Monday, February 21, 2005

Liberal Maryland Suburb A Hub Of Human Trafficing

No wonder bigshots are for unrestricted immigration.

The suburbs of Montgomery County, Maryland have a reputation as a bastion of liberalism and increasingly as a region in which English is a dieing language as immigrants flood into the Washington Metropolitan Area.

While these self-appointed scions of progressivism get up there and hem and haw about the wonders of multiculturalism and diversity, what they really want is an ample supply of pliant slave labor.

According to the Sentinel.com, a number of migrants recently testified before the county council how their employers there forced them to engage in what amounts to a form of involuntary servitude by withholding pay and employing various forms of abuse in an attempt to keep them in line. Many of the violators are diplomats with immunity.

So remember when Democrats and leftwing Republicans lecture you on your racist attitude for not wanting your country overrun by alien cultures, these elitists won't even give these workers the pittance wages promised to their employees and the minimal dignity even migrants are owed as fellow human beings.

It has been said that a rising tide lifts all boats. Likewise, those shooting holes in the ship of state will cause us all to drown, especially when those pretending to be captains are the only ones with access to the lifeboats.

Current immigration practices have little whatsoever with elevating the status of the so-called downtrodden, but are rather about dragging the rest of us down to that abysmal level.

Copyright 2005 by Frederick Meekins

Witch Doctors Go Mainstream

Mexican Death Squads Assasinating Americans

Sunday, February 20, 2005

Elitist Conservative Laments The Rise Of The Blogosphere

Does Kathleen Parker really fear the blogosphere's impact on freedom of speech or its tendency to cut into the turf of payed professional media.

From this column, one gets the elitist impression that only traditional journalists and columnists are wise enough to make the distinctions of what is and is not news worthy.

Saturday, February 19, 2005

State University Needs Lesson In Priorities

In the propaganda put out by governments at all levels, considerable emphasis is often placed on the importance of education and the respect those in public office profess to have for their fellow civil servants pursuing the subdued honors of educating the next generation rather than the more obvious glories of elected position.

In the state of Maryland, such lofty sentiments about aiding in the dispersion of knowledge are little more than beguiling words when it comes to putting the state’s money where the mouths of the politicians are.

At the University of Maryland, those facilitating the orderly transfer of knowledge are so valued that the servants of the people are required to render tribute for the privilege of arranging the storage necessary to drive their own vehicles to work. Campus employees much pay at least $314 a year for a parking permit.

However, it seems even this is not enough as permit prices are going to increase to $345 for employees making under $50,000 and $517 a year for those making over $50,000. According to the February 3, 2005 edition of the Diamondback, the increase will in part go to finance increases in employee insurance benefits and overall utility bills.

But while university and state administrators sing the blues of hard times, from very same edition of the paper detailing the parking crisis is a story that causes the reader unfamiliar with the twisted logic of higher education to question whether resources there are being allocated in the manner most expeditious to facilitating the university’s core mission and its responsibilities to those charged with carrying out these tasks. For while the faculty and staff are being compelled to aide in shouldering a $80,000 Department of Transportation Services budget, things aren’t apparently that tight as the Health Center had no problem dispensing 200,000 free condoms --- some of which were flavored --- provided by the Maryland State AIDS Administration.

As will be expected, the kneejerk enthusiasts of decadence will snap, “It’s nobodies business at a university who uses condoms.” And in a sense they are correct.

If college students want to be treated as adults, shouldn’t they be required to procure their own prophylactics out of their own disposable incomes?

Those continuing to wallow in their own debauchery will no doubt continue to insist upon the need for privacy. What better reason then to eliminate campus condom distribution programs?

For where will privacy be better protected: at the campus health center where heaven only knows whom you might bump into from one of your classes or at a store or supermarket removed from the prying eyes of college gossips where the only faces recognized are those of the presidents whose visages demarcate the denominations of currency?

Those still affectionate towards the condom racket will no doubt whine, “But students couldn’t otherwise afford condoms.” If that’s the case, should they really be carrying on in such a manner as to need them?

One of the purposes of a college education is to make one a civilized individual, one aspect of which is realizing one cannot always satisfy one’s desires at the moment one would necessarily like to.

One does not take on the responsibilities of a mature relationship unless one can afford to do so. The mature individual does not expect the government to pick up the tab for their assorted pleasures.

