Back in the ‘60’s, San Francisco was the capital of peace, love, and flowers. But that was then; this is now. Today it looks like the city by the gay, uh, bay has traded in peace, love, and flowers for leather, whips, and chains. The city, through the use of tax dollars, is helping to finance something called The Folsom Street Fair, where several city blocks are closed to traffic so this parade of perverts can flaunt their sickness in public.

As if that weren’t bad enough, the promoters of the Folsom Street Fair have a publicity poster that should be offensive to just about any normal person. It’s a takeoff on DaVinci’s painting of the Last Supper. But guess what they’ve done. In this picture, Jesus and his disciples are gay, wearing leather for what few clothes they have on, and sporting sex toys. Well, needless to say, this has offended a lot of people, as well it should.

Andy Copper, one of fair’s board of directors, wants you to believe the poster has no religious significance. He says there was no intention of being anti-religious. He said the image is intended only to be reminiscent of the Last Supper. No religious significance? The Last Supper? When you do that to a religious painting, how could it not be anti-religious?

Peter La Barbera, president of Americans for truth, an organization that exposes the homosexual activist agenda, says, of course it contains anti-religious elements. When you picture Jesus and His disciples at the last supper, hanging around in various stages of undress and what is covered is covered in leather and they’re exhibiting sex toys openly, what do you call it? Folks, this whole gay thing is getting a little much, don’t you think?

When a city uses public money, make that read tax dollars from citizens, to help pay for something like the Folsom Street Fair, they’re getting right up there with Sodom and Gomorrah and I think we all know what happened to them. Right now, San Francisco is nothing but a sewer full of perverts, commies, and anti-war maggots. Well, maybe not everybody. I’m sure if you looked hard enough you could find enough normal Americans to fill, oh, at least a mini van.

I have a proposal on what to do about San Francisco. Take that mini van, fill it up with those normal people and get out of there as fast as possible. Then, as a public service to everyone, construct a high voltage electric fence around the city so nobody can get out or in.

Dan Rather Liberal, who was forced out of the anchor chair at the CBS Evening News and practically no one noticed because of their miniscule audience size, is now suing his former employer for $70 million.

Okay, let me see if I’ve got this right. Dan Rather goes on “60 Minutes” and produces some documents that were later proven to be forgeries that say that George W. Bush didn’t fulfill his duties in the National Guard but because his father was who he was, got his record whitewashed and sugar coated by a superior who can’t say it’s true or not because he’s dead.

And after the documents were proven to be as phony as Dan himself, he still stood by them until he had to make a sheepish admission that he no longer could vouch for their validity. So CBS told him to hit the road as well they should. There’s such a thing as credibility and Dan never had any to begin with.

So, after filing his lawsuit, what does Dan do? He goes on the only TV talk show that would even consider having him on, “The Larry King Show”, to make this impassioned plea that government and corporations are pulling the strings at CBS. He said, “Somebody has to take a stand and say democracy cannot survive with the level of big corporate and big government interference and intimidation in news.

They sacrifice support for independent journalism for corporate financial gain. ” Oh, please, Dan. Do you really believe that government and corporate pressure forced you to lie to the American public? Are you trying to tell us that those documents weren’t phony…still? He’s saying CBS used him as a scapegoat. A scapegoat for what, Dan? You were caught giving false information deliberately. How does that make you a scapegoat?

Dan’s been a notorious liberal throughout his entire career. He wouldn’t even report on the story of liberal Democrat California Congressman Gary Condit and his fooling around with an intern because he said he didn’t think it was newsworthy, even after the girl was found murdered. Those were facts but Dan chose not to report them because it would make a liberal look bad.

Yet he blatantly lied about George W. Bush’s service in the National Guard to make a Republican look bad. Dan, I’m sure your former bosses at CBS are taking direct orders from the government and the big corporations just like you say they are. Yeah, right. Hey, Dan, I’ve got an idea. Have you tried the “vast right wing conspiracy” story yet?

Do you folks know who James Hansen is? He’s the global warming alarmist in chief who works for NASA and says that the Bush administration is suppressing all so-called evidence of global warming and the administration has a personal vendetta against him for saying global warming is real. Of course, what Hansen doesn’t tell you is that he was quite active in the campaign of American traitor John Kerry when Kerry ran for president in 2004.

