Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Media frenzy determines our court of public opinion

There are times I want to punch a reporter or journalist in the face. Now I don’t condone violence but the Media frenzy of “First and only here” on countless radio/print/television media outlets is getting ridiculous and actually making fools of many people.

We can look at Rick “Spazzie” Santorum’s recent “Bullsh*t” comment towards a New York Times reporter for stupid reporting. I applaud “Spazzie” for his outburst because it needs to be said about how Media is acting these days.

In 2006 it was the Media frenzy over Terry Schiavo, then 2011 with Casey Anthony and now Trayvon Martin. Media outlet trying to outdo another Media outlet, but they are also fending off the Internet as well to be the first exclusive report.

What happened to Trayvon Martin was a tragedy and we, the viewing public, should be appalled at ourselves for diving in with little knowledge, yet determined we know everything.

Does it matter that Zimmermann teaches Sunday school in this case? No, but it’s about his character. Does it matter that Trayvon Martin was suspended from school? No, but it’s about his character and our court of public opinion will be determined by their character no matter the final outcome.

The Internet is no help with the likes of Michele Malkin and Media Matters, both politically divisive to their readers and both have had their faults in the Martin case.

Malkin had published pictures of a young “Martin” showing gang signs and flipping the bird had to later retract those pictures with an apology that the pictures were not Martin, but another young black male.

Media Matters had to print an apology for calling the Drudge Report a racist website for publishing a multitude of articles on about Martin and Zimmerman, which were unfounded.

Both have dedicated readers and with their senseless reporting have already embedded their original thoughts into the minds of their readers.
What the Media, better yet WE, need to focus on is this was a young adult killed.

What we need to remember in the Martin case is that Zimmermann was told by the Police Dispatcher not to pursue/follow Martin and let the Police handle the situation. Zimmermann is at fault for not following a direct police order and should’ve been arrested for that. Martin may still be alive today had Zimmermann followed that direct order, he is the cause of everything that has resulted afterwards.

But the Media cannot stop, because it’s all in the ratings.

Go back to Casey Anthony, no one in the Media was reporting about Casey Anthony except Nancy Grace. The rest of the Media saw her ratings spike when she would talk about Ms. Anthony and the frenzy began. Soon everyone knew what was going on and watched intently waiting for the verdict.

When a story becomes a national statement, many opinionating journalists become so involved with trying to report a different aspect of the story that they become “bullsh*t” clowns. And FOX News has the biggest clown of all time in Geraldo Rivera.

According to Geraldo, Martin’s biggest mistake was his apparel, the “Hoodie.”

To quote Geraldo "You cannot rehabilitate the hoodie. I'd bet you money that if he (Trayvon Martin) didn't have that hoodie on, that nutty neighborhood watch guy wouldn't have responded in that violence and aggressive way. Unless it's raining out or you're at a track meet, leave the hoodie at home."

So absurd was his comment, Geraldo’s own son verbally attack him on his Twitter page and five days later, a half-hearted apology was issued by Geraldo.

The “Hoodie” was not a motive in Martin’s death; no it was ignorance and stupidity by both Man and Law.

So now, with help of “bullsh*t” journalistic clown comments, whenever you turn on your TV, a celebrity, journalist and prominent Sports star is proudly displaying the “Hoodie” during interviews and reporting.

So absurd was the comment by Geraldo that the website CafĂ© has a dedicated page titled “10 hoodies Geraldo would find terrifying (with pics).” The pics are of babies and dogs displaying “hoodies.”

But Geraldo’s original premise was that the “hoodie” is worn during a majority of crimes makes me wonder what he feels about the new NRA “hoodie” with a handgun pocket at mid-chest? What are they promoting? Wouldn’t a criminal enjoy wearing such apparel according to Geraldo? Does that mean the NRA is promoting criminal activity?

Yes, as stupid as the last paragraph sounded, it fits perfectly with the Media frenzy of stupidity and “bullsh*t” journalism before us and helps divide us.

