Thankfully there will probably be no more Weiner’s wiener pictures released (even though the nightmares remain), and after a leader of the anti-circumcision movement published a blatantly anti-Semitic comic book (called Foreskin Man), the ballot initiative to ban childhood circumcision Santa Monica was dropped. The San Francisco initiative still remains on the ballot.

Sadly the movement against circumcision is not over and Academy Award winning actor Russell Crow, has decided to join in on the “fun” with an anti-circumcision rant on twitter.

A Crowe follower told the Australian celebrity that he was expecting a son soon, and asked for his input on whether he should have his baby circumcised.

Crowe responded harshly, saying that “circumcision is barbaric and stupid. Who are you to correct nature? Is it real that GOD requires a donation of foreskin?”

The actor added that “babies are perfect” when they are born. Crowe later said that he “will always stand for the perfection of babies, I will always believe in God, not man’s interpretation of what God requires.”

Mr. Crowe should know that throwing a telephone at an employee of the Mercer Hotel is barbaric and stupid, circumcision is not, it is part of a both Jewish and Muslim religious practice.

Many Jewish practices do originate from Rabbinical interpretation of what is written in the Torah, such as not eating milk with mean (Rabbis got that from the Torah saying “Do not boil a kid in its mother’s milk)

On the other hand circumcision is directly commanded in the Torah, the five books of Moses. The command for circumcision is in the appears  in  Bereisheet (the Jewish name for the book of Genesis)

You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, as a sign of the covenant between Me and you. At the age of eight days, you shall circumcise every male child born to you throughout the generations …Bereisheet 17:11-1

This is not as Mr. Crowe says an  interpretation of what God wants, but according to Jews and Muslims it is a direct order right there in ink and parchment. From what I understand from my Christian friends,  they too believe that the Torah is the word of God (but order’s such as circumcision apply only to Jews in the “old Testament”)

Where there is interpretation is why God ordered Jews to circumcise their son’s at eight-days-old. One interpretation given by the Rabbis is that males are  not born perfect on purpose.  The reason for circumcision is to give fathers (the parent who is ordered to conduct the ritual) is to allow them to have a greater participation in the act of creation.  We believe that God has a huge role, and the mother’s obviously have the role of developing the baby within her body, through the act of Brit Milah (the circumcision ceremony) dad has the role of adding the final touch, making the boy perfect.

Several followers responded to Crowe’s remarks, using scientific and hygienic explanations to justify circumcision. The actor rebuffed them, saying that “‘human’ science has caused too much damage,” calling the follower “a moron”. In response to claims that circumcision is hygienic the actor scoffed, saying “why don’t you sew up your ass then?”

Maybe Mr. Crow should sew up his fingers before his stupidity continues. It is an established scientific fact that circumcision helps prevent HIV.

The actor pointed out what he believes to be a double standard, saying it is “interesting that female circumcision is widely considered barbaric, while male circumcision is so widely accepted.”

Perhaps it has been a long time since Mr. Crowe saw a woman naked (which may be why he is so cranky), so allow me to refresh his memory….females parts are different than male ones.

The female circumcision argument is often presented by the anti-circumcision forces. Female genital cutting, a controversial practice that usually involves the removal of the clitoris, is illegal in the United States.  Female circumcision  is designed to take away sexual pleasure from women, male circumcision does not reduce sensation (you will have to trust me on that one).

Per the explanation I gave above, according to the Rabbis, it is males who are born imperfect, not females so there is no need for female circumcision. As far as permanent injuries during the practice, thankfully they are very very few and far between (although after my Bris at eight days old, I could not walk for over a year, the same thing happened with my son).

Crowe clarified that he is not anti-Semitic, saying he loves his Jewish friends with their “apples and the honey and the funny little hats”. However, he implored them to stop “cutting” their babies.

He may not be anti-Semitic but he is certainly insensitive. The reader is half expecting him to say  ”some of his best friends wear those funny little hats.”

Crowe’s argument is reminiscent of the Hellenist philosophy behind the Chanukah story.  The Hellenists “worshiped” the human form, it was the essence of perfection. The story of the Maccabees begins with the  Greeks banning circumcision, which led to a bloody revolt. The Romans banned circumcision after the destruction of Jerusalem in the year 70.

