in that car. When one of those passengers was killed, that was Garrison's fault. I think it's rather pathetic that he could only get a max of a little less than seven years in prison for killing this kid. He should be doing life in my opinion. From what I've read, they want to see if he's a good candidate for probation. Yes, that's right!! Probation for killing someone while drunk. Surprised? I'm not!! Oh, but don't worry. I'm sure that the prosecutor will assure us that EVERYONE that's guilty of vehicular manslaughter while being drunk would receive the EXACT same sentence.

More Republican Thuggery At Its Finest!!

I'm sure you all remember Mark Foley, the Republican puke from Florida who liked little Congressional pages. Well, the sick mother fucker will likely get off and won't be charged with any crimes.

Why won't he face any charges? He most likely won't face any charges because the son of a bitch refuses to hand over his computer to investigators. Isn't that called OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE or OBSTRUCTING AN INVESTIGATION? This piece of shit should at the very least be charged for obstructing the investigation against him.

This is the story courtesy of Think Progress.

Foley blocking police investigation into page scandal

Florida’s top police agency said its investigation into former congressman Mark Foley “has been hindered because neither Foley nor the House will let investigators examine his congressional computers.” The House claims the computers are considered “congressional work papers” and that only Foley can release them.

Excuse me? Since when do authorities need permission to investigate someone? And the last time I looked, he was no longer a Congressman. Therefore, his computers are fair game!! But, I can't say that I'm surprised that this piece of shit would obstruct the investigation. What else is new? The Republican pukes will do anything to stop any and all investigations. But you better damn well believe that if this were a Democrat, the PUKES would be the first ones bitching about how the guy should be charged for obstruction of an investigation. You better damn well believe that those computers would be handed over immediately. And you better damn well believe that he would be dragged through the mud until the end of time!!

Republicans are SCUM!! No wait, they're lower than scum. They're the scum that lives on scum. God, I hate these people!! They make me sick!!

When Is The United States Ever Going To Accept Responsibility For Iraq?

The latest in the never-ending Iraq saga is the blaming of the UK for the Iraq violence. When is the United States ever going to accept responsibility for Iraq? It's far easier to blame someone else than to accept responsibility for what you've done. The United States will NEVER accept responsibility for what we've done.

Escalation Architect Blames UK For Iraq Violence, Calls For A British Surge

Yesterday, Ret. Gen. Jack Keane, who was vice chief of staff during the 2003 Iraq invasion and remains a key adviser to the Bush administration, went on BBC radio and sharply criticized the UK for planning withdrawal from Iraq. He argued that they should instead add more troops, similar to President Bush’s escalation in Baghdad.

“They have never had enough forces to truly protect the people, a mission similar to what the coalition forces are taking on in Baghdad, but I think there is a general disengagement from what the key issues are around Basra,” said Keane.

Keane’s comments echo those of another U.S. officer close to Gen. David Petraeus, who recently said of the British: “Quite frankly what they’re doing right now is not any value-added. … The situation there gets worse by the day. Americans are disappointed because, in their minds, this thing is still winnable. They don’t intend to cut and run.”

These statements blame the British for not reducing violence in Basra, a task that the United States has also been unable to achieve in the rest of Iraq. Another surge is not the answer. Since Bush announced his escalation plan in January, the situation in Iraq has continued to deteriorate:

– Attacks in June “reached their highest daily average since May 2003, showing a surge in violence as President George W. Bush completed a buildup of U.S. troops.”

– The “number of unidentified bodies in the capital has risen again to pre-surge levels over the last two months,” concluded a report by IraqSlogger.

– Today’s National Intelligence Estimate concludes that “the level of overall violence, including attacks on and casualties among civilians, remains high; Iraq’s sectarian groups remain unreconciled; AQI retains the ability to conduct high-profile attacks; and to date, Iraqi political leaders remain unable to govern effectively.”

It’s not surprising that Keane’s solution is another surge. He was one of the architects of Bush’s escalation plan, pushing to send 40,000 more troops to Iraq. He also blasted the Iraq Study Group’s recommendations for redeployment, giving the report an “F.” “I think it is wholly inadequate,” said Keane of the report. “It’s a cover story to accept defeat.”

Digg It!

Transcript:

HOST: A senior U.S. military figure is voicing frustration at the way the British army is handling the situation in southern Iraq. Gen. Jack Keane, who is retired, acts as adviser to the American commander in Iraq now, Gen. David Petraeus. Gen. Keane told the Today program that British forces seem to be less engaged.

KEANE: I think there is some frustration with the troops being out at the airport, primarily training the Iraqi 10th division, not as engaged as they had been in the past in what is taking place in central Basra and the surrounding communities.

They have never had enough forces to truly protect the people, a mission similar to what the coalition forces are taking on in Baghdad, but I think there is a general disengagement from what the key issues are around Basra.

HOST: Ret. Gen. Keane also said the situation in southern Iraq is gradually deteriorating and U.S. military commanders might have to intervene if things become worse.

KEANE: From a military perspective, I know what the commanders are trying to avoid, is having to send reinforcements to the south, from forces that are needed in the central part of Iraq, and that situation could arise if the situation gets worse, if and when the British forces leave.

If we want to go ahead and alienate our friends from the UK, go right ahead!! I mean, what's one less friend in the world? After all, George Bush said either you're with us or against us and we can go it alone if we have to. So George, if you're mouthpieces want to alienate the UK and blame them for the violence in Iraq, you will be looking for another partner. Highly unlikely, but a girl can dream can't she?

Allow me to explain how things work so that morons like Mr. Keane can understand. Governments from different countries have the authority to do whatever they want with their own military. If the British government has decided that they're withdrawing from Iraq, they're withdrawing from Iraq. There's not a damn thing Keane, Georgie, or anyone else can do about that, unless Georgie is prepared to go to war with Britain over this. You may be laughing now, but you better believe that he would do it in a heartbeat if he got something out of it. The British government and military doesn't answer to the United States. They don't take orders from the United States. The United States needs to remember that!!

By the way, the majority of the violence in Iraq appears to be taking place in areas that are "controlled" by the United States. How does Keane explain that? Well of course, it's Britain's fault!!

If Keane thinks he can do a better job, perhaps he would like to volunteer his ass to go over there and participate on the front lines of this civil war. If not, he needs to shut the hell up!!

"Blowhan" Lohan Cops A Plea!!

That's right!! "Blowhan" Lohan copped a plea today. And guess what boys and girls? She gets ONE day in jail. Yes, that's right!! ONE!! In other words, she can walk into the jail at 11:59 at night, and be out a minute later because they'll credit her for a day served!!

So, what have we learned today? We have learned that if you're rich and you're a celebrity, you can do anything you damn well please. And the great part about it is, nobody will care!! If you drive drunk and high twice in two months, that's okay. If you essentially kidnap three people, steal their car, and go on a 100 plus mph chase after someone else, that's okay. If you have cocaine in your possession not to mention that cocaine is also in your system, that's okay. All you have to do is blame your crimes on an addiction and an unstable childhood. Never mind the fact that you're a FUCKING ADULT!! Just say those things, and people will have sympathy for you.

Oh wait, you're not rich or a celebrity? Well, don't worry. You see, the prosecutor has assured us that this is the punishment that EVERYONE would get if charged with the same crimes. Oh wait, you're hearing the clink of cell doors slamming shut? Well, that must be a mistake because the prosecutor has assured us that EVERYONE would only get ONE day in jail for the same crimes. Oh wait, you're serving five to ten? Well, that really must be a mistake because the prosecutor has assured us that EVEYONE would only get ONE day in jail for the same crimes.

Yeah right!! Tell that to the next man or woman that you arrest for the same crimes. Tell them that they'll only be getting ONE day in jail. Then, let's see what they really get!!

