Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Larry Flint's Shooter Executed

#JoeFranklin #whitesupremacist  #white #shooting #Larryflint #murder #serialkiller #executed #execution #larryflintsshooter #flint

Ever see the movie The People Vs Larry Flint? If you have then you know exactly who Larry Flint is, what he does for a living, and what happened to him. I suggest if you haven’t seen it to watch it if you have the chance.

Larry Flint is the man who started Hustler Magazine, a hardcore controversial pornography magazine which features pictures of women in hardcore nudity as well as politically based articles and cartoon strips. The magazine is described by some as disgusting and not just because of it’s imagery but because of its offensive writing style which has been highly popularized since its inception to make the magazine seem different from Playboy.

Larry Flint was not a very well-liked man, and not because he was some evil monster. People didn’t like him because he owned a magazine which he felt had to cut out the bullshit and get straight to the ‘fucking’ issue. His photography would contain women in explicit hardcore poses, spreading their legs and genitals in what most people might describe as deviant. His articles would usually involve satires of public figures engaging in obscene or taboo sexual affairs. The words “obscene” and “taboo” are really an understatement though.

A good example of this is when he published a magazine which contained an article about Jerry Falwell which told a story of Mr. Falwell’s experiences with consensual incest with his mother. After being sued Flint was asked in court if he had any proof that Jerry Falwell had sex with his mother, at which point he denied he had proof of that but implied he had video of Falwell performing fallatio on a sheep.

Larry Flint from 2009
Yes Larry certainly had many people in an uproar. But on one faithful day on March 16th, 1978 Flint was shot by what was then an unknown assailant. Flint was paralyzed from the waste down after the shooting and will never be able to walk again.

The shooter was Joseph Paul Franklin, 63 a white supremacist who was accused of killing as many as 20 other people, targeting blacks and Jews in a nation-wide killing spree between the years of 1977-1980. He was also the man who shot civil rights leader Vernon Jordan in 1980. He was finally caught and sentenced to death after killing a man named Gerald Gordon near a synagogue in St. Louis, MO in 1980.

Scheduled to be executed at 12:01AM 11/20/2013, a judge refused to stay his execution, saying that the crimes committed by Franklin where "cowardly” and “calculated”. However, another MO judge has decided to stay the execution of the shooter until the execution protocol is reviewed.


In her 14-page ruling late Tuesday afternoon, U.S. District Court Judge Nanette Laughrey criticized the timing of the state's changes to its lethal-injection procedures, stating that "details of the execution protocol have been illusive at best."

Larry Flint in my book is a very bad ass civil rights activist, and what he is doing here is even more astounding. Flint is a guy who is pretty much open to anything and he shies away from nothing. Homosexuals, transsexuals, bisexuals, heterosexual, black, white, Asian, Jew, it doesn’t matter who you were. If you were a good person than you were welcomed as a friend to him, and this is something about Larry that I think gets over looked too much and I think a lot of that stigma still involves the fact that he is a hardcore porno publisher and lives a life that seemingly puts Huge Heffner’s to shame.

That being said, the reason Joe Franklin decided to kill Flint that day was because Flint had published some pictures of an interracial couple together in the December 1975 edition of Hustler. This was during a time when racism was still a huge issue in many parts of the country. To place a black man with a white woman in a pornographic scene together was unheard of and disgusting to most people.


'I saw that interracial couple he had, photographed there, having sex,' he says. Franklin is referring to the December 1975 issue of Hustler that featured several photos of a black man with a white woman. 'It just made me sick. I think whites marry with whites, blacks with blacks, Indians with Indians. Orientals with orientals. I threw the magazine down and thought, I'm gonna kill that guy.'

The amazing part of this whole story is that now we have come to the end of days for Joe Franklin as far as the government sees it and a judge granted him a stay of execution. This was because Joe had requested the stay on the grounds that the drugs used during lethal injection violate the Constitutions ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

Joe Franklin in court
Flint himself has rolled forward and call for clemency for Joe as well saying, “"the government has no business at all being in the business of killing people." Even though this man shot and paralyzed Flint nearly ruining his life Flint spoke up about how he felt about Franklin being executed. "A life spent in a 3-by-6-foot cell is far harsher than the quick release of a lethal injection” he said. "I have had many years in this wheelchair to think about this very topic."

All I can say is that Flintis a man of true character, regardless of his sorted past. There is nothing I can say about his assailant other than I agree with the previous judge who called him a “coward”.

However, after hours of delaying the execution Joe Franklin was finally put to death at 6:07AM CT. He had no final meal and no last statements.

I’m not making a case for the abolition of the death penalty. I’m not exactly sure how I feel about the issue. I can tell you I have never jumped out of my seat and cheered for executing someone for heinous deeds, but I haven’t sat around raising my voice about capital punishment being bad. Some people need closure and cannot get it until they feel like justice has been dispensed.

Was justice dispensed though? Is it right to kill someone for killing another? Either if the person is hateful and despised does that make it right? I’m not sure of that answer. However I do think that how we treat others and executing people for crimes will be one of the major factors that define us as a species. 


