NSA denied Hillary’s 2009 request for secure smartphone

Newly released emails show that a 2009 request to issue a secure government smartphone to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was denied by the National Security Agency.

A month later, she began using private email accounts accessed through her BlackBerry to exchange messages with top aides.

The messages made public Wednesday were obtained by Judicial Watch, a conservative legal-advocacy group that has filed numerous lawsuits seeking the release of federal documents related to Clinton’s tenure as the nation’s top diplomat.

The Democratic presidential front-runner has come under intense scrutiny for her decision to use a private email server located in the basement of her Westchester home to route messages, some containing sensitive information.

Security experts have raised concern that the arrangement could have left the messages vulnerable to attack by hackers working for foreign intelligence agencies.

Clinton’s desire for a secure “BlackBerry-like” device is recounted in a series of 2009 exchanges between the State Department and the NSA.

The State Department’s designated NSA liaison expressed concerns about security vulnerabilities inherent with using BlackBerry devices for secure communications or in secure areas. However, the specific reasons Clinton’s requests were rebuffed are being kept secret by the NSA.

Right Wing Christians Are Evil Hypocrites

Please share this article.

Fundamentalist Christianity was a reaction to the internal pressures of theological modernity, often equated with theological liberalism and emerging external pressures of the theory of evolution, rapidly advancing science and industry, and the growth of cultural secularism within the evangelical community in the late ...

Right-wing Evangelical Fundamentalism claims to "go back to roots of Christianity." In fact, the "literal" (i.e., the earth was created in seven literal days) reading of the Bible was invented in the 19th century. Few fundamentalists care about the early church, the Gospels, the Catholic traditions, Augustine, Arian heresies, encyclicals and councils. Rather, they blend Southern Conservatism, bastardized Protestantism, some Pauline doctrine, gross nationalism and a heavy dose of naive anti-intellectualism for a peculiar American strain of bullshit. As Reverend Cornel West has noted, "the fundamentalist Christians want to be fundamental about everything, except 'love thy neighbor.'"

Here are some verses we liberal Christians wish they would get "fundamentalist" about:

1. Immigration

The verse:

When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God. - Leviticus 19:33-34.

Why Fundamentalists Hate This Verse:

Because fundamentalists are xenophobic: religious fundamentalism is a reaction to the multiculturalism of liberal democracy. Rather than seek a "brotherhood of man," religious fundamentalism longs for a tribal community, without the necessary friction from those with foreign beliefs, cultures and customs. Here's an open letter from the president of an organization called Christians for A Sustainable Economy (Or as I call it: Christians for an unsustainable environment):

We are called to discern among, "sojourners" (like Ruth and Rahab who intend to assimilate and bless) and "foreigners" (who do not intend to assimilate and bless) and to welcome the former with hospitality.

This is an odd spin, given that in Leviticus, the command is unambiguous, there is no aside about a distinction between those who intend to assimilate. The letter then addresses the immigration bill:

Its passage would allow 11 million illegal immigrants to become citizens in the short-term, with likely an additional 20 million family members as new citizens within about a decade. ... The net price tag of S. 744 will be in the trillions of dollars. ... Such escalation of debt is one way to destroy a nation.  It is immoral. It is theft from American seniors and children. It is unbiblical. It is unkind.

I could write a bunch of stuff about those numbers being crazily inaccurate, but let me allow the Lord to respond:

I will be a swift witness against... those who oppress the hired worker in his wages, the widow and the fatherless, against ... those who thrust aside the sojourner, and do not fear me, says the Lord of hosts. Malachi 3:5.

2. Poverty

The Verses:

One of the most humorous aspects of modern-day, far-right Christianity is its reverence of capitalism. That's because Christ could be considered almost "anti-capitalist." Consider this verse:

Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God. - Matthew 19:24.

There is some version of the story of the rich man approaching Jesus that appears in every synoptic Gospel. In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells the rich man, "go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven."

The story of Lazarus should similarly terrify modern day fundamentalists:

Lazarus is a beggar who waits outside of a rich man's house and begs for scraps. When both Lazarus and the rich man die, Lazarus ends up in heaven, while the rich man ends up in hell. When the rich man begs for water, Abraham says, "Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish." Luke 19:25.

