Top 10 Reasons Why Christine O'Donnell is Not a Real Witch

10) A real witch pays for his/her own stuff, while O'Donnell steals campaign funds to pay for her stuff.

9) Since a real witch might have problems hooking up for sexual relations, masturbation might be very important.

8) A real witch definitely does not wear white pearls with a black dress.

7) Historically speaking, homosexuals are huge fans of real witches, but they don't care for O'Donnell, so she can't be for real.

6) A real witch isn't as scary as O'Donnell serving in the Senate.

5) A real witch would take pride in her witchery and never say "I'm not a witch."

4) A real witch would never go to a tea party, since a witch prefers witch's brew.

3) A real witch knows that the freedom to cast spells and make potions is not protected by the First Amendment.

2) A real witch knows that "Bedknobs and Broomsticks" is a movie, not a case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.

And, finally, the Number 1 reason why Christine O'Donnell is not a real witch:

A real witch uses a broomstick for transportation, whereas Christine O'Donnell shoved a broomstick so far up her ass that it caused permanent brain damage!

Sex Education Saves Lives

By accident, thanks to the Internet, I happened to catch a recent letter to the editor of Milwaukee's Journal Sentinel newspaper in Wisconsin. I have no clue how old the writer of the letter is, but it is an important commentary (but sad one) on the status of sex education in many parts of the nation.

I am providing a copy of the letter here, followed by a link to a similar letter to a newspaper I wrote about the subject in 1979, when I was about 18.

Here's the recent Wisconsin letter:

Your Opinions

From Journal Sentinel readers (Wisconsin)

Posted: Dec. 10, 2007

SEX EDUCATION

Youth need open, thorough discussion

I was appalled by the Elmbrook School District task force's discussion to shy away from proper sexual education ("Task force debates sex ed lesson timing," Dec. 6). I am thankful I was taught in Brookfield's public school system in a comprehensive manner about sex and disease prevention. To deprive children of that in a culture laced with provocative media and sexual innuendo is both a contradiction and a disservice.

Children should learn about sex not only for the prevention of unwanted pregnancies but for the fact that more than half of all sexually active people in the United States will have a sexually transmitted disease at some point in their lives, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Depriving children of education about sexual behavior when they reach the age of curiosity is damaging to them and to society. Young teens should feel comfortable discussing the matter of sexual health with their doctor and their sexual history with their partner. The rising statistics of diseases show the need to be rid of stigmas associated with sexual behavior.

Teaching teens to be ashamed and embarrassed to talk about sexual behavior by beating around the bush with abstinence-only education is asking for ignorance and an increase in diseases among the young population. I encourage the district to reconsider.

Katherine Groth

Brookfield

********

Click here to read a 1979 letter I wrote to a newspaper on the very same topic in California when I was about 18.

Click here to read a 1979 news article regarding the school board voting against sex ed!