Friday, December 19, 2008

DW&F: Chocolate Chip Peanut Butter Cookies and Rick Warren

Hello everyone!

You should know the routine by now. If not, go here first.

Daily Win and FAIL!

Win: Chocolate Chip Peanut Butter Cookies!

Cathy made cookies yesterday! This recipe wasn't one of those dry, cardboard-tasting, crappy peanut butter cookie recipes with chocolate chips added. No, this one is more like Toll House chocolate chip cookies with peanut butter added. And since it's that time of year, here's my Saturnalia present to you, the viewer:
Peanut Butter Chocolate Chip Cookies
• 1/2 cup (1 stick) butter, softened
• 1/2 cup chunky or smooth peanut butter
• 1/2 cup granulated sugar
• 1/2 cup brown sugar, firmly packed
• 1 egg
• 1 1/4 cups all-purpose flour
• 1/2 teaspoon baking powder
• 1/2 teaspoon baking soda
• 1/4 teaspoon salt
• 1 cup semisweet chocolate chips
Preheat oven to 375°.
Cream the butter, peanut butter and sugars until light. Add the egg and mix until fluffy.
Blend the flour, baking powder, soda and salt together well. Add these dry ingredients to the butter mixture. Add the chocolate chips.
Drop cookie dough by teaspoonfuls onto lightly greased baking sheets. Bake for 10-12 minutes at 375°.
These are fantastic! And they're even better when you have a kick-ass wife who's willing to make them for you! If you're reading this, Cathy, I love you sweetheart! Oh, what the heck, I love you even if you don't read this. Win!

FAIL: Rick Warren

True story: I used to have a boss named Rick Warren. But that's not who I'm talking about. I'm referring to this butt-munch:

At least with the nutjobs like James Dobson and Fred Phelps, they're open with their ridiculousness and outright hate, respectively. But Warren masks his bigotry behind a friendly, marketable façade. However, it comes out here in this interview.

To him being gay is the same as being angry or shy, which of course means it's simply some emotional problem that can be corrected. Then he claims that he has had "many gay friends" that want to have "multiple sexual partners," which is absolutely utter bullshit for two reasons. One, why would anyone want to be "friends" with someone who thinks he or she is a sinner and is going to hell? Two, if there were people willing to do this, why would they then want to have detailed conversations about their sex lives with that person? I don't go around discussing my sex life with my friends, who certainly wouldn't be judgmental about it if I did, yet we're supposed to believe that a guy who compares gay marriage to sibling marriage, pedophilia, and polygamy has a whole string of gay friends just lining up to ask him for advice on sex?

Then he gets really creepy and says he's "naturally inclined to have sex with every beautiful woman" he sees (the interviewer's reaction was priceless), but that it's not the right thing to do, of course without explaining why it's not the right thing to do. I have no problem with promiscuity provided precautions are used and the involved parties are honest and open about it with each other. But this is just pushing the same old stereotype that only gay people are promiscuous. I know lots of gay people, and none of them are any more promiscuous than any of the hetero people I know.

He says he "reigns in" his "natural impulses." That's fine, but it begs the question: why am I allowed to explore my "natural impulses" with my wife but gay people aren't (with each other, not with my wife)? What's the difference? I've never heard this question answered without referring to an obscure bible passage in Leviticus while simultaneously ignoring the other passages in Leviticus that promoted slavery and condemned people who eat shellfish or cut their sideburns to death by stoning.

Then the icing on the cake is when he claims that gay people repressing themselves is "part of maturity" and "character." This is when his bigotry really shines through, but instead of just ranting and raving about how he thinks gay people are sinners, he just essentially says they're immature and have a bad character, which of course is much more palatable but still marginalizes a whole group of people.

There's also the same old, tired argument about redefining marriage, and he even has the audacity to claim that marriage has always been between a man and a woman, of course completely ignoring thousands of years of concubines and polygamy, as well as the fact that marriage has routinely been "redefined" throughout history. Case in point: our current President-elect would've been a bastard child if his parents were from one of about 20 states because of the anti-miscegenation laws on the books. Fortunately, people decided to "redefine marriage" in order to not legally enforce bigotry, something just over 50% of the voters in California haven't yet learned.

But here's the real kicker: that same President-elect whose parents benefited from the redefinition of marriage invited to his inauguration a guy who's against giving rights to an oppressed minority, one Rick Warren. Obama is not off to a good start, and he hasn't even officially started yet. In fact, he's looking more and more like Bill Clinton by the day, possible even more so than Hillary would've been. FAIL!

fail owned pwned pictures

fail owned pwned pictures
I guess I'll just have to spend the next four (possibly eight) years reminding myself that at least Bush isn't the president.


Labels: , , ,


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home