Soy turning America's boys gay - World Net Daily

[dude]

Posted: December 12, 2006

1:00 a.m. Eastern

There's a slow poison out there that's severely damaging our children

and threatening to tear apart our culture. The ironic part is, it's a

"health food," one of our most popular.

Now, I'm a health-food guy, a fanatic who seldom allows anything into

his kitchen unless it's organic. I state my bias here just so you'll

know I'm not anti-health food.

The dangerous food I'm speaking of is soy. Soybean products are

feminizing, and they're all over the place. You can hardly escape

them anymore.

I have nothing against an occasional soy snack. Soy is nutritious and

contains lots of good things. Unfortunately, when you eat or drink a

lot of soy stuff, you're also getting substantial quantities of

estrogens.

Estrogens are female hormones. If you're a woman, you're flooding

your system with a substance it can't handle in surplus. If you're a

man, you're suppressing your masculinity and stimulating your "female

side," physically and mentally.

In fetal development, the default is being female. All humans (even

in old age) tend toward femininity. The main thing that keeps men

from diverging into the female pattern is testosterone, and

testosterone is suppressed by an excess of estrogen.

If you're a grownup, you're already developed, and you're able to

fight off some of the damaging effects of soy. Babies aren't so

fortunate. Research is now showing that when you feed your baby soy

formula, you're giving him or her the equivalent of five birth

control pills a day. A baby's endocrine system just can't cope with

that kind of massive assault, so some damage is inevitable. At the

extreme, the damage can be fatal.

Soy is feminizing, and commonly leads to a decrease in the size of

the penis, sexual confusion and homosexuality. That's why most of the

medical (not socio-spiritual) blame for today's rise in homosexuality

must fall upon the rise in soy formula and other soy products. (Most

babies are bottle-fed during some part of their infancy, and one-

fourth of them are getting soy milk!) Homosexuals often argue that

their homosexuality is inborn because "I can't remember a time when I

wasn't homosexual." No, homosexuality is always deviant. But now many

of them can truthfully say that they can't remember a time when

excess estrogen wasn't influencing them.

Doctors used to hope soy would reduce hot flashes, prevent cancer and

heart disease, and save millions in the Third World from starvation.

That was before they knew much about long-term soy use. Now we know

it's a classic example of a cure that's worse than the disease. For

example, if your baby gets colic from cow's milk, do you switch him

to soy milk? Don't even think about it. His phytoestrogen level will

jump to 20 times normal. If he is a she, brace yourself for watching

her reach menarche as young as seven, robbing her of years of

childhood. If he is a boy, it's far worse: He may not reach puberty

till much later than normal.

Research in 2000 showed that a soy-based diet at any age can lead to

a weak thyroid, which commonly produces heart problems and excess

fat. Could this explain the dramatic increase in obesity today?

Recent research on rats shows testicular atrophy, infertility and

uterus hypertrophy (enlargement). This helps explain the infertility

epidemic and the sudden growth in fertility clinics. But alas, by the

time a soy-damaged infant has grown to adulthood and wants to marry,

it's too late to get fixed by a fertility clinic.

Worse, there's now scientific evidence that estrogen ingredients in

soy products may be boosting the rapidly rising incidence of leukemia

in children. In the latest year we have numbers for, new cases in the

U.S. jumped 27 percent. In one year!

There's also a serious connection between soy and cancer in adults ?

especially breast cancer. That's why the governments of Israel, the

UK, France and New Zealand are already cracking down hard on soy.

In sad contrast, 60 percent of the refined foods in U.S. supermarkets

now contain soy. Worse, soy use may double in the next few years

because (last I heard) the out-of-touch medicrats in the FDA

hierarchy are considering allowing manufacturers of cereal, energy

bars, fake milk, fake yogurt, etc., to claim that "soy prevents

cancer." It doesn't.

P.S.: Soy sauce is fine. Unlike soy milk, it's perfectly safe because

it's fermented, which changes its molecular structure. Miso, natto

and tempeh are also OK, but avoid tofu.

[Tanuki Racoon]

WTF?

[Trab]

Maybe having a soy allergy has saved me from the horror of homosexuality. ROFLMAO

Seriously though, it is insidious. Sadly, the increasing acceptance of genetically modified foods is growing daily, much of it spliced with ... soy.

[blue]

I've seen articles about soy and estrogen before, but nothing that looked definite to me, from a layman's POV.

