New Adventures of Queen Victoria by Pab Sungenis for October 01, 2010

Fair & Balanced Note:

I live in VA & I know the parents, the Goebbels-Heidler family. They are church going & were always so quiet. Though now I think of it, the crosses they used for burning, were oddly crooked…

And to cap it all, Christine O’Donnell would have handed her over to Hitler …

It boggles the mind.

By the way, it’s “Culpeper” not “Culpepper” folks. Just getting the name right.

“Homosexual themes”? Have they misunderstood what was meant when Anne Frank was hiding in the closet?

…can we burn Food Network Tv shows that show Queen Victoria with cartoon eyes popping out?…

PhantomPlumber, I think they mean the passage where Anne remembered the time she suggested to a friend that they feel one another’s breasts.

Some people also get torqued off by her suggestion that having faith was more important than belonging to one particular faith.

Dum Dum Dum Dum Dum

Given the sort of folk who rant and rave about what everyone else must do to get admitted to heaven, I rather hope there is more than one heaven… because I don’t want to spend eternity with THAT crowd.

Perhaps I’d support book burning of the Anarchist’s Cookbook but it’s kind of late. Went on a Banned Books seminar last night. The ACLU was against my suggestion. I guess they thought I was suggestion the Patriot Act 11. OK, kids, the first amendment says it’s alright to build bombs in the cellar, poison the water supply, and try to violently overthrow the government. Queenie Deals with it.

well, our all american wingnut teaparty thinks it’s ok to water the tree of liberty with the blood of anybody who disagrees with them, so ……….

lkissell,

if these people are this dumb, are you sure that THEY didn’t misspell the county name? ;-)

but if the anarchist cookbook is banned, criminals will still get the info illegally, but law abiding citizens won’t be able to build their own bombs to protect themselves!

(seriously though, the info’s all over the internet anyway)

Consider that the bible contains an explicit occurrence of incest between two daughters and a father. The daughters supposedly plied the father with alcohol so that he was drunk - but not too drunk to consummate the union as they were both impregnated. Under the reasoning of that “church-going” parent, the bible must be banned.

well true… by the same token the anarchist cookbook is almost certainly outdated also then (plus, that, in and of itself, is available on the internet… did you know that you can get high off peanut skins? apparently there’s a way…)

the edition first printed in 1947, which her father edited to remove parts that “detail her emerging sexual desires”, and “unflattering descriptions of her mother and other people living together” [quotes from the washington post article on the banning] WILL still be used in the classroom. its the DEFINITIVE EDITION that was banned, but IS still available in the school’s library.

BUT…the post article states the school’s policy was NOT followed when the edition was banned - no written complaint on the book [it was oral], no review committee. one administrator made the decision.

knee-jerk, panicy, public-appeasing reaction. stinks on wheat.

Good to see all us posters enjoyed college in the 60s and the literature available. Think it’s time to grow up? I know the idiots who blew up the ROTC building across from my dorm seriously changed my political bent.

@ Orgelspieler - with you on that.