The Believers Share Their Possessions

All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.  Acts 4:32-35

Why Fundamentalists Hate These Verses:

Because the only thing fundamentalists dislike more than immigrants is poor people. Seriously. Just this year, Tea Party Congressman Stephen Fincherexplained why he thought the government should cut food stamps entirely, "The role of citizens, of Christians, of humanity is to take care of each other, but not for Washington to steal from those in the country and give to others in the country." Michelle Bachmann has also made a similar statement. The entire Tea Party movement is based on the idea that a huge portion of Americans are "takers" who suck the lifeblood out of the economy.

The Catholic Church actually has a long history of decrying the exploitation of the poor and supporting union movements See Rerum Novarm).  G.K. Chesterton's writing on the rich often hits Occupy Wall Street levels ("The rich man is bribed... that is why he is rich.") But fundamentalists insist that poverty be explained in terms of a personal moral failure. They therefore hold that success should be described in terms of morality; this is the so-called Protestant ethic that Weber praised. But it is also, as Nietzsche noted, the "ethic of the hangman." The poor are considered culpable so that they can be punished -- like today's cuts to food stamps or the public shaming of those on welfare.

3. The Environment

The Verse:

In Genesis, man is given stewardship of the Earth, God's creation. [Stewardship, in the Christian tradition implies protection. Man should exist in harmony with the earth, not work against it.] As is noted in Colossians 1:16-17:

By him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities -- all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

Fundamentalists Hate The Verse

Jesus Christ once told his followers:

No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money. - Luke 16:13.

Increasingly, the religious right is trying to do exactly that, intertwining Evangelical fundamentalism with unfettered capitalism -- with disastrous results for the environment. Thus, American political life is increasingly dominated by Christians who reject the religious ethos, in favor of capitalist ethos.

One Conservative Evangelical publication, World magazine, hypes the "We Get It" campaign, which seeks to discredit the threat of global warming. It also claims the threat of climate change is "alarmism" and fears that efforts to clamp down on emissions will hurt the poor (read: corporations). In reality, climate change will have its greatest effect on people living on less than a dollar a day who can not adapt to higher temperatures. Conservative Evangelicals are not concerned with dwindling biodiversity, the destruction of ecosystem, rampant pollution, global warming and the numerous other environmental challenges we face. Rather they, with the business community, are concerned with the bottom line. The future is irrelevant (unless we're talking about government debt). Thus, the Biblical command to protect the environment is widely eschewed.

4. War

The Verse:

In two Gospels, Jesus tells his followers:

You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. - Matthew 5:38-42, Luke 27-30.

In another passage he says:

You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. - Matthew 5:43 - 45.

Why Fundamentalists Hate This Verse:

As a religious and political movement, fundamentalists have defined themselves as a party of opposition, rather than of love, grace and mercy.

In her fantastic essay, "Onward Christian Liberals," Marilynne Robinson argues:

The excitement we are seeing now is called by some scholars a third great awakening, yet it is different from the other two... it is full of pious aversion toward the so-called culture... and toward those whose understanding of religion fails to meet its standards.

While past "Great Awakenings" have looked inward, seeing sin within the conflicted self, this new awakening looks outward, seeing sin in the wider culture. The culture, that which is secular is evil, while the church is sacred. This is why modern religious fundamentalism gravitates towards xenophobia, homophobia, sexism, etc. Fear and disgust are its motivating factors.

This fundamentalism inclines some religious people toward a pre-emptive "war of religion" and a strong disgust (that sometimes culminates in violence) toward Muslims. Oddly enough, the Christian tradition has developed a theory of "Just War" (developed by Aquinas) which condemns war except when all other options have been exhausted and there is just treatment of prisoners (with a specific condemnation of torture). If only one of the past two "Christian" presidents had listened.

5. Women

The Verse:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. - Galatians 3:28

Why Fundamentalists Hate it:

Although the right often claims the Bible supports their absurd ideas about gender roles (just like the Bible supported anti-miscegenation) such claims have beenthoroughly debunked by theologians. Generally, when you'll hear an explanation of why women belong in the home, it'll rely on a misreading of one of Paul's doctrines.

