Friday, March 03, 2006


We've finally got proof that America's founding fathers were not Christians—at least they were not the same kind of Christians as our modern fundamentalists. In Missouri, their Christian legislature is trying to make Christianity the official religion of Misery—oops, I mean Missouri. As I've many times said, Christians would not be able to write the Constitution that our founding fathers created so I've always guessed that our founding fathers were not really Christians. I knew that real Christians would want to make America a Christian nation. They would not be able to create a secular American nation. Now we have proof of my hypothesis; the Missouri Christians prove my point. Since they insist on making Missouri a Christian state, we must assume that had they been around at the founding of our nation, they would have made America a Christian nation too. Since America's founding fathers did not act like the Missouri Christians, we must assume that, ergo, our founding fathers were not Christians for had they been real Christians, they would have made Christianity the official religion of America. Can anyone see any fault with my logic?


The iMac G5 is still in the hanger. As I understand it, Apple does have a recall on certain serial numbers. Since mine is still under the 90 day service warrant, I didn't even ask about mine. It's being fixed free and slowly anyhow. But the failure of the logic board and power supply fits with the problems that other iMac G5s are having.


While selling books at the library used book store, I came across Anita Hill's book, Speaking Truth To Power, about the Justice Thomas confirmation hearing. I was working evening shift while that hearing was going on. That was the first time I truly realized how nasty the right wing conservatives can be, how conscienceless and implacable they can be in their drive for power. How they distorted and lied at every turn to discredit her evidence. I also recall she had not sought to come to Washington to testify, had tried to avoid it. It was not that she was someone out to get Thomas, but she had been brought to Washington to testify and, so, could not get out of it. Subtly, they ignored the facts and attacked her character with inuendo and distortion.

The funny thing about all of it was that I would have had no trouble with Justice Thomas's sexual appetites at all, but his lying did bother me. He had been a recently divorced man, lonely and horny, and so he made an inappropriate pass at a young woman in his office. I understood him perfectly. I was single myself at the time and had gone through a painful divorce a few years back. As far as I was concerned that didn't disqualify him for the post. The irony is that the one's who would have not wanted him to be a Justice were the ones who were also raping Anita Hill. They had to rape Hill in order to justify Thomas to themselves. They are a strange bunch.

No comments: