Inauguration

Well it's been a busy couple of days. Yesterday I got a phone call from the CEO here at S&Z to tell me how proud he was of George W. Bush for his wonderful inauguration speech. He said he brought him to tears and felt the urge to salute the president several times during the speech. Then he commented that he knows Bush didn't write the speech, he isn't smart enough for that, but he sure did speak it well. So just as I always do when I hear such an overwhelmingly good comment on something from a conservative, I check it out. I mean, you all know I hate Bush, but I will give the man the benefit of the doubt if I see improvement. Well I saw none. This speech was totally broad in it's call for a spread of American democracy in the form of Liberty an Freedom. No mention of strengthening our alliances in Europe. No mention of what sort of plan this next four years will bring, no mention of anything really, but Freedom and Liberty. Sounds good, if he wasn't talking about a crusade to rid the world of everything that isn't wholly advocated by the Christian side of the American political system. Y'know it's true, all you have to do is listen to Bush in any given moment for about five minutes and the reasons why the rest of the world hates us so much are blatantly displayed.
Of course the news media didn't do it's job very well. According to Media Matters:
"Media Matters for America inventoried all guests who appeared on FOX News, CNN, and MSNBC during the channels' January 20 inauguration coverage. Between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Republican and conservative guests and commentators outnumbered Democrats and progressives 17 to 6 on FOX, 10 to 1 on CNN (not including a Republican-skewed panel featuring Ohio voters), and 13 to 2 on MSNBC. Moreover, the rare Democrat or progressive guest usually appeared opposite conservatives, whereas most Republican and conservative guests and commentators appeared solo or alongside fellow conservatives."
"Additional note: CNN political analyst Carlos Watson's Ohio citizens panel included four Republicans, one Democrat, and one swing voter."

Great, so it would be reasonable to assume that the news media wasn't so concerned about the democratic whining of the day, which is somewhat understandable, but as media matters notes, most of the liberal biased guests were put up against conservatives, while the conservative guests were mostly alone or with other conservatives. So why is this a problem? Well even though Bush's speech didn't reflect it, all day long these assholes are spitting out propaganda for their foolish SS policy, their overwhelming attachment to a lack of reality in Iraq and a great many words about how much more fit for the presidency W, Laura and even the girls are. They really are the perfect first family, aren't they? Sad. They also took a moment to jab Kerry for being booed by some of the crowd, but there's another BS part of this inauguration.
In order to avoid the protesting that went on 4 years ago, they changed the way the security worked. So that if you wanted to get close to the event at all, you needed a ticket(guess who wasn't allowed to have tickets?) and beyond that, security was up the ass keeping protestors behind fences. So of course the president was met with cheers, there were only supporters around him. Of course those supporters would have a low opinion of John Kerry. So where am I going with all this? I guess I'm just saying that it sucks we have four more years of the same rhetoric, lies and rediculous plans for world domination. And anyone that doesn't agree this is the best way for America can continue to be labeled anti-american, unpatriotic and treasonous.

Two other fun media bits. Cal Thomas from the Washington Times believes that "24" is actually a warning to help wake up Americans to possibilities of terrorism. Quote: "Read this book and/or watch "24" on Fox for a chilling reality check. Government must get tougher, or it will be complicit in the deaths of more than the 3,000 people who perished on September 11, 2001. " Sure and did you see Smallpox?!? We could all be in danger right now!
Also the Daily Independent received a letter worth reading if you're into bigoted assholes that believe Christianity is the only way anyone should live. His point is that liberals shouldn't be aloud to speak because "Oh, they raise ridiculous arguments like other (false) religions would be "upset" if they were forced to pray alongside the righteous in schools or council meetings.Surely those others would appreciate the opportunity to be saved.
As God's chosen people, we Christians have the right to express our religion and praise tolerant, patient and merciful God, and I don't want to read any more letters from Liberals suggesting non-believers should be allowed to express their superstitions just because we Christians can express ours.
The Founding Fathers were God-fearing men and never intended the first Amendment to promote other superstitious beliefs.
Ridgecrest used to be filled with right-minded, polite and decent people.I can't believe the vicious slander of some people who have the nerve to portray or suggest Jesus behaved as a Liberal.
Jesus makes his position very clear. The wisdom of an "eye for an eye" would never occur to a Liberal.
Liberals are always talking about peace at any price, when Jesus said: Do not think I have come to bring peace, but a sword.
Liberals hate people who have managed to raise their station in life, and instead insist on giving money away to the irresponsible: Store yourselves treasures for Heaven for where your treasure is, there your heart is also.
No one can serve two masters, either your are a good conservative with God or you are not with God. Remember: A bad tree cannot bear good fruit."
Jesus was a liberal, and the New Testement preaches giving and caring for others, not "eye for and eye", that's pre-Jesus. On the two masters comment, Jesus said to follow the words of the king so long as they don't impede the will of God. And on the bad fruit comment, I was always taught that God don't make no junk. Oh well I guess if I was a poorly educated man with a strong tie to religion preached not through the bible, but some bigoted pulpit, I'd be a fool like this man too.
I'm no big Christian, in fact I'm quite the latter, but it's quite obvious from any gospel that Jesus was for peace, not war and thay my friends is a liberal viewpoint. Turning the other cheek is a liberal viewpoint. Conservatives have the rope on Jesus rhetoric merely because of the rampant amount of dogmatic nonsense that is tied to how people preach or interperate a scriptural text that was written over a long period of time and not a single stitch of it was written during the time the actual Jesus lived. The gospels were written later and that old testement was written earlier. Period.
I'm going to parse this for shits and giggles, but read the rest, it's all like this.