Parodies Lost

Bush Vetoes Stem Cell Bill; Republicans Growing Divided

July 19, 2:45 President Bush just issued the first veto of his presidency, legislation that would have made it easier to get federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.  The president has the most support in the House, which is likely to vote on overriding the veto as early as later today.  The bill was four votes short of an override vote in the Senate.

According to the AP, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., was quick to criticize the president's veto.  "I am pro-life, but I disagree with the president's decision to veto the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act," said Frist. "Given the potential of this research and the limitations of the existing lines eligible for federally funded research, I think additional lines should be made available."

The veto is likely to become a major campaign issue in November, according to the Washington Post.  Democrats, playing off the public's broad support for wider stem cell research, believe the issue will be a powerful one for them. 

"This is the kind of issue that voters use to distinguish members who are beholden to the far right," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), a chief recruiter of Democratic House candidates for this fall's elections. "Every family in America is touched by someone who could benefit" from embryonic stem cell research."

The issue is clearly splitting the Republican party and is made all the more sensitive with former first lady Nancy Reagan strongly supporting the legislation.  Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, a staunch opponent of abortion, said the bill promotes life by encouraging research.  He told CNN, "I believe we are aiding the living, which is one of the most pro-life positions you can take."

An analysis of the available research on Political Arithmetik found that while there is little difference between 2001 and 2005 on support of expanding stem cell research with about two thirds of Americans in favor, the 2005 data shows that Republicans are more opposed than Democrats.  Even so, writes Charles Franklin, political science professor at the University of Wisconsin, who runs the site, "The most striking thing about the [2005 research] is that the Republican party is indeed divided on this issue."

With conservatives growing more critical of Bush because of his foreign policy efforts, creating even more splits within the party, this latest event is certain to have an effect on the Congressional elections in November.  A shocking turn of events occured earlier today when Freshman Sen. John Thune, the Republican who ousted Senate Democratic leader Tom Dascle, said Wednesday that if "he were running this year, he'd distance himself from President Bush and his agenda."  Thune not only cited Iraq as the major problem, he said that Bush's policies were making it more difficult for Republicans this fall.

The problem, as usual, is how much and in what districts.

Technorati Tags: Bush, stem cell research, veto, religion, science, Divided Republicans
Add to: | Technorati | Digg | del.icio.us | Yahoo | BlinkList | Spurl | Furl |

Homosexuality & Religion

You young whippersnappers reading this won't remember Frank Zappa & The Mothers of Invention, one of the great absurdist rock bands of the 60s, but there's a great line in one of the songs:  "I'm not black, but there's a whole lots of times I'm not proud to be white either."

Well, I'm not gay, but there's a whole lots of times I'm embarrassed to be associated with heteros.

There was this fellow in Houston who'd been attending a Methodist Church in South Hill, VA for several months.  He sang in the choir.  He was a well-known local businessman.  Then he made a really silly request of Rev. Edward Johnson, the church's pastor.  He asked to become a formal member of the church.

The good reverend said no.  Didn't want no queers in his church--at least as a member.  Go ahead and sing in the choir--everyone knows that gays got great voices.  But, shudder, if you become a member, maybe you'll start practicing your secret deviant homosexual rites and turn all our young people into...gasp...faggots and faggettes.

To be fair, the issue has split the entire Methodist church & the reverend yesterday was put on unpaid lead after giving his supervisors the finger for telling him to admit the unnamed gay fellow.  (Not literally the finger of course; he just said no, following in the footsteps of Nancy Reagan but forgetting that she was talking about drugs.)

Seems the Methodist Church is a little like the military.  You can join, but you can't be ordained.  That'd be terrible, even though "gay men and lesbians are 'persons of sacred worth'..."   Let's see, not worth as much as a hetero, which means we heteros are more than sacred.  Why, we must be Godly!

"Church member Gary W. Creamer told the Mecklenburg Sun newspaper that Johnson 'was holding to Biblical principle and that 'a terrible injustice' was done to the pastor."

