Dumprick in 2006

The Seed editorial staff want to know how we're voting in the upcoming election. I try to avoid politics on this blog -- not because I don't have an opinion, but because I'd rather write about science. Here's what they want to know:

What's the most important local political race to you this year (as a citizen, as a scientist)?

As much as I would love to wax eloquently on issues of local politics, I've got a statewide race on my mind.

i-879faa059980f7303a5e2077204c979f-dumprick.jpg

You see, Rick "Man on Dog1" Santorum is one of my US Senators. Zuska is also suffering from this same condition. Hopefully, come Tuesday, the Dog Fucker won't be representing us in the US Senate. The man is anti-science, anti-reason, and pro-willful ignorance. My neighbor's pet cat could be running against the Dog Fucker and I'd still vote against the Dog Fucker.


1- The nickname comes from this interview. Here's what my Senator said:

Every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. Why? Because society is based on one thing: that society is based on the future of the society. And that's what? Children. Monogamous relationships. In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be.

More like this

Today ScienceBlogs launched a new sponsored blog, Food Frontiers. The sponsor is PepsiCo. Here's the description of what the blog is going to be about from its inaugural post by Sb overlord Evan Lerner: On behalf of the team here at ScienceBlogs, I'd like to welcome you to Food Frontiers, a new…
We haven't had a good navel-gazing kerfuffle around here in a while, but not to worry-- Bayblab comes to the rescue with a broadside against the current state of science blogging, as epitomized by ScienceBlogs: If you examine the elephant in the room, ScienceBlogs, the trend is maintained: politics…
As I like to say, when it comes to science debates, the public is far more likely to be miserly in reaching a judgment than fully informed. Most citizens are cognitive misers relying heavily on information short cuts and heuristics to make up their minds about a science controversy, often in the…
I know some of the others (among them Jason) have talked about this, but I thought I would mention it. The May 4th issue of Cell has an article by Laura Bonetta about scientific blogging. Money quote: The concept of scientists reaching out to a lay audience is not new. "Scientists are an…

I guess Ol' Rick's knowledge of human relationships doesn't extend far in time or miles. Can the man even spell "polygamy"?

The institution of marriage as he thinks of it in the USA (the "nuclear family") is AFAICR barely 100 years old. Used to be that the kids had very low expectation that both parents would live to see them reach maturity (let alone they themselves getting that far), and this led to many forms of cohabating units that included child-rearing.Has done throughout history. The Mayflower Puritans were no paragons in this regard either, nor the founding fathers, so there goes his "traditional" adjective. So he, as it appears do the rest of the fundamentalist right, subscribes to what Sociologist Judith Stacey, author of "In the Name of the Family," calls "sitcom sociology."

By david1947 (not verified) on 05 Nov 2006 #permalink

So he, as it appears do the rest of the fundamentalist right, subscribes to what Sociologist Judith Stacey, author of "In the Name of the Family," calls "sitcom sociology."

You have to wonder about some of those sitcom fathers though. It seems that Ward Cleaver never knew where the Beaver was.

By Ick of the East (not verified) on 05 Nov 2006 #permalink

Hello, I'm sorry for posting on your blog but I have a stupid question :) What does Flaucinauci Hilipilification mean? :)

By Victoria Fox (not verified) on 10 Nov 2006 #permalink