The broader point of Digby’s post is fine with me, but when it comes to “anti-Lincoln cranks”, allow me to put forth an alternative view: I think Lincoln was one of the worst presidents for not letting the South secede in the first place. Seriously, why do we venerate the guy? He made clear many times that he only cared about keeping the union together, he had views of blacks that would make Strom Thurmond applaud, he freed the slaves as a tactical manuever, not a moral one, and thanks to that stupid fucking move of keeping the southern states in the union by force, we’re still cursed a century and a half later with recalcitrant, angry, anti-intellectual rednecks who insist on voting their prejudices and bitter resentments. If he had let them go, they would have eventually noticed their northern neighbors enjoying luxuries like basic literacy, shoes and toilet paper and come crawling back begging to rejoin.
Damian
Posts by Damian :
There Must Be Some Mythunderstanding
Hey, I’d be fine with letting our own snake-handlers have their religion in public schools as long as we could have an alternative like this. Of course, religious instruction in an academic sense has never been the name of the game, just the opportunity to preach to a captive audience while preening and making a spectacle of themselves, despite some fairly clear instructions to the contrary.
O Tempora, O Mores!
This must be some of that post-partisan comity I’ve heard so much about. Ah, it’s nice to see that Sensible Liberals and voices of right-wing reason like the New York Post (headline: Bush Dodges Crazy Iraqi’s Flying Shoes) can come together to sing along with Eric Cartman: Respect mah authoritah, you ungrateful wogs! When we want to hear what you think, we’ll waterboard it out of you!
(My only complaint is that dogs are noble animals, and in no way deserve to be slandered by having George W. Bush named as one of them.)
If it were just one of the dimmer lights at Pandagon, I wouldn’t think too much of it, but I was really amazed to see how many people, bloggers and commenters alike, had a similar reaction as I checked out what several other liberal blogs made of this. Here you have a feeble, impotent expression of rage, of no real threat to anyone, but that didn’t stop people from hyperventilating over the fact that dear lord, one of those barbaric mud-people actually threw something at an elected official of the United States government! (Quick! Back to the safety of the gated community! Where’s those nuclear launch codes?) What if had been a stick of dynamite cleverly disguised to look like a shoe, huh?! What if someone does that to Obama one day, what then?!
(Well, if he actually makes good on all his bellicose threats towards Iran, I’d say flying shoes would be the least of what he would deserve. But let’s hope it doesn’t come to that.) But all kidding aside, I guess that good old American Exceptionalism runs deep, even in liberals. Hey, if there were any justice in the world, hundreds of our officials would be lined up at the Hague for their war crimes trials, but that’s no reason to get all huffy about it! Don’t you know we’re the indispensable nation?
Seriously, what the fuck do you expect Iraqis to do, send a scathing letter to the editor? Post a vlog on YouTube calling Bush names? It’s fucking obscene for people like this to cluck their tongues disapprovingly at people who have been forced to live through a hell they could never imagine. In fact, just try to do that, you cosseted motherfuckers. Imagine being that weak and powerless. Imagine standing a dozen yards from the smirking monster who had invaded your country using the most risible, transparent lies as a fig leaf, who had sent one entire quarter of your population into exile or an early grave, and ask yourself what you would do. What would you do, you fucking cowards? Stand in line, raise your hand and voice strong reservations about his actions, possibly even ask for an apology?
If Americans had any guts, they’d be pelting this bastard with garbage and rotten fruit any time he stuck his head out in public. Thank goodness not everyone in the world is that meek, frightened and whipped.
Do You Feel Epistemological? Well? Do Ya, Punk?
Grampa Simpson Clint “Steely Gaze of Intellectual Incuriosity” Eastwood says the unexamined life was damn well good enough for the old-timers, so it oughta be good enough for you wisenheimers, and stay outta my yard, you goddamn kids…
Tough guy Clint Eastwood believes America is getting soft around the middle – and the iconic Oscar winner thinks he knows when the problem began.
“Maybe when people started asking about the meaning of life,” Eastwood, 78, growls in the January issue of Esquire.
The actor/director recalls the deeper questions were rarely posed during his Depression-era California childhood – and says that wasn’t a bad thing.
“People barely got by,” Eastwood recounts. “People were tougher then.”
Yeah, living hand-to-mouth and never knowing whether you were going to have food, let alone a job next week will do that to you. Still, I imagine living one of John Calvin’s wet dreams is one of those things that looks a little more bracing, invigorating, and character-building in hindsight; in real time, not so much. As Aristotle himself said* in Nicomachean Ethics, “Fuck you, you cranky old coot.”