Whether they were meant to be anti-Jewish or not, both the SF Ballot initiative and Crowe’s rant,  are fundamentally anti-Semitic,  as is the Dutch ban on kosher slaughter and the movements across Europe to ban kosher meat.

Although I would argue that their intent is more nefarious, even if you give them the benefit of the doubt and believe their intent to be Humanist or Hellenistic the end result is banning key Jewish rituals and practice.

As for Crowe, if he is truly not anti-Semitic,  he should do research on the issue and understand, prior to starting to rant against it. Based on his tweets he either a hater, too stupid to think before he tweets, or simply jealous because he cannot be circumcised.  Because his recent twitter behavior has proven he cannot be circumcised because there is no end to that prick!

Admiral Ackbar is one of my favorite characters in the Star Wars franchise.  He still looks more real than any CGI character today despite being brought to life by 1982 technology.  He also has the immortal line, “It’s a Trap,” when the rebels discover that the Death Star is “fully armed and operational.”

In case you missed it, here’s Ackbar reacting to other “traps.”

Conservatives have walked into a trap of late, or as Michael Steele might say, “have stepped in it.” Why should the liberals, with their rogues gallery of freak shows and incompetents, even sweat it when the Conservatives are too busy fighting with each other?  How much time on blogs, cable news, and Sunday talk-shows is dedicated to Conservatives arguing about the direction of the “party” or challenging each other on the authenticity of their Conservative credentials?

There are really only two core beliefs that you need to be considered a Conservative in my book.  One, as I’ve stated before, is the conviction that personal liberty is paramount.  Two, you don’t look to your enemies for validation.  Unfortunately, a few “Conservatives” fail the test.  These types somehow believe that in-the-tank media reporters and their liberal opponents must validate their beliefs in order for those beliefs to become viable and understandable.  Wrong.  Wrong.  Wrong.  It’s a trap!  You follow that line of logic and the next thing you know, you’re staring at your own robotic hand over a crippled Darth Vader with the Emperor cackling in the background.

I threw up in my own mouth several times watching Conservatives squirm as reporter after reporter asked them to disavow Rush Limbaugh over his completely legitimate, completely American, and completely logical “I hope he fails” comment.  How many liberals were asked to disavow Perez Hilton for calling a woman a “c*#*t” onYouTube?  Crickets.  Crickets.  Crickets.  Nada.

Here’s how it should go down:  The Conservative should say “Well, (Anderson Cooper, Larry King, David Shuster, Chris Matthews), Rush Limbaugh can say whatever he wants.  This is America.  What I think of the comment is irrelevant.  See, when you have a political movement based on personal liberty and independent thought, people speak their mind.  Unlike our opponents, we don’t all take our marching orders from the same source.  We are not the Borg.  Our solutions and ideology are a bit more advanced, intelligent, and intricate than our opponents.  I don’t expect you to understand, because I don’t think you’re that smart or intellectually capable.”  Smack!   Booyah!  The media would stumble back like the Iron Sheik after an Atomic Leg Drop from Hulk Hogan.

You can’t build a house with just a hammer.  You can’t fight a war without air support.  You can’t make a movie without lights and a camera.  There are a million analogies I can think of to say the same thing: you need a lot of tools to get the job done.

There are various categories of public Conservatives.  They all serve a different function.  No one is right.  No one is wrong.  As long as we all focus our arguments within the context of personal liberty and anti-statist ideology, we will pick up Independents and bring some sanity back to our country.

We need axe men like Cheney and Limbaugh.  We need Michelle Malkin and Glenn Beck.  We need Dennis Miller and Greg Gutfeld.  Nobody should be packing his or her bags.  Disagreements between each other are great, but they should be reserved for internal debate and shouldn’t be moderated by a hostile talk show host to the glee of David Axelrod.

Imagine this match-up in large debate hall.  In the audience sits every Independent voter in the country.  On the one side heavyweights like Limbaugh, Cheney, Coulter, Larry Elder, Hannity, O’Reilly, Beck, Malkin, Dennis Miller, Penn Jillette, John Stossel, Greg Gutfeld, Andy Levy, Laura Ingram, Mark Levin, Thomas Sowell, Prager, Lynne Cheney, Tammy Bruce, Christopher Hitchens, Mark Steyn, John Ziegler, and Andrew Breitbart.  On the other side, in slumps Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann, Janeane Garofalo, Sean Penn, David Shuster, Chris Matthews, Maureen Dowd, Arianna Huffington, Larry King, Joy Behar, Rachel Maddow, Jon Stewart, Anderson Cooper, Perez Hilton, Al Sharpton, Barney Frank, Barbara Streisand, and Al Gore.