Also, I'd point out that Asians have been using soy products for centuries, and they don't seem to be disappearing any time soon. (Thank goodness.) As far as I know, there's no higher incidence of any of the issues mentioned in that article among Asians than among Americans.

I can't see that any delaying or speeding up of puberty or any supposedly feminizing effect makes a boy gay. -- A boy can have any of those issues and still like girls or guys or both... or neither, I suppose. If someone has data that really proves there's a connection between that and being gay, then bring it on. But I doubt that's real.

Now then, as to soy making me or any other male a homosexual male? Soy, if it had any effect, would have to be way down in probability. I still think it's a mix: genetics, biochem. in the womb, environmental, psychological, I think it all contributes.

When I first saw the title, I had a flippant, uncharacteristic thought: "More for me!" -- With a laugh, because it wasn't a serious statement.

After thinking of it more, though, there is the very real thought: This planet is overpopulated with human beings. There have to be limits on it. Nature takes care of it somehow. If a portion of the population are gay people, this is not a bad thing. We still contribute in all kinds of ways toward our culture and our children's future.

And if there are a few extra choices for a partner in life, I for one would appreciate that, as a single guy who was late in accepting the truth of himself.

Just my rambling thoughts....

[JamesSavik]

Ca-Ca

[DesDownunder]

Soy does what?

Sarcastic remarks ahead, be warned.

So what are we saying here? Estrogen is the cause of being gay? Didn't work for my Mom.

Does this mean that If you want to be str8 you should swallow as much testosterone as possible?

Doesn't seem to work for any of my gay friends. In fact the more testosterone they swallow the gayer they seem to get. Though I do notice a decidedly greater desperation to get even more of it.

End sarcasm.

(please note: swallowing of testosterone or estrogen from human sources is not considered a safe sex practice -Please don't do it.)

Actually I'm with blue's response on this one. Describes just the way I feel about it all. High quality ramblings blue.

[DarkShadow]

This has got to be the single most idiotic thing I have ever heard. Gay people have been around for a much longer time than 'soy products'.

To even remotely imply that the 'estrogen like' compounds that 'may' be in soy products is in some way close enough to human based estrogen, and, cause a change in their sexual preference is simply ridiculous.

Also, I would like you to note that there is not even one instance that tells precisely which studies back the claims that are being made here. It might be different if there were a pile of medical studies that were cited so that we might make reference to them and search out the truth. In this retarded babble, we're not given a single one to substantiate what is being said. I suppose that would be... because it is simply not true.

I am also a bit of a health nut, and soy is an excellent high protein low fat substitute to meat. Yay for the Boca Burger!

Could it be... that maybe... just MAYBE, society has changed, and now more and more people are drifting away from the ludicrous stigma associated with homosexuality. I suppose now it will be a detriment for male babies to breastfeed for fear that they will get an 'overdose' of estrogen directly from the source? You see... there in lies the bullshit ;) Breastfeeding is a natural thing, and they surely wouldn't want to bash that now would they?

In my opinion, it would be best if someone... anyone... put a boob or otherwise in this person's mouth to stifle the ignorance.

By the way... I never had soy formula as a child. I also did not breastfeed according to my mother. We had this thing back then called MILK!

I guess it was too many hormonal 'COWS' that were my downfall :)

[E.J.]

Always consider the source. Worldnet Daily is An extreme right wing "news" site...

The trouble with soy ? part 2

Story LINK

Last week's column ("Soy is making kids 'gay'") got a lot of attention ? 500 e-mails and three dozen media interview requests ? because it blindsided the overwhelming majority of readers.

Perhaps fewer than 10 percent of us are aware that soybeans are a hotly debated topic in medical circles today. Soy products ? eaten, drunk, and slipped into thousands of commercial products ? are rightly being blamed for a horrendous variety of medical conditions, several of them nearing epidemic status and a few of them irreversible. Pediatricians and other doctors are starting to see a growing parade of patients suffering from serious symptoms that were quite rare just a generation ago.

The shocking statements in my column produced much incredulity, the more so because I did not footnote or go into detail. I simply did not have room to introduce all the biggest problems with soy and do it in a scientific, footnoted format.

I will make an attempt to compensate for that shortcoming in this column and the next few. To keep within the length limit, I will tuck footnotes and excess text into one continuous hyperlink. You'll have to click on each "footnote" to see the column in full.

