Several months ago, I named Fred Phelps as the Asshole of the Year. I honestly didn't expect him to have competition, but he does.

His competition is our STUPID, DISHONEST, AND THOROUGHLY AMORAL SHITSACK OF A PRESIDENT. Here's WHY.

So, researching  cures crosses a moral boundary, but:

Starting a war based on lies does not?

Shortchanging our troops on armor, then charging them for it, does not?

Cutting VA benefits does not?

Taking food stamps from children does not?

Consistently passing blame to subordinates is not?

Letting Haliburton rip us off is not?

Trying to give control of our ports to a country that aided our attackers does not?

Calling off the search for Bin Laden does not?

Taking personal revenge on political enemies does not?

Making it impossible for the sick and elderly to get less expensive medicines does not?

Putting friends in important jobs that they are not competent to perform, thus costing American lives, does not?

Breaking the FISA laws and then claiming that he is not bound by the Constitution does not?

This cocksucker-in-chief does not know the meaning of the word "moral", and if Jesus wastes one second on this piece of shit when he dies, then he's a waste of time as well.

I mean it. Christians keep whining that there is a war against their beliefs. Well, perhaps it's time for the rest of us- that is, people who actually give a shit about other people, instead of just caring about their own selfish interpretations of an ancient text- to GIVE them one. Baptists LOVE burning books. I bet a pile of Bibles would burn really well, also.

Where is the philanthropy that that Mark was talking about, when we tell our own people who are suffering from disease that they are not as worthy as someone yet unborn? I guess placing our own people above our stupid superstitions is more difficult than tossing some money overseas and patting ourselves on the back for it.

I also find it very telling that after 5 1/2 years, the first time he uses his veto power is when it might help someone who isn't rich.

How can anyone with human feelings and a conscience support this evil jerkoff????

Clarification, please: In mentioning Mark in the philanthropy part of my rant, I wasn't trying to pick a bone with him personally. I was merely referring to the philanthropy that was mentioned as a source of and justification for pride in that dialogue. It seems to me that the philanthropy we see in reality is a bit uneven. After all, charity and Federal funding both begin at home. I did not intend to imply that Mark is against sick people, or prefers little clumps of cells to the elderly, or is in agreement with Bush on this issue or any other. He is simply mentioned as the one who brought up the philanthropy I wanted to refer to, because it wasn't that long ago, and saved us from a long and boring recap. Of the philanthropy thing. That I wanted to refer to.

'Kay?