For Certain Reasons

Here is a piece I wrote in February of '08, in case anyone was wondering why I despise Mr. Scandal-of-the-Moment so.

Ugh.

A few days ago I received a response to the email I sent to my jackassed representative about HR 888:

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to affirming our nation's Judeo-Christian heritage. I appreciate hearing from you.

No, seriously - don't dilly-dally around. Just piss me off in the very first sentence with your pathetic attempt at sarcasm. Bag of douche.

As you know, Representative Randy Forbes of Virginia introduced H.Res. 888 on December 18, 2007. I have cosponsored this resolution, which would affirm the significant role that religion and faith have played in the establishment of our country. H.Res. 888 has been referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform for further review.

I know what it is, asshat. That's why I wrote you in the first place. And no, it's not about "affirming the significant role that religion and faith have played in the establishment of our country." It's about revising history to insert christian influence where it never before existed, and ignoring the dominance of classical liberalism in creating a representative democratic republic.

The importance of Judeo-Christian values on America's history should not be underestimated.

No, it shouldn't. Let's talk about how we could have eliminated slavery at the very beginning of our young nation, yet didn't because the bible clearly sanctioned it.

Yet in the public square, religion has been maligned by the courts to the point where the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the Pledge of Allegiance.

Really!?! Struck it down wholesale? Like no one can ever say the Pledge EVER? Or could it be that the court thought, even with the phrase "under god" removed, it was kind of ridiculous and antithetical to the notion of personal freedom to make any declaration of allegiance mandatory?

I will oppose any legislation that seeks to remove our country's religious heritage from the public square.

Um...okay. I'm not aware of any such legislation...just trying to get you not to support an inane affirmation of revisionist history...but whatever you need to make you feel secure, I guess...

Thank you for keeping in touch with me. If I may be of assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me again. I also encourage you to visit my Web site, which may be found on-line at www.Souder.House.gov.
Sincerely,
Mark E. Souder
Member of Congress

Thank you sir, for being so completely predictable.

Okay, that stupid letter aside, here are my other reasons for despising Mark Souder:

1. He always seems to appear on camera for events that have little or no direct bearing on his constituents. "Hi! Mark Souder here, reporting live from Saddam Hussein's haggard spider-hole!" "Hi! Mark Souder here, looking out for Indiana's MLB interest at the Clemens hearing and on ESPN!"
2. Likewise, he proposes legislation with the same disregard for relevance to Northeast Indiana. "Let's put Reagan on EVERYTHING!" "Let's get millions for a 'WWII Victory Museum,' because nothing would honor veterans more than housing disparate junk (like the Batmobile) in a crappy pole building in Auburn, complete with a splashy sign that would make the average truck stop look classy by comparison!"
3. Of course, I'm all about freedom of religion. Mark Souder exercised his by claiming "Conscientious Objector" status when his country asked him to serve. Why, then, would he keep voting to send other people to do the fighting and dying and limb-losing that was so wrong for him to do himself?

Please let a viable democrat run against this idiot - whoever it is has my full support.

I'm really trying hard not to revel in this, considering there are staff members whose careers are likely now in limbo, and an ill wife who deserves our sympathy.  However, I couldn't be happier to see this backwards, out-of-touch, toxic politician out of office.  Good riddance.