The whole point of free speech is not to make ideas exempt from criticism but to expose them to it.

Friday, February 25, 2011

If you've ever seen Roger Hunt walk across a room...

A few days ago a friend on Facebook suggested a way to alleviate storm-enforced houseboundness. She said, “Pick up a book. Turn to page 56. Quote the fifth sentence in your reply to this post.”

I picked up Larken Rose’s “The Most Dangerous Superstition.” The specified sentence is:

“People who have been taught to respect “authority,” and have been taught that obedience is a virtue, and that cooperating with “authority” is what makes us civilized, do not like to hear the truth, which is that truly evil people, with all their malice and hatred, pose far less of a threat to mankind than the basically good people who believe in “authority.”

The storm is still with us, literally and, well, literally. Roger Hunt, a smarmy little tick from Sioux Falls, believes in authority. He says he draws his authority from God, as written down by some folks who said they used to talk to God, with any blank spots, such as abortion regulation, filled in by smarmy little ticks like Hunt.

Picture of Representative Roger Hunt

I used to hang out at the Capitol during session, because I was still trying then to save the state. I talked to Hunt on occasion, and he is unfailingly nice. He’d act politely toward you if you were masturbating while talking to him. He walked around with a clipped little walk, like he had shit to do. Every time I saw him, I just wanted to kick the crap out of him. I once asked an Eagle Forum lobbyist if she’d support medical cannabis legislation. She said, “I’ll talk to Representative Hunt about it at our prayers in the morning.” Hunt was already on record as saying, “There is no medical marijuana. Anyone who says different is blowing smoke.” (I still get sick at the thought of the smarmy little look on his face as he made his jokito.)

Recently he sponsored a bill (there were a raft of assholes as co-sponsors, too) purported to “establish certain legislative findings pertaining to the decision of a pregnant mother considering termination of her relationship with her child by an abortion, to establish certain procedures to better insure that such decisions are voluntary, uncoerced, and informed, and to revise certain causes of action for professional negligence relating to performance of an abortion.” That was the title of HB1217. You really should read the whole thing.

You might also want to read Obstetrician Marvin Buehner's editorial about it in the Rapid City Journal. As of tonight the bill has passed the House Judiciary committee and the whole House.

Here's the link to the House floor vote breakdown. 49-19, and it's, of course, pretty much party line, maybe 100% part line.

It's halfway to becoming law. It's scheduled to be heard in Senate Judiciary on Monday (2/28). You might consider calling your local senator this weekend.

5 comments:

David Newquist said...

Never saw him walk, but I think I saw him on the back of a Harley boobing the world.

Bill Dithmer said...

There is an interesting discussion about HB1217 going on over at Mount Blogmoor. I was cussed out for my use of the English language and my misuse of certain words and phrases. Specifically my use of the term “mind rape” in describing what Roger Hunt and the rest of our legislature are trying to do to the women in this state.

David Montgomery the moderator told me in no uncertain words that there is no such thing as mind rape and it was an inappropriate use or those words to describe what was going on. I didn’t have any idea when I wrote the term that it actually existed but it dose. Here is the definition of “mind rape”

Mind Rape - Definition
Introduction
The forceful violation of a victim which takes place on the physical or mental plane is referred to
as rape. This violation has long term effects on the psyche of the victim. The term “Mind Rape”
reflects violation which occurs on the mental plane. This violation can result from the conscious
or unconscious methods used by members of the legal, medical, religious, judicial or other
professions when they try to impose their own preconceptions (or misconceptions) on lay people.
The preconceptions/misconceptions can ignore or denigrate the life experiences, perceptions and
integrity of the lay person. This can be devastating and it undermines the effectiveness of lay people
representing themselves against the establishment.
A person of high political and social standing can impose their opinions on others by virtue of their
perceived status; particularly in a context which already places one at a disadvantage e.g. a court or
medical consultation.

This was from a very very brief search on the net.

The Blindman

larry kurtz said...

just responding because the word verification is "cunfie."

Barry G. Wick said...

Would you please stop being so kind to Roger Hunt?

Bob Newland said...

Barry, I was in an exceptionally good mood. Otherwise, I might have come down hard on the little slimesucker.