In contrast to Paul, Christ rarely concerned himself with sexual mores, he was far more concerned with fighting oppression. Fundamentalists want to keep women submissive and subservient, but Jesus won't let them. In Luke, for instance, Jesus is blessed by a priestess named Anna. He praises a woman who stands up to a judge and demands justice. It's worth noting that in a time when women could not testify in a court of law, all four resurrection stories have women arriving first to Jesus' tomb (although it's unclear which women). Jesus talks with a Samaritan woman at a well and praises Mary Magdalene for listening to his words (Luke 10:38-42).

Fundamentalism Obscures True Religion

These verses are powerful and I believe that they should be carefully considered.

I worry that Christianity and religion in general is represented by its most conservative, fundamentalists elements. Remember that Marx drew his the inspiration for his famous quote "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" from the example of the early church (Acts 4:32-35).

I understand the fun that Sam Harris and Reddit have destroying fundamentalism, and I went to a Christian college and had jolly good time of it as well. "Haven't you read your own book?" I would ask smugly. But once the gleeful potshots are finished, we all have to face the fundamental and aching deprivation of having been born. We can continue to have a fun time berating those who believe the Bible explains science and that there was a snake in the Garden of Eden, but it's really a waste.

The Christian message doesn't contradict science, and nor is it concerned with bourgeois politics. Ultimately Christianity (and many other religions) are about transcending politics and fighting for social justice. Think of Martin Luther King Jr., Desmond Tutu, Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi and Thich Quang Duc -- all of whom were influenced by their religion to change the world. Jesus saw how oppression and oppressors consumed the world. He, as all great reformers have, sided with the oppressed. This kind of skewed fundamentalism is radically new and far removed from true Christianity. True Christianity offers us a far superior doctrine -- one of social justice, love and equality.

Enter your email address to get top stories and blog posts emailed to you each day.

Socialism Defined

We have had unbridled socialism for the banks and corporations forever. Some refer to it as corporate welfare. It's real name is National Socialism aka Nazism. Ron Paul referred to is as mild Fascism but lately it is not so mild.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander or so they say but maybe that is good for the gander is not necessarily good for the goose? Corporate socialism is not working. American democracy is gone. What replaced it was plutocracy but the plutocracy has given way to the kleptocracy and the kleptocrats. One prime example of that is when the financial industry fuck the American people so hard that they ended up fucking themselves and then extorted the taxpayers to bail them out. Many of these whores gave themselves million dollar bonuses with that taxpayer bailout money. Corporate socialism is Nazism.



True socialism is merely a more fair economic system than capitalism where instead of the corporations and banks owing the government the government/the people has ownership over the corporations. Republicans hate that idea and they hate it because it would mean a more equitable distribution of wealth. Corporate Republican hate that idea because in the sick sick evil mind of a corporate Republican the one who dies with the most wins. The base of the Republican party are ignorant, uneducated, low information hate mongering bigoted dumb asses. Proof of that is the ground swell of support for Trump and Cruz and the lack of support for John Kasich. The majority of Republican voters love to toss words like socialism and Marxism around without have a shadow of a clue as to what those words mean. They hear criminal trash like thief Shawn Hannity, drugster Rush Limbaugh and crybaby Glenn Beck using those words so the righties repeat those word and parrot the phrases. I doubt if Beck, Limbaugh and Hannity can define socialism and it they could define it I doubt they could understand how it works.

Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterized by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production; as well as the political ideologies, theories, and movements that aim at their establishment.



Alan Grayson sent me the following.

Dear Mr Bastardo, 

The blood-libel against Bernie Sanders is that he admits – he admits! – that he’s a democratic socialist.

I will quote Sen. Sanders on this: “Let me define for you, simply and straightforwardly, what democratic socialism means to me. It builds on what Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, when fought for guaranteed economic rights for all Americans.” (Like a decent minimum wage, for instance.)

But that got me wondering – what is a socialist? If you listen to the Republicans talk about socialists, they seem to mean that socialists are moochers. Or, as Mitt Romney framed it, the “47 percent” – the ones who receive benefits of some kind from the government.

