At the opening of Super Bowl XLV, less than a minute into the song, Christina Aguilera mangled some words of the national anthem.Instead of "O'er the ramparts we watch'd, were so gallantly streaming," Ms. Aguilera belted out, "What so proudly we watched at the twilight's last reaming." That line was a repeat of one she'd already sung a few seconds earlier, except with some personal embellishments, like her replacement of the word "gleaming" with "reaming."
"What church do you go to?"
(sigh) "I don't go to church."
"Why not?"
(gnashing teeth, rejects claim of Satanism) "I'm an atheist."
(thrilled to finally get a chance to use the "argument" he learned in Sunday school) "Oh, yeah? Well, then how did everything start without God? You can't get something from nothing!"
Makes you want to carry around an astrophysics textbook.
But don't despair! PZ Myers has found an excellent retort:
Nicely done: Ethan Siegel explains how we know that stuff is getting spontaneously created all the time. It's no miracle, it requires no magic man in the sky, particle/anti-particle pairs just pop into existence constantly.
One of the oldest adages in existence is you can't get something for nothing, as over a million websites will tell you, including not-so-subtly, cartoonstock.And, most often when people bring this up to me, it's in an attempt to prove the existence of God -- and the insufficiency of the Big Bang -- by pointing to the Universe.
Well, let's take this question as seriously as our knowledge allows us to. (And by that, I mean physically, rather than philosophically or theologically.) In physics, can you get something for nothing? And if so, what can you and can't you get?
In many ways, yes, you can. In fact, in many ways, getting something when you have nothing is unavoidable! (Although you can't necessarily get anything you want.)
But wait, there's more.
Morford: Your science is stuck in my mystical.
###
What's next - the Palin clothing line?
I'm sure she'll call it "Hillbilly Hottie" or something like that:
In the last several months, Politics Daily has learned that the Palin family lawyer, Alaska attorney Thomas Van Flein, has filed applications to the United States Patent and Trademark Office to trademark "Sarah Palin®" and "Bristol Palin®."
Bristol Palin® condoms? Sarah Palin® Phonics? The mind, it boggles.
[h/t Gummo]
UPDATE: Denied! Well, for now, at least. I'm sure she'll issue a Wasilla fatwa on the USPTO.
###
Redefining Rape... Again
Posted by JM Ashby
I'm not sure why Republicans feel the need to defend rapists, but they just can't stop themselves from making it a priority at a time when the economy is in the shitter and a laundry list of other problems require attention.
WASHINGTON -- A Republican state legislator in Georgia doesn't like the term rape "victim." In fact, he has introduced a bill mandating that state criminal codes refer to these people as, simply, "accusers" -- until there's a conviction in the matter....According to the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, "60% of rapes/sexual assaults are not reported to the police, according to a statistical average of the past 5 years. Those rapists, of course, never spend a day in prison. Factoring in unreported rapes, only about 6% of rapists ever serve a day in jail." Under Franklin's definition, all of these people who didn't report their crimes aren't actually victims -- because there is never a conviction.
"To be classified, off the bat, as an accuser instead of as a victim places one more barrier to reporting the crime to the authorities," writes Amie Newman at RH Reality Check, who points out that Franklin's state of Georgia ranks 11th out of the 50 states and the District of Columbia for incidences of forcible rape.
To quote Blazing Saddles:
"Qualifications?"
"Rape, murder, arson and rape."
"You said rape twice."
"I like rape."
###
This notion that Kagan is not only biased in regards to HCR, but that Roberts, Thomas, and Scalia somehow wouldn't be, is so ridiculous I have trouble even repeating it. Here is Sen. Orrin Hatch:
WASHINGTON – Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch, an opponent of the recently enacted health care overhaul, says Justice Elena Kagan should not take part in the widely expected Supreme Court consideration of the new law....Hatch said he is sure that Kagan participated in discussions about the law and challenges to it while she served in the Justice Department as Obama's top Supreme Court lawyer. Hatch told Fox News that he believes Kagan "should recuse herself," although he noted the justice alone will make that determination.
