I think I've posted this video before, but it certainly bears repeating.
Milton Friedman would have been 100 years old today. I see that William Jacobson over at Legal Insurrection has done likewise.
Please send this to anyone you know who thinks ...well, send it to anyone who thinks. And send it to anyone who doesn't.
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Sunday, July 15, 2012
Jonah Goldberg & How Liberals Cheat In The War of Ideas
I keep stumbling on great videos to share. So, share I will.
You are a racist or an ideologue or worthy of some other label, if only you fail to subjugate yourself to the greater "common good." This is the same hogwash that Ayn Rand warned you of: that the collective is somehow superior to the Individual.
You'll find the Liberals' same semantical shell-game in The Little Blue Book. It's just as it claims, a primer on how to close your mind to rational thought, and succumb to group-think collectivism.
Mike Vanderbeogh reminds us that the best way to defeat them is to first know them. And TLBB is their user's manual.
As Mike points out, among other things, their book identifies "Four Effects of Extreme Conservatism" as justification for subscribing to Progressivism:
You are a racist or an ideologue or worthy of some other label, if only you fail to subjugate yourself to the greater "common good." This is the same hogwash that Ayn Rand warned you of: that the collective is somehow superior to the Individual.
You'll find the Liberals' same semantical shell-game in The Little Blue Book. It's just as it claims, a primer on how to close your mind to rational thought, and succumb to group-think collectivism.
Mike Vanderbeogh reminds us that the best way to defeat them is to first know them. And TLBB is their user's manual.
As Mike points out, among other things, their book identifies "Four Effects of Extreme Conservatism" as justification for subscribing to Progressivism:
The Effect on Democracy-
Extreme conservatism inflicts its damage in multiple venues: it chips away at democracy and the Public; it poisons the human spirit; and in the world community, it contributes to human agony and damages both America's standing in the world and America's friendships with other nations. Extreme conservatism is not merely about abortion, the size of government, or gun control. Extreme conservatism is an all-encompassing worldview, and its adherents want to bring into its compass the lives of every citizen.
The consequence is intransigence, a refusal to compromise, a high level of aggression toward other moral views, and the ambition of total control by the ideology itself. (MBV note: Shucks, and here I just thought we wanted to be left alone by these nanny-state tyrants.) This intransigence showed up in the 2010 House of Representatives, controlled by extreme conservatives, who have refused to compromise with President Obama. Not only does their moral system not allow compromise, but extreme conservatives believe that if this intransigence leads to a nonfunctioning government, so much the better, since that would prove that government doesn't work. And if that leads to a failure to fund ongoing social programs, so much the better, since those programs need to go.
Extreme conservatism's all-encompassing nature and ambition are usually hidden from view. Much of its work is done in think tanks, which are tasked to come up with strategic initiatives to take control of major areas of public life. . . At the same time, conservative communication experts find language for those initiatives that seems simple and intuitive but hides the major effect of the issue on American democracy and the public . . . Democracy is not just about government; it is about all areas of life: family, religion, education, and business. When extreme strict father values are imposed, extreme conservatism comes to run institutions of all sorts, including the following:
Family: As we have seen, extreme strict father parenting is often destructive and abusive. Children in such situations, if they do not rebel, often grow up reproducing authoritarian family life and imposing it in other areas of their lives. Women who are natural nurturers may have a hard time speaking up when disagreeing in important matters.
Religion: Extreme forms of conservative religion, whether Christianity, Judaism, or Islam, have authoritarian organizational structures . . .
Education: Extreme conservatism can occur in the classroom. . . Teaching is spoon-feeding: students are not taught how to think critically or how to think for themselves, but are taught to recite the right answers without questioning the teacher.Continue beyond the fold to learn more of their presumed justification for opposing your individuality...
Friday, July 13, 2012
New Film By Dinesh D'Souza
Probably not really that big a deal that your messiah was mentored & nurtured by a Soviet Communist. Right?
Even more disturbing is the possibility that the "father figure" in his autobiography is a "compressed" version of imaginary persons to hide the identity of the real father...
Even more disturbing is the possibility that the "father figure" in his autobiography is a "compressed" version of imaginary persons to hide the identity of the real father...