*not really.
Simplify, Sim–
Am I the only one who finds that ironically amusing? Unnecessary repetition in a phrase being used to symbolize the need to strip away superfluous ornamentation and clutter? Perhaps Thoreau was just a student at the School of Redundancy School.
Anyway! I recently had an email correspondence with a former teacher in which she apologized a couple times for her “verbosity” – in this case, writing about three or four good-sized paragraphs per email. It wouldn’t have even been two pages of a book if printed out. I thought, what a shame it is that anyone should feel bad about expecting you to take a whopping several minutes of your day to read something they felt was important enough to share with you. It reminded me of something Susan Jacoby wrote:
E-mail, often cited as the savior of written communication and as a worthy successor to obsolete snail mail, has delivered the coup de grâce to the traditional letter.
…I know this because of the haste and inattentiveness with which my close friends and I approach the reading and writing of our own e-mail today. Neither I, nor anyone I know, turns to e-mail with anything like the sense of anticipation and pleasure that used to accompany my opening of the mailbox. How could we?
…When I receive an e-mail from someone dear to me, I am happy. But the contents usually amount to, “Hi, I was thinking about you when I read this article the other day,” followed by a link. And I answer in the same nondiscursive way. When I first went online, I was excited about e-mail because I thought it would replace the long letters I used to send and receive, but I soon found that lengthy e-mails elicited very brief responses – even when the person was someone who liked me or loved me. So I started replying in kind.
There undoubtedly are a few people who save their e-mail correspondence with good friends and who write e-mails as interesting as the letters many of us used to write during the snail-mail era. For the most part, though, e-mail as a medium really is the message – and the message is short.
I’ve always been one to put a lot of time and effort into my own emails, occasionally saying (and only partially joking) that I aim for them to be events. And I greatly prefer them to handwritten letters – my handwriting is terrible, for one thing, but also for the ability to easily choose aesthetic touches like color, font size and style, and especially for the ability to add hyperlinks, something that I think adds much more depth to an email that wouldn’t be possible in a traditional letter, unless you wanted to have endless footnotes and parenthetical asides, which I’ve always felt makes for a distracting reading experience. I have no problem with the medium at all; it’s just a question of how much effort you care to put into it. The majority of people I write to usually send back terse three-or-four line responses if they bother to respond at all, so I understand Jacoby’s frustration here, but it’s not a question of a monitor versus a piece of paper, or a keyboard versus a pen. My co-blogger Arthur and I have written some incredibly ostentatious emails just for the fun of writing and crafting them. The future may belong to the small mammals texting each other in their retarded lol-speak, but it’s still possible to be a big, plodding thesaurus-saurus and enjoy it. Just make the effort.
S.O.S. texted from a cell phone.
Please tell me I’m not the only one
that thinks we’re taking ourselves too seriously.
Just a little too enamored with inflated self-purpose.Constant entertainment for our restless minds.
Constant stimulation for epic appetites.Don’t lose touch.
— Against Me!
Of course, that raises the question of why no one ever makes the effort. Jacoby blames the “culture of distraction”, and I partially agree – the fun ‘n’ games aspect of our wired world certainly places a lot more demand on the attention of people with ever-shortening spans. Who wants to sit at the computer for forty-five minutes concentrating on communicating with one person when you could be instant-messaging several others rapid-fire while watching TV and listening to music in the background?
But the culture of work is where I would mostly look. She looks back fondly on her correspondence with her then-fiancé in the ’60s and is skeptical of the thought of a similar correspondence being possible today through email, but other, more important changes than the means by which we write to each other have occurred since then as well. It’s a cliché, but unfortunately no less true, that people are too busy working all the time to pay (with wages that have been stagnant since the early ’70s) for all the stuff they never have time to enjoy because they’re too busy working, and on and on in an Ourobouran frenzy. One of the greatest philosophers ever, Bill Watterson, noted this in a strip featuring Calvin’s dad, where he groused about how modern technology had only made people expect everything to get done instantaneously, and said that if we wanted more leisure time, we’d invent machines to do things less efficiently. With all the “labor-saving devices” we’ve invented in the last half-century or so, why are we all working longer hours for less money than ever before?