But that’s not the point I’m trying to make here. What I want to do is point out something very unusual about Hansen. Okay, let’s go back 36 years to an article that was published in the Washington Post in 1971. In their July 9th, 1971 edition, the Post ran an article headlined “U.N. Scientist Sees New Ice Age Coming.”

It told of a prediction by NASA and Columbia University scientist S. I. Rasool that the burning of fossil fuels by mankind would put so much dust in the atmosphere that it would diminish the amount of sunlight the earth receives and the temperatures would be about six degrees cooler. And the Post reported, “aiding Dr. Rasool’s research is a computer program developed by Columbia research associate James Hansen.

Hansen said, “there’s no need to worry about the carbon dioxide that fuel burning puts in the atmosphere. ” Hello? Calling Al Gore. Wasn’t this settled science back then, too? Well, now, we have Mr. Hansen closely aligning himself with Al Gore in predicting gloom and doom from global warming. Oh, yes, suddenly the carbon dioxide suddenly seems to matter. This science doesn’t sound quite so settled, does it?

And that’s not all the egg on Hansen’s face. He concocted some global temperature projections for the next fifty years which showed we’re in mortal danger from global warming. Forget global cooling. The watch phrase is now global warming. Well, something interesting happened on the way to Hansen’s global warming, settled-science conclusions.

It turns out there was a major mathematical error in his calculations and the truth it turns out was that the hottest year of the 20th Century wasn’t 1998…but 1934. Well, what have we here? What we have is ever mounting proof of the fraud that is the environmental movement. Today, it’s global warming. Yesterday, it was global cooling.

In the meantime, the mindless followers of this massive hoax worship at the throne of whatever Chicken Little can squawk the loudest. People like Hansen, Al Gore, and the rest of those snake oil salesmen should be exposed for what they are, confidence men who should be in jail for running major scams the way they dupe the not-too-bright and selling them carbon offsets.

I’ve got a couple of reasons you should be thankful you live in Wyoming and not Oregon, especially if you have kids in school. Oregon, long a battleground with the environmental cases battling the logging industry, has broken new multi-cultural ground in a couple of areas. The first is that some Oregon high schools are adopting a Mexican curriculum for their public schools.

This is theoretically to help educate Spanish-speaking students with Spanish textbooks, DVD’s and CD’s provided by Mexico in subjects such as math, science, and even history. I wonder if Mexico would return the favor if the situation were reversed and we’d get those things in English. I seriously doubt it but, hey, you’re in America now, speak Spanish. Until now, Oregon school districts have relied on bilingual teacher aides but not anymore.

Isn’t it inspiring to know that we’ve sacrificed the education of young American citizen students in English to placate the wishes of a group of people who probably aren’t even in this country legally? Isn’t that about the same as finding a burglar in your home and saying to him, “Is there anything else you want? Look, don’t worry, take everything in the refrigerator and here are the keys to my car.” There’s very little difference in principle there.

Meanwhile, do these kids make any attempt to learn English if they don’t have to? What do you think? But if you say anything against some boneheaded idea like that, then you’re a bigot. Well, if you don’t say something, you’re an idiot. And now, political correctness example #2 in Oregon. Public school students in Nyassa, Oregon are being taught Islam…as a history course.

If parents complain, School Superintendent Don Grotting says the course features only a chapter called “Islamic Civilizations”. Well, it’s a long time being spent on just one chapter because the kids are required to prepare five minute skits on Islam and how great it is to be a Muslim.

Janine Weeks, the curriculum director at the school, and she says, obviously practicing good old fashioned C Y A, “The content standards require us to present information about the rise of Islam in the context of world history. ” What do you want to bet that there’s no mention of September 11, 2001? And what do you want to bet you won’t hear a peep out of the ACLU or any of those other separation of church and state nut groups?