Let's start here: The most common question of the past week has been, "If soy is so harmful as to potentially alter sexual physiology and behavior, why haven't the Chinese and Japanese all died off or become homosexual centuries ago?"

Three interlocking reasons: Click here for the first two. The third is that Orientals simply do not eat as much soy as Westerners think. The average daily consumption in Japan (one of the highest soy-consuming countries in Asia) is at most about eight grams of soy protein. China and other countries eat far less.

Soy has never been a leading staple there like rice, fish or pork. Even going back to the 1930s, calorie intake from soy in China was rarely more than 1.5 percent of their diet, whereas pork provided 65 percent! No comparison. Traditionally, soy plants were plowed under in fields as fertilizer. Soy was a poverty food, eaten heavily only by the poor in times of famine. (Grazing animals don't like to eat it, either.) People have always eaten soy in small portions as a condiment or a supplement with a meal. The highest intake of soy in Japan is among monks, who eat it to turn off sexual desire. (Think about that the next time you're in the grocery store.)

By comparison, the FDA has encouraged Americans to eat 25 grams of soy protein a day as a way to prevent heart disease. This FDA health claim has doubled the consumption of soy protein in the U.S., yet was recently discredited when the American Heart Association changed its position on soy, now saying that soy does not lower cholesterol and does not prevent heart disease!

You couldn't say that FDA opinions are for sale to the highest bidder, but they were influenced by a campaign and formal endorsement request by the soy industry, which includes giants like Monsanto, Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill and DuPont. When the mud hit the fan during the investigation period, the FDA quickly modified its stance, limiting its endorsement to just basic soy protein instead of the isoflavone (estrogen-mimicking) ingredients in soy. The problem with that is soy protein contains those dangerous plant estrogens. This is why two of the FDA's most distinguished scientists, Drs. Daniel Sheehan and Daniel Doerge, protested the FDA health claim in a public letter.

If you think you don't eat much soy, think again. Though only 15 percent of us eat a mostly-soy product once a week, 55-70 percent of all processed foods in supermarkets now have some soy in them. You can't escape it. Soybean oil accounts for a whopping 79 percent of the edible fats used annually in the U.S.

Health-conscious people are likely to eat the most. Even a moderate vegetarian or soy fan would think nothing of tossing down eight ounces of tofu, a quarter cup of roasted soy nuts and a glass of soymilk daily, and that's far, far more than any normal Japanese individual would be likely to consume.

But the worst victims of soy are babies. Per kilogram of body weight, the average Japanese in 2000 ate 0.47 milligrams of soy isoflavones daily, while the average U.S. baby drinking soy formula got 6.25 milligrams. Isoflavones are testosterone-suppressing female hormones.

What is that doing to their sex organs and their sexual orientation? Tune in next week. The story gets worse, much worse.

Copyright 1997-2006 WorldNetDaily.com Inc.

[DarkShadow]

Interesting... that all of the links go to a nondescript website that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the story and offers NO conclusion or even the slightest bit of supporting evidence for this idiocy.

Also ;) Take note who is actually writing this dribble ;)

James Rutz is chairman of Megashift Ministries and founder-chairman of Open Church Ministries. He is the author of "MEGASHIFT: Igniting Spiritual Power," and, most recently, "The Meaning of Life." If you'd rather order by phone, call WND's toll-free customer service line at 1-800-4WND-COM (1-800-496-3266

Hmmm wonder what the agenda is here.

[DesDownunder]

You beat me to saying that DarkShadow.

I doubt these people have any credible understanding of scientific method, reasoning or reporting let alone any objective documentation skills.

I'm starting to feel str8, must be time for my soy shake.

[DarkShadow]

LOL You Go Girl!

[Trab]

The interesting part of this to me is that this whole stupid article (fabrication?) doesn't address lesbians. What is it with them? Based on this stupid concept, they should be the most feminine of all females. Now I won't say that there aren't lots of very feminine lesbians (I've met some), but a significant percentage of those I've encountered were not exactly ballerinas.

[DesDownunder]

TRab, excellent point, but have you seen the hippo-ballerinas in Disney's Fantasia?

LOL Oh! dear, have I been politically incorrect again?