Look at that fight card.  What are we worried about again?

The second annual Ride 2 Recovery Memorial Challenge is from May 25-30. For the first time, the event started with a cycling clinic featuring Olympic cyclist Wayne Stetina and former Mercury Cycling Team mechanic Scott Moro. With support from cycling professional like Gary Hanson and Neil Stewart, Vietnam vets Jim Penseyres and Duane Wagner, all of the R2R participants had a great deal of knowledge to learn the ins and outs of riding and healing.

The clinic really helped get the R2R participants oriented on their bikes and almost all of them had their riding positions fixed up and this will make for a much more comfortable ride.

The Wounded Warriors that participate in the Ride 2 Recovery events have come from all over the US and almost all service branches are represented. Many of these brave men and women have seen their friends and fellows soldiers not return from Iraq and Afghanistan. Memorial Day is not just another day off.

Memorial Day is a United States federal holiday observed on the last Monday of May (May 25 in 2009). Formerly known as Decoration Day, it commemorates U.S. men and women who died while in the military service. First enacted to honor Union soldiers of the American Civil War (it is celebrated near the day of reunification after the civil war), it was expanded after World War I to include American casualties of any war or military action.

View from Iwo Jima

This R2R ride goes thru some of the most historical areas of our country especially the Civil and Revolutionary War periods. The first stop on the route is Manassas, where the first major battle of the Civil War took place. On the way, the group will go past Mt. Vernon, the home of George Washington.

The ride will kick-off with the National Memorial Parade, where the warriors and the American Legion Riders will be a part of the parade and then head down to Manassas.

This R2R ride is the largest group yet to take part in the ride. Over the next six days, we will bring you their stories.

We really look forward to bringing you all of the action……

Regards,

Ride 2 Recovery
Making a Difference in the Lives of Wounded Warriors
818.888.7091×1
818.710.1453 Fax
www.Ride2Recovery.com

You can also follow the ride by joining our Facebook Ride 2 Recovery group.

Supporters include American Legion Auxiliary, USO, Star Trac, VFW, Otis Spunkmeyer, Sunkist, Giant Bicycles, League of American Bicyclists, Operation Rebound, American Legion Riders, Step Up 4 Vets, California American Legion, Coca-Cola, Shimano, Veltec Sports, Hincapie Sports, Alternative Vehicles, Hansen’s, Clif Bar, Rudy Project, DeFeet, Park Tool, Speedplay, ProMax, Chamois Butt’r, CytoSport, and Bicycling Magazine. R2R is an America Supports You Homefront Group.

The unveiling of OCO capped-off a terror euphemism trifecta for the administration.  Previously, the Justice Department scrapped the ghastly “enemy combatant” to describe war prisoners in favor of the much more uplifting, “detainee.”  Additionally, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano─who may be the only member of the administration more intellectually troubled than Tim Geitner─rebranded terrorism as “man-caused disaster.” (To review:  mail carrier; police officer; business person; but man-caused disaster… maybe the errant sexism has something to do with Ms. Napolitano’s romantic leanings.)  

Ever sensitive to the plight of our illegally invading friends from the south, Ms. Napolitano also refuses to use the term “illegal immigrant.” In an administration where the Secretary of Treasury is a tax cheat, it’s only fitting that the Security of Homeland Security does not wish to tarnish the image of people who illegally raid our country and pillage our resources.

Words are very important to B. Hussein Obama─they don’t describe the narrative, they structure it.  In college, he transformed himself from Barry—a hackneyed disgrace of a name befitting lounge singers and kid actors—to Barack, instantly making him exotic and interesting (a Barry snorting coke is a hapless junkie, but a Barack snorting coke is a conflicted soul seeking to open his mind, especially if he’s wearing a kente kufi hat while snorting).  During the campaign, two little, but very important, bumper-sticker and t-shirt friendly words helped solidify his candidacy.  Thanks to Hope and Change, Barry didn’t have to leak anyone’s kinky, sealed divorce papers to the media to get elected this time.