Ms. Weeks says she’s unaware of what requirements there are for presenting the basic beliefs of any other religion, especially Christianity to other students. Well, couldn’t she do a little digging and find out? Oh, no, that would bring the godless crowd down on the school and we all know teaching the history of Christianity isn’t politically correct. If this country falls, and it could, it won’t be because we were conquered but instead because we have the country away.

Politics has become about the biggest money game around with whichever candidate has raised the most money for their campaign eclipsing what they stand for and, in a lot of cases, even the pre-primary voter polls. Well, who do you think the biggest contributor is to political candidates? A lot of you might think it’s the National Rifle Association, or at least that what the gun control crowd would want you to think. But if you thought that, you’d be wrong.

The biggest contributor by far is.. may I have the envelope please…MoveOn.org, the radical leftist, America-hating group of extreme liberal kooks with money. In the last two election cycles, MoveOn.org has spent nearly $58 million on liberal Democrat candidates, according to figures from The Federal Election Commission. Just last year, they spent $27 million in an off-year to get a Democrat majority elected in Congress.

And that’s about three times more than the National Rifle Association. But you never hear about that in the liberal media. So where did this bunch of crackpots come from? The group was founded only a short time ago, nine years to be exact, in 1998 by two left-wing Democrat activists named Wes Boyd and Joan Blades.

It started out as an on-line petition to try and stop the impeachment proceeding against Slick Willie. Boyd and Blades are both from Berkeley, wouldn’t you know, and their ranting and raving of course attracted other ranting and raving liberals. Well, that was the start. They formed a political action committee fully dedicated to the destruction of the American way of life and began raising money.

So, you see, this group of dingbats was all started in trying to save Slick Willie’s sorry butt from being thrown out of office and sent to prison, which he should have been. Well, so much for the high moral standards of MoveOn.org, not to say that there’s a high moral standard in politics anyway. It’s just that managed to lower the bar significantly.

In the last election, up in Montana, they managed to raise a little over $300,000 in the razor thin victory of Jon Tester over Conrad Burns for the Senate seat. And they’ve gotten such power with the Democrats that nobody will speak out against them if they’re a liberal Democrat. Hillary, Osama Obama, the whole lot of them are now just stooges for MoveOn.org. Don’t you wish this group of lunatics would do what their name says and move on…move on out of the picture?

Folks, if you elect Hillary as president next year, bend over. The queen of socialist dogma has unveiled her socialized medicine program in her never-ending effort to wreck the country and gain total control of your lives. The centerpiece of this take over of one-seventh of the American economy and put it in government bondage would require everyone to have health insurance. And to pay for it, you’ll get tax credits to help pay for it.

So where is this tax credit money coming from? Well, you could start with a sharp increase in tobacco tax. After all, isn’t tobacco the number one health problem in America today? Okay, so everybody quits smoking and that means nobody pays the tobacco tax. THEN, where does the money come from? Good question. And this socialized medicine fiasco will cost you only about $110 billion a year.

Oh, come on, if you believe that, then I’ve still got that deed to Devils Tower I’ll sell you at a bargain price. Hillary’s low balling everybody on the cost of this mess. Remember George W. Bush and his Medicare Prescription Drug Program? It started out at just $400 billion. Then, even a year before it was to go into effect, revised cost estimates went up to $750 million. Now it’s close to a trillion dollars.

And you think Hilllary can pay for the entire healthcare system for just $110 billion? Now, here’s another little fly in this utopian ointment. Every employer in America, large or small, would be required to provide health insurance or pay into a government fund for uninsured workers. What? Folks, let’s look at the constitutional aspects of this.

First of all, can anybody show me ANYWHERE in the constitution where the government has an obligation to pay your doctor bills? Second, can anybody show me ANYWHERE in the constitution where it says the government is authorized to force anybody to pay into a government program, outside of income tax, of course? Don’t even bother looking. I’ll tell you now, it’s not there.

So where does Hillary get these cockeyed ideas? Because she’s a socialist, trained at the feet of the American Communist Party. And it’s their notion that capitalism is evil, that rich people obviously got their money from stealing it from the poor. How you steal money from people who don’t have any is still a question that’s unanswered but let’s not bother a liberal with technicalities…or whether what they want to do is legal or not.

