Who wants to burn down a church?

If you don't, I suggest that you watch this video. Then maybe you will want to join me.

This is the kind of stuff that turns me against religion. Sure, I'll buy that religion does give some people a sense of peace or whatever with life and helps them feel good and all of that, but there is too much of this stuff. And the worst part of it isn't Pat Robertson...it's the fact that there are probably millions of people who listen and think, "ya know what, Pat's right! If Haiti's going to make a pact with the devil, of course God is going to send a devastating earthquake to clean that island up. What's that? The pact happened all the way back in 1825? Well, you know what, GOD'S GOT SHIT TO DO!". Better cut a check to Pat right now to cleanse Haiti from the devil residue!

Jeez, Pat. I know you are insane to the point where you've claimed that the Lord done hath given you the strength to leg-press 2,000 pounds. Well, that and your age-defying protein shake, which is probably some form of jizz latte. And I know you blamed Katrina on all the sin and abortions and the dicks touching together down in New Orleans. Weird, though...all of these dens of sin are located on coasts vulnerable to earthquakes and hurricanes. Maybe we should start a sinplex in International Falls, Minnesota and see what the Lord comes up with to run that one out of town. Maybe polar bears? Anyway, this one's got to take the cake. Blaming an earthquake leveling a dirt-poor country that kills an estimated 100,000 people on a voodoo priest from the early 19th century? Come on, man. Doesn't God have a statute of limitations on this stuff? The sneakiest part about it was the way God subtly placed a fault line under the country and kept it inactive until he really needed it. Although I guess all of the scientists that predicted such an event have some explaining to do...why were they crediting their obvious conversations with God to science? Probably just served to piss him off more.

The best part is the comparison to the "wealth" of the Dominican Republic, as if God had big plans for the entire island of Hispaniola until the voodoo priest went and fucked it all up. The differences in societies have nothing to do with the mountain range that separated them...I mean, come on! Those ancient civilizations couldn't just dig tunnels or something? Or just boat around them to see what's up with each other? The French and Spanish couldn't just get together on this one? Crazy. Pat also ignores that while the DR is in much better shape than Haiti, it's still poor as fuck. Just because it has some resorts doesn't change that fact that it's not a great place to live. In fact, the main reason that it looks so good is probably the fact that it's right next to Haiti. Haiti is the DR's fat friend. So the Dominican looks good enough comparatively for "US" to fuck it. We'll probably still end up with crabs.

So fuck you, Pat Robertson. You and the complacently-nodding light-skinned chick that you rode in on.

OMG, socialism!!!

Yeah, you got that one right, kids. That's Mao Zedong, November 2001's Dictator of the Month! Congrats, Mao!

So, as could be expected, the cries of socialism that we heard pre-election are really ratcheting up right now as Obama begins to actually do things in office. Town hall meetings are being flooded with retards absolutely frightened of Obama and clinging to the only thing that they trust, their Glenn Becks. HE'S A GOD DAMNED DIRTY SOCIALIST, I TELL YOU!

No, lady, let me tell you. Ok. First, understand what socialism is. If your dictionary defines socialism as "a 3% income tax increase on the highest bracket along with a public healthcare option", then please, throw that dictionary away. Or just cut a hole in it and use it to transport your meth around. But please, do not use the actual definitions inside of it.

WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SOCIALIST AND ALWAYS WILL BE. We are not a democracy. We are a republic. We have elected leaders. Our checks and balances consist of like, 500 people total in a nation of 275 million. So, if you motherfuckers in Detroit don't like something that Justice Antonin Scalia believes, well...you better hope that Ruth Bader Ginsberg has your back, or else you are completely and wholly horsefucked right in your bankrupt foreclosed asses. We have always had welfare. We have had Medicare. THIS IS NOT FUCKING NEW. You retards are going to have your taxes LOWERED by Obama because you do not make $250 K a year.

Two things here....first, insurance. Health insurance. Public options. "How can private insurers compete with a government option that doesn't have to pay taxes!". Good question. But save it for now and ask it to yourself the next time you send something with FedEx. Or the next time you drive your Nationwide-insured car, eschewing the horrible state-insurance option. Or maybe the next time you fuck some drunk chick with your Trojan-sheathed whiskeydick instead of adhering to the government's abstinence-only policy. Wait, Palin didn't get elected. But still, how can Trojan compete with abstinence? Insurance companies have been accused of collusion in the past and, as profit-based enterprises, the best way for them to make a profit is to deny every claim that they can possibly deny. All the government plan is attempting to do is to keep them honest. Do you really trust the insurance companies? While you may disagree with the option, which is fine, just try not to be convinced that a public option will destroy private insurance and forcefully titfuck the "American Way". It won't.