Excuse me?  Injustice done to the pastor?  Let's bring Jesus down and ask him what he'd do....Seems he won't answer, but I'll tell you what he'd do.  He'd toss the Rev. Johnson out on his ass the way he tossed the money lenders out of the temple.  Well, at least I hope he would.

I haven't read the Bible in years--don't even own one.  But I sure hope the Bible doesn't preach against homosexuality.  If it does, I'll stop pretending to be a tolerant agnostic and call down the wrath of God on all religion.  (Hmm...can an agnostic do that?  Oh what the hell, I'll try.)

I looked up the Sermon on the Mount.  Jesus said, "Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven."  And "Judge not, that you be not judged."

I don't understand it.  I never will.  Wasn't Pastor Johnson persecuting the gay guy?  Wasn't he judging him?  Does that mean old Pastor J ain't gonna see the kingdom of heaven but will be judged himself?

What the hell are people so afraid of.  Science has virtually proved that homosexuality is no more a matter of choice than eye color or whether you go bald.  It's genetically determined.  It's not evil, it's not demonic possession, it's not a decision based on wanting to be a good dancer.   

"Hmm, lemme see.  I really want to look good at parties, and, frankly, most guys dance like psychotics getting electro-shock therapy.  Think I'll become a homo so I can really dance.  That'll get the chicks."

Homophobes of the World:  Repent.  I swear that if there's a God, you'll burn in hell for so long that eternity will seem like a couple of minutes.  You wreak of evil, you make a mockery of everything Jesus tried to teach.  (He was great whether or not he was the son of God.) 

And why do I keep capitalizing God if I'm an agnostic.  Oh yeah, respect for those who believe--even those who believe that only heterosexuals are deserving of a place in God's house.

What assholes these mortals be.

In Jamesons Veritas

Intelligent Life in the Universe?

'Tis a question that rocks the very sages back on their well-worn heels--is there intelligent life in the universe.  I used to think SETI (Search for Extra-terresteral Life) was an exercise in humanity's search into the unknown.  Now I know better. 

In a recent interview, Dr. Leopold E. Paster, astrophysicist at the Jerkes Astronomical Observatory,  revealed the truth about SETI.  Luckily, we were in a bar in New Orleans, we were down and out...wait, someone else wrote that.  Well, we were three sheets to the wind, whatever that means, which caused him to let down his guard and reveal the truth.

At the time, we were talking about the bar maid.  Although we could only dimly make her out through the smoke in the room and fog in our brains, we both agreed she was a real looker.  That set him off.

"Looker...looking...searching," he muttered.  "That just brings back memories I'm trying to crush."

"What's that?" I asked, searching for my drink.

"Looking...SETI...Is there intelligent life in the universe."

"Well," I asked, finding my drink on the floor and deciding it was easier to order another one than try to get the Jameson's Irish whiskey from the floor back into the glass, "is there?"

"Bah, who cares?" he said sadly.  "The real question is, is there intelligent life on earth?"

Truly, I was shocked.  How could he ask such a question?  So I asked him.

"How can you ask such a question?"

He gave me a withering look.  "Open your eyes, meatball.  Look at what's going on around you."

I looked around and saw a bunch of drunks and what I was sure was a very cute bar maid.

"Well," I said, "this is a small sample."

"Bah and more bah," he said.  "Do you realize that a majority of Americans don't think humans evolved from earlier species?  Almost half don't think plants and animals evolved.  Almost two-thirds think we were created directly by God.  There's a museum in Petersburk, Kentucky where they tell people that T-Rex lived in Eden."

"No wonder Adam and Eve bolted," I said.  "Hard to call it Eden when you've got some maurading dinosaur trying to turn you into a mid-morning snack."

"No," he said.  "They claim that this T-Rex was a vegetarian."

My jaw dropped.  He looked at me and shook his head. 

"Just look at you gaping like some moronic elected representative of the people, which brings up more evidence that there's no intelligent life on earth.  Do you know who the most respected world leader is?"

"George Bush?" I guessed.