You see they think they have this higher calling and you don’t mean doodley squat other than to work and have taxes confiscated from your paycheck to pay for their feather brained ideas. Folks, Dr. Hillary is putting on her rubber glove and she wants to sock it to us. And I can think of no weapon of mass destruction greater than the liberal agenda.

There was a song out by Bruce Sprinsteen several years ago called “57 Channels And Nothing’s On”. Well, according to survey by Associated Press and America On Line, that’s pretty much the thinking of most people today. Yet Americans continue to watch television on an average of 12 to 17 hours a week even they hate what they see. And 62% of the people polled in the survey say television in general is getting worse.

And the most irksome type of show? The so-called “Reality Show”. 71% of those surveyed say, “enough already with the reality shows. ” I don’t have a problem with that, do you? First of all, the reality shows aren’t about reality. You take “Survivor” for example. The whole situation is staged and I suppose the reality comes from the way the contestants manage to manipulate their way through whatever hostile environment they’re placed in.

And “American Idol” is considered to be a reality show. Oh, come on, cut me some slack. It’s a talent competition, just an extended, overly produced version of “Star Search” with an obnoxious, self-absorbed English guy and a has-been disco singer. Also on the list of not-so-liked shows were crime shows, the afternoon gab fests, and game shows. The most liked programs were newscasts, sports, and dramatic shows.

But even their audience numbers have been dropping steadily so I hope the producers of those shows aren’t looking for any kind of consolation in this survey. Yet people keep the TV on even though they don’t like it for some reason. Do you think it’s just become part of the home ambience, you know, just have it on to have something on that will fill any silence that might occur?

Or could it be that there’s just too much television available, that it’s lost its novelty and its ability to command attention but we still keep it on? Or could it be that because of television’s insatiable appetite for programming ideas that most, or all, of the new ideas have been done before and we still keep it on? Or could it be all of the above? Whatever the answer is, Americans are getting tired of the tube apparently.

There’s very little excitement over the new shows and, outside of a handful, most of them are gone before their premier season’s over. All those channels and nothing’s on. Do we have an example here of the law of supply and demand? With all those channels and all those programs, could the supply be much greater than the demand?

Folks, Senators Enzi and Barrasso are on the warpath—as well they should be. They’re trying to stop the federal government from getting a majority share of royalties from Wyoming’s minerals. Currently the deal is that the feds and the state split the mineral royalties 50-50. But in a proposal that’s buried deep inside an Interior Department appropriations bill, the federal share of those royalties would go up to 51% while Wyoming’s share would drop to 49%.

Now, you say, “Steve, that’s only one percent. What difference would that make? ” Well, you run the numbers and you’ll see that the state gets shafted out of about $20 million a year. Senator Enzi said, “It’s unfortunate that the appropriators think taking money away from states to spend it on bigger government programs or some other federal priority is the way to fix a problem.

Senator Barrasso said the money could be used very well here in Wyoming to be spent on highways, state building projects and families. He said, “The federal government is trying to rob our future. I won’t let them pickpocket Wyoming’s royalty money. I’ll work hard with my Senate colleagues to strike this provision from the bill. ” Now, folks, wait till you hear the reason for this. The Interior Department says the measure is necessary to help cover federal administrative costs? Federal administrative costs?

If you translate that into English, it means the salaries of bureaucrats who have no appreciable abilities in the world other than shuffling papers and complicating things needlessly because bureaucrats think if you make something complicated, you’re smart. And the more bureaucrats you have to complicate things, the better is the way they think.

Never mind that you’ve got five different people doing the exact same job and one doesn’t have a clue as to what the other four are doing. And if there’s a contradiction in their paperwork, don’t let that bother you. They’ll just include both in the new set of regulations. And the poor shmoe in the mineral industry is left to figure it out by himself. It’s just another prime example of your tax dollars at work.

This idea, oddly enough, was proposed by the administration, the BUSH administration. You know, the ones who got elected twice telling everybody they were conservatives? Well, so much for credibility on their part. Do you remember when the federal government’s motto used to be “In God We Trust’? Well, that’s all been changed now.

With this latest confiscation of money that rightfully belongs to the people of Wyoming, the new motto for the federal government goes from “In God We Trust” to “This is a stickup.”

