Latest Activity

Doone commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"I don't really understand this but i assume due to global warming, Canada will have more…"
15 hours ago
Mrs.B commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"Quite appropriate right now."
16 hours ago
Stephen commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"I like the welcome to the USA cartoon Mrs B"
16 hours ago
Mrs.B commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"Duh porr widdle guy."
16 hours ago
Doone commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"#CoronaDon The "woe is me" president."
16 hours ago
Mrs.B commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
Mrs.B commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"He doesn't give a damn."
Doone commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"Scump is incompetent  YOU HAD ONE JOB TODAY.  "
Doone commented on Michel's group The Daily Cosmos or Interesting Facts about the Universe
"Matt Baker creates helpful visual guides that condense thousands, of years of history. His poster…"
Doone commented on Doone's group World History before that Idiot Took Power
"The actual worst year in history was 536 CE and not…"
Doone commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"There is the potential now for Scump to kill up to 10 million in the USA with the Scump…"
Mrs.B commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
Doone commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"Well done typo."
Mrs.B commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"Figuring people out is a lost cause."
Stephen commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"If I were to live a thousand years I truly wouldn't understand why people vote against their…"
Mrs.B commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"Not to mention younger."
Stephen commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"I wouldn't count our chickens just yet. I have this nagging doubt that Biden could screw…"
Doone commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"There was a man? named Scump, He gave the world a giant dump, The smell was so bad,  It made…"
Mrs.B commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"Well Neal said before the 2016 election that scump would NEVER get elected, & look where you…"
Doone commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News
"The odds are against Scump  The Economist predicts Dem landslide, swung by Dems taking back…"

We are a worldwide social network of freethinkers, atheists, agnostics and secular humanists.

Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News


Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News

USA/Li'l Trumpistan & WORLD NEWS affecting all of us on Earth with an emphasis on the influence of religion and stupidity.

Location: #world
Members: 61
Latest Activity: 15 hours ago

Global Voices

Discussion Forum

So frightening!

Started by Mrs.B. Last reply by Mrs.B May 10. 2 Replies

After weeks with coronavirus, a sick woman wonders when it will end - The Washington Post ‘How long can a heart last like this?’I’ve hardly moved from this couch in weeks, but right now my heart rate monitor says I’m at 132. That’s double my normal.…Continue

How do you see the gradual easing of the lockdown laws happening in countries other then the US

Started by Stephen. Last reply by Davy May 1. 6 Replies

How is everyone. i hope you're doing ok and keeping well. The UK government has just extended the lockdown for a further three weeks. I unlike some people I understand the reasoning behind this decision, but I have to admit that my government has to…Continue

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion - Unless you live in Indiana.

Started by Neal. Last reply by JeanMarie May 10, 2019. 39 Replies

Indiana, being the Alabama of the north, is front and center this week. Governor with presidential ambitions Mike Pence signed into law the "Religious Freedom" act. Basically vilified by all those who are part of the thinking human race, it is just…Continue

Tags: pence, mike, freedom, religious, Indiana

The IPA and the Heartland Institute

Started by Davy. Last reply by Chris Jan 15, 2018. 1 Reply

Institute of Public Affairs.And Heartland Institute Link.From the AU's ABC.Last week's revelations about the Heartland Institute, probably the most…Continue

Tags: Institute, Heartland, IPA, Climate, Denial

Ethics? We don't need no damn ethics.

Started by Neal. Last reply by Chris Feb 15, 2017. 11 Replies

House Republicans secretly vote to gut Office of Congressional EthicsLet's get this party started! In a secret vote held behind closed doors…Continue

Tags: board, gone, ethics, independent, universe

The Proceeds of Corruption

Started by Davy. Last reply by Stephen Mar 2, 2014. 17 Replies

This is inside the former President of Ukraine Victor Yanukovich's residence.Here is another link to it from  here …Continue

Tags: residency, opulence, Ukraine, President

China Launches Hypersonic Missile Test, Downplays Fears

Started by Davy. Last reply by Lester Unega Waya Jan 19, 2014. 1 Reply

China's recent test of a hypersonic vehicle should not unduly alarm the United States or any other nation, Chinese military officials say.The test of China's new "…Continue

Michigan Senators Write God Resolution

Started by Neal. Last reply by archaeopteryx Jan 10, 2014. 5 Replies

Ah, MI, so disappointing. My state has been hijacked by the reality challenged.Posted on January 8, 2014 by admin They’re back. All rested-up and ready to enact critical new laws and measures — Michigan legislators are raring to get down to the…Continue

Tags: senators, michigan, resolution, god, the

Comment Wall

Nice Comment

You need to be a member of Humans of Earth and an Imbecile Named Scump News to add comments!