Here’s a thought for Geraldo and the rest of the Media frenzy ass clown journalists, go back to Al Capone’s vault, step in and close the door till you actually have an idea on how to report the news.

Rick Santorum, I agree with you, "it's bullsh*t!"

That’s it, Slap the Tap, pour me a Guinness and pass the peanuts. Pay your political tab on the way out.

Friday, March 23, 2012

Willard Romney the “Etch-a-Sketch” President? More like Mr. Potato Head

Willard Romney the “Etch-a-Sketch” President? More like Mr. Potato Head

Poor Willard, the man just can’t get love from his own party and with the eventual mental “spaz” breakdown of Santorum, the GOP is still hesitant to back him.

In the past 7 weeks, Willard and his campaign have been on gaffe control, almost comparable to “O’s” campaign reeling in Biden’s mouth.

Now we've all heard the "Etch a Sketch" comment by Romney campaign aid Eric Ferhnstrom , to which pundits for/against Willard started to interpret Willard as the GOP version of John “for it before being against it” Kerry.

But I don’t think the toy Etch-a-Sketch is correct, Willard is more Mr. Potato Head for all his interchangeable parts/policies.

The first week of February Willard had made a supportive stance to raise minimum wage to coincide with inflation, a stance that is not held within the GOP rank and file. Yet, by the beginning of March, Willard reversed course and is now touting he is against a minimum wage increase.

Let’s see Willard says what he can to get the nomination and then reverses course after getting the nomination. “Spaz” Sanoturm might be onto something here, as Willard held the same stance when running for Massachusetts Governor in 2002.

Ok, you won't buy into that one because Willard has been a successful businessman and he loves letting us know in every interview, but what about his stance on TARP?

Everyone remembers TARP (Trouble Asset Recovery Program) and how “O” put us $770+trillion in debt under his supervision. Oops, sorry that was the Con-talker media giving me bad info, TARP was under “W’s” supervision, “O” was only a pawn in the Congressional Soup that voted for it.

Ok, we’ll give both the blame, it’s only fair.

On March 22, Willard is quoted as:
“There was a fear that the whole economic system of America would collapse — that all of our banks, or virtually all, would go out of business. In that circumstance, President Bush and Hank Paulson said we’ve got to do something to show we’re not going to let the whole system go out of business. I think they were right. I know some people disagree with me. I think they were right to do that.”

So, we can assume Willard may reproduce another TARP? After all he was for it originally.

But the Auto bailout, he was completely against that right?

Well back in 2008, again campaign aid Eric Ferhnstrom, stated that is was Romney’s idea to correct the Auto industry that was adopted "O" and that “O” should give credit to Romney.

But Willard still blames “O” for the Auto Industry bailout, something Willard was for then against then for again. The only one not being blamed for the Auto Industry bailout is “W.”

Originally, after TARP, “W” wanted to help the Auto Industry but Congress finally got a spine and said “No.” So “W” circumvented their answer and took unused TARP money ($13 billion), gave it to the Auto Industry, and nothing to show that they would fix their problems. A few months later, Detroit returned for more and “O” asked for something in return.

So which seems fair?

So “O” and Willard are more alike on paper and in real life and with one more reason.

That’s right the “Birthers” have risen again and not only want more answer on “O’s” birth certificate, now they want Willard’s California birth certificate as well. Why?

In 1897, Willard’s great granddaddy was opposed to giving up his 4 wives and headed south to Mexico. Guess he couldn’t resist losing all that loving. So the family lived in Mexico and daddy George was born in Chihuahua, Mexico. By 1912, the family decided to move back North and settled down in California.

So both have foreigners as fathers, but did Willard’s great granddaddy ever denounce his US citizenship? That’s the question I want answered.

So let’s recap, Willard and “O” are equal on the following: Affordable Healthcare, Auto Industry bailout (depending on the day of the week for Willard), Minimum wage increases and TARP.