In the financially trying times in which we live, policy makers must carefully determine the educational priorities of the jurisdictions over which they govern. Will they use what resources are available to properly compensate those charged with the responsibility of turning the lofty ideals of education into a concrete reality or will they squander them fostering salacious pursuits that degrade both the individual as well as the broader society.

Copyright 2005 by Frederick Meekins

Wednesday, February 16, 2005

The Sweet Taste Of Winter Vindication

Few things can compare with being labeled a lunatic only to have one’s opinions and observations later confirmed as insightful commonsense. Recently I got to experience this brand of joy in reference to two different issues.

This past holiday season, news consumers could hardly turn on the television or surf the Internet without coming across stories about the escalating campaign to undermine Christmas in the conflict having the ultimate goal of abolishing Christianity as the foundation of American society. To many, this culture war crescendo comes as a surprise; I predicted it as far back as 1994 and have written at least one column regarding the controversies surrounding Christmas every year since then.

I feel vindicated even more, however, on the second issue. In spring of 2004, I wrote a couple of columns on the impropriety of applauding unwed American Idol contestant Fantasia Barrino as a role model worthy of emulation by the youth of the nation.

From the response to the columns, you would have thought I suggested everyone ought to toss their grandmothers into oncoming traffic. After getting over one thousand hits at one website, in an act of unparallelled gratitude I was shortly thereafter banished from its roster of columnists.

If authors and analysts are going to be that concerned about tickling the ears of readers, why not just go ahead and become a liberal? Though many so-called “Conservatives” refused to address the issue, Larry Elder is to be commended for eventually tackling the matter head on.

In a column titled “Children Having Children”, Elder lets Fantasia really have it for not only having an out of wedlock child but for glamorizing it in her ditty “Baby Momma” and in mooching off the public dole just because she couldn’t keep her baser impulses in check. Those wallowing in hedonism and wanton impropriety whine it’s nobody’s business that she had a child outside marriage.

Really? That might be true if Fantasia, her baby, and the sleazebag fathering her child were the only ones involved in this story; but, as Elder details in the column, Fantasia had her own welfare apartment and sat on her rear-end all day platting her rugrats hair and watching TV.

Since she was picking the pockets of taxpayers to finance her lifestyle at that time, as citizens we have the right to say whatever we want since we were the ones putting the roof over the heads of her and her child and food in their bellies.

Many theologically confused Christians hoodwinked into embracing a weak-willed sissy version of Jesus that would not demand anything from anybody invoke the usual cliches of judge not lest ye be judged, the need to forgive, yada yada yada. Yet to receive forgiveness and absolution, doesn’t one have to be sorry? But with lyrics calling unwed motherhood a “badge of honor” it would seem Fantasia really isn’t sorry about anything.

If those on welfare don’t like what the gainfully employed have to say about them, they are perfectly free to forego these lavish handouts. After all, a musician such as Fantasia should understand that he who pays the piper calls the tune.

Copyright 2005 by Frederick Meekins

Tuesday, February 15, 2005

Monday, February 14, 2005

Dobson Panders To Minorities For Black History Month

Ragheads Accost Valentine Revelers

Heathen Fanatics Put The Dampers On Valentine's Day

Love Similar To Dope

Lesbian Daughter Seeks To Humiliate Father Alan Keyes

Unnamed Gunmen Opens Fire In Mall

I'd like to point out in earlier accounts of the incident witnesses mentioned multiple gunmen. Wonder how long until they are harassed and intimidated into altering their story like those insisting they saw more than McVay and Nickels at the Oklahoma City Bombing.

Wednesday, February 09, 2005

New Robotech Series Planned


Fans of one of the greatest animated series of all times have waited nearly two decades for a continuation of the Robotech saga. However, their wait might soon be over if Harmony Gold finally keeps their word and produces a sequel to the epic.

From what I have been able to gather from the Internet, the series picks up at the end of the Third Robotech War following the defeat of the Invid when Scott Benard heads out into space in search of the missing Admiral Rick Hunter. The series will tie the three Robotech casts together by including characters from each of the conflicts such as Louis Nichols (the guy with the shades that drove one of the hovertanks).

I wouldn't get my hopes up too high as rumors of Robotech's return have always been exagerated as nothing much came of the proposed Sentinels series that would have gone more into the background interrelating the Zentradi, the Robotech Masters, and the Invid.

