Thursday, August 30, 2007
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Albert Mohler is for the most part to be commended for his comments about the failure of the church to speak out against the rise in illegitimacy.
However, in the same broadcast he goes a little too far in saying a couple should not be able to get a divorce until the church says they can get a divorce.
Using the first example of tackling a disturbing social trend, namely the explosion of out of wedlock births, by speaking out against the practice from the pulpit, shouldn't that rather also be the approach taken to curb the divorce rate also?
Dr. Mohler suggests those getting divorced without church sancition should be subject to ecclesiastical discipline. If so, shouldn't similar sanctions be imposed deciding to set up house without pastorial imprimatur as well?
by Frederick Meekins
While it is nearly impossible to determine if Sen. Larry Craig had lewd intentions when arrested in a men's room, frankly those loving liberty should be concerned about the flimsiness of the standard that can be invoked by law enforcement to justify ruining reputations.
Unless this NRA supporter blatantly caressed another man's holstered sidearm if you get my meaning, how can it be conclusively be proven what his intentions were.
From the sound of it, the cop should be arrested also as from the text it reads he reciprocated in what could be considered a bizarre mating ritual by moving his own foot up and down.
From the story, we also learn that if we are not comfortable with others peeking into the stall while we releave ourselves, now we are the perverts.
Those not caring one way or the other thinking the Senator was up to no good and got what he deserved might like to know that such ridiculously lowered standards of probable cause are in place elsewhere to pull as many Americans into the criminal justice system.
Carry on your person or vehicle a rudimentary tool kit? Often on COPS, that is enough to get you booked for "burglary tools".
Put your medicines in a plastic baggie rather than the perscription bottle. That's enough to get a drug charge slapped against you.
by Frederick Meekins
Monday, August 27, 2007
Friday, August 24, 2007
With all the fuss made over the 300 millionth American, the U.S. Census Bureau enjoyed an unaccustomed moment in the limelight as the work done by this government agency is seldom considered glamorous enough to warrant much coverage in the media.
Article One, Section Two of the U.S. Constitution authorizes an enumeration of the population to be taken every ten years. The only purpose for this tabulation authorized by the Constitution is to figure our how to divvy up the House of Representatives.
But while the Founding Fathers instituted the census as a tool to safeguard the liberties of the Republic by making sure each person is properly represented numerically in the national legislature, as with many of the other institutions devised by these innovative political thinkers, this one is also being used to undermine the very nature of freedom itself.
One of the foremost aspects of freedom is the ability to withhold from those in power information regarding one’s private affairs that is not necessary to the fulfillment of legitimate government functions. However, as the state seeks to concentrate power in order to become the dominate social institution over individual human lives with the hopes of surpassing the influence of church, family, and even the self, those administering these bureaucratic constructs have come to believe that collecting reams of data regarding every possible fact of your existence is necessary to carry out its constantly expanding functions.
Throughout much of Western history, free peoples have often exhibited a natural and understandable hesitation regarding (extraneous) tabulations on the part of government operatives. Therefore, as the data the Census Bureau seeks to collect becomes increasingly intrusive, more and more those charged with collecting this information turn to other names and euphemisms designed to get the American people to lower their guard to a practice they had initially been bred to be leery of.
Replacing the so-called “Census Long Form”, the American Community Survey is simply the same pill sent out more periodically to get the people of the United States to swallow it more easily. In much the same was as a summons to jury duty, the introductory epistle and instruction pamphlet accompanying the survey begins by going on pleasantly about the survey, thanks you for your cooperation, and almost tacks on as an afterthought that you are required to comply by law.
Those of a cavalier pioneering spirit might feel led to resist divulging their secrets to these federally sanctioned peeping Toms (and God bless them for such courage); however, as the Borg --- the futuristic outcome depicted on Star Trek that awaits mankind if this continual march towards collectivism is not halted ---- might say, “Resistance is futile” as the free citizen may be assessed a fine of up to $1000 for each question not answered correctly. Some might say such is the price one might have to pay for liberty as some others have been called upon to give their lives in freedom’s name.
