January 25, 2006 by s.z.

Civility  InstaGlenn thanks the A.P. (and the NRO Media Blog) for proving why he's right to not have comments: because the press might pick up on the fact that his readers are hateful morons. P.S.  One of my questions was used during that WashingtonPost.com: Panel: Ethics & Interactivity today.  Unfortunately, it wasn't the good one, which was:. During his 'Talking Points Memo" of yesterday, Bill O'Reilly gave several reasons why he felt the Democrats weren't gaining any political traction in this country.  One of those reasons was that "The left is perceived as being out of control mean. When the liberal Washington Post is forced to shut down its own website because of personal attacks on its ombudsman, generated by left-wing smear websites, you know there's a huge problem."  (One of Bill's bêtes noir is left-wing smear websites).  Do you agree that your liberal readers are out of control mean?  And how does it feel to be keeping company with Bill "Thin-Skinned Bully" O'Reilly on the subject of how it's wrong of the left to draw attention to instances of when people in the media tell lies? And also unfortunately, my question only got responses from Glenn (who doesn't allow comments, but who gave some patronizing reply how commenting mores vary from blog to blog) and from Jeff Jarvis.  But hey, I figure that I have done my Leftist out-of-control-mean part to let the Post know how the Internet works, so I can sleep okay tonight. 6:42:44 PM

Wo'C Blogs o' the Week! Well, it's been a couple of months since we did this, so time for two more Blogs o' the Week. They are . . .. Sisyphus Shrugged, run by the lovely and talented (and funny, smart, and knowledgeable) Julia. And  Bats Left Throws Right, run by the lovely and talented (and funny, smart, and TV Guide knowledgeable) Doghouse Riley. Their blogs are much butter better more packed with golden creamy goodness than this one, so I hope they appreciate this honor. 5:46:37 AM

Renew America: So Easy to Mock, No Wonder It's Number One! (On Our List of Favorite Wingnut Sites) It seems that AOL is attacking Guy Adams again. Back in November, it was censoring him because of his conservative beliefs, in that it wouldn't let him send his newsletter to people who didn't want it.  (Brad at Sadly, No! covered this shocking story very ably in the expose' "Thank God for Renew America." You should read it, because, as Brad raved, Guy's column "has everything you could possibly want from a wingnut op-ed, including rampant paranoia, homophobia, and the complete rejection of what we lowly mortals know as 'reality.'" ) And now, as we learn from Guy's latest (which happens to be Renew America's lead story), AOL has crossed the line by allowing homosexuals to communicate with each other.  And since homosexual sex "wars against you and me," you can see why Guy is so upset with the Internet company.  Anyway, with this column, Guy has now done what many would have said was impossible, and has topped his previous AOL paranoiac rant. Let's read some of his work so you can see for yourself: A strange thing has recently happened in America. America Online, a new American icon, is actively supporting the homosexual lobby. They go way beyond tolerance toward the far end of endorsement. Thirty years ago, no one would dare to do what AOL has proudly done. I am currently an AOL subscriber, although that might change soon. Oooh, I bet AOL is trembling in fear at those ominous italics!  However, since Guy didn't quit the service after they censored him because of his conservative beliefs, I personally believe that Guy, like me, is too damned lazy to switch to another Internet provider, no matter what the provocation. Why on earth would AOL actively cater to homosexuals, who are such a very small minority in America? To be cool?  To be fair?  Because if you take $22.95 a month, and multiply it by just 5% of the country, it ends up being a pretty large sum?  I occasioned upon this when I went to add a "buddy" to my Instant Messenger list. I went to my Buddy List and clicked on Setup, which brought up: "Buddy List Setup" with "Make a connection" on the lower right, with "People Connection" under that. Clicking on "People Connection" brought up the URL http://peopleconnection.aol.com/messageboards, which then brought me to http://GayandLesbian.AOL.com/. I was astonished at America Online's audacity. Not only is AOL endorsing homosexuality, they're proactively sponsoring it. Actually, clicking on "People Connection" brings you a page with links to "Diet Tips," "Pet of the Day," "Sports Bloggers," etc., plus links to 15 AOL "communities," to include "Black Voices," "Friends, Flirts, and Romance," "Home, Hobbies, & Family," and, yes, "Gay & Lesbian."   The "Gay & Lesbian" page features several message boards and chats oriented towards homosexuals -- however, you don't just stumble upon it while trying to set up your Buddy List, you have to seek it out.  But hey, if Guy says that he was just going to the sporting goods store to buy a football, and then found to his horror that he was in the Tom Kat theater watchingForrest Rump, then I guess we should pretend to believe him. So, yeah, AOL does feature a section which is geared towards homosexuals, and so it is "proactively sponsoring" homosexuality by giving gays and lesbians a way to communicate with each other -- just as it proactively sponsors disabilities by giving the disabled a "community."  (And yeah, I was shocked, SHOCKED when I first learned that some people frequented chat rooms with titles like "Men Seeking Men." "Men Seeking Women," or "Married But Cheating" in order to find sexual partners -- but in the 8 or so years since I discovered this, my outrage has kinda diminished.) But back to Guy, who is going to cut to the chase. Cut to the chase So let me ask you bluntly, if I might: What is so "American" about things like anal sex between two men? Yeah!  And what is so "online" about it?  I think we need to shut down this Internets thing, as it allows people to talk about unAmerican things like sex.  (Of course, that would would mean that we'd miss out on Guy's Renew America columns, but I guess that's a sacrifice we'll have to make). Anyway, that was the chase, but Guy has not begun to fight the homosexual agenda. NBC proudly states that "Will & Grace" has won eight GLAAD Media Awards. Okay, so what does that prove? Nothing at all? Nothing at all. Then why the heck did you bring it up, Guy?  I thought we were talking about AOL. You see, Hollywood, including NBC, is trying extremely hard to separate the image of homosexuality from the harsh and brutal reality of the homosexual lifestyle, by depicting homosexuals as somewhat normal, if only a bit quirky. When the truth is, homosexuals are icky and disgusting, in that they have icky, disgusting sex -- but Hollywood won't show you that, unless you go to the Tom Kat theater and watch those gay pornos. But there's nothing normal about male-to-male, or female-to-female, "sex." It wars against nature and it wars against you and me. Yes, kids, gay sex is warring against you and me.  I can't add anything to that. God got it right the first time, and anything that willfully chooses otherwise is unwise, at best. The first time (or on the first day), God created the heaven and the earth -- and somehow gay sex is willfully choosing otherwise.  Although I don't know what this means, I agree that it's unwise, at best. Passage of homosexual "rights" and related hate-speech laws threatens to effectively silence the Church itself (as I'll talk more about later in this article). But you can change that.Call and write your legislators and let them know that you adamantly oppose the "gay agenda." When you call, ask the operator to "register" your opinion.   I think it would go a little something like this: Operator: Senator Smith's office.  How may I help you? You:  Hi. I adamantly oppose the "gay agenda"  Operator: Well, what do you want me to do about it? You: Will you please "register" my opinion? Operator: Sure thing -- it's now "registered" in our special opinion registry. You:  Don't you need my name or anything? Operator: No, I'm sure that information is already included in our "Kooks & Loonies" file.  But thanks for calling -- the Senator really values your input (tee hee!), and he shares your concern about the gray credenza. You: I said "gay agenda!" Operator:  Whatever. Now, back to Guy, for "Will and Grace: Behind the Gay." In "Will and Grace," we have what NBC describes as a "light-hearted drama," but let's imagine--just what does Will actually do with his boyfriends? Yes, let's imagine what TV characters do in their off-screen time, and work ourselves up to a froth thinking about the horrible, depraved stuff they're probably up to when we're not watching.  I apologize for the question, but now you can begin to see that "gay" is not really gay. There's nothing "gay" about anal sex or any other male-to-male sex act. I am not trying to be provocative for the sake of shock value alone, but with good reason I ask you, when the curtain folds and the light fades to black, just what do homosexuals do with each other in bed? Disgusting to contemplate, isn't it? Now, imagine what Dick Cheney and Lynne do with each other in bed, after the lights go out.  Disgusting (and horrifying) to contemplate, isn't it? I think that if you can picture this for a moment, as unpleasant as it is, you will see the awful truth about the homosexual lifestyle. So, my imaginings about all the depraved, nasty stuff that TV characters do with each other when I'm not looking reveals the truth about the homosexual lifestyle, and not something sad and twisted about my mental health?  Good to know.  Like I said, there is nothing "gay" about it, is there? While watching shows like Will and Grace, have you thought about that? Homosexuals can be so intentionally illogical. LOL!  Those silly homosexuals, calling themselves "gay" when really they must be terribly unhappy, if we go by my mental images of all that hot, wild, sweaty, sex the "Will and Grace" characters are having. The pomposity of the more radical homosexual activists is amazing. They go to great lengths to hide the actual nature of their acts. I hope I have not offended you by asking you to imagine these things, but having done so, you can see that the images these activists give you of normal--or normal-and-yet-only-slightly-quirky--homosexuals is just not true. Wait, homosexual activists go to great lengths to hide from me that they're having homosexual sex?  