"He proves my point once again," Dr. Paster said to himself.  "No, according to a Gallop Poll, it's Vladimir Putin.  When I heard that, I almost choked, but then I started thinking.  It's a set-up poll.  It's like asking which turd floating in a pond is the least offensive.  Face it, can you think of one president in your lifetime that you're proud of?  Or one politician today you'd enthusiastically support for president?"

"Edward Kennedy?" I was getting desperate and confused.

"Dolt," he muttered.  "We go to war for the wrong reasons, we don't know what to do when we've won the war, there's an earthquake that kills tens of thousands in Kashmir and the Muslims and Hindus are still killing each other there, middle class Muslims are becoming born again suicidal maniacs, the Chinese are working mightily to win the prize for the greatest pollutor in the history of humanity...ah, who cares?"

"I care," I said meekly.

"Sure you do.  Do you care that we've created a world where millions of children a year die of malaria when the proper use of DDT would save them--but, no, DDT bad, hurts little birdie eggs, let the babies die.  Do you care that millions of American children go to bed hungry every night?  Do you care that...ah, forget it."

Well, Dr. Paster went on for a long time, but that's all I can remember...except for the startling revelation that scientists were looking for intelligent life in in the universe in the faint hope they could get them to come here and straighten things out.

(By the way, Leopold E. Paster is not his real name...but if you're smart, you can figure it out.)

'urp.

Fat & Breast Cancer: When Will The Media Learn?

Front page news--low fat diet may reduce risk of recurring breast cancer.

For years, health news reported by the media, good and bad, has either given people false hopes or scared them silly.  Only later did we discover--and almost never on the front page--that the studies were inconclusive and found to be useless or, worse, that just the opposite was the case. 

The public is so fed up that they tend to disbelieve all health news--and reporters and editors scratch their heads and wonder why their credibility lingers just above used insurance salesmen.

"A low-fat diet can decrease the risk of breast cancer recurrence by more than 40% in patients with a form of the cancer that is not sensitive to levels of the hormone estrogen, researchers said Monday," was the lead in the LA Times Story.  At least the reporter knew enough to note that for women who were sensitive to estrogen (which was never explained) the reduction wasn't statistically significant.

As usual, The Washington Post buried the real news after about ten paragraphs of hype.  "After an average of five years, 96 women on the low-fat diet -- 9.8 percent -- had had a recurrence of cancer, compared with 181 -- 12.4 percent -- of those on a standard diet. That amounted to a 24 percent reduction in risk on the low-fat diet."  Then they went on to warn that the results were preliminary. 

What the reporter didn't note that any epidemiologist will tell you that a 24% reduction is probably no reduction at all.  Because epidemiology is such a weak science, you need a 100% change to have any confidence at all.  That's why they have to do so many studies to confirm initial findings.

Gina Kolata of The New York Times, one of the best health reporters in the country, at least put the cautions early in the story.  The study's principal investigator, Dr. Chlebowski, "and independent experts at the meeting and elsewhere said the study's findings, which were only marginally statistically significant, must be confirmed before recommending that women with breast cancer follow such a diet." 

And only The LA Times noted, "But a major epidemiological study from Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston published in 1999 found no firm link, even hinting that a low-fat diet might increase the risk of breast cancer."

If that's the case, what's this story doing on the front page of all three papers?  Don't editors know that people will read the headlines and take away what they want to hear?  Particularly for cancer patients, any straw is one to be grasped, no matter how slim.

Let's dangle false hopes in front of those already desperate and terrified.  Nice work, media moguls.

God Exists! Original Remains of Adam Discovered

Archeologists around the globe are all aflutter about the recent discovery of a fully-preserved body said to be that Adam--the first man, the Lord God's finest creation.  (Although a group of female archeologists known as "Freedom For Eve" have taken exception to the use of the world "finest."  They suggest "first" creation and suggest that with Eve, God corrected numerous design flaws in his first attempt at a human.)

On April 2 of this year, a Kurdish peasant in Northern Iraq fell through a soft spot in the earth into what was later discovered to be a sealed tomb containing the fully preserved remains of a man.  Carbon dating has ascertained that he died sometime around 4004 B.C.