Not to sound flippant, but if such an end came quickly, those befalling such a demise might be better off that someone facing the full wrath of the U.S. Census Bureau. For at a fine of $1000 for every question not answered correctly, that could theoretically be a penalty of $42,000 for each person living at a targeted residence failing to comply.
Advocates of the busybody school of government will respond that not a single person has ever been fined for failing to relent to Census Bureau interrogations. Maybe not yet, but as with nuclear weapons, the threat always looms overhead; and like a nation of inferior military status before an atomic-wielding power, do you want to be the one to tick off the petty magistrate drunken on the authority the government is allowing the official to exercise? Such a strategy could be used to obtain the property of some patriotic individual reluctant to reveal to yet another agency yet more about private matters and possessions.
And speaking of ways through which to swindle the good property holders of the United States out of the dwellings, plots, acreage, and structures they so cherish as a free people, the questions asked by the American Community Survey could be used to do just that.
For example, it is not enough for the American Community Survey to ask how many reside at a particular residence. Now they ask how many acres the dwelling in question sits on, how many rooms are in each house, does the domicile have hot and cold piped water, does the residence have a flush toilet (no doubt the next time this abomination is put into your mailbox you’ll be asked how many toilet tissue squares you use per wipe as well), how many automobiles are kept at the residence, and how much utility bills were the previous month.
If you think all the American Community Survey asks is about what kind of dwelling you live in, you are sadly mistaken. The document gets even more personal.
For once the document finishes asking you about your living arrangements, it proceeds to get even more personal by snooping into your occupational background. For it not only asks you where you work and how much you make but also what time you leave for work, how many people ride to work with you, and how long it takes you to get there.
It’s a wonder they don’t ask how many times a week you have to take a bowel movement while at work. It wouldn’t be any nosier than the other questions asked.
Those thinking that last suggestion was so outrageous that it doesn’t even bear mentioning might change their tune once they learn what else is on the drawing board. For though they have not yet been incorporated into the American Community Survey, state governments --- Washington in particular --- are busy conditioning their residents into accepting the next level of administrative intrusion into their lives.
According to a Seattle Times article titled “State To Check On Residents Health”, health officials there plan to fan out across the state to gather medical dossiers on selected residents as part of the Washington Adult Health Survey, an effort funded in part by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
As part of the survey, health department operatives will show up on the doorsteps of the targeted to ask them questions about what medications they are on, diet, alcohol and tobacco use, and any dental problems they might have. After all, it’s always been a tradition for a prospective master (in this case the state) to examine the teeth of its prospective beasts of burden; but in this case, it is of you, the slave, rather than a horse.
Why don’t they go ahead and ask if you and the Mrs also had a pleasant romp in the boudoir the night before while they are at it?
And don’t think you’ll be able to get these lab-coated snoops off your back by just telling them the sweet nothings you think they’ll want to hear. For not only will the subjects be required to answer questions but they will also be subject to a battery of tests such a blood pressure, height, weight, and waist size but also have blood drawn to assess cholesterol and sugar levels (no doubt to determine if you are eating a government approved diet).
Perhaps even more interesting still is that hair samples are to be taken from fecund women between the ages of 25-44 and men and women over 60, it is claimed, to test for mercury. However, what better way to start laying the foundations for a DNA identification database.
By starting with women of childbearing age and grandparents, one is well on the way to covering a sizeable percentage of the population. Sort of reminds me of how on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine it was told that the Cardassians authorities extracted the back molars from each of the citizens living under that particular police state for identification purposes.
As with the propaganda accompanying the American Community Survey materials, those of the Washington Adult Health Survey extol the virtues of compliance (even promising a $45.00 gift card for those that comply). Yet very little is said about what will be done to those leery about lurid minions of the state poking around for information about some of their most private affairs.