Monday, November 18, 2013

Benghazi: The False 60 Minutes Report

#Benghazi #60minutes #benghaziscandal #foxnews #CBS #republicans #Obama #embassyattack

A terrible thing happened last year, the Benghazi Embassy in Libya was attacked by anti-American extremists and the American Ambassador to Benghazi was killed along with others placed to guard the embassy. After this occurred the conservatives went on a offensive, saying that the attack happened and was successful because the Obama Administration ignored warnings that tensions were rising and ignored requests to send more protection to the embassy. They turned this horrible attack into a media shit storm and attempted to place all the blame on Obama and his administration. To make them seem even worse conservatives spread rumors around and begged the question, “Why does Obama hate Americans?”

Of course anyone with a brain can see that this was a republican attempt to discredit the president and make him seem like an anti-American Islamic socialist that wants to see Americans die and wants to turn the country on its head. In order to do this they had to prove that Obama refused to send backup to the Benghazi Embassy even after multiple requests to the White House for additional assistance. Of course, the only news network that was trying to discredit the White House was Fox News. They wanted the American people to believe this crock about the president not caring about Americans enough to send out reinforcements. Unfortunately for Fox they had all the answers and knew exactly why the president did this, they just couldn’t prove anything.

Recently though on the CBS program 60 Minutes they covered the Benghazi story, as one man was brave enough to step up to the plate and tell the truth about what really happened in Benghazi, and how he tried to warn the White House many times and that his voice fell on deaf ears. This man is Morgan Jones and he was a security officer sent to protect the Benghazi mission.

60 Minutes did this report based on everything Jones had told them. He told them that he warned the Obama Administration that more backup was needed, and that he was there during the September 11th 2012 attack on the Benghazi embassy.

When this was aired on television Fox News jumped on it, almost as if they were relieved. Fox News personalities were talking about how the story has to be true because 60 Minutes wouldn’t cover the story if it wasn’t. They were also touting themselves for breaking the “scandal” story saying “60 Minutes reported on things that Fox uncovered months ago.”

Fox was generally happy now that another news network corroborated their insinuations about the Benghazi attack. They’ve been so hell bent on finding out exactly what happened and trying to get the American people to see if as a huge act or corruption and cover-ups designed to kill US citizens and protect our anti-American president. So this was exactly what Fox needed, someone who was there who can backup everything they have said about this incident, and now they’ve got him. Only problem is that the story that Morgan Jones gave CBS was entirely false.

CBS discovered that the incident report Jones filed with his employer was completely different from what he told 60 Minutes. The New York Times discovered that he told the FBI that he was no where near the compound during the attack, a claim which Jones says is a smear attack against him and not true despite the fact that the report he gave the FBI are consistent with statements he gave to Blue Mountain, a British-based contractor hired by the state department to secure the perimeter around the compound.

After this was all discovered 60 Minutes had this to say:

60 Minutes has learned of new information that undercuts the account told to us by Morgan Jones of his actions on the night of the attack on the Benghazi compound.
We are currently looking into this serious matter to determine if he misled us, and if so, we will make a correction.

Fox News had nothing to do with releasing this story, as all they did was talk about the 60 Minutes report and brag about how this was all stuff that they had uncovered months ago…they just never had any proof. And now that this guy Morgan Jones comes up and says he has proof they are all super excited to tout themselves as great investigative journalists. But much to their chagrin the story turned out to be false and Morgan, whose REAL NAME is actually Dylan Davies lied to 60 Minutes about being there during the attack. Fox has a really bad reputation for saying things with no proof to back them up. They can’t even find someone to lie for them; they have to wait until another news organization covers it. And even though it turned out to be lies, Fox will only use this situation to make other news networks out to be untrustworthy.

You see, Fox plays semantics and so they can never be held responsible for the things the say. Just like Bill O told Jon Stewart on his show, “I’m an opinion man” even though Jon told him that he may see himself as an opinion man but he consistently delivers his opinions as fact and leaves little to the imagination otherwise. Of course Bill firmly denies this, but it’s true. Bill even likes to call his show the “No Spin Zone” yet he wants to say he is an opinion man who doesn’t present his information as factual. Jesus H. Christ if that’s not spin I don’t know what is.

So this is just a case of Fox jumping on any lie they can propagate and spread. Lucky for them the majority of their viewers are not very smart and much like Fox News itself the viewers never bother to check facts. So unfortunately I can see people talking about this all like it is real and wasn’t debunked. So just remember folks, when someone tries to tell you that Fox News was right on the money about Benghazi because of this misleading 60 Minutes report make sure you correct them and tell them to check their facts. Because this is the type of bullshit that will be spread around the streets and of course social media sites like it already has been. You just need to remember one simple thing about Benghazi: Republicans cut spending on protecting embassies, which is exactly why the Benghazi embassy was under protected.  


On Wednesday morning, CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien asked the Utah Republican if he had "voted to cut the funding for embassy security."

"Absolutely," Chaffetz said. "Look we have to make priorities and choices in this country. We have…15,000 contractors in Iraq. We have more than 6,000 contractors, a private army there, for President Obama, in Baghdad. And we’re talking about can we get two dozen or so people into Libya to help protect our forces. When you’re in tough economic times, you have to make difficult choices. You have to prioritize things.”

