Why shouldn't those disrupting a speech expect to get the snot knocked out of them?
Maybe a judge will recognize this as an inherent component of "Red Neck" culture if tantrums are to be legally applauded as an inherent component of an Islamic mindset?
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Joe Scarborough remarked that transvaginal sonograms weren't the way to win swing voters (in other words those wanting to hack their unborn babies to pieces without a smeared conscience). Neither was desegregating lunch counters and water fountains. But don't some human rights need to take precedence over others?
If Obama apologized to Karzi over the burning of the Korans with Jihadist crib notes scribbled all over them, do the likes of the Taliban and the Afghan government intend to apologize over outrages perpetrated upon Christians. The only thing that Obama should have said in the letters is that, if the Afghan mobs didn't stop their rampaging, more than a few texts are going to be set aflame.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
If good is epitomized by the supernatural personality referred to as "God", why should there not be a literal supernatural entity personifying evil? And if one is going to claim that actual evil does not exist, on what grounds does one insist it is wrong to mention the personification of evil in the consciousness known as "Satan"?
If a White philanthropist donates significant sums of money to a museum commemorating the achievements and struggles of the White race but not a similar museum memorializing the history of all American people, wouldn't the philanthropist be considered racist? Then shouldn't Oprah Winfrey be considered as such?
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Will Summer Youth Program Teach Students To Rampage In The Streets?
Will lessons include how to defecate on police cruisers, how to defile church buildings, and how to toss condoms at private school pupils?
School Lad Blacklisted As Racist For Expressing Cross Cultural Curiousity
Interesting we can't ask those that look different from us where they are from, but are we are suppose to fawn all over their cultures as superior to our own or have hand outs dug out our rear ends to lavish all over them.
Monday, February 20, 2012
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Some Mormons Less Cultic Than Others?
For obvious and justifiable reasons, a number of Evangelical leaders often cast a suspicious gaze at Mormon figures in American public life. After all, though the two systems of belief share a similar vocabulary at certain points and often both hold to traditionalist assumptions regarding social morality, these perspectives differ considerably regarding the nature of God as well as the origins and destiny of man.
However, the least that the orthodox Christian commenting on public affairs ought to do is to try and maintain some kind of consistent policy towards those advocating what could be considered a doctrinally questionable religious viewpoint. It seems that instead of basing such characterizations solely upon the beliefs such voices claim must take precedence above all other considerations, such analysis is often skewered in favor of those most likely to ensure that the particular pundit in question can retain a position as the water carrier of the entrenched political establishment.
For example, in his 9/16/11 commentary transcript, Cal Thomas mentions Rick Perry presenting his testimony before an audience at Liberty University. Thomas closes his brief analysis by concluding Perry's testimony isn't all that important beyond its existential value as it is more important how one's faith works itself out in a President's policies. Thomas astutely observers that believers have had the wool pulled over our eyes numerous times in terms of politicians saying one thing and doing another.
Thomas concludes, "But if Mitt Romney, a Mormon turns out to be better to defeat the President and advance policies with which most Evangelicals agree, then he should be the one the President's opponents get behind."
From the standpoint of an objective political calculation, Thomas is correct. However, since the publication of "Blinded By Might: Why The Religious Right Can't Save America" in which he and co-author Ed Dobson heaped criticism upon the Religious Right by exposing the shortcomings of Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority (an organization both men saw from the inside), Thomas has gone out of his way to downplay the role conservative Christians ought to play in politics.
Since Thomas's coauthor went from a standpoint of being apolitical to losing his marbles by taking on the less than kept grooming habits of an Old Testament prophet insisting that the Scriptures insist that the only properly cast ballot had to be for Barack Obama, you'd think Thomas might have realized he might have been duped into castigating conservative Christians into a state of hyperpious quietism. However, it seems Thomas continues advocating this perspective selectively whenever he thinks doing so might win him a few scraps of dwindling recognition from media and Republican elites.
For whereas we are suppose to gleefully march behind Romney (Thomas no doubt in part so he can ask the former Massachusetts governor who does the candidate's cranial dye job), his tone regarding Glenn Beck, another prominent Mormon, is markedly different.
In the transcript of the 4/11/11 Cal Thomas commentary, the columnist warns, "Beck is not only a Mormon, he frequently drifts into universalism." Writing in particular to the news of Beck's ouster from Fox News, Thomas muses, "They come and they go in this business...and eventually flame out..Put not your trust in princes and kings. That goes for show hosts, too."
This from the very same media figure that just a few paragraphs back was getting all aboard the Romney express.
Evangelicals do need to be cautious regarding Mormon theology. For example, in his book "The Real America: Early Writings From The Heart & Heartland", Beck said a number of things that would make a true believer's hair stand on with goosebumps had it come from the lips of anyone else.
In one passage, Beck said that he thought the Trinity, the idea that the Godhead is composed of the three distinct personages of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, was laughable and that there was no such thing as Hell.
Which brings us to another point. It is interesting how Beck can ridicule the most profound belied and mystery of the greatest number of Christians in the world (that being those that grant assent to the ecumenical creeds such as the Nicene) but the entire Republican Party stands ready to burn at the stake a single pastor that dared enunciate as to why he would not be endorsing Mitt Romney for the nomination.