In a March 5, 2006 Argusleader.com article titled “Census Bureau Gets Personal: Latest Survey Asks About Daily Routine, Stocks, Health”, Census officials claim they promise confidentiality for those answering the survey. But that is something that the Bureau cannot guarantee.
According to a Sept. 22, 2006 ABCNews.com story titled “Census Bureau Loses Hundreds Of Laptops”, nearly 300 computers containing personal information have been stolen or lost. Will representatives of the Census Bureau be the ones to spend hours on the phone for you trying to get your identity and good name back should this data fall into the wrong hands?
Officials urge compliance with the American Community Survey on the grounds that the information will in no way be used to penalize individuals. Try telling that to Japanese Americans who, according to Kerby Anderson in “Moral Dilemmas: Biblical Perspectives On Contemporary Issues” were rounded up for the Internment thanks in part from information gathered off of Census Bureau punch cards (183).
While a quaint notion these officials would try to quell fears of individual punishment, this deception is designed to lull the discernment of those whose morality is rooted in loftier assumptions. For you see, in the dawning collectivist era, one is not judged by the actions one has actually committed as an individual but rather upon what one might do as part of the group or COMMUNITY.
Certainly, the government might not punish you directly or specifically as a result of how you answer a particular question on the American Community Survey. However, if a certain number in a given locality answer a question in a manner deemed to be out of accord with the preferences of social planners, you can bet the government is going to enact measures that will penalize you in the long run even if these agencies do not admit to doing as such.
For example, too many people from a certain neighborhood drive the family car to work? Federal, state, and local planners could sneak in new gas or road development fees to discourage motorists. Other proposals might not even address matters so specifically linked to particular behaviors but rather to forced targeted economic or demographic groups our of designated areas.
For example, your neighborhood a little “too White” for those elites who themselves live in gated communities where we common dregs of humanity can’t get access to without being accosted by an armed sentry in a guard booth? If so, armed with reams of American Community Survey data, planners can drone on about the need to “diversify” a particular locality through the introduction of public or subsidized housing.
Conversely and just as much an outrage, do you find yourself living in a neighborhood where, though it might not be the fanciest town around, but the people --- irrespective of their ethnic backgrounds --- love and care for their homes? Armed with American Community Survey statistics regarding the number of rooms, nature of the toilet facilities, property tax amounts and monthly mortgage costs, conniving developers could manipulate the numbers to make the neighborhood sound blighted even though there might not be as much a single crooked shingle in the entire town. In light of the Kelo decision, that is pretty much the thrust of what is needed to get the ball rolling to get your house snatched from you.
As to whether or not one decides to comply with the American Community Survey is ultimately up to them. For short of receiving a biometric identification mark as part of the process as depicted in the Christian movie “Years Of The Beast”, the Bible is itself pretty much of a mixed opinion on the matter.
On the one hand, King David was chastised by God for implementing such a measure. The obedience of Joseph and Mary in reference to such a decree, on the other hand, was what led to the Messiah being born in Bethlehem as prophesized. Only the leading of the Spirit of God can lead you in what to do regarding this unsettling intrusion into your private affairs.
by Frederick Meekins
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
In his broadcast examining declining fertility rates, Albert Mohler condemns as narsacisitc those reluctant to reproduce on the grounds that social conditions are no more darker than at other times in the nation's history.
Though one caller skirted around the issue, no one had the nerve to come out and state the obvious that it is because the nation is becoming darker in terms of unbridled immigration that many who might otherwise want a family are reluctant to have children if in the future the country overall more resembles a Third World slum than what we now think of as the United States of America.
Some will no doubt fuss and fume that such a statement is inherently racist.
And even though all people are created equal, the way in which they choose to live is not.
I wonder how many making such grandiose proclaimations of universal brotherhood would live in neigherborhoods with two and three families to an average size house, where parking on the street is nearly nonexistent as a result, where non-English music now pierces the night on a regular basis, and empty beer cans flow into the street or haven't already moved out of such areas.
For some reason, I don't think Rev. Mohler sees many of these realities cloistered on his picturesque seminary campus or recording studio.
Others will respond, well all that needs to happen is for the native Caucasian population to have as many offspring as their rabidly breeding foreign counterparts.
But that said, I wonder if these rapidly expanding demographic segments would be as eager to increase the size of their households if they had to do so without the benefit of government, ecclesiastical, or philanthropic handouts like the rest of us.
by Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Christians in Arab countries might refer to God as "Allah", but frankly I don't really care since this country speaks English and here refer to the deity as "God."
If you don't like it, take your headtowel and go back to your filthy sandpile.
Years ago, I remeber watching a moving scene filmed during World War II where Roosevelt and Churchill aboard an aircraft carrier led the service personnnel gathered on the flight deck in a rendition of "Onward Christian Soldiers".
Should those giving their lives for our freedom hear of plans to surrender now before the battle for souls has hardly begun, such patriots would no doubt be spinning in their graves.
by Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
In saying that one cannot say that one's way is the only way, does this apostate have the backbone to say that one cannot say that one's way is not the only the way is the only way?
Monday, August 13, 2007
Sunday, August 12, 2007
This show has to have been one of the biggest disappointments on TV that I can remember.
Flash didn't even have a spaceship.
Instead he traveled back and forth to Mongo through a hole in space.
There is already a show that employs such a plot device: its called Stargate.
If producers want this show to last, they are going to need to show viewers more of Mongo's dictatorship and less of earth as that segment was about the only one worth watching.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Monday, August 06, 2007
Flash Gordon has faced a number of coloful enemies throughout the decades, but one has to wonder if his greatest may end up being the U.S. legal system.
Though it probably hasn't been noticed by the average viewer, but I couldn't help but noticing that the lighting bolt insignia of the new Sci-Fi channel series is almost indentical to that of DC Comics' Flash character, no doubt causing enthusiasits everyowhere to explain yet again to unitiated friends and family that these beloved characters are entirely different.
What better way to control movement than to let bridges collapse?
Those living near the bridge are automatically confined to their isolated communities and the remainder of the nation becomes reluctant to traverse what they are repeatedly told is a decaying infrastructure.
As a result according to this WorldNetDaily article, public-private partnerships will be heralded as a solution.
However, these will largely be a new system of toll roads that will be too expensive for the average motorist to use if they will even be allowed to use them at all as in some discussions of the so-called NAFTA Superhighway it was been hypothesized that the use of this transportation corridor will be restricted by the Department of Homeland Security.
Already news features are springing up asking what the American people what more they will be willing to pay to shore up transportation safety. How about simply better allocating the taxes already extorted from our pockets to pay for these services everybody can use rather than as payouts to illegals and other deviants that can't keep their libidos in check?
At this time, it is too early to speculate as to the technical cause of this tragedy. However, as a tool of propaganda, the government could not ask for a better opportunity to fall into its lap.
By Frederick Meekins
Thursday, August 02, 2007
Commonsense teaches that, if one deliberately with aforethought puts oneself into oncoming traffic, one is going to get run over. As such, that is what you deserve.
To some, such a sentiment brings to mind elderly grandmothers crossing the street and young children absentmindedly chasing after an errant ball. However, that is not what I am referring to.
Those I am referring to are protestors and self-appointed revolutionaries thinking that they are so important and much more better than you that they somehow have the right to literally bring your life to a screeching halt to compel you to listen to their juvenile tantrums by impeding the flow of oncoming traffic
Two incidents in recent months hint that this tactic may become more prevalent in the future as leftists ratchet up their propensity towards mayhem and violence in an attempt to intimidate the American people into acquiescing to their socialistic demands.
