Buy Xanax Without Prescription Best Prices Guaranteed

Lewis Black is an angry, shouting comedian. You might recognize him from his appearances on The Daily Show. He took some time to review the major issues of 2006 and grapple with Christmas. I'm not sure if this counts as yet another salvo in the ongoing War on Christmas (he hates it) or a brave flanking maneuver from an unlikely ally (he hates the rampant commercialization of it). Perhaps if he had read our guide to fighting the War on Christmas, he would be able to make less ambiguous pronouncements. [youtube]PL8SCSz42us[/youtube] Also, the paddle is getting shorter. [youtube]nB_vKh9oye4[/youtube]

[youtube]UuXpysYEhgA[/youtube] Don't mistake him for Steven Hawkins. This is Scientist and Atheist Richard Dawkins.

Since many of our troops are committed to the War in Iraq, we find ourselves once again facing an even more dangerous situation here at home. That's right, the War on Christmas. Because the politically correct mainstream media refuses to cover this silent scourge, it's a little-known fact that the War on Christmas now accounts for more deaths in the United States than any other single cause except for diseases and misfortunes. Every time the clerk at the Seven-Eleven says "happy holidays" instead of "merry Christmas," it is a terrorist attack akin to flying a building into a plane, except this happens 1000 times every day. So what can you do to survive this trying ordeal (and maybe kick some butt back)? Here are five tips for surviving the War on Christmas: 1. Remind everyone that America is a Christian nation, founded by Christians on Christian moral standards (as Jesus said, "If they raise the tax on tea again, I'm going to fucking riot!"). They have no choice but to celebrate Christmas, and wish you a merry one. It's in the Constitution... or the Bible maybe... whatever, same thing. 2. Build a Yuletide fallout shelter. You can find construction plans for a sturdy backyard bomb shelter for sale via mail order - check the back pages of a 1966 Popular Science magazine. When the big one hits, it won't be the godless atheists you are fighting - it will be your own neighbors. Stock plenty of provisions such as egg nog, canned Christmas Goose and mistletoe. When the evil radiation of agnosticism begins to clear, send out a dove and do not leave the shelter until it returns with an olive branch. 3. Refuse to shop at any big-box retailer whose employees do not vigorously and specifically bombard you with Christmas blessings. Remember, multi-billion dollar corporations have feelings and care about you as a customer - going to Best Buy instead of Circuit City really makes a difference in the world. Boycott any store with a "Season's Greetings" banner, except for the big sale next Sunday, because seriously, I heard they will have this DVD player for like $29 and they will only have 10 per store so I'm going to camp out Saturday night. 4. Don't forget the true meaning of Christmas. A lot of secular humanists and other fascists will blather on about the spirit of giving, the importance of charity, fellowship and good will towards your fellow man, and other hippy garbage. Also, Santa Claus Frosty the Snowman are not the reason for the season. The true meaning of Christmas is how important it is that Jesus' mom did not have sex before he was born. This is very important. 5. This last tip is absolutely the most important thing you can do this holiday season to survive the War on Christmas: whine and cry about it day and night. Bitch and moan to your friends, family and coworkers. If you have your own cable news show, talk about how offended you are, and how the liberals have gone too far this time, and how political correctness is sending America down a slippery slope toward Sodom and Gomorrah and Maoism. For god's sake, write letters to the editor of your local paper! Construct unfunny "observational humor" jokes to point out how ironic it is when liberals oppress Christians in the name of multiculturalism (BTW you don't understand irony). Strain to work in that zinger that your golf buddy faxed you in 1993 about 'Billary' Clinton, make relevant pop cultural references to the ACLU and feminists! Pontificate over and over about how much better things were in the good old days, when every five and dime had a big, gory crucifix on the wall and we went downtown to see the department store displays but then we saw a black person once in 1973 so we moved far, far out to the suburbs and I hear they are opening a Country Kitchen isn't that exciting! Why don't you call, what am I, chopped liver? You kids get off my lawn! Remember, when a cashier making $6 an hour doing a boring, repetitive job is required by company policy to numbly acknowledge your presence, and they don't do it in your preferred manner, you are being oppressed! You should feel indignant - who will protect Christianity if not you? It's not like you're part of the overwhelming majority. It's not like all three branches of government at the federal, state, and local level are dominated by Christians. You are the scrappy underdog in this Culture War (by Bill O'Reilly), imagine a Hanukkah boot stomping on the face of humanity for all eternity! Thanks to Business Week for bringing this issue to my attention.

Newt Gingrich, former Congressman and possible 2008 presidential candidate spoke at the Nackey S. Loeb First Amendment Award Dinner last Monday. In his speech, Gingrich explained that in order to fight terrorists, we will need to cut off their freedom of speech.