Like veterans’ healthcare. Like pensions. Like Social Security and Medicare. Like unemployment insurance. Like student loans. Like FHA or VA mortgages. Like food stamps. Like that.

I’m looking at my dogs right now, nine-year-old Maltese twins. Take a look:

As you look at this picture, ask yourself this: Do you see any socialists?

Are my dogs socialists? Are these moochers, or poochers?

These dogs can do nothing all day long, and they still get their food and water. (Admittedly, the food is dog food.) Whenever they’re sick, they get free medical care. (One of them just had a bone spur removed, but now he’s got his hops back.) When they were puppies, they received free education, in terms of learning tricks and commands. (They will spin, and play dead, in return for a treat.) No matter how hard I try, I can’t even get them to do the laundry or wash the dishes (although they are willing to lick them). I suppose that I could try to hire them out as service dogs, but most likely, they would just run in circles, chasing each other’s butts.

They do “protect” the house, all 7 lbs. each, by barking loudly whenever anyone approaches. Including my children. And whenever a stranger dares to enter the house, they will . . . lick him.

Oh, and speaking of my children -- Are they socialists?

I pay for their shelter, their food, their clothing, their transportation, their tuition, their health insurance, their phones, their computers and toys (much the same thing, to them), their personal care products, and their Hulu subscription. And what do I get in return?

Well, their love. But beside that?

How about my Mom -- Is she a socialist?

I love her very much. She has been an incredible mom, for an amazing 58 years in a row. But the fact is that she hasn’t worked a day in almost two decades now. (Don’t get me wrong. I’m not jealous of her. Actually, I envy her.)

There are 150 million people in this country who work, and there are 170 million people who don’t. Plus over 200 million dogs, cats and pet fish, who never worked a day in their lives, and never will. If they ever get the vote, look out.

Wow. It’s just like Sen. Joe McCarthy said – this country is just crawling with socialists. It’s going to the dogs..

Which bodes well for the Sanders campaign, one would think. As the old saying goes, even a dog knows when it’s being kicked. And that’s exactly what’s been happening to the American middle class, for a long, long time.

If you like the dogs – or your fellow human beings – then please support our campaign with your contribution of $10 >>

Courage,

Rep. Alan Grayson

How Fat Acceptance Killed Itself

For a long time I have said that fat acceptance, the angry jealous fat girl gluttony denying kind wasn't dead but that is just smelled that way. Fat acceptance has been in its death throes for about 8 years and like fat people it died slowly e.g. a stroke here, diabetic blindness there, a heart attack here, cancer there, a diabetic amputation here, clogged arteries there. It would appear that third wave fat acceptance has been mercifully removed from life support and has finally died.

The last bastion of fat acceptance was a very retarded site called Fierce Free Thinking Fatties. There certainly was not free thinking or free expression allowed on that site. If you didn't agree that diets are bad and everybody is mean to fat people and that being fat has no health risks they would not allow you to express your opinion let alone state medical facts.



Everyday the owner of Fierce Non Thinking Fatties would post an article whining about fat people and the cruel cruel world they are forced to live in. WTF!! 75% of Americans are fat slobs. Fat people are being mean to fat people?! It's true that fat girls are meant to fat guys but hell, fat girls are mean to everyone. That's just how those miserable yeast beasts are. The owner or someone else associated with Fierce Big Stinking Fatties would post an article often accompanied by the words "trigger warning." Only a crazy cunt would say something like that.

As their leader, some fat ass calling himself Shannon spouted deadly delusions daily. He would name each day of the week. For instance he would call Monday, Metamorphosis Monday and I suppose with all that extra flab and body parts those piggies were actually morphing into something other than human. If I, Fat Bastardo were to rename Monday I would call it Meat Face Monday. They call Friday, Frankly Friday and I'd call it Fat Ass Friday. They call Wednesday Wishful Wednesday but I would call it Wipe My Fat Ass Wednesday... You get the idea.

UPDATE: Fierce Free Thinking Fatties is now off line!

