More popular than Tim Henson??!!??

No, I'm not claiming that more people read my blog than listen to Distorted View. As much as such a change would signal an increase in the nation's common sense and moral decency, I have no such fantasies.

No, I'm talking about that as far as Google is concerned, my Bog is more relevant for some Time Henson searches than ay of Henson's own sites.

For example, Tim Henson is conducting a gag Presidential campaign for 2008. This is a common gag for "comedy" shows so it's no surprise that Henson, in his delusion that he's funny as opposed to crass and juvenile, would attempt to use a classic comedy routine.

I decided to find his "Campaign" site, so I searched for:

Tim Henson 2008

I was surprised that the first hit was for the Ron Paul campaign. Imagine, a random Ron Paul Supporter who happens to be named "Tim Henson" comes up before the supposed "Media Darling" podcaster.

The next two hits were links to my own Blog, IN the end, three of the links on the page were to one of my Blogs, while only two directed people to the podcaster, and even then, one was to his myspace profile and the other to a video aggregation site.

If you search for:

Tim Henson

The results shift back to favor the Podcaster. ONly two of the links are to one of my sites, while three are to unrelated people named "Tim Henson"

A search for:

TIme Henson 2008

On Yahoo yields two hits related to Tim Henson's Podcasts, and three to my blog where I discuss Time Henson and his deviant influence.

What's this mean?

Not Much. It just means that people trying to look up Tim Henson will be as likely to see one of my web pages as his.

A final victory against Distorted View

Tim Henson has announced he will No Longer Run his infamous "Sextastic Tuesday" sketch.

Many readers will remember my onging feud with Tim Henson, the host of the Podcast "Distorted View." The first episode of Distorted View I ever heard featured a graphic story about the supernatural rape of a 12 year old girl. This story was read as part of what Henson described as the "Sextastic Tuesday" sketch, where he would read admittedly disgusting and disturbing pornographic stories every Tuesday.

I've been through several rounds of conflict with the program and it's fans, and in the end have learned that despite the frequent appearance of underage characters in these stories they appeared to be considered legal by State and Federal Authorities.

While the grassroots movement to ban such filth is still getting started in Indiana, I learned that Henson had begun editing the stories so that all participants were 18 or older. While this further protected him legally, it did not address the fundamentally disgusting nature of the content he made freely available online without so much as a login to verify a listener's age.

I was recently sent a sound clip of Tim Henson announcing the end of the "Sextastic Tuesday" sketch, and while he blamed the end of the "bit" on a "Lack of quality stories" it was a thin and laughable rationale. Having heard a number of episodes of "Distorted View" I can attest that there was never a question of story quality. The only way Henson could have run out of content he deemed appropriate for the segment would be if he;d read all of the disgusting, disturbing and vile sexual fantasies that have been posted to the Internet.

Since I doubt he could have narrated ALL the vile material online, I can only conclude that he had other reasons for discontinuing the "bit."

The pressure is working. The efforts of Christians to get Obscene content off the Internet is making progress. There IS hope, and there IS a way to win this battle.

Keep the Faith, and remember that this world does NOT have to slide into decay and depravity. We can turn back the tide and beat back the demonic influences that are trying to corrupt our youth.

Update

On the 8-30-20-07 episode of Distorted view, twenty minutes and 20 seconds into the episode Tim Henson admitted that the quality of the stories is NOT the reason he's discontinued the "Sextastic Tuesday" segment. He continued to claim that pressure from Christian Conservatives was NOT the cause of his pulling the bit, but failed to offer an alternative reason.

Strippers for Ron Paul--the Video

Yet more proof that Ron Paul is a deviant who needs to be removed from the Presidential Race.Thankfully, the Republicans will never endorse such a filthy, disgusting person. Let him twist in the wind, because in a few months he'll be another Also-Ran when the parties pick their candidates. I'm looking forward to the pervert fading back into obscurity.

read more | digg story

Is Microsoft Censoring Christians?

