"I need a place that can offer me intellectual simulation."

He should try Liberty University. (The one founded by Jerry Falwell.)

You are misconstruing what I said. You said "Bush and religion ridiculous by associating one with the other". That's why I posted my response.

Now you are saying that the democrats were for the war as well, however you don't acknowledge the fact that information has been shown to be cherry picked to develop a credible case for war and make Iraq seem like an imminent threat to America and the western world.

Then presented using some of the most respected individuals to validate the case for War, Colin Powell's UN address comes to mind. The Downing street memo showed that: "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

Your later point simply benefits mine only you seem to spread the blame on all presidential candidates while not looking at the way the Bush run for Presidency was actively catered and supported by evangelicals, Jerry Falwell comes to mind. Bush's own constant mention of faith rescuing him from alcoholism, his meddling in the Terry Schiavo case.

No other president in our time has so constantly referred to a personal relationship with God in guiding his policy as Bush has. Essentially you are agreeing that politics and religion have no business being affiliated, as even a president so vehemently supported by Christians, endorsed by its religious leaders and in a personal relationship with God has proved to be an outright disaster.

Let me tell everyone here something, because I'm mildly drunk and I feel like it:

McCain is NOT now, nor has he EVER been, a fucking maverick! I don't give a flying fuck that he spoke against the likes of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson in the 2000 election cycle. He was doing that for a reason: To set himself apart from the other candidates, trying to make a name for himself. In other words, he was doing it for POLITICAL reasons. Also, let's not forget that in his second fucking term in the United States Senate he got busted for his involvement in the Keating 5 scandal. That's your fucking maverick, folks.

I am so sick of this narrative about "Maverick McCain." Even some Democrats say "he USED to be" a maverick. WRONG. He has voted the party line just as much as any other Republican Senator, and he has consistently voted for Bush policies. Not just Bush the Douchebag, but Bush the Elder Douchebag too.

Don't let 'em fool you for one second about this "maverick" shit. He's a desperate, crotchety old man with a sense of entitlement. He thinks that just because he's an old veteran (and Obama's not) that he deserves the keys to the Oval Office. Yeah, every old veteran deserves every fucking thing they ask for. Now before someone accuses me of troop-bashing, I'll remind you that I'm a veteran too, so I'll say this: Most veterans aren't cut out to be President. Is that a bad thing to say? NO, only because most PEOPLE aren't cut out to be President. In other words, he ain't getting a veteran's discount from me.

Attacking a fellow veteran, McCain? Rev. Wright also served his country in the United States Marine Corps, asshole.

We sometimes act like we've got freedom of speech for comedy figured out here in America, and its no big deal, but not long ago Larry Flint had to fight and appeal all the way to the Supreme Court (spending over $2 million) to defend a simple parody about Jerry Falwell.

In Larry's words;

'The justices held that a parody of a public figure was protected under the 1st Amendment even if it was outrageous, even if it was "doubtless gross and repugnant," as they put it, and even if it was designed to inflict emotional distress. In a unanimous decision — written by, of all people, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist — the court reasoned that if it supported Falwell's lower-court victory, no one would ever have to prove something was false and libelous to win a judgment. All anyone would have to prove is that "he upset me" or "she made me feel bad." The lawsuits would be endless, and that would be the end of free speech.'

(from http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-flynt20may20,0,2751741.story?coll=la-home-commentary)

(and the parody ad can be seen here http://medialibel.org/imgd/falwell.jpg)

Thank you very much, that was excellent.

In reply to this comment by bamdrew:
Larry Flynt wrote a wonderful, heartfelt opinion piece upon the death of his... friend,... Jerry Falwell.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-flynt20may20,0,2751741.story?coll=la-home-commentary

... a highlight, summing up his Supreme Court victory over Falwell;

'The justices held that a parody of a public figure was protected under the 1st Amendment even if it was outrageous, even if it was "doubtless gross and repugnant," as they put it, and even if it was designed to inflict emotional distress. In a unanimous decision — written by, of all people, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist — the court reasoned that if it supported Falwell's lower-court victory, no one would ever have to prove something was false and libelous to win a judgment. All anyone would have to prove is that "he upset me" or "she made me feel bad." The lawsuits would be endless, and that would be the end of free speech.'


I also recall a Larry Flint interview where he noted that part of his late-life friendship with Jerry Falwell was driven by Jerry's appreciation of having someone who didn't agree with him, and wouldn't just tell him what he wanted to hear.

Larry Flynt wrote a wonderful, heartfelt opinion piece upon the death of his... friend,... Jerry Falwell.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-flynt20may20,0,2751741.story?coll=la-home-commentary

... a highlight, summing up his Supreme Court victory over Falwell;

'The justices held that a parody of a public figure was protected under the 1st Amendment even if it was outrageous, even if it was "doubtless gross and repugnant," as they put it, and even if it was designed to inflict emotional distress. In a unanimous decision — written by, of all people, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist — the court reasoned that if it supported Falwell's lower-court victory, no one would ever have to prove something was false and libelous to win a judgment. All anyone would have to prove is that "he upset me" or "she made me feel bad." The lawsuits would be endless, and that would be the end of free speech.'


I also recall a Larry Flint interview where he noted that part of his late-life friendship with Jerry Falwell was driven by Jerry's appreciation of having someone who didn't agree with him, and wouldn't just tell him what he wanted to hear.

Both hero and villain, purveyor of pornography and tireless civil rights advocate, the always controversial publisher of Hustler magazine Larry Flynt is the subject of Joan Brooker-Marks new tell-all documentary Larry Flynt: The Right to be Left Alone.

In a timely response to a current political situation where the fundamental civil rights of Americans are being challenged, the film offers an eye-opening and authoritative overview of Flynt’s long-standing struggles to expand the parameters of free speech and expose the hypocrisy of this country’s elected leaders. Featuring rarely seen documentary and television footage, as well as in-depth interviews with Flynt himself, the documentary focuses on the self-confessed smut peddler’s usually contentious entanglements with politics – from his precedent-setting Supreme Court case against evangelist and adulterer Jerry Falwell, to his prison sentence for refusing to name his source for the tapes documenting the FBI’s entrapment of John DeLorean, to his campaign runs for both California governor and President.

Brooker-Marks also profiles Flynt’s confrontation of the current administration of George W. Bush on the issues of civil liberties and government transparency. Flynt exposed the administration’s staged rescue of Army Private Jessica Lynch – choosing not to publish naked photographs taken of the 19-year-old, which Flynt felt, would add to her victimization. Additionally, he successfully sued Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon for press access to the battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Delving beyond Flynt’s political career, the documentary offers an intimate glimpse of the publisher’s personal life, including the assassination attempt that left him paralyzed and his first wife’s battle with AIDS. Ultimately, Brooker-Marks delivers the full, unvarnished story of one of America’s most unlikely defenders of civil liberties.

[Contains mature content. Viewer discretion advised.]

In reply to this comment by NordlichReiter:
Do you have any more info on the Larry Flynt video?

>> ^SaNdMaN:
"Outstanding. This guy needs to be on Jon Stewart and/or Colbert if he hasn't already."
He was on The Daily Show and it wasn't anything special.


By 'not anything special' generally means that he defended the Iraq war rather than attacking religion. Thus disappointing a large portion of the crowd. For those interested, his Daily Show appearances include him talking about nearly getting spanked by Margaret Thatcher, playing devils advocate for Mother Theresa and having the grand son of Ayatollah Kohmanei over for supper at his house. Oh, and the time he spent in Iraq and North Korea too. Nothing special? One of the far and away most interesting guests the Daily Show has had, which is saying a lot.

Why doesn't fox send its attack dogs after the bigtime conservative demagogues Jerry Falwell and Pat Roberton who said 9/11 was God's punishment to America for harboring gays and feminists? That's infinitely worse than saying you're not proud of a country that invades other countries without a good reason and subverts the will of their people. The Mossadeq affair was shameful. The USA has participated in a long line of coups from Iran 1953 to Iraq 2003.

Makes as much sense as Jerry Falwell...

I disagree with Doc_M's statement that Obama's church is a disgrace. The sermon that contained the three-second soundbyte of "God damn America for killing innocent people" makes as much sense as any sermon when taken in context and you realize he was talking about the leaders of America, not all the people. Wright seemed reasonable in his hour interview with Bill Moyers and his hours at the press club. He's not half as bad as Hagee/Falwell/Robertson or any other televangelist.

What about falwell, hagee, robertson, the pope, etc?

The pope's anti-contraception activism has lead to quite a lot of poverty and suffering. The nuts in christianity are more like 30% than 0.1%. The same goes for Islam. You have high-ranking clerics issuing death warrant fatwas over books and cartoons (such as the Iranian head of state, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has wide support among Iranian Muslims still living in Iran and much less support among exiles and emigres)

Or what about how McCain spiritual advisor Rod Parsley wants to eradicate Islam, or any of a number of insane things that Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson have said. In my book, this double standard smacks of racism.

That other cat is a hellcat! Look at those eye! I can see Jerry Falwell burning in those eyes... (but maybe that's just me).

Having a gun is like having a buzzsaw in your kitchen, a poor idea at best. Any accidents involving guns stem from... having a gun. That's a bunch of fatalities you can stop right there. As far as I know, there's no statistical evidence connecting gun access and crime rates, as such, but gun access and gun injuries/killings are certainly linked.

If I have something genuinely bad to say about someone, even if they're dead, I'll damn well say it, and I will thank anyone to accept my right to do it. (case in point) That being said, I have no particular grievance with Charlton Heston; he was a fine actor and had a poor idea about guns. Everyone has flaws.