American Heathen®

(The following post is courtesy of blog contributor/author John Mill)

My friends warned me not to take a Carnival cruise. They reminded me of the Carnival Triumph, whose engines became disabled in February, and the Carnival Dream that became stranded in the Caribbean in March. But they never warned me about the tacky “art.”

What I saw all over the ship – papering the hallways to the staterooms, covering the elevator walls, mounted throughout each lounge and plastered pretty much anywhere there was wall space – were reproductions of artwork, with Rubenesque ladies and plump cherubs abundant. There was nudity aplenty, female nudity. None of it was vulgar, that is, it was high-class, elitist nudity, not Hustler nudity. (The word “vulgar,” itself, is elitist: it comes from Latin vulgus, that is, “common people,” as if common people are not entitled to titillation, too.) I saw breasts exposed everywhere – I’m not taking about beach and pool, but in paintings and wall art – and there seemed no reticence about it.

That was until I walked the hallway to the fitness center. I remember when the health club or fitness center or athletic club was called simply “the gym,” short for gymnasium, which is where I took gym class at school and work out today. Decorating the hallways to the gym were reproductions of ancient Greek athletes from the original Olympics, copied from pottery. I recognized the paintings. That is, I had seen them before in books… except, one important detail was missing from the wall art that was present in the original art.

The Greek word for gymnasium comes from gymnós (γυμνός), which means “naked.” That describes how the male-only training for competitors in the games were held in ancient times: The athletes wore their birthday suits. But for these athletes, the ones on the walls to the cruise ship’s “gym,” the artist had bowdlerized their boners; he had purged their penes; their genitalia was gone! I wondered why the ithyphallic athletes were left dickless, but I could easily assume.

Dickless: n. the state of lacking manly fortitude.

I acknowledge that it isn’t fair that men have monopolized the language of courage, such as, having balls/cojones meaning possessed of mettle. (My favorite rejoinder comes from M in the 2002 James Bond film Die Another Day, in which she fires back at the admiral who claims she doesn’t have the balls for the job: “But the advantage is, I don’t have to think with them all the time.”)

My suspicion is that exposing breasts here and there, at least in classic paintings, is probably tolerable to the largely American (that is, prudish) crowd on the cruise ship. Being classic, it’s pornography that is more or less “grandfathered” into modern culture. There were no John Ashcrofts about, making sure any bare-breasted Spirit of Justice statues are more properly attired. But it was curious that the Greek Olympiads were pictured dickless. Why amputate their members? Was this a double standard? Yes, a penis is a sex organ and breasts are not. But isn’t it just weird, considering the way the athletes are posed, that their masculinity is missing? What did the copyist find so offensive about the organ? Was the artist lacking in manly fortitude?

I could have concluded that here on the Carnival Pride there was a clear double standard about nudity in art… until I happened the ride the lift to Deck 10 and the eponymous restaurant, David’s. There, rising his full 17′ height above the deck, in imitation white marble, was a reproduction of the 16th century Michelangelo statue of the same name. Uncut and flaccid, David’s dong dangled against his dual-chambered scrotum, larger than life and hard to miss.

David’s is supposed to be the classy restaurant aboard the Pride, but even though I found it fully staffed, I never saw anybody eating there. Perhaps the women were offended and the men felt intimidated? All things considered, I’m glad we made it safely back to port!

To the tune of the Old Roy Rogers and Dale Evans Classic:

Happy trails to AH, until we meet again.
Happy trails to RJ, keep blasphemin’ until then.
Who cares about the theocrats when we’re together?
Just send em a zinger and tell em “theocracy?  never!“
Happy trails to John Mill, ’till we meet again.

Some trails are happy ones,
Others are blue.
It’s the way you ride the trail that counts,
Here’s  to  a rational one for you.

Happy trails to D2, until we meet again.
Happy trails to Chuck, keep teachin’ em  until then.
Who cares about the wing nuts when we’re together?
Just call em out on their bronze age , looney palaver

Happy trails to  YOU ALL, ’till we meet again.

This Saturday’s broadcast of American Heathen® will be special for many reasons, of course, but none will be as interactive as this…

This Saturday’s “Real History 101″ segment will be THE FINAL EXAM!

