Bigots who donated to Proposition H8 are upset that they're being targetted for boycotts. They whine, "we just wanted to support traditional marriage!" Yeah right. Let's get this straight: They targetted gays rather than straights because they're bigots. Otherwise they would have targeted divorce, not gay marriage, as the #1 enemy of "traditional marriage". Nobody is one less bit traditionally married if two guys get married or two gals get married. On the other hand, if they get divorced, they certainly aren't traditionally married anymore, right? So bigotry is the only reason to oppose gay marriage. The fact that bigotry is written into various religious scripts is irrelevant. It was bigotry when Southerners quoted the Bible to justify depriving blacks of fundamental human rights, and it is just as much bigotry when "Christians" quote the Bible to justify depriving gays of fundamental human rights.
So here's the deal: I have a right to not buy things from bigots, and to tell other people that someone is a bigot. That's my right too. This isn't "McCarthyism". This is just me being a citizen with rights, one of which is the right to not buy from bigots.
And if the bigots don't like it... well. Waahh! You want some cheese with that whine, bigots?
-- Badtux the Rude Penguin
Fark! There's even a connection to Erik Prince of Blackwater infamy amongst them. When the political killings start in the U.S., it will be mercenaries like Blackwater which are doing the assassinating.
ReplyDeleteI'm still plowing through "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" (not that it's a bad book, but Gibbon's sentences are so dense and packed with philosophy that one does not want to dash through it) and it's focused a lot on the role of the Praetorian Guard. I just got finished with the part where the Praetorians killed Pertinax, an honest but not-nobility emperor circa 190 A.D. and auctioned the Empire to the Senator who would pay them the most money. I can see Blackwater/Titan/DynCorp/CACI et. al. doing that.
One of the reasons Pertinax was axed was because he started reforming the extravagant spending of Emperor Commodus (a sick fuck who combined the wretched excess of Nero with the kink of Caligula) and was reining in the privileges of the untouchable Guards. What would you rate the odds that a mercenary will kill Obama if he cuts back on the hundreds of billions their companies are getting?
I love this post, I linked to it, but there is a problem with one of the links.
ReplyDeleteWhich link? I just clicked on all of them and they all looked fine to me.
ReplyDelete- Badtux the Blogging Penguin
I don't care if they marry, how else can they experience divorce?
ReplyDeleteWhat would you rate the odds that a mercenary will kill Obama if he cuts back on the hundreds of billions their companies are getting?
ReplyDeletePretty slim, he will be well protected. But if someone does manage to take him out that will open another whole can of interesting worms.
I think that he made preznut at a bad time in history though, if he can't fix a lot of things it isn't going to look good for him and I like the man.
But the many of the white monkeys will blame him instead of looking into a mirror.
May you live in interesting times.
Exactly, BBC ;-). Really, what business is it of mine whether gays get married or not? It's their business, not mine.
ReplyDelete- Badtux the MYOB Penguin
the one to the mercury news, the first one
ReplyDelete"I don't care if they marry" Interesting sentence: "I don't care if"---a progressive allowance; "Marry"---an issue of civil rights, no problem there. But "they," carries the nuance of 'Other.' I had a similar reaction when Sarah Palin was proud of her 'tolerance.' perhaps it's too much to be sensitive to the built-in prejudical nuances of common language. But I can tell you first hand gays don't sit around and congratulate themselves on tolerance of straights and 'their' marriages. This is not a reflection on bbc, but an observance of the silent toxicity of language.
ReplyDeleteyou're leaving out a whole historical listing of troops that started out as outside, loyal to the crown, mercenaries which then ended up ending the very state they were founded to serve.
ReplyDeletethe "immortals" of the persian kings were slaves in every sense of the word. except with their access to the throne, and their allegience to their own wealth they ended up making as many kings as they protected.
the mamelukes of egypt were also slave troops which ended up with a major, then dominant political role.
the janissaries of the ottoman empire were christian boys who were captured during raids into the balkans. they were forcibly converted islam, raised to the sword. they also turned on their caliph.
the knights templar, and the hospitalers, and the knights of malta also became rich and powerful through their mercenary service to the pope, and the holy roman emperors. the templars especially were destroyed when they had the inquisition sicced on them.
blowback is nothing new to mercenary ops. as a matter of historical fact it is almost a certainty.
something with your links...Ill try again. Love your reasoning.
ReplyDeleteI just read your ground rules and couldnt stop laughing...you are such a funny one...
ReplyDeleteThanks for the history lesson, MB. Hadn't heard of the Persian immortals. I knew of the Mamelukes and the Janissaries, because a few years back I read a long book on the history of Islam. (Now THERE'S some fascinating and bloody stuff!) Mrs. Bukko is a boffin for anything that's bashin' the Catholic Church, so I'm familiar with the fate of the Knights Templar, but I hadn't made the connection that they were like Blackwater, mercenaries who eventually threatened the political order. It would be fine with me if Blackwater et. al. met the same fate as the Knights. (Although esoteric conspiracy tin-foilers argue that the never completely went away; that they're part of the Illuminati/Bilderbergers shadowpower that runs the world...)
ReplyDeleteIsn't it odd how those that love to preach Tolerance & Diversity measure such things according to how many people agree with them, part and parcel?
ReplyDelete