Gays Inflict New Pestilence Upon Themselves

Red Menace Alive & Well In Latin America

Tuesday, February 08, 2005

Border Patrol Caught Aiding & Abetting Illegals

Math Curriculum Wastes Time Emphasizing Tolerance Propaganda

Regarding the lack of educational opportunities for Blacks at one time, it use to be said a mind is a terrible thing to waste.

As socialism usually ends up doing, seems now the intellectual depridation is being spread to people of all races.

UFO's, The Masons, & The Pending Energy Crisis

U.S. Government To Give Terrorists Better Retirement Plan Than Average American

Islamists Threaten Internet Columnist

Sunday, February 06, 2005

Student Seeks To End Summertime Mental Enslavement

this is an audio post - click to play


While the case of a student suing his school on the grounds that summer homework ruined his vacation might not be the best use of the nation's overly burdened court system, the lad does have a bit of a point.

On what grounds, exactly, do schools have the right to compel students to complete assignments during those times of the year when students are not under the school's legal authority?

The school claims these requirements are not an undue imposition since they only apply to honors courses in which the plaintiff volunteered to participate.

While that might apply to this particular Wisconsin jurisdiction in question, it does not settle the matter on a broader philosophical level as some schools such as those in Prince William County, Virginia I wrote about way back in the mid 90’s do not make it an honor's only requirement but rather mandate that all students do book reports and such over the summer.

In the same spirit as that motivating Bill Clinton when he said he opposed tax cuts on the grounds Americans would not know how to spend their own money properly, educrats claim students not given assignments to do over the break would otherwise allow their brains to whither. What of it?

Since the brains belong to the students and under the custodianship of their parents, aren’t they free to do with them as they see fit when school is not in session? Besides, other than basic reading, who uses most of what they learned in school anyway?

Maybe if schools did not devote so many resources to intellectually dubious pursuits such as diversity appreciation, environmental awareness, and indoctrination in evolution, schools would have more than enough time to teach those essentials education propagandists insist there isn’t enough hours in the day (and hence the year) to teach.

For students still ensnared for whatever reasons in the clutches of the public education leviathan, these institutions for whatever reason, these institutions serve as centers of indoctrination in the ideology of total state control. For what other lesson do students learn from summertime homework than that, even when not on duty, their lives belong to those running the New World Order?

Copyright 2005 by Frederick Meekins

Hindu Mob Attacks Christians

Thursday, February 03, 2005

Soviet Tyrant Disparages Legitimacy Of Iraqi Elections

Heretics For Heinz: Liberal Religionists Backed Kerry

Enterprise Cancelled


Seems now that this show is finally worth watching, it's having its warp drive yanked out from under it.

The show, I think, has had it's best season thus far as the "mini-arcs" combined the best aspects of stand-alone episodes and last year's on-going Xindi storyline.

Frankly, some of this year's episodes have presented some of the best Trek stories in the series, especially the conclusion of the Temporal War involving time traveling aliens aiding the Nazis, the trilogy examining Vulcan politics and spirituality, and the return of Brent Spiner as a mad geneticist in part responsible for the infamous Eugenics Wars.

But with Sci-Fi channel's Friday night lineup of "Stargate: SG1", "Stargate: Atlantis", and "Battlestar Galactica", I guess dinky little Enterprise couldn't keep up. Guess UPN needed more smutty comedies appealling to humanity's baser nature rather than something that stimulated thoughtful imagination.

Unless my calculations are incorrect, the upcoming 2005/2006 season will be the first without some kind of Star Trek on the air in 18 years.

Wednesday, February 02, 2005

Government Releases List Of So-Called "Real Colleges"

this is an audio post - click to play



The government has released a database of schools accredited in a manner approved by the Department of Education.

The purpose of the database is to serve as a reference to protect employers from hiring those whose credentials come from so-called diploma mills. Often these schools require little more than a check to acquire a degree.

However, the database may also stifle the innovations in distance education that have arisen over the past few years since it equates "unaccredited" with "underhanded". Already the Washington DC Fox affiliate, WTTG Channel 5, is calling it a "List Of Real Colleges and Universities", making no distinction between the unaccredited schools that require a significant amount of work and those that merely accept your check and will even pad your grades based on what one is willing to pay.