I can do my part though. I'm boycotting Lohan. If she's on the cover of a magazine, I'm not buying it. If she's on a television channel that I'm watching, I'm changing the channel. I'm not buying or watching any movies that she's in. If she's on the radio, it's going off. If she's at an awards show program that I want to watch, I'm not watching it. I'm not buying her "music". I can do my part by ensuring that not a single penny of my money goes to her. I can do my part by NEVER mentioning her again. She thinks that she can do whatever she wants because as she put it, "I can do whatever I want and I won't get into trouble because I'm a celebrity". Well bitch, I will do my part to ensure that you're not one for much longer!!

"Blowhan" Gets Off!! Big Surprise!! Not!!

Yes, I'm going to bitch about the rich and famous for a minute. Lindsay "Blowhan" Lohan is essentially getting off with nothing more than a slap on the wrist. Big Surprise!! Not!!

D.A. to Lindsay -- You're Not a Felon

TMZ was at the Beverly Hills Courthouse this morning when the L.A. County District Attorney filed criminal charges against Lindsay Lohan. The charges are seven misdemeanors -- NO FELONIES. And, there may be a plea bargain today at 1:30 PM PDT.

Lohan, who was busted twice since Memorial Day weekend, was charged with two counts of driving under the influence. If convicted of both, she'd face a minimum of four days in jail. If a felony were filed, Lohan could have faced several years in state prison.

As to why no felony charges were filed, the DA says Lohan's cocaine traces "were below the .05 grams required by office policy for felony filing."

Sources tell us there were also problems even proving she was in possession of the drug.

As for the second case, a law enforcement source tells us the manner in which the cocaine was seized was questionable. In addition, the source says the amount of cocaine "didn't meet the threshold for filing."

But there's more to the story: In deciding whether to file felony cocaine charges, the D.A. always looks at the person and the circumstances. In Lohan's case, the fact that she was busted twice in a short period of time actually helped her. It shows someone is struggling with an addiction problem. The fact that each time she was busted, she immediately checked into a rehab facility also helped her case. Also, her age -- 21 -- and the fact that her upbringing was extremely unstable -- also worked in her favor.

One law enforcement source put it this way: "Prosecutors in this county see a lot of kids in crisis. There are lots of kids struggling with addiction. The first sign of trouble usually involves a car. We're not going to throw every one of them in prison. It doesn't make sense."

It must be nice having millions upon millions of dollars at your disposal. It must be nice being able to throw that money around to get out of legal trouble.

Let's break this down. She wasn't charged with any felonies because she is:

1) A kid!! Wrong there!! She's a 21 year old ADULT. And quite frankly, I'm getting pretty fucking tired of hearing these people called kids when they're not.

2) She has an addiction. Plus, her two drunk and drug fueled driving incidents and subsequent rehab stints actually helped her to avoid a felony charge. Huh? I thought that if you broke the law, you're charged with a crime. I didn't know that your CRIMES actually could help you. But hey, let's blame her addiction for her crimes and all is right with the world. I knew she would get off easy by shouting ADDICTION.

3) She had a disfunctional childhood. Again, this brings me back to the point that I was making a few seconds ago. She's an ADULT. Her childhood has got absolutely nothing to do with the fact that she drove drunk and high twice. What, was she trying to make a statement to her parents by doing this? Has she ever heard of picking up the damn telephone if she had something to say? And when in the hell is she going to grow up? She's not a child anymore. Her childhood is not an excuse for what she did. If that's the excuse they're going with, that's rather pathetic. The average Joe wouldn't get away with that shit!!

4) Her age. Yes, let's talk about her age for a minute. Again, she's an ADULT. With adulthood comes responsibilities. She chose to drive drunk. She chose to drive with cocaine in her system. She CHOSE!! Her age has absolutely nothing to do with this either. There are actual KIDS that do the same shit she did, and they've faced far worse punishment then she ever will.

5) The manner in which the cocaine was seized was questionable, and there would be problems proving that she was in possession of it? Um, how about the fact that it was in her fucking pants pocket? Doesn't that count for something? That says POSSESSION to me. And, let's not forget that she had cocaine in her system. If she had cocaine in her system, she can be charged with being under the influence of DRUGS. It's that simple.

Now let's talk about what they're not saying. She wasn't charged with felonies because:

1) She's Lindsay Lohan. Clearly, she has enough money at her disposal so that she will never have to face a minute behind bars.

2) She's white. I guarantee you that if this had been someone of another race, she would be facing felony charges. Yes, oh hell yes!! I'm going to pull out the race card people. It happens all the time, and will continue to happen until the end of time. It's a known fact that a person that isn't white is more likely to face harsher penalties for their crimes than a white person is.

3) She's rich. If this had been a poor person, they would be locked up for a long time. But since she's rich and famous, she's not going to see a day behind bars.

What message does this send to people? Well, it says to me that if you're rich, pretty, famous, and have an addiction, you can do whatever the hell you want and get away with it. All you have to do is cry UNSTABLE CHILDHOOD, and I'M AN ADDICT!! It says to me that if you have enough money to buy your way out of a situation, you should do that. Am I saying that she flashed the cash at the D.A.? No!! But with her money, she could hold up this situation until the D.A. decides that it's not worth pursuing.

I can't wait to see what happens the next time she drives drunk and high. Trust me, there will be a next time!! If she kills someone the next time she's driving drunk and high, is she going to get off because of her unstable childhood, age, and addiction? No doubt!!

Let this be a warning to anyone that lives, works, or travels in or around the area in which Lindsay "Blowhan" Lohan lives, works, or travels!! Don't step foot outside!! You may be her next victim!!

Anti-Gay Bigots About To Be Outed

It's about time we find out who the anti-gay bigots are here in this country. If they have to be outed, so be it!! We have a right to know!! It's about to happen in Oregon!!

Group To Out Signers Of Anti-Gay Oregon Petition

Portland, Oregon) People who sign petitions seeking to put measures repealing two LGBT civil rights laws on next November's ballot are about to be outed.

A newly formed group is planning to put the names and addresses on a national Web site. The names, once submitted to the state, are public property.

Conservative groups are trying to collect enough names to have the two laws put to voters. They need to collect the signatures of 55,179 registered voters within 90 days of the adjournment of the Legislature. The deadline is in about a month.

One of the laws the groups seek to overturn is a partnership law that grants rights, responsibilities and protections afforded to other Oregon couples and their families currently only available through a marriage contract in Oregon. It would be open to both same and opposite-sex couples.

The other law would amend the state's non-discrimination laws to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation in housing, employment, public accommodation, education and public services statewide.

The two pieces of legislation were signed into law May 9 by Gov. Ted Kulongoski and are to take effect January 1. If the repeal groups should gather enough signatures to force a vote the laws would be put on hold until after next November's election.

The groups opposing the laws say that the partnership law violates a constitutional amendment approved by voters in 2004 that declares marriage as legally valid only between a man and a woman.

They also say the non-discrimination law violates the rights of churches to practice their religion.

Know Thy Neighbor Web sites have previously been used in two states where conservative groups planned constitutional amendments to ban same-sex marriage.

The first began in 2005 in Massachusetts. As a result a number of names collected were discovered to be fraudulent. The groups calling for an amendment, however, gathered more than enough names to send the issue to the legislature where the issue died earlier this year.

The second was in Florida where conservatives continue to push for a marriage amendment.

The importance of Know Thy Neighbor is it creates a dialogue, KnowThyNeighbor.org director Tom Lang told 365Gay.com from Massachusetts.

"It shows this is us, we're here. we're your neighbors," said Lang. "it's an opportunity to discuss the issues with our neighbors.

Of the Oregon effort, Lang said final details are being worked out with Gay Rights Watch in Portland.

Oregon's largest LGBT group, Basic Rights Oregon is not involved, but spokesperson Bryan Boyd said it does not oppose the effort.

"Anything that helps defeat this odious attempt to overturn rights is fine by us," Boyd told 365Gay.com.

"Basic Rights Oregon will remain focused on preparing for the possibility the two ballot measures will go to voters in 2008."

Anyone who thinks that it's okay to discriminate against people based on sexual orientation among other things clearly needs to be outed. These sick SOB's need to have their names plastered everywhere so that people know exactly who they are!!