Thursday, July 12, 2012
Vanderboegh on Lou Dobbs' Show
Programming Alert kids:
Mike Vanderboegh & David Codrea will be on the Lou Dobbs Tonight show, 7PM Eastern this evening, on Fox Business Channel. They'll be discussing the DC Bar malpractice(?) case against Eric Holder.
Don't get Fox Business Channel?
Demand it!
Seriously, folks. Fox Business is all the good that is the Fox News network, without hardly any of the Shepard Smith drama-girling (and related nonsensical fluff).
Mike Vanderboegh & David Codrea will be on the Lou Dobbs Tonight show, 7PM Eastern this evening, on Fox Business Channel. They'll be discussing the DC Bar malpractice(?) case against Eric Holder.
Don't get Fox Business Channel?
Demand it!
Seriously, folks. Fox Business is all the good that is the Fox News network, without hardly any of the Shepard Smith drama-girling (and related nonsensical fluff).
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
You Show Me Yours...I'll Show You Mine
Lil Debbie WassermanSchultz-her-face and David (the real Darth Vader) Axelrod have recently been heard bemoaning Mitt Romney's offshore holdings. The point indirectly (and then more directly by the Obamamedia) asserting that unless he "comes clean" about the amounts and nature of those accounts, nobody can really know what's there or isn't there.
One of the montage of talking heads Hannity played yesterday had the nerve to ask, "if he's not willing to release his past tax filings, what does he have to hide?"
Well, yeah. That's absolutely right. Why in the world would anyone want to hide their own hard-earned money from a rabidly confiscatory evermore-gluttonous federal government? Sure beats me.
If I'm Mitt Romney and get asked about it, my response would be, "I'll be happy to give you every detail about those accounts...on the two following conditions.
"All the President has to do is rescind his Executive Order over the Fast & Furious documents and cooperate fully with the Congressional investigation, and I will submit every last detail regarding those accounts, when they were opened, and how much is in them. Furthermore, I'll even give his campaign manager the access codes for the largest of them as soon as Eric Holder is arrested for his role in the facility and ensuing coverup of Fast & Furious."
Quid Pro Quo, assholes. After all, if he's not willing to release those documents, just as you've all said, what does he have to hide?
One of the montage of talking heads Hannity played yesterday had the nerve to ask, "if he's not willing to release his past tax filings, what does he have to hide?"
Well, yeah. That's absolutely right. Why in the world would anyone want to hide their own hard-earned money from a rabidly confiscatory evermore-gluttonous federal government? Sure beats me.
If I'm Mitt Romney and get asked about it, my response would be, "I'll be happy to give you every detail about those accounts...on the two following conditions.
"All the President has to do is rescind his Executive Order over the Fast & Furious documents and cooperate fully with the Congressional investigation, and I will submit every last detail regarding those accounts, when they were opened, and how much is in them. Furthermore, I'll even give his campaign manager the access codes for the largest of them as soon as Eric Holder is arrested for his role in the facility and ensuing coverup of Fast & Furious."
Quid Pro Quo, assholes. After all, if he's not willing to release those documents, just as you've all said, what does he have to hide?
Monday, July 2, 2012
John Roberts: Your Slavemaster
To suggest that the Chief Justice is like a plantation owner, might be a stretch. But the visage of him as Slave-boat Captain is pretty accurate, for he's the one that last Thursday delivered you to your new owners.
Get this straight kids: The Obamacare "law" is the most unlawful monstrosity to ever come out of the legislative process in this country. Ever.
Every facet of it is meant to expand government's intrusive reach into the lives of individuals. Its raison d'etre is to facillitate more authority for them, and less independence for you and me. You are not as free as you were prior to last week. The concept of Liberty is a thing of the past. You're no longer a citizen, and that's if you could even call yourself that last Wednesday.
You're a subject.
John Roberts pretends that he has preserved the legislative process, that it isn't/wasn't his responsibility to protect the citizens from the consequences of their bad voting-booth choices. But the fact of the matter is that, yes, it is his job to do exactly that.
Once you and I cast our vote, we have very little legal recourse until four years hence to hold those electees accountable. Without safety nets in place, like the US Supreme Court's duty to uphold the Consitution, those elected representatives can pass any self-serving nonsense they choose. In fact, when it became apparent that we'd trusted the wrong sort of folks in 2010, we did our part by kicking many of them (those enablers of the more-insideous power-mongers) right out of office.