Education bureaucrats and even a few misguided Congressional Representatives argue such oversight is necessary to protect the American people from those wielding faulty degrees. You know, the usual rubbish about Homeland Security and all.

But apart from certain professions such as medicine, does it really matter where someone has acquired their knowledge? Why should someone whose been to Harvard automatically be considered more intelligent than someone who has gained as much wisdom and experience (if not more and probably of better quality not intellectually contaminated by the radicalism of subversive academics)through a life of independent study and career experience in fields say such as business, government, or journalism? Who is actually more deserving of the appellation of "doctor"?

Is education, after all, a measure of the knowledge one has acquired or how many hours one has wasted under the yolk of windbags that couldn't find employment doing anything else?

Some might not have much of a problem with the government decreeing which schools are or are not legitimate. But in this day when national security and the increasing complexity of life are constantly invoked to justify increasing levels of intrusion into our lives, what's to prevent a similar approach being taken in determining which churches are deemed acceptable in terms of promulgating governmentally sanctioned theology?

Copyright 2005 by Frederick Meekins

Bush's Social Security Plan To Screw Over Younger Americans

Monday, January 31, 2005

Billboard Of The Beast


Often in discussions of the the Mark of the Beast, it is so easy to get wrapped up in the technological aspects that will control all economic transactions and be a form of survelliance, one often forgets it is also a statement ultimately about who owns us.

Though this moron won't be going to hell for his stupidty and it could probably be said he is as dumb as those nether regions, this idiot that sold his forehead as a billboard provides a bit of prophetic insight into developments coming down the eschatological pike.

The Cybernetic Apothecary

German Welfare System Forces Women Into Brothels

Maryland School Superintendent A Dope Peddler

Religious Purge Underway At Smithsonian

Friday, January 28, 2005

Thursday, January 27, 2005

Churchill Of A Different Color: Filthy Radical Claims 9/11 Victims Nazis & Terrorists Heroes

Students Suspended Over Homicidal Stick Figures


Aren't schools so much better since we have gotten rid of prayer and the Christian assumptions upon which prayer was based?

Instead of having the matter addressed at the classroom level since that might mentally scar the little darlings, we automatically call in the police.

Had the students said this was merely homoerotic art, they'd probably be heralded as creative geniuses and given a government grant.

So much more free now, aren't we?

Wednesday, January 26, 2005

World's Most Famous Drunk Gets Own Dinky TV Show

Nearly 85% Of Blacks On Food Stamps

this is an audio post - click to play



This story first caught my eye in the Jan 2005 issue of the Futurist.

It is in reference to a Cornell University study so one can hardly blame it on right-wing Republican propaganda.

And speaking of Republicans, over the past several days, a number of Republicans (including President Bush) have stirred up a fuss that Blacks are cheated out of Social Security because on average they do not live as long as Caucasians and such.

From this story, it seems that particular ethnic group more than makes up for it in terms of other welfare entitlement programs though.

Are we going to release comments to the media that Food Stamps are a bad investment of White dollars and that we should instead go to a program of privatized nutritional accounts?

Some courageous academic or think tank scholar should do a study to determine if the reduced statistical longevity has anything to do with the larcenous activity younger members of this demographic are known to wallow in.

Maybe if they would behave themselves, there would be more of them around to collect their Social Security checks.

Maybe if their food stamp allowances were cut, they wouldn’t have as much time on their hands and thus have a better chance of making it to retirement since their time would be spent on work and self improvement rather than seeing how much trouble they can get into.

Interesting, isn’t it, how the government is eager to cut out a program you work to qualify for but seems bent on expanding the scope of unearned handouts?

Copyright 2005 by Frederick B. Meekins

Saturday, January 22, 2005

Teats For Tots: Holiday Season Gets Whole New Kind Of Ho Ho Ho


When shoppers head to the store during the Christmas season, it is assumed the price is borne by the party giving the gift. However, should these yuletide bequeathals originate from questionable sources, the price extracted can in fact be too high for the recipient.

Though allegedly an act of selflessness and altruism, the act of gift giving is as much about bringing praise and a sense of self-satisfaction to the giver. The act, in fact, bestows a degree of legitimacy upon the giver in the eyes of the receiver and can boost the ego or esteem of the party giving the gift.

This oft-denied reality bounced to the surface this past Christmas quicker than a Hooter girl on a trampoline when the even more ribald counterparts of these risque serving wenches attempted to create a favorable impression of their questionable profession.

