My son and I just got back from a thing called "Tsunami on the Square", which is a sort of quasi-theater, quasi-circus-ie thing. Sort of Cirque de Tsunami. Prescott has a big old county courthouse "square" and there're a lot of events there. One of the things that makes this a nice place to live. Anyway, this particular thing is very "alternative", in terms of the artsy performers. It was actually pretty good, although some of it was a little too "down the rabbit hole" for a group most of whom hadn't taken any drugs today.

Why the description? Well, when the evening started, we got a little political speech. It was the sort of incredibly lame type of thing you'd expect, but that always makes me shudder that people can be that simple minded. It's not innocence... that would warm my heart. It's pure "numbskullery".

In introducing the evenings festivities, the guy says something like: "This is what we need to bring the world together. Sharing the arts! Coming together as a community and communicating through art and dance and music. We don't need torture. We need the truth and the truth is in art." Something very close to that... including the torture thing.

OK... here's the scene. Many of the women in the audience, and almost all of the female performers, were in form fitting pants (short or long... either way, we were getting a good look at the shape of the legs and ass), tight shirts with their midrifts, shoulders, and in most cases cleavage showing, and no bras. In the performance, naturally, the women were occasionally sexually suggestive in their gestures. Among the men, I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing we had a gay guy or ten. And, none of the men had appropriate Muslim beards, and nobody was carrying either a prayer rug or a Koran.

The guy who made the speech saying that there is an answer to the worlds problems as simple as share the arts so we understand each other, and his troupe, would, in fact, probably would be the FIRST targets of an Islamafacist regime. He seemed to figure that if we dance for the Islamafascists, or with them, they won't want to kill us. Of course he forgets, they would STONE our women for dressing like our women dress. We can't dance WITH their women, because they don't get to dance.

The Taliban was a demonstration of what al Queda considered to be a good government. All these wonderful women, who truly were wonderful performers, (and, hell yes, they were very nice to look at) would be stoned or killed outright for looking like they looked. If we lose our war with Islamafascism, those ladies will be in burkas, won't be able to drive, won't be taking yoga and dance... They guys won't be able to pursue their artistic desires... And, if they resist, if their art doesn't manage to pursuade this insane enemy to become liberal, they'll be killed, or tortured (not for "truth" but as an example to the rest of us), etc. etc. etc.

He says that dumb ass shit, gets applause of course, and I'm thinking, "You people just have zero idea what we're dealing with here. This little infidel gathering would be a RIPE target. Those poor 'tortured' guys at Gitmo would LOVE to blow this fucker sky high... they'd get the salaciously dressed women, the infidel men, and the infidel kids all in one fell swoop. And I don't think they'd be dissuaded by the fact that we're showing them our 'truth' through dance."

I wish things were as simple as my artistic friend said. I remember the days when I'd watch the Olympics, prior to the end of the cold war, and I'd think, "You know... they enjoy their sports, we enjoy our sports... surely we can get along!" Ooops. Forgot that in their system, what the people cared about didn't mean a damned thing. They had an oppressive totalitarian government that controlled their lives. See this post for more...

By the way there was a standout performer at this event. He might actually help us in the war on terror because the terrorists minds would be blown wondering how he does what he does, and we could nail 'em. He's very cool, and truly talented. His name is Kid Beyond. He's a trip!

Filibuster BS... or... Who's the Fascist Here?

In response to the Powerline post: Deja vu all over again (follow Powerline's links for the whole thing)--

I think the point needs to be made over and over: the Democrats are saying that a President's nominees held up in committee BY THE MAJORITY PARTY (when different than the President's party) is THE SAME as a MINORITY filibustering presidential nominees that have majority support. It is saying that it should make NO DIFFERENCE who has won an electoral majority. I think the word for a RULING MINORITIY is... "elitist?" Perhaps "fascist?" Funny, though... the lefties keep trying to say the Bush administration, with it's electoral victories in the presidential race, and majorities in both houses of Congress is fascist. Minority rule is... democratic? Majority rule is... fascist? Go figure the logic in THAT one!

Religious Zealotry Meme Debunked

The far lefties are trying to scare the middle with charges against the right that the conservatives are religious zealots trying to establish a theocracy (see Maureen Dowd). First, I think it's interesting to note that they find religious zealots trying to establish a theocracy to be a bad thing, while at the same time seeming (at least on the far left) to be constantly undermining the war on terror, which is, in essence, a war in which we are fighting religious zealots trying to establish a theocracy. I'm generally stunned that liberals don't see what Pres. Bush has done for women's rights, human rights in general, gay rights, etc. in Afghanistan and Iraq and praise him unabashedly. I always want to shout: Remember!!! They've shown us the kind of government they want to have, because they had it in Afghanistan. Do you REALLY want us to back down so THAT can happen to us?

Anyway... that wasn't the original purpose of this post. My point is that when you look around the blogosphere and see all the conservatives, you see... um... normalcy. Even irreverence, and playfulness. Case in point: The Cotillion, a collaborative blog by women on the right. These women KNOW they are women. They include sexual innuendo for humor in their posts. One of the contributors to The Cotillion is Atlas Shrugs who put a post on her site titled, "Deep Throat Gives No Pleasure". The point is, these women are not uptight religious fundamentalists, they are real, powerful women; women that are complete, from their intellect to their sexuality.

Yes, there are religious fundamentalists on the right. Guess what? There are religious fundamentalists on the left too. And while GWB may speak of his spirituality (not stating that his RELIGION is right, but actually just speaking of his own spirituality), he wasn't campaigning in black churches! Suddenly playing the "religion" card to get African Americans to vote for them. And the Republicans don't have the African American leaders with "Reverend" preceding their name either. HOWEVER!!! I have a sneaking suspicion that Rev. M L King Jr. would be a Republican today. It seems that the Dems use the black churches to keep the victim culture firmly in place. My recommendation to African Americans: The Republicans are interested in the content of your character, not the color of your skin. We don't think there's anything that skin color should mean you can or cannot do, or be.

I think the whole religious theocracy meme is a canard, and people on the right need to make it known that it does not represent us. Look around at the real conservatives, not what the MSM or the far left would have you believe are the conservatives, and you find average (or above average in many categories) people... most of whom would be as uncomfortable with a "fundamentalist Christian" state as a secular Democrat (though possibly for different reasons).