And let’s not forget having people question their foreign born fathers, religious belief and funny names.

I’m starting to believe they are the same person, interchangeable just like Mr. Potato Head.

That’s it and I still have half a Guinness left. Pay your political tab

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

The President jumped over the Moon or where’s my Death Star?

The President jumped over the Moon or where’s my Death Star?

I seem to be finding myself constantly deflecting the misinformation spewed by both Con/Lib-Talkers repeatedly. The more these folks fling, the more half-assed information is absorbed into so many minds that it’s no wonder the partisan divide grows further every day that they broadcast.

I could (repeatedly) blog again about how rising gas prices are not reflective upon how a President performs his Constitutional duties as some Con-Talkers insist. Heck even Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal and the Tea Party billionaire backing Koch Bros have come out in defense of the great “O.”

Here’s a hint: Just as “O” inherited low gas prices from “W” in 2009, so did “W” from Clinton in 2000. Actually both “W” & “O” have been equal on the rise and fall of gas prices through their terms.

But that’s not necessary to talk about. Let’s talk Space, as in NASA and the blackness that surrounds us.

Some like to claim the great “O” killed the Space Shuttle program and NASA, yet once again half truths being spewed for many to jump on the misinformation bandwagon.

I’ve written about the aging Shuttle fleet before (Goodbye to the Flying Brick) and how the Shuttle was one of the most technological beasts ever designed, but for NASA and the Feds to believe it would last longer than expected, well shame on them for never developing a viable alternative when the fleet was destined to be mothballed.

Just look at this recent quote:
“The Shuttle's chief purpose over the next several years will be to help finish assembly of the International Space Station. In 2010, the Space Shuttle — after nearly 30 years of duty — will be retired from service.”

— President George W. Bush
January 14, 2004

Oh wait, was that “W” that put the nail in the coffin? Yes, yes it was.
And if you carefully notice, the great “O” doesn’t attempt to renegotiate nor reschedule anything that was set by “W.” Case in point is Iraq; “W” set the withdrawal timetable to which many pundits called a victory, yet when “O” carries out the order a few years later, it’s considered a failure by those very same pundits.

I actually think the Con-Talkers were more upset that “O” cut “W’s” grand plan to return the Moon. What is it with the GOP wanting to return to the Moon?

Last month, Flounder Gingrich was pandering to the souls of Florida that “by the beginning of my 2nd term, will have started a Moon base.” Um, you gotta have a 1st term to have a 2nd and you ain’t gonna have either Flounder!

Is there any economic value to the Moon?

Last time I checked, there are no resources on the Moon. No oil to drill, no water to drink, no air to breathe. But it does have an abundance of sunlight on one side, 24 hours a day.

Oh wait, I think Flounder Gingrich figured out a way to get our money back from Solyndra. Place solar panel across the Moon to run clean energy for the Moon base.

Actually I think Founder’s true plan is to attach booster rockets at both Moon poles to create an artificial rotation and he can then have his very own Death Star.

Sure Flounder’s plan was to possibly create a new form of private industry in the aspect of Space, yet that private industry has existed for years or maybe Flounder never heard of Richard Branson and his Virgin corporation.

In its 50+ years of existence, we have spent close to $530 billion on NASA and we are still trying to find out how frogs have sex in zero gravity or if marijuana is more potent 30+ miles above Earth.

The NASA budget for 2012 was $18.7 billion with 2013 set at $17.7 billion under “O.” To be fair in comparison, under “W” NASA’s budget was roughly the same, varying between $16 and $19 billion yearly. So, who do you blame for NASA’s budget woes?

Yet, as usual the Con/Lib talking pundits will lead their listeners down the wrong avenue and lay blame to the wrong person. But hey it’s an Election year and face it, Americans only care in sporadic Patriotic spurts.

Yes, we need to keep reaching into space and go as far as possible. We need to keep Hubble in orbit, we need to covet what we’ve accomplished in space exploration, but the Moon, we'll let Ol’ Ralph Cramden take care of that.