In 2003, floozies from Teaser’s strip club distributed toys at the Statesville, North Carolina housing project. This past Christmas, however, administrators declined donations from these purveyors of the lust of the flesh.

The problem is not so much with these loose women and their patrons wanting to spread Christmas cheer to children who allegedly won’t have anything under their trees (apparently these people have never heard of dollar or thrift stores) but rather the way in which these seductresses have gone about doing so in the past.

Often those playing secret Santa deposit their gifts on the doorsteps of the economically challenged, never revealing their identities. No doubt that is why the word “secret” is emphasized; apparently there’s something about the concept ditzy blondes cannot seem to grasp as they distributed the gifts in such an ostentatious manner that they would make a pimp’s tailor blush.

Instead of quietly distributing the gifts under the cover of evening, these ladies of the twilight showed up in limousines and scanty outfits. Those opposed to these titillating histrionics where accused of having a 1940’s mentality (certain aspects of which might actually do us some good).

But perhaps even worse and even more shocking is one of the sources of support for these women of questionable repute. Pastor Jeff Porter of the First Baptist Church of Statesville told the Record and Landmark that the holidays are when differences are to be set aside because “Christmas gives us the chance to cross barriers for the less fortunate. The Bible is full of times when folks of all backgrounds took one step closer to God by acting like Jesus.”

In other words, we ought to set aside our most cherished values and beliefs. Interesting, isn’t it, how those holding to traditional standards are expected to lower them rather then requiring those in the gutter to elevate themselves. The Bible is indeed full of examples where individuals of all backgrounds “took one step closer to God by acting like Jesus.”

However, such accounts of redemption were only accomplished by committing one’s life to the standards to which Christ has called us. It may come as a shock, but there is more to the Biblical message than the proto-Marxian redistribution of goods and property of the hippy Jesus promulgated by apostate ecclesiastical syndicates such as the National Council of Churches.

While Jesus did stress the need to assist the downtrodden, even more central to His message was the condemnation of sin throughout the course of His ministry. Thus, how can individuals claim to be acting in the Lord’s name when they don’t believe sin actually exists, for if they believed sin did they would not take their cloths off in public or advertise that they do so without embarrassment.

Jesus kept His pants on. Shouldn’t those eager to follow His example do the same?

Try as religious liberals might to excuse various transgressions such as homosexuality and fornication by obfuscating Biblical injunctions against these acts, there is little that can be done to deny the connection between acknowledging one’s sin nature and the shame of public nudity.

In Genesis 2:25, before falling into sin, it says Adam and Eve were naked and not ashamed. But after eating of the forbidden fruit, Genesis 3 tells us Adam and Eve realized they needed to conceal their bodies now that sin pervaded every aspect of their being.

Ever since that day our first parents felt the need to cover up their privates, only two groups have countered the moral need for clothing. On the one hand, there are the ignorant such as the National Geographic jungle savages who know no better and on the other are those who unabashedly flout the standards of propriety and decorum.

The deep theological ramifications of nudity in the current dispensation aside, is it really wise to glamorize careers in the sleaze racket as impressionable young eyes look on? If you have no problem portraying strippers and exotic dancers in a favorable light and as pillars of the community, would you like your daughter, sister, or mother to take off her clothes off for a living in front of a bunch of dirty old men?

Furthermore, would you feel comfortable accepting Christmas gifts from a stripper who goes out of her way to make sure you and your child know she is a stripper? If not, why not?

Interesting how the most effusive proponents of hedonistic solipsism become as prudish (sometimes even more so) as the rest of us when their own children are involved. Kind of like how Madonna won’t let her own children watch TV but has made a career of thrusting her own bosoms into the face of the American people.

It has been said there is no such thing as a free lunch. The same could be said of gifts as well. For even though such items do not cost the recipient anything in terms of money, they can extract a price in terms of the indebted loyalty they end up demanding.

Copyright 2005 Frederick Meekins

Tuesday, January 18, 2005

Tuesday, January 11, 2005

Inaugural Pomp More Important Than Public Safety To Bush Admininstration

According to this story, the DC taxpayer's have to pick up the tab for Inaguration security.

Thus, in the eyes of the Bush Administation, Inagural pomp out ranks public safety.

If things are that bad, maybe we ought not have Inagural festivities.

