ESPN and the Three Little Pigs

What do ESPN, and the Three Little Pigs have in common? They expose the hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty that are destroying civilization right before our eyes.


According to the Times of London, an animated adaptation of the tale of the three little pigs has been panned because it has been deemed to be "offensive to Muslims" due to the porcine protaganists. According to the story, Muslims had not complained but it was still thought to be offensive. Similar episodes have occurred in the US and other countries around the world. I guess that the strategy of killing infidels for offending Islam is producing the desired result; fear. Publishing cartoons and naming stuffed animals can get you killed if you offend the wrong demographic. Even printing something off the Internet can be fatal. On Tuesday, Sayed Parwez Kaambakhsh, 23, was sentenced to death for distributing a report printed from the Internet that religious officials said violated Islam.


Recently, an ESPN host made a less than appropriate remark about Jesus and was given a one week leave from her job. (Yawn) If she had made the same comment about another religious figure she could well be the target of a fatwa and be off of work much longer. Fortunately, Christians are more inclined to allow justice to occur without their hastening influence. It is in fact, the Christians who cherish concepts like free will, tolerance, and freedom of conscience. These ideals have enabled western civilization to thrive. Some might argue that Christianity has had a stifling effect at times in human history. On balance, the positive contributions outweigh the negative. However, one need only to look at the founding of this nation to see the benefits that freedom of religious choice and Judeo-Christian principles brings to a society.


There is never an outcry when "Christian sensibilities" are offended. In fact, there is usually a great deal of celebration and self-congratulatory fanfare whenever Christians are maligned. Trey Parker and Matt Stone, Andres Serrano, and more recently the folks at the Folsom Street Fair have all been hailed for their open mindedness and gifted free expression for their anti-Christian endeavors. Whenever Christians or Jesus are the butt of the joke or the target of derision, mockery and scorn most people cheer or certainly have a good laugh. I can only imagine the response to any of these "artists" and their endeavors if they targeted someone other than Jesus with their religious themes.


The world in which we live is a very dangerous place. Yet, many people seem content to ignore their plight and others choose to imitate Neville Chamberlain and bend over backwards in an effort to not offend and appease an enemy for whom anything less than total victory is not an option. Apparently suicide bombers have failed to convince people of their level of commitment to the cause and unwillingness to compromise.

The three little pigs are offensive enough to warrant censure but zealots sawing off a person's head and broadcasting the video around the world is not offensive enough to warrant action. Western sensibilities are offended every day in countries where women are oppressed under the guise of religion, murdered for "honor" and people are killed for "religious insults". Yet, the only response is to walk more softly and work harder to appease and not to offend. I believe that Jews don't appreciate swine any more than Muslims. But no one complains about being insensitive to Jews.



I wonder when ESPN will start calling for the NFL and NCAA to be less offensive and ban the use of "the pigskin".

Madame Mayor!

Carmen Kontur-Gronquist, mayor of a small town in Oregon is taking some heat for some photos posted on her private My-Space page. I wonder is she is a Democrat since they were posted online before she was elected more than three years ago. Only after her election did it become an issue. Obviously, a very slow news day in Arlington, Oregon.

To her credit, she makes no apologies. "I'm not going to change who I am," she said. "There's a lot of officials that have a personal life, and you have people in this community who have nothing better to do than scrape up stuff like this." She certainly is not guilty of being a chameleon like many other politicians who pander to the crowd du jour.

Personally, I don't think that her photos were that racy. She could have just as easily been photographed on vacation at the beach or on the job as a lifeguard in a swimsuit that was more revealing. The photos that grace the covers of the supermarket tabloids and the billboards along the highway often portray much more suggestive themes than her photos. I can only imagine if I were a politician and some of the photos from my youth came to light. Fortunately, I went to Spring Break long before digital photography and the Internet.

I think that more feminists should come to her defense and support her freedom to express control over her body. However, I doubt that the more vocal feminists want to support someone who actually can pull off being photographed in their underwear.

Final thought: Given identical political ideology, who would you rather see in office? Ms. Kontur-Gronquist or Ms. Rodham-Clinton?

Edwards for President

I have intentionally tried to avoid listening to the prattle and pablum of the Democratic (and some Republican) candidates as the WWE-like spectacle of the presidential campaign season begins. However, I was unwilling to totally isolate myself from the outside world and thus I was forced to take note of the parade of fools in Iowa.

I am glad that Barack Hussein Obama spoiled the party for Hillary Rodham Clinton. Unfortunately for the smartest woman in the world, she tied with the ambulance chasing, dead child channeling Breck Girl, John Edwards.

It was Edwards who nearly inspired me to channel Elvis Presley and destroy my new HD plasma television as I listened to his ridiculous rants masquerading as rhetoric. The man who personally made millions of dollars through lawsuits decried the excessive pay of corporate CEOs. Even though many of them make considerably less than he did as an attorney. He also spoke about "taking away the power" from "Big Drugs, Big Oil, and Big Insurance". I believe that is code for "Communism". He makes no pretense about his vision of the United States of America as becoming a socialist collective ruled by liberal elites who can "take care" of the ignorant masses.

I wonder where the oil, pharmaceutical and insurance companies will invest their capital when he and his ilk remove the economic incentive to innovate and produce. I am certain that he never read "Atlas Shrugged" but was moved to the core by "Das Kapital" and the Communist Manifesto. It is quite clear that he does not think that Americans should have personal property rights. Actually, he is clear only to those who can understand the implications of his Robin Hood rantings.

For example, he rails against "Big Oil" that rapes the little guy with $100/barrel oil. Forget for the moment that oil prices are controlled by OPEC and the laws of supply and demand.

1 barrel of crude oil is 42 gallons and 1 bottle of water is .5 liters or about 1/8 of a gallon.
A barrel of oil at $80 is $1.90/ gallon and $100/barrel is priced at $2.38/gallon before it is turned into gasoline.
A bottle of water priced at $1.00/bottle is about $8.00/gallon.

For the more sophisticated home-gamers: 3 barrels of crude is roughly equivalent to 2 barrels of unleaded gasoline and 1 barrel of heating oil. I am not taking this into account to make the math easier to follow for the working Americans.

How much capital does it take to fill a bottle of water compared to how much is required to fill an oil barrel?

If crude oil is $2.38/gallon and gasoline is $3.00/gallon and bottled water is $8.00/gallon, who is making "obscene" profits? Where is the indignation toward "Big Water"?

If a drug company has $500 million to invest, should it invest in a new drug, water or some other investment vehicle? According to candidate Edwards, the money should be given away. The drug companies should spend their money and give the drugs away at less profit than they could make if they invested their money in making bottled water.

What is more obscene? A-Rod making $275 million over 10 years to play baseball or a CEO of a major corporation employing 100,000 people making a couple millon dollars a year? Perhaps a trial lawyer like Edwards making a few hundred millon on a lawsuit?

Edwards, Obama, Clinton et al. want to nationalize as much as possible. They have not realized that socialism has been an abysmal failure wherever it has been tried. Their raison d'etre is to make as many people as possible dependent on government largess and to control as many aspects of the lives of the citizenry as possible. Of course, they don't come out and admit this. But, that is the end result of their proposed policies.

Capitalism is far from perfect. But, it has resulted in the most benefit to mankind compared to every other alternative. Freedom, private property rights and the economic incentive to achieve have also been astoundingly successful whenever they have prevailed.