...which I recommend to anyone who wants to start understanding the true nature of these people.

My favorite part? My full-body clench when an AOG activist, Bob Lokey, describes how one night God guided his hand as he circumcised himself with a razor blade. He doesn't mention medical care afterward, but he does speak glowingly of feeling free from lust for women afterward. Which I suppose is for the best, given what he's probably left with.

A lot of them talk of how important it is for them to separate themselves both from women, or from thoughts toward and attraction toward them. One young guy in particular, who was no different than an Al-Quaeda recruit except insofar as he was Christian and American, obsessed over this. And the more he did, the more his obvious readiness to bomb a clinic increased.

And then there's Neil Horsley throughout, famous for proudly admitting he once screwed cows.

Throughout you rarely see women, if at all. These men are not fathers. They haven't GOT babies. Mostly they live alone; Horsley lives with another man.

So this is interesting, because for them "babies" are an abstract. And women are something to be feared, for whatever reason. And the more they deny themselves the more ferocious their commitment to violence becomes; they speak throughout openly of how impatient they are to blow up a clinic or kill a doctor, in the same manner as others might be excited about a movie premiere.

It isn't about babies for them. Not really.

http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2009041828/far-rights-first-100-days-shifting-overdrive

"The far right wing has been laying the groundwork for violent action for decades. Long before they turn dangerous, political and religious groups take their first step down that road by adopting a worldview that justifies eventual violent action. The particulars of the narrative vary, but the basic themes are always the same. First: their story is apocalyptic, insisting that the end of the world as we've known it is near. Second: it divides the world into a Good-versus-Evil/Us-versus-Them dualism that encourages the group to interpret even small personal, social, or political events as major battles in a Great Cosmic Struggle -- a habit of mind that leads the group to demonize anyone who disagrees with them. This struggle also encourages members to invest everyday events with huge existential meaning, and as a result sometimes overreact wildly to very mundane stuff.

Third: this split allows for a major retreat from consensus reality and the mainstream culture. The group rejects the idea that it shares a common future with the rest of society, and curls up into its own insular worldview that's impervious to the outside culture's reasoning or facts. Fourth: insiders feel like they're a persecuted, prophetic elite who are being opposed by wicked, tyrannical forces. Left to fester, this paranoia will eventually drive the group to make concrete preparations for self-defense -- and perhaps go on the offense against their perceived persecutors. Fifth: communities following this logic will also advocate the elimination of their enemies by any means necessary, in order to purify the world for their ideology."

There is a debate about whether a fetus is a living person.

There is no debate about whether a doctor in his sixties is a living person.

Whatever Tiller was, that was murder, and those expressing support of it are complicit and don't care about "life," but revenge.

Where's that other cheek? The Jesus I know did not believe in revenge. Which is the EXACT OPPOSITE of forgiveness.

You're hypocrites. Jesus did not like them either.

You cannot do and support what you do and call yourselves Christians.

This is said to you by one. Who does not believe you have the right to hijack God, and while I'm not a believer in Hell, you should really think about whether you might. If, that is, you also believe Islamic terrorists are evil.

Nothing to do with Walsh--but is this THE Norm Breyfogle who used to work for DC? (a longtime Batman artist)

Nice to see other cartoonists around here.

They're freaking out because:

http://niacblog.wordpress.com/2009/06/13/election-liveblogging-saturday/

"the President of the Committee of Election Monitoring has requested that the election be canceled."

That happened this afternoon. The officials who monitor it believe there may be fraud, and the powers that be don't want that pursued.

And now they're aware of how the people resent them and would like to move forward, so it's an opportunity for a clampdown.

This is all foolish on their part. But they may also be thinking of China, Tianemen Square, and all the consequences that reaped(none).

And good god no, the US should not even leave a fingerprint on this. Not after what we did in the 50s that started this whole mess:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossadegh#Coup_d.27.C3.A9tat

Possibly, like the Republican party in 2000, they want to demonstrate to the people that they have no power. Which in Iran is a panic move that has a history.

"Bowl"

It's rare in a legitimate election for the winner to arrest the loser, isn't it?

Even if the result was legitimate, Ahmadinejad has crapped in the punch powl.

...because I don't like civil violence that causes death and injury, nor government clampdowns(which, I'm sorry, does tend to tip the idea towards a theft). And I don't know if it was fraud. But an 80% result? Certainly suspicious.

Nevertheless, fair enough.

So let me ask you this, as a former Californian: do you have a recall process or an equivalent for the governorship?

Here is a graphic for you of the results. Please note the straight line going upward with no variation.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/.a/6a00d83451c45669e201157108943e970b-500wi

This is what incredibly crude fraud looks like.

That's why Iran is exploding now, and the government is acting like the Shah did before he was toppled.