Slap the Tap and lift me a Guinness. Time to pay your political tab

Friday, March 16, 2012

What a couple of sexy b*tches

What a couple sexy b*tches!

Newt "Flounder" Gingrich vacationing in Fiji during the early campaign

And recently, after telling Puerto Ricans that if they would like to become a State, they should adopt English as their main language, here lies Rick "Spaz" Santorum poolside at a Puerto Rican resort. I wonder, did he order his drinks in SPanish or English?

However I will not post the infamous Charlie Rangel poolside pic. There are some things people should just not see

Slap the tap everyone. Drink up it's St Patty's Day

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

The News Junkies Denial of being part of Mass Media

There are times when I wish I would record some of the political conversations I partake in, it would be Youtube gold.

As my wife tells it, I'm a magnet for conversation. People come out of nowhere and start talking sports/politics to me as she stands there giving me evil facial expressions to hurry the conversation to "good-bye."

People voicing their opinion is a two way street, the ear can tell who knows their stuff and who is regurgitating something they heard elsewhere. And with that, I always wonder about people who believe that Fox News and/or Conservative talkers are not part of Mass/Mainstream Media.

Mass Media: A means of public communication reaching a large audience by means of television, newspapers, magazines, and radio.

Over the weekend a conversation started with a "Thinker*" defending recent events about Rush Limbaugh. "All these Liberals and their money going after Limbaugh and his advertisers! That girl deserves to be called slut one time on the air."

As I stopped the "Thinker," I asked "How often to do you listen to Limbaugh?"

"I don't because his show is on while I'm working. But I heard about it on Fox," said the "Thinker."

And there folks lies the problem, one cannot defend something that their did not see nor hear, but heard about through a secondary source.

I listen to Limbaugh, only because I am not medicated like most and heard his 3 day tirade and his pitiful apology. Limbaugh and anyone else have the right to say whatever they wish, but they have to accept the consequences that follow.

Limbaugh, no matter how much he opposes the thought, is part of Mass/Mainstream Media. He is the "Drive By Media" of the Conservative Right and is the loudest megaphone.

A great example is from 2009 when Congressman Phil Gingrey stated:
"Rush Limbaugh is a has-been hypocrite loser, who craves attention. His right-wing lunacy sounds like Mikhail Gorbachev, extolling the virtues of communism. Limbaugh actually was more lucid when he was a drug addict. If America ever did 1% of what he wanted us to do, then we'd all need pain killers."

When word got back to Limbaugh, he of course went on attack to which Congressman Gingrey called into his show to apologize to Limbaugh for his harsh words.

I know it must be hard for Fox News Nation and other Conservative talkers to believe they are what they hate, but its hard to see with blinders on.

As of March 11th, 2012, Fox wins the minds of adults between the ages 18-49 with a 2.4 rating with CBS a distant second at 2.0 rating.

If that's not enough, just look at the latest Nielsen ratings for the Top 30 Cable TV news programs from February 2012:

1. Fox News/Bill O'Reilly (8pm) - 2.943 Million viewers
2. Fox News/Sean Hannity (9pm) - 2.115 Million viewers
3. Fox News/Braier Special Report (6pm) - 1.84 Million viewers
4. Fox News/Shep Smith Fox Report (7pm) - 1.753 Million viewers
5. Fox News/Greta Van Sustern (10pm) - 1.689 Million viewers
6. Fox News/The Five (5pm) - 1.647 Million viewers
7. Fox News/Neil Cavuto You World (4pm) - 1.209 Million viewers
8. Fox News/America's Newsroom (9am) - 1.206 Million viewers
9. Fox News/Bill O'Reilly Replay (11p) - 1.202 Million viewers
10.Fox News/Megyn Kelly America Live (12p) - 1.163 Million viewers

Seriously, Fox News "The Five" and a replay of Bill O'Reilly are in the Top 10!