The bastards!  Now I know the truth from imagining Will having sex with his boyfriend, I will never trust them and their pomposity again! Anyway, Guy has a LOT more to say, including the astounding statement that "the average male homosexual has hundreds of sex partners in his lifetime," plus a warning that we could face another Civil War in America if we don't defeat the Homosexual Agenda now, because "just how many pastors and family members will have to be locked up before we say 'Enough is enough!' and are forced to take action?" But let's cut to the chase (again): It's not about "equality." Since homosexuals can buy houses, obtain loans, work where they want, vote, live where they want, and do just about everything else a normal person can do, just what is this call for "equality" all about, except for them calling for "special" homosexual rights and extraordinary (and unneeded) legal protections that could punish you and I simply for our views? We should have every right to express our views about fags (who can do almost everything a normal person can even though they're not normal) by beating them up -- after all, this is America, isn't it? The tolerant are really the most intolerant when it comes to moral conservatives criticizing their lifestyle, which is why they are lobbying feverously for more hate speech legislation. And why on God's green earth would any sane parent want their child to be indoctrinated with elementary school courses like "Heather Has Two Mommies"? Do you know what two lesbians do together in bed? I'm sorry to be so graphic and provocative--but is this what you want for your daughter? Yes, I remember when my daughter took the "Heather has Two Mommies" course in first grade.  On the first day, the kids learned that some families have a mommy and a daddy, some have just a mommy or a daddy, and some have two mommies or two daddies.  The rest of the eight-week course was spent teaching the tots what Guy thinks lesbians do together in bed.  Personally, I found it overly graphic (but kind of provocative and arousing).  However, my daughter was so scarred by the experience that she ran away from home, and now is a rich Hollywood lesbian who writes for "Will and Grace" -- or so I like to imagine. Okay, I guess that wasn't actually the chase.  But let's cut back to AOL: AOL gives you some other "gay" choices as well--among them being "Lambda lounge" and "Gay Marriage." [...] Another homosexual group, the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) actually states that "NAMBLA's goal is to end the oppression of men and boys who have mutually consensual relationships." Amidst all the furor over criminals who rape young children, then get probation or extremely light sentences when convicted--IF they're convicted (this has been brought to light thanks to guys like Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly)--how can we even seriously entertain such statements? How can they even dare say such a thing? It's called reprobation, and they go far beyond the bounds of decency by any standard. All this homosexual decadence is all proudly advertised under "AOL Gay & Lesbian"--they have no shame at all. Anything to make a buck. Is NAMBLA a homosexual group? Does AOL link to it or advertise it? Is Guy several chicken McNuggets short of Happy Meal?  No, no, and yes. However, it is true that Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly spend a lot of time creating a furor about the handful of cases where scary strangers have kidnapped and raped young children, all while failing to warn viewers that most child molesters are family members, friends, neighbors, or acquaintances of the victims.  But that's a topic for another, less-gay day. In my opinion, AOL has no corporate conscience, and I suspect, since leadership dictates policy, that some of AOL's senior management have no public conscience either, in addition to possibly participating in the homosexual lifestyle themselves. That is just inference on my part, but you can connect the dots as well as I can. And then you can imagine what those AOL senior managers do together in bed, once the lights go out. Yes, they think of new ways to bombard their customers with advertising. Disgusting, isn't it? Anyway, Guy calls upon you to contact AOL, Time/Warner, NBC, ABC, and CBS, and tell them that you find it offensive that they are "actively and openly endorsing sexual relations between people of the same sex." Then, call or write your legislators and "let them no in no uncertain terms that you oppose all aspects of the homosexual lifestyle, that you oppose hate crimes legislation, and that you are strongly against homosexual marriage or even civil unions." After that, stick your head out of the window, and yell that you're crazy as hell, and you're not going to take the gay agenda anymore. And spend some time imagining what those gay monkeys do together when night falls in the jungle -- and then lie on the carpet gibbering to yourself until the men in the white coats take you away.  1:48:30 AM