What the pastor said was technically correct. If Americans inclined themselves a bit more towards religious reflection, they would know that the word "cult" does not necessarily denote a sect that ultimately meets with a violent end as a result of authoritarian leadership as in the cases of Johnstown, Heaven's Gate, and the Branch Davidians.
A cult can be any group that splits off from one of the larger world religions and is distinct from the parental creed it has separated itself from by either renouncing the more orthodox formulations of a doctrine or by promulgating a new dogma or revelation that the more orthodox adherents of the larger faith cannot embrace in good conscience.
For example, Mormonism holds that God was once a man not all that different than the rest of us who worked his way up to that status and that we too can also one day become deities over our own little planets as well. Traditional Christianity holds to the idea, that Beck snidely derided, that God exists externally from everlasting to everlasting in the form of three distinct unified persons. God is complete in Himself and does not grow or learn over time as claimed by the Later Day Saints.
The prominence played by Mormonism in the 2012 election cycle has presented American Christians in general and Evangelicals in particular with a unique set of challenges. On the one hand, believers are obligated by Scripture to speak in a firm but loving manner in defense of their own beliefs while pointing out distinctively where that faith is incompatible with Mormonism. And on the other, in a constitutional republic recognizing the freedom of religion we each posses as individuals created in the image of God, Mormon citizens have every right to engage in the same forms of civic participation that all Americans enjoy and sense a profound duty towards.
by Frederick Meekins
However, the least that the orthodox Christian commenting on public affairs ought to do is to try and maintain some kind of consistent policy towards those advocating what could be considered a doctrinally questionable religious viewpoint. It seems that instead of basing such characterizations solely upon the beliefs such voices claim must take precedence above all other considerations, such analysis is often skewered in favor of those most likely to ensure that the particular pundit in question can retain a position as the water carrier of the entrenched political establishment.
For example, in his 9/16/11 commentary transcript, Cal Thomas mentions Rick Perry presenting his testimony before an audience at Liberty University. Thomas closes his brief analysis by concluding Perry's testimony isn't all that important beyond its existential value as it is more important how one's faith works itself out in a President's policies. Thomas astutely observers that believers have had the wool pulled over our eyes numerous times in terms of politicians saying one thing and doing another.
Thomas concludes, "But if Mitt Romney, a Mormon turns out to be better to defeat the President and advance policies with which most Evangelicals agree, then he should be the one the President's opponents get behind."
From the standpoint of an objective political calculation, Thomas is correct. However, since the publication of "Blinded By Might: Why The Religious Right Can't Save America" in which he and co-author Ed Dobson heaped criticism upon the Religious Right by exposing the shortcomings of Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority (an organization both men saw from the inside), Thomas has gone out of his way to downplay the role conservative Christians ought to play in politics.
Since Thomas's coauthor went from a standpoint of being apolitical to losing his marbles by taking on the less than kept grooming habits of an Old Testament prophet insisting that the Scriptures insist that the only properly cast ballot had to be for Barack Obama, you'd think Thomas might have realized he might have been duped into castigating conservative Christians into a state of hyperpious quietism. However, it seems Thomas continues advocating this perspective selectively whenever he thinks doing so might win him a few scraps of dwindling recognition from media and Republican elites.
For whereas we are suppose to gleefully march behind Romney (Thomas no doubt in part so he can ask the former Massachusetts governor who does the candidate's cranial dye job), his tone regarding Glenn Beck, another prominent Mormon, is markedly different.
In the transcript of the 4/11/11 Cal Thomas commentary, the columnist warns, "Beck is not only a Mormon, he frequently drifts into universalism." Writing in particular to the news of Beck's ouster from Fox News, Thomas muses, "They come and they go in this business...and eventually flame out..Put not your trust in princes and kings. That goes for show hosts, too."
This from the very same media figure that just a few paragraphs back was getting all aboard the Romney express.
Evangelicals do need to be cautious regarding Mormon theology. For example, in his book "The Real America: Early Writings From The Heart & Heartland", Beck said a number of things that would make a true believer's hair stand on with goosebumps had it come from the lips of anyone else.
In one passage, Beck said that he thought the Trinity, the idea that the Godhead is composed of the three distinct personages of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, was laughable and that there was no such thing as Hell.
Which brings us to another point. It is interesting how Beck can ridicule the most profound belied and mystery of the greatest number of Christians in the world (that being those that grant assent to the ecumenical creeds such as the Nicene) but the entire Republican Party stands ready to burn at the stake a single pastor that dared enunciate as to why he would not be endorsing Mitt Romney for the nomination.
What the pastor said was technically correct. If Americans inclined themselves a bit more towards religious reflection, they would know that the word "cult" does not necessarily denote a sect that ultimately meets with a violent end as a result of authoritarian leadership as in the cases of Johnstown, Heaven's Gate, and the Branch Davidians.
A cult can be any group that splits off from one of the larger world religions and is distinct from the parental creed it has separated itself from by either renouncing the more orthodox formulations of a doctrine or by promulgating a new dogma or revelation that the more orthodox adherents of the larger faith cannot embrace in good conscience.