The Obama Administration had nothing to do with cutting the funds, and because of the republican led cut back the Benghazi Embassy was left under protected and the White House had it’s hands tied and couldn’t send out extra help. And now they want to turn around and blame it all on the president and Hilary Clinton? What a waste of time…

Republicans Admit Cutting Funds for Embassies
60 Minutes Apologizes for Misleading Benghazi Report

Art: Girl Draws Self-Portraits While High on LSD

#LSD #selfportrait #art #LSDart

So when I first started this blog one of the things I wanted to write about other than politics was art. I thought that art would give me and the readers a nice break between the crazy antics of politicians and world events. However I don’t really post too many things about art work, and I have received a few emails on my other blogs about art asking me to do more art posts. So here we go.

I found this awesome gem on Facebook this morning. A French girl draws her self-portrait before and after taking the hallucinogenic substance lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD). Having experimented with LSD myself I had to get a look at these and share them with everyone I could.

For those of you who don’t know much about LSD (other than what you hear from old movies or the mainstream media) it’s a powerful hallucinogenic drug. When ingested it can take up to 45-60 minutes before the effects take hold of the user, at which point the user feels extreme feelings of euphoria and can experience powerful visual and auditory hallucinations. This can have a profound affect on the mind of the users, usually described as a spiritual or life changing experience.

In the 1950’s the US government and the governments of other countries experimented with LSD on soldiers and agents. Other scientists have experimented with LSD on insects such as spiders to see how they react when exposed to the drug.

This girl who dosed on LSD and drew herself was actually chronicling her journey as well, writing on each drawing short notes about her experience as well as noting how much time has passed since dosing the LSD.

About 15 minutes after dosing LSD

45 minutes into the trip and we can see noticeable changes

1 hour and 45 minutes in and the real transformation is just beginning

2 hours and 15 minutes in and we can see some major changes here. She is transforming into her true self.

Now it's almost as if her aurora is coming to the surface and her whole body and mind is now ascending to a higher form of consciousness.

More changing, as if true self is still trying to convert the old self into a being of pure energy, half way caught in between being human and being other worldly

As if she has shed her human qualities and her conscious starts to grow and branch out from the crude matter that is her human form

It almost looks as if she is trying to draw what she was before her transformation

Now it looks like she has finally transformed and shed all of her human qualities to become some type of goddess that is made of pure energy. She has finally shed that old side of herself

As the LSD wore off she was asked to draw one more picture. This is what she drew, as if she was slowly returning back to her original form as her trip comes to a close
The art work is just phenomenal and gives you a very interesting look into the mind of an artistic individual. What I think is really cool is that as time passes you can see that the image she draws changes a lot from a very natural seeming portrait to small changes occurring on certain facial features and finally a transformation into what seems to be a completely different being that doesn’t seem human anymore.

While getting deeper and deeper into the high of the LSD you can notice that the artist actually stops filling in the eyes of the portraits. She claims in the notes that she usually draws the eyes last because she doesn’t like the portrait looking at her while she draws, but as the high became more intense she omitted the eyes from the portrait. One can only imagine what was going through her mind when drawing these.

All and all I say it’s some awesome art work that allows you to get inside the mind of a person on LSD and see things from a completely different spectrum. It’s very interesting to me because the times I experimented with LSD I tried writing to see what crazy things I could come up with. Over time I noticed that my handwriting (which is already sloppy) became even more unreadable and my ideas were jumbled and never seemed to flow the way I wanted them to. The end result was usually something that was completely unreadable, incoherent, and followed no structure at all.

However, I did write ONE good story while on LSD, and it became one of my favorites. It was about a science experiment called STX-1 and it involved a lizard-like creature whose biochemistry was altered to make him smarter and stronger. Little did anyone realize that the lizard was about to assimilate the DNA from every living thing into his own body, essentially copying some aspects of that DNA into his own and changing his appearing/intellect/strength. Eventually the lizard, who later named himself Sterzex, is able to see certain disturbances in space and time and can actually create wormholes out of those disturbances to travel to different dimensions and ultimately increase his own awareness and intelligence.

Follow me on Twitter! @Turk_Reno


Thursday, October 31, 2013

Snowden May Testify on Merkel Spying

#snowden #NSA #merkel #wiretapping #obama #germany

So it looks like Edward Snowden, the 30 year old ex-analyst with the NSA who reveled NSA domestic and foreign spying may testify at a hearing concerning the Angela Merkel phone surveillance situation. I have to say, I think this is awesome.

If this actually happens Snowden will have to travel from Moscow, Russia to Berlin, Germany to be interrogated by German authorities, which could be a diplomatic hurdle all on its own.  

If brought to Germany German officials have stated that they will not cave into any pressures from the US to extradite the former NSA employee and whistle blower if he steps on German soil.

This whole wire tapping thing has caused all sorts of problems for the Obama Administration. According to the documents and other sources, it seems Obama was in fact aware that Angela Merkel was being spied on by the NSA. Of course the WH is firmly denying this allegation, saying that the president was never briefed by the NSA about Merkel phone surveillance.

However, it would seem as though the documents released by Snowden tell a different story. A story of how the US pushed ahead and wire tapped phone conversations in Germany. Not just German leaders were wire tapped mind you, but the German citizens as well.