I would just suggest that it’s because few people take a reflective view on life, work and leisure. They never figure out a way to make time for those things, like good conversation and time to relax (not merely collapsing in a vegetative, catatonic state or an alcoholic stupor, but actually relaxing), and by the time they start to wonder how it could be done, they’ve probably got themselves stuck on the hamster wheel of working just a little longer to get a little extra money…only to realize that what was once just a temporary extra effort quickly becomes a required norm, especially once everyone else starts doing it too. Maybe Max Weber was on to something, and we’ve just thoughtlessly inherited a tradition of slaving away beyond all practical need to prevent idle hands from doing the devil’s work, or in the hopes of receiving some slight reassurance by means of material blessings that an insanely hateful, fickle God favored us for a trip to paradise. Maybe we just need to develop a stronger concept of art for art’s own sake in our notoriously practical, no-nonsense business-oriented culture, to do certain things just because they’re inherently fun and valuable, not as means to an end that never comes.
BASHO’S POND: Aphorisms on Poetry and Poets
Poetry, Eros of Absence.—The sixth sense is the sense of loss. The ab-sense.
*
Advice to a Bad Poet.—Try to write a bad poem. You may write a good one by mistake.
*
Poetry humiliates ideas: it runs them to earth.
*
Poetry is what is gained in mistranslation.
*
The Oyster.—Give me one small imperfection and I will build a perfect world around it.
*
Taming the Theorizing Impulse.—Apollo has a frenzy all his own.
*
Don’t let your intellect make you stupid.
*
Poets take nothing for granted. This is their gift.
*
Look at the world as it performs itself on the time-lapse film of your imagination and growth and decay are suddenly sudden. The corpse of a deer is hyperactive with a zoo of living things feeding on fruitful rot. As the flower grows it exfoliates so quickly you can see it turning inside out. Finally the death appears, that which was innermost and most germane; now it is like ripeness from the seed.
*
A poet is a topological magician who turns things inside out to demonstrate their true properties; before our very eyes they bare the life and death inside them as a single thing.
*
Poets are closer to Heaven than the rest of us and also closer to the ground. Sacred and a bit silly. Monkey gods…
*
Poet: More godlike and more monkey than the rest of us. (Stevens: a touch of the peasant).
*
The poet: a kind of god. A kind of dog.
*
Animals walk on all fours. Poets walk on all metaphors.
*
Language: the clew and the labyrinth.
*
The paths that thread this wilderness of words are made of words.
*
Theseus, look down at the thread you are holding: fiber within fiber, it too is a labyrinth.
*
Piranesi.—The labyrinth has no hope, it is lost, it has given up on itself. What you are threading is the structure of despair.
*
The anti-taxonomy that is poetry picks apart dense categories, like balls of thread, into the separate filaments of their exceptions: oddities, hybrids, border phenomena, the hapax legemenon, the lusus naturae. These threads are then reassembled in Borges’ Emperor’s Catalogue.
*
Words bead at the mouth of the world like the fat dew of the honeysuckle.
*
Analyzing great poets is like shining a flashlight into a Klieg light. They illuminate us almost infinitely more than vice-versa.
*
Wilde Reading Dante in Prison.—When he looked down at the paper, his eyes, whose powers of resolution suffering had greatly magnified, saw not the lines but that which lay under and between the lines: an intricate cross-weave of fibers resembling worms, or rope.
*
Wilde’s sin was to live in the world as if it was his private Eden.
*
Pose was Wilde’s repose.
*
Because Wilde refused to take anything solemnly we assume he took nothing seriously. This is a mistake.
*
There is a certain kind of poetry, full of a desperate cleverness, a plangent sophistication of philosophical abstractions, a snarky academic hipness, and dark intimations of Foucaultian knowingness, that can only be called “grad studenty.”
*
The plop of the frog in Basho’s pond: the splash the poet makes. The sound of one hand clapping: the poet’s fame.
*
Entertainers amuse, poets bemuse.
*
Poetry is the most beautiful vampire that has ever known me.
*
Once you have run through the totality of rhymes for a word you seem to have exhausted the totality of the world (insofar as it has no totality).
*
A poem is an actor narrating the story of itself. It must deliver its lines flawlessly or we will not suspend our disbelief in it.
*
In poetry, a poised complexity of tone is one of the last signs of mastery. Just as in learning a foreign language one masters intonation last of all.
*
We are too hip to want to write a “classic” anymore. We only want to write something that will have an influence and be remembered. In other words, a classic.