I especially love how these sick SOB's hide behind religion, and use it as an excuse to allow discrimination. It's always the same. Well, it would violate a church's right to practice their religion. How about the rights of gay people to live their lives? Oh, wait!! Stupid me!! I forgot that gay people aren't people, therefore they don't have a right to live their lives the way they want. They don't have a right to be treated with respect and dignity. They don't have a right to expect to be treated as equals.

NO MORE HIDING BITCHES!! YOU'RE ABOUT TO BE OUTED, AND I CAN'T WAIT!!

Protest Hypocrisy!!

Let me get this straight!! If you're a pro-lifer and you stand in front of an abortion clinic, harassing women going to that clinic then it's okay. If you're a pro-choice person and you shout obscenities at pro-lifers and knock over some cross, you're arrested and charged with battery? Battery on what? A cross? Give me a fucking break!!

Illinois Pro-Abortion Activists Arrested for Harassing Pro-Life Advocates

Aurora, IL (LifeNews.com) -- Two pro-abortion counterprotesters were arrested on Monday after they harassed pro-life advocates who were rallying against the construction of a new abortion business in this Chicago suburb. The two activists were given misdemeanor battery charges by authorities following the altercation.
Aurora residents Shawn R. Pawlak, 24, and Kelly L. Mahan, 27, confronted the pro-life protesters on Sunday outside the construction site.

According to a Suburban Chicago News report, they shouted obscenities at the pro-life people and knocked over small white crosses that had been set up to mourn the loss of life at abortion centers across the country.

Pawlak received battery of a protester charges and Mahan was booked on disorderly conduct. Both were released after posting bail, police said, and they will appear in Aurora Branch Court on the morning of September 11.

Over the weekend, hundreds of pro-life advocates in this northern Illinois city listened to pro-life leaders from across the country as they rallied in opposition to a new abortion business Planned Parenthood is almost done building there. They don't believe it's possible to close down the new center but they hope to raise public opinion against it.

Eric Scheidler, an Aurora resident who heads up the Pro-Life Action League, brought in the other pro-life leaders and said that members of the community never expected "an abortionist as their neighbor."

"We don't want Planned Parenthood in Aurora, Illinois," he added. "Whether it's 40 days of prayers or 40 years of effort, we will shut down the abortion fortress of Aurora."

A handful of abortion advocates counterprotested at the event.

They brought signs, including one with a coat hanger and the words "Never Again" -- an attempt to recreate history with claims that thousands of women died from illegal abortions. They said nothing of the women who have died from legal ones.

Naperville resident John McCollum told the newspaper that "We feel quite strongly in a woman's right to choose. Everybody should be a wanted baby."

The pro-abortion protesters had to be confined on a sidewalk off to the side because they didn't obtain a permit to protest as the pro-life advocates did.

The new abortion center, located at 240 N. Oakhurst Drive in the DuPage County section of Aurora, is set to open September 18.

So, it's perfectly acceptable in this country for pro-lifers to harass women, to call them murderers, to preach their religious shit to these women, and whatever else they do. That's fine!! It's apparently protected under their First Amendment rights. They can be the biggest bitches they want to women, and nobody does anything. But if you're pro-choice and you dare to confront these pro-life assholes, one of these bitches whines about a cross being knocked over and a few FU's hurled at them and the pro-choicer is arrested because it's not covered by their First Amendment rights. Like I said, battery on what? A cross? Take your crosses, and shove them up your ass!! We all know where these bitches are going when they die, and it sure as hell ain't HEAVEN!!

Perhaps the next time these bitches decide to protest, maybe the women that they're harassing will hurl some FU's at them. Oh wait, the women might get arrested for being...um...unladylike!!

There's No Hatred For Muslims In America!! Yeah Right!!

The next time someone tells you that there's no hatred for Muslims in America, ask them where the hell they live. Clearly they're ignorant if they think there isn't hatred for Muslims in this country!! A great example of that hatred and ignorance can be found in this article.

Muslim women: My headscarf is not a threat

(CNN) -- Last year at Christmastime, Rehan Seyam, a Muslim living in New Jersey, went to pick up some things at a local Wal-Mart. Seeing her distinctive traditional Muslim head covering called a "hijab," a man in the store, addressing her directly, sang "The 12 Days of Christmas" using insulting lyrics about terrorism and Osama bin Laden.

She was stunned.

"Do I look like a terrorist to you?" Seyam said she asked the man.

According to Seyam, the man replied, "What else does a terrorist look like?"

Such stories are not altogether uncommon for Muslim Americans. According to a recent poll by the Pew Research Center, 53 percent of Muslims living in America said it has become more difficult to be a Muslim in the United States since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Fifty-one percent said they are "very worried" or "somewhat worried" that women wearing the hijab are treated poorly, according to the poll.

A simple headscarf generally used by women to hide the hair from view, the hijab has become so controversial among some that several countries have banned or considered banning Muslim women from wearing them in public places. In light of this contentiousness, why do Muslim women choose to wear the hijab? Watch the making of CNN's TV special "God's Warriors" »

Gayad al-Khalik lives in Egypt and says the hijab is a focus on inner beauty.

"I want to shift the attention from my outer self to my inner self when I deal with someone, I don't want them to look at me in a way that wouldn't suit me," she told CNN in an upcoming documentary called "God's Warriors."

Al-Khalik is fluent in English and German; studied in Europe; plays Western music on her guitar; and spent time working for a women's rights organization.

She wears the hijab -- and says it's not just for religious reasons.

"My own conclusion was it is debatable whether it is a religious obligation or not, but I chose to keep it on because I do believe in modesty and you shouldn't be showing off yourself," al-Khalik said.

The Quran calls for women to be modest in their dress but interpretation of the edict varies widely, according to religious experts who spoke with CNN. An author who has written widely on Islam told CNN the Quran does not require women to wear the hijab.

"There's nothing in the Quran about all women having to be veiled or secluded in a certain part of the house. That came in later [after Prophet Mohammed's time]," said religious historian and author Karen Armstrong.

For Seyam, the hijab is a religious duty. "It's God's wish," she said.

"It's a requirement by God. He wants us to cover. He wants us to be modest," Seyam said.

But as important as the hijab is to her, Seyam's decision to cover her face wasn't one she made easily.

"It was very dramatic for me. And I remember, even now thinking about it, it really does make my heart beat a little bit faster," she said, "I was making a decision I knew was permanent. You put on hijab, you don't take it off."

Through her childhood growing up in Long Island, New York, Seyam prayed with her devout Muslim parents, but says she was just "going through the motions." It wasn't until college that she decided to wear a hijab consistently.

Influenced by her more devout friends, Seyam decided being a good Muslim meant covering her head.

"My sole purpose is to be here for the sake of Allah, and I'm doing something that he specifically says that you should be doing."

Seyam said there were practical factors in her decision as well. "I'm sick of guys catcalling. It was just driving me crazy. I felt like a piece of meat."

But Seyam says she traded in catcalling for a different kind of negative attention. People "look at me as if I am threatening and I do not feel like I am threatening looking. I don't feel I should instill fear in anybody's heart, but I do feel like I get dirty looks," she said.

Still, Seyam says her faith sustains her and that wearing the hijab is an important part of that faith.

"I'm not here to live my life and do whatever I want. I'm here to worship God," Seyam said. "I don't think that everybody has that, and I think that I'm lucky for it."

Rehan Seyam clearly has more self-restraint than I do because that asshole would have been lying on the floor if it had been me. It would have gone a little something like this.

Man: "What else does a terrorist look like?"

Me: "You, you stupid, ignorant mother fucker!!"

That would have been followed up with a punch right to his damn mouth. Maybe then he would have gotten the message that he was a stupid, ignorant mother fucker!! If that didn't work, I would have followed up the punch with a swift kick to his "family jewels"!!

Yes, I know!! Violence doesn't solve anything. It may have landed me in the slammer, but it sure as hell would have been worth it. This is a clear example of the ignorance in this country, and it's truly pathetic!! It makes me feel disgusted to even call myself an American because I don't want to be associated with this vile garbage, and there is plenty of it in this country!!

Well, If There Is Money To Be Made.....