[Trab]

I'd like to caution you all to keep an open mind. The stories may be crap, but then again, they might not be. Sometimes it takes someone who is fearless (or a nutcase) to actually voice concerns which others, more entrenched in the corporate heirarchy, are loath to voice. When the aim is simply to warn, particularly if the audience is not a group of scientists, a list of credits and studies is the last thing one would want to use. Hook the topic to something that seems to be of concern to many, and which has much public attention, and you get your story out much more quickly and widely. That's good marketing. It also doesn't mean the message is necessarily false.

As for an agenda, I cannot see that it is all that sinister, nor invisible. It is pretty obvious that the writer is cautioning against eating too much soy, and the use of soy derivatives in so much food. I cannot disagree, having nasty reactions to soy. It is very frustrating that almost weekly another food that I COULD eat, has suddenly got soy in it, and I have to avoid it. Usually I don't even know they've added it, till I react.

[DesDownunder]

I like your reasoning Trab, but it does worry me that there is either someone using the right wing media to get the information out there or doesn't have a sense of propriety to not use the right wing media.

Either way seems somewhat unscrupulous to me though I concur with your analysis.

I was told by my naturopath that my blood type is not compatible with eating soy beans.

My medical physician could not verify that statement.

It is also a verifiable fact the my blood type is unsuitable for my being a vegetarian.

So I have supplemented my diet with plant derived amino acids for twenty years with no ill effects.

Something like 30 years ago an article appeared in the local press that it had been discovered that tea had a property in it that caused cancer. In recent times there have been scientific claims that drinking tea actually has cancer prevention properties. (both black leaf and green leaf teas, but green is supposedly better.)

Sorry I do not have references for what must therefore remain anecdotes.

[DarkShadow]

I'd like to caution you all to keep an open mind. The stories may be crap, but then again, they might not be. Sometimes it takes someone who is fearless (or a nutcase) to actually voice concerns which others, more entrenched in the corporate heirarchy, are loath to voice. When the aim is simply to warn, particularly if the audience is not a group of scientists, a list of credits and studies is the last thing one would want to use. Hook the topic to something that seems to be of concern to many, and which has much public attention, and you get your story out much more quickly and widely. That's good marketing. It also doesn't mean the message is necessarily false.

As for an agenda, I cannot see that it is all that sinister, nor invisible. It is pretty obvious that the writer is cautioning against eating too much soy, and the use of soy derivatives in so much food. I cannot disagree, having nasty reactions to soy. It is very frustrating that almost weekly another food that I COULD eat, has suddenly got soy in it, and I have to avoid it. Usually I don't even know they've added it, till I react.

My point is that you could substitute the word 'soy' with 'oats', or 'corn', and it would still be a factless based article, but none the less 'possible'. Then again... we can all make blanket statements pulled from nowhere. Of course, oats and corn would suddenly have a greater impact and sound even more ridiculous. Is it possible that large quantities of a food can be a detriment to our health? Certainly. But, with the complete lack of supporting data, any one of us could make a similar statement and not have to explain ourselves. We could add several footnotes, as was done in this atricle, and link some third rate search engine.

I thought the 'agenda' was blatantly clear. To sell his book and promote his religious beliefs.

----

**Notice!*** This just in. Scientific studies in 2006 have proven too much consumption of Jello*, the well known snack food and desert, will cause bleeding from the eyes.

For more information you can purchase my book at www.religious-BS.com

:)

I do agree we have to keep an open mind. What disturbs me is that so many individuals will read this and say, 'oh!' I'll be damned. That Soy Burger from the Happy Meals my son ate as a child made him gay! Down with Mc'D's... Down with SOY! Oprah made a similar mistake once. Beef came back and kicked her ass.

Take care!

[DesDownunder]

Aha exactly DarkShadow.

Consider that we are told that:

Oats lowers cholesterol

Corn which is undercooked causes hereditary birth defects.

Both of which appeared in the local press and should be verifiable if researched to have some scientific credence.

The wonderful "jello" example you give delightfully reveals the impropriety of the method used to sell a book.

So I quickly googled soy and lo and behold there does seem to be some scientific doubt about soy as a suitable food or its use as an additive. Hmmm.

I do not have the time to further research this. What I can say is that the "hysterical right" seem to have attached the above scientific doubt to an irrational connection of gay causation.

I still prefer the old idea (joke) that my mother made me a homosexual and if you give her the wool she will make one for you too.

[Abraxas]

Don't forget the great Twinkie scare from a number of years back!

Personally, I was fed goats milk as an infant, soy products (and regular milk) made this little baby boy engage in projectile vomiting....