After all, we're told the rest of the time how this is Post-9/11 world and we can't do other things we use to do.

We're All Crooks In Big Brother's Eyes

Saturday, January 08, 2005

Wednesday, January 05, 2005

Burning Away Our Liberties

As many have no doubt heard by now, the nutcase that set himself on fire in front of the White House was a government informant. From his actions, makes you wonder what else he might have been on the government payroll to do or manipulated into possibly doing by his Machiavellian handlers.

Interestingly, these pyrotechnics weren’t the only street theater that transpired less than a week after the reopening of Pennsylvania Avenue to pedestrians. Those bent on fostering a nationwide siege-mentality did not have to wait long for the excuse they needed to turn the people’s boulevard into an off-limits thoroughfare once again.

Some will respond that, in this age of terrorism, we must accept changes to the way of life to which we were accustomed to in less dangerous times. Maybe so, but unless those alterations are in accord with clearly defined and publicly agreed upon rules, these measures are little more than a grab for power no matter how those in positions of authority make the situation sound.

Many of the so-called “security precautions” around the nation’s capital cannot be described any other way. A number, upon careful scrutiny, aren’t even based whatsoever on what civilized individuals classify as duly promulgated regulations but rather upon the arbitrary whims of petty bureaucrats intoxicated by their own delusions of self-importance.

Traditionally, government buildings and monuments in Washington have been admired as symbols of American justice and liberty. However, tourists exhibiting too much awe and enthusiasm for these physical manifestations of the nation’s might might come away from the experience now realizing these structures no longer adhere to the idealistic notions we have all been led to believe these agencies were allegedly created to safeguard.

WUSA TV 9, the Washington DC local CBS affiliate, reported tourists face possible arrest if caught photographing certain government buildings. Various agencies justified these punitive measures on the grounds of new regulations promulgated by the Department of Homeland Security.

Thing is, the Department of Homeland Security admits no such regulations exist prohibiting the photographing of government buildings. However, operatives within that agency insist it is acceptable for security forces to harass you as to what you are doing in areas open to the public.

Maybe some courageous patriot should remind errant authorities that in a free society citizens should not have to divulge such information unless they have actually done something wrong.

Yet even this reluctant admittance will not keep the enthusiasts of unbridled power from devising new ways of asserting their lust for domination over the American people. Even those loyal to our own system, but who endeavor to keep it within its intended bounds of authority, are not safe from these stifling tentacles.

In October, former Idaho Representative Helen Chenoweth-Hage was pulled aside at an airport to receive an additional rifling through her person and possessions. She then inquired to see the regulation authorizing the additional scrutiny.

Her request was denied because the rule is itself deemed “too sensitive” to be looked upon by mere mortals (you’d think it was written across the Ark of the Covenant or something). Like a true patriot, Mrs. Chenoweth-Hage refused to submit and, at her own financial loss, decided not to fly.

Such regulations have little to do with security but are rather about conditioning the American people into accepting greater and greater intrusion into their lives. Today, we pliantly step aside to let the minions of the state fiddle with our belts or bra straps and to rummage through our underwear bags; where will it all end?

There have been threats of female bombers hiding explosives in their vaginas. Does that mean airport screeners will get to boff female passengers to make sure they aren’t concealing anything, with women and husbands objecting detained for not cheerfully placing evasive government directives over personal modesty?

Don’t laugh. Already one woman was forced a few years ago to take a swig of her own breast milk and a number of women have already filed complaints about the wandering hands of overly-enthusiastic security personnel. Pregnant women have been forced to disrobe in order to verify their gestational status.

As William Lind of the Free Congress Foundation remarked about the need to inspect footwear in light of suspected shoe-bomber Richard Reid, thank God he did not have an exploding suppository. Can you imagine what they’d make us take off and look into if he had?

If we are not allowed to see the regulations pertaining to these procedures, how are we to determine what is and is not permissible under the audacious banner of “homeland security”. If we are to be a nation of law rather than of despots, shouldn’t such policies be open to public scrutiny?

Five or ten years ago would so-called Conservatives, Libertarians, or even semi-consistent Liberals let the government get away with refusing to allow citizens to see the very laws it uses to justify the curtailment of our liberties and way of life? How long until Americans will be forced to endure Fallujhan-style security measures with retinal scans on every corner, identification displayed at all times, and mandatory reliance on militarized public transportation? But more importantly, when that day finally arrives, will the average American even care?