If you thought the whole Utah mine situation couldn't get any worse, you thought wrong. You have to read the whole article here to see what I'm about to get at.

Families Outraged After Utah Mine Official Says Miners May Not Be Found

HUNTINGTON, Utah — Officials said six trapped coal miners may never be found, outraging family members of the men who say their loved ones are being left for dead.

Searchers were grim Sunday after receiving air readings from a fourth hole drilled more than 1,500 feet into the mountainside. The readings detected insufficient oxygen to support life.

Repeated efforts to signal the men have been met with silence.

"It's likely these miners may not be found," said Rob Moore, vice president of Murray Energy Corp., co-owner of the Crandall Canyon Mine.

Mine officials had sustained hope for two weeks that the miners would be brought out alive, even after three rescuers were killed and six more hurt in another "bump" inside the mountain.

Family members of the six miners trapped in the initial Aug. 6 collapse accused the mine's owners and federal officials of abandoning their loved ones.

"We feel that they've given up and that they are just waiting for the six miners to expire," said Sonny Olsen, a spokesman for the families, reading from a prepared statement Sunday night as about 70 relatives of the trapped miners stood behind him.

"We are here at the mercies of the officials in charge and their so-called experts. Precious time is being squandered here, and we do not have time to spare," Olsen said.

The families demanded that rescuers immediately begin drilling a 30-inch hole into which a rescue capsule could be lowered. Olsen said the families believe it is "the safest and most effective method to reach" them.

Moore had been far more upbeat earlier in the weekend, but on Sunday he said oxygen readings and video images taken from the fourth hole had changed his mind about the miners' probable fate. Oxygen levels in the hole are just 11 to 12 percent, incompatible with life. Normal oxygen levels are 21 percent.

Workers started Sunday on a fifth borehole into the mountain, more than 2,000 feet down, but Moore said he expected to find insufficient air there, too.

"Our thoughts and our prayers and our deepest sympathies go out to the families — for all those families involved in the two tragedies here," he said.

If tunneling doesn't restart, part of the mine will have been turned into a tomb. Despite that, Moore said there is recoverable coal in other parts of the 5,000-acre mine, and the company expected to resume operations at some point. He said he didn't discuss that prospect with family members.

Let me start off by saying that I understand what these families are thinking. They're still believing that their family members are alive because for the last two weeks that's what they've been told. They've been lied to time and time again. They've been given false hope thanks to the mine owners and the other idiots in charge here. Now, two weeks later they still think they are alive and can be rescued. I know it's difficult to accept. But the reality is, they're deceased. If they survived the initial collapse, they most likely didn't survive much longer due to the lack of oxygen in the mine. The families don't want to accept that, and that's their business. That's their right. I also understand their desire to be able to bury their loved ones if their bodies are ever recovered. Who wouldn't want that?

But that's not the part that pissed me off. If you read down to the bottom of the article, you'll see what I'm talking about. This son of a bitch Rob Moore offers his thoughts, prayers, and sympathy to the families in one breath, and talks about making money in the next breath. He says that there is "recoverable coal in other parts of the mine". He goes on to say that the "company is expected to resume operations at some point". To that I ask, what fucking idiot is going to be willing to go back into that mine to recover your coal for you? Nobody!! Especially not after this debacle here. Nobody in their right fucking mind is going to risk their lives so that Robert Murray, Rob Moore, or anyone else can make yet another buck at the expense of others. Oh, and who the hell would allow that mine to be reopened for business ever again? If that mine is reopened, these bastards should be charged with murder if anyone gets killed.

Talk about dancing on the grave of someone. These bastards don't even have the balls to tell the families about their plans to resume work at the mine. We all know why that is. If they did tell these families that, I guarantee you that Rob Moore, Robert Murray, and others would either be seriously injured or dead because these families would beat the shit out of them or kill them.

And The Delusional Comments Continue.....

Just when you thought that the Catholic Church/Vatican couldn't become more delusional, you're proven wrong!! They are!!

Vatican envoy praises church response to crisis
Official lauds Roman Catholic leaders’ response to U.S. sex abuse scandals

In his first visit to the United States since his appointment, the Vatican’s top diplomat said the Roman Catholic Church has responded to the U.S. clergy sexual abuse crisis with “dignity and courage.”

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican secretary of state, spoke at a news conference at the annual convention of the Knights of Columbus, the Catholic fraternal organization.

Speaking through an interpreter, Bertone called the “business” created in the United States around the clergy abuse scandal “unbearable,” according to a Knights of Columbus transcript.

He added: “I hope that other institutions and social agencies will face this same problem with their members, with an equal degree of courage and realism as the Catholic Church has done.” He questioned whether other institutions have financially supported victims and “taken care of the victims and those who are guilty.”

Bertone also was asked about the role of Catholics in public life, an issue that took on greater significance in the 2004 presidential election and could re-emerge as a factor in the 2008 race.

“I don’t understand how a person in public office or one engaged in political activity can be obliged to renounce his Catholic identity because the party, be it in the U.S. or in other countries, imposes an ethical choice on the basis of the party’s program,” he said. “This, according to me, does not respect freedom of conscience.”

Bertone was appointed to the Vatican’s No. 2 post last year. Pope Benedict XVI is scheduled to visit United Nations headquarters in New York in 2008; details of the pontiff’s first U.S. trip have not been released.

First and foremost, DIGNITY AND COURAGE FOR WHOM? Certainly not for the victims!! The Catholic Church and the Vatican didn't and haven't handle any of this with dignity and courage. They have done nothing but throw hush money at the victims in order to essentially secure their silence. They have removed the CRIMINALS from their parishes, and moved them on to other parishes. They have knowingly covered up the crimes of these pedophiles, and they don't care. And yes, I'm saying that THEY KNOWINGLY COVERED UP THE CRIMES OF PEDOPHILES!! What else would you call moving these pedophiles around from parish to parish instead of turning in these pedophiles to the police? That to me is aiding and abetting a crime. That to me is covering up a crime.

The Catholic Church and Vatican have faced this "problem" with realism? WHEN? When the hell has that ever happened?

If he means "financially supporting and taking care of victims" by throwing hush money at the victims to shut them up or encouraging them to keep the knowledge of the crime within the Church instead of going to police, then I guess he's right!!

He also said the following when asked about Catholics in public office:

“I don’t understand how a person in public office or one engaged in political activity can be obliged to renounce his Catholic identity because the party, be it in the U.S. or in other countries, imposes an ethical choice on the basis of the party’s program,” he said. “This, according to me, does not respect freedom of conscience.”

Respecting freedom of conscience? Silly me, but I thought that if you respect the right to freedom of conscience you respect the right of someone to THINK FOR THEMSELVES!! Clearly, that's not how the Catholic Church operates. If you're Catholic you are expected to believe and practice what the Catholic Church preaches. So if you believe in a woman's right to choose, you're apparently not worthy of calling yourself a Catholic. If you believe in the right to use birth control, you're apparently not worthy of calling yourself a Catholic. If you believe in the right to undergo in vitro procedures, you're apparently not worthy of calling yourself a Catholic. If you believe in the right to divorce, you're apparently not worthy of calling yourself a Catholic. If you believe in the right of everyone to be who they are whether they're gay or straight, you're apparently not worthy of calling yourself a Catholic. You see, you're not worthy because you didn't seek permission from the Catholic Church or Vatican to THINK FOR YOURSELF. You see, you're not worthy because you didn't seek permission from the Catholic Church or Vatican to ACTUALLY HAVE CONVICTIONS OF YOUR OWN AND NOT THOSE IMPOSED BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

And the delusional comments continue!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

To My Blog Readers

In case you're wondering what the whole ANONYMOUS thing is about, I'll gladly explain.

Today when I checked my comments, there was an anonymous comment left for me. I tolerate many things. Blatant ignorance and hate are not on that list!! When someone refers to a woman as something that I'm not going to post here, I draw the line. When someone questions the honesty of a rape victim and makes a mockery of such a horrific crime, I draw the line. If someone wants to be an asshole, go right ahead. But they're not going to get an outlet for their asinine comments on MY BLOG!!