The last post to appear on Fierce Fatties was on February 23 2015. Nearly four months and no new articles. What happened? Did the owner finally grow a pair, develop a conscience and realize he was full of shit? Did he buy the farm and no I am not talking about Pepperidge Farms?

The other bastion of blubber was Big Fat Blog. The last article there was posted on February 24 2013.

Kate Harding has crawled back into her hole.

Kelly Bliss is missing in action.

Joy Nash of fat rant fame is no longer posting her tiresome Youtube diatribes.



This is what happens to a movement that squelches speech and is fueled by insanity and paranoia. It eventually ossifies, collapses under its own weight of stupidity, ignorance and bad ideas and eventually it dies. This is what has happened to 3rd wave fat acceptance. Sorry fat girls, MeMe Roth did not kill fat acceptance with her truth and logic. Like a gormandizing glutton on a year long food binge, fat acceptance killed itself.

Gay Republicans: A Retrospective

Marco Rubio On The Far Upper Right

BOMBSHELL: Marco Rubio is GAY GAY GAY

When we think of gay Democrats we think or Barney Frank and that's about it. If a Democratic politician is gay he'll make no bones about it. Democrats like gays but damn few of them are gay. It's a different story when it comes to Republicans. The Republican party has more gays than the Barbra Streisand fan club and the American Guild of Interior Decorators combined and Republicans hate gays. There have been two on the debate stage who get so flustered over straight alpha male Donald Trump that they both throw hissy fits. Even that flit boy Glenn Beck said he wanted to stab The Donald non stop.... Calling Dr Sigmund Freud! Rubio and Cruz were so flustered over Mr Trump that I thought for a moment they would start slapping this with their purses. Kasich being a straight beta male knew his subordinate role and stayed out of it.



There are so many prominent closeted gay Republicans that have been outed by their scandalous behavior (Former Republican Pedophile House Speaker Dennis Hastert comes to mind.) one must wonder how many more remain in the closet. It also seems that the more these Republicans invoke Jesus and the Bible the more egregious their deviant behavior is. Their own Apostle Paul referred to homosexuals as dogs which reminds me of a joke. What did the gerbils say when the two Republican senators walked into the pet store? Arf Arf Arf!! That said I leave you with the story of mega gay hating rich Conservative preacher Ted Haggard.

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Delighted Snickers: by America's Greatest Christian Mrs Betty Bowers

I suspect that this will be a rather uncomfortable time at the Pastor Ted Haggard tax-free mansion. You see, Reverend Haggard is a vociferous spokesperson against gay marriage and, until yesterday, his wife probably had no idea she was actually in one.

Oh, I can hear some of you gals used to being around florists and Governors of New Jersey -- and Texas -- cackling. You think I'm selling the woman's intuition for pushily obvious queenery short. But if Haggard's unblinking congregation could sit and listen to such a liturgical Liberace week after week and not realize they were in the presence of someone who makes Barry Manilow in a full-length mink look butch, they really need to re-calibrate their ability to detect prescription-strength doses of flamboyance. Because if you can't tell that Haggard is not just gay, but marabou mules wearing gay, you must have bought your refurbished Gaydar at the same kiosk Tom Cruise got his E-meter.


But before everyone piles on with protestations of shock and awe, allow me to pause for praise where it is due for this man Harper’s claimed to hold more sway over the political direction of evangelicalism than any pastor in America. It is quite clear that Ted Haggard is a man with admirable devotion to the Christian/GOP cause. After all, it must take enormous willpower for a meth-crazed sodomite to remove a penis from his mouth long enough to denounce homosexuality.

Haggard famously claimed that "the only difference between me and George Bush is that Bush drives a Ford and I drive a Chevy." And from what I can tell, this may be the only honest thing the man has said. Let's compare, shall we? 

Against gay marriage? 

Check.

Fondness for sniffing illegal white powder? 

Check. 

Association with gay male prostitutes? 

Jeff Gannon meet Mike Jones. 

But I guess it is no more difficult to be a homosexual who purports to dislike homosexuality than it is to be a strike-first warmonger who purports to follow the Prince of Peace. Indeed, if only lying were a car, instead of a way of approaching the world, maybe one of them would have finally traded it in for something else by now.