The peasant said he wanted to rob the grave, but that a blinding white light came through the hole in the earth, and he heard a deep voice calling out to  him.

"Schmuck, you're going to revile the tomb of the first man I placed upon the earth?"

"My name's Achmed, not Schmuck," the peasant replied.

"Oy, such a mess in such a short period of time," replied the voice.  "Get thee to thy betters and bring them here.  There will be...what is it you people worship these days?"

"Allah."

"What, you want a piece of Allah, you putz?  No, what earthly things do you desire?"

"An Oreo cookie?" asked the peasant, now thoroughly confused.

"I offer you the world and you want some hydrogenated bundle of fused chemicals?"

The peasant thought.

"No," he said, "I changed my mind. I want gold."   He wasn't sure if that was the right answer, as he gingerly looked up.

"Gold," muttered the voice.  "Vell, it's better than Oreos.  So go get thy betters and I will fill thy meagre hut with mountains of gold."

It took the peasant a while to convince anyone to accompany him, since he'd already claimed to find the Virgin Mary, Mohammed's lost molar, and the Shah's testicles.  But finally a little old Arab scholar walked up the steep hill and climbed down into the hole.

There he found the perfectly preserved man.  Long, brown hair, just touching his shoulders.  Clean fingernails.  Trim waist.  A real looker, if you know what I mean.  But what convinced him that he'd found the ellusive Adam were two items.  First, on the right wrist was a silver bracelet with the word "Adam" inscribed.  That eliminated a lot of other possible names.

But the most important discovery was that, on his left wrist, was a watch that read "Sunday, 11:59 p.m. October 23, 4004 B.C."  When he examined the watch, he realized there was no battery.  Apparently, God gave Adam the watch but forgot to put in a battery.

"Bishop Ussher was right," proclaimed the Arab scholar.  "Clarence Darrow was a dickhead.  Oh glory to Allah the most masterful."

Wait a minute, you might ask.  Why Allah?  Why not Ya--eh or however the Jews write their God's name?  Why not Je-us?  A simple reason.  When he examined the body of Adam, he pulled a dried piece of apple from between his teeth, and, most important, he also discovered that Adam had never been circumcised.

So the mystery's solved.  The Arab's win...except for the stupid peasant who ran home, stood in his house and said, "o.k., I'm ready for the gold."

So God dumped a couple of tons of gold on the house. 

When he saw what he'd done, he sighed.  "Oy vey."

The Values We Cherish...Beyond Security

I am so relieved.  Saint Ashcroft has returned to his Missouri Mission to kneel and pray until the Good Lord calls for him.  (What ol' Lord gonna do to him is another question & he ain't talking to me about.)  But our national security is not only in good hands, it's now being balanced by the new AGs commitment to "give law enforcement the tools they need to keep America safe while honoring our values." 

That's so sweet.  But wait!  What are our values?  A great country has to have great values, right?

Let's see:  We value human dignity.  That's why Congress is close to passing a industry-sponsored bankruptcy bill ("No Deadbeat Left Behind") that treats everyone equally--those who thiink of bankruptcy like "get out of jail free" cards and those silly enough to pile up medical bills so high even Bill Gates couldn't bail them out.  (And these are people with insurance.) 

We value freedom...except for those who may have known someone who read about a person who once saw a terrorist on TV.  Those people deserve to be held in some unrevealed location without benefit of legal counsel, constitutional rights, or toilet seats.  And torture?  Get real, you lilly-livered liberals.  A little pain builds character.

We value tolerance...except for gays who want to get married.  Yuck!  Like, how gross.  They might even kiss.

We value truth...unless it gets in the way of a good war.

We value civility...except in the Halls of Congress.

We value opportunity, which is demonstrated by the ethnic origins of our new  A.G. Alberto R. Gonzales--who must be a great American because he's Hispanic.

Gosh, I'm proud to be an American.  Aren't you? 

Computer Security & Hubble. Bah, humbug.