Yes, after all of those classes of history you may or may not know, the dirty little secrets certain people don’t want you to know, it’s time to find out if you were paying attention in class or if you were Twitting about your favorite snack.

Don’t worry, though, the exam won’t be long.  Nor will the questions be too difficult to answer.

But we DO ask that you have a sheet of paper and a pencil ready before the show.   It doesn’t HAVE to be a #2 pencil.  It could be a #3 or even a #4 pencil.  Take the Exam, jot down your answers, and then later on in the show call in and let us know how you scored.

Do you have what it takes to pass Real History 101?  Find out this SATURDAY (11/3) on AMERICAN HEATHEN® starting at 8pm ET, 7pm CT, on www.ShockNetRadio.com and simulcast on Apple’s iTunes and FreethoughtRadio.com!

(This is a transcript of Al Stefanelli’s “Voice Of Reason” segment on my American Heathen® Internet Radio Show)

There’s been so much talk in the news over the past several months about the Republican Party and their desire to control women. People ask me why I think these men, and the occasional woman, think it’s perfectly fine to spout off these things, as it seems to the reasoned mind to antithetical to common sense.

Well, that’s because it is. It is a religious mindset, and a patriarchal one, at that. It’s not necessarily because most of these politicians are older, or even white. The religious mindset knows no age, gender or race. On any given Sunday, you will hear the same rhetoric being spouted from pulpits all over.

This is because in the bible, women are basically commanded to accept a role of inferiority and to be shameful for the simple fact that they are women.

Misogynist bible verses are so common that if one opens a bible to a random page, the odds are pretty good that you’ll find one close to wherever your finger lands. To add insult to injury, many Christian women will defend these passages with apologetics that were written by misogynist Christian men.

The most common one is that women are equal, but have different roles. This, of course, reeks with the Orwellian “some are more equal than others,” which is a common theme that many of you have read or heard me use many times before.

The book of Ephesians, chapter five, states,

“Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church. . . .”

Yes, there is the second part about men treating their wives as Christ treats the church, but it seems that part is largely ignored. I know plenty of Christian men who use this passage to justify some pretty bad behavior.

In fact, I have been privy to many conversations where Christian men joke about how they order their wives around and treat them like property, refer to the “submission” verse, and have a good ol’ laugh-fest.

Christian men have a long history of treating women as chattel, and up until recently, it was still legal for a man to beat his wife, and those husbands who beat their wives were largely exempt from prosecution.

This behavior is learned, my friends. I can tell you with great certainty that there are Pastors, Preachers and Priests all across the land who continue to advise abused women to stay with their husbands and Christian children are taught misogyny to be perfectly acceptable every week in Sunday schools across the nation.

These children grow into adults who continue to perpetrate this dogma toward their wives, mothers, sisters and daughters. This dogma is manifested whenever we hear men talk about what they think a woman should be doing.

And, boy, do they have a fixation on vaginas. These guys have no problem telling women what they can do with their vaginas. When to have sex, who to have sex with, why to have sex, when to have babies, who to have babies with, and what to do with the babies they have, what may be inserted in their vaginas by whom and for what purpose and the contribution women make to their own rapes and sexual assaults

Religious men are only too happy to also dictate what a woman should wear on their bodies and what can happen to them if they wear the wrong clothing. Or how to speak in the presence of a man.

The fact is that the way that the religious right treats women is horrible and they should be ashamed of themselves. But they aren’t, because they are immoral and unethical. They are cold, uncaring and delusional people who have no concept of anything even remotely connected to compassion.

Christopher Hitches said that religion poisons everything. I wish he were wrong. I really do. But all one needs to do is click on a news site, turn on the television or sometimes just look out the window to realize just how true those words are.

(The following is a transcript of an impromptu segment by Al Stefanelli on my American Heathen® Internet radio show. Air date of this particular segment: 10/27/12)

Dear Red States:

We’re ticked off at the way you’ve treated the Blue States, and we’ve decided we’re leaving. We intend to form our own country and we’re taking the other Blue States with us. In case you aren’t aware that includes Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, California, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and all the Northeast.

To sum up briefly: You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states; we get stem cell research and the best beaches. We get the Statue of Liberty; you get Opry Land. We get Harvard; you get Ole’ Miss. We get 85 percent of America’s venture capital and entrepreneurs; you get Alabama. We get two-thirds of the tax revenue; you get to make the red states pay their fair share.

Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the Christian Coalition’s we get a bunch of happy families; you get a bunch of single moms.

Blue States in hand we will have firm control of 80% of the country’s fresh water, more than 90% of the pineapple and lettuce, 92% of the nation’s fresh fruit, 95% of America’s quality wines (you can serve French wines at state dinners) 90% of all cheese, 90 percent of the high-tech industry, most of the US low sulfur coal, all living redwoods, Sequoia’s and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools plus Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Cal Tech and MIT. With the Red States you will have to cope with 88% of all obese Americans and their projected health care costs, 92% of all US mosquitoes, nearly 100% of the tornadoes, 90% of the hurricanes, 99% of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100% of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia.

We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.

38% of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62% believe life is sacred unless we’re discussing the death penalty or gun laws, 44% say that evolution is only a theory, 53% that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61% of you crazy bastards believe you are people with higher morals then we lefties.

We’re taking the good pot too. You can have that dirt weed they grow in Mexico.

Sincerely,

The Blue States.

———————————————————–

This has been making the rounds in emails and on social networks for some time, now. I have not been able to find the author of this, but it is brilliant! If anyone can find the author, please put it in the comments and I will give proper credit.

(This is a transcript of Al Stefanelli’s “Voice Of Reason” segment on my American Heathen® Internet Radio Show)

I am wordsmith. An architect of thoughts, plying my trade through the free exchange of ideas between the different facets that make up my concept of self. With due respect to the classically trained, I don’t reason there is a right way or wrong to build using words, and I also reason there are no words that should never be used.

A cursory glance down the streets of many cities and towns reveal the tried and true, angular construction that is so prevalent in our buildings. The materials are mass produced, wood, glass, brick, and mortar. Every now and then, though, you see the unusual, the odd building that is not shaped like the rest, or that is made of something that isn’t normally used as construction material.

We marvel at round houses, homes built in trees, made of beer bottles and hubcaps, and we even stop and stare at the roadside eyesores that look like they fell out of an episode of “Hoarders,” but are designed that way, intentionally. For whatever lines these structures run, and to what end our tastes demand what we perceive as aesthetic, we are attracted to them. And the architects know this. It is why they build them, and they are not constrained in their ideas.

I view writing the same way. There are certain rules that must be followed. This is true for even the Frank Lloyd Wright’s of the world. A building, any building, must have structure and load-bearing members. But after that, all bets are off. I do this because, like the architect, I have a different purpose for what I write. Not every building is suited for every use, and not every style is suited for every subject.

Thus, there is nothing that is placed outside of purpose, especially words, and what words I use depend on what message I am trying to convey. This is why I have such a problem with censorship. I would just as soon see Vincent Van Gogh censored as I would any artist, and the same goes for any wordsmith.

It’s one of the reasons I admired George Carlin so much. Do you remember his shtick back in the 1970’s, the one where he listed seven words that you would never, ever hear on television? Well, here we are, thirty years later, and you still won’t hear the words “shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker or tits” on NBC, CBS or ABC. Some of the cable networks have allowed them, but only recently.

What saddens me is that there is a movement within the freethought community to censor words, just for the sake of their existence – giving no thought to context. There are words that have been deemed simply too offensive to even utter, and that, as a wordsmith, I have a huge problem with, because it reminds me of a certain religion that has a prophet that depicting an image of is too offensive to even draw. It makes me wonder if heads will start being chopped off if someone simply speaks the words, “Picture of Muhammad,” because it elicits a mental image.

Don’t even get me started on phrases like, ‘the n-word’ or whatever word people want to describe in similar fashion. If I mean to say something, I am going to use the word, not a rendition of the word. It reminds of the Christian who says, “Well, Sally is such a b.” For fuck’s sake, if you think Sally is a bitch, then just call Sally a bitch, and move on. We know what you mean, and using a letter in place of a word does NOT make you a better person.

Trying to change attitudes by force-feeding people different words that carry the same meanings is just plain stupid. It’s like building a facade over an existing building. It’s still the same on the inside, still has the same inner walls, structure and design.