Comment by Doone on March 1, 2012 at 6:45am

But They Hate Him, Right?


If you listen to the on-going political conversation in Washington, Israelis hate President Obama and are pining for a Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney to take the White House, destroy Iran and generally make the world a happy place again. But a new poll paints a very different picture.

For starters, the poll shows that when it comes to the coming presidential election itself Jewish Israelis prefer President Obama to all four of the remaining Republican candidates. Mitt Romney gets closest — Obama 32%, Romney 29%. Santorum does the worst — Obama 34%, Santorum 21%.

Ironically (or perhaps not ironically — who knows?), when the poll was opened up to all Israelis (i.e., Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs), Mitt ties Obama.

As you can see, the poll found very high numbers of undecideds, which you’d expect when talking about the leadership of another country. But the really interesting data comes on the question of an attack on Iran — particularly the level of support if it’s done without the sign-off of the United States.

Here’s the breakdown.

19% of Jewish Israelis support a strike against Iran even without the backing of the United States.

42% say they support only if there is US support for the move.

32% say they don’t support it under any circumstances.

The big takeaway seems still in tune with the basic strategic vision

The poll was conducted by Shibley Telhami, Brookings Nonresident Senior Fellow and the Anwar Sadat Professor for Peace and Development at the University of Maryland. The poll itself is online here.

Comment by Doone on February 29, 2012 at 6:29pm


104133389_ad035087991-300x225Julie Sedivy in over at The Crux:

Keith Chen, an economist from Yale, makes a startling claim in an unpublished working paper: people’s fiscal responsibility and healthy lifestyle choices depend in part on the grammar of their language.

Here’s the idea: Languages differ in the devices they offer to speakers who want to talk about the future. For some, like Spanish and Greek, you have to tack on a verb ending that explicitly marks future time—so, in Spanish, you would say escribo for the present tense (I write or I’m writing) and escribiré for the future tense (I will write). But other languages like Mandarin don’t require their verbs to be escorted by grammatical markers that convey future time—time is usually obvious from something else in the context. In Mandarin, you would say the equivalent of I write tomorrow, using the same verb form for both present and future.

Chen’s finding is that if you divide up a large number of the world’s languages into those that require a grammatical marker for future time and those that don’t, you see an interesting correlation: speakers of languages that force grammatical marking of the future have amassed a smaller retirement nest egg, smoke more, exercise less, and are more likely to be obese. Why would this be? The claim is that a sharp grammatical division between the present and future encourages people to conceive of the future as somehow dramatically different from the present, making it easier to put off behaviors that benefit your future self rather than your present self.

Posted by Robin Varghese at 04:30 PM | Permalink 

Comment by Doone on February 29, 2012 at 6:28pm


Baiocchi_37.1_handsGianpaolo Baiocchi and Ernesto Ganuza in Boston Review:

[The movement] 15-M has evolved to become a new political subject, distinct from the original Internet-based group—Democracia Real Ya, or Real Democracy Now (DRY)—that organized the mobilization of May 15, when about 20,000 people gathered in Puerta del Sol. Three months earlier, on a Sunday night in February, ten people met in a Madrid bar to began planning the event. They had already been exchanging opinions online about the political and economic situation in Spain. Their meeting ended with both a slogan—“Real Democracy Now: we are not goods in the hands of politicians and bankers”—and plans to hold a demonstration the week before the municipal elections of May 22.

Although DRY targeted unemployment and mortgage reforms, the main message was not about the economic crisis but about the breakdown of political accountability and representation. Some commentators on the left criticized this message as insufficiently radical, but more than 500 organizations and movements supported the May 15 event, even though DRY rejected official collaboration with any political party, union, or other expression of institutionalized political ideology.

The gathering was a success. The widespread disaffection of Spanish citizens took center stage at one of the nation’s most visible sites.

That was supposed to be it.

But not all of the participants left the plaza. Initially about 50 decided to stay. By midnight, this group had dwindled to just over twenty. They decided to spend the night in the square. Most of the holdouts did not belong to any social movement; they were not seasoned activists or even members of DRY. They stayed, some of them said, because they were “tired of demonstrations that finish happily and then: nothing.”

