Some of my friends and relations have written me recently wondering if I had been bitten by a were-Liberal. Apparently, that's how it's passed on. That and sharing needles.

I'm beginning to worry about you, Ken. Are you feeling okay? First, there was the rant against the gay marriage amendment. Now you've posted your views about flag burning. And they're definitely leaning to the left rather than the right. What's next? Will you be writing fan letters to Bill Clinton?

Please, don't send the GOP Intervention Squad over to my house to redecorate in an elephant motif. I am still a card-carrying Republican, and a dyed-in-the-wool conservative. And as long as the former never contradicts with the latter, I'll keep sending my checks into RNC headquarters. Republicans (used to) believe in the supremacy of self-determination with a minimum of government interference. I'm not talking full blown Libertarianism here - I am still fond of the rule of law, and believe that society does benefit from a framework which keeps us all moving vaguely together in a generally positive direction. But I do believe that my position on the proposed flag burning amendment and gay marriage ban are wholly in keeping with that philosophy. The way I learned it, as long as I'm not kicking the nearest politician in the groin, or threatening my neighbor's prize cockatoo, the government should pretty much stay out of the business of telling me how to express myself. Particularly if I'm expressing my opinion about my government. Something about free speech. You know - that thing we enshrined in the Constitution. Hell, Charlton Heston tells me that being pissed at the government is why the Framers gave me the right to own a bazooka. And that doesn't begin to address trying to tell me who I can play slap-and-tickle with in my own bedroom. Admittedly, I learned all this in a public school, and we all know that they are the pawns of the Democratic party. But, truly, I am in little danger of joining the Cynthia McKinney fan club. I'm still the guy who's boyhood hero was Alex P. Keaton (know what the "P" stands for? I do) and not infrequently considered getting "I heart Ayn Rand" tattooed on some normally-clothed part of his body. Mostly, I just want to write my quasi-humorous stories about the Critter or crazy British people. But hey, the 'Groove is my soap box. Sometimes I get the urge to preach - Don't worry, though. It usually doesn't last. (Except when I re-read my tattered copy of Atlas Shrugged, when I'm completely unbearable for the duration, and I can only apologize in advance).

In recent news: Fried chicken is bad for you

A doctor and a consumer group have sued KFC in an effort to stop the chicken chain from cooking with high-fat oil. "KFC ... recklessly puts its customers at risk of a Kentucky Fried Coronary," Jacobsen said. Hoyte and the consumer group are seeking class-action status for the lawsuit and asking a judge to let Hoyte represent anyone who ate at a Washington, D.C.-area KFC in 2004 and 2005. "If I had known that KFC uses an unnatural frying oil, and that their food was so high in trans fat, I would have reconsidered my choices," Hoyte said. Dr. Hoyte said he is suing to force KFC to change its cooking practices "for my son and others' kids, so they may have a healthier, happier, trans-fat-free future."

Excuse me, doctor, but what the hell did you think the Colonel was cooking his chicken in, if not a gigantic tank of grease? I suppose it never occured to the esteemed Dr. Hoyte to just not order the family bucket of extra crispy poultry parts with a double side of gravy, and just have a salad instead, did it? In tomorrow's news, we will cover lawsuits claiming "Morton Salt promotes sodium" and "Crisco contains too much grease."

When speaking about his support for a Constitutional ban on gay marriage, President Bush said the following:

"In our free society, people have the right to choose how they live their lives," Bush said. "And in a free society, decisions about such a fundamental social institution as marriage should be made by the people, not by the courts."

If understand him correctly, he's saying that we're so free to choose how to live our lives, that we should support the supposed majority's attempt to dictate how we get to live our lives. Excuse me while I regurgitate my lunch. Look, I'm a Republican. The money-donating kind, so please take a moment to listen, Mr. President. I'm a conservative guy who does my bit to support conservative politicians. But seriously, you want me to support the limitation of rights in an area where the government has no business interfering in the first place? I know plenty of people are uncomfortable with the idea of gay marriage, or homosexuality in general. And I mean, I know them personally - hell, the overwhelming majority of people I am related to by blood or marriage fall into that category. Some criticize it because of their religious beliefs. Some just think it's ooky. And that's ok. You're well within your Constitutional rights to be all grossed out. But to contemplate the enactment of an amendment which would deny a portion of the population the same rights to enter into the partnership of love and dedication that you enjoy in marriage, just because it's "ooky" - that's simply beyond comprehension for me. 50 years ago, because of anti-miscegenation laws, it would have been illegal for me to marry my bride. And at the time, the same reasons were being given. That is was unnatural for members of two different races to consider marriage. That it was a religious affront. That it was just plain ooky. Thank God that no one thought that it was worth seeking a Constitutional amendment to ban it after those laws started being struck down by so-called 'activist courts.' Look, if you're uncomfortable with gay marriage, that's fine - look away if you choose. And if God really does frown on it, then please leave it to Him to sort out. I'm sure He'd be capable of managing the issue without your help. But do not try and strip the rights of your neighbor away, and tell me that you're doing it for "the good of society" unless you want me to vomit on your shoes. This is not about you defending your marriage - if your marriage falls apart because Steve & Timothy down the street get married and honeymoon in Cabo, then your marriage has some serious problems on a whole different level. You want to promote the sanctity of marriage? You want to honor the commitment of two people which builds a stable home, good family environment, not to mention a strong tax-base? Then you ought to get the hell out of the way of any two people who want to stand up in front of their friends and neighbors and publicly dedicate their lives to one another. If marriage is supposed to be built on a foundation of love, then please don't try and set the "standards" for what qualifies based upon your hate.