What Roberts did was far worse than simply uphold the Obamacare Law. He validated it as a tax, and in so doing, validated the notion that the Federal Government has absolute authority to dream up any tax for any behavior or activity or lack thereof. And for him to do that, regardless of his motivations, he had to turn a blind eye to the Framers' intent.
If you don't believe that, then please tell me: Which of those Founding Fathers would endorse Roberts' written opinion?
We didn't just tell the crooks in Washington DC to get out, back in 2010. We told everyone involved that we didn't like what they'd foisted on us. The Harry Reids and Nancy Pelosis and Barry Obamas have pretended to not hear that message. Obviously, John Roberts isn't listening, either.
Instead of following the Constitution, or heeding the wishes of the people, they've doubled down on their big-government schemes.
And we're forced to likewise double down on our resistance to them...
Join Americans For Prosperity.
As I mentioned above, we have pretty much lost any legal remedy to this legislation, except for perhaps the coming election. The House & Senate have proven to us that they will gravitate toward whatever improves their power and status. The President is the most corrupt and inept buffoon we've ever elected. And the fail-safe backstop to protect this country's people from their government has spinelessly thumbed its nose at us.
The most despicable aspect of this is that Roberts' manipulation of the Constitution (which by the way, isn't his to manipulate), is its newly created precedent for future courts to do likewise!
I heard Rush put it this way: "It's like your neighborhood chief of police held a press conference and stood at the podium and said to you and everyone in your community, 'From now on, I'm going to be working with the bad guys...against YOU.'"
Is there any question that we are now living in a post-Constitutional America?
When your elected representatives feather their own nests, in direct opposition to your clear objections, and the President places himself above the law and due process, and his Justice Department refuses to enforce some laws, stretches the definition of others, files suit against states to support fraudulent voting processes and lies to Congress about a murderous operation, and the Supreme Court, whose basic responsibility is to uphold the US Constitution does just the opposite, ladies and gentlemen, there no longer IS a law of the land.
This upcoming election is likely to be the last one that stands any chance of being a meaningful one.
Get this straight kids: The Obamacare "law" is the most unlawful monstrosity to ever come out of the legislative process in this country. Ever.
Every facet of it is meant to expand government's intrusive reach into the lives of individuals. Its raison d'etre is to facillitate more authority for them, and less independence for you and me. You are not as free as you were prior to last week. The concept of Liberty is a thing of the past. You're no longer a citizen, and that's if you could even call yourself that last Wednesday.
You're a subject.
John Roberts pretends that he has preserved the legislative process, that it isn't/wasn't his responsibility to protect the citizens from the consequences of their bad voting-booth choices. But the fact of the matter is that, yes, it is his job to do exactly that.
Once you and I cast our vote, we have very little legal recourse until four years hence to hold those electees accountable. Without safety nets in place, like the US Supreme Court's duty to uphold the Consitution, those elected representatives can pass any self-serving nonsense they choose. In fact, when it became apparent that we'd trusted the wrong sort of folks in 2010, we did our part by kicking many of them (those enablers of the more-insideous power-mongers) right out of office.
What Roberts did was far worse than simply uphold the Obamacare Law. He validated it as a tax, and in so doing, validated the notion that the Federal Government has absolute authority to dream up any tax for any behavior or activity or lack thereof. And for him to do that, regardless of his motivations, he had to turn a blind eye to the Framers' intent.
If you don't believe that, then please tell me: Which of those Founding Fathers would endorse Roberts' written opinion?
We didn't just tell the crooks in Washington DC to get out, back in 2010. We told everyone involved that we didn't like what they'd foisted on us. The Harry Reids and Nancy Pelosis and Barry Obamas have pretended to not hear that message. Obviously, John Roberts isn't listening, either.
Instead of following the Constitution, or heeding the wishes of the people, they've doubled down on their big-government schemes.
And we're forced to likewise double down on our resistance to them...
Join Americans For Prosperity.
As I mentioned above, we have pretty much lost any legal remedy to this legislation, except for perhaps the coming election. The House & Senate have proven to us that they will gravitate toward whatever improves their power and status. The President is the most corrupt and inept buffoon we've ever elected. And the fail-safe backstop to protect this country's people from their government has spinelessly thumbed its nose at us.
The most despicable aspect of this is that Roberts' manipulation of the Constitution (which by the way, isn't his to manipulate), is its newly created precedent for future courts to do likewise!