For example, Mormonism holds that God was once a man not all that different than the rest of us who worked his way up to that status and that we too can also one day become deities over our own little planets as well. Traditional Christianity holds to the idea, that Beck snidely derided, that God exists externally from everlasting to everlasting in the form of three distinct unified persons. God is complete in Himself and does not grow or learn over time as claimed by the Later Day Saints.
The prominence played by Mormonism in the 2012 election cycle has presented American Christians in general and Evangelicals in particular with a unique set of challenges. On the one hand, believers are obligated by Scripture to speak in a firm but loving manner in defense of their own beliefs while pointing out distinctively where that faith is incompatible with Mormonism. And on the other, in a constitutional republic recognizing the freedom of religion we each posses as individuals created in the image of God, Mormon citizens have every right to engage in the same forms of civic participation that all Americans enjoy and sense a profound duty towards.
by Frederick Meekins
Friday, February 17, 2012
Insightful Santorum Policy Tome Dismissed As "Mysterious"
To paraphrase Chesterton, in these times "common sense" is viewed as anything but common.
Judeosupremacists Oust Pat Buchanan From MSNBC
Certainly lays to rest the notion about the "you-know-whos" controlling the media.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Public School Chorus Sings Song In Praise Of Allah
Even if "Allah" is simply the Arabic word for God, we speak English in America.
Can we sing a German tune with the word "Fuehrer" in it when we simply mean a leader?
Can we sing a German tune with the word "Fuehrer" in it when we simply mean a leader?
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Food Gestapo Deems Chicken Nuggets Healthier Than Ham & Cheese
Is this about nutrition or about manipulating us into Shariah law without even realizing it?
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Monday, February 13, 2012
In a CSPAN interview, leftwing commentator Bill Press jumped down the throat of a caller for saying "Democrat Party" rather than "Democratic Party". Press snapped that proper English be spoken. Is he going to be as vehement about English being made the official language and that concessions to bilingualism be abolished?
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Has news of the invention of the fishing pole and net yet reached Hillybilly Handfishers? The next hit cable show will probably consist of those that hunt alligators by sticking their limbs into the mouths of the massive reptiles. Producers could probably find someone from either the deepest South or the New York metropolitan area stupid enough to do it.
The Golden Corral chocolate fountain looks like a health hazard waiting to happen. I can imagine the roaches and the rats each night taking a leisurely dip after the establishment closes. If diners can dip a piece of fruit into a chocolate fountain, just think what else they are sticking in their. I doubt they are given a crash course in proper food handling techniques before being allowed to plunge on in.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Those Denying Resurrection Keep Religious Language To Spread Deception
In the 9/20/11 issues of Sojourners magazine is an advertisement for the 2012 Gladdening Light Symposium featuring Jesus Seminar scholar John Dominic Crossan. Part of the ad copy reads, "Feed the soul, savor the beauty, and experience the communion love of Agape in the Gladdening Light of God."
However, if Crossan is being heralded as what in show business and prize fights circles is called the main event, those in attendance will have very little to ultimately be glad about. Given the name of the symposium, the event frankly borders on false advertising.
Anyone that has subscribed to the History Channel or A&E before both networks went nearly all alien autopsy and rummage sales has no doubt seen Crossan. He is a talking head that use to get dragged out around Christmas and Easter time for those specials that posture as giving viewers the latest dirt on the events of the Bible being bantered about in the halls of respectable academia.
However, seldom do these programs confirm the accuracy of the Biblical accounts. Rather, the intended purpose is often to heap as much skepticism upon these narratives as possible.
Crossan’s ticket to never picking up a bar tab (or in this case midwinter accommodations in sunny Florida) is that Jesus didn’t rise from the dead. Instead, Crossan believes Christ’s body was instead most likely eaten by dogs.
But rather than surrendering to a life as a squeegee man if religion is such a colossal waste of time, Crossan has taken up the mission of destroying other people’s faith as well. It’s just that Crossan continues to hold onto Christian terminology to accomplish this task. And it’s quite the incentive to keep at it that mildly entertaining eccentric skeptics are invited on midwinter Florida speaking tours and squeegee men are not.
Over the centuries, most have been drawn to Christianity as a result of its hope and promise of a blissful afterlife at the conclusion of this so very brief existence of terrestrial mortality. Crossan’s vision of Christianity’s allure is markedly different.
On the surface, what Crossan and the Gladdening Light Foundation are calling for sounds quite a bit like Communism, but of a milksop variety lacking the backbone to do so without reference to God and along with the hopes that the religious buzzwords will draw in the easily duped.
The ad copy reads, “...Crossan’s vision of God’s longing for a just and loving community representative of all (‘loving thy neighbor as thyself’ from Leviticus and the Gospel of Mark).” The paragraph concludes that, along with Crossan, a number of whom couldn’t otherwise get real jobs such as a “community choreographer” will speak about “their own creative aspirations struggling for transformation beyond societies that marginalize the disenfranchised.”