There goes that theory, brought to you by the same people who invented creationism and intelligent design.

Some people will believe anything.

Abraxas

[The Pecman]

They don't provide any sources for the research, so I think it's all hooey. Unless and until they provide the names of the researchers and published data, this is just a theory.

I'm of the opinion that homosexuality is caused by both heredity and environment, and I don't think just one piece of the diet (like soy milk) will do anything. Malnutrition won't help any baby, but it won't necessarily make them gay or effeminate, not in my experience.

Unless a real bona fide news organization presents this case, I'm not gonna buy it. This is the problem with believing so-called news being presented on websites with no credentials.

[Graeme]

I haven't weighed in before because I thought the article was too ridiculous to be worth commenting on.

There IS one detail that has enough truth in it to make the whole thing credulous for someone who doesn't know better.

Soy products at an early age are not good for a baby.

However, the same is true of cows milk, salt, sugar, nuts and many other items. This has nothing to do with hormone or other content, but simply that breast milk (and the various baby forumula) is a lot better suited to the specialised dietary requirements of an infant.

There are also certainly a wide range of additives that are dangerous to give to infants: BHA, BHT, caffeine, MSG, propyl gallate, quinine and saccharin being only a few.

I've just brought out one of our parenting books:

Bottle-fed babies are more likely to develop allergies than breastfed infants -- probably because cow's milk protein is a relatively common cause of allergic reaction. If you are nursing your baby, continue, if possible, for the entire first year. The later cow's milk is introduced to his diet, the better. Using a soy-based formula when a supplement is needed is an option in allergic families, but some babies turn out to be allergic to soy, too and doctors prefer to hold off the soy milk and use a protein hydrolysate formula.

(source: What To Expect The First Year by Arlene Eisenberg, Heidi Murkoff and Sandee Hathaway, B.S.N.)

The only time the book suggests soy-based products is for vegetarians, as a source of protein that the child would otherwise not get.

[E.J.]

Soy, the perfect heathen food -- it does a body gay

Mark Morford, San Francisco Chronicle

I know what you're thinking. You're thinking: I knew it. I knew that soy stuff was evil like black sunshine in spring! Also: Is Tom Cruise really gay? Does he eat a lot of soy? Is Steve Jobs a god? Does God like soy? Wait, didn't God invent soy? So how could it be bad for my innocent cherubic child who loves iPods and looks nothing like Tom Cruise? Is this the year I wear more orange? And so on.

Oh yes, you knew it. Especially if you are from the far end of the baffled, gay-hatin', right-wing mind-set and don't read much and don't really care about pesky stuff like science or facts or health or, you know, actual thought. Yay, you!

Yes, you knew there was a threat far, far more dire to your precious child right now than Nancy Pelosi's terrifying agenda or Aaron Sorkin's bewildering dialogue or pagan yoga classes or swell federal abstinence programs.

Here, then, is your hot new target, writ large in what must be the absolute cutest unsung little ultra-right-wing article of all of 2006, appearing on an obscure conservative news compendium site called WorldNetDaily, among other stories like:

"Should Christians be armed? The ultimate biblical exploration of self-defense." "How the U.N. will be the death of Israel and the West." "Chuck Norris' column appears here!" "U.S. infrastructure for sale to foreigners." "The good news about the looming disaster ... it's easy, inexpensive and fun to get prepared!"

The author of this particular article, Jim Rutz, a guy who likes his meat organic but his facts as toxic and undercooked as a high school cheeseburger, states, with absolute certainty, that soy products will make your kid gay. And why? Because soy contains "feminizing" estrogen compounds, so when you feed soy products to your little girl, she will menstruate by age 7, and if you feed it to your little boy, his testicles might not fully develop until he enters college, and if you feed soy milk to your baby (heathen! sinner!), your tot will, according to Jimbo, receive the equivalent of five birth control pills per day (italics his), and doing so could actually kill your baby. Oh, my God, who will save the children from the gay (plant) agenda!

I see you smiling, you, over there, who actually read books and eat well and, you know, think for yourself. I see you shaking your head in disbelief, perhaps thinking I am making this up. Alas, I am not. It is a real article, read (presumably) by real humans, many of whom might actually believe it, just as they believe that immigrants want to "mongrelize" the American "race" and that Christmas trees are actually Christian and that Taylor Hicks is somehow tolerable. It's funny because it's true.