11. Fox News/Fox & Friends (6a-9a) - 1.074 Million viewers
12. Fox News/Shep Smith Studio B (3pm) - 1.073 Million viewers

Anyone see a pattern? You have to get to #13 till another network appears.

13. MSNBC/The Rachel Maddow Show (9pm) - 1.072 Million viewers
14. MSNBC/The Ed Shutlz Show replay (8pm) - 1.021 Million viewers
15. MSNBC/Last Word w/Lawrence O'Donnel (10p)- 963K viewers

Believe it or not, CNN is listed but not till #19 with Anderson Cooper 360 replay, not the first run. The first run comes in at #22.

So who is actually controlling the conversation in our Nation on TV? Sure doesn't seem like the Liberal broadcasters, who can't even crack the Top 10.

Even on Radio and Livestream syndication, the conversation is controlled by Conservative talkers.

1. Rush Limbaugh - 15 million listeners
2. Sean Hannity - 14 million listeners
5. Michael Savage - 9 million listeners
7. Glenn Beck Program - 8.5 million listeners
8. The Mark Levin Show - 8.5 million listeners
11.The Neal Boortz show - 6 million listeners
12.The Laura Ingraham show - 6 million listeners

That's a crazy 7 of the Top 15 Conservative talkers controlling the airways. So when Limbaugh goes on a 3 day tirade about Sandra Fluke, that's 15 million listeners regurgitating what he said to co-workers or family.

Even Newsmax has seen the influence the Conservative talker and recently listed their "Top 25 Radio Hosts" results:
1. Rush Limbaugh
2. Bill O’Reilly
3. Don Imus
4. Michael Savage
5. Sean Hannity
6. Laura Ingraham
7. Glenn Beck
8. Neil Boortz

The only Liberal to crack the Top 10 was Al Franken at #9, followed by Ed Shults at #15, which is strange because I didn't think Franken was broadcasting any longer with the demise of Air America.

Even Presidential hopeful Rick Santorum, a former Fox News employee, has recently called out Fox News as pushing/leading the issues and helping rival Willard Romney gain the Republican nomination.

So by numbers alone, no matter which way one looks at the numbers, Fox News and Conservative talkers are the leaders of Mass/Mainstream Media, just the diehard listener is in denial to the fact.

Sorry to have so many facts listed that passed the motto "never write more than the average person can read during the average crap," but it was the only way for those with blinders on to see the proof.

That's it, the Guinness has gone empty... Slap the tap and pay the political tab!

Follow bigpoppapolitics on Twitter: @bigpopapolitics

* The Thinker- family members that switched political belief but refuses to believe they were/are part of the convsersational problem by listening to one source

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Open Letter to L. Brent Bozell III: Morality & Hypocrisy go hand and hand in Politics and Media

Open Letter to L. Brent Bozell III: Morality & Hypocrisy go hand and hand in Politics and Media

I’ve come to loathe former Parents Television Council and current Media Research Media bigwig L. Brent Bozell, III for well over 15 years now. His fight against the lack of Morality on TV mirrors his ignorance of looking the other way on Media hypocrisy. Maybe because he’s a paid extra for Fox News and the Con-Talking heads like Sean Hannity.

Mr. Bozell’s PTC past was led more for the lack of civility and moral comprehension during what was termed “The Family Hour” timeslot of TV viewing. That timeslot was designated as the 8p-9p of non-cable channels like NBC, ABC, FOX, WB and CBS.

Shows like Seventh Heaven led the PTC ranks as the best on TV, while shows like Rosanne were considered deplorable for viewing.

Let’s see Seventh Heaven was a show about a minister and his family working through daily issues and Rosanne was a comedy about a middle class family working through daily issues. Grant it, Rosanne starred the crass Rosanne Barr might have something to do with it.

But even wholesome PTC favorites fell victim for lack of moral character like Brandy’s Moesha,the once beloved show of the PTC eventually was attacked because of one episode dealt with unprotected teenage sex.