I don't know if the comments were directed towards me or not. I don't really care either!! I'm not going to allow this asshole, be it a man or a woman, to spread the hate on MY BLOG!!

Have a nice weekend!!

TO ANONYMOUS!!

I really enjoyed the comment that you left for me. It was a rather pathetic attempt to get YOUR "point" across. But it was great for entertainment purposes!! Unfortunately for you, I don't offer up blog space on my blog to people who can't present an intelligent argument. Perhaps next time, you'll come at me with something of substance instead of whatever that was.

Terry Schiavo REDUX!!

Look folks!! It's a Terry Schiavo REDUX!! Well, sort of!!

Right To Life Seeks To Intervene In Case Of Sedated Patient

MADISON, Wis. -- Wisconsin Right to Life wants to intervene in a legal fight over whether a 54-year-old stroke victim should be allowed to die instead of being kept under sedation and on a feeding tube because she otherwise won't take food or drink.

The family of the woman said that they have gone to court to have the nutritional measures stopped.

But the anti-abortion group said in a motion that state law prohibits the woman's guardian or the court from ordering the withdrawal of nutrition and hydration.

Court records show the woman isn't in a persistent vegetative state and didn't express her wishes through a conversation or leave an advance directive authorizing such a move.

The patient has had seven strokes since 1995 and suffers a variety of other serious health problems including violent dementia, diabetes and pneumonia.

A hearing in the case is set next Wednesday.

When will these people keep their noses out of other people's business? Seriously!!

When this patient has constantly pulled out her tubes, what does that say to you? That says to me that she doesn't want them in her. That says to me that she doesn't want anything like them in her. The family members aren't trying to stop the removal.

Clearly, this isn't any of Wisconsin Right To Life's business. They have no business getting involved in a private family issue. They have no business getting involved in a private citizen's medical situation. They don't know this woman, yet they're all too eager to exploit her for some publicity. And that's exactly what they're attempting to do here. They're attempting to exploit her situation to further their so-called pro-life agenda. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't petition Congress to pass a private bill like they did in the Terry Schiavo situation. I'm waiting for the 24/7 coverage of these lunatics on television. I'm waiting for the back and forth court action. Trust me, it's coming!!

Here's a thought!! GET A LIFE INSTEAD OF TRYING TO INTERVENE IN THE LIVES OF OTHERS!! This is none of their damn business, period!! Man, these people make me want to puke!!

Professor Says Pro-Abortion Catholics Are Worse Than Catholic Pedophiles

Yes, you read that title correctly!! A Princeton professor said that Catholics who are for abortion rights are far worse than pedophile priests and nuns.

Princeton Prof: Pro-abortion Catholics More Horrific than Clergy Sex Abuse

By Peter J. Smith

UNITED STATES, August 13, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A Princeton professor has warned that the scandal of pro-abortion Catholics and its cover-up by bishops threatens more damage to the Catholic Church than the abhorrent scandal of pedophile priests hiding behind their Roman collars to perpetrate crimes against children.

Robert George, a McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University, writes in an article published in the ecumenical magazine First Things that, unlike the clergy sexual abuse scandal, the tolerated scandal of prominent anti-life Catholics continues to engender far more insidious effects upon society.

"Nothing undermines the cause of justice and cultural reform and renewal more than the bad example of prominent Catholics who have made themselves instruments of what Pope John Paul II bluntly described as 'the culture of death,'" states George.

"The scandal given by these individuals over the past thirty years, particularly with respect to the exposure of the unborn to abortion and, more recently, embryo-destructive research, is far greater in its cultural effects even than the horrific-the word is not too strong-scandal of clergy sex abuse."

If the sex scandals have enough power to make many Catholics "lose confidence in the reliability of the Church as a teacher of truth, particularly in the moral domain" then the Church's toleration of publicly proclaimed pro-abortion Catholics is much worse, especially when the culture is in grave peril.

"The Church doesn't need fundamental transformation; it needs to be about the business of transforming us," warns George. "For better or worse, culture is character-shaping and, thus, person-forming. That's why the task of cultural renewal and reform is part of the Christian task-an essential part."

George writes that Catholics should know that the Church faces both "danger" and an "opportunity for a special kind of greatness, the greatness that comes only in times of the most profound danger."

"Critical (possibly irreversible) decisions will be made in the next year or two" writes George, indicating that the particular decisions to which he is referring will occur in the field of marriage and bioethics. Both issues, he says, "will go one way or the other depending on the posture and actions of Catholics."

"If the Catholic community is engaged on these issues, working closely with evangelical Christians, observant Jews, and people of goodwill and sound moral judgment of other faiths and even of no particular religious faith, grave injustices and the erosion of central moral principles will be, to a significant extent, averted. Indeed, with respect to both marriage and the sanctity of human life, earlier reverses may themselves be reversed. If, on the other hand, the Catholic community compromises itself, abdicates its responsibilities, and sits on the sidelines, the already deeply wounded institution of marriage will collapse and the brave new world of biotechnology will transform procreation into manufacture, and nascent human life into mere disposable 'research material.'"

However George continues to point out that bishops and pastors must make a decision to lead Catholics in the culture war, not by becoming politicians themselves, but by exhorting lay Catholics to fulfill their responsibilities in the political arena and other cultural dimensions.

"[The bishops] should never hesitate to reprove us when we fail in our obligations to defend human life, marriage, and the common good, as far too many Catholics, including Catholics prominent in public life, have done and, alas, are doing," says George.

"The bishops must make clear that being a faithful Catholic means many things; but among the things it means is bearing unambiguous witness to the sanctity of human life. By bearing such witness, Catholics can seize the opportunity now before them to renew and reform the culture."

Wow, and I thought I had heard it all!! Obviously I was wrong!! Just when I thought there wasn't a bigger ass out there, Robert George proved me wrong.

First of all, let's get something straight!! Unlike what Robert George said, the Catholic Church sexual abuse scandal was and still is tolerated. Clearly, he hasn't been paying attention and doesn't care enough to get his "facts" correct. It has been tolerated from the church level right on up to the Vatican. If it wasn't tolerated, these pedophile priests and nuns would have been turned over to the police. Instead, they were and are shifted around to different parishes where the abuse continues. Instead of turning over these pedophiles and owning up to what they've done, the Catholic Church would rather throw cash in the faces of its victims to keep their mouths shut. If that isn't tolerance, I don't know what is.

To Robert George, I say FUCK YOU!! Fuck you for suggesting that a woman who has an abortion is more vile than a pedophile who preys on innocent children. That includes women who are rape and incest victims. That includes women who need an abortion for medical reasons. That also includes women who undergo abortions for various reasons. How fucking dare you even suggest that they are more vile than a pedophile who sexually abuses a child. You, Robert George, are one sick asshole and clearly an apologist for PEDOPHILES EVERYWHERE!!

These Are CHRISTIANS?

Two people at a Christian Boot Camp in Texas are facing assault charges for dragging a 15 year old girl behind a van.

Christian Boot Camp Officials Accused of Dragging Teen Behind Van

Friday, August 10, 2007

BANQUETE, Texas — Arrest warrants have been issued for two officials at a Christian boot camp accused of dragging a 15-year-old girl behind a van after she fell behind the group during a morning run, authorities said.

Charles Eugene Flowers and Stephanie Bassitt of San Antonio-based Love Demonstrated Ministries, a 32-day boot camp, are facing aggravated assault charges for the alleged June 12 incident.

The two were accused of tying the girl to the van with a rope then dragging her, according to an arrest affidavit filed Wednesday by the Nueces County Sheriff's Department. Arrest affidavits for Flowers and Bassitt list a $100,000 bond.

A call to Love Demonstrated Ministries was not immediately returned Friday. No listing was found for Bassitt. An answering machine at a listing for Flowers cut off during an attempt to leave a message Friday.

Flowers, the camp's director, allegedly ordered Bassitt to run alongside the girl after she fell behind, the affidavit said. When the girl stopped running, Bassitt allegedly yelled at her and pinned her to the ground while Flowers tied the rope to her, according to the affidavit.

