Biffster’s World

For the most part, I love living in Highlands Ranch. Sure it is a suburb, but it’s a nice one. And there’s plenty to do here. But the political climate here often gives me reason to be less than proud. Voters here routinely elects possibly-racist candidates like Tom Tancredo and Ted Harvey. And it turns out that around 13 of my fellow citizens gave money to the Swift Boat Veterans For “Truth” group. The area is very conservative and very Republican. And anyone who has read this blog knows that is most definitely not me.

I was encouraged, however, to see a minivan plastered with bumper stickers including “Bill Winter For Congress” and a big W with a strike-through. We had to stop at a red light, and as we pulled up to the intersection, the driver got a look at my bumper stickers (I rotate them out, but currently have a slash-W and a “Stop The War” sticker). The driver looked over and gave me a thumbs-up with a big smile.

The tide is turning!

How many different ways do I love Howard Dean? I dunno if I can list them all. But let me try starting with this quote:

Dean said in Wednesday’s speech that Democratic incumbent Bill Nelson is “going to beat the pants off Katherine Harris, who didn’t understand that it is ethically improper to be the chairman of a campaign and count the votes at the same time. This is not Russia and she is not Stalin.”

Now really, who can argue with that? Harris did act much in the same manner that Stalin would have concerning “elections.” Rigged election? Check. Make yourself the person in charge of said election so it’ll never be questioned? Check.

Of course, Harris’s camp whined about Dean’s statement:

In a statement Thursday, Harris’ campaign said Dean’s comments comparing her to a communist dictator responsible for millions of deaths “reflect a lack of understanding and basic decency.”

Which is the equivalent of saying, “MOMMY! Howie was mean to me!”

(Source: TheDenverChannel.com)

I have completed the template changes to this blog (a perfect world). I am now quite happy with the look and feel here. I don’t plan on changing it anytime soon. I hope you all like it as much as I do. Feel free to comment on the new look.

One bit of trivia: The photo in our new logo was taken by my wife E. For those of you who don’t know the area, the pic is of Garden of the Gods in Colorado Springs. E. has a great eye, and can take a fantastic photo. I was just sad that I had to crop out a lot of the photo to make it fit. Kudos, E., on the great pic, and thanks for letting me use it. I love you!

This is absolutely disgusting, assuming that the report is accurate. According to Boston.com, a report by “Democrats on the House Government Reform Committee, women are being given false, alarmist information regarding abortion risks. From the article:

Care Net, an umbrella group for evangelical pregnancy centers across the country, instructs its affiliates to tell callers there is a possibility that abortion can lead to greater risk of breast cancer, according to Molly Ford, an official with the organization. She said there have been several studies that say it does, and several that say it doesn’t.

“I know the report is wanting to say that it’s conclusive, but it isn’t,” Ford said.

None of the pregnancy centers the committee staff called was identified, and it could not be determined if any were linked to Care Net, which has helped about a quarter of the nation’s pregnancy centers begin operations.

One pregnancy center told a congressional aide the risk of cancer after an abortion could be 80 percent higher, the report noted. Ford said she doubted a pregnancy center would go that far, but the Web site for a pregnancy center in Albuquerque says the risk for cancer after an abortion is 50 percent or greater.

In February 2003, a National Cancer Institute workshop concluded that having an abortion or miscarriage does not increase a woman’s subsequent risk of developing breast cancer. [Emphasis mine]

How disgusting is this? Are anti-choice groups really so desparate that they would flat-out like to a woman, trying to both scare her and not give her the information she needs to make an informed decision? How can one justify this? It’s a horrible practice, and a horrible thing to do to someone who is trying to face one of the hardest decisions of her life.

If you have to lie to someone to justify your beliefs, then your beliefs are probably wrong.