The documents also tell a tale of how the NSA has been spying on Google and Yahoo overseas, which has led German officials to urge journalists to stop using Google and Yahoo search engines for the time being. The Germans also want the US to sign a “no spying” deal to ensure that espionage between allies is not occurring.

So to be honest, I can’t wait to see what happens. I would love to see Snowden go to Germany and testify. This all needs to be brought out into the light. Is America a great country? I would like to think so. But with all of these revelations how can we trust what our president is saying? It doesn’t matter if the president is a Democrat or not. How can we ever trust another president again when we know this stuff is happening?


"Coach" ave Daubenmire Responds to My Email

#bullying #homosexualbullying #christians #davedaubenmire #davidpakmanshow #bible  

I seriously didn’t think it would happen, but it did. “Coach” Dave Daubenmire actually replied to the email I sent him which asked him to recount the things he said about bullying.

I posted this blog last night about a guy named Dave Daubenmire who has his own internet talk show. Yesterday I found a clip from the David Pakman Show where David talks about this “Coach” and how he thinks that not bullying homosexuals is actually anti-Christian bullying.


In fact, when someone says something that their conscience tells them to say and everyone rises up against him, then we see the majority begin to bully the minority once again. And you know what’s rapidly happening in America? We’re beginning to see Christians and Christian ideas and Christian values become the most bullied things in all of this nation.”

I wrote the blog about this man and what he said and then I went straight to Twitter, where I asked some of my followers to tell Dave Daubenmire what they all think of his ridicules statements. I myself sent a message to Mr. Daubenmire:

Dear "Coach" Dave
A clip from your show was recently brought to my attention, where you claim that the most bullied of all things in this country is Christianity. For shame, Mr. Daubenmire.

As a Christian you have churches dedicated to your beliefs all across the country. You have politicians on your side that rally congress to make law based on the god of bible. There are Christian clubs in nearly every school across the country.
Your whole idea of "the discrimination of discrimination is discrimination" is nonsense.
I'm sure you're a relatively intelligent man (I hope at least) who has a strong faith in god and walks side by side with Jesus down the beach like in that "Footsteps" poem. But what you said on your show is not what Jesus would have wanted. You claim that not allowing Christians to bully homosexual people is discrimination against Christians. But what did the bible say about bullying?

Leviticus 19:18 ESV / 1,060 helpful votes

You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord.

2 Timothy 1:7 ESV / 598 helpful votes

For God gave us a spirit not of fear but of power and love and self-control.

1 John 3:15 ESV / 411 helpful votes

Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.

What’s even better is this verse:

Matthew 5:11 ESV / 257 helpful votes

“Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account.

The bible even says that homosexuals are blessed when you bully them. Sure, you can play the semantics game all you want Mr. Daubenmire, and claim that you yourself are blessed because people revile your revile. But if you keep that up you're not making any strides toward any sort of progress what-so-ever and you go against god's wishes.

Anyone can play the semantics game, sir. The sad part about that is that it keeps this ridicules circle jerk going for years. 

I thought it was a great message. I was trying to be as diplomatic and friendly as possible. I thought I made a pretty good point. Here is the full message Mr. Daubenmire sent back to me from his iPhone:
I m not sure the Bible says anything about bullying but it says a lot about how we treat one another.  I never said it was ok for anyone to bully anybody....I merely tried to point out that bullying gets worse the older we get and that we would do well to teach our children that truism so that they might be better prepared for life
But unfortunately that is not what Mr. Daubenmire was saying on his program. Mr. Daubenmire is trying to hide from the fact that he said not allowing Christians to bully gays is anti-Christian bullying. Mr. Daubenmire says that bullying gets worse as you get older. I have to disagree to a certain extent, but that’s just my opinion. But either way, he is trying to say that telling a Christian not to persecute a homosexual is actually persecution against the Christian. He was begging the question, “Aren’t Christians being persecuted by the homosexuals?”

I have a final thought to this. Mr. Daubenmire just isn’t a very good talk show host. Like all conservative pundits and pundit wanna-be’s he just makes crazy statements that he can’t even follow, and then gives an explanation in the attempt to distance himself from the words he actually used. “Oh no I didn’t say that Christians are bullied because tolerance for homosexuality was growing. I was saying that bullying gets worse no matter who you are and we need to prepare ourselves for it.”

The whole “discrimination of discrimination is discrimination” idea that Mr. Daubenmire talked about in the video is just a semantics game that anyone can play. And the sad thing is that these people are willing to play semantics and use cognitive dissonance to make their absurd points, and when people do that it allows this ridicules circle jerk to continue forever with seeming no end in sight.

Tell Mr. Daubenmire what you think of his statement:

Phone: (740) 323-0871

Address: “Coach” Dave Daubenmire
P.O. Box 744
Hebron, OH, 43025, USA UPDATE!


So remember earlier this year? I didn’t either until I saw my calendar this morning. God damn time files by!  

Anyway I was going through some old files, doing some organization to get the blog up and running again and I noticed my blogs from earlier this year about

For those who don’t know, was a scam site that would create fake personal ads on websites like and would take responding male’s information and post it online. The victim who was unfortunate enough to reply to these fake sex ads would receive an email explaining to them that they are on a website that lists known sexual predators and exhibits the information publicly.

