Commentary Telling It Like It Is To Those That Might Not Want To Hear It & Links To News Around The Internet
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
If MacDonald's intends to decrease the serving of fries and increase the serving of fruit or vegetables in Happy Meals, are they really happy meals anymore? This ought to be borderline false advertising. It is claimed this adjustment to the menu has been made in response to the demands of parents. Or is this change more out of fear of the termagant Frau Obama? If parents are really behind it, it is likely those annoying liberal ones that stuffed their faces with whatever they pleased as youngsters but demand of their own progeny a level of asceticism similar to that of a desert hermit.
Monday, July 25, 2011
The act of violence must remain the primary focus regarding the Oslo shooting tragedy. But isn’t it creepy that a political party is running a youth camp? Are the same tolerancemongers opposed to Promisekeepers rallies and the Answers In Genesis creation science museum going to speak out against such closed recreational associations and environments?
If wrong 4 women 2 take measures 2 lessen labor pain cuz of the curse imposed in Gen 3 upon women, then is it sinful 4 a man 2 b employed in any occupations other than physical labor in general & agriculture in specific according 2 that very same passage? Or as often occurs in many Fundamentalist churches do we emphasize those verses making the life of women more toilsome & gloss over those inconviencing the men.
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Shining The Light On Laser Pointer Penalties
The Federal Aviation Administration has announced plans to impose fines as high as $11,000 upon those caught shining laser pointers into airplane cockpits.
Exposure to the beam emitted by such a device can result in temporary blindness, thus theoretically resulting in a major air catastrophe if a flight crew were unexpectedly incapacitated.
In a sense, such a regulation is all good and called for.
However, one can't but help ask the question how the perpetrators of such malfeasance can be identified at such a distance.
One account categorized the proposed penalty as civil rather than criminal in nature.
As such, it should be pointed out that the threshold to impose such are often lower and occasionally do not afford those they are leveled against with the traditional procedural protections of the judicial system.
In light of the way certain regulations regarding drug possession are implemented, these enforcement operations could end up being as much about raising revenue and seizing desired property as it is about making the skies a friendlier place to fly.
For example, under certain instances of civil penalties and forfeiture, those ultimately cleared of any criminal wrong doing in regards to the drug offenses leveled against them do not necessarily have their property returned to them despite never having been convicted as a part of due process.
Often assorted agencies end up retaining the seized objects and parcels or require those such possessions should rightly revert back to to go through additional bureaucratic procedures that consume both time and resources. This for the purpose of pressuring the individual to relent to the seizure of their property and to further enrich the lawyers for whom the regulatory behemoth was ultimately designed to benefit.
The reasoning is that such property could potentially be used in a future crime. And in the case of an automobile seized from the owner despite the fact that it was being driven by someone else at the time of a contraband interdiction, the standard reply goes something like, "Well, you should have been more careful as to whom you let borrow your car so we are going to auction it off now anyway ."
Thus, will fines for the shining of laser pointers into jetliner cockpits be issued against the person actually aiming the device or rather the title holder of the land from which the beam originated?
Eventually, if an area has a disproportionate number of laser pointer incidents or even the potential for a disproportionate number of laser pointer incidents, the government will step in to preemptively snatch the property in question. What they then decide to do with the disputed parcel may have nothing whatsoever to do with enhancing air travel safety but more about rewarding contributors in real estate development.
Vigilance against the terrorist menace out to destroy the American way of life is essential. However, perhaps even more imperative is keeping an eye on those that would use this threat to undermine life, liberty, and property.
By Frederick Meekins
Exposure to the beam emitted by such a device can result in temporary blindness, thus theoretically resulting in a major air catastrophe if a flight crew were unexpectedly incapacitated.
In a sense, such a regulation is all good and called for.
However, one can't but help ask the question how the perpetrators of such malfeasance can be identified at such a distance.
One account categorized the proposed penalty as civil rather than criminal in nature.
As such, it should be pointed out that the threshold to impose such are often lower and occasionally do not afford those they are leveled against with the traditional procedural protections of the judicial system.
In light of the way certain regulations regarding drug possession are implemented, these enforcement operations could end up being as much about raising revenue and seizing desired property as it is about making the skies a friendlier place to fly.