But Mr. Haggard shows no more knack for honesty than he does for picking discreet prostitutes. As an evangelical preacher, he is clearly too used to getting up in front of people who believe anything he says to lie convincingly to those still fettered by thought. Indeed, his lying skills are so uproariously amateurish that, frankly, I think he needs some lessons from a pro like Dick Cheney, a man who can say, "I'm not currently saying this" and mean it. 

For example, Haggard claims he visited the man he previously had never met simply to get a "massage." The chaste, innocent purpose of this endeavor must explain why he used a pseudonym. (As Marge Davis asked, "Well what is it that they are massaging is what I want to know!"). 

Haggard is also claiming that he purchased a "first time customers only" introductory sample of crystal meth (meth dealers are notorious for their promotions). But threw it away. This must be our GOP version of the implausibility of "not inhaling," but, in typical Republican fashion, seems rather more blatantly wasteful. Did he not think of the consequences of this lie? Why, poor Nicole Richie is probably combing the side of every road out of Denver for that tiny baggie as I type this. But the talent-free waif searches in vain. Anyone who listens to Haggard's insistent voice messages can tell that this was someone jonesing for a fix, not a mildly curious man given to impromptu middle-age hard-drug experimentation like another 50 year-old might finally try a Mojito. Listen to the recordings: we're talking "Lindsay Lohan down to her last kilo" desperate here. 


It's become almost an axiom of American unctuousness that the more preening the public scold, the more inevitable the public scald. A public paradigm usually has a private paramour. Once pompous glutton William Bennett set himself up as an arbitrator of our virtues, it was only a matter of time before the arbitrariness of his own virtues was laid out like a losing twosome in blackjack. 

While this type of cynical scorn of one's own words might strike the naive as galling, there has always been a disconnect between private men and their public protestations. But for the miracle of vote tampering and activist Supreme Court judges, evangelicals would have been as essential to Mr. Bush's election as they like to assume. And every pandering appearance near a cross or coded reference to scripture stuck like a clumsy, phosphorescent Post-It into a State of the Union address reminds us that the President is keenly aware of this perceived debt. But David Kuo, in his book Tempting Fate, tells us that such overt supplication is done with patronizing perfunctoriness. Evangelicals are actually mocked behind their backs at the White House. 

The Bush White House might have found this revelation embarrassing if people like Haggard didn't routinely prove that Evangelicals don't take anything they say seriously either. Jim Bakker got caught with his secretary while she still had her own breasts. Jimmy Swaggart got caught in a motel on a urine-stained mattress littered with unsavory streetwalkers. And Paul Crouch had to pay off his gay lover. (Mr. Crouch, appears to have been forgiven, if only because even those most strongly against homosexuality understand the urge to look for sexual outlets that don't involveJan Crouch being naked.)

Mark Foley campaigned against legalizing gay marriage. Almost inevitably, we then find out that this was probably only because he would never tie the knot with someone old enough to legally marry. Haggard, perhaps in response to how Foley's crude, after-the-fact attempts to link his unacceptable homosexual indiscretion to a perfectly acceptable addiction, was rather smart to have a sex scandal prepackaged with an even better addiction. Well played!

Not to be outdone, Republican candidate for Florida Governor, Attorney GeneralCharlie Crist, much like Ted Haggard, has not allowed his actual participation in homosexuality to get in the way of speaking out against the idea of homosexuality. And, frankly, I'm not sure what more readily impugns his boyfriend Bruce Carlton Jordan's character: being a convicted thief or working for that crazy sex kitten Katherine Harris. But what can you expect from the state that gave us not only the odious Miss Harris but also aquamarine appliances? 

While Jesus was appallingly lax in neglecting to mention His disgust with homosexuality, He did take Republicans (for some reason, called Pharisees back then) to task for being hypocrites. As any modern Republican can tell you, Jesus, of course, had it all backwards. Homosexuality is to be despised. And lying (even about despising homosexuality) it just a quirk, something you tell people to get their money or vote. Ask Ted Haggard's best buddy James Dobson.