In order to get the information taken off this bogus site, you had to pay the guy $99.95. The reason the owners felt this payment was necessary was listed in the FAQ section of the website. It explained that it was needed to pay the developers for their time and service to remove the information.

They were tricky bastards, because also in their FAQ they mention US law which protected them. You see, in no way can you link the people who post the fake ads to the owners of the bogus website. And the owners of the website don’t post this information themselves, they allow any Joe Shmo to post information about anyone they please, just as long as they don’t use any copyrighted photos. The US law which protects them basically says that the owner of a website cannot be held responsible for the content their users post. And since the owners posted this on their site, and everyone else but them is posting this bogus information, they cannot be held liable.

Example: I use to host this blog. is not held responsible if you are offended at the stuff I say on my blog. If I am breaking the TOS then can delete my profile. But other than that they can not be held liable for the crazy shit I talk about in this blog.

For extra protections, the owners even used a service called “domain privacy”. That’s where you pay a third party to pretend to be the owner of the site, when in fact they really have no affiliation with the site other than providing you with privacy. So yeah, these guys had their asses covered.

Well I checked out the website and it is gone! In fact is also down! This was done because of several entities from what I hear, but I’m still not clear on who or what was behind the closing of these two sites. But who cares right?

But hey folks, watch your back out there. I’m sure this set back isn’t going to stop the owners of these sites, or any other scum bag who wants to do the same thing from doing it again.

Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Not Bullying Gays is Anti-Christian Bullying

So I was checking out the articles and videos on the net as I usually do, when I suddenly came across this piece. It was from a David Pakman show I found on Youtube which was posted today. It was all about a guy named “Coach” Dave Daubenmire, who said on one of his internet show that not allowing Christians to bully homosexuals for their lifestyle is actually bullying against Christians

So I watched the video and found that yes, this man did actually say that Christians are being bullied because they are told they can’t bully homosexuals. For some insane reason (which I will chalk to religion), this man believes that Christians have a right to bully gays because their lifestyle goes against the will of god. Telling them they can’t or shouldn’t bully people for being homosexual is an attack against their religion, and therefore they are the ones who are really being bullied.

I can’t even begin go into how stupid/hateful/ignorant this is, because the idea of it is just so ridicules. It’s just another case of religious folk who claim to be bullied and tormented because people refuse to agree with their insane doctrines.


Dave Daubenmire: “But only in the last five, fifteen years has bullying become such a big issue, and folks the whole bullying idea is built around the homosexual agenda. To try to get people to (not) criticize, or make fun of, or poke fun at homosexuals, that is the whole genesis of the “no bullying”. That’s where it all came from. What is hate speech legislation? See? They say hate speech prevents bullying but it’s not, it’s just the opposite. Hate speech increases bullying! In fact, when someone says something that their conscience tells them to say, and everyone rises up against him, then we see the majority begin to bully the minority once again. And you know what’s rapidly happening in America? We’re beginning to see Christians and Christian ideas and Christian values become the most bullied things in all of this nation.”

David made a great point in his video. He said that the “Coach” is actually sympathizing with gay people in a way because he is basically saying that Christians being bullied is bad because bullying is bad, essentially saying that if it’s bad for the goose it’s bad for the gander.

I’m very sure the “Coach” doesn’t see it that way but…wait a second…what is this man a coach of, anyway?

Hey, seriously though, tell “Coach” Dave Daubenmire what you think of his statement.

“Coach” Dave Daubenmire

Phone: Tel: (740) 323-0871

Address: Coach Dave Daubenmire
P.O. Box 744
Hebron, OH, 43025, USA


Back Again! What Have I Missed?

It’s been a long time, but after another long hiatus I am back!

It’s hard talking politics all day and debating over the net and in person. It can really get to a person after a while and really burn them out. So I took a break, focused on work, and silently watched as America (and the rest of the world) put on this lovely little absurd play. I laughed, I cried, I shouted, then I drank a beer and passed out. So let’s get down to it. What happened since my last post?

Government Shut Down:

Oh joy! Republicans have outdone themselves this time. They actually shut down the government because of their grievances with the Affordable Care Act.

When the Affordable Care Act, also known as “Obamacare”, was due to be enacted the Republicans went on an all out assault and tried to stop it by shutting down the government. Many Republicans were on the TV at this time talking about how this was all about stopping “Obamacare”, yet others were saying that this was less about “Obamacare” and more about the debt ceiling or both. Debt ceiling debates aside, we all know why they wanted the shut down. It was simply an effort put forth to attempt a halting of funds to, or the down right dismantling of the Affordable Care Act.

Why would Republicans do this? Were the majority of Republicans all for this? Well, no they really weren’t at first, I think. Sure, many Republicans were against the ACA, even after a SCOTUS ruling which deemed the ACA constitutional. But a minority of House Republicans (Tea Party Republicans) were able coaxed the rest of their colleagues to take it one more step off the crazy edge. And thus the government shut down was born.

What is really funny about the whole Republican manufactured shut down is how after the shut down took place the Republicans were quick to respond to critics by saying that they never wanted to shut down the government and that it was the Democrats fault the government was shut down.