The girl's mother gave investigators photos of her daughter's injuries that were taken at a hospital where the girl was treated and a sworn statement from a witness who claimed to see the girl being dragged on her stomach at least three times.

These are fucking CHRISTIANS? Did their Bible tell them to drag this girl behind the van when she no longer could run? Did GOD tell them to drag this girl behind the van when she no longer could run? What the hell is wrong with these two assholes? I hope that her mother is going to sue these assholes, and that "boot camp" should be shut down.

I especially love the name of the place that runs this boot camp. It's called Love Demonstrated Ministries. Apparently, this is how they show LOVE. They drag a CHILD behind a van. That's love!! THAT'S GOD'S LOVE!! And yes, she is a child regardless of the fact that she's 15. She's somebody's child, and these assholes took it upon themselves to injure this child for absolutely no reason.

Surprise!! Surprise!! Surprise!! Not!!

It should come as no shock to anyone that the Catholic Church is attempting to fight legislation that would extend the amount of time a child sexual abuse victim has to pursue a lawsuit.

Uncovering Child Sex Abuse: A Stand-Off with the Catholic Church

By Bill Frogameni, Ms. Magazine. Posted August 9, 2007.

This is an excerpt from a longer report in Ms. magazine. To get the whole story, pick up Ms. magazine on newsstands now.

Joelle Casteix was a 15-year-old Catholic schoolgirl in the mid-1980s when a teacher began molesting her. The abuse ended when she was 17, but not, she says, before she contracted genital warts, got pregnant and had an abortion.

At the time of the molestation, Casteix confronted the administrators of her school, Mater Dei High in Orange County, Calif., but says she was asked to keep quiet. Behind the scenes, administrators eventually verified her claims and elicited an extraordinary signed confession from her abuser, who also admitted molesting another student.

But it wasn't until 2005 -- after the original statute of limitations had expired -- that Casteix finally found justice. Thanks to a California law enacted in 2002, she was able to compel the Church to hand over its documents, which allowed her to join a then-record $100 million settlement reached between abuse victims and the Diocese of Orange. Casteix received $1.6 million herself.

The 2002 California law gave victims of childhood sexual abuse a one-year "civil window," allowing those with otherwise expired claims to sue retroactively. Lawmakers recognized it can take years for sexually abused children to confront their abuse -- a task made all the more difficult if the abuser is a religious authority. An estimated 800 litigants took advantage of the window and filed suits, and many of those suits were settled in July when the Catholic Diocese of Los Angeles agreed to pay a total of $660 million to 508 victims of priest sexual abuse.

The California law was the first effort to give victims of long-ago abuse their day in court. In its wake, there's been a nationwide push to lengthen inadequate statutes and allow retroactive litigation in other states. (With criminal statutes, at least 25 states no longer have time limits for prosecuting the most serious offenses.) Approximately a dozen states have considered following California's lead and providing a "window" for retroactive civil suits, and Delaware is the latest to approve a statute-extending law with a civil window. Previous Delaware law allowed children only two years from the date of their abuse to bring civil action. "I didn't think it was fair a child would be expected to hire an attorney within two years and sue," says State Sen. Karen Peterson, who sponsored the legislation. "Some of these kids are 5 and 6 years old."

Although such legislation isn't meant to apply only to victims of clerical abuse, opposition has overwhelmingly come from the Catholic Church. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops claims not to hold a position on retroactive suits, but bishops' conferences in individual states have lobbied vigorously against them. Last year, a bill proposed by Colorado State Senate President Joan Fitzgerald to extend civil statutes and create a window period was effectively killed after Colorado's bishops hired lobbyists and had letters read in church invoking the fear of bankruptcy and urging congregants to call their representatives. "It was horrific," says Fitzgerald. "They pulled out all the stops ... It seemed amazing to me -- their lack of concern for their flock and their laity."

Fitzgerald, herself Catholic, believes that concerns about unfair suits and Church bankruptcy are red herrings. The real agenda, she thinks, is to insulate Church leaders from further public scrutiny over abuse and cover-ups. Bishops are required by Church law to keep records of scandal secret, so documentation of abuse often remains in files controlled by top diocesan officials. Barbara Blaine, founder of the Survivors Network for those Abused by Priests (SNAP), agrees with Fitzgerald that bishops' real fear is having these documents exposed. "More than anything else, they are fixated on avoiding depositions and courtroom testimony where they'll be treated like regular citizens instead of royalty, and where they'll have to explain decades of secrecy and recklessness and corruption," Blaine says.

Retroactive civil action affords a unique opportunity to identify perpetrators who escaped criminal penalties and may still be abusive, says Marci Hamilton, a professor at Yeshiva University's Cardozo School of Law and author of God vs.The Gavel: Religion and the Rule of Law (Cambridge University Press, 2005). "If you don't extend the statute of limitations and you don't create a window, it's just a given you won't know about 90 percent of the perpetrators out there," says Hamilton, who has testified in several states on the constitutionality of retroactive civil windows.

SNAP's Blaine refuses to accept a system that lets child abusers -- and those who protected them -- off the hook. "Many prosecutors are timid and many laws are antiquated," she says, "so [Church] cover-ups will stay covered up unless child sex victims are given a chance to seek justice and expose crimes in court."

If anyone is shocked by this, clearly they haven't been paying attention!!

The Catholic Church has a history of covering up sexual abuse, and protecting the abusers. Why should this be any different? This is yet another attempt to shut the victims up!!

P.S. If you get a chance, read the comments on the message board about this. I especially love the apologist for the Catholic Church. He (I'm assuming it's a he) essentially refers to the 15 year old victim as a whore, and then goes on to call her a liar. You see, according to him it's not possible that she got an STD, and became pregnant as a result of the abuse because that would mean that the school administrators would be guilty of aiding and abetting a crime. It's just not possible!!

Abortion Blamed For Yet More Things In Life

Abortion has been blamed for yet more things in life.

Study Says Abortion Lead to Higher Crime, Increased Murder Rates

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
August 9, 2007

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A study conducted by a researcher at the University of Maryland shows that legalized abortion has led to higher rates of crime and increased murder rates. The occured because a higher percentage of children grew up in single-parent homes during the years following Roe v. Wade.
The findings have been published in the April 2007 issue of the academic journal Economic Inquiry and are part of a new book written by researcher John R. Lott.

According to Lott, the high court's decision ultimately resulted in more out-of-wedlock births, a reduction in the number of children adopted and fewer married parents.

"Those are contradictory directions," the economist told the Cybercast News Service in an interview. "What ties them together is liberalized abortion rules."

Lott said those results produced by Roe "affected decisions on premarital sex and careful contraception. It's a matter of economics. When something seems less costly, there's more of it."

As LifeNews.com has previously reported, Lott and John Whitley, affiliated with the University of Chicago, wrote a paper in August 2006 challenging claims that abortion led to less crime.

That paper led to the journal article and subsequent book by Lott.

Because Roe resulted in more children growing up in single-parent homes and because such children are more likely to become criminals than those in two-parent homes, the researchers say abortion led to higher rates of crime.

They point out that 5 percent of white children were born out of wedlock from 1965 to 1969, compared to 16 percent in the 1980's. Black children born out of wedlock increased from 35 percent to 62 percent in the same period.

These children of unwed mothers, statistically more at risk of becoming criminals, are responsible for the increase of murders by 700 cases in 1998 alone, they say. Such a dramatic increase carried a financial price tag of $3.3 billion in "victimization costs," according to their paper.

Ultimately, Lott says murder rates rose anywhere from half a percent to 7 percent as a result of legalized abortion.

The new study is another among other recent analysis showing the finding of the authors of the 2001 book "Freakonomics" were wrong in contending that abortion led to a decrease in crime.

John Donohue of Stanford Law School and Steven Levitt of the University of Chicago published a study linking a decline in the U.S. violent crime in the 1990s with abortion.

"If the estimates are correct, legalized abortion can explain about half of the recent fall in crime," Donohue and Levitt wrote.

