The Lower Quote, As If You Didn't Know, Is By Richard Dawkins, Son.

Friday, June 16, 2006

Lincolnish and Truthy

Colbert Hammer

Watching The Colbert Report the other night, Stephen interviewed Congressman Lynn Westmoreland. I haven't seen someone more perfectly embody the ignorance and soft-headedness of the religious right for quite some time and Colbert played it to the max. You can see the video here if you are so inclined.

Colbert made some general pokes about him being the "do-nothing'est" person in Congress, got Westmoreland to say that cutting the department of education would be a good way to save money, and made him uncomfortable with a bit about being a "Georgia Peach". He then brought up the Congressman's co-sponsoring of a bill that required the display of the Ten Commandments in the House of Representatives and the Senate. Colbert played him like a master:

Westmoreland: "The Ten Commandments is (sic) not a bad thing for people to understand and to respect. Where better place could you have something like that than in a judicial building or in a courthouse?"

Colbert: "That is a good question. Can you think of any better building to put the Ten Commandments in than in a public building?" (fantastic comeback)

Westmoreland: "No. I think if we were totally without 'em we may lose the sense of our direction."

Colbert: "What are the Ten Commandments?"

Westmoreland: (silence) "What are all of 'em?"

Colbert: "Mm hmm"

Westmoreland: "You want me to name 'em all?"

Colbert: "Yeah, please."

Westmoreland: "Mmmmmmm...(thinking)..."

Colbert: (holds up two fists, ready to count off on fingers)

Westmoreland: "Mmmmm...don't murder....don't lie...don't steal...uhhhhh...I can't name 'em all."

Colbert: (stares straight at him, expressionless)

It was an amazing exchange vividly showing the sanctimony and vapidness of some leaders. Yes, we should "understand" the commandments, which you'd think may entail knowing what the hell they are in the first place. This Westmoreland fella is just a microcosm of many Xians who yell in your face about how we should use the stupid bible and all that it entails as a moral guide to make people better (and make fags and all other religions die a horrible death), while not having the faintest clue what are between the covers of that retarded book.

Colbert...irony like a hammer.

9 Barbaric Yawps:

At 16/6/06 11:24 am, Blogger Paul said...

I'm not a huge fan of Colbert, but I couldn't help but laugh out loud at that video clip.

At 16/6/06 2:48 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just look at Commandment 10 in the Second set of stones that Moses got (cause he dropped the first set of stones and had to get another one): Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk.

Great, where am I supposed to seethe those kids now? Does this guy really want that posted in a Judicial building?

At 16/6/06 4:28 pm, Blogger BigHeathenMike said...

hahahaha..."seethe kids". That's hilarious!

At 17/6/06 10:59 am, Anonymous modusoperandi said...

If I remember correctly Moses smashed the first set after coming back from vacation and finding some of god's chosen worshipping a golden calf, rather than the perfectly sensible invisible fire/volcano god they worshipped before.
It's weird how the Commandments V2.0 never get mentioned. They are way worse than V1.0. At least with the first set they were obvious, with the exception of the first four.
The second set are frikkin insane ( with ones like:
7. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread.
Of course the second set has the most important commandment of all:
5. Six days shalt thou work, but on the seventh thou shalt rest.

ps. seethe is boil, right? I assume that the definition of it has changed somewhat, as "seethe" for "wash/clean" makes more sense than "seethe" as "boil"...but you never know with that whacky book. Too bad more people don't point out just how evil the OT really is (heck, even the NT has sexist crap about women not speaking/teaching/bossing).

But on subject now...the new right wants to return us to when the church had real power; he's just an example of who'd be in charge. At least with democracy we change exchange new morons for old ones; with theocracy they're in for life.

...and the golden age they get all drippy about? It starts roughly at the the Dark Ages and ends after the Inquisition, when that pesky middle class got it's edjimacashun and started asking questions...
or's the America that never existed, with the apple pie, and mom, and baseball, and no "uppity negroes" (man, I felt dirty just typing that...), and no "Gol'dernd ferners yellowin' up the place." (felt dirty there to), and jesus over the doorway...

At 17/6/06 12:21 pm, Anonymous modusoperandi said...

Oh,'s "kid" as in "li'l goat". Now that makes sense...I wondered why god was mad at me, it turns out that it's because I've been cooking baby goats in goat milk.

Who the hell cooks things in milk? Blech!

At 17/6/06 6:55 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Some Hamburger Helper recipes require milk as an ingredient so as long as you don't substitute hamburger with baby goat meat you're alright.

At 20/6/06 4:34 am, Anonymous modusoperandi said...

Odd that god would waste commandments on useless cooking tips, rather than good ones like, "Thou shalt thoroughly cook pork before eating that most other white meat." or "No sacrifices. None with bread, leavened or not. I'm telling you, it's just not necessary."

Sure, there's the no pork rule later on, but safer preparation technique would have been more useful than tips about not cooking lunch with its mother's milk.

It's odd that god'd use his most holy time to send down rules that aren't all that useful: it's almost as though the book was writ by men.

Of course that line of thinking just leads to heresy, rationalism, and knowledge...

At 20/6/06 10:49 am, Blogger BigHeathenMike said...

And, you know, being burnt at the stake (I'd prefer steak).

At 21/6/06 1:41 am, Anonymous modusoperandi said...

Luckily no true christian would be burnt at the stake...


Post a Comment

<< Home