I was planning on writing a massive rant on how horrible Bush’s veto of the stem cell research bill was, ’til I saw this Daily Show clip where Jon Stewart skewers this much better than I ever could. So I’ll just link to that here instead:

I still don’t understand how Bush can handle his own hipocracy. And the next time that someone says that an embry is a “human life,” I think I am gonna scream. I also want to know why it is better that excess embryos from fertility clinics are destroyed rather than used for research that could save millions of lives…

You knew this had to show up on YouTube eventually, right?

Okay, try and stay with me on this one. In a June 14th hearing of the House Subcomittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection, Congressman Joe Pitts, a Pennsylvanian Republican, made the following horrific statement:

During the subcommittee’s period of opening remarks on June 14th, Pitts said, “It’s safe to say that a wealthy kid from the suburbs can play ‘Grand Theft Auto’ without turning to a life of crime, but a poor kid who lives in a neighborhood where people really do shoot cops and steal cars and deal drugs might not be so fortunate. There’s almost certainly a child somewhere in the America who is going to be hurt by this game. Maybe his dad is in jail or his big brother is already down on the corner dealing drugs.”

Jon Stewart rightly flamed Pitts on The Daily Show, referring to Pitts and other House Republican wackos as “insane jackasses.” Pitts decided that, instead of apologizing for his horrifyingly prejudiced statement, he would attack The Daily Show, saying that his statement was portrayed inaccurately. How the above quote can be portrayed inaccurately, I don’t know. And reading the release from the Pitts camp doesn’t make it much clearer. As near as I can tell, Pitts is basically saying, “Don’t pay attention to the words that I actually said. What I realy meant was…” Which IMHO is the cowards way out. Why not just admit, “Yes, I made a horrible remark, and I apologize for it?”

Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens decided to prove to the entire world just how little he knows about the internet while he tried to justify his vote against a net neutrality bill:

They want to deliver vast amounts of information over the internet. And again, the internet is not something you just dump something on. It’s not a truck.It’s a series of tubes.

And if you don’t understand those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and its going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material.

Senator, my I suggest that you know what the hell you are talking about before you talk about it on the Senate floor? Pretty much everything that Stevens said was gibberish. It seems to me that Senator Stevens was purchased lock, stock and barrel by someone in the telecom industry, but whoever bought his vote didn’t do a very good job giving him talking points to use. Instead, Stevens simply sounded like an ignorant fool.

Unfortunately, the fate of the internet is in the hands of a moron.

This problably shouldn’t be as surprising as it is… The Rocky Mountain News is reporting that Ken Salazar is going to choose to back Joe Lieberman if Lieberman loses to Ned Lamont in a Connecticut primary:

Sen. Ken Salazar is risking the ire of some fellow Democrats by pledging to support incumbent Sen. Joe Lieberman, of Connecticut, in November’s election whether or not he wins the Democratic primary.Lieberman, a centrist and stalwart supporter of the war in Iraq, is facing a serious challenge from anti-war candidate Ned Lamont in the Aug. 8 Democratic primary.

Last week, Lieberman announced he was circulating petitions to run on the ballot as an independent even if he loses the Democratic primary.

Liberal activists have been trying to pressure national Democrats to support the winner of the primary, even if it is not the incumbent. This week, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., said she would not back Lieberman if he loses the primary.

But Salazar said Wednesday that he is in Lieberman’s camp and that he will support him in an independent bid if he loses the Democratic primary.

What Salazar is basically saying is, “Screw what the Democratic voters in Connecticut thing. Joe’s my friend, so I am going to back him. Even if that hurts the party.” Seriously, what part does Salazar belong to? Because he sure isn’t acting like a Democrat right now.

Sorry that I didn’t give advance warning here, as I did on my computer/technology blog, but I am currently making some drastic changes to the template used for this blog. The content will stay the same, but the look & feel will change, hopefully for the better. I think I am through testing and changing templates; what you see here now is pretty much what I’m gonna stick with. I will be making minor changes  over the next few days or so, though, as I tweak settings and components. Thank you for your patience in this transition!