But the Republicans spent weeks and months talking about how they will shut down the government unless a law they didn’t like was repealed immediately. How in the world can they turn around and say they never wanted to shut down the government?

It’s like being in a dysfunctional, abusive relationship with someone. You demand that your partner do something that they can’t or otherwise don’t want to. So to get them to comply you threaten them with the ultimatum that they either comply or get injured. When they still don’t comply you start to beat them, all the while saying, “This hurts me more than it hurts you. I never wanted this, nor am I doing it. You’re doing it to yourself and you’re the one who wanted this. If only you just did what I told you to do, you wouldn’t have brought this on.”

What is even more absurd is the Republican attitude toward the shutting down of war memorials and national monuments and parks. They seemed to be more upset that veterans could not go to war memorials than the fact that their shut down was going to cost billions of dollars for the country. I thought this was somewhat interesting though. Republicans tout themselves as being extremely patriotic, and their attitude towards the fighting men and women of our military seems very loving and highly supportive. Republicans constantly talk about supporting the troops and how we wouldn’t have freedom without them.
Memorials Closed Due to Government Shut Down

Yet, when they aren’t fighting wars Republicans don’t seem to care about them. They come home after fighting questionable wars, and all they get is a pat on the back and sent on their way. Many of the troops who come home suffer from mental disorders they received due to the traumas of war. Many of them cannot find jobs, cannot get the healthcare they not only need but deserve due to VA hospital tie ups (another debacle created by Republicans), and many even end up homeless. But Republicans don’t seem to care about the health and status of our veterans at all. They only care about buildings made of stone and mortar that were erected to honor them, not the actual fighting soldiers. If they truly cared, then why would they try to cut funding for VA hospitals?

To drive the idea that this shut down was not their fault the GOP had photos taken of Republican law makers sitting down at one side of a long conference table, the other side was vacant essentially saying, “We’re here to fix this, but Democrats don’t want to.”
GOP "Ready to Compromise"

In the end a compromise was made though, one that would raise the debt ceiling and allow “Obamacare” to continue unhindered as planned. The Republicans lost their silly battle against healthcare, and the cost of the shut down to the country was $24 billion. All because they wanted to cry about something they couldn’t dictate.

Now that they lost that battle a new battle rages on to discredit the Affordable Care Act; the failure of the ACA website. Yes, the ACA website is one hell of a cluster fuck. With all of the problems it is having it really is hard to tell if the site is just being inundated with traffic from Americans who want to sign up for healthcare, or if the site just plain sucks.

Republican attacks against the site are filled with silly talking points that make them look pettier then you could imagine. They are attacking it by criticizing the President for the cost of fixing the ACA website, which is being reported as $634 million.

This is silly, because compared to the shut the ACA website has only cost 2.64% of the government shut down cost (if the numbers are being reported are accurate). Hmm, and they call themselves fiscally responsible when they can’t even tell that 24 billion is more than 634 million? Interesting.

NSA Spying:

Well, the cat’s out of the bag now, Mr. President! Thanks to 30 year old Edward Snowden, an EX analyst for the NSA, the entire world now knows that the United States of America has been spying not only on it’s own people, but the people and governments of other countries. How did this information get leaked? It got leaked because Edward Snowden was privy to this information and had access to sensitive documents, and he released them to The Guardian, exposing the NSA’s domestic and foreign spying efforts.

Currently, Snowden is living in Moscow, Russia after being given amnesty by Russian president, Vladimir Putin. This action by Putin was taken simply to stick a large bug up Obama’s ass, and it worked. Because of these actions Snowden is safe from American reprisal for the time being. And now the entire world knows of America’s spying, and they are not very happy about it to say the least.

German chancellor Angela Merkel is one of many world leaders that are particularly concerned about this spying revelation, especially now since we are discovering that the USA was spying on her cell phone conversations and what’s more sources say Obama knew about it.

Merkel has been in the news a lot recently because she is asking the President if these allegations are true. The White House of course has taken a firm stance on these accusations, and the NSA itself is denying that they ever briefed President Obama on Angela Merkel phone surveillance.
Angela Merkel and Barack Obama

First off come on, man. Obama had to have known about it, I’m sure he did allow it, and now I’m sure he is lying about it. I mean, the man renewed NDAA which expanded on indefinite detention and indiscriminate wire tapping. Then he went behind everyone’s back and signed into law the Monsanto Protection Act, knowing damn well that his constituency did not want him to do that. Yet, I’m not seeing very much anger on the Democrat side.

I have to share a story here. A friend of mine once bashed Bush, saying that he was wire tapping the American people and spying on us and detaining people indefinitely and that Bush was a real asshole for all of that.

So, just this summer I asked “What do you think of the NDAA being renewed and all the NSA revelations under this administration?” To which he replied, “Well PEOPLE in the GOVERNMENT have been spying on us for decades now, so it’s no big deal really. And I don’t mind it at all because I’m not doing anything that I shouldn’t be.”

WOW! What a change of heart! A Republican is in office and a Democrat assaults him verbally for establishing laws which make it easier for the government to spy on its own people. Then a Democrat gets into office, does the same exact thing, and it’s totally acceptable.

Remember folks, I’m no Obama-Yes-Man. I did vote for him, yes. But that doesn’t mean I’m going to defend his every action or inaction. This is just how it is.