When more than one word has to be produced, Barry defers to his teleprompter to ensure rigid semantic integrity and to minimize his brain’s default proclivity of generating “uhhhhhs” and “ummmms.” In a recent speech before a requisitely awed group of business leaders, the teleprompter displayed the following gem, which The Father of the $1.2 trillion stimulus package voiced with contemplative gravitas:  “I don’t like the idea of spending more government money, nor am I interested in expanding government’s role.” The statement wasn’t followed by a “NOT!” or a “PSYCH!” or even a “FACE!” Just more contemplative gravitas.

In Barry’s bizzaro world, reality in and of itself doesn’t matter.  Words make the reality. Words matter. Teleprompters matter.  The biggest spending bill in American history never happened if Barry calls it a “stimulus.” But if it did happen, Barry never agreed to the bonuses.  But if he did agree to the bonuses, he did so unknowingly.

In the first half of the 20th century, Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf cobbled together a theory of linguistic determinism and linguistic relativity which would eventually become the unwitting foundation of the PC movement.  In a nutshell, Sapir-Whorf believed that language determines thought, not vice versa.  So call a prison a “correctional facility,” and the inmates should be so overcome by the warm fuzzies that they wouldn’t rape each other as much as when they thought they were stuck in a mere “prison.” Likewise, call welfare expansion a “tax cut” and more people will vote for you.  I doubt Barry read much Sapir/Whorf, but many of the same ideas are discussed in different terms by his favorite community organizer, Saul Alinsky, and his favorite unicorn wrangler, Karl Marx.

Marx believed words may be used to confuse and control the dolts, rubes and twits who constitute the governed.  An effective leader could introduce new words─or alternative definitions and combinations of old words─into the lexicon, and thereby induce the unlearning of old belief systems and the learning of new ones. Change the culture through words─one of the planks of the Cultural Marxist platform.  As Fred Barnes points out, BHO has already redefined “fleeting”: the quarter century of unprecedented economic growth which began in the first term of the Reagan presidency was “fleeting prosperity” according to our noble leader. “The Reagan Recovery is urban legend, my children, now don your purple Nikes and listen unto me…”

Moreover, the War on Terror was that dummy Bush.  General Secretary of the Central Committee President Obama doesn’t deal with wars or terror, he deals with contingencies and operations.  You say, “potato,” I say, “potato.” You say, “that sleeveless dress really shows off Michelle’s toned arms,” I say, “pre-menopausal hot flash relief.” You say, “sensitive language soothes the people,” I say, “social engineering through verbal eugenics.”

To distance the current administration from the words of the former administration is predictable, to do so from the words of the Founding Fathers is creepy.  Whether conscious or not, the end game of the current administration is to redefine the US Constitution in its own socialist, state-must-save-the-proles image. Now hopechange means abhorrent stimulus and bailout packages.  Soon it may mean government-run health care or restrictions on how much gas and electricity citizens can use.  The more Barry’s Obonics seep out of the teleprompter and into pop culture, the easier the administration’s task to remake America becomes.

Maybe Barry was stoned the day the English teacher pointed out that George Orwell was a warning, not a blueprint.

It’s like saying:  “I love love films about the Middle East… “Ishtar” is my favorite!”

DC’s greatest icon, Superman, one of the handful of fictional characters known throughout the world, no longer seems to be too proud of America. He still finds occasion to mention he fights for truth and justice, but no longer finishes that famous line with, “…and the American way.” Then again, according to the most recent movie, he’s become a creepy stalker and a deadbeat dad, so maybe not openly linking himself to the American ideal isn’t such a bad thing.

Marvel’s legendary patriot Captain America, in a comic book story published shortly after 9/11 spent a good part of the issue apologizing to the super terrorist he was battling about all of the terrible things America did in its pursuit of the cold war against the Soviets. “(But) we’ve changed. We’ve learned,” he whines. “My people never knew!” Then again, at least ol’ Cap was fighting the bad guy, so maybe there’s still hope.

Except that In another later appearance, in a different title (same company) Captain America willingly goes along with a government cover-up of a incident that resulted in massive civilian casualties. He not only goes along with it, he doesn’t even bat an eye when asked to do so.

