Iranian Chess Set

I was recently sent the following image. This is a high cost chess set popular in Iran and parts of Iraq. Seven years after the September 11 attacks and Iran's leader are still gloating over it as if they were responsible.

Scientists create Superman E Coli in the lab

Richard Lenski of Michigan State University (Nicknamed "Moo U") spent 20 years working on a new E Coli strain. The resulting "super bacteria" can digest citrate, an organic compound E Coli could not previously eat. The "mutants increased in population size and diversity." They also "evolved larger cells ... faster growth rates ... and lower peak population densities."

The "lower peak population densities" makes them more efficient, allowing them to maintain the host in a substantially weakened state, but not killing him or her immediately. This will increase E Coli's ability to spread, as fewer of the unwilling hosts will be killed during the early stages of infection. While victims will live longer, the destruction of citrate compounds such as Vitamin C would all but guarantee the victim will eventuallly die.

Citrates are vital to human biology, but were previously immune to damage by E Coli infections. This new strain can literally eat more of it's victim's body, further incapacitating them and attacking their bodily systems on more fronts.

The question becomes, "Why?" Why would a researcher spend most of his professional life developing a deadlier version of a life threatening bacteria? Why would he make it more efficient at spreading and causing disease and misery? Why would he teach it to eat a new compound, allowing it to literally unknit the very brain of it's victims? Why would he put this bacteria through 44,000 generations of mutation to get these frightening results?

Lenski's experiment is also yet another poke in the eye for anti-evolutionists, notes Jerry Coyne, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Chicago. "The thing I like most is it says you can get these complex traits evolving by a combination of unlikely events," he says. "That's just what creationists say can't happen."

That's right, a scientist spent 20 years developing a bacteria capable of decimating millions, perhaps billions, in order to challenge Creationists. The great irony has been the massive yawn from Creationists and ID theorists. All the experiment proves is Micro Evolution, a series of changes within a created species or Baramin. Micro Evolution was well known and documented before Darwin's time. The bacteria is still just bacteria, just like a Poodle and a Doberman are both still dogs. In order to challenge Creationism, the scientist would have to observe a series of random mutations that resulted in another species, not just a variation upon an existing one.

The new E Coli is still being studied. It's can already survive being frozen. What other properties will this new super bacteria posses? If it were to escape into the wild, it's ability to eat citrate could render many fruits and vegetables as dangerous as raw meat. The larger cells may even be more resistant to existing antibiotics. Our best hope is for someone with a clearer head to step forward and order the destruction of this deadly new bacteria. In the absence of such a common sense approach we can only hope the researchers don't accidentally release the bacteria into the wild. The consequences if they did would be devastating.

Obama isn't a citizen! He can't be president!

Barack Obama is not qualified to be president not just because of his Muslim background, racist wife and general liberal idiocy but because he's not a natural-born citizen!

Barack Obama is not a natural-born citizen. The Constitution requires you to be a natural-born citizen to be President. US Law very clearly says that if you aren't born on US soil: "If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16."

Obama was born in Hawaii, but it wasn't a state when he was born!

Barack Obama's father was not a U.S. citizen

Obama's mother was only 18 when Obama was born, which means though she had been a U.S. citizen for 10 years, the mother fails the test. For Obama to be a citizen his mother would have needed to be a citizen for 10 years, at least five of which would have been after the age of 16. She was only 18 when he was born, so she was three years TOO YOUNG to give birth to a "natural-born" US Citizen.

It's too bad Obama's pedophile father knocked up a 15 year old. If they'd waited until she was 21 Obama could be president.

Obama is therefore a naturalized citizen, which means he can't be president without a Constititutional amendment! What next, is Arnold going to run for the Presidency? His citizenship is as much a qualification as Obama's.

It's proof of the brain dead nature of the Democratic party that they would let a man get their official nomination without realizing it would be illegal for him to hold the office. It's typical of them to ignore the law. As much as I wish we could just disband the Democrats, it gives the morons, perverts and reprobates a place to collect and leave the rest of us alone.

Putting Race before values, Hillary Supporters for McCain

All the high flying racial rhetoric in the world can't gloss over the fact that 28% of Hillary Clinton supporters plan to vote for McCain against Obama. There's an online grassroots movement to get Hillary supporters to vote for McCain now that Obama is the official Democratic candidate.

As much as I want to see Obama defeated and as much as I'm going to begrudgingly vote for the liberal Republican McCain, I can't help but have a sour taste in my mouth over the Democrat swing voters who will help swing the election in the Republican's favor.

McCain may be liberal by any objective measure, but when you throw Obama and Hillary into the mix he comes out looking like a shining bastion of Conservative values by comparison. From issues like Abortion and Intelligent Design to religious freedom McCain can't be more opposed to Clinton. They fall on completely opposite ends of their narrow political spectrum.

Obama is a near perfect match for Hillary's policies. Aside from being Muslim and even MORE eager to abandon Iraq than Clinton, he's pretty much a black male version of Hillary.

The Liberals who've been supporting Clinton have been the same people demanding we clog our court system with trials for Iraq enemy combatants. They're the same morons who want to open diplomatic discussions with terrorist states like Iran and refer to Islam as the "religion of peace." Their overtly pro-Muslim stance makes it impossible to think Obama's murky religious credentials are the reason they refuse to back him.

Why are so many Liberals refusing to back Obama when they were backing Hillary?

It's not politics, there's little difference between them.

It's not religion, they're so pro-Muslim some of them would give up their daughters to be an oil baron's third wife.

Can it be gender? Nope, because McCain, the person they say they'll vote for, is a man.

That only leaves one thing. Race.

28% of Hillary supporters refuse to vote for a black man. They consider race more important than their alleged value of "Abortion rights" or even the war in Iraq. In 2008, 28% of LIBERALS are still so mired in racial hatred that they'll let it act as a trump card to literally every other issue they consider important.

Before he turned against the party, I would have voted for Powell. There are plenty of black men who, if they ran, I would vote for them. Clinton supporters are a different story. If Hillary put on black face, you'd be hard pressed to tell her and Obama apart. It's clear that "Keeping darkie down" is the single most important issue to a large percentage of Hillary supporters.

I wonder if we'll see any dippy hippies at KKK rallies? They clearly have comparable views on race relations.

The trial continues, and it's going well for Jesus

A juror serving in the Tampa obscenity trial of a Hollywood producer has asked the judge if shorter portions of pornographic movies could be shown in court as evidence.

That's right folks, the prosecution picked a jury that doesn't like porn.

What does this mean?

Simply put, it means the "No really, it's art" arguments are falling on deaf ears. None of the jurors will buy the line and they're already tired of the perverted videos. I'm told that more lascivious "news" articles go into detail about the content of the videos. I'll spare my readers that level of detail on moral grounds and simply say that the videos advocate rape and pedophilia.

The trial is not going well for the defendant. Once convicted he faces up to ten years in prison to the charges and I hope the judge sends a message to perverts across the nation by sentencing him to the maximum allowed by law.

Update by Frank's personal porn star

The judge in the case stepped down when bestiality porn was found on his PC. Jesus is really on the ball on this one isn't he?