But I’m done talking about PTC past, no my compliant today with Bozell is his hypocritical defense of Rush Limbaugh in the op-ed “The Rush to Censor Limbaugh.”

The fact that Bozell is defending Limbaugh boggles my mind. Oops, I forgot, just like Liberals, Conservatives circle the wagons for one of their own as well.

Funny how both sides will cry about moral attacks of the other, yet commit the same sin themselves. I mean wasn’t it almost a year ago that Conservatives went on the warpath against MSNBC’s Ed Shultz for calling Fox News’ Laura Ingraham a “right wing slut” twice (once on radio and once on TV) in a day?

First, Shultz is a Liberal blowhard almost equal to Limbaugh and his reasoning for name calling? He was upset that Ms. Ingraham spoke displeasure over “O’s” decision to keep his scheduled European trip instead of visiting tornado devastated Joplin, Missouri. Certainly not a great reason to call someone names.

Secondly, unlike Clear Channel (largest carrier of Limbaugh’s show), MSNBC immediately suspended Shultz for a week (without pay) as well as broadcasted an apology by Shultz to Ms. Ingraham and anyone that he may have offended.

Ms. Ingraham even went on air, accepted Shultz’s apology and stated “Mr. Shultz seemed sincere with his apology.”

What’s the difference between Shultz and Limbaugh that Bozell missed? Easy, Bozell’s op-ed makes it sound as if Limbaugh’s words to Sandra Fluke were a one-time deal, when in reality it was a three day rant of name calling and asking her to post her sexual encounters on the web.

Bozell’s biggest gripe is no one boycotted Shultz’s shows.

I cannot speak for Bill Maher, nor will I ever. I have not watched his Real Time show since I got rid of HBO and when I did have HBO I was a casual viewer, waiting to see who the guests were to determine if it would be worth my time.

I did enjoy the times the late Andrew Breitbart was a guest. The man took verbal shots from other guests, host and audience alike, only to return his own shots with much glee.

Yet, again, Maher is a crass comic who’ll say anything for applause. But how many times can a viewer listen to “those f*cking a**holes” or “solve the issue by legalizing pot” to take one serious as a political talking head?

We’re comparing apples to oranges when dealing with verbal assaults of the egomaniacal political mind. We could go back and forth all day comparing verbal jabs from talk show hosts and congressional figures alike.

The true argument is that Limbaugh was in the wrong for his three day tirade. Maybe had he spoke those words once and gave a sincere apology, not typed words on his website or unapologetic on air tone used the following Monday, it may have blown over. But this is Limbaugh, he doesn’t give up and he doesn’t full heartedly apologize for anything.

The proof came forth on March 7 with a Limbaugh article in Vanity Fair to which he made himself the victim by his own words without truthfully taking responsibility. That article was all about business and sponsorship and not about his over bloated ego.

I’ll take Mr Bozell seriously as soon as he takes his Morality tour seriously and takes on Media as a whole, not sporadic voyeurism for a paycheck.

Oh, did I forget to mention that Clear Channel, the largest carrier of Limbaugh’s show, is owned by Baine Capital? Is there some conspiracy there just like GE and “O”? You decide.

That’s it, Slap the Tap, pour the Guinness and pay the political tab.

Monday, March 5, 2012

Scopes Trial 2012: The presentation of Limbaugh contraceptive needs

I've always said that it's all in the presentation of the argument that will win the mind, but no one is making a convincing argument when it comes to the Contraceptive argument over the last few weeks. As a matter of fact the argument has evolved into a deadly creature.

I've blogged many times about the Republicans adding, distorting and even circumventing new abortion laws from the State level into the Federal level and yet it took "O's" plan of Churches needing to add Contraceptives to their health insurance coverage to bring "control over the woman's body" into to a larger light.

The argument has grown from the 27 State's that mandate such a practice as being OK to the Feds needing to stay out of our Church. Yet many on the Right are now arguing it as a "Separation of Church and State" as well.