For example, under certain instances of civil penalties and forfeiture, those ultimately cleared of any criminal wrong doing in regards to the drug offenses leveled against them do not necessarily have their property returned to them despite never having been convicted as a part of due process.
Often assorted agencies end up retaining the seized objects and parcels or require those such possessions should rightly revert back to to go through additional bureaucratic procedures that consume both time and resources. This for the purpose of pressuring the individual to relent to the seizure of their property and to further enrich the lawyers for whom the regulatory behemoth was ultimately designed to benefit.
The reasoning is that such property could potentially be used in a future crime. And in the case of an automobile seized from the owner despite the fact that it was being driven by someone else at the time of a contraband interdiction, the standard reply goes something like, "Well, you should have been more careful as to whom you let borrow your car so we are going to auction it off now anyway ."
Thus, will fines for the shining of laser pointers into jetliner cockpits be issued against the person actually aiming the device or rather the title holder of the land from which the beam originated?
Eventually, if an area has a disproportionate number of laser pointer incidents or even the potential for a disproportionate number of laser pointer incidents, the government will step in to preemptively snatch the property in question. What they then decide to do with the disputed parcel may have nothing whatsoever to do with enhancing air travel safety but more about rewarding contributors in real estate development.
Vigilance against the terrorist menace out to destroy the American way of life is essential. However, perhaps even more imperative is keeping an eye on those that would use this threat to undermine life, liberty, and property.
By Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
The Communist sympathizers at Sojourners magazine in an act of capitalism are selling a "Friend Of An Immigrant" t-shirts. How about a "Friend Of America" shirt specifically intended for foreigners to let people know that the United States is their highest national loyalty and that they aren't here for the public to pick up the tab for them?
Monday, July 18, 2011
You Haven't Seen The Last Of Wiener
With a pending financial collapse, you might have to spend your declining years selling pencils on a street corner.
It will likely help you feel a bit warmer though, that we haven't heard of the last of wiener in connection to the federal government.
The Traditional Value Coalition has uncovered tax money going to a study determining how penis size in gays influences whether they played the part of the pencil or that of the sharpener, if you get my meaning.
It will likely help you feel a bit warmer though, that we haven't heard of the last of wiener in connection to the federal government.
The Traditional Value Coalition has uncovered tax money going to a study determining how penis size in gays influences whether they played the part of the pencil or that of the sharpener, if you get my meaning.
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Chris Plante of WMAL made an astute observation. If pension payments for the assorted elderly of varied occupation status and wages for regular government employees are to be halted should the debt limit not be raised in time, will the delay in the transfer of payments also be applied to the Obama advisors making six figure salaries?
Friday, July 15, 2011
Leftists Plot Materialistic Afterlife
Futurist Ray Kurzweil, Former Vice President Al Gore, and Bill Maher are scheduled to take part in an all-star panel discussion titled "Transcendent Man” broadcast to select theaters across America.
The forum will in part discuss the merging of man and machine for the purposes of indefinitely extending the human lifespan.
No doubt listening to Al Gore drone on and on will definitely make it feel like an eternity has elapsed.
Apparently, overcrowding isn't the pending calamity he often makes it out to be. That is unless of course, his friends in the New World Order are planning a culling of the human herd.
Other than a profound hatred of God and a contempt for those that believe in an omnipotent creator, what qualifications does Bill Maher posses to speak as an authority figure on such an ethically complex subject?
The fool has said in his heart that there is no God.
How else does it explain that an individual can belittle the prospect of Heaven in one breath and then grasp at straws in the hopes of delaying the inevitable by either hooking oneself up to a ghastly array of machines or somehow electrochemically uploading the memories we have accumulated our few brief years upon the earth as some kind of accumulated database that might eventually animate some android duplicate of our own visage?
G.K. Chesterton is said to have quipped that the danger when we no longer believe in God is not that we won’t believe in anything but rather that we will end up believing in anything.
by Frederick Meekins
The forum will in part discuss the merging of man and machine for the purposes of indefinitely extending the human lifespan.
No doubt listening to Al Gore drone on and on will definitely make it feel like an eternity has elapsed.
Apparently, overcrowding isn't the pending calamity he often makes it out to be. That is unless of course, his friends in the New World Order are planning a culling of the human herd.