I am a wordsmith. An architect. I will use whatever words I choose to build with, and it is your choice to drive by and bitch about how ugly the building is, or drive around town to find other things I’ve built. Either way, your choice. Just know, in any given room you’ll likely find an old record player, with a scratchy recording of a familiar voice, saying, “shit piss fuck cunt cocksucker motherfucker tits,” and sometimes even “fart, turd or twat”

(The following is a special comment by David 2, co-host of “American Heathen®” and the host of “Brutally Honest”.)

When it comes to religion and politics, those two things have a lot in common.   Both are venues for power-hungry manipulators to worm their way into the lives of others without accountability.  Both demand unquestionable loyalty and compliance.  Both are guilty of perverting the human condition.  Both seem to have a problem with money and continually demand more of it from others.  Both are fixated on trying to control our actions, supposedly for “our own good”.

And I’ve discovered that both utilize the same cultish arguments to keep their power and control over others.

Imagine going to an atheist, or an agnostic, or a freethinker, and telling them that they HAD to make a choice between Christianity and Islam.  Not only that, but you were then told that no matter which of those two options you HAD to choose, you HAD to support even the most extremist of positions within that group, even if you didn’t agree with those positions yourselves.

In other words, if you chose Christianity, you HAD to support the most extremist of sects within the extremist of factions within the forty-four-thousand-plus derivations of Christianity that currently exist.  That extremist group would become the de facto image of the whole religion.  No matter what they say, no matter what they do, you HAVE to support them, and do so without question or public challenge.  Not only support them, but you HAVE to defend and justify their actions and stances when challenged by others.  Ditto for Islam.

If you were a Christian, you probably wouldn’t have too much of a problem doing that.  The choice would be easy for those people, and they would easily defend their chosen faith no matter what.  Even lesser faiths like Judaism would find it easy to pick a side, especially given how one wants to exterminate them now and the other wants to wait until Armageddon.

But we’re not talking about forcing a Christian or a Muslim to choose between those two dominant global faiths.  That kind of situation is dilemma-free.  We’re talking about atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, and pretty much anyone who is neither Christian nor Muslim.  We’re talking about forcing THEM to choose between two dominant global faiths when they would find both to be abhorrent in their own ways.

Don’t want to choose, you say?  Tough!  We’ll barrage you with campaigns telling you to “Choose or Die”.  We’ll hassle you with prerecorded phone calls telling you that you HAVE to choose one of two dominant faiths over the other.  We’ll pepper the airwaves and litter the newspaper editorials with messages telling you that you HAVE to choose between those two beliefs and paint the other side with the nastiest of imagery the human imagination can come up with.  We’ll stick signs in lawns and street corners and billboards telling you that you HAVE to choose between Christianity and Islam.  The fate of the whole human race is at stake, don’t you know?

Alternatives?  There are NO alternatives!  You HAVE to choose between those two dominant faiths.  We’re not going to allow you to waste your belief on some useless delusion of an “alternative”.  And we’ll continually repeat the phrase “wasted belief” in the mainstream media and social media and email circles.  It’ll come rolling off the tip of your tongue whenever anyone even remotely suggests an “alternative” to the two dominant religions.  Not only that, but we’ll launch a barrage of messages from “experts” claiming that there has ALWAYS BEEN those two specific dominant religious beliefs all through human history, even if the facts prove otherwise.

The time has come.  Make your choice, atheist: Christianity or Islam.  Make your choice, free-thinker: Christianity or Islam.  Make your choice, agnostic: Christianity or Islam.  Choose!  What are you waiting for?  Time’s up!  CHOOSE!

How many of you would find that abhorrent?  How many of you would want to resist to your dying breath the demand that you pick between two dominant faiths that you would rather have nothing to do with?  How many of you would want to stand up and defend what you personally believe?

Welcome to my world as a political independent.

This is what I have to live with anytime the subject of politics comes up.  If I question the actions or stances or statements of a Democrat, then I’m instantly branded as being a member of the GOP, and vice-versa.  I can’t question President Obama’s policies without being branded a conservative “Republican”.  I can’t question the logic (or lack thereof) of the GOP without being branded a liberal Democrat.