I recently received the following tip in e-mail:

In Microsoft Windows:

Open Notepad

Type the text "Love God and Jesus" (Without the quotes) as the sole content of a text file.

Save the file

Exit Notepad.

Double click on the file to open it in Notepad.

Instead of the text "Love God and Jesus" you'll see a series of little black boxes. At the suggestion of a friend I tried changing the font in the opened file but the original text was not restored.


What other phrases are being censored and changed behind our backs by Microsoft software? Who decided that religious advice should be censored by a word processor???

What else is being edited and changed behind the scenes by rouge programmers at Microsoft?

A more disturbing thought, what if this wasn't a case of a rouge programmer corrupting Notepad, but a policy decision from high up in Microsoft???

I tried the same thing with the phrase "Love Allah" but the same thing did not happen.

Update:

It turns out that not all Versions of Microsoft Widows are censoring Christian Content.

The censorship has been confirmed in Windows 95, 98, ME and 2000.

I do not yet know if Windows Vista is also censoring Christian Content, but something called the Microsoft XP Media Center edition does NOT censor the phrase.

Can anyone out there with a different version of Windows XP or Vista test this and let me know what happens?

Should New York REALLY rename the George Washington Bridge?

The George Washington Bridge, usually referred to as the GWB, connects New York City, located on Manhattan Island, to the rest of the continental United States. Despite the "B" in GWB referring to the word "Bridge" a large percentage of New Yorkers call it the GWB Bridge.

The letters "GWB" also refer to the current president George W. Bush.

These two facts have collided and caused many people to think that the "GWB" acronym refers to the current president. At first, it was mostly out of town visitors who made the mistake, but now that "W" is in his second term, many New Yorkers have grown up thinking the GWB Bridge is actually the George W Bush Bridge.

Tourist guides have been printed using the "New" name. None of these have, to date, been produced by the state or city of New York, but many four and five star Hotels are using this "New" name. Most signs referring to the bridge use the letters GWB as opposed to the full name, so maps and guides calling it the George W Bush Bridge rarely, if ever cause confusion.

There's even a grassroots movement in New York City and State to officially rename the bridge, or at the very least replace all signs that contains the name "George Washington Bridge" with ones saying "GWB."

Why rename the bridge? Why even make the "Official" name ambiguous enough to let people use wither name? Isn't that disrespectful to George Washington?

The argument has been made that because common usage is already changing the name, making it official would clarify things, simplify and streamline a process that is already taking place.

Removing Washington's name from the bridge would mean there was one less monument to his legacy, but with a state, numerous monuments and even the nation's capital named after him, one solitary bridge would hardly impact his legacy. Besides, isn't the nation itself a testament and monument to George Washington?

George W Bush was president duing the single worst day in New York' City's history, and has been the wartime President dedicated to avenging New York, and ensuring such an attack never again happens on US Soil. Doesn't his contribution to New York merit some recognition?

On the topic of what recognition Gorge W Bush deserves, it's clear that many New Yorkers, particularly the younger generation, are ALREADY giving him that recognition by referring to the bridge with his name.

People prefer a living legend to a dead one, and naming the Bridge after a vibrant, living leader, one whom today's youth remember, will encourage more patriotism and national pride than leaving it named after a man long dead.

Finally, there's the fact that the New York City Roads department seems to tacitly agree. Road signs are being replaced all the time, and New Yorkers have noticed that a LOT of sings that once read "George Washington Bridge" are being replaced with "GWB." Is this practice no more than the cost saving measure that the Road department claims, or is it a subtle not to the desire of many New Yorkers to rename the bridge after George W Bush?

I encourage all New Yorkers to write their city and state government about this matter, and voice support for the renaming of the GWB.

George W Bush has been the defender of New York, and has been the first President since his father to take action against Terrorism. All Presidents get a library, but George W Bush deserves to be recognized by the city and state of New York.

They're not real

Dimensio has left a new comment on your post "The Life of Alfie":

So what of homosexuals who were not molested as children and who did not have a dysfunctional relationship with their fathers?