Quite frankly, I believe that Obama is way more right-winged than anybody is willing to believe, and that this type of behavior is going to continue and many of us, Democrats and Republicans alike, are going to allow it.


So Syria was a big deal for me. When I heard about it I was pissed. “Here is our famous “anti-war president” dragging us into another unnecessary conflict”, I thought. I mean seriously folks, this is the guy who campaigned on Iraq being an unnecessary conflict that we should never repeat again, yet he wants to lob missiles into other countries?

Obama said that “no boots would touch the ground”, and he even had John Kerry try and explain to us that war is only war when troops are not on the ground fighting other soldiers. Since no boots are touching the ground, Kerry tried to explain to us, there is no real war. It’s just some missiles being fired, aimed at strategic points to cripple the other country’s regime and force them to surrender. That’s all, folks. No war here.
Kerry at Senate Hearing Discussing Syrian Intervention

It hurts my brain to think about it, but Mr. Kerry truly is one real son of a bitch for trying to get us to believe this nonsense. He clearly wants us to believe that there are no sailors who are going to be controlling these missiles. Are they not troops or part of our fighting forces during war time? Do they not feel the morality of what they do weighing on their shoulders? I guess not. How about pilots whose missions are to drop bombs or control drones? Are they not troops?

This reminds me of something, an anime called Gundam Wing. In the story there is a type of mobile suit created which does not require a pilot to control it manually from the inside of its cockpit or from a remote location. They are all controlled by computer and are for the most part autonomic. While these machines are out fighting wars in space against real people the citizens of the alliance which built the machines barely feel the true effects of the war and have essentially become separated from it in nearly every way.

That is how I feel when our politicians try to tell us that no boots on the ground means war cannot exist. I feel it is a dirty, underhanded trick that politicians find necessary to use when they want to start another conflict without their followers realizing what it really is.

Luckily though, we have had some seemingly good progress come out of this almost-conflict with Syria. The Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad has actually pledged to get rid of their chemical weapon stock piles and has said that he would like Syria to become apart of the Geneva Convention. I have to admit, I did laugh when I heard this. Only because I wasn’t sure if Assad would go through with it, however it seems that he is.

No news has been making it to the major media networks about that region for a while though…interesting.

So that’s about it for this blog, now that I’m back from hiatus stayed tuned for some more to come.

If you want you can follow me on Twitter @Turk_Reno

Or you can find me on Facebook at


Friday, February 8, 2013

Why Do Conservatives Fear Gay Scouts?

With the decision to repeal a discriminating exclusion of homosexuals in the Boy Scouts of America coming up a lot of emotions are running in overdrive. Many people who are gay and straight are currently showing either their support or outrage toward lifting this discriminatory membership policy, which excludes homosexuals (and atheists) from being members of the BSA organization.

The BSA is a great organization that I was once a member of. Around my early freshman year of High School I started to realize that I was gay, and it was around the same time I found out that the BSA discriminates against gays. I felt so ashamed at first, like I had done something wrong, so I quit the scouts. But I also felt so ashamed afterward that I never came out. I was very confused about the way society expected me to be and how I was not meeting up to those standards. My self confidence deteriorated significantly, and my social skills became nearly nonexistent. Not to say that I was the most popular or well liked person in school, but there was most definitely a difference between the ‘Boy Scouts me’ and the ‘after Boy Scouts me’. All because some people decided that homosexuals do not fit the criteria of an organization that promotes good vales and teaches great life lessons. What a fucking shame.

My boyfriend was also a member of the Scouts, and his father was too, as well as a Scoutmaster. He knew he was gay and accepted it at an earlier age than I did. He completed everything the Scouts ask of him in order to obtain his Eagle Badge up to completing his Eagle Project. He came so close to being awarded with his Eagle Badge accomplishment when he told the BSA to fuck off, and that he was gay and that he wanted nothing to do with a discriminatory organization. Wish I had done it that way, but instead I gave into the belief that I was unsuitable to be a Boy Scouts because of who I was. Does anyone have a time machine I could borrow?

Seriously, if I had stayed with the Scouts I would have had much more self confidence in my High School years, plus I would have had more great times with my fellow Scouts, learning new ways to be self sufficient and self reliant, while at the same time having awesome and daring adventures across the United States.

I love the Boy Scouts of America, and I think that they teach young men the skills and values that are useful in nearly every aspect of life.

But the question has to be asked. Why would an organization like this discriminate against homosexuals? And why is it that when people try to put an end to this kind of discrimination that conservatives come out and act like it would be the end of the world?

“Oh my God, we could have gays in the Boy Scouts, Martha!”

Newsflash folks, we already have gays in the Boy Scouts! I was a Boy Scout who is gay; my boyfriend was a Boy Scout who is gay. As far as we know any volunteers we that we knew while we were in Scouts could have been gay.

Just like in the military, the ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy was in affect, like majorly. That was good and all, I guess. But what happens to a soldier or a sailor when his commanding officers found out he was actually gay? He was discharged, end of story. And the same thing is happening to good gay men all across the nation. Men who never brought up their sexuality because it had no place in a Scouting or military atmosphere have been persecuted and discharged upon discovery of what they do in their own private time with the ones they are intimate with.

