CPC Report; An unabashedly liberal perspective

14 April 2011

Conservatives say the damnedest things

To Steven Colbert of the Colbert Report (Reprint from Postscripts- 1 September 2010)

Thanks Colbert, you have inspired me. Recently you have declared that if the Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said he was not an human-turtle hybrid, you would take him at his word. Naturally this was in response to McConnell saying that he would take President Obama's word that he is not a Muslim, which was really lame of him.

I just thought I might try to top you. If the good Senator from Kentucky said he was not a radioactive artichoke-like zombie shape-shifter from the planet zrnixiahajiwu, a planet orbiting the star Alpha Centauri, I would take him at his word. I might however, question the wisdom of allowing him to be free to roam wherever he wished, rather than be immediately quarantined.

Not a reprint from Postscripts

In a heated budget debate in which Senator Kyl wandered into unknown territory last week, he made the erroneous claim on the Senate floor that 90% of Planned Parenthood's services are abortions whereas the true figure is 3%. When called on his statement that 90% of what planned parenthood does is abortions, John Kyl responded through his staff thusly, "That was not intended to be a factual statement".

Steven Colbert in his report explained that Kyl was merely rounding to the nearest 90% and then added this "You can't call him out for being wrong when he never intended to be right." Colbert seemed to be just making excuses for his good buddy Kyl.

Perhaps Colbert was wrong when he stated, "Jon Kyl calls the underside of his Senate seat 'The Booger Graveyard."" Maybe he, Colbert, really meant that Kyl said it is just graveyard of cooties. In any case, obviously neither statement was intended to be factual.

Mr. Bill O'Reilly is not Mr. Science

Bill O'Reilly on the O'Reilly Factory of Spin, debating David Silverman, a well known atheists, on the idea of God and creation. Bill O'Reilly argued of God's existence, by trying to cite the unexplainable, such as the nature of tides. "The tides go in. The tides go out. You can't explain that." Unfortunately, that be explained- it is the gravitational pull of the Moon that does pushes and pulls the tides in and out, a fact known since the time of Sir Issac Newton. Even if we could not explain how tides work, all that is known is that we are ignorant of the cause. This was certainly true of people before Newton's times. For them, it was necessary to invoke the existence of God to explain the phenomenon of tides- the gods of gaps argument. When enlightened on the moon's connection to tides, naturally O'Reilly fell back on the first cause argument- how did the moon get there? Naturally a god put it there. But this brings on another question- where did that god come from?

To makes things worse, an inspired O'Reilly posed the question as to why the Earth has a moon and Mars does not. Actually Mars has two moons- Phobos and Deimos. But let us pretend he really meant Venus. The reason Venus has no moon is simply because that is the way it is. You might as well ask why the Earth has a moon. As hard as he tried not to, O'Reilly only proved to the world that he is not smarter than a fifth grader.

What I would like to know are the answers to the following questions;

Bill O'Reilly has more money than you. You can't explain that.

God spelled backwards spells dog. You can't explain that.

Mom spelled backwards still spells Mom. You can't explain that.

If you spelled MOM with all uppercase letters and flipped them upside down, you end up with WOW. You can't explain that either.

Bill O'Reilly really does has a brain. You definitely can't explain that.

Perhaps O'Reilly's scientific observations were not meant to be factual. That really lets him off the hook.

Work in progress

glynn braman

Make a Free Website with Yola.