Monday, January 31, 2011
Friday, January 28, 2011
Albert Mohler endorsed a statement that the suburbs are not a good place in which for the elderly to live. Obviously he does not live in an area where there is mariachi music is blared at 2 am or the sighting of a White person is about as rare as a Sasquatch or even a unicorn.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Monday, January 24, 2011
Obama shrugs that “China has a different political system than we do”. So did South Africa under Apartheid. So why didn’t we just leave that regime to their own human rights abridgements as well? Is it somehow moral to slaughter your fellow citizens so long as they are the same basic color that you are?
Friday, January 21, 2011
A Facebook evangelist insinuates that one is occultic if one has no problem with women wearing pants, cutting their hair, or riding in a car with an unrelated man. Though the poster was not necessarily Reconstructionist per say, would Reconcstructionists holding to a similar position reinstitute witch trials for those engaged in such activities or have problems with Muslims that punish for such offenses.
A proposed DC law would require snow to be shoveled from the sidewalk within 8 hours of the precipitation ceasing. So if the snow stops at 9 pm, it must be removed by 5 am. If so, is DC also going to relax handgun regulations so residents can protect themselves in the middle of the night fulfilling this civic obligation?
Thursday, January 20, 2011
- Watch more Videos at Vodpod.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
A number of leftist Democrats either boycotted the reading of the Constitution in the House of Representatives or denigrated the ceremony.
These representatives should either resign or be removed from office.
For if they think that the very thing that authorizes them to hold office and wield authority is irrelevant, shameful or outdated propaganda, they certainly shouldn't be granted a hefty salary under a system that they have exhibited so much contempt for that they can't even grant the respect to to hear read aloud.
Americans would be shocked and outraged to learn of an athlete thinking themselves too good to be bothered with learning the basic rules of the game.
Then shouldn't we be even more so when it comes to those that actually assume that they have more of a right to run and order our lives than we do?
by Frederick Meekins
Interesting those that think you are "deceived" if you attend a Glenn Beck rally don't have a problem with hobnobbing with Reconstructionists that would put to death those disagreeing with them on points of theology and likely disenfranshise those they disagree with over matters of ecclesiology
CNN in an uproar over a guest using the word "crosshairs". I remember back in the day before that network lost their gonads on of the channel's most entertaining programs actually being named "Crossfire". That goes a step beyond "crosshairs" because "crossfire" denotes the gun actually being discharged.
Wonder if the spokesman of the Birmingham Islamic Society upset that the Gov. of Alabama only considers fellow Christians his brothers & sisters is in as much an outrage over actual abridgements of human rights by Muslims against those considered infidels in the eyes of that faith.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Monday, January 17, 2011
If Christians are to avoid altogether books such as "The Lord Of The Rings" and "The Chronicles Of Narnia" because these stories contain wizards and witches, by definition does that prohibition also include the Bible since it too mentions witches and the like?
Like the Bible, don't these works warn that what we categorize as magic is not for mortal beings and in many instances depict what happens to those that succumb to this particular temptation?
In regards to Gandalf, though he is referred to as a wizard, in Tolkien's background materials, weren't the wizards beings more akin to angels in terms of their ontology?
More importantly, for hyperpious critics to condemn these books in such minute detail, wouldn't they have had to have read them or at least have had to study them closely?
If so, then on what grounds do they forbid you the opportunity to read these materials if for no other reason than to verify the conclusions that they have arrived at?
Rather, wouldn't the more respectable position be to warn the reader and to let them decide for themselves?
by Frederick Meekins
Friday, January 14, 2011
Failing to fulfill promised obligations to those having reached a certain age seems to be a modus operandi for Gingrich.
He dumped two wives before they ever got the chance to be as fat and gray as he has become.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
In the attempt to make the amount more manageable, perhaps naming rights could be sold to various government landmarks or agencies in a manner similar to the way corporations currently purchase the ones to athletic stadiums.
For example, the Lincoln Memorial could be renamed “the Lincoln Mercury Lincoln Memorial”.