The BSA and proponents of this anti-gay member policy say that if homosexuals are allowed to be members of the BSA that they will be required to talk about sex with our children and make it policy that homosexuality be brought up during Scout meetings. They fear that once homosexuals are allowed in that we will have to explain to our kids that Scoutmaster Rick is gay and that means he likes other men.

But the Scouts have never been about teaching children about sex. It even says so, right in the Scoutmasters Handbook from 1972:

Rule number 1: You do not undertake to instruct Scouts, in any formalized manner, the subject of sex and family life. The reasons are that it is not construed to be Scoutings proper area, and that you are probably not well qualified to do this.

So with this rule being stated, why is it that the BSA has to exclude homosexual members? Do they believe that because they are homosexual they will undoubtedly indoctrinate children and teach them about sex?

The right-wingers make a great point on this too, and that is that Scouting is not about sex. They’re absolutely right, couldn’t agree with them more on that statement. But if that’s the case then why is it that the BSA is discriminating against a group of people because of their sexual preference? If Scouting is not about sex why do they make it an issue to discriminate against a certain group of people because of who they have sex with? Doesn’t that whole line of thought kind of go along the lines of saying, ‘Scouting has everything to do about sex’?

I guess what I am saying here is that homosexuals who want to be members of the BSA never wanted there to be an issue about sex, or their sexuality. They never wanted it to be brought up, nor did they want to bring it up. And why is that? Again, it’s because Scouting is not about sex (says so in the Scoutmaster’s Handbook of 1972), and it is certainly not about your Scoutmaster giving your kids any type of sexual education.

The people who made this issue about sex are the conservatives, mainly the Mormon Church. They are the ones who claimed that homosexuals would HAVE to be appointed to Scoutmaster positions and that they would HAVE to be allowed to talk about sex and sexual orientation. This can’t be further from the truth.

With the presences of homosexuals already in the ranks of the Boy Scouts, don’t you think this would have happened already? Like I said it’s just like Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, as long as no one knows you are gay you are fine, so just keep your mouth shut.

Well many people have done that but it backfired on them, big time, and they are released from duty unwarrantedly. There are many men who have been Scoutmasters, who kept their sexual orientation quiet, and did not talk about sex or their own sex life to their troops. But, once someone they knew saw them with another man, or at a gay bar (which makes me wonder why someone who went to a gay bar would try to blackmail someone else who went to a gay bar….politics…) and they get proof then it’s all over. That Scoutmaster is now fired for having a private life, a private life that had nothing to do with Scouting.

This is what is wrong with this whole thing. Not only does it cause young men who believe they are gay to think that they are wrong and sinful but it also persecutes those who worked hard to earn their position, only to have it stripped away from them because of their private life…which by the way, never came up in Scout meetings.

So what are they so afraid of? I have already shown that homosexuals are no more at risk of abusing children than heterosexuals, and I have already shown that homosexuals don’t want to take over and start teaching sex. So why is it that they have such a bug up their ass on this?

Well it goes back to the Christian God and organized religion in general. The Scouts have been hijacked by the Mormon Church, for all intents and purposes. And we all know the Mormon Church’s track record with gay and civil rights. They believe that homosexuality is wrong and against God. And since one of their laws is to, “Do my duty to God,” they believe that gays do not do their duty to God.

OK, being an ex-Boy Scout I know that the BSA allows people of all faiths.


“The BSA, therefore, recognizes the religious element in the training of the member, but is absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward that religious training.”

Meaning that Muslims, Jews, Christians, Buddhists, etc can join the Boy Scouts of America, but what of the homosexual? And the biggest word there is “nonsectarian”, meaning that they will not relate to specific religious sect or political group. So then why are they trying to say that they can’t exclude homosexuals when they don’t relate to any specific religion? And even then, what if a member is homosexual and a Christian? Is it right to cast him out for his sin?


“I thought only ‘he without sin shall cast the first Prius.’”

I have tried really hard to discredit many of the claims made by the religious right-wing on this issue in order to restore some type of sanity or rationality. But one voice doesn’t do enough. You need to speak out against this as well whether or not you’re a new reader, older reader, liberal reader, or conservative reader. You should at least look at the argument I’m trying to make and just for once step away from politics, and step away from that ‘I think along the party-lines’ type of rationale and start thinking for yourself a little bit. I mean, really, are homosexuals that much of a threat to society? We’ve been living with them for thousands upon thousands of years, and they are the ones out to destroy the fabric of society?

I had this discussion with my boyfriend and he said that if there existed a type of radar that could locate homosexuals (a gaydar if you will) than we would find homosexuals within every nook and cranny of our society. They are our neighbors, they are our friends, and they’re our cops, firefighters, nurses, doctors, teachers, and politicians. They make up the fabric of society like everyone else does.

Republicans often make the claim that citizens are paranoid, especially with this new gun control debate, and they like to say that people who are against guns just don’t trust their neighbors enough. And this is true to a degree. But can’t the same be said for them? They are happy to say that trust is a huge issue and that there should be more trust toward your fellow American, yet they discriminate against homosexuals teaching their children because they don’t trust them to not abuse children. Isn’t this the same argument?