The authors argue that the ready availability of abortion since its legalization in 1973 resulted in fewer unwanted children and therefore less crime in later generations. They cited arrest records to claim that abortion would account for a 1% reduction in crime each year over the next two decades.

Lott says the analysis in the book is wrong because the authors only examined five states that legalized abortion prior to Roe and assumed that no abortions were occurring in the other 45, even though they were done in limited circumstances.

"Some states had a fair number of abortions. Some were more restrictive," he told CNS News. "You can't assume there was zero before Roe."

Also, in November 2005, Christopher Foote, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and research assistant Christopher Goetz, told the Wall St. Journal the data Levitt used was faulty.

Foote said there was a "missing formula" in Levitt's original research that allowed him to ignore certain factors that may have contributed to the lowering of crime rates during the 1980s and 1990s.

Foote also argues that Levitt counted the total number of arrests made when he should have used per-capita figures. After Foote adjusted for both factors, the abortion effect simply disappeared, the Journal reported.

"There are no statistical grounds for believing that the hypothetical youths who were aborted as fetuses would have been more likely to commit crimes had they reached maturity than the actual youths who developed from fetuses and carried to term," the Foote and Goetz say in their report.

So, let me see if I have this right. Because women are allowed to have abortions in this country, there's more crime. Because women are allowed to have abortions in this country, there are more murders. And this is based solely on what? The idiotic idea that abortion has led to more single mothers, and the children of single mothers are more likely to be criminals than those with two parents. Prove it bitches!! I want to see proof that children of single parents are more likely to be criminals than the children of two parent households. I want to see proof that abortion leads to higher crime rates and more murders. There is no proof. It is purely speculation, and pretty ignorant and asinine speculation at that!!

I know plenty of people who come from single parent households. They're not thugs. They're not criminals. They're actually very well-rounded individuals. But, these "experts" who are nothing more than mouthpieces for the Pro-Life Thuggery in this country would like you and I to believe otherwise. It's such a shame that we're not all as braindead as your moronic followers!! Not!! You can't fool us with this bullshit!!

What's next? Abortions are to blame for UFOs? Perhaps the aliens are really all the dead fetuses coming back to visit.

Quit Your Bitching!!

Boo Hoo!! White people are becoming the "minority" in at least one in every ten counties in the United States. Cry me a damn river!!

WASHINGTON - Whites are now in the minority in nearly one in 10 U.S. counties. And that increased diversity, fueled by immigration and higher birth rates among blacks and Hispanics, is straining race relations and sparking a backlash against immigrants in many communities.

"There's some culture shock," said Mark Mather of the Population Reference Bureau, a Washington-based research agency. "But I think there is a momentum building, and it is going to continue."

As of 2006, non-Hispanic whites made up less than half the population in 303 of the nation's 3,141 counties, according to figures the Census Bureau is releasing Thursday. Non-Hispanic whites were a minority in 262 counties in 2000, up from 183 in 1990.

The Census Bureau's report has population estimates by race and ethnicity for every county in the nation. They are the first such estimates since Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast in 2005, scattering hundreds of thousands of people.

The biggest changes in were in Orleans Parish, La., home to New Orleans. The share of non-Hispanic whites in Orleans Parish grew from 27 percent in 2005 to 34 percent in 2006, while the share of blacks dropped from about 68 percent to 59 percent.

Many of the nation's biggest counties have long had large minority populations. But that diversity is now spreading to the suburbs and beyond, causing resentment in some areas.

Many Latinos say they see it in the debate over illegal immigration.

In northern Virginia, Teresita Jacinto said she feels less welcome today than when she first arrived 30 years ago, when she was one of few Hispanics in the area.

"Not only are we feeling less welcome, we are feeling threatened," said Jacinto, a teacher in Woodbridge, Va., about 20 miles southwest of Washington.

Woodbridge is part of Prince William County, which recently passed a resolution seeking to deny public services to illegal immigrants. Similar measures have been approved or considered in dozens of communities across the nation. In all, state lawmakers have introduced more than 1,400 measures related to immigration this year, the National Conference of State Legislatures says.

Supporters say local laws are necessary because Congress has failed to crack down on the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. But many Hispanics legally in the U.S. say they feel targeted, too.

"I think across the board all of us feel like we're not welcome," said Jacinto, who was born in the U.S. and volunteers for an advocacy group called Mexicans Without Borders.

Prince William County has seen its Hispanic population more than double since 2000, to nearly 70,000 last year. Non-Hispanic whites account for a little more than half the population, down from about two-thirds in 2000.

Greg Letiecq recently helped form a group to fight illegal immigration in northern Virginia, called Help Save Manassas. The group is named for a city surrounded by Prince William County.

"It's not about ethnicity, it's not about race. It's about lawful behavior versus unlawful behavior," Letiecq said.

Still, he complained that many newcomers eschew American culture in favor of their Latino heritage.

"It's the folks who come in and try to maintain the culture of the country they came from," Letiecq said. "They don't seem to embrace the American culture, the English language, the social norms of American culture."

Nationally, the number of minorities topped 100 million for the first time in 2006 — about a third of the population. By 2050, minorities will account for half of U.S. residents, according to Census Bureau projections.

"I don't think Latinos or any other so-called minority group are seeking to make white people a minority," Jacinto said. "It's just a reality."

I'm white!! Do you think I care if I'm in the "minority" in the county or city I live in? HELL NO!! Do I sit here bitching every single day about how Hispanics, blacks, or others are "taking over" my county or city? HELL NO!! It's called the human race. In case white people have forgotten, the entire population of the world isn't solely WHITE!! It's diverse, and it should be that way.

So, let's cut through the bullshit here. When someone says it's not about ethnicity or race, they're full of shit. This has everything to do with race and ethnicity. I'm not saying that all white people feel this way, but I'm sure some do. They see people who move into their comfy, "been this way since I was born" city, and they can't stand it because these people are "outsiders" to them. They can't stand that these people have cultural traditions and beliefs. They can't stand that these people choose to celebrate their heritage. They think that these people must tow the line, and be like everyone else. But that's not how life works. Everyone is different. Everyone has a right to be different. Everyone has a right to celebrate who they are.

The other thing that they don't get is that not all "minorities" are ILLEGAL. Just because a Hispanic person moves into your city or neighborhood doesn't mean that they're an illegal immigrant. Just because a black person moves into your city or your neighborhood doesn't mean that they're an illegal immigrant. Just because an Asian person moves into your city or your neighborhood doesn't mean that they're an illegal immigrant. Just because someone new moves into your city or your neighborhood doesn't mean that they're an illegal immigrant.

People need to get over themselves, and realize that the world doesn't revolve around them. They need to realize that they're not the only people on Earth, and that everyone is different. This country and the rest of the world isn't going to be forever WHITE. Quit your bitching, and get a life!!

Catholic Priest Jogging NAKED Is Arrested

A Catholic priest in Colorado was arrested in June for jogging naked.

FREDERICK, Colo. -- A Catholic priest faces an indecent exposure charge after police said he went jogging in the nude about an hour before sunrise.

The Rev. Robert Whipkey told officers he had been running naked at a high school track and didn't think anyone would be around at that time of day, a police report said.

He told officers he sweats profusely if he wears clothing while jogging. "I know what I did was wrong," he said in the report.

Whipkey did not return phone messages. His attorney, Doug Tisdale, told the Longmont Times-Call that Whipkey had no comment.

Whipkey, 53, was arrested June 22 in this small town about 20 miles north of Denver. An officer said he saw a naked man walking down the street at 4:35 a.m. The U.S. Naval Observatory Web site said sunrise that day in Frederick was 5:31 a.m.

The officer said when he shined his flashlight at the man, he covered himself with a piece of clothing he was carrying.

The Archdiocese of Denver said it takes the incident seriously but is awaiting the outcome of the case. Whipkey, who also officiates at parishes in the nearby towns of Mead and Erie, remains an active priest.

If convicted of indecent exposure, a misdemeanor, he would have to register as a sex offender, prosecutors said.

It was not clear why the June incident was not reported by the newspaper until this week.