And of course, come election time, I am inundated with continual messages not only telling me that I HAVE to vote, but that I HAVE to choose between two parties that are so corrupt and so full of institutionalized narcissism that they have become both psychotic and sociopathic.  I am told that I HAVE to choose, and yet I am condemned for MAKING my choice, no matter WHAT I choose!  Every time, no matter which party I choose, no matter which candidate I end up picking, I am ridiculed by one party or another for MAKING THAT CHOICE!

Be thankful, then, that you are not being pressured to make a choice of your beliefs on a continual basis and then be condemned for making that choice!

And it is understandable why supporters of the two dominant political parties will want to lie and exaggerate and pull out all of the stops to get every vote they can, by hook or by crook.  They have a vested interest in LYING about how there has “always been two parties” and trying to convince people that somehow not voting for THEIR dominant political party is a “wasted vote”.

What surprised me, though, is seeing the same “wasted vote” arguments being recited BY atheists, free-thinkers, and agnostics.  To see people who I know are atheists or free-thinkers or agnostics take a look at my support of third party groups and actually tell me that I am “wasting my vote” for supporting them.

And I have to call “bullshit” on that.  Because let’s get brutally honest here… my support of third party groups in defiance of the two dominant political parties is MY atheism!  And I am just as angered at being told that I HAVE to choose between two overbearing dominant political parties as you would be if you were told that you would HAVE to choose between two overbearing dominant religious beliefs!

We are not BORN into any political party, just like we are not BORN into any religious belief.  We are indoctrinated into both our religious and our political stances by parents and peers and by the messages in the media.  And, yes, sometimes we CHOOSE to go along with “the crowd” within the two dominant parties, just like one would CHOOSE to go along with “the crowd” in any dominant faith.

But sometimes we CHOOSE to do something different.  Just like someone CHOOSES a different religious path, so too can they CHOOSE a different political affiliation.  We can make a decision based not on political rhetoric, but on LOGIC and REASON, just like you – as atheists, agnostics, and free-thinkers – made your decisions about what you CHOOSE to accept about the world you live in.

So my question to those of you who have CHOSEN to not accept either of the dominant religions is this: WHO ARE YOU to condemn my choice to not accept either of the dominant political parties?  Because, as far as I am concerned, those of you who do just that are guilty of intellectual hypocrisy.

Now I can understand why you may want to support either of the dominant political parties.  And I know how important every vote is in any given election.  Whole careers have been made or lost by as few as a handful of votes.  But just like you would not want to be insulted and intimidated into a religion you find disgusting, you are not doing your political choice any favors when you use the same tactics on political independents such as myself.  And you do yourself an even bigger insult when you use denigrating terms like “wasted votes” for others, because if you cannot value their political choices, how can you expect others to value your religious choices?

My predecessor, H. L. Mencken, once said that he respected another man’s religion in the same light as he accepts that man’s assertion that his wife is beautiful and his kids are smart.  I would add that the same should apply to one’s political choices.  Respect them in the same way that you expect of yours.

(This is a transcript of Al Stefanelli’s “Voice Of Reason” segment on my American Heathen® Internet Radio Show)

You hear the word Freedom thrown around a lot. In fact, RJ Evans,the host of American Heathen Radio  is fond of stating “Freedom and Liberty For All.” It’s a mighty phrase, indeed. It can be applied to so many different aspects of our existence, and aptly so. Today, however, I want to apply it to something specific. Rather, a specific demographic that has been connected to the recent terrorist attack on the US Embassy in Libya.

These attacks came on the 11th anniversary of the terrorist attacks in New York City, Pennsylvania and at the Pentagon. This was a horrific event that resulted in the deaths of US Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, and three other United States citizens, including members of the US Military. It was initially thought that this attack was a protest in response to an Internet movie that was less than friendly to the Islamic Prophet, Muhammad. This, of course, played well into the fear that many Americans have toward Muslims.