Then again Cap’s dead now, so problem solved, right?

Those are but two examples of the slow but steady degradation of the American superhero over the years. The ’super’ is still there, more so than ever, but there seems to be a slow leak in the ‘hero’ part. There’s even a term for it, coined by (I’m not sure who, but it might have been one of two respected comics journalists) either Dirk Deppey or Tom Spurgeon. Folks, we’re smack dab in the midst of the Age of Superhero Decadence. Old fashioned ideals of courage and patriotism, backed by a deep virtue and unshakable code, seem to be… well, old fashioned.

Full disclosure time. I’m at least partially to blame for this steady chipping away of the goodness of our comic book heroes. In my very first comic series Elementals, first published close to thirty years ago, I was eager to update old superhero tropes, making my characters more real, edgier, darker — less heroic and a good deal more vulgar than the (then) current standard. Elementals was one of the first of what was later dubbed the ‘grim and gritty’ movement in comic books. And to complicate my confession, I’m still proud of much of that early work. At least my crass and corrupted Elemental heroes still fought, albeit imperfectly, for the clear good, against the clear evil.

What can I say? When I was young and foolish I was young and foolish. In hindsight I should have realized then what is so obvious today. In any industry, especially one as inbred and insular as the comics world, one excess feeds another. Of course we didn’t think of it as excess. We called it stretching the boundaries. Pushing the envelope. Doing a bigger and better car chase in this one than they did in that one. And every other cliche we could summon to our defense. “If they got away with having their hero accidentally kill his opponent in that book, then we’re going to outdo them by having our guy purposely kill someone in ours!” And so on, until today an onscreen (and quite graphic) disemboweling of a superhero’s opponent is not only allowed, it’s no big thing.

Don’t get me wrong. All is not completely dire in the comic book industry. For the most part superhero stories still involve the good guys battling the bad guys for identifiably good causes. And even in that story mentioned above where Captain America participates in the sinister cover-up, under the pen of the same writer, a few issues later he resurrects a shade of his former self (summons his inner John Wayne if you will) and tells an evil alien invader he’s fighting, “Surrender? Surrender??? You think this letter on my forehead stands for France?” (The letter is an ‘A’ for America, of course.) Good one, Cap.

Along with many others, I’ve come to the conclusion that we’ve gone too far, but not irreversibly so.

So, finally to the point of this note. Borrowing some wisdom from the famous parable of the mote in one fellow’s eye, and the whole beam in another’s, it would be the height of hypocrisy for me to make any call for our industry to clean up its act, until I’ve first cleaned up my own. I’ve already made some progress down that road. In my run writing the Robin series (of Batman fame), I made sure both Batman and Robin were portrayed as good, steadfast heroes, with unshakable personal codes and a firm grasp of their mission. I even got to do a story where Robin parachuted into Afghanistan with a group of very patriotic military superheroes on a full-scale, C130 gunship-supported combat mission. And in my short run on the Shadowpact series I kept to the same standard (but with less success as several story details were editorially imposed).

But ’some’ progress isn’t enough. It’s time to make public a decision I’ve already made in private. I’m going to shamelessly steal a line from Rush Limbaugh, who said, concerning a different matter, “Go ahead and have your recession if you insist, but you’ll have to pardon me if I choose not to participate.” And from now on that’s my position on superhero comics. Go ahead and have your Age of Superhero Decadence, if you insist, but you’ll have to pardon me if I no longer choose to participate.

No more superhero decadence for me. Period. From now on, when I write within the superhero genre I intend to do it right. And if I am ever again privileged to be allowed to write Superman, you can bet your sweet bootie that he’ll find the opportunity to bring back “and the American way,” to his famous credo.

For now, I invite others in my business to follow suit, as their own consciences dictate. We’ll talk more about this later.

As I said above, not all comic stories are about superheroes. Comics are a medium, not a genre. There’s still plenty of room for gray areas, stories of moral ambiguity, and the eternal struggle of imperfect people trying to find their way in a bleak and indifferent world. I plan to continue all of that and more in my Fables series. But for me at least the superhero genre should be different, better, with higher standards, loftier ideals and a more virtuous — more American — point of view.

Call this my mission statement. Or even my pledge.