This may need to be translated for those that don’t speak stoned hippy. What this really means is that your rights and property as an individual mean very little or even nothing.
It is only the group that counts since that is the only thing that lives on. In a materialistic universe without a Resurrection, we pass out of existence at death (or at best make a guest appearance as a garbled electronic voice phenomena on one of those cable TV spiritism shows that took the place of the kind programming Crossan used to be featured on when A&E and the Discovery Channel attempted to appeal to the educated).
"Struggling for transformation" is the new euphemism for the old revolutionary phrase "by any means necessary". For now, the saps at the Gladdening Light Symposium are so naive that they think you will be so dazzled by COMMUNITY choreography (must be something like a Glee cast dance number) and Cherokee story telling that you will gladly hand everything you have over to what the ideological forbearers of these sorts of activities use to call the vanguard of the proletariat.
Of course, they will skim some extra off the top for themselves. I'm sure John Dominic Crossan didn't come cheap and at least had his first class airfare provided while no doubt working into his lectures why the rest of us ought to flagellate ourselves over the developed world's carbon footprint.
This still doesn't answer the most important question. What will prevent the likes of those worked up into such a froth of imminent expectancy from turning violent when they discover you aren't quite as moved as they thought you would be by fancy footwork and the cute little parables many American Indians seem to have a knack for?
One should not try to deny that there will not be any bashing of Western civilization in general and America in particular at the symposium. This will be an automatic given.
This can be discerned from the phrase "societies that marginalize the disenfranchised". But is a symposium where "Pilgrims concerned with the plight of the world's people will gather for an entire weekend of vigorous discussion, enlightened teaching, and thoughtful reflection" where the attendees don't actually travel to assist the disenfranchised but rather to the state whose very name epitomizes delightful winter comfort and luxury really going to accomplish all that much?
About the closest any of the attendees will come to a Third Worlder is the picture of the African refugees placed in the left hand corner of the advertisement announcing the symposium. What this vigorous discussion, enlightened teaching, and thoughtful reflection will likely consist of is a bunch of moderately wealthy former hippies and their young adult children dreaming up additional ways to shame you out of your own money or how to swindle it away from you at the end of the taxman's gun if you aren't gullible enough to go along with the obsequious self-loathing.
I Corinthians 15:19 says in regards to the Resurrection, "If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." I Peter 1:16 assures, "For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty." Any doubting this central teaching of the Christian message while continuing to employ the imagery and rhetoric of the faith is not out to instill hope but rather the most enslaving form of tyranny.
by Frederick Meekins
However, if Crossan is being heralded as what in show business and prize fights circles is called the main event, those in attendance will have very little to ultimately be glad about. Given the name of the symposium, the event frankly borders on false advertising.
Anyone that has subscribed to the History Channel or A&E before both networks went nearly all alien autopsy and rummage sales has no doubt seen Crossan. He is a talking head that use to get dragged out around Christmas and Easter time for those specials that posture as giving viewers the latest dirt on the events of the Bible being bantered about in the halls of respectable academia.
However, seldom do these programs confirm the accuracy of the Biblical accounts. Rather, the intended purpose is often to heap as much skepticism upon these narratives as possible.
Crossan’s ticket to never picking up a bar tab (or in this case midwinter accommodations in sunny Florida) is that Jesus didn’t rise from the dead. Instead, Crossan believes Christ’s body was instead most likely eaten by dogs.
But rather than surrendering to a life as a squeegee man if religion is such a colossal waste of time, Crossan has taken up the mission of destroying other people’s faith as well. It’s just that Crossan continues to hold onto Christian terminology to accomplish this task. And it’s quite the incentive to keep at it that mildly entertaining eccentric skeptics are invited on midwinter Florida speaking tours and squeegee men are not.
Over the centuries, most have been drawn to Christianity as a result of its hope and promise of a blissful afterlife at the conclusion of this so very brief existence of terrestrial mortality. Crossan’s vision of Christianity’s allure is markedly different.
On the surface, what Crossan and the Gladdening Light Foundation are calling for sounds quite a bit like Communism, but of a milksop variety lacking the backbone to do so without reference to God and along with the hopes that the religious buzzwords will draw in the easily duped.
The ad copy reads, “...Crossan’s vision of God’s longing for a just and loving community representative of all (‘loving thy neighbor as thyself’ from Leviticus and the Gospel of Mark).” The paragraph concludes that, along with Crossan, a number of whom couldn’t otherwise get real jobs such as a “community choreographer” will speak about “their own creative aspirations struggling for transformation beyond societies that marginalize the disenfranchised.”
This may need to be translated for those that don’t speak stoned hippy. What this really means is that your rights and property as an individual mean very little or even nothing.
It is only the group that counts since that is the only thing that lives on. In a materialistic universe without a Resurrection, we pass out of existence at death (or at best make a guest appearance as a garbled electronic voice phenomena on one of those cable TV spiritism shows that took the place of the kind programming Crossan used to be featured on when A&E and the Discovery Channel attempted to appeal to the educated).
