The segment was about a Christian fitness center (can't remember where exactly, but somewhere in America) and Neil had on as his guests the founder of the center and the owner of capitalistpig.com. At one point the capitalistpig guy was saying he didn't see it as being a very good marketing tactic because he thinks people check their beliefs at the door when deciding things like which gym to work out in. The founder of the center said that she didn't think it was a marketing tactic at all, she was trying to help her Christian sister's do what she felt God helped her to do (lose weight). Capitalistpig retorted that he couldn't see how she could say it wasn't a marketing tactic when it clearly was, when she was "clearly" using her religion as a draw to bring people in.

My first reaction was just, Wow.

Clearly the capitalistpig does not have the slightest clue about what it means to be a Christian. Christians don't EVER "check" their relationship with God. The founder of the center pointed out during the interview that a lot of Christians feel uncomfortable going into certain gyms because of the lyrics of the music played over the loudspeakers. As a Christian I can understand this point and why, all other things equal, a Christian might prefer a gym playing Christian music as opposed to one playing secular music with some offensive lyrics.

The comment made by the capitalistpig about it being a marketing tactic also was very telling to me. This guy could not fathom, could not comprehend the idea of someone running a business and having it be about more than money. This woman stated clearly that she started the fitness center because she felt God gave her the strength to lose weight and she wanted to help other sisters who were struggling with the same issue. She was very earnest on this point but the guy just scoffed at her and announced definitively that this was obviously a marketing tactic.

But, at least they stopped doing the religion bashing intros they had for the first 3 or 4 episodes. Those were really turning me off.

Why do I still watch this show when it makes me feel like I need a hot shower? I'm addicted! I must know if Dana survives cancer or whether Tina will leave Bette for a man. This is like when I got stuck on Days of Our Lives when I was in junior high.

Thus, I am trying to avoid people and situations that make me tense, annoyed, angry and irritated. Unfortunately you can't really avoid traffic or liberals here in Los Angeles.

I seem to be drawing a blank.

Well here's something. As some of you may know I will be going back to school this fall and moving (temporarily) far away from Paul. What most of you do not know is that I am completely and utterly addicted to true crime shows like the FBI Files and New Detectives and Cold Case Files and uh...yeah. Anyway, the point is those shows have made it abundantly clear to me that it is women who live alone that are often the target of brutal attacks, rape, murder, etc., and then Paul's best friend Talbot who used to live in Stockton informed me that Stockton isn't the safest place in the world (ex-murder capital of the country? is this true?) and all this has me wondering: If I end up living off campus alone should I buy a gun? Or will pepper spray suffice? Maybe I'm being paranoid but I'd rather be safe than sorry when it comes to things like rape and murder.

Now I know what you're thinking, I'm a conservative woman why shouldn't I buy a gun? There are several good reasons that I can think of, all relating to the fact that I am prone to accidents and as afraid as I am of being raped or murdered I am also afraid of accidentally shooting myself in the foot.

Inevitably I know there will be a Cheney joke now, so can I just say I love the phrase, "I'd still rather go hunting with Cheney than riding in a car with Ted Kennedy."

Also, why is it Democrats get so indignant when anyone brings up the fact that Kennedy saved himself and left a girl for dead? Why is this "off limits," do they even have an explanation? Or will they admit that they simply think its wrong to bring up any bad behavior of Democrats while Republicans are fair game?

Yes, it is.

Not only does my profile tag me as "married" I also put "housewife" in there somewhere and a picture of me and Paul, and yet a lot of the guys who message me don't even bother with the whole "I just want to be your friend" pretext. At least they're honest, I guess?

It's not that I mind getting messages from strangers but the whole "You're cute, message me" thing gets old. I mean I can just picture them sitting there at their computers late at night copying and pasting the same message to hundreds of girls in every sitting.

I recently decided to remove my political ideology and delink this website from my Friendster profile to further keep my "real life" away from my blog, but at least I got some interesting messages when I had the whole "I think liberals live in a land of rainbows and butterflies where everyone sings kumbaya in a circle, I'd like to live there too but unfortunately that place doesn't exist" quote in my profile. Maybe I'll put it back in there.

Quite a few bloggers have been addressing the silence from the left that truly irrirates me. My favorite article so far is from Mark Steyn (via Michelle Malkin):

Very few societies are genuinely multicultural. Most are bicultural: On the one hand, there are folks who are black, white, gay, straight, pre-op transsexual, Catholic, Protestant, Buddhist, worshippers of global-warming doom-mongers, and they rub along as best they can. And on the other hand are folks who do not accept the give-and-take, the rough-and-tumble of a "diverse" "tolerant" society, and, when one gently raises the matter of their intolerance, they threaten to kill you, which makes the question somewhat moot.

I can't wait to watch some liberal pundit dance on this subject...first a defense of the "Muslim outrage" over the cartoons, followed by a bob-and-weave when O'Reilly or Hannity or whoever brings up their defense of "free speech" when Christianity is disrespected or the Virgin Mary is covered in poop.

But dare to publish some silly cartoons about Mohammed? Man you better get ready to rumble with these "peaceful" folk.

Does this prove to liberals once and for all that the Muslim world is it is now is at odds with both freedom and democracy? Probably not, after all liberals tend to ignore facts that don't align with their preconcieved notions of the world (i.e. only Republicans are bad). But maybe this will be a wake up call to all those who have half a brain in their head. After all, even many of those Muslim leaders considered "reasonable" have pointed to the cartoons as a good reason to limit freedom of the press.

These people do not want a free society, they want a society shaped purely according to their religion. Were are all the liberals? Why aren't they up in arms? Aren't they supposedly the great defenders of freedom of speech and press? Why is it suddenly so quiet on the left side of the aisle? They're not afraid of offending Christians but they're deathly afraid of those Muslims eh? Must be the appeaser's syndrome they suffer from.

Anyway, sorry if that rant wasn't perfectly thought out, I just think it's absolutely nuts how far the Muslim world is taking this and it's totally ridiculous the way the MSM (*cough*CNN*cough*) are rolling over and playing dead. Where is all the commentary from the left? Why aren't they out there telling Muslims that if they want to live in a free society then they'll just have to deal with libs dressing up Mohammed in funny turbins? Bleh.

Michelle Malkin has a great video clip.

On the one hand, you've got the situation with the Danish cartoons that depict the Prophet Mohammad in an unflattering way. The reaction?

In Paris, the daily newspaper France Soir fired its managing editor after it republished the caricatures Wednesday, and in Pakistan protesters marched chanting "Death to Denmark" and "Death to France."

Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan was quoted as saying the cartoons -- one depicting the founder of Islam wearing a turban resembling a bomb --showed press freedom should have its limits

...

"The cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad are an attack on our spiritual values. There should be a limit to press freedom," the state Anatolian news agency quoted Erdogan as telling French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy during talks in Ankara.

...

In continuing protests, Palestinian gunmen shut the European Union office Thursday in Gaza City, writing on the door that the office would remain closed until the Europeans apologize to Muslims, Palestinian security sources told CNN.

Wearing masks, the men -- from Islamic Jihad and the al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the armed wing of Fatah -- fired bullets into the air and one of them read demands.

...

Palestinian officials said the gunmen were threatening to kidnap European workers if the European Union did not apologize.

So basically, masked gunmen are closing down buildings and threatening to kidnap people and Muslim leaders are now calling for limits on freedom of the press.

On the other hand, the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the USA (imagine the guns they could rally) are upset over a cartoon using the image of a severely wounded American soldier and just guess what kind of mayhem they're causing. C'mon, just guess!

They wrote a letter.