Other than a profound hatred of God and a contempt for those that believe in an omnipotent creator, what qualifications does Bill Maher posses to speak as an authority figure on such an ethically complex subject?
The fool has said in his heart that there is no God.
How else does it explain that an individual can belittle the prospect of Heaven in one breath and then grasp at straws in the hopes of delaying the inevitable by either hooking oneself up to a ghastly array of machines or somehow electrochemically uploading the memories we have accumulated our few brief years upon the earth as some kind of accumulated database that might eventually animate some android duplicate of our own visage?
G.K. Chesterton is said to have quipped that the danger when we no longer believe in God is not that we won’t believe in anything but rather that we will end up believing in anything.
by Frederick Meekins
Mind Your Own Condiments
As a part of bread and circuses designed to keep the workers from revolting, an associate's employer bought the staff lunch.
The sandwiches were procured from an establishment that went out of its way to point out that mayo, mustard or catsup would not be available.
Why does everything have to be elevated to the level of some grand struggle poking the average American in the eye regarding the things most of us enjoy?
If you regularly patronize such an establishment, in all likelihood, you are one of these types that believe your own gastronomical peculiarities should be imposed upon everybody else.
If this was just all about free enterprise, wouldn’t the true entrepreneur allow the consumer to make their own policy in regards to condiments?
by Frederick Meekins
The sandwiches were procured from an establishment that went out of its way to point out that mayo, mustard or catsup would not be available.
Why does everything have to be elevated to the level of some grand struggle poking the average American in the eye regarding the things most of us enjoy?
If you regularly patronize such an establishment, in all likelihood, you are one of these types that believe your own gastronomical peculiarities should be imposed upon everybody else.
If this was just all about free enterprise, wouldn’t the true entrepreneur allow the consumer to make their own policy in regards to condiments?
by Frederick Meekins
A suburban MD eatery called Rhode Island Reds in honor of Communism is closing in part because of the owner's disillusionment with overwhelming bureaucratic intrusion. Isn't that exactly what you deserve if you are going to glorify the most homicidal & liberty destroying ideology to plague modern man?
Thursday, July 14, 2011
In uttering as the villain in Transformers: Dark Of The Moon that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, wonder if it dawned on Leonard Nimoy finally what ill this utilitarian catchphrase could be invoked to justify when he often invoked it in a heroic standpoint as Spock for all these years.
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Frau Obama Gluts On Junk Food
A Tufts University nutritionist insists criticism of the First Lady's dietary selection is an invasion of her privacy. What about the invasion of Obama's policies into the lives of the American people?
An Australian law demanding Islamic women remove their veils when requested by police or face a fine or jail time is being condemned as "culturally insensitive". Will these diversitymongers condemn death sentences handed down for Muslims converting to Christianity as "culturally insensitive"? When Westerners travel to these trashpile nations, we are admonished to respect the customs there whether we agree with the backwards practices or not. How about these immigrants start abiding by our bizarre customs for a change? After all, they came to live here and not we there.
Monday, July 11, 2011
Thursday, July 07, 2011
If Mark Halperin was suspended indefinitely for using the vernacular in reference to the male appendage in regards to the President, shouldn’t Chris Matthews be dismissed altogether for using the verbal form of the same vulgarity in connection with America? Shouldn’t it be a greater offense to speak ill of the entire country than a single individual no more important than the rest of us in terms of fundamental ontology?
Wednesday, July 06, 2011
Did Lack Of Pollution Spark Global Warming?
Interesting how when America burns coal, we are contributing to global warming, but when Red China does, they are applauded for halting this climate change phenomena.
Obama Administration Allies Itself With Homicidal Pedophile
To those claiming bad things will happen to Americans in other countries if we do not abide by these diplomatic technicalities, perhaps Americans ought not to be going to these hellhole countries.
Tuesday, July 05, 2011
The Halperin Hullabaloo
An MSNBC analyst called Obama a BLEEP. As spineless as the President is, one shouldn't be so sure he should be categorized as anything so distinctively male.
In the sex-dominated culture of the leftist media, wouldn't calling Obama a BLEEP actually be the highest possible compliment?
Calling Obama a male appendage is no worse than calling anyone else that.