I heard Rush put it this way: "It's like your neighborhood chief of police held a press conference and stood at the podium and said to you and everyone in your community, 'From now on, I'm going to be working with the bad guys...against YOU.'"
Is there any question that we are now living in a post-Constitutional America?
When your elected representatives feather their own nests, in direct opposition to your clear objections, and the President places himself above the law and due process, and his Justice Department refuses to enforce some laws, stretches the definition of others, files suit against states to support fraudulent voting processes and lies to Congress about a murderous operation, and the Supreme Court, whose basic responsibility is to uphold the US Constitution does just the opposite, ladies and gentlemen, there no longer IS a law of the land.
This upcoming election is likely to be the last one that stands any chance of being a meaningful one.
Saturday, June 23, 2012
Friday, June 22, 2012
Which Is Worse?
Richard Nixon was impeached for his role in covering up the Watergate Hotel break-in. He may or may not have known about the burglary beforehand, but most certainly knew about efforts to hide the crime afterwards.
The burglary wasn't so much an exercise in thievery, as much as an attempt to spy on the other guys.
Operation Fast & Furious was an attempt by persons in Federal Law Enforcement to facillitate the movement of US-made combat-type firearms into the hands of Mexican drug gangs. The recurring mistake being presented by some of the few who are reporting on it (Fox News) is the assumption that the operation was "botched".
Nothing was botched, except the schemers' end result. From the beginning, the scheme was one intended to get American guns into the hands of Mexican criminals (and visibly so) such that common Americans watching their evening news programs might be misled into thinking more legislative "gun control" could perhaps be a thing of necessity.
Just like the Watergate cover-up, Operation Fast & Furious is turning into (as most of us watching objectively always suspected) a case of who knew what and when did they know it.
Again, Watergate was a burglary and a botched burglary at that. Operation F&F was an illegal (but successful) gun-smuggling scheme, designed to ultimately cast American firearms in a negative light. Two federal agents, Border Patroller Brian Terry and Immigrations/Customs Agent Jamie Zapata were murdered as a direct result of this crime.
US Attorney General Eric Holder first claimed ignorance (under oath) of the Operation, then later recanted his testimony after evidence was presented disproving his claim. He's repeatedly stonewalled the Congressional investigation, and "changed" his testimony at least once again. Demands from Congressman Darrell Issa for documents related to the case have been refused. It's easy to believe that Holder, not only knew intimately about the Operation, but that he likely orchestrated it from conception.
And with Obama now granting Executive Privilege status over those same documents, shielding them from rightful Congressional scrutiny, can't the exact thing be also said of him? That is, is there any reason to believe that Obama didn't at least know of the cover-up, and perhaps even originally complicit in the conception and implementation of the scheme? Does the objectives of the Operation not fit with Obama's ideology, and those of his radical friends? How blindly devoted to him would you have to be to make the leap of faith that he's above such treachery?
A Democrat Congressman named Maloney said, according to this article by Katie Pavlich in Town Hall, that “I am offended, personally, that you would call the Attorney General a liar”.
Well, Mr. Maloney, I am likewise offended, personally, that you have the audacity to pretend that admitting a lie is the same thing as being honest. If you lie to me and submit that lie as the truth until I prove you're a liar, and you then recant your earlier lie, there are no longer any mathematics that support your contention of being honest about anything.
And the same goes doubly for those enablers and protectors of your lies. If you are unwilling or unable to point an accusatory finger at Holder and Obama, then you are as culpable in the deaths of those Agents, Terry & Zapata, as those that pulled the triggers.
Furthermore, your culpability includes those deaths of hundreds (hundreds!) of bystanding Mexican citizens.
Impeachment procedings should commence forthwith.
Reference also for vital/recommended reading:
Sipsey Street Irregulars (ALL of the truth and background dirt pertaining to Fast & Furious, Holder, Boehner, et al). Vanderboegh is THE authority or F&F.
Yesterday, I was out on a job and had a member of the Contracting team showing me pictures of his very impressive gun collection: scores of pistols, self-defense shotguns, assault/combat arms, etc... This 30-year-old or so guy had retired from State Law Enforcement (and Federal Task Force teamwork) to help with the family business. I asked him what he thought, as a retired LEO and certified gun advocate, about the Fast & Furious scandal.