"Struggling for transformation" is the new euphemism for the old revolutionary phrase "by any means necessary". For now, the saps at the Gladdening Light Symposium are so naive that they think you will be so dazzled by COMMUNITY choreography (must be something like a Glee cast dance number) and Cherokee story telling that you will gladly hand everything you have over to what the ideological forbearers of these sorts of activities use to call the vanguard of the proletariat.
Of course, they will skim some extra off the top for themselves. I'm sure John Dominic Crossan didn't come cheap and at least had his first class airfare provided while no doubt working into his lectures why the rest of us ought to flagellate ourselves over the developed world's carbon footprint.
This still doesn't answer the most important question. What will prevent the likes of those worked up into such a froth of imminent expectancy from turning violent when they discover you aren't quite as moved as they thought you would be by fancy footwork and the cute little parables many American Indians seem to have a knack for?
One should not try to deny that there will not be any bashing of Western civilization in general and America in particular at the symposium. This will be an automatic given.
This can be discerned from the phrase "societies that marginalize the disenfranchised". But is a symposium where "Pilgrims concerned with the plight of the world's people will gather for an entire weekend of vigorous discussion, enlightened teaching, and thoughtful reflection" where the attendees don't actually travel to assist the disenfranchised but rather to the state whose very name epitomizes delightful winter comfort and luxury really going to accomplish all that much?
About the closest any of the attendees will come to a Third Worlder is the picture of the African refugees placed in the left hand corner of the advertisement announcing the symposium. What this vigorous discussion, enlightened teaching, and thoughtful reflection will likely consist of is a bunch of moderately wealthy former hippies and their young adult children dreaming up additional ways to shame you out of your own money or how to swindle it away from you at the end of the taxman's gun if you aren't gullible enough to go along with the obsequious self-loathing.
I Corinthians 15:19 says in regards to the Resurrection, "If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." I Peter 1:16 assures, "For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty." Any doubting this central teaching of the Christian message while continuing to employ the imagery and rhetoric of the faith is not out to instill hope but rather the most enslaving form of tyranny.
by Frederick Meekins
Thursday, February 09, 2012
Obama Undermines No Child Left Behind
If Bush has done this, he'd had been condemned as an enemy of education and America's children.
How about in those areas where Scripture doesn't say much or could be interpreted validly in a number of certain ways without damaging the essential message that we are more careful in promulgating heavy-handed proclamations? In so doing, one might find fewer decent people leaving particular congregations.
Wednesday, February 08, 2012
Tuesday, February 07, 2012
Monday, February 06, 2012
Interesting philosophical contrast. Gingrich would expand our technological horizons through the development of a lunar colony. Democrats want to limit our choice of lightbulbs, restrict where America can search for additional energy resources, and likely even eliminate the private automobile if given the opportunity.
Friday, February 03, 2012
Thursday, February 02, 2012
Wednesday, February 01, 2012
First Lady Embarrasses Nation On Late Night TV
Would Martha Washington have gone on TV to lecture Jay Leno regarding his dietary habits?
Leno's diet must not be too bad. He seems quite active, lively, and relatively young looking for his age.
What an outright hypocrit. Frau Obama confesses about her birthday cake while lecturing Leno on junkfood.
Is it any First Lady's business how an American gets their fiber, as Frau Obama interrogated of Jay Leno?
It is more offensive for Frau Obama to inquire of Leno's fiber intake than Sam Donaldson asking if there was blood in Reagan's stool.
Would Martha Washington have been on national TV with a skirt so short that her ass was just about sticking out?
Leno's diet must not be too bad. He seems quite active, lively, and relatively young looking for his age.
What an outright hypocrit. Frau Obama confesses about her birthday cake while lecturing Leno on junkfood.
Is it any First Lady's business how an American gets their fiber, as Frau Obama interrogated of Jay Leno?
It is more offensive for Frau Obama to inquire of Leno's fiber intake than Sam Donaldson asking if there was blood in Reagan's stool.
Would Martha Washington have been on national TV with a skirt so short that her ass was just about sticking out?
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Who is the greater fearmonger? Is it the person warning of pending cataclysm and by so doing allowing those hearing the warning to potentially escape the tragedy or prepare for the upheaval? Or is it the person that repeatedly emphasizes the glories of predestination and the erroneous assumptions about free choice? Because if there is no choice there is nothing that can be done about it anyway.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Stream Of Consciousness Observations Regarding The 2012 State Of The Union
Obama insists he doesn't want our energy needs linked to unstable parts of the world. Then why did he veto the Keystone Oil Pipeline?
Obama remarked his grandparents' generation triumphed over fascism. Yet fascism is the very economic system that he advocates. Perhaps not yet in terms of wide scale deprivation of human rights but rather in the technical sense of the means of production remaining privately owned but strictly controlled by the government.
If we are all to play by the same set of rules, then why has it taken months for the National Park Service to do anything about the Occupy beatniks laying siege to a number of parks in Washington, DC?
Why should it be portrayed as a greater tragedy when a "single mother" loses her job rather than a man with a wife that stays at home? Seems both domestic arrangements are in similar positions without income.
In calling for a single source for the unemployed to seek information on training opportunities, doesn't that involve the federal government assuming more control over education?