Social Security checks and statements could have boldly emblazoned across them “Brought to you by Depends Undergarments” or the name of a prominent retirement community in a given area.
The Capitol Building could have a giant Pepsi logo painted on it for the right price.
Prominent national parks could be sold off or contracted out as Disney resorts provided the Magic Kingdom agreed to leave these land holdings in a state close to natural. Given the levels to which gas prices are expected to rise over the coming years, it’s not like anyone other than the elites are going to be able to travel to enjoy these treasures anyway.
Since it has been hinted at in occultic circles that the Washington Monument is actually a gigantic phallus, it could be renamed “Trojan’s Washington Monument”.
Of course in each of these cases, steps could be taken to ensure that corporate influence would be limited to advertising and image purposes only.
Still distasteful and undignified?
Of course it is; but it less so than your children starving to death for lack resources available to feed them, being conscripted into Red Chinese slave labor factories, or having to surrender the nation’s daughters to Arab harems in the attempt to settle astronomical debt.
by Frederick Meekins
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
A quote often attributed to the NEA defines mental illness as an allegiance to the Founding Fathers, parents, belief in a supernatural being, and the sovereignty of the United States. Before we go along with liberals in agreeing that firearms should be kept from the mentally ill, it needs to be deliberately clarified where they stand on the above definition.
Interestingly, though, none of the gathered researchers and theoreticians looked like they would be all that much into manual labor.
So I guess in their thinking, it will be up to you to give up your standard of living. They, on the other hand, will get to become the new feudal lords still sitting around thinking what by then will be useless kinds of thoughts while you will be the one toiling away in the fields.
Though an intellectually stimulating program and discussion, one couldn’t help but notice the hypocrisy of the analysts filmed driving around in their automobiles lamenting how human beings should have never been allowed to advance to the level of technology that we now enjoy.
Interesting how the old bald guy with the earring gripping about the decline of fossil fuel supplies never said a word about part of that crisis resulting from legislative and bureaucratic prohibitions against exploring for and developing new sources of oil within our own borders and off our own shores where other world powers are beginning to stake a claim.
If those assembled were suppose to be such experts about the threats that could lay waste to modern civilization, how come not a single word was raised regarding electromagnetic pulse weapons?
by Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
A Fox News talking head made a fuss about Gabrielle Giffords being the first Jewish woman elected to Congress from Arizona. Would the assassination attempt be less tragic if it had been on a Christian man?
In analyzing the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, blame is not placed on the gunmen for this evil deed but on politics becoming “too personal”. But aren’t the liberals the one that made it that way in their efforts to control every facet of existence?
Maybe political rhetoric would not have grown so intense if the government had done its job of securing the borders and minding its own business as to what type of toilets we have in our homes, what kind of lightbulbs we decide to illuminate them with and what kind of food we decide to stick in our mouths.
The shooting of Arizona representative Gabrielle Giffords is tragic. Too bad there isn't as much outrage over illegal aliens murdering, raping, and looting the average citizens of that state. Perhaps the Speaker of the House ought to make a statement that an attack on any run of the mill American is an attack on all Americans, not just when these horrors befall the ruling elites.
An ABC news report reveals that the shooter of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords listed The Communist Manifesto as one of his favorite books and didn’t make it past the urinalysis in his attempts to enlist in the military, essentially meaning he was strung out on dope. It has also been learned that the gunmen had constructed an occult altar on his parents' property. Seems he has more in common with Obama voters than members of the Tea Party.
A fuss is being made that the gunmen's Satanic altar was in a camouflage tent. Would the hyperfeminized media have pointed out its coloration if it had been pink with lacy frills?
If all men are created equal, the murderous Arizona scumbag deserves no more of a stiffer sentence for killing the federal judge than he does for the young girl or senior citizens he murdered.
Is Congress really postponing scheduled business to focus on the tragedy or merely using this as an excuse for an extended weekend that few will have the gonads to question?
Will the tragic AZ shooting serve as the Reichstag Fire in the attempt to abolish the Internet, Talk Radio, and the First Amendment? Of course, in the New World Order that will likely spring from this, merely raising such a suggestion will likely get one incarcerated in the near future.