*
If you are willing to spend hours, or perhaps days, or perhaps years, worrying over the arrangement of three words, or the choice between two words, or the choice between one word and no words at all, then perhaps you will become a writer.
*
Some of us are authors only in order to be readers. No one is writing the books we want to read, so we write them ourselves.
*
A poem should end a little abruptly, a little sooner than it should. This frees its profoundest reverberations. A too-neat closure would merely trap them inside the poem. You wouldn’t feel them in your bones.
*
A poem should stop just short of where you expect. If the poem were a car, you would be thrown slightly forward in your seat. You would suddenly feel the forces at work, their weight and speed and power. You would feel shocked—pleasantly shocked.
*
Poetry teaches you what you are. Not in a pedantic way, more like the rope around Villon’s neck: It will teach my neck the weight of my ass.
*
All poetry is experimental poetry.
*
Poetry offers the naked poverty of everything but its excess.
*
A great poem seen through the prism of a mediocre imagination looks impossibly awkward, like a whale in a swimming pool.
*
Sometimes the part of you that only wants to write meets the part of the world that only wants to be written. Poetry is a kind of dating service for words and things.
*
Writing is the art of writing down precisely what you did not know you meant until you wrote it down.
*
Revising constantly is like playing a game of chess in which you get to take every move over and over again until your opponent finally resigns. At this rate, monkeys would defeat Grand Masters. (Perhaps the same monkeys who wrote the works of Shakespeare?)
*
Poets are intellect’s ombudsmen.
*
Poet’s Skepticism.—Sure it works, but does it look good on paper?
*
The poet’s syllogism: I think, therefore iamb.
*
The poet, that symbol-minded fellow.
*
Dryden and Pope discovered the grandeur of stupidity.
*
Blake, a brilliant mystic, hated the intellectually sophisticated with a sophisticated passion.
*
Poe: three-quarter poet.
*
Is it still possible to celebrate our American days through the sunlight of Whitman’s profane Ordinaries?
*
Frost hid behind the mask of having no mask.
*
It has been said that in America you are either a saint or a stranger. Stevens disguised himself as one of the saints, the better to survive among them as a stranger.
*
Stevens.—Every poem is a last look at the ducks.
*
The more puzzled and puzzling Ashbery’s poems appear to us, the more we believe in their authenticity. A kind of confidence game in reverse.
*
The frightening fecundity of Neruda’s early work: each line contains several poems, each word several lines of poetry.
*
Neruda as Walt Whitman as Magic Realist.—A torrent of surreal metaphors, each one born pregnant with other metaphors, all pushing for an explosive birth, in a war of extravagances—and here and there in the storm of these dreams, he is sitting in the barber’s chair, dropping off his clothes at the dry cleaner’s…
*
Rimbaud.—I is not only another, I is several others, including me, myself, and I forget the other. This causes a systematic derangement of the census.
*
A way with words? Away with words!
*
I own the copyright to my poems, not their meaning.
*
Beware doctrine, beware theories. The poem knows better than you do what the poem is about. It does not take orders from the Ministry of Meaning.
*
There is meanness in expecting everything to mean. And a kind of mediocrity.
*
The power of poetry is not that it gives us metaphors but that it gives us metaphors that turn out not to be.
*
The silences in a poem say more than what is said.
*
The poet makes words out of the absence of words.
*
The mockingbird’s cadenza has no beginning and reaches past its ending as if it had no end.
Arthur Chapin
No, Pollyanna, No
I’m being somewhat unfair by referring to Digby that way, but I don’t care. I’m really tired of seeing this kind of tripe.
That is not to say we didn’t invade other countries on trumped up rationales or thin evidence. We certainly did. But it was a given among western democracies after the two horrifying wars of the 20th century that wars of aggression were a no-no. But just as Bush and Cheney decided that 9/11 changed everything such that even the civilized taboos against torture were out of fashion, they openly flouted and then discarded the world’s consensus on this issues after WWII. We became what we had once abhorred.
Wait, what? Western democracies didn’t “wage wars of aggression” after World War Two, we merely “invade(d) other countries on trumped up rationales or thin evidence”? You say “to-MAY-to”, I say “Ohai! Weer in yur kuntree, killin all yur d00dz!” Is this what the kids today mean by “American Exceptionalism”? All that other bad stuff didn’t count, because we really meant well, gosh darn it, and besides, the USSR was worse?