He had not even heard of it.
I told him if he's getting any news of his world at all, he's listening to the wrong folks.
The burglary wasn't so much an exercise in thievery, as much as an attempt to spy on the other guys.
Operation Fast & Furious was an attempt by persons in Federal Law Enforcement to facillitate the movement of US-made combat-type firearms into the hands of Mexican drug gangs. The recurring mistake being presented by some of the few who are reporting on it (Fox News) is the assumption that the operation was "botched".
Nothing was botched, except the schemers' end result. From the beginning, the scheme was one intended to get American guns into the hands of Mexican criminals (and visibly so) such that common Americans watching their evening news programs might be misled into thinking more legislative "gun control" could perhaps be a thing of necessity.
Just like the Watergate cover-up, Operation Fast & Furious is turning into (as most of us watching objectively always suspected) a case of who knew what and when did they know it.
Again, Watergate was a burglary and a botched burglary at that. Operation F&F was an illegal (but successful) gun-smuggling scheme, designed to ultimately cast American firearms in a negative light. Two federal agents, Border Patroller Brian Terry and Immigrations/Customs Agent Jamie Zapata were murdered as a direct result of this crime.
US Attorney General Eric Holder first claimed ignorance (under oath) of the Operation, then later recanted his testimony after evidence was presented disproving his claim. He's repeatedly stonewalled the Congressional investigation, and "changed" his testimony at least once again. Demands from Congressman Darrell Issa for documents related to the case have been refused. It's easy to believe that Holder, not only knew intimately about the Operation, but that he likely orchestrated it from conception.
And with Obama now granting Executive Privilege status over those same documents, shielding them from rightful Congressional scrutiny, can't the exact thing be also said of him? That is, is there any reason to believe that Obama didn't at least know of the cover-up, and perhaps even originally complicit in the conception and implementation of the scheme? Does the objectives of the Operation not fit with Obama's ideology, and those of his radical friends? How blindly devoted to him would you have to be to make the leap of faith that he's above such treachery?
A Democrat Congressman named Maloney said, according to this article by Katie Pavlich in Town Hall, that “I am offended, personally, that you would call the Attorney General a liar”.
Well, Mr. Maloney, I am likewise offended, personally, that you have the audacity to pretend that admitting a lie is the same thing as being honest. If you lie to me and submit that lie as the truth until I prove you're a liar, and you then recant your earlier lie, there are no longer any mathematics that support your contention of being honest about anything.
And the same goes doubly for those enablers and protectors of your lies. If you are unwilling or unable to point an accusatory finger at Holder and Obama, then you are as culpable in the deaths of those Agents, Terry & Zapata, as those that pulled the triggers.
Furthermore, your culpability includes those deaths of hundreds (hundreds!) of bystanding Mexican citizens.
Impeachment procedings should commence forthwith.
Reference also for vital/recommended reading:
Sipsey Street Irregulars (ALL of the truth and background dirt pertaining to Fast & Furious, Holder, Boehner, et al). Vanderboegh is THE authority or F&F.
Yesterday, I was out on a job and had a member of the Contracting team showing me pictures of his very impressive gun collection: scores of pistols, self-defense shotguns, assault/combat arms, etc... This 30-year-old or so guy had retired from State Law Enforcement (and Federal Task Force teamwork) to help with the family business. I asked him what he thought, as a retired LEO and certified gun advocate, about the Fast & Furious scandal.
He had not even heard of it.
I told him if he's getting any news of his world at all, he's listening to the wrong folks.
Sunday, June 3, 2012
The Showboat
Just getting around to posting this, but a few weeks ago, Sherry and I toured the USS North Carolina. And here are some pix of the boat known affectionately during WWII as "The Showboat."
There was a Coast Guard plane passing nearby...
Acting as her "spotter", I helped Sherry scare him away...
I remember visiting the Memorial as a wee lad, but didn't remember the float planes (Note plane in background racing for cover after Sherry riddled his fuselage with bullets)...
Please continue to more pix and video beyond the fold...
There was a Coast Guard plane passing nearby...
Acting as her "spotter", I helped Sherry scare him away...
I remember visiting the Memorial as a wee lad, but didn't remember the float planes (Note plane in background racing for cover after Sherry riddled his fuselage with bullets)...
Please continue to more pix and video beyond the fold...