Stenny Hoyer claims Gifford's astronaut husband wants the nation's political rhetoric toned down. News flash to Hoyer, while sympathetic to the Congresswoman's plight, this isn't the 1950's anymore. There is no reason compelling Americans to defer without question to the preferences to an astronaut.
If astronauts are going to preach to us from the Space Station as to what we can say, does that mean preachers can now run the space program from their pulpits?
And what if we refuse to "tone down our rhetoric", which means conservatives are expected to silence ourselves. Not many ways legitimately around "Congress shall make no law..." unless you plan to repeal it.
Does the government intend to establish a Bureau of Verbal Tone & Infliction to objectively determine what rhetoric "needs to be toned down" or has crossed the line?
An Associated Press story claims the scumbag shooter was noted for being "confrontational, nonlinear, and obsessed with how words create reality". So basically, he was indistinguishable from the average postmodernist university literature professor.
If Congresswoman Giffords had been 15 to 20 years older than she is now, the policy wonks behind the Obama healthcare legislation she voted for might not see her worthy of the heroic actions taken to save her innocent life.
If the Arizona Tragedy is to serve as justification for additional gun control, does that mean Gabrielle Giffords should have her gun confiscated because someone else shot her?
The crazed Tucson sheriff claims that the shooting of Representative Giffords was a result of the Arizona ID law intended to crackdown on illegal alien criminals. So basically, citizens thinking that those the world doesn’t come to a screeching halt over when befalling a horrible tragedy are as valuable in terms of their basic humanity and thus worthy of the same protection as the vaunted members of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government are the ones responsible for this act of terrorism.
It has been projected that energy bills are expected to triple. Before it's all over with, overheated rhetoric is about the only warmth Americans may be left with as no one will be able to afford gas or lights.
by Frederick Meekins
Monday, January 10, 2011
Sunday, January 09, 2011
An ABC news report reveals that the shooter of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords listed The Communist Manifesto as one of his favorite books and didn’t make it past the urinalysis in his attempts to enlist in the military, essentially meaning he was strung out on dope. Seems he has more in common with Obama voters than members of the Tea Party.
The shooting of Arizona representative Gabrielle Giffords is tragic. Too bad there isn't as much outrage over illegal aliens murdering, raping, and looting the average citizens of that state. Perhaps Boehneer ought to make a statement that an attack on any run of the mill American is an attack on all Americans, not just when these horrors befall the ruling elites.
Saturday, January 08, 2011
Friday, January 07, 2011
Promoting her book on “The O’Reilly Factor”, Roseanne Barr declared that she is a socialist. Then shouldn’t all the proceeds be confiscated by the government? Or, rather, like the majority of leftists is this aging sow only publically minded when it comes to other people’s money? The communal work farm she proposed sounded disturbingly like Jonestown
Ted Nugent claims Sarah Palin not ready for the Presidency . As someone whose primary skill is strumming his instrument, isn't he even less qualified than the average garbage man to be offerring policital advice? At least the garbage men know about providing a government service. Shouldn't the Ingram Doctrine of "Sh...ut Up And Sing" be invoked against this celebrity?
Thursday, January 06, 2011
Seems my Huckleberry Finn prophecy has come to pass in the span of a day or a mere matter of hours. During the reading of the Constitution, parts of the document such as the 3/5th Compromise deemed offensive were omitted from the public reading for fears of being offensive. Will clauses referring to the Freedom of Religion, the Right to Bear Arms, and the Takings Clause be deliberately overlooked in future years during this exercise?
A crazed Christian Reconstructionist, in a number of Facebook posts, apparently thinks the mass of (as of yet) unexplained) fish die offs of birds and fish in the South East is a laughing matter. How does he know that groups of human beings in that region aren't going to be the next group of creatures to keel over unexpectedly? If such a tragedy were to occur and provided his own family didn't rank among the victims, he'd be the type of ass clown to say such victims got what they deserved as a part of God's judgment.