Staying on the topic of insurance, there is a good economic reason to have insurance. Let's consider auto insurance. You are required to have auto insurance. Because when you hit some douchebag Oregon-liberal right in his gay little Prius, somebody is going to have to pay to fix the little engine on his car that converts flowers into torque. And you can't afford it. That's why you have insurance. Who do you think it is fucking up auto insurance for the rest of us? It's the uninsured. Economics is also behind the reasoning for the law requiring seat belts to be worn. It may be your body, but we don't give a fuck. Because when your dumb ass flies through the windshield, WE have to pay more to keep you on life support. WE have to pay more for all of the surgeries that you are going to require now to reattach your leg.

So, don't give me that "it should be my choice whether or not I have health insurance!" argument. You may believe it, but I don't. Because when you get cancer, do you think we are going to just let you sit there and die? Or, when you get shot, do you think that we are just going to let your uninsured ass bleed to death there on the street? No. The hospital is going to treat you, get stiffed, and the ripple effect following will raise everybody else's health insurance in the end. So why don't we just see if we can insure everybody? If not, the rest of us are paying for your right not to have health insurance. You fucking socialist. So that's my argument when you ask me how we are going to pay for all of this...in the grand scheme of things, I think most current insurance prices will drop. Might I be wrong? Abso-fucking-lutely. I don't know much about economics. However, I will contend that you don't either, because no one does. It's an inexact "science". If one side was right and the other was wrong, we'd have a perpetual cycle of one side fucking up everything they touch and the other bringing it all back together. But we don't have that. Possibly because the only economics those 500 or so in power care about are their own, but that's a different story.

And secondly, socialism. Welfare. Medicare. Food stamps. GET A FUCKING JOB! That's easy for you to say, everybody with a job. Hey homeless guy, get a fucking job! Yeah. I'm sure he actually just turned down a position at Target. I don't want the government taking my money and giving it to these poor ass motherfuckers while they sit around and enjoy the good life in Section 8 housing! Come on, people. First of all, perfect unemployment is not only practically impossible, it's not even recommended economically. Second, is you think sitting around and collecting $200 a month in food stamps is the life, then go do it. Go ahead, cowboy, this is America. You have the freedom. And if you tell me you'd rather not because your patriotic hands would rather sweat and callus and make valves for some employer who most likely doesn't give the slightest fuck about you, I'm going to jizz on your Toby Keith CDs. You do it because you like being able to afford, like, cable. Seriously, man. I actually like Toby Keith. I don't want to have to do this.


(EDIT: Upon second thought, the "partial unemployment is economically recommended" argument is disingenuous for the point I'm making. Sure, it's true, but it doesn't really address welfare recipients so much as it addresses people waiting in the wings and keeping wages reasonable and productivity high.)


And, truly, welfare and its ilk keep those poor motherfuckers from attacking you. If you cut welfare out, you had better have one hell of a security force because these legions of hungry ass people who don't have a single thing to live for know that you have money. And they are coming to your house. Probably with a gun, since there are so many of them out there. Welfare is as much about humanitarianism as it is about assuaging the masses and keeping them complacent. So please, for the good of the rest of us, pay that extra $103 a year or whatever it takes in taxes to keep welfare going.

We have always had socialist tendencies. But we are not truly socialist. In a truly socialist state, yes, you would have public health care. But it wouldn't be an option. You'd just take it. And you'd go to work where the government told you to go to work. And you'd do what they told you to do. And you'd get a monthly stipend. And that's it. The government would control all industry (well, I guess they are kind of getting close to that, actually). You can disagree with some of Obama's policies. Hell, I do myself. I think him and Bush and very similar and don't see how someone could love Bush and hate Obama and vice versa. But don't be a moron about it. Don't bring that weak "but he's a socialist!" stuff in here, because I'm going to get all argumentative and start raising my voice and possibly end up cockslapping you in the face. If your main argument is to vapidly characterize Obama as a dirty commie socialist, I'm going to characterize you as a fucking retard.

Ok. Now let's get back to talking about Vince Young's sadfaces.