But wait. Do not fall into fits of ironic intellectual mirth just yet, because perhaps you should consider the ugly truth that, by logical extension, God hates vegans.

Is it not obvious? After all, most vegans eat a lot of soy. Consequently, most vegans are, of course, violently gay, just like the billions of Asians who've eaten soy products for millennia and are so gay and feminine and estrogen heavy they can barely stand up. Which explains Hello Kitty. And samurai movies. And the Scion Xb. I mean, obviously.

It all makes perfect sense. Because if there's one thing God loathes, it's gay people, what with them being such an abomination for daring to want to fall in love and be happy. Therefore God must really hate vegans (especially Asian vegans), because they must be gay, even though he loves everyone, which is a total contradiction and which sort of confuses God and which therefore makes him hate soy products even more even though he invented the stuff despite having long ago forgotten why. See? Clear as a bell, right, Jim?

By the way, for the record, soy does indeed contain estrogen. Plant estrogen (phytoestrogen), that is, a very weak estrogen indeed, 1/1000th the strength of synthetic. Soy, in particular, contains estrogen-like compounds called isoflavones, which actually do have some very mild estrogenic effect.

Does this make soy a bit controversial? Indeed it does. Are there some on the fringes of the health spectrum who are now claiming we are eating way too much of it? Indeed there are. Should you check into it for yourself? Absolutely.

But does this mean that eating a nice tofu veggie burger will shrink your testicles and make your average hetero male linger, swooningly, a bit longer over photos of George Clooney than he normally would? Does this mean you get to dispense with logic altogether and claim that small penises somehow equal gayness (as opposed to, say, increased SUV sales) or that all gay men are "feminine" or that soy is the probable cause of obesity and leukemia and infertility and the downgrading of Pluto? Why not? It's the homophobic, science-is-for-sissies GOP way.

Alas, there is no mention in Rutz's article about the other foods that have calamitous effects on one's sexual wiring. It is no secret, after all, that the consumption of excess Girl Scout cookies -- particularly Caramel deLites -- will make you a butch lesbian. It has also been reported in lesser-known scientific journals that eating lots of organic baby greens means you want to subscribe to the New Yorker and drive a Prius and get your genitals pierced, often at the same time.

Finally, it is now widely known that hip, fusion cuisine has been proved to contain alarming amounts of multicultural ingredients, such as couscous and lemongrass and ghee, which obviously translate directly into anti-American hate and probably mean you are a radical Muslim, a Bollywood fan or both.

I know what you're thinking: It's all too easy to make fun of mind-sets like Jimbo's. But it is also, of course, mandatory that we do so, if for no other reason than to laugh at such matters and point up the adorably warped mental gyrations required to make such claims. Because if you cannot, then you are not able to lay blame where it so obviously lies, which is, of course, smack on our education system. It's an intellectual crisis, is what it is.

Stay in school, kids. Stay in school and please learn something lest you end up like Rutz, what with his trembling hands and his spasming colon and his violent nightmares featuring giant tofu robots leading perky armies of sashaying soy-fed children, marching into his yard wielding soy lattes and Barbra Streisand records and waving gay-marriage petitions like victory flags. Shudder.

?2007 San Francisco Chronicle

Story Link

[colinian]

We get the SF Chronicle and I read the story. It's very funny. I like Mark Morford's columns, they are sarcastic and funny and edgy.

Colin

[Drewbie]

Good column :d

and yes steve jobs is a god :p

[DesDownunder]

The Soy controversy has reached the land of OZ.

The Sanitarium company which pioneered soy as a vegetarian food in Australia, and is supposedly connected to the conservative, Seventh-day Adventist church, is up in arms about the claimed dangers of soy to health. They have issued statements to the effect that the health issues are unfounded.

I have seen no comments from them about the soy connected gay concerns.

I am really being restrained with this report to not offend anyone.

[colinian]

Mark Moreford's columns are online (no registration needed) at http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford/archive/. The way the SF Chronicle describes his columns is very funny:

Mark Morford is a columnist for sfgate.com and the San Francisco Chronicle. He also teaches yoga, subscribes to magazines, admires trees, detests shrill alarmism (including his own), sleeps naked. He has not seen your blog, but is sure it's amazing. He never wears sneakers. He writes about politics, pop culture, sex, music, design, a wry and punch-drunk universe, vibrators, scotch, media, spirituality and small European cars. And sometimes, parrots. Email him here.

Colin