There's no such thing. Homosexuality is a mental disease born largely out of sexual abuse.

The Life of Alfie

Homosexual Activists go to great lengths to convince people that Homosexuality is somehow "natural" or "right." This claim is an outright fabrication, as there's nothing natural about homosexuality. Even atheists who believe in "Evolution" can't deny that Homosexuality is something that, if it WERE to occur naturally, would be bred out of the population. Queers don't breed without surrogate parents.

Below is a children's book designed to teach kids and parents about the REAL origins of Homosexual behavior. Alfie's Home is the story of a young man who, as a teenager, thinks he may be gay.

Below are images of the major pages form the story. I highly recommend buying a copy of the book and including it among the gifts given at baby showers and to new parents.











This Simple yet powerful book has Homosexuals running scared as they throw out lies and fabrications in an attempt to discredit the book "Alfie's Home."

Ron Paul, Hero to Anti-Semites and Other Racists?

One of my more popular articles is one in which I describe how Ron Paul is a traitor to Conservative American values. I basically took a look at some of his platform points and outlined how destructive this proposed ideas and tactics would be to American culture and the economy. Below is one of the comments I received:

barryliberty said...

Ron Paul is the only candidate to stand up for America. Real conservatives like David Duke and Pat Buchanan Support Ron Paul because he is the only candidate to stand up to Zionist control of America. No more wars for Israel like Iraq. He'll bring back states rights and end the "civil rights" war against white America.
August 5, 2007 1:17 PM

Phrases such as "Zionist control of America" are frequently used by white supremacists to describe their fevered fantasy that Jews control the US government and Media. The reference to David Duke, a known and prominent member of the KKK, is another indication of the Anti-Semitic nature of barryliberty's views.

I was intrigued, as most of the criticism I'd seen of Ron Paul focused on his stated political views. I'd had no idea that rampant racism was part of what fueled his supporters.

Was barryliberty an arbitration, or did he represent a larger problem? I decided to do some research

Simply looking up the phrase "Anti-Semitic Ron Paul" yielded instant results. The first hit was a New York Sun article "Ron Paul's Race Problem" It, and an article from the web site sayanythingblog.com both referenced the same Houston Chronicle article, the link to which now results in a 404 error. Both sites quoted the salient quotes from the now censored Houston Chronicle article:

Paul reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and commented, “If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be.”

“Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal,” Paul said.

Paul also wrote that although “we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.”

Stating that lobbying groups who seek special favors and handouts are evil, Paul wrote, “By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government” and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to stifle criticism.

So, we have Ron Paul perpetuating the stereotype of Blacks being fast runners and he claims 95% of the blacks in a given area are criminals.

And then there are the attacks on the Israeli Lobby, which is no doubt one of the things the white supremacists are latching onto as a sign that Ron Paul is "their guy." The article "Ron Paul May Not be An Anti Semite, but..." summarized the issue nicely.

Ron Paul's Apologists are running around trying to claim that the incriminating phrases above were ghost written for his newsletter, but if that were the case, should he not have printed a retraction in the very next edition? Is the oversight of his newsletter is so poor that blatantly racist content is left unchallenged until brought up by a critic? If I were having Ghost Writers put words in my mouth, I'd made damn sure to read their statements before they went to print. Regardless of what his supporters claim, Ron Paul endorsed the blatantly racist statements by failing to recant them.

It's clear that in addition to being an isolationist who would destroy the US economy, Ron Paul is a racist who gleefully stereotypes Blacks and doubts the right of Israel to exist.

His failure to recant makes me beleive he's trying to court racists of all stripes with vague references and roundabout chatter, just the sort of thing to make the racists think "Oh he's on our side, but knows he'll be committing political suicide by being to blatant."