Even Muslims who are also American citizens…

It was later discovered that these were actually two different events. There was a protest about the movie, but the protesters were there to express their dissatisfaction using conventional methods. Al Qaeda hijacked the protest and committed a pre-planned terrorist attack on the embassy. As a result, much of what I am being exposed to on the social networks and in the comments section of various news agencies demands that I address this in context to the concept of “Freedom and Liberty for All.“

Once again, the actions of some dimwitted psychopaths have succeeded in convincing a hugely disproportionate number of American citizens that this behavior is indicative of the entirety of the American Muslim community, and thus, all American Muslims are either terrorists or sympathetic to terrorism. This is not to say that there exist no Muslim extremists in the United States, but there are also Christian extremists here, as well. In fact, there are extremists of almost every ideology you can think of, and some of them have manifestos that are way more direct and pointed as to who deserves to be killed and for whatever bigoted reason their organizations have.

All of “Those People…”

The fact is, for the most part, your average Muslim in the USA are no different from your average Christian. They wake up, go to work, try to get their money to last until the month is over and wonder what the hell they are going to do when the car breaks down, the washing machine stops working, they get sick or any of the gazillion things that happen to your average person, living and working here.

When I hear derogatory comments that include the words “All Muslims” or “All Christians,” I cannot help but to think how horrible it is to replace those words with “All Black People,” “All Women,” and, yes, even “All Atheists.” People reply with verses in the Quran that point to commands for the death of infidels, and yes, it is true that in some areas of our planet there exist radical fundamentalist Muslims who act on these words and commit horrific acts of violence against anyone they feel has demeaned them or their prophet. This does not mean, by any stretch of the imagination, that “All Muslims” feel this way. You can argue the point until the cows come home, but I know enough Muslims that condemn acts of terrorism, bigotry and discrimination.

It’s funny, you know. Some Christian bombs and abortion clinics or Federal buildings or a public event or holds up pictures of dead babies while accosting medical patients as they enter fully legal clinics, or shoots physicians dead, and the general consensus is that they are not “True Christians,” but acting alone on a twisted interpretation of the Bible. Sorry, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Most Christians I know do not support these acts, and the only quarrel I have with them is that they are not vocal enough about it. At least when a radical Muslim does something batshit crazy, mainstream Islam issues report after report trying to let people know that they are not supportive of these actions.

Horrible Holy Books…

Both the Bible and the Quran contain some horrible things, including commands to kill a variety of people for many different offenses, as well as utterly ignorant statements about things that have long since been debunked by science. There are more death-penalty crimes in these books than in the penal codes of any modern country for things as ridiculous as eating shellfish, wearing clothing of mixed fabrics or talking back to your parents. My point is that “Freedom and Liberty for All” applies to everyone. I don’t agree with religious doctrine. Not by a long, long shot. I don’t care where it comes from, either. It’s all bullshit, to me. But the Muslim deserves the same freedoms and liberties that the Christian does, that the atheist does, the Buddhist, the Hindu or anyone else in this country.

Bigotry begets bigotry, and we would do good to remember what happens when our citizenry adopts an attitude of bigotry because of the actions of a specific demographic. We interred tens of thousands of Japanese American citizens in detention camps on US soil during World War II out of fear. These were American citizens.

Don’t fall for it, my friends. All of any one demographic shouldn’t be lambasted for the actions of a few nut cases. That goes for atheists, as well. The worst thing that the mainstream of Islam and Christianity here in these United States can be accused of is indifference. Calling out the entirety of Islam here in the United States for being terrorists or potential terrorists by my fellow atheists disturbs me, Indeed. But when Christians – a group whose holy book demands almost the same divine obedience to kill and oppress, is nothing but sheer hypocrisy.

And as RJ Evans also says, the hypocrisy always reveals the lie.

________________________________________

Special Notices: 

Here’s the Podcast, as heard on this past Saturday’s show. 

Freedom And Liberty For All  

America’s Angriest Atheist, RJ Evans, is fond of pointing out that “the hypocrisy always reveals the lie”.

But it took a comedian on a comedy-themed cable channel to show just how right RJ is!

Jon Stewart took FoxNews to task for their coverage of both the RNC and DNC conventions and exposed their rank double-standard.

No, Fox News is NOT “fair and balanced”.  Their own actions demonstrate that they are nothing less than the unofficial public relations arm for the Christian Nationalist Party (aka the GOP).

For more about the political parties, join David 2 this coming Monday at 8pm ET, 7pm CT for “Brutally Honest”.  And then for more about the hypocrisy revealing their lies, join RJ Evans, David 2, and company for “American Heathen®” this coming Saturday at 8pm ET, 7pm CT.