R.C. Sproul "Jr" is scheduled to speak at the Family Economics Conference 2011. Wonder if his presentation includes how to illegally use tax identification numbers & threatening members of his congregation that have considered leaving his church. Seems he is an expert at those tactics.
If the "n-word" can be removed from Huckleberry Finn because it offends when pulled from its literary & historical context, what is to prevent similar editorial decisions from being made in reference to words found in the Bible such as "damn", "hell", "sin" and "sodomite"?
Wednesday, January 05, 2011
Tuesday, January 04, 2011
Each winter without out fail, the flu sends millions to the local pharmacy in search of some kind of relief. However, it won’t be this pesky virus that will give you a headache and make your stomach churn.
In order to purchase pseudoephedrine, consumers must now produce a photo ID (something that is apparently an outrage to require illegal aliens to do when accused of a crime) with these details added into a computer database tracking how much and often you purchase this perfectly legal substance. It is claimed that this procedure is necessary as a result of the meth epidemic sweeping across the country since pseudoephedrine is an ingredient used to make this drug.
While methamphetamine might be illegal, pseudoephedrine is not and is available over the counter in smaller doses. If the nanny state wants to restrict access to this substance, why not make it unavailable in its entirety without a prescription or enact an outright prohibition all together.
It could be argued that there are already restrictions on other products deleterious to bodily health such as cigarettes and booze. However, the regulations stipulating how these products are to be dispersed are not part of the Patriot Act nor are (as far as I know since I have never purchased either) the details of the photo ID necessary to purchase them entered into a computer database.
And at least with a six pack of beer, you can actually caresses or fondle the package before finalizing the purchase. Simple cold pills are now concealed behind the counter and one must bow and scrape before authorities in order to be granted access to them, no doubt as part of yet another training exercise to further condition a once free people into acquiescing control over additional areas of their lives to the technocrats wielding power.
What is to prevent these kinds of restrictions from being applied to additional legal products “our betters” have deemed communally irresponsible? For while shoppers have to surrender their most private information just for a bit of sinus relief, condoms hang on the wrack just a few aisles away with anyone free to thumb through them.
Americans are constantly reminded that we must endure these embarrassing indignities for the sake of public health. If that is the case, then why shouldn’t we be required to produce a marriage license before being permitted to purchase a prophylactic?
After all, in the case of decongestants, we are being inconvenienced because of the small percentage that abuse a legitimate product. Then shouldn’t similar safeguards be put in place in reference to a product that, whether we want to admit it or not, all of us could be tempted into using illicitly? After all, in terms of the costs, fornication likely surpasses the expense caused by abused Sudafed tablets as evidenced by the lives shattered by sexually transmitted diseases, welfare payments to unwed mothers, and the conception of the next generation of meth addicts who will end up strung out on this chemical trash because their parents are to busy out whoring around rather than raising the babies they have made.
Some may not care one way or the other if the government steps in to regulate either of these errant behaviors, thinking that their own exemplary character will prevent them from falling under the surveillance of government operatives. However, even though at this moment this manner of draconian regulation is directed towards behaviors most would consider social pathologies, it won't be long until this kind of bureaucratic procedure is applied to other basic human behaviors no sane person would have any qualms about.
According to a piece of legislation at one time submitted to the Mississippi legislature, it would be illegal for a licensed restaurant to serve obese patrons. Some are quick to point out that the measure quickly died in light of the public outcry against it.
Maybe so for now. But does anyone honestly believe that this will be the last time we hear something like this?
This measure or something like it will be proposed again and again in legislative bodies across the country until it is no longer news and is quietly enacted without much fanfare. Or, as in the case of homosexuality and assorted abridgments of liberty such as high taxes and government agents interrogating you over how many toilets you have in your home, most Americans will still oppose the advance of these policies within their own hearts and minds but their resistance will be so eroded that the will just accept the regimented status quo without much protest. The dispirited will conclude there is little point in speaking up anyway.
Preventing drug abuse is an important health policy concern. However, no legitimate interest is served by treating the entire population as potential suspects without a single hint of probable cause.
by Frederick Meekins