See, here’s the thing: if you think the CIA hasn’t been happily torturing people since its founding, you’re a gullible naïf. I mean, what leftist, even of the milquetoast variety, hasn’t heard of this little point of national pride? Did we just accidentally stumble into that? Did some other country set that up on our soil as a prank while we were sleeping? How do you square that sort of thing with this historical memory loss that pretends that all this started in January, 2001? I mean – um…wait…hold on a sec…I’m sorry, what?
Oh, hey, it’s Salvador Allende! What’s up, Sal? Did you have something you wanted to add?
Yeah, I’m still fucking dead, here. And I see that fat frog-faced fuck Kissinger is still hale and healthy, not swinging in the breeze!
I know, Sal, I’m sorry. Anyone to the left of Mussolini was potentially a Communist, you know. It was practically inevitable we’d come barging on in.
Fucking tell me about it. Hey, how ya like that Ahmadinejad? Better than Khomeini, at least, huh? Good thing you overthrew my secular, soft-on-Communism ass, wouldn’t you say?
Mohammed Mossadegh! Why, it’s like a Ghosts of American Boogeymen Past parade in here all of a sudden! Hey guys, glad you stopped by, sorry for the bloodthirsty imperialism and all, but I gotta finish this post, a’ight? Later.
Anyway, here’s some ugly truth: the only thing Bush really did differently than recent presidents was to go about running the empire like the lazy, ne’er-do-well fratboy fuckup he’s always been. He just simply didn’t bother to put any gloss on it. He couldn’t care less about putting any effort into telling you that a shit sandwich was really something from a five-star restaurant. He just let it all hang out, and smirked at you for gaping in shock. That’s right, America – you walked in on your beloved Uncle Sam, unshaven, unwashed, drunk in a wifebeater t-shirt and stained boxer shorts, and halfheartedly yanking himself to a bukkake video starring Iraqi victims of our “liberation” – and you didn’t do anything about it. He put it right in your face and smirked about it, and you consoled yourself by pretending that it was all his fault, that if we could just get rid of him, it would all go back to the way it was, when we were the indispensable nation, the city on a hill, and everyone loved us, and mistakes were made, and we might have broken several tiny countries when all we wanted to do was stroke their soft fur, but it was only because we cared too much, and we always apologized a few decades later anyway, and…
Sigh. Really, Chomsky and Zinn should be required reading for high-schoolers here. It’s going to be a fun four-to-eight years.
READ MY APOCALYPSE: Aphorisms on Religion and Philosophy
Which would be the greater miracle, if the human race were created by God or if it came into existence by chance? Perhaps those monkeys really did type Shakespeare…
*
Suppose, as some do, that the Big Bang was just part of a cycle of bangs stretching backwards and forwards forever… So when God said Let there be light, He was just reinventing the light bulb?
*
The world does not need faith so much as it needs credit.
*
Apocalyptic thinking is least appropriate in a real emergency.
*
The Middle Ages turned religion into a neurosis. We have turned neurosis into a religion.
*
The St. Peter Principle: Every clergyman rises to the level of his spiritual incompetence.
*
Heaven is a gated community.
*
In my Father’s house are many McMansions.
*
I let Jesus into my heart… Now all He does is watch TV and leave crumbs on the sofa.
*
I have listened to the call of Being. It is a recording.
*
Did Nietzsche have a system? Yes. But it was a nervous system.
*
The Owl of Minerva is a fly-by-night operator.
*
The Tree of Knowledge stands on a trunk full of facts. Next to it sways the Flower of Poetry on its ghostly epistème. The Tree branches out, the Flower opens up. They evolve in different directions and are radically the same. Think your way to the roots.
*
Dendrites: tiny knowledge trees.
*
Truths are misconception’s exceptions.
*
Synergy.—A poetaster, a mediocre musician, a scatterbrained philosopher, a sloppy philologist: from the intersection of these incompetencies rose Nietzsche’s incomparable genius.
*
Epistomological Proposition in the Form of a Cheap Suit Joke.—Q. How is epistemology like a cheap suit? A. It keeps coming apart along the “seems.”
*
Pale Ontology: 1. The study of all delicate ghostly things that will forever shimmer just beyond the grasp of the mind. 2. Branch of philosophy that studies the gradual but inexorable falling away from us of that night we pledged eternity to each other on the beach beneath the stars as a fundamental predicate of Being. 3. Science that measures the perpetually receding earliness of things.
*
He kept bumping his head into walls. In an open field he stumbled through the absence of walls.
*
Take a thing for granted and you no longer see it. Look at it too closely and it disappears.