Kagan should recuse herself? Shouldn't Roberts, Thomas, and Scalia do the same then? Their history of paling around with the Tea Party, The Koch Brothers, and other corporate entities is well documented.
###
Debunking the Reagan myths
How long before Republicans start asking for funds to have Ronald Reagan's face carved out of granite alongside Lincoln's on Mount Rushmore? Conservative politicians appear unable to give a speech these days without mentioning the holy trinity of divine truth and wisdom: Reagan, God and the Founding Fathers.
A piece in yesterday's Washington Post (Five myths about Ronald Reagan's legacy) should be required reading for all conservatives.
…much of what today's voters think they know about the 40th president is more myth than reality, misconceptions resulting from the passage of time or from calculated attempts to rebuild or remake Reagan's legacy.
So what might some of those myths be?
1. Reagan was one of our most popular presidents.
His average approval rating during his eight years? 52.8 percent – lower than Lyndon Johnson, H. W. Bush and Clinton.
2. Reagan was a tax-cutter.
He raised taxes in 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986 and 1987. Who got screwed? You guessed it – the middle class who "paid a higher percentage of their income in taxes when Reagan left office than when he came in."
3. Reagan was a hawk.
He bombed Libya in 1986. Before that? Nothing. After that? Nothing.
4. Reagan shrank the federal government.
Under Reagan…
a) Spending grew by an average of 2.5 percent a year.
b) National debt when Reagan took office: $700 billion. National debt when Reagan left office: $3 trillion.
c) Number of federal employees when Reagan took office: 2.8 million. Number of federal employees when Reagan left office: 3 million.
Ronald Reagan has to be the most over-rated president in American history. The man was a conservative with charisma, charm and a Hollywood background who would be unable to get the backing of today's Tea Party. Reagan was weak on immigration, he tripled the national debt, raised taxes and grew government – not quite your teabagger's cup of tea.
As for what the Reagan years represented, Bill Clinton had it figured out in 1991.
"The Reagan-Bush years have exalted private gain over public obligation, special interests over the common good, wealth and fame over work and family. The 1980s ushered in a Gilded Age of greed and selfishness, of irresponsibility and excess, and of neglect."
In the words of the Great One, tear down those myths!
###
Mario: Climate Change Deniers Deny While Rain Forests Die
###
So much for Wall Street feeling the pain if their stock prices drop. The high-priced scam artists have done it again.
###
Rumsfeld overheard: "War lies are cool now".
###
LOLOCAUST
Rush Limbaugh laughs and laughs at hippie journalists detained in Egypt
###
What may be hurting our country more than anything is a thick-skulled mentality that refuses to face the facts.
Sad to say, people don't necessarily change their minds when their erroneous assumptions are corrected. A University of Michigan study found that misinformed people, particularly those loyal to their politics, rarely change their minds when exposed to corrected facts in news stories. Instead, they often become more strongly set in their beliefs.
This restriction of intelligence may be America's most baffling and self-destructive problem. The nation's complex challenges won't get solved by all the dead brains cells insisting that President Obama is foreign-born, death-panels are coming, and gun controls destroy liberty.
While we're at it, let's deny the fact that the carbon we're producing from oil, gas, and coal is causing global warming.
Why are many of us so obtuse? [...]
Read on...