Copyright 2005 by Frederick B. Meekins

Tuesday, January 04, 2005

Peanut Butter Connoisseurs Ostracized As The New Smokers

One Indiana School requires those eating peanut butter to consume their victuals in a separate room because of one student with a peanut allergy.

If the tot is that sickly, why is he allowed to attend school at all?

Frankly, I am not too hip on the stinky slop some Asians eat. Does that mean they should be shunted away to a separte dietary facility? If some one is allergic to fried chicken and watermelon, does that mean Black kids should be sent to their own separate but equal lunchroom?

Where does this stupidity end? In the article, they are already concerned about what to do with the lactose intolerant kids who might get ahold of cheese from kids already brainwashed into being vegetarians: but since they are intolerant, perhaps they get whatever they deserve.

Thursday, December 30, 2004

Tuesday, December 21, 2004

Monday, December 13, 2004

Broadcast Charity Drives Full Of Something Other Than Stuffing

Holidays such as Christmas and Thanksgiving are noted for their many traditions. Turkeys and football, decking the halls and all that stuff.

There is also the less noble tradition of conspicuous feigned compassionate charity on the part of local broadcast news outlets and the shame these glory hogs like to spread around during the holiday season in an attempt to lavish praise upon themselves as embodiments of enlightened progressive attitudes. However, in the light of such efforts, it would seem neither commonsense nor critical observation rank among the virtues heralded by these activist newsmen.

The thing about these charitable drives organized by TV stations is that these efforts would not be undertaken if the correspondents did not have a crew there to chronicle this fallacious eleemosynary in order to pat themselves on the back. At one of these celebrations of self-congratulation documented in the Washington, DC metropolitan area, one reporter interviewed an allegedly “underprivileged” woman with eight children.

Eight children. Mind you, it would be one thing if this woman had one or two kids and fallen upon hard times. In such a case, some kind of assistance might have been justified.

But eight children and unable to provide for herself? In all likelihood, that means she has spawned eight more times than she should have.

Advocates of social dependency and personal irresponsibility will snap, “Would you rather she abort her children?” No, I’d rather she’d exercise a little control and keep her pants on.

Unless she’s been raped eight times (highly unlikely), she should have never gotten herself into this situation. She is a human being, not a breeding sow; it’s about time she act as such.

The promiscuous schooled in the doctrines of “free love” and hedonism will gasp, “How dare you criticize this woman’s private life.” Maybe so, but as soon as this woman stepped forward for a public handout --- be it from either government or charitable institutions --- the matter ceased being a solely private concern.

Of course, one question (maybe eight in this instance) that few have the courage to raise in these cases is where are the fathers of these children. For in this era, most women --- unless they are remarkably devout and if so not likely not to require handouts --- don’t usually have that many children by one man.

Maybe broadcasters should plead with these copulating sleazebags to step forward to take personal responsibility for tossing their seed to the wind or do an ambush style interview with each of them as to why they think its everyone else’s responsibility to pick up the tab for their fleeting pleasures. It would also make for catchy holiday headlines: “Daddy, why don’t you love me this Christmas?”

After all, if you are the one having the fun, shouldn’t you be the one held responsible for the child’s welfare? It certainly isn’t that of those of us who go to work everyday and keep our noses to the moral grindstone.

Almost as politically incorrect is the observation that many of the indolent clamoring for the rest of us to fill their outstretched hands or suffer the wrath of public shame, humiliation and reeducation aren’t really “poor”. In this age of elastic definitions, poor no longer means being Ethiopian skinny or Appalachian toothless. Poverty, rather, is a conceptualization invoked when the slothful and their patrons in the social welfare racket believe they deserve a higher a standard of living than they are willing to exert an effort for in order to obtain.

A number of so-called “single mothers” I am aware of receiving public assistance as well as availing themselves of the bounty of annual school supply charitable drives instead squander the income freed by this misdirected philanthropy to purchase several hundred dollar handbags, go out partying at nightclubs, and on long, shellacked fingernails that would put a fighting cock to shame. Can anyone justify to me why I should pay higher taxes or increase charitable outlays so that the offspring of such women, who barely deserve the honor of being called mothers to begin with, might be able to have a Nintendo set or Nike basketball shoes?