*
The anti-chameleon has the uncanny ability to maladapt to any surroundings.
*
Everything is necessary; nothing is sufficient.
*
The improbability of Nietzsche: a nineteenth-century Prussian Lenny Bruce.
*
Nietzsche reads on the page like a great stand-up comic.
*
Nietzsche and Untimeliness.—Untimeliness is essentially a comedic position and requires perfect timing.
*
Nietzsche harvested the peculiar ripeness of the untimely.
*
The difference between ripeness and decay is a matter of taste.
*
Yes, Virginia, there is tragedy in Heaven, but it is set to music by Mozart, illustrated by Botticelli, and narrated by Oscar Wilde.
*
Life is a one-way street—but look both ways.
*
The origin did not happen, it is happening.
*
Infinity is never finished.
Arthur Chapin
The Joy of Violent Movement Pulls You Under
Let us stop thinking so much about punishing, reproaching, and improving others! We rarely change an individual, and if we should succeed for once, something may also have been accomplished, unnoticed: we may have been changed by him. Let us rather see to it that our own influence on all that is yet to come balances and outweighs his influence. Let us not contend in a direct fight – and that is what all reproaching, punishing, and attempts to improve others amount to. Let us rather raise ourselves that much higher. Let us color our own example ever more brilliantly. Let our brilliance make them look dark. No, let us not become darker ourselves on their account, like all those who punish others and feel dissatisfied. Let us sooner step aside. Let us look away.
Nietzsche’s not referring to issues of criminal justice per se; rather, in keeping with his recurring theme of resentment, the ways we concern ourselves with others’ business more than our own, the ways we take revenge for petty slights, and most importantly, the ways in which that drive for revenge (or “justice”, if you want to break out the linguistic cosmetic kit) warps us the longer we hold on to it. I had that beautiful passage in mind as I listened to some of the Inspector Javert-wannabes I know gloating over the news of OJ Simpson finally going to prison for a long time.
It’s not the issue of whether he was guilty fourteen years ago or guilty now that concerns me. I just find it interesting, and more than a little disturbing, to see people who have lived the last decade-plus paying little or no mind to the details of Simpson’s life suddenly becoming giddy at the thought of him spending the rest of his life in jail, as if this had been some festering psychic wound that had been preventing them from getting a good night’s sleep. I can understand the Browns and Goldmans feeling good about this, but everybody else – Jesus, seek some help.
I guess what bothers me is the thought that these are the kind of people that can tell themselves that this somehow makes things “right”, and believe it. I’m certainly not arguing to abolish laws or concepts of criminal justice, merely pointing out what I thought was so jejune as to be common sense, needless to mention: you can’t change the past and no amount of punishment will bring back the victims; you’ll just create more grieving friends and relatives. I vaguely recall a passage from one translation of a Taoist text – the Hua Hu Ching, I think – that was referring specifically to war, but it applies here: something to the effect of it being an absolute last resort, of course, and the need to treat it as an occasion of mourning that it should have come to this, to take no joy in the prospect of violent action. Of course, this is a culture that breaks out the same sadistic jokes about prison rape every time a famous (or infamous) person goes to jail (I mean, fantasizing about Martha Stewart being sodomized in prison? Really?)
I’m just always wary of people who are absolutely certain what other people “deserve”, whether positive or negative.
Abort Christ
Um, what?
“PPIN’s move has enraged various anti-abortion organizations—Indiana Right to Life and the Indiana Family Institute among them. Jim Sedlak, vice president of the American Life League and executive director of Stop Planned Parenthood, an anti-abortion group based in Stafford, Va., condemns the certificates as a continuation of Planned Parenthood’s “annual attacks on the Christian community at Christmastime.”
I just recently donated money to my local Planned Parenthood, and they didn’t mention anything about an annual tradition of attacking the Christian community! What, is that only for those who donate $100 or more? I want to knock over some nativity scenes and hang a life-size Santa on a crucifix, too! It’s not fair! I guess I just have to get my Christian hate on by the usual vicarious route of listening to Scandinavian black metal bands.
I’d hate to hear what Mr. Sedlak would think of my annual holiday tradition of masturbating to my treasured copies of North Polesmokers; Hos, Hos, Hos; O Cum All Ye Faithful; Santa’s Sack; Threeway in a Manger and Kris Kringle’s Naughty List: Workshop Buttsluts, Vol. 9. It’s like a sperm genocide!