I first heard the story this morning, and I thought it was rather hilarious. A naked Catholic priest goes out for a jog, and has an excuse for being naked. I can just picture the conversation with police.

Police: Sir, why don't you have clothes on?

Priest: Well, it's really quite simple. I sweat profusely when I'm wearing clothes. God told me that it was okay to go without clothes so I did. (Okay, I made that last part up!!)

Nice try there FATHER!! It's against the law to go jogging naked unless you're somewhere that it's not outlawed. I do find it interesting that if he's convicted on the indecent exposure charge he will have to register as a sex offender. Now if only the child molesting priests and nuns would be forced to register as sex offenders. Oops, my bad!! In order for that to happen, the Catholic Church would actually have to turn those priests and nuns over to the POLICE!!

Robert Guzman is ALIVE!!

Robert Guzman, the U.S. citizen who was illegally deported to Mexico in May has been found alive!! And, the United States Government didn't do a damn thing to find him.

Wrongfully Deported SoCal Man Found
Tuesday, August 07, 2007

By JACOB ADELMAN, Associated Press Writer

LOS ANGELES — A U.S. citizen who was wrongly deported in May was found at a border crossing and could be reunited with his family soon, an American Civil Liberties Union spokesman said Tuesday.

Superior Court Judge Carlos Chung ordered Pedro Guzman's release at a hearing Tuesday in Lancaster. Guzman, 29, was expected to rejoin his family later in the day, according to ACLU Southern California spokesman Michael Soller.

Guzman was jailed on a misdemeanor trespassing violation and deported to Mexico on May 11, according to authorities, after he allegedly told immigration and sheriff's officials that he was an illegal immigrant.

Guzman's family is suing federal and county officials over the deportation. In the lawsuit, the family claims Guzman is mentally disabled and was asked about his immigration status in jail and responded that he was born in California.

The ACLU, which helped file the lawsuit, has said it has a copy of Guzman's birth certificate showing he was born at Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center.

U.S. State Department officials have denied the family's claim that Guzman was mentally disabled, and federal and county officials have maintained they acted properly.

Guzman's family said he called them soon after he was deported to tell them what happened but couldn't say exactly where he was. After that they lost touch with him.

They said they spent weeks frantically searching in Mexico for him.

As you can see, the United States Government didn't find him. He showed up by himself at a border crossing.

Another thing that really pisses me off is the fact that the U.S. State Department actually had the audacity and the cojones to dispute his family's claim that he's mentally disabled. How fucking dare they!! If anyone knows that he's mentally disabled, it is certainly his family. It is not the damn government.

I hope that these bastards are held accountable, and I'm glad that the family is suing. These bastards deserve it!!

I'm very happy for him as well as his family that he is alive, and that they will be reunited. I, like probably many others, thought that he'd be deceased. But I'm pleased that there is a happy outcome here, no thanks to this damn government who put this whole situation in motion by being incompetent, ignorant, lying bastards.

Ohio Lawmakers Are Sick!!

Lawmakers in Ohio are out of their minds. A bill is being proposed that would require women who are seeking abortions to get PERMISSION from the father of the fetus before they can seek an abortion.

Ohio Bill Would Make Abortion Illegal Without Paternal Consent

A group of Ohio state legislators have submitted a bill that would ban women from obtaining abortions without consent from the man who impregnated her. The proposal comes two weeks after Rep. Tom Brinkman proposed a law that would ban all abortions in Ohio.

In addition to mandating that abortion providers obtain paternal consent before proceeding with an abortion, the proposed bill would also require women to provide a list of previous sexual partners in cases where the fetus' paternity was unknown. Abortion providers would then have to perform paternity tests.

Supporters of the bill tout it as a measure that would give men a say in the abortion decision. If the bill is passed, women in violation of the law will be tried criminally for abortion fraud, a first-degree misdemeanor. Men falsely claiming paternity and medical providers who perform abortions without paternal consent would be similarly charged.

"This extreme bill shows just how far some of our state legislatures are willing to go to rally a far-right base that is frustrated with the pro-choice gains made in the last election," said NARAL Pro-choice Ohio executive director Kellie Copeland. "It is completely out of touch with Ohio's mainstream values. This measure is a clear attack on a woman’s freedom and privacy."

The Record-Courier reports that Brinkman's abortion ban is unlikely to pass, but Adams' has an outside chance at becoming law.

If a woman is RAPED and becomes pregnant, are these people seriously going to force her to beg her rapist to allow her to have an abortion? If a woman or girl is the victim of incest and becomes pregnant, are these people seriously going to force her to beg her rapist to allow her to have an abortion? If a woman is pregnant but could die if she doesn't have an abortion that's needed to save her life, are they seriously going to force her to beg for permission from her husband, boyfriend, or the father of her fetus to save her damn life?

This bill adds insult to injury!! How fucking dare these people force a woman to seek permission from the father to have an abortion. How fucking dare they!! And to make matters worse, they want to seriously charge these women with a crime for not seeking permission to have an abortion!!

Pro-lifers in this country have seriously gone too far!! If you're a pro-lifer out there and you support this bill, you're sick. If you support this bill, you support RAPE and the RAPIST, INCEST and the RAPIST, and allowing a woman to die who could otherwise be saved if she had an abortion that was needed to save her life. Oh, I bet you're so fucking proud!! Pro-lifers make me sick!!

Rape...It's No Big Thing

This very attitude is why people don't take RAPE seriously in this country, and the rest of the world for that matter.

Reporter sorry for Vick comment

Pittsburgh reporter said Vick better off raping woman

PITTSBURGH (AP) -- A newspaper reporter who said Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick would have been "better off raping a woman" than being charged with dogfighting has apologized and will no longer appear on the local sports panel TV show where he made the remark.

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reporter Paul Zeise made the comments Sunday night on the Sports Showdown show on KDKA-TV, a CBS affiliate. He was disagreeing with another panelist who said NFL commissioner Roger Goodell should suspend Vick for the rest of the season because he was indicted on federal dogfighting charges July 17.

"It's really a sad day in this country when somehow ... Michael Vick would have been better off raping a woman if you look at the outcry of what happened," Zeise said. "Had he done that, he probably would have been suspended for four games and he'd be back on the field. But because this has become a political issue, all of a sudden the commissioner has lost his stomach for it."

Zeise apologized Monday.

"I regret the poor choice of analogies I used to characterize a professional athlete's legal situation," Zeise said.

KDKA apologized on its Monday newscasts and said Zeise, one of a group of rotating panelists on the show, will not be invited back.

Zeise's "insensitive and offensive" remarks "do not represent the view of the Post-Gazette," the newspaper said in a statement Monday.

Vick, 27, has pleaded not guilty to the charges and said in a statement that he looks forward to "clearing my good name."

Goodell has already barred Vick from training camp and Vick has lost several endorsement deals over the gruesome allegations.

Excuse me? Poor analogies? The fact that he would even use an analogy to compare rape to what Michael Vick is accused of shows a complete lack of brain to mouth function.

Yes, what Michael Vick is accused of is absolutely HORRIFIC. I can't even comprehend why someone would do what he is accused of doing. But to compare that to the brutal rape of a woman is just completely asinine to say the least. I said brutal because let's face it, RAPE IS BRUTAL.

I will give him one thing though. He is right that Vick would get off with a lighter sentence if he raped a woman instead. However, it is this reporter's very attitude that is what's wrong in this country. Don't think that he's the only one who thinks this way. He's not because if he was, rapists would be either locked up for LIFE or sentenced to DEATH. Since many people don't take rape seriously, the rapist gets off pretty much with a slap on the wrist.

I don't think being removed from the panel is good enough, and an apology certainly isn't good enough!! If I had my way, this reporter would be made to volunteer at a rape crisis center for a period of no less than one year. He would be made to sit there and listen to the horrific, brutal stories of rape victims over and over again. Maybe then he would understand what rape victims go through. Maybe then he wouldn't be so quick to make an analogy involving rape. Maybe then he would think before he opened his mouth!! Maybe, but probably not likely!!