According to SiliconValley.com, our government's computer security systems in the largest agencies improved last year and now rate a D-.  Or, said in a different way, U.S. computer security sucks.  Recently, we learned that the vaunted Star Wars defense system, sucking money out of the federal budget with the enthusiasm of a new born at its mother's breast, can't even get its stupid missiles to launch.  Forget about knocking down incoming missiles.

Incoming missiles.  From where?  Newton was a very smart man with his 3 laws, one of which is that a body in motion will continue in motion until whacked on the head with a rolled-up newspaper.  Even Clinton didn't kill that stupid program.  So why should we be surprised that the government can't secure its computers.  Think of the expression blindingly obvious.  Some things are so obvious, they blind you to them.

For one more pet peeve, continue.

What's a Novelist to Do?

After 30 years toiling in the public relations field, I make the monumental decision to return to my first love, writing.  I thought about writing the Great American Novel, but great authors are troubled by deep, meaningful, philosophical or personal issues that drive them to explore the depths of the human condition. 

I'm not that interesting.  I wish I were more angst ridden, but I just don't have the attention span.  Forget about mutli-tasking, I find single-tasking challenging enough.  But I am drawn to humor, satire, and parody.

For example, current novel:  Down-on-his-luck reporter, writing for a supermarket tabloid, stumbles onto a national conspiracy involving virtual every federal agency--the White House, DOJ, DOD, Ag, Homeland Security, U.S. Trade Representative, CIA, and FBI--and the biotech and organic food industries.   Someone sends an Italian wannabe hit man who's really a Philadelphia Main Line rich kid homosexsual to kill him.  (Obviously it fails.  Having your hero killed off halfway through a book is not a good thing if you want to get published.) 

There are a host of absurd, unbelievable, unreasonable situations.  At least, I try to make them as absurd as I can.  What happens?

Davos, 2005:  Where the powerful, the elite, the decision makers assemble every year to debate and, one hopes, eventual resolve the major problems of the planet.  And who shows up?  Richard Gere, Sharon Stone, Angelina Jolie, and Gerard Depardieu, among other celebrities.  Celebrities?  Why  would anyone in their right mind put Jolie on a panel?  And why would anyone want to listen? 

How can any self-respecting parodist (is that a word?) go about his craft when the world insists on doing things he'd never put in a book?  If I wrote about Davos and had Sharon Stone there standing up and offering $15,000 (whoa, Sharon, that's some generosity) for some poverty program, encouraging others to kick in, my editor--if I ever got one--would throw the manuscript into that vast black hole where rejected manuscripts go.   

"Parody's one thing," he say with a sneer, 'but it has to have some touch with reality.  This is just stupid."  And he'd be right.

Oh well, we trundle on.  Maybe I'll make those four "celebrities" part of the vast conspiracy...nah, too absurd.

Rush to Judgment: Health Scares & Realities

Health news, the great joke in American journalism. 

• I.U.D. contraceptives are bad.  Oops, nope, they're o.k.
• Dioxin's the most toxic substance known to man.  Well, that is if we could find a study to support that claim.
• Breast implants are dangerous.  Well, 22 studies say there's no evidence of that.
• Margarine is good.  No, wait.  It'll kill you.
• Booze, the devil's brew.  Hey a couple a day keeps heart attacks away.
• And now, a paper noted for some of the worst health reporting of any major news paper, The Washington Post, confesses,  "Oops, we were wrong on Aleve."  Seems that the Post didn't have all the information from the National Institutes of Health (NIH, also known as "Government Grants are Us") when they--and dozens of other papers--went to press with headlines designed to scare people to death.  To their credit, this article goes into great detail about what they missed and why the so-called warnings about taking Aleve and similar drugs was kind of like yelling fire in a crowded theater because someone might have a book of matches.

What they found?  Steel yourself.  In fact, if your easily scared, I'd get myself a stiff drink before reading on.  Studying people over 70, the government found that those taking Aleve had about 3.5 cardiovascular incidents of some kind while those taking a placebo had 2.5.  That's one extra incident per hundred people.  Sure it's a 50% increase in risk, but no sane epidemiologist would take it seriously, which makes you wonder about who works at NIH (Motto:  They're going to die anyway, so let's scare them to death.)