In the first incident, students at American University laid down in front of the limousine of presidential advisor Karl Rove in protest of him speaking at the campus chapter of the Young Republicans. Had the driver decided to role over these delinquents, he should have been given a medal.
Rove’s status as either a political genius or a crooked scumbag is not the issue here. Given that the leftist bilge probably pretty much owns the rest of the campus anyway, shouldn’t these students in the Young Republican Club, who probably rank among the best mannered and dressed at the school in comparison to the slovenly hippies wallowing all over the blacktop, been able to invite whomever they wanted to to address their association without incident?
Seems these vassals of political correctness represent the greater threat to freedom of thought.
One hopes those opposed to cracking the heads of those that get out of line and infringe upon the rights and mobility of the nonparticpants of such demonstration will be as vocal when those going beyond the bounds of propriety resort to violence in the attempt to appropriate for themselves sole use of accommodations to which such they at best deserve secondary usage.
In San Francisco, the movement known as Critical Mass regularly commanders the roadways in order to flout in the face of motorists how morally superior cyclists are to those preferring modes of transportation propelled by the internal combustion engine. Most have no doubt been conditioned by leftist institutions such as academia and the mainstream media to think of such activists as peace loving and harmless.
However, according to an April 4, 2007 story titled “Minivan’s Rude Introduction To Critical Smash”, one family won’t feel so lighthearted and magnanimous if the subject of Critical Mass comes up in the course of a conversation. For as the Ferrando family was coming to town to celebrate the birthday of one of its members, their minivan inadvertently rolled into the midst of a Critical Mass ride.
As such beatniks are wont to do, instead of adhering to the message of docility and accommodation they seek to impose the remainder of us, like the jungle heathen they admire as a culture superior to our own, these radical bicyclists descended in attack formation on the hapless family. In a display of tolerance and understanding no doubt, riders surrounded the minivan and began pummeling the vehicle with fists.
According to the report, one rider even hefted his bike through the air and smashed the wear window of the van even through there were children inside. Yet in a bastion of sodomy such as San Francisco where natural family and affections are so despised such a domestic arrangement is more likely to make one a target of such violence rather than protected from it. After having been set upon by such savages, some in the mob wanted the family in the minivan arrested rather than the perpetrators.
Had things gone as they should have as soon as the unfortunate incident unfolded, the driver should have floored the accelerator and taken out as many as necessary that were impeding the family’s path to safety. Frankly, it would make a good scene for next season’s 24 if Jack Bauer could hop out of a van in a similar scene and put down these fanatical pedal pushers like they ought to be when they so blatantly get out of line.
Those conditioned to bow at the filthy feet of the environmentalists will drone on about the need for motorized vehicles to share the road with bicycles. However, since these protestors do not follow proper procedures by failing to file a permit to demonstrate, they have no right to block the flow of traffic.
As the inherently slower and less powerful vehicles, by default the bicyclists should be compelled to move to the side of the road. This human debris are usually the type to drone on incessantly about the impropriety of blocking access to abortion clinics. Then why are city officials doing next to nothing to stop the infringement of a human right more fundamental than shiskabobbing the unborn, namely unimpeded travel?
Those deluded by Critical Mass will probably liken these riders to the Tinnamen Square protestors in 1989 standing down the barrel of a Red Chinese tank. However, things are not quite at the point yet in this country where those wanting to bring about social change cannot avail themselves of other means of getting their message across. The thing of it is, what they have to say probably isn’t worth considering all that much in the first place.
by Frederick Meekins
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Apart from the humor of the headline, is kind of disturbing you can be arrested for a hissy fit where from the sound of it you don't even lay a hand on somebody.
Had he claimed he was impeding traffic as a statement against global warming, he'd probably now be having the ACLU and Al Gore running to his defense.
And I suppose as a result in the grand name of public safety this will be enough to abridge his Second Amendment rights as is the case in a growing number of jurisdictions.