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Spike This
Listen through to Scott Ott's closing statement, and you'll get the 1-year anniversary speech that should have been.
Or, I could say WOULD have been if the Obfuscator-In-Chief had even the faintest idea of how to be a Commander.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
From The Densest Of These
I used to listen to Boortz frequently, and I even had a link to his program in the sidebar of this Blog for a while. And I had a fairly high regard for his opinions, for the most part. But, he alienated me a few years ago when I heard him suggest that gays are "born that way." And not only did he adhere strictly to that notion, but he also made it clear that he felt anyone who didn't subscribe to that nonsense was a bigot of the highest order.
Well, I do not subscribe to that idiocy, and so just tuned him thenceforward, out.
This morning, after reading the results of yesterday's voting in the Old North State (happily, I might add), I caught a brief blurb by the self-proclaimed "talkmaster" that he equated those who voted FOR the North Carolina Constitutional Amendment defining the State's only recognition of marriage as being between one man and one woman, with an endorsement of Obama. I didn't hear the prelude to what he said, but he reiterated that those hicks in North Carolina that have voted against homosexuals are somehow simultaneously endorsing Obama.
I might have stuck around after his commercial break to see how he twisted that into something resembling actual logic, but thought better of the idea when he said, "My God, you people are dense!"
Call me colloquial if you like, but dense? You've got some nerve there, foureyes.
North Carolinians voted to A) embrace Federalism, B) de-fang activist judges, and C) thumb their noses at the Occupier-In-Chief's presumed influence on American culture. Yes, we knew he'd be pandering to that segment of his base in short order.
Methinks it isn't my density that is at issue, but your personal agenda. There are those of us who realize that the whole point of the "gay rights" crusade is only an attempt to legitimize their perversions.
I agree with at least one of my fellow NC bloggers who said that the State can not tell him (or you or me) who we can marry, and that if he (or you, but not me) wants to marry a goat, or a person of the same sex, or an imaginary friend, it's nobody else's business in the whole wide world.
But asking (or insisting) that I recognize that union as somehow equated to marriage as I would define it? Uh, no.
I quietly supported the Amendment and encouraged those who I care about to do likewise. Not to shoo the faggots to those places where they're more welcome (New York & California come to mind), although that's a welcome side-effect, but more to be on the right side of a law well-written. I don't want more laws, and North Carolina already had a "gay marriage ban" on the books, but this was an opportunity to say "This is how we'll define it" in defiance to the creeping perversion that Boortz doesn't seem to mind. Or perhaps, that he prefers.
Yes, it's a black day in the Tar Heel State for queers, and not the smallest coincidence for their bedfellows, also.
In unrelated burps, and no particular order...
I thought it particularly entertaining that a current federal inmate and convicted felon got more support on the Democrat ballot in West Virginia than did the Corruptocrat-In-Chief.
Idea for a bumper sticker...TRAYVON MARTIN: DEAD CRIMINAL
George Zimmerman: Non-victim, would be another good one.
How about the mug on this guy, known as Bandit?
Well, I do not subscribe to that idiocy, and so just tuned him thenceforward, out.
This morning, after reading the results of yesterday's voting in the Old North State (happily, I might add), I caught a brief blurb by the self-proclaimed "talkmaster" that he equated those who voted FOR the North Carolina Constitutional Amendment defining the State's only recognition of marriage as being between one man and one woman, with an endorsement of Obama. I didn't hear the prelude to what he said, but he reiterated that those hicks in North Carolina that have voted against homosexuals are somehow simultaneously endorsing Obama.
I might have stuck around after his commercial break to see how he twisted that into something resembling actual logic, but thought better of the idea when he said, "My God, you people are dense!"
Call me colloquial if you like, but dense? You've got some nerve there, foureyes.
North Carolinians voted to A) embrace Federalism, B) de-fang activist judges, and C) thumb their noses at the Occupier-In-Chief's presumed influence on American culture. Yes, we knew he'd be pandering to that segment of his base in short order.
Methinks it isn't my density that is at issue, but your personal agenda. There are those of us who realize that the whole point of the "gay rights" crusade is only an attempt to legitimize their perversions.
I agree with at least one of my fellow NC bloggers who said that the State can not tell him (or you or me) who we can marry, and that if he (or you, but not me) wants to marry a goat, or a person of the same sex, or an imaginary friend, it's nobody else's business in the whole wide world.