The President is owed no more verbal deference than anybody else.
White House propagandists insist it's inappropriate to refer to any President as a BLEEP. Are you really going to tell me no one ever giggled at the double entnde of referring to Nixon as "Tricky Dick". Or that Clinton was only called "Slick Willy" because of his political acumen and not his philanderous nature.
If the President is this sensitive as to be profoundly disturbed by a single reporter enunciating a reaction to what was definitely not the rhetorical high point of Obama’s public career, how can this President ever hope to stand up to Al Qaeda, the Red Chinese or the Russians?
So long as you don't threaten violence, it is not the concern of the White House how you refer to any president.
How come our ears will shatter if we hear Obama referred to as a BLEEP but there isn't second thought about sending out more information over the airwaves regarding feminine hygiene products and male erectile dysfunction than most members of the respective opposite sexes ever cared to know?
Why on MSNBC is it deemed an outrage to refer to Obama as a "BLEEP but referring to conservatives as "teabaggers" is worthy of a hearty chuckle?
Shouldn’t Americans be more offended that Obama minions called MSNBC in an intimidating manner rather than that Halperin called Obama a BLEEP?
There is nothing in the Constitution authorizing any branch of government to determine the propriety of what names a citizen may call the President. Seems to me one of the document’s primary provisions cautions against the government from doing such a thing.
Maybe if more Americans had the courage to tell a President he’s been acting like a BLEEP, this country wouldn’t be as in bad of shape.
Since Halperin’s elocutionary faux pas, broadcasters have been tripping over themselves as to the necessity of respecting the President. How about the President respecting the American people for a change?
by Frederick Meekins
In the sex-dominated culture of the leftist media, wouldn't calling Obama a BLEEP actually be the highest possible compliment?
Calling Obama a male appendage is no worse than calling anyone else that.
The President is owed no more verbal deference than anybody else.
White House propagandists insist it's inappropriate to refer to any President as a BLEEP. Are you really going to tell me no one ever giggled at the double entnde of referring to Nixon as "Tricky Dick". Or that Clinton was only called "Slick Willy" because of his political acumen and not his philanderous nature.
If the President is this sensitive as to be profoundly disturbed by a single reporter enunciating a reaction to what was definitely not the rhetorical high point of Obama’s public career, how can this President ever hope to stand up to Al Qaeda, the Red Chinese or the Russians?
So long as you don't threaten violence, it is not the concern of the White House how you refer to any president.
How come our ears will shatter if we hear Obama referred to as a BLEEP but there isn't second thought about sending out more information over the airwaves regarding feminine hygiene products and male erectile dysfunction than most members of the respective opposite sexes ever cared to know?
Why on MSNBC is it deemed an outrage to refer to Obama as a "BLEEP but referring to conservatives as "teabaggers" is worthy of a hearty chuckle?
Shouldn’t Americans be more offended that Obama minions called MSNBC in an intimidating manner rather than that Halperin called Obama a BLEEP?
There is nothing in the Constitution authorizing any branch of government to determine the propriety of what names a citizen may call the President. Seems to me one of the document’s primary provisions cautions against the government from doing such a thing.
Maybe if more Americans had the courage to tell a President he’s been acting like a BLEEP, this country wouldn’t be as in bad of shape.
Since Halperin’s elocutionary faux pas, broadcasters have been tripping over themselves as to the necessity of respecting the President. How about the President respecting the American people for a change?
by Frederick Meekins
Monday, July 04, 2011
Married Military Personnel Deserve No More Benefits Than The Unmarried
Who is to say what a "sham" marriage is?
If it is viewed as one primarily for material gain rather than love, most of the marriages in history have been sham marriages.
The entire concept of nobility and especially the British royal family is based upon the concept of sham marriages
If it is viewed as one primarily for material gain rather than love, most of the marriages in history have been sham marriages.
The entire concept of nobility and especially the British royal family is based upon the concept of sham marriages
A new Captain Morgan advertisement encourages consumers to "Live. Love. Loot." While the first two aren't that objectionable, the third suggestion is certainly over the line. Since the peddlers of this particular booze want to promote a buccaneer ethos, they shouldn't object if aspiring brigands pilfer the brand off the store shelves or, better yet, if a mob rampages through the homes of company executives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)