"My view is that either before we lose a city, or if we are truly stupid after we lose a city, we will adopt rules of engagement that we use every technology we can find to break up their capacity to use the Internet, to break up their capacity to use free speech, and to go after people who want to kill us, to stop them from recruiting people before they get to reach out and convince young people to destroy their lives while destroying us."

On Tuesday, conservative writer and radio host Dennis Prager wrote abut the upcoming oath of office by Keith Ellison, the newly-elected Congressman from Minnesota. Ellison is a Muslim, and he is planning on swearing on the Koran instead of the Bible. Prager voiced his disapproval.

"When all elected officials take their oaths of office with their hands on the very same book, they all affirm that some unifying value system underlies American civilization. If Keith Ellison is allowed to change that, he will be doing more damage to the unity of America and to the value system that has formed this country than the terrorists of 9-11."

Liberal bloggers are predictably up in arms. Many writers have commented on the somewhat strained appeals to the threat of terrorism, saying that Gingrich and Prager are using scare tactics instead of rational arguments. Plenty of posts point out the irony of speaking out against free speech at a First Amendment award ceremony, and many have pointed out the logic of Ellison swearing on the holy book he actually believes in. Some conservative see things differently. But I won't comment either way along those lines, because at the heart of their arguments, both Prager and Gingrich are right. I agree with them. At least, I agree with their basic premise. Democracy, even representative democracy, is scary. They are correct -- freedom of speech and freedom of religion are difficult. This is an important lesson that I wish all Americans would learn: our Constitution, our form of government, our very way of life is putting you at risk every hour of every second of every day. If we allow anyone to say just about anything, some people might say bad things. Hurtful, dangerous things. Things we don't agree with. If we allow anyone to believe whatever they want, some people will challenge the beliefs we hold most sacred! What if a terrorist creates a web page that convinces others to attack America? What if Ellison, or someone like him, is so eloquent, so charismatic, that average, Christian Americans convert to Islam en mass? What if the majority of voters elect a person who turns out to be untrustworthy or deceitful? But there is a point where I begin to disagree with Gingrich, Prager, President Bush, and possibly a large percentage of the population: I am willing to accept the risks. I think the risks are well worth the rewards. I am willing to accept the risks of living in a free society. I'm not asking for a plane to crash into my house or soliciting an anthrax-laden envelope, but I am willing to live with the possibility that these things will happen, because I believe in free speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion. Some times you just have to stand up for what you think is right. I cannot fault Gingrich or Prager's arguments if they are not willing to stand up, if they aren't willing to take the risks, and if they don't believe in freedom or representative democracy. Perhaps it is just too scary for them--these frightening, terrifying possibilities. I wouldn't ask a coward to defend liberty any more than I would ask an acrophobic to walk a tightrope. I also think the risks are well worth the rewards. If we allow people to believe and say anything that they want, we increase the chance that new ideas, better ideas, and more valuable ideas are created and propagated. I suspect (although this is far from proven) that these freedoms are the reason why the United States has been so successful, and I think it is telling that the countries with the highest standards of living have similar freedoms. To be quite honest, the risks aren't even that bad. In fact, in countries with representative governments and free market economies, you are 390 times more likely to die in a car crash than in a terrorist attack. In 2001, so many people died in car crashes in the U.S. that the terrorists would have had to have a 9-11 level attack every 26 days to keep up. If the terrorists could pull of a 9-11 attack every year, you would still be more likely to die walking across the street than in an attack. I'm not even sure what material risks Prager imagines - he does mention that if Ellison can swear an oath on the Koran, then a Jew could swear on the Torah and an atheist could swear on Voltaire. I have a hard time quantifying that. He worries it is "damaging to the fabric of American civilization," but does not say what kind of fabric this is - apparently it is not woven from the Bill of Rights or Article VI of the Constitution. It's not surprising that Gingrich, Prager and others are bad at assessing risks, people are hard-wired to overestimate some dangers over others. But I would suggest to them, that if they are so afraid, that they should consider advocating the abolition of the automobile, or arguing for strict enforcement against jaywalking. If they think prior restraint, instituting state religion, and even waterboarding are valid methods to combat the threat of terrorism, surely they would agree to even harsher methods to lessen car crashes. Personally, I would say that we should definitely devote some time, effort, and money to fighting terrorism - if terrorists are using the Internet, then we should train our military and police to investigate and gather evidence and intelligence effectively using the Internet. But even if Gingrich could guarantee we could stop all attacks (and prevent any damage to the cotton-polyester weave of our civilization) by suspending these rights, I would not want to do so. I guess I'm just not that big of a wuss.

So, do you believe in God?  This video will tell you why you shouldn't.  Watch it.  Or don't. But if you don't, Santa will know.  He knows who is naughty and who is nice. [youtube]GxA8_NIxQZc[/youtube]