But asking (or insisting) that I recognize that union as somehow equated to marriage as I would define it? Uh, no.
I quietly supported the Amendment and encouraged those who I care about to do likewise. Not to shoo the faggots to those places where they're more welcome (New York & California come to mind), although that's a welcome side-effect, but more to be on the right side of a law well-written. I don't want more laws, and North Carolina already had a "gay marriage ban" on the books, but this was an opportunity to say "This is how we'll define it" in defiance to the creeping perversion that Boortz doesn't seem to mind. Or perhaps, that he prefers.
Yes, it's a black day in the Tar Heel State for queers, and not the smallest coincidence for their bedfellows, also.
In unrelated burps, and no particular order...
I thought it particularly entertaining that a current federal inmate and convicted felon got more support on the Democrat ballot in West Virginia than did the Corruptocrat-In-Chief.
Idea for a bumper sticker...TRAYVON MARTIN: DEAD CRIMINAL
George Zimmerman: Non-victim, would be another good one.
How about the mug on this guy, known as Bandit?
Thursday, April 12, 2012
What If?
What if someone wrote an essay that contained only "what if" questions? What if Judge Andrew Napolitano wasn't there to ask those tough questions?
What if your government, right this second, has less regard for your Liberty than King George had for that of those pesky Colonists 240-odd years ago?
What if you and I were afraid to speak the answers to those questions?
What if your government, right this second, has less regard for your Liberty than King George had for that of those pesky Colonists 240-odd years ago?
What if you and I were afraid to speak the answers to those questions?
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
Sorry
So sorry it's been such a long time between posties. Can't believe I've contributed nothing to the blogosphere for an entire month. Here's something Les sent me...
I miss Paul Harvey. Hope I'm not alone.
For those among us who would maybe say, "Someone should have warned us about those things that were gnawing away at the fabric of our society...", Mr. Harvey warned you 40+ years ago. And he just did so again.
I miss Paul Harvey. Hope I'm not alone.
For those among us who would maybe say, "Someone should have warned us about those things that were gnawing away at the fabric of our society...", Mr. Harvey warned you 40+ years ago. And he just did so again.
Friday, March 2, 2012
"Not Only Are Conservatives More Patriotic..."
My new favorite quote comes from John Hawkins:
"most American liberals 'love' America in about the same way a wife-beater loves his wife."
20 Obvious Truths That Will Shock Liberals
"most American liberals 'love' America in about the same way a wife-beater loves his wife."
20 Obvious Truths That Will Shock Liberals
Thursday, March 1, 2012
RIP Mr. Breitbart
I was about to shut of the background television and leave, but caught the ticker news scrolling across the bottom. Andrew Breitbart helped make second-guessing big media in the blogosphere a much-less lonely and haphazard endeavor.
I went to Big Government to find the unwelcome confirmation.
May God embrace you, Andrew.
I went to Big Government to find the unwelcome confirmation.
May God embrace you, Andrew.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
I Been Ever Where Man
Everywhere that is.
Had to go to Flarda for some Train-ing, and had some vittles at a place. Flarda is very hot. Don't believe me?
If you're a developer, you might not like seeing these things on the property you've invested in, because their presence almost certainly means there's a cypress tree nearby. And cypress trees are a tree-hugger's wet dream, because the presence of cypress tree's define (at least in part, or so I'm told) an area as a wetland.
Damn tree-huggers.
I'm getting back on the road this aft'noon. I'm gonna be hammer-down and boiling out some black diesel pollution into your otherwise pristine environment whilst listening to some mighty good pickin and sangin...
That Eddy sure could play.
If you see my "NOBAMA" sticker, flip me the one-finger salute. I don't mind offending a good number of you folks.
Had to go to Flarda for some Train-ing, and had some vittles at a place. Flarda is very hot. Don't believe me?
Then, I drove very nervously through Georgia. Why was I nervous?
Because there are signs everywhere that tell you "Seatbelts Must Be Worn" and I figgered mine looked too new. My advice to you, if you're travelling to Georgia, scuff up your seatbelts before you leave so you won't be in violation.
Wonder what the penalty is for having "too-new" seatbelts.
In Sow Care-line, there's also signs that warn you of "Reduced Speed Ahead". How can they know?