Posted by Robin Varghese at 04:07 PM | Permalink 

Comment by Doone on February 29, 2012 at 10:53am

From Wonkette

Not at all a whiny prickSmegma-lipped poutmonster Rick Santorum, continuing his streak of saying only and at all times sensible and logically sound things, reminded Americans today that it was President B. HUSSEIN Obama who retroactively caused the housing crash because of how he is a Gaia-worshipping lesbian Wiccan dildonic priestess who hates America, and low gas prices, and Jesus. Obama is also a time traveler, because he went back to 2008 before he was even elected and caused the financial collapse. Witches c

Comment by Neal on February 28, 2012 at 10:53am

Corseted Minds: Does Fear of Irrelevance Send Conservative Men Fleeing to the Victorian Age?

If you focus on the utilitarian value of human beings, you may find yourself at some point nervously glancing in the mirror.

February 28, 2012

In the last 50 years, American women have finally been able to reliably earn a living, thus rendering men economically unnecessary. Women are outstripping men in education. We’re breaking the glass ceiling. Childbirth out of wedlock no longer carries disgrace. There’s enough sperm stashed away in banks to promulgate the human race indefinitely. On a biological level, modern science has debunked the Adam’s rib story about the female being a derivative of the male.

Still more shattering, there’s even worry that the Y chromosome is in danger of extinction. At the very least, it has seen better days. As the New York Times recently reported:

“Men, or at least male biologists, have long been alarmed that their tiny Y chromosome, once the same size as its buxom partner, the X, will continue to wither away until it simply vanishes. The male sex would then become extinct, they fear, leaving women to invent some virgin-birth method of reproduction and propagate a sexless species.”

That’s gotta make Rick Santorum nervous. (Though the Times does concede that men may have “long-term viability” after all).

Conservatives find themselves in an era of technological advance, information on steroids, women on the rise, and men who do not know what their role is supposed to be. Can we be surprised that they look back wistfully on a “simpler time” when gender roles were strictly defined – and when men did the defining?

The Angel in the House

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread. And young conservatives, apparently. In a recent episode of the birth control battles, James Poulous, a Georgetown grad student styling himself a “postmodern conservative,” plunged into political quicksand on Tucker Carlson’s blog “The Daily Caller” with a much-reviled essay: “What are women for?” This question, he announces, is the most pressing of our time. Writes Poulous:

“In a simpler time Sigmund Freud struggled to understand what women want. Today the significant battle is over what women are for. None of our culture warriors are anywhere close to settling the matter.”

All righty then. The sophomoric and risible qualities of his posting aside, Poulous has an argument, of sorts. He makes a roundabout suggestion that the utilitarian purpose of women is to get married and make babies. But not quite comfortable with leaving women as two-legged cattle, he endows us, based on our “privileged relationship with the natural world,” with a moral purpose, too. Women are here to civilize the barbaric ways of men. In response to the predictable social media/web backlash, Poulous has posted two defenses of his original essay. Amid the hurly-burly of the gender wars, he notes that “everyone else feels their civilization is in peril, and the bile rises accordingly.”


Comment by Doone on February 27, 2012 at 5:25pm

From the Dish - 

Santorum Exposes The Real Republican Party


What's fascinating to me about Santorum's outburst yesterday was not its content, but its candor. In fact, one of Santorum's advantages in this race, especially against Romney, is that we can see exactly where he stands. There can be no absolute separation of church and state, let alone a desire to keep it so; and in their necessary interactions, the church must always prevail, or it is a violation of the First Amendment, and an attack on religious freedom. The church's teachings are also, according to theoconservatism, integral to the founding of the United States. Since constitutional rights are endowed from the Creator, and the Creator is the Judeo-Christian one, the notion of a neutral public square, embraced by liberals and those once called conservatives, is an attack on America. America is a special nation because of this unique founding on the Judeo-Christian God. It must therefore always be guided by God's will, and that will is self-evident to anyone, Catholic or Tcs2Protestant, atheist or Mormon, Jew or Muslim, from natural law.

Hence the notion that America could countenance abortion or same-sex marriage is anathema to Santorum and to theoconservatism. It can only be explained as the work of Satan, so alien is it to the principles of Judeo-Christian America. Hence the resort to constitutional amendments to ban both: total resolutions of these issuesfor ever must reflect what theocons believe was in the Founders' hearts and minds.