Obama insists it should be illegal for students to drop out of school before they are 18. Why should this be a matter of federal interference and what will the punishment be for those leaving prior to that age?
If no country is better than any other according to multiculturalist dogma, then why should foreign students be allowed to remain here after graduation?
If women are to earn equal pay for equal work, then make them lug the same weight around the stockroom or warehouse without having to seek masculine assistance to do so.
If lightweight vests are being developed by federal researchers that can stop any bullet, will such protective garments be made available to civilians as well or do we have an obligation to be shot by law enforcement?
Interesting how it was mentioned derisively about a company that at one time ONLY produced yachts.
If it should be impermissible for insurance companies to charge more for women’s health coverage, then why should men have to pay more for motor vehicle policies?
Obama claimed politics is not about clinging to rigid ideologies. So why is it conservatives that must always surrender their basic ideals and ideas?
Obama claimed that government ought to only do what people are unable to do for themselves. Thing of it is, given his Frau's desire to manipulate and meddle in your dietary intake, the First Couple doesn't think you are really capable of doing anything for yourself.
Obama wants to grant tax credits to businesses hiring veterans. Why should the military status of a business's employees be any business of the federal government?
The best way to insure opportunities for veterans, as well as all other Americans, is for the federal government to know the least amount possible regarding the nation's workforce.
If it doesn't matter in the military what color or gender you are, as Obama insists, why are certain standards lowered for females seeking advancement and White males held back because of the color of their skin rather than the content of their character. If color has no bearing in the military, why are we often reminded that Colin Powell was the first Black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as if that is suppose to immunize him against all criticism and scrutiny?
Would Bob Gates have been kept on as Secretary of Defense had he been a solid conservative Republican rather than an ardent establishmentarian compromiser?
Obama admonished the American people to look at what the nation could accomplish if the people were organized along military lines. However, the purpose of the military is to defend democracy, not practice it. In a civilian state, the average person is allowed to question the decrees and decisions of leaders at all levels: elected, appointed, and bureaucratic. Such bottom up scrutiny is not allowed in the military and is punished severely.
This analyst tabulated approximately 80 rounds of applause in the 2012 State of the Union Address.
by Frederick Meekins
Obama remarked his grandparents' generation triumphed over fascism. Yet fascism is the very economic system that he advocates. Perhaps not yet in terms of wide scale deprivation of human rights but rather in the technical sense of the means of production remaining privately owned but strictly controlled by the government.
If we are all to play by the same set of rules, then why has it taken months for the National Park Service to do anything about the Occupy beatniks laying siege to a number of parks in Washington, DC?
Why should it be portrayed as a greater tragedy when a "single mother" loses her job rather than a man with a wife that stays at home? Seems both domestic arrangements are in similar positions without income.
In calling for a single source for the unemployed to seek information on training opportunities, doesn't that involve the federal government assuming more control over education?
Obama insists it should be illegal for students to drop out of school before they are 18. Why should this be a matter of federal interference and what will the punishment be for those leaving prior to that age?
If no country is better than any other according to multiculturalist dogma, then why should foreign students be allowed to remain here after graduation?
If women are to earn equal pay for equal work, then make them lug the same weight around the stockroom or warehouse without having to seek masculine assistance to do so.
If lightweight vests are being developed by federal researchers that can stop any bullet, will such protective garments be made available to civilians as well or do we have an obligation to be shot by law enforcement?
Interesting how it was mentioned derisively about a company that at one time ONLY produced yachts.
If it should be impermissible for insurance companies to charge more for women’s health coverage, then why should men have to pay more for motor vehicle policies?
Obama claimed politics is not about clinging to rigid ideologies. So why is it conservatives that must always surrender their basic ideals and ideas?
Obama claimed that government ought to only do what people are unable to do for themselves. Thing of it is, given his Frau's desire to manipulate and meddle in your dietary intake, the First Couple doesn't think you are really capable of doing anything for yourself.
Obama wants to grant tax credits to businesses hiring veterans. Why should the military status of a business's employees be any business of the federal government?
The best way to insure opportunities for veterans, as well as all other Americans, is for the federal government to know the least amount possible regarding the nation's workforce.
If it doesn't matter in the military what color or gender you are, as Obama insists, why are certain standards lowered for females seeking advancement and White males held back because of the color of their skin rather than the content of their character. If color has no bearing in the military, why are we often reminded that Colin Powell was the first Black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as if that is suppose to immunize him against all criticism and scrutiny?
Would Bob Gates have been kept on as Secretary of Defense had he been a solid conservative Republican rather than an ardent establishmentarian compromiser?
Obama admonished the American people to look at what the nation could accomplish if the people were organized along military lines. However, the purpose of the military is to defend democracy, not practice it. In a civilian state, the average person is allowed to question the decrees and decisions of leaders at all levels: elected, appointed, and bureaucratic. Such bottom up scrutiny is not allowed in the military and is punished severely.