Mysteries of the universe.
Also in SC, if you look hard enough (or if you just happen to be hangin a turkey-neck in the right spot), you might see some Cypress Knees. I'd never heard of them. This is what they look like.
If you're a developer, you might not like seeing these things on the property you've invested in, because their presence almost certainly means there's a cypress tree nearby. And cypress trees are a tree-hugger's wet dream, because the presence of cypress tree's define (at least in part, or so I'm told) an area as a wetland.
Damn tree-huggers.
I'm getting back on the road this aft'noon. I'm gonna be hammer-down and boiling out some black diesel pollution into your otherwise pristine environment whilst listening to some mighty good pickin and sangin...
That Eddy sure could play.
If you see my "NOBAMA" sticker, flip me the one-finger salute. I don't mind offending a good number of you folks.
Friday, February 3, 2012
Friday, January 27, 2012
Mortui Vivos Docent
I had the distinct pleasure of hearing Mike Vanderboegh speak at Guilford Courthouse a few years ago. And, although I haven't linked to his essays often, I read as much of his work as I can. As should we all.
He remains the standardbearing voice of Patriotism for those who won't be cowed, coerced, or coddled by the nanny state.
"My problem is that I have seen with my own eyes too much. I no longer trust. I can no longer be patient. For we who have trusted and been patient in our previous searches for federal justice have always been betrayed by the same people who claimed to be determined to "get to the bottom of it."
If my long education in bi-partisan perfidy in the cover-up of federal murder and mass murder has made me impatient, abrasive, untrusting and cynical, I make no apology. If we do see a complete and honest investigation of the Gunwalker Conspiracy, it would be a triumph of faint hope over jaded experience.
But that's not the way to bet."
Well said, Mike.
He remains the standardbearing voice of Patriotism for those who won't be cowed, coerced, or coddled by the nanny state.
"My problem is that I have seen with my own eyes too much. I no longer trust. I can no longer be patient. For we who have trusted and been patient in our previous searches for federal justice have always been betrayed by the same people who claimed to be determined to "get to the bottom of it."
If my long education in bi-partisan perfidy in the cover-up of federal murder and mass murder has made me impatient, abrasive, untrusting and cynical, I make no apology. If we do see a complete and honest investigation of the Gunwalker Conspiracy, it would be a triumph of faint hope over jaded experience.
But that's not the way to bet."
Well said, Mike.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Steel
I'm all for the prolonged Primary season, and concur with Rick Santorum's characterization (yeah, I've been doing more and more of that) that at its best, the process is one of steel sharpening steel. But I cringe when I hear leftist rhetoric coming out of Republican mouths.
These guys are at their best when they each remain focused on the real target, and lose votes for themselves (and their Party) when they take cheap shots at each other.
Cases in point: Newt's assault on Bain Capital (with Santorum chiming in), and Mitt's "Nancy Pelosi might have something (on Newt) there..." I'm paraphrasing.
Romney missed a perfect opportunity to say, "You know what folks? It'll be a cold day in hell before I go hanging my campaign hat on anything that slug (Pelosi) has to say."
Ann Coulter likes Mitt. Thomas Sowell (who Miss Coulter reveres) leans toward Newt. Chris Christie loves Mitt, but Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin prefer Newt. I still like Herman, but I think America's chances are pretty good against Obama with Rick or Mitt or Newt.
I think Rick Santorum should have demanded John King apologize to Newt, and stolen some of the standing ovation.
You want some steel? Check out my guy...
These guys are at their best when they each remain focused on the real target, and lose votes for themselves (and their Party) when they take cheap shots at each other.
Cases in point: Newt's assault on Bain Capital (with Santorum chiming in), and Mitt's "Nancy Pelosi might have something (on Newt) there..." I'm paraphrasing.
Romney missed a perfect opportunity to say, "You know what folks? It'll be a cold day in hell before I go hanging my campaign hat on anything that slug (Pelosi) has to say."
Ann Coulter likes Mitt. Thomas Sowell (who Miss Coulter reveres) leans toward Newt. Chris Christie loves Mitt, but Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin prefer Newt. I still like Herman, but I think America's chances are pretty good against Obama with Rick or Mitt or Newt.
I think Rick Santorum should have demanded John King apologize to Newt, and stolen some of the standing ovation.
You want some steel? Check out my guy...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)