###
Daddy Frank on Americans' media-fed ignorance about Egypt and the Middle East
###
On Sunday afternoon, while everybody was busy with their Superbowl parties, Gawker put up a story titled "The FBI is Investigating Scientology for Human Trafficking"
###
AOL buys Arianna Huffington's famous internet website
Sweet Jeebus, AOL has agreed to purchase popular liberal/Brangelina Internet destination "The Huffington Post" for $315 million! Why does AOL think this is a wise investment? And will Arianna Huffington's citizen journalists continue to Win the Afternoon, with the hottest hot scoops ("D-List Celebrity Has Boobs" and "Ten Things You Didn't Know About Celebrities Who Have Boobs" and "BREAKING: So Many Boobs!")? There is probably a HuffPo "personality quiz" and/or slideshow that can answer both of these important questions. [CNN]
###
Oh the irony of fiscal conservatives; Congressional edition
A new GOP proposal would reduce domestic agencies' spending by 9 percent on average through September, when the current budget year ends. ... Congress, on the other hand, would get nicked by only 2 percent, or $94 million."Don't cut me, don't cut thee, cut that man behind the tree!"
Same as it ever was. Fucking teabagger congressmen are as hypocritical as teh traditional budget-busting Republicans were.
Ginni Thomas may have been forced to resign her duties as Washington Teabag Queen because she was drunk-dialing Anita Hill all the time, but that doesn't mean she can't make a living! (Clarence Thomas doesn't report her living on his tax forms, by the way, even though the law says he has to. But let's see the Supreme Court uphold that conviction.) This news has made some people upset because, uh, this Supreme Court justice's wife is a lobbyist, for God's sake. But it wasn't like it was ever in question the way Clarence Thomas would vote on the things she's advocating. It's just that she officially gets to tell people she can deliver them a vote on the Supreme Court, if necessary, by threatening to deny her husband access to delicious cookies. READ MORE »
The creepy Koch brothers own the republican party -- and they will use their ownership to poison and pillage at will. "The billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch no longer sit outside Washington's political establishment, isolated by their uncompromising conservatism. Instead, they are now at the center of Republican power, a change most evident in the new makeup of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. ... Wichita-based Koch Industries and its employees formed the largest single oil and gas donor to members of the panel, ahead of giants like Exxon Mobil, contributing $279,500 to 22 of the committee's 31 Republicans, and $32,000 to five Democrats. ... Nine of the 12 new Republicans on the panel signed a pledge distributed by a Koch-founded advocacy group - Americans for Prosperity - to oppose the Obama administration's proposal to regulate greenhouse gases. Of the six GOP freshman lawmakers on the panel, five benefited from the group's separate advertising and grass-roots activity during the 2010 campaign. ... Claiming an electoral mandate, Republicans on the committee have launched an agenda of the sort long backed by the Koch brothers. A top early goal: restricting the reach of the Environmental Protection Agency, which oversees the Kochs' core energy businesses."
###
The National Enquirer seems to think John Boehner is having an affair, which is really unfair because that could easily be a creamsicle in those photos.
###
No, global warming is not a religion. There is empirical evidence for global warming. "With record-breaking climate disasters crippling the United States, defenders of global warming pollution are growing increasingly desperate. Gordon Peterson, host of PBS's weekly Inside Washington show, noted the scientific fact that "there's about a four percent more water vapor in the air now in the atmosphere than there was in the '70s because of warmer oceans and warmer air, and it returns to earth as heavy rain and heavy snow." Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer - like his colleague George Will, a radical climate denier - countered with a Godzilla-spores theory, attacking Al Gore and claiming that climate science is a "religion.""
###
Predictable ...
It should be time for the Reich-Wingnuts to get their line of bullshit together and tried to go all apeshit about the Muslim Brotherhood being the next al-Qaeda/Goldstein/Hamas/Ooga Booga..........
Ladies and Gentlemen, I present the perspective of Glenn Beck.
I dare you to click the link, but don't blame me if you never ever sleep again. People actually eat this bullshit up. Seriously.
Without a doubt, Egypt is going to be soon under the command by Al Qaeda's newest second in command control the world......or something like that.
Get duct tape, Now!
Fortunately, he's losing his audience.
Must be a Hitleresque Muslim plot by liberal elite Nazis funded by George Soros. Damn them! Hee hee.