I’m sure you’re familiar with the old saying, “the more things change, the more they remain the same. ” If you want a perfect example of this, just look at last year’s change in the Congressional leadership from the Republicans to the Democrats. Remember the term “culture of corruption” the Democrats used at every turn to describe the Republican congress? Well, things changed. And, lo and behold, they’re still the same.

Yesterday, we observed the 6th anniversary of September 11 and the attacks on America. By the way, before I get to the point I want to make here, did any liberal Democrats take part in honoring the memory of the three thousand people who died in those attacks? Well, one did. And wouldn’t you know it’s Hillary Rodham Klingon, the senator from New York and the wife of the man who made 9-11 possible, Slick Willie.

Hillary attended a memorial service near Ground Zero in Manhattan. Now, before your heart swells with pride at this patriotic gesture, think about this. A week from now, we’ll see the true Hillary when she speaks at a $1,000-a-plate fund raiser with big money interests who stand to reap billions of dollars in post-9/11 homeland security spending. Again, follow the money trail and it will lead you to the truth.

Among some of the fund raising audience will be big government contractors and lobbyists who’ve gotten quite rich in the last six years due to increased government spending on useless bureaucracies such as The Department of Homeland Security.

But that’s not all here. For the $1,000 price of a ticket, attendees will get the chance to participate in small hour-long sessions with key Democrat lawmakers many of whom, in the ODDEST of coincidences, just happen to chair important subcommittees on the Homeland Security Committee. Who would have thought it? Didn’t we drive the corruption out of Washington when the Democrats took over back in January?

I thought we had a Congress now that wouldn’t tolerate things like this. Hillary gets her $1,000 from each attendant and the rest of the hookers in the Democrat congress will be there to honor these upstanding business leaders with the order of the outstretched palm. Somebody call the vice squad. Who does Hillary think she is, anyway, Heidi Fleiss? If you’re thinking about going, the location ought to be easy to find. It’ll be at powerful Washington law firm offices.

I don’t know the name of the firm but just look for the red light over the door.

Rush Limbaugh has a term for the media. He calls them the “drive-by” media. Well, sometimes, as was the case in the Larry Craig brouhaha last week, a more appropriate term for those liberal empty suits is “the vigilante media”. Okay, don’t get me wrong. I’m not here to defend Larry Craig or what he was accused of and said he was guilty of the way the media did when Bill Clinton was having sex with Monica Lewinsky.

“Oh, let’s leave his private life out of it” was the liberal whine while Clinton was disgracing the Oval Office. But Larry Craig was accused of a questionable PROPOSITION in the men’s room at the Minneapolis Airport, not actually having sex. Look, if Craig is guilty, he should have resigned, which he did, but not under the media onslaught that the liberal lynch mob hit him with. This is just another example of the media vigilantes going after a Republican and letting the sins of the Democrats get a free pass.

Remember last year that Republican Congressman from Florida who was hounded out of office by the media vigilantes because he propositioned a male Congressional page via e-mail. The moral indignation of the media was almost deafening. Yet, though, there was actual sex involved, just the proposition. But a few years earlier, a Democrat Congressman from Massachusetts actually HAD sex with a male Congressional page and you barely heard about it.

And then, of course, there was light in the loafers Congressman Barney Frank who had a roommate who was a gay pimp operating out of Frank’s house. Mum was the word from the media. So why weren’t the DEMOCRAT congressman who had sex with a male page and Barney Frank’s knowledge of his pimp roommate enough to force them to resign, too? It’s because the vigilantes in the media are liberal Democrats and all liberal Democrats live by the double standard.

And the liberal media are nothing more than their attack dogs who defend them relentlessly when they’ve sinned but don’t hesitate to cast the first stone when it’s a Republican under the gun. And, to make Republicans look bad, sometimes they’ll even make up stuff. Remember Dan Rather? Look, I don’t know if Larry Craig’s guilty or not. Only he knows that. But I do know the much bigger story is the way the media mob of vigilantes magnified this out of all proportion.

And how come you never hear anything about a “vast left wing conspiracy”?