If the rest of us have to squeak by on Ramen noodles and Budding Beef, so should those thinking they deserve better and expect you to pay for it.

As any good parent will tell you, there is more to love than giving an undisciplined child everything they want. Likewise, the greatest gift we might be able to give those claiming to be downtrodden this holiday season is the responsibility of fending for themselves for awhile.

Copyright 2004 by Frederick Meekins

Sunday, December 12, 2004

Saturday, December 11, 2004

Saturday, December 04, 2004

Tom Clancy Predicts Nuclear Attack


WUSA TV 9, the Washington DC Metro Area CBS affiliate, did an interview with author Tom Clancy.

The famed techno-thriller was consulted to determine what he considered to be the next terrorist threat.

In his estimation, he predicted Islamic radicals procuring the nuclear parts of Russian atomic buoys to be used as the components of a dirty bomb.

While overall the piece was informative and admitting that Clancy can be a bit gruff in interviews at times, the story is out of line in deriding Clancy for being a “right-winger” and for insinuating he deserves hate mail for conjecturing terrorist Muhammad Atta was a homosexual.

Happily Ever After Not As Long As It Use To Be: Fairy Tale Marriage Between Exotic Princess & American Marine Ends In Divorce

MSNBC & Newsweek Whitewash Broken Homes For The Holidays

Friday, December 03, 2004

Unwrapping Innocence

Earlier this year, I wrote a column about the impropriety of airing prophylactic advertisements during Saturday morning children’s programming. Aficionados of the moral debauchery into which our nation is descending snapped classic animation is no longer directed at young children but rather towards libertine post-adolescents with less control over their urges than barnyard animals. Some unable to muster a rational argument instead chose to disparage my personal appearance.

Even if the viewing public must concede dominion of old favorites to these reprobates, does that mean we must stand by and yield all quality programming to those who want to drag us down to their level?

Typically, broadcasters have had a tradition of airing quality programming during the Christmas season. Usually, parents don’t have to expend much moral anguish as to whether or not the innocence of their children will be compromised through viewing these often cute or touching shows.

However, as in regards to the older Saturday morning adventures of yore now under new custodianship, it is my contention that the ethical peril lies not so much with the content as it does with the commercials.

The American Girl series of books have received considerable acclaim as quality literature depicting the lives of young girls during the nation’s early years in a manner reminiscent of Little House On The Prairie or Anne of Green Gables. As with other successful literary properties that have come before it, this one has made the transition from bookshelf to film as a new television movie produced for this special time of year titled “Samantha: An American Girl Holiday”.

Sounds like a night of enjoyable, worry-free TV, doesn’t it? Such an assessment would be incorrect.

While the movie was itself well-done and will no doubt become a Christmas classic and hopefully spawn sequels, many parents --- at least in the Washington Metropolitan Area watching channel 50 --- were no doubt flustered when they either had to avert the attention of young eyes and ears or face having to answer questions about birth control pills or feminine hygiene products.

Call me old fashioned or out of touch, but I think a parent should be able to sit down to watch a children’s show without having to explain what a tampon or maxipad is to a seven year old. Furthermore, what’s the point of advertising these things anyway since they have a captive market to begin with whose demand is not going to fluctuate any appreciable degree due to persuasive advertising.

Disgruntled feminists cannot dismiss such criticisms as sexist, chauvinist, misogynist, or what ever other label they might throw around certain times of the month to intimidate cowering males. Most women I know of frankly find those kinds of commercials embarrassing. Even NBC anchor Brian Williams, hardly a pawn of the religious right, revealed on The Sean Hannity Show how he did not like such intimate matters discussed during commercial breaks.

In the movie, the grandmother chides Samantha for inquiring about the private life of the family servants. While contemporary social relations shouldn’t be characterized by the same degree of contrived hyperformality, a little Victorian modesty might do everyone a bit of good and would be a gift this season that would give the whole year through.

Copyright 2004 by Frederick Meekins

Wednesday, December 01, 2004

New Bolshevik Flag Weds Elements Of History's Deadliest Movements


Stumbled across this ominous looking banner. It was taken at the congress of the National Bolshevik Party in Moscow.

Students of history will note it melds elements of both the symbols of Communism (the hammer and sickle) and the color scheme of the Nazi flag.

Bringing these two movements together does not bode well for freedom loving people everywhere, but yet one you are not likely to hear much about in the mainstream media.