Pres. candidate hopeful Rick Santorum believes Church should be brought into the State, not separate. OK, if that's the thought then the Church cannot be tax-exempt. Will that happen? Highly doubtful.

Last week, the Republicans attempted to add the "Blunt-Rubio" amendment to a Transportation bill. That amendment was about "If a company/employer should have the option not to include a Contraceptive packge to their emplyees if it goes against the company/employer religious belief."

The amendment failed and the Transportation bill was sent packing. Funny how now Eric Cantor is complaining about how the failure to pass now cost jobs and stopped needed road repairs.

Here's an idea, don't add amendments to a bill that don't belong!

So acording to the "Blunt-Rubio" amendment that would mean someone of non-faith or another faith now becomes part of a religion by employment to receive health insurance?

Didn't we just go through the whole "Religion vs. Science" fight some 60+ years ago with the Scopes Monkey Trial?

Why are we going "Back to the future" on Social Issues?

I listened to Limbaugh's tirades last week against Sarah Fluke and he completly took the original argument to a new level, who should use contraceptives and how should they be able to get them.

Of course, Limbaugh in his bloviated egotistical mind took personal attacks on Ms. Fluke and completly ignored the facts of what contraceptives are used for.

Does everyone realize the many types of birth control available today?

Let's see: Abstinence, Fertility Awareness Method: Natural Family Planning (NFP, Barrier Methods:(male & female condoms, sponges, caps, spermicides, diaphragms), Hormonal Methods: (Intrauterine Device (IUD), PILL, NuvaRings),
and Surgical: (Male & Female tube tying).

The PILL has many medical purposes outside of preventing pregnancy, it's a Scientific fact. Oh wait, I forgot this is about God vs. PILL. But according to Limbaugh's rants, women, particularly Democratic women are whores, sluts and prositutes.

In Ephesians 5:6, it says, "Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Be not ye therefore partakers with them."

So should we ask Rep David Vitter (R-La.) how he enjoyed paying for sex as the infamous "Client #9" in the DC Madam's little blackbook, since he has taken the Religious route. This is a man that attack Pres. Clinton about morality and cheating on his spouse while doing so himself.

Should we ask former SC Governor Mark Sanford the same as well?

I hope they used contraceptives (Condoms) as well. Oh wait didn't we as taxpayers pay for their extra-marital & condoms as well? Yes, yes we did.

Now we have Democrats arging before Congressional hearing, talking about the medical neccessity of contraceptives, yet those Republicans (Mike Fisher {R-Pa}) stating "We are talking about Religion, not Science."

Actually Mr. Fisher, we are talking about both.

Republicans are arguing that it's OK for men to have Viagra listed on their health insurance because it is a health need. WTF? Um, I missed the Viagra section in the Bible. Was that under Luke or Paul?

If one looks closer and listens to more sources, there is a larger hiden argument, that many are upset that women are having child later in thier lives, some wanting to further their careers before family or some simply not wanting to bear child or unable to concieve child.

Here's a thought; "Gen. 38:8 Then Judah said to Onan, 'Go in to your brother's wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her; raise up offspring for your brother.' 9 But since Onan knew that the offspring would not be his, he spilled his semen on the ground whenever he went in to see his brother's wife, so that he would not give offspring to his brother."

So Onan was to have sex with his sister-in-law to bear child to help his brother, yet pulled out at the last second not to inpregnant her.

Hey wait! That's a form of contraceptive right there in the Bible and it was OK

And if we go by that writing then Oklahoma State bill 1433 by Constance Johnson, a Democrat, that "every sperm is sacred" is wrong. The insert of "any action in which a man ejaculates or otherwise deposits semen anywhere but in a woman’s vagina shall be interpreted and construed as an action against an unborn child" is against the Bible.

I mean afterall are we not arguing Science Vs. Religion now or has the argument been turned into who will control the purpose of one's body?

Once again it's all in the presentation of the argument to win the mind.

That's it, Slap the tap (non-sexual please) and Pay the political tab.