It reminds me of the origins of the phrase "Culture of Life." The sentence used to be code for "Pro-Life" and it was used by politicians who wanted to court the Pro-Life vote without coming out and admitting they were against abortion. The code has long since been broken, and the phrase is no longer a subtle hint at what a politician really means. Ron Paul, like the cowards who first used the phrase "Culture of Life," has a view that he's afraid to admit to the world at large. In a way, I have more respect for David Duke. He's also a racist, but he joined the KKK. I have no respect for cowards who hide their real views and try to give hints to potential supporters.

To be fair, I was pretty harsh here

Another one of my Yahoo Answers was deleted:

Question: Is Hilary the mother figure Barack Obama needs to enlighten him on the way's of the world?

Deleted Answer: What a load of nonsensical, hippie style nonsense. Did your mother smoke pot when she was pregnant, or are you a mindless moron of your own accord? Besides, Hillary is too masculine to be a mother figure to anyone.

To be fair, I was unduly harsh and personal with that one, and I really should have found a better way to explain that the question was typical of the touchy feely nonsense perpetuated by the Hippie Generation and Eastern Mysticism.

Yahoo Answers, slave to Wicca

I sometimes post in Yahoo Answers, trying to provide some guidance to people asking for aid. During a recent round of question answering, I answered a question from a young woman who was asking where to find "harry potter fanfiction."

"Fan Fiction" is sexually explicit stories about characters from popular fiction. I was first told of this abominable perversion by a friend who was talking about having encountered a short story involving the Smurfs and group sex. The Smurfs, as detailed in the book "Like Lambs to the Slaughter" were a 1980's cartoon program that glorified magic, sorcery and congress with Satan, going so far as to vividly and routinely depict "wizards" casting spells in pentagrams. One of the characters, "Smurfette" was not even alive, but was in fact a demon spawn given the semblance of life after being molded from clay!

I decided not to address the fact that the young woman was seeking sexually explicit stories about underage British cult members and merely said:

It's all Satanic propaganda for Wicca. Don't read any of it, it exists only to destroy your soul.

All things considered, I thought this was a calm and well worded response. I gave my opinion, my answer, and left it at that. I didn't go into chapter and verse about WHY Harry Potter was evil. Yahoo decided that even that mild reply was too much.

I received the following message:

On 02 Aug 2007 09:48:26 -0700, Yahoo! Answers wrote:
Hello cornswalled (cornswalled)

You have posted content to Yahoo! Answers in violation of our Community Guidelines or Terms of Service. As a result, your content has been deleted. Community Guidelines help to keep Yahoo! Answers a safe and useful community, so we appreciate your consideration of its rules.

Question: harry potter fanfiction question?

Question Details: It's all Satanic propaganda for Wicca. Don't read any of it, it exists only to destroy your soul.

Deleted Answer: It's all Satanic propaganda for Wicca. Don't read any of it, it exists only to destroy your soul.



If you feel this content was removed in error, please contact Customer Care and tell us why.

Regards,
Yahoo! Customer Care

I've sent the following reply:

I don't see what I did that supposedly violated any of the terms of use. I wasn't rude or abusive, I didn't use profanity or otherwise attack the person who asked the question. I just stated a simple fact about the nature of the Harry Potter stories. I don't believe my answer should have been deleted.

Alexander Cornswalled

Let's see if they have the guts to restore my answer.

8x as many people approve of Bush as the Democratic Congress

Democrats love to gloat over Bush's approval rating over the Iraq war, a meager 24%. What they tend to ignore is that only 3% of Americans, that's right, just 3%, approve of how the Democratic Congress is handling the war.

Let's put that in perspective.

For every one 1 who approves of how congress is handling the war, 8 approve of how Bush is handling it.

94% of Americans gave congress a negative rating on the Iraq war. That only leaves 3% for a neutral rating.

No matter how much trouble the Republicans are in with the court of public opinion, they're 8 times better off than the Democrats. The Barking Moonbats have failed to turn the Anti-Bush sentiment into pro Democrat sentiment, and the Republicans, despite the hammering of the liberal media, are still stronger than the Democrats.