This has long been the theocon argument; it was the crux of what I identified as the core Republican problem in "The Conservative Soul". It is not social conservatism, as lazy pundits call it. It is a radical theocratically-based attack on modern liberal democracy; and on modernity as a whole. It would conserve nothing. It would require massive social upheaval, for example, to criminalize all abortion or keep all gay couples from having any publicly acknowledged rights or status. Then think of trying to get women back out of the workplace or contraception banned - natural, logical steps from this way of thinking. This massive change is radical, not conservative. It regards the evolution of American society these past few decades as literally the work of the Father of Lies, not the aggregate reflection of a changing society. It is at its essence a neo-Francoite version of America, an America that was not the pinnacle of Enlightenment thought, but an America designed to destroy what the theocons regard as the catastrophe of the Enlightenment.

PM Carpenter is right to note below that "Kennedy was emphasizing an institutional separation; he never denied that his conscience was influenced by his faith." But to say that Santorum is attacking a chimera is unfair to both men. Yes, of course, Kennedy's conscience was informed by his faith; how could it not be? But what Kennedy asserted was that his public pronouncements would be defended by non-sectarian reason, devoid of explicit religious content. Moral content - yes. Religious content - no. Which is why I have long found Obama's occasional digression into defending, say, universal healthcare by invoking Jesus as depressingly part of the problem. Money Kennedy quote:

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish--where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source--where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials--and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.

This is an explicit public denial that this country is a Christian nation. It is a reaffirmationthat "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." The most important feature of today's GOP - and the fundamental reason I have long abandoned it - stands foursquare against that idea. Moreover, in its fusion of explicit religion and explicit politics, it is itself, in my view, an attack on America - and the possibility of a civil republic. Its religious absolutism is the core underpinning of this country's polarization - because when religion becomes politics, negotiation and compromise become impossible. Bring God into it, and a political conversation must become a culture war.

Note this too from Kennedy:

I believe in a President whose religious views are his own private affair, neither imposed by him upon the nation or imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office.

This is a defense of private conscience as the core bulwark of religious life - emanating from the Second Vatican Council. And that too is what today's radical GOP is attacking.

Comment by Sydni Moser on February 27, 2012 at 7:26am

Comment by Doone on February 26, 2012 at 9:53pm

Rick Santorum’s Views on Church and State Make My Brain Vomit

[Cole covered this already, but I’m posting this here anyway because I do what I want and besides, you’re not the bossa me. -ABLxx]

Rick Santorum is such a nutbag that actual bags of nuts see him and are like, “Wha?!”

 Today in “Rick Santorum is a nutbag” news, we have Santorum going even further off the religious deep end. Surprise!

On This Week with George Stephanopoulos, Santorum said that John F. Kennedy’s 1960 speech to the Baptist Ministers made him want to “throw up,” and that the separation of church and state likewise makes him want to throw up.  No seriously.  He said that.

Let’s take a look at what JFK said back in 1960 as he made his case that as a Catholic, he would not go off the religious deep-end and unleash some sort of papal theocracy: Read the rest of this post »

Comment by Doone on February 26, 2012 at 8:50pm

Quote For The Day

"Six months before this thing got going, every Republican I know was saying, ‘We’re gonna win, we’re gonna beat Obama.’ Now even those who’ve endorsed Romney say, ‘My God, what a fucking mess,'" - Ed Rollins, GOP apparatchik.

Comment by Doone on February 26, 2012 at 6:48pm

"One Of The Finest Minds Of The 13th Century"

That's what Tom Ferrick Jr. jokingly calls Rick Santorum. Ferrick illustrates Santorum's extremism:

In 2010, Santorum delivered a little-noticed speech in Houston to mark the 50th anniversary of John F. Kennedy’s address in the same city before a convention of Protestant ministers. Kennedy went before the group to alleviate fears that if a Catholic was elected president of the United States, the Pope would rule America. As Kennedy said at the beginning of his speech: "I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute."

Santorum went to Houston not to praise Kennedy but to bash him. To Santorum, the Kennedy speech did permanent damage because it led to secularization of American politics. He said it laid the foundation for attacks on religion by the secular left that has led to denial of free speech rights to religious people. "John F. Kennedy chose not to just dispel fear," Santorum said, "he chose to expel faith."


© 2020   Created by Atheist Universe.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service