This analyst tabulated approximately 80 rounds of applause in the 2012 State of the Union Address.
by Frederick Meekins
Friday, January 27, 2012
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Christmas Irritants Pervasive
Use to be during the Christmas season in modern America, if the individual wanted a little buzz during the holidays, they would slip a bit of something into their eggnog. Now, all you have to do to feel that surge of agitated surliness is to turn on the news or read about those turning themselves into the hind quarters of the species the Holy Family rode into Bethlehem in order to pay the assessed tax (an existential financial matter it seems fewer and fewer could possibly relate to).
If you think it is only secularists making an overall nuisance of themselves, you are in for a bigger disappointment than finding a lump of coal in your stocking Christmas morning.
For better or worse, the Internet is widespread enough that most are aware that there is nothing in the Bible compelling believers to participate in the celebration of the birth of Christ even though His miraculous arrival is documented in the pages of Scripture and that many of the trappings such as decorations and related customs now imbedded with meanings symbolizing the spiritually profound account have (to invoke a word of sectarian irony) less than kosher origins.
However, for the most part, Christians on either side of the divide have established a kind of amicable truce where for the most part about the worst that they do to their counterparts is to look down their noses at one another and snicker how peculiar or inconsistent the ones on the side of the debate opposite their own happen to be.
That has changed in one Michigan town. There, an anonymous equivalent of Dana Carvey’s Church Lady character from Saturday Night Live sent a letter to those daring to adorn their abodes with Christmas lights.
Usually, those going to such lengths as to put the criticism of such decorations into writing make a point of accusing either the decorations or the individual putting them up of being too religious. This time, the victims of such in your face busybodyism have been accused of not being religious enough.
The note insists that the homeowners ought to reevaluate their beliefs. This is because decorative lights, mistletoe, and yule logs can be traced back to pagan origins.
While nothing should be done about the doofus posting the letter since the First Amendment is pretty much a get out of jail free card for unbridled stupidity, it makes you wonder just how much authority over what goes on in homes or on our property should be granted to those insistent upon a hardline implementation of America’s Puritan heritage.
Most years, it seems many of the Christmas time outrages such as the one detailed above occur on the local level such as a school child having their constitutional religious liberties trampled upon in the attempt to forge Christmas-free school zones or as result of the directors of homeowners associations overly eager to enforce Soviet-style architectural conformity. However, it now seems the partisans of the White Witch of Narnia are attempting to assert themselves at the center stage of U.S. national government.
Irrespective of the overall decline in respect for the body brought about by the often unconscionable behavior on the part of the institution, Congress is often looked upon as the greatest deliberative body in the world in that its members are suppose to be able to speak their consciences freely to their fellow members, their particular constituencies, and the nation as a whole.
However, it now seems that an authority within the legislative branch may be attempting to curtail expression that, to most Americans not having jumped off the cliff into one variety of fanaticism or the other, would be about one of the least partisan things one could say as such sentiments are usually enunciated freely irrespective of the party affiliation of those to whom the greeting was intended. One of the perks extended to members of Congress is the so-called franking privilege where taxpayers pick up the tab for the postal correspondence between legislators and their respective constituencies.
In exchange for this benefit, the outgoing communications are required to adhere to certain criteria regarding content. For example, these items aren’t suppose to be of a campaign nature.
It seems now though that, at least in regards to the House of Representatives, wishing someone a Merry Christmas via these official dispatches has been deemed the equivalent of saying, “Vote for me because the other guy kicks puppies.” Proponents of the prohibition insist epistolary interference is necessary as today one never knows who might be offended by the platitude.
I’ll tell you what ought to offend people. It’s that these clowns don’t only get to send any mail at someone else’s expense but that they’ll get to enjoy lavish retirements while the last words from your dieing lips will likely be “Hello. Welcome to Walmart” because Social Security will be nothing but a memory.
This snide disrespect towards the religion and customs of the vast majority of the American people on the part of parts of the Legislative Branch extends beyond the House mailroom. It has even come to infiltrate the symbols this branch of government has adopted to commemorate this particular holiday. In so doing, it has attempted to manipulate the meaning of the occasion in the minds of the American people.
On the Capitol grounds, each year a stately tree is erected. As with countless other trees the world over, this one is adorned with a variety of ornaments.
By tradition, the ornaments are donated by the residents of the state from where that year’s particular tree originated. The 2011 tree came from California. So hence the theme “California Shines”.
CNSNews correspondent Terrence Jeffery observed that, while the decoration is a Christmas tree, other than a reference to Psalm 19 symbolizing that the Word of God is more precious than gold, not a single ornament on the visible part of the tree references Christmas as the celebration of Christ’s birth. There is also an ornament declaring how much the creator of that particular bulb loves President Obama, the figure many concluded worthy of adoration as a new Christ figure for no other reason than that he emerged from his mother's womb of racially mixed pigmentation but who came up disappointingly short perhaps even more so than many other aspiring pseudo-messiahs.
When informed of this incongruity, officials from the U.S. Forest Service and the Architect of the Capitol both sheepishly feigned an unawareness as to the nature of the tree's adornment and insisted that there is no stipulated prohibition regarding decoration content. However, that does not mean that hullabaloo surrounding the tree will remain objective and neutral.
To get students particularly to contribute ornaments to the tree effort, a special curriculum was developed. Yet if you assumed the lesson plan was about how these trees came to be replete with Christian metaphor and symbolism, you are sadly mistaken.
Instead, the Christmas tree has become merely an additional prop in the unending effort to indoctrinate students with environmentalism. According to Jefferies, the website sponsoring the decoration contest intones, "We ask that all ornaments for the Capitol Christmas Tree be made of natural or recycled materials...There is No Away with your students when they create an ornament for the Tree. Ask students where they think that trash goes when they throw it away. Work with them until they understand that trash eventually ends up in a landfill. Show students the image of a landfill."
Can't the students of today simply be allowed to do something for fun without being politically browbeaten? Why ought they be made to feel guilty for simply living and enjoying their lives when greater examples of waste occur at the levels fostering environmentalism not so much as a way to steward finite resources but rather as a way to control those of us deemed to be the lesser breeds of man.
If we are to lead lives of constant ecological vigilance as epitomized by the constant admonitions to buy locally grown produce, carpool to work, and these guidelines insinuating the environment will collapse if ornaments aren't crafted from recycled material, isn't one of the most profound examples of unnecessary excess the annual felling of a tree and the shipping of it to Washington, DC for no other reason than to titillate Congress’s sense of Yuletide vanity?
Between 1964 and 1968, the tree decorated was one planted permanently on the Capitol grounds. So in this era where environmental concerns are suppose to triumph over other concerns such as convenience and enjoyment, shouldn’t our so-called leaders set the example by planting a permanent tree rather than harvesting one at the close of each year?
The U.S. government is divided into three branches: the executive, the legislative, and the judicial. Each of these have played their own role as a social irritant in the disputes regarding Christmas.
The courts have eroded the Judeo-Christian foundations of the legal system through rulings such as those removing Nativities and Menorahs from public land and decisions curtailing religious expression in the public school system.
In this exposition, it has already been examined the role played by the legislature in fomenting Christmas discord. Readers should not expect the executive branch to go unscathed.
Regarding the other examples examined thus far, each has been about those attempting to undermine the celebration of Christmas. However, it seems the Executive Branch may have gone overboard in commemorating Christmas 2011.
During his ascent to power as well as throughout the duration of his reign, Barack Obama has consistently called for shared sacrifice on the part of all Americans in the hopes of getting the nation through challenging economic times. One would think such a plea for austerity would result in the White House erecting only one or two trees not all that different than those enjoyed by Americans in most of our homes. And the cost for such a decoration ought to come out of the Obamas’ personal pockets given that they are multimillionaires several times over and it is doubtful they have been burdened with picking up the tab for their own Washington utility bills while we let them bunk in the servants’ quarters.
However, White House decorators didn't exactly take the spirit of the Charlie Brown Christmas special to heart with that program's classic message that even the scrawniest tree possesses its own form of inner beauty. Not only were thirty-plus Christmas trees jammed under the White House roof but also a gingerbread house weighing nearly 500 pounds. I am sure it wasn't wasted and was distributed for consumption once it was no longer needed for ornamental purposes.
When this incongruity of calling upon the rest of us to give a little more up for the good of the COMMUNITY while she herself wallows and frolics amongst extravagant opulence was pointed out, Michelle Obama feigned what a burden it really was dwelling in the light of such splendor. The First Lady assured the trees are really there to uplift the spirits of the struggling in America, especially the unemployed and the families of U.S. military personnel.
But try showing up unannounced (even if you belong to one of these two unassailable classes invoked to nullify and evade nearly every form of known criticism) insisting you are there to see YOUR trees and see how far you get. The only holiday greenery you'd get to see after that would be the mold on the bread in the prison cafeteria.
The First Family spent the lion's share of their Christmas vacation in Hawaii. So few Americans get to see the White House (as well as numerous other sites around Washington, DC) thanks in part to the security procedures put into place as a result of the Jihadist Third Worlders Obama so admires in the darkest depths of his heart.
There is really little reason for the White House to be decorated at all other than for a sprig or two of evergreen in the windows or on the pillars for the tourists to take pictures of from the sidewalk. But I doubt the common American is even allowed to do that anymore given that glorified rentacops so inebriated on their trivial amount of power that they don't enforce properly enacted laws but rather ones pulled from their doughnut-fed backsides.
Even though fewer and fewer Christians or conservatives want to admit to the existence of the culture wars anymore either out of the weariness that inevitably results from nearly constant struggle or for fear of losing any status they might have gained as a result of silent compromise, these disputes for the most part have become a permanent feature of American society. And until the triumphant return of the King so humbly born in that simple manger, these disputes surrounding the day celebrating His birth will no doubt ring out as among that conflict’s most contentious.
by Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Scientists have discovered that, through the application of certain hormones, they can activate dormant genes in an ant's genome to create monstrosities of enhanced ability. Wonder how long until they attempt to do the same thing to human embryos in the attempt to create the supersoldiers of the future.
Interesting some that would denounce Glenn Beck as a danger because the broadcaster urges the stockpiling of provisions during a time of upheaval have little problem positively extolling ministries that hint at a desire to curtail the constitutional